[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 6]
[Issue]
[Pages 7571-7706]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
[[Page 7571]]
VOLUME 153--PART 6
SENATE--Monday, March 26, 2007
The Senate met at 2:30 p.m. and was called to order by the Honorable
Mark L. Pryor, a Senator from the State of Arkansas.
______
prayer
The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, offered the following prayer:
Let us pray.
Almighty God, whose power moves in the changes of the seasons and in
the circuit of the stars, let Your gentle strength live in each of our
hearts.
Today, infuse our Senators with Your wisdom so that in their coming
and going they will walk in the path of Your will. Lord, keep them
faithful. Amid the haste and hurry of their labors this week, remind
them to spend time with You so that they experience You as the joy and
strength of true living. Quicken their faith and hope; give them Your
perfect calm as they aspire to honor You. Make their lives a gift of
Your love to a hurting world.
Much like the gift of Bishop Gilbert Earl Patterson, Lord, we thank
You and praise You for his life and witness. Today, comfort the
millions who are mourning his death. We humbly pray these things in the
Name of Him who was in the beginning and will be in the end. Amen.
____________________
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Honorable Mark L. Pryor led the Pledge of Allegiance, as follows:
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of
America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
____________________
APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to
the Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Byrd).
The bill clerk read the following letter:
U.S. Senate,
President pro tempore,
Washington, DC, March 26, 2007.
To the Senate:
Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable
Mark L. Pryor, a Senator from the State of Arkansas, to
perform the duties of the Chair.
Robert C. Byrd,
President pro tempore.
Mr. PRYOR thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro
tempore.
____________________
RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY LEADER
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized.
____________________
EXTENSION OF MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be an
extra 30 minutes for morning business.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________
SCHEDULE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, this afternoon, the Senate will be in a
period for morning business. At 3:30 p.m., the Senate will proceed to
consideration of the supplemental appropriations bill, H.R. 1591. As I
announced earlier, there will be no rollcall votes today. This week is
slated to be the last week of the work period prior to the Easter
recess. However, we must work toward finishing the supplemental before
we can do this, and I am going to be meeting in the next few minutes
with the distinguished Republican leader to see if that is possible to
do.
____________________
MEASURE PLACED ON THE CALENDAR--H.R. 545
Mr. REID. Mr. President, it is my understanding that H.R. 545 is at
the desk and due for a second reading.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the bill by
title for a second time.
The bill clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 545) to amend the Omnibus Crime Control and
Safe Streets Act of 1968 to clarify that territories and
Indian tribes are eligible to receive grants for confronting
the use of methamphetamine.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I now object to any further proceedings at
this time.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection is heard. The measure
will be placed on the calendar.
____________________
RESERVATION OF LEADER TIME
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
leadership time is reserved.
____________________
MORNING BUSINESS
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, there
will now be a period for the transaction of morning business until 3:30
p.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes
each, with the time equally divided and controlled between the two
leaders or their designees.
____________________
RECOGNITION OF THE MINORITY LEADER
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Republican leader is
recognized.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I wish to make a brief statement, but I
believe the majority leader may have one as well.
Mr. REID. Please, go ahead.
____________________
EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS BILL
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the House of Representatives passed an
emergency war spending bill on Friday that includes tens of billions of
dollars for projects that have no connection whatsoever to the needs of
our troops
[[Page 7572]]
in Iraq and Afghanistan, that tells U.S. generals how to do their jobs,
and which pulls out of thin air a date for evacuating U.S. troops from
Iraq.
It was meant to send a message to the Commander in Chief, but its
only real effect is to delay the delivery of urgent material support to
our troops. The President has said he will veto any legislation that
includes a surrender date and which substitutes the judgment of
politicians in Washington for the judgment of commanders in the field.
Those who voted for the House spending bill on Friday, therefore, knew
it had no chance of being approved. It was an empty promise to the
troops.
The Constitution gives Members of Congress a concrete way of
expressing their opposition to a war, and that is to vote against
funding it. But House Democrats are trying to have it both ways: They
call their bill a statement against the very war it continues to fund,
a promise of support for the troops that has no chance of being signed.
Who loses out in this strange calculus? American soldiers and marines
deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq and their worried families here at
home are the losers.
The Secretary of Defense said as much last week. He said delaying the
approval of funds would slow the training of units already headed into
Iraq and reduce the funds available for repairs to buildings and
equipment. He said it would force the Army to consider cutting funds
for renovations to barracks and cut off repairs to equipment that is
needed to support troop deployment training.
The House brushed these concerns aside to express a point of view.
But troops who have been sent into battle with assurances of support
got another message: Don't count on it from us.
Some have said the Senate version of the war spending bill is more
palatable. They say this because its date for withdrawal is only a
goal. They think that by retaining this provision, they will eventually
force Republicans to accept the notion that battlefield commanders
should be tied to arbitrary timelines. Believe me, they are wrong.
The week before last, we prevented legislation that would have told
our enemies the date on which we will give up. A majority in the Senate
showed it won't approve a bill that shares our battle plan with the
enemy or which tells soldiers and commanders how to do their jobs.
We won't let timelines be used as the toll booth for getting aid to
the troops, and we need to send the President a bill that doesn't
include them so he can sign it without delay. I urge my colleagues to
put an end to this unfortunate and misguided effort to set an arbitrary
date upon which to withdraw from Iraq and to strip language from this
emergency spending bill that only guarantees our troops will have to
wait for the help they need and the support they deserve.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader.
____________________
EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS
Mr. REID. Mr. President, the first 3 months of the 110th Congress
have been very productive. We have shown the American people that when
Democrats and Republicans work together results flow. It is
interesting, when that happens, there are a lot of positives that can
be said by both parties. When we don't accomplish something, there is a
lot of criticism that is shared by both parties.
This productive work began in January when we passed the ethics bill,
the most sweeping reform in the history of our country. Next we worked
to raise the minimum wage for the first time in a decade. After minimum
wage, we finished the fiscal work of the last Congress, the 109th
Congress, by passing a responsible continuing resolution with no
earmarks. Then we went to homeland security and ensured that 5 years
after 9/11, all the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission will be
implemented. Last week, we passed a balanced budget which includes over
$180 billion in tax breaks for middle-class families and says in the
future, if you are going to lower taxes, if you are going to increase
spending, you have to have some way to pay for it. Ethics, minimum
wage, the continuing resolution, the 9/11 recommendations and the
budget--it is a record of which all of us can be proud. But, of course,
we have so much more to do. From stem cell to immigration to energy,
there are challenges ahead, and this week the Senate will turn its
attention to the most pressing challenge of them all--the debacle of
Iraq.
Today we begin consideration of the 2007 supplemental appropriations
bill. This legislation includes more than $121 billion. The vast
majority--90 percent of it--is for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It
is also for enhancing military readiness generally, for improving
veterans health care--and certainly in the wake of Walter Reed and
other scandals regarding how veterans are being taken care of, this is
certainly something that is necessary--for national priorities such as
rebuilding the gulf coast and homeland security and I mention, Mr.
President, drought assistance, farm disaster.
In the western part of the United States, because of this global
climate change, we have had millions--I am speaking directly--millions,
not thousands, but millions--of acres burned, and unless we figure out
some way to restore that vegetation, that land is going foul, to say
the least. That is what this is all about--farm aid assistance. Willie
Nelson could sing for weeks about the need for this assistance to take
place in the West. I am not an expert on wheat, corn, rice, and all
those other products--a lot of people here are--but I am about
rangelands and what has happened to Nevada.
The bill contains critical money, as I have indicated, for our
troops. We need to get the money to them as quickly as we can. Our
troops are serving under difficult conditions. The Senate will ensure
they have everything they need to continue this fight as we have done.
Our support, though, for the troops does not stop at funding. We must
also ensure our soldiers have a strategy for success. The Democratic-
controlled Congress is listening to the American people and fighting to
give our troops what they need and strategy--strategy worthy of their
sacrifices. That is why in addition to the much needed changes for our
troops, the bill also contains a strong message for President Bush:
Change course in Iraq.
My friend, the distinguished Republican leader, criticized what is in
this bill that will be reported to the floor shortly, saying it is not
good for the troops. David Brooks, the very conservative editorial
writer for the New York Times, said last Friday on the ``Jim Lehrer
NewsHour'': This is ridiculous for anyone to criticize a democracy for
debating the most important issue of the day, the war in Iraq. The very
conservative David Brooks said this is what democracies are all about.
The troops over there know this is good.
I have my BlackBerry on my hip. Someone BlackBerried his friend, one
of my staff members, who is a full colonel in the Army National Guard
out in Nevada. He keeps in touch with his friends. He said what
happened in the House and what we put in our bill is good for the
troops--this is a soldier e-mailing my friend from Iraq--because it
lets the Iraqi Government know we are serious. He went on to say the
deadline is important for the Iraqi people and the soldiers, and the
Iraqi people know that.
Secretary Gates, when asked about this timeline, provisions in the
bill relating to Iraq, said it doesn't affect the troops adversely at
all.
Certainly the troops know we care about them. We give them everything
they need. But last week, we entered the fifth year of this war. Think
about that, the fifth year of this war, and there is no end in sight, I
am sorry to say. The news this morning, when I first got up, was five
more soldiers were killed yesterday, 238 this year alone. March 26, 238
dead Americans, just like the boy Raul Bravo, from Elco, NV. I talked
to his mother--237 just like that young man. Three thousand two hundred
forty-one so far in
[[Page 7573]]
this war--dead Americans--25,000 wounded. One hospital in Texas has
handled 250 amputations. There are 2,000 double amputees as a result of
this war.
The war continues to move in the wrong direction and yet--instead of
digging us out of the hole it created in Iraq--instead of stopping this
downward spiral of destruction--instead of taking the fight to the
terrorists who attacked us on September 11--this White House wants us
to keep doing more of the same in Iraq.
In January, President Bush said he would escalate the conflict and
send 21,500 new troops for a few months. Of course, we were misled on
that. We now know the number is around 30,000, and they will be there
indefinitely, and the President has said he might ask for more troops.
There is no short-term surge, as the President has described. It is
more of the same. The President is placing troops in the middle of an
Iraqi sectarian civil war. More military solutions to a problem that
General Petraeus, our top commander in Iraq, has said can only be
solved politically. Our commander on the ground in Iraq has said that
only 20 percent of it can be won militarily. That is not good enough
for me. We need to find a new way forward.
If the President will not listen to the generals, if he will not
listen to the American people, who have spoken for a new direction,
then perhaps he will listen to us, Congress, when we send him a
supplemental bill that acknowledges reality in Iraq. We must find a new
way forward. The President can swagger all he wants, but we have 3,241
dead Americans.
The Iraq measure in this bill changes the mission of U.S. troops from
policing a civil war to counterterror, training, and force protection.
It rejects the notion that this war can be won militarily, and it sets
a goal of redeploying our troops by March 2008. It includes a
requirement for a political, diplomatic, and economic strategy to be
implemented in conjunction with the redeployment.
The Iraq language is based on a simple premise: Iraq can be won only
politically. In short, it offers a responsible strategy in Iraq that
the American people asked for last November 7--a strategy that will
enhance our country's ability to wage war on terror.
Contrary to what President Bush believes, the key to success in Iraq
is not escalating the conflict by adding tens of thousands of
additional troops to trod down the same dangerous road. It is to find a
new way forward.
I urge my colleagues to support this supplemental. After 4 years of
war, our troops deserve a strategy to help them complete the mission so
they can come home.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I wish to thank our leader for his
comments about the progress that has been made in the Senate on issues
that affect the working middle-class families of this country and also
for his responses on the issue of the war in Iraq, where there should
be an opportunity, as we focus on the particular amendment, to get into
that in greater detail. But I thank him for his very worthwhile
comments this afternoon.
____________________
NORTHERN IRELAND PEACE PROCESS
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, the leaders of Northern Ireland took
another giant step toward lasting peace earlier today when Sinn Fein
and the Democratic Unionist Party reached a landmark agreement to share
power in a joint administration to be established on May 8. The
agreement gives hope to all who have worked so long and so hard to
bring unionists and nationalists together in government on a permanent
basis.
Prime Minister Ahern of Ireland and Prime Minister Blair of Britain
have been strong allies for peace. John Hume and many others have been
heroes along the way. But the indispensable persons in this historic
agreement today are Gerry Adams, the leader of Sinn Fein, and Ian
Paisley, the leader of the Democratic Unionist Party. In reaching this
agreement, they have acted to strengthen democracy and create a future
of peace and stability for the future of that troubled land.
Today, the people of Northern Ireland salute them both for reaching
this new day, and the world congratulates them as well. We know it was
not an easy step to take. Their past disagreements have been intense
and deep. The challenges they have faced often seemed irreconcilable,
and the scars of the past have often seemed impossible to heal.
Compromises have been difficult and painful to achieve. But with this
agreement, Sinn Fein and the DUP have finally taken the essential step
of looking forward together--not backward--and have agreed at long last
to work with one another for the future of Northern Ireland.
The eyes of the world will be on them on May 8. All who care about
lasting peace and stability look forward to the permanent restoration
of the Northern Ireland Government at that time. In a world where
political resolution often is elusive, these leaders deserve enormous
credit for giving us hope.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I listened with interest to the remarks of
the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts. I do, myself, feel a
great sense of pleasure and comfort in what has transpired today with
regard to Ireland, and I wanted to say so.
____________________
THE EMPLOYEE FREE CHOICE ACT
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, on March 1, the other body passed the
horribly misnamed ``Employee Free Choice Act,'' H.R. 800, and we may
soon be called upon to consider that bill or a similar Senate
counterpart. The bill was steamrolled through the House of
Representatives in less than a month from its introduction, with only a
single day of subcommittee hearings, at which only one expert witness
critical of the bill was permitted to testify. It was considered in the
House with only limited amendments allowed to be offered. Obviously, it
is incumbent on us to make certain the Senate takes the opportunity for
fuller debate on a measure of such wide impact.
The chairman of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee
has scheduled a hearing tomorrow, where we will undoubtedly hear how
``unfair'' the current unionization system is and how it must be
amended to allow for greater unionization. I am sure we will have a
full and robust debate in this body. But as we kick off this debate
over whether to deny private ballots to workers who wish to unionize,
it is my hope we will be able to at least hold fast and true to the
facts. There should be a full debate on these facts.
There is ample evidence to indicate that we should be wary of
amending the National Labor Relations Act, the NLRA, in a way that
would upset the balance in national labor policy between labor and
management and employer and employee. We must not rely on slogans,
anecdotal stories, and questionable secretly commissioned and selective
statistics about alleged unfair labor practices.
The NLRA and its attendant volumes of reported decisions and case
precedent by the National Labor Relations Board is an extremely
complicated, interwoven area of law. Amending it in the way the
sponsors of H.R. 800 envision could rip a gaping hole in the precise
weave of this complex fabric and have a dramatic impact with many
unintended consequences.
It must also be considered that amending the NLRA will not only
affect the welfare of unions, but it will also have a negative overall
impact on workers, employers--especially small employers--and on the
economy and America's ability to be competitive in a global economy.
[[Page 7574]]
So let us begin the discussion of the bill. The Employee Free Choice
Act is designed to increase union membership, which currently stands at
7.4 percent of the private sector workforce. The bill would accomplish
that through an artificial, union-controlled ``card check''
certification procedure in place of the traditional NLRB-supervised
private ballot election or, as some have called it, a secret ballot
election.
In fact, the bill would radically upset the balance in labor and
management and employer-employee relations by amending the National
Labor Relations Act in three ways:
First, the bill would mandate union representation without a private
ballot election among employees. The so-called Employee Free Choice Act
mandates that the NLRB certify a union as the exclusive collective
bargaining representative of employees when the union has demonstrated
that a majority of the employees, 50 percent plus 1, have signed union
authorization cards--or, in other words, the ``card check'' system
without a private ballot election among employees.
Not only would this deny employees the right of private, NLRB-
protected ballot elections on the question of initial union
representation, but through operation of the NLRB's current
``certification bar'' doctrine, it would prevent employees from
challenging the union's majority status through a decertification
election for the certification year.
Secondly, the bill would guarantee union contracts where the
Government would impose the wages, the terms, and conditions of
employment for 2 years if the parties fail to agree after 90 days of
bargaining and 30 days of mediation. That is because the so-called
Employee Free Choice Act requires compulsory, binding arbitration of
initial union contracts.
Specifically, under the so-called Employee Free Choice Act, an
employer must begin bargaining within 10 days of the union's demand.
Thereafter, if the union and the employer cannot reach an agreement
within 90 days, the contract terms must be submitted to the Federal
Mediation and Conciliation Service for a 30-day period of mediation. If
the FMCS is unable to mediate an agreement between the parties, then it
must refer the initial contract to an FMCS arbitration panel with the
authority to issue a decision that is binding on the employer and union
for a 2-year period.
Added to current law, the effect would be to deny employees the
opportunity to approve, or ratify, the terms of the contract. They
would be prevented by the NLRB's ``contract bar'' from initiating a
private ballot decertification election challenging the union's
continuing majority status for the 2-year term of the contract.
Finally, the bill would impose new antiemployer penalties. These
include prioritizing NLRB investigations of unfair labor practice
charges alleged to have been committed by an employer during an
organizing campaign and possibly pursuing injunctive remedial action in
Federal Court.
The proposal also provides for liquidated damages in the amount of
two times any back pay found due and owing and subjects an employer to
a civil penalty not to exceed $20,000 per violation of the NLRA. As
this chart shows, the proponents of the so-called Employee Free Choice
Act are asking the American worker to accept the denial of access to
complete information about the union, the denial of a private ballot
vote, the inability to decertify a union for at least 28 months after
it is initially certified, the denial of the right to strike for a
better deal after binding arbitration, potentially the denial of an
employee's opportunity to vote on a contract, and the denial of knowing
if a union is organizing at their place of work.
Let us look at that again. The effect of the Employee Free Choice Act
dissolves workers' rights to access to complete information about the
union, to vote in secret, to decertify the union for at least 28
months, to strike for a better deal--takes that away from them--to vote
on a contract--takes that away from them--and to know if union
organizing is taking place. It takes their rights away as workers.
This deceptively named bill has little to do with employee free
choice. In fact, it would take away an employee's right to choose union
representation through private ballot elections--some say ``secret
ballot'' elections--something the unions have always fought for but now
are going to throw away in their desire to unionize at all costs.
Indeed, it has everything to do with guaranteeing union organizing to
increase union membership, at a time when unions represent a steadily
declining percentage of America's private sector workforce.
As you can see clearly from this chart, since the modern-day union
movement in 1935, when you evaluate their percentage of the overall
workforce, unions have had good years, up in here, and they have had
many bad years.
As that chart clearly demonstrates, under the current system of NLRB
overseeing private ballot elections in recent years, unions have lost
membership.
Currently, I must underscore, union membership stands at 7.4 percent
of the private sector workforce. Proponents of the Employee Free Choice
Act seek to turn back time when it comes to the percentage of the
American workforce that is unionized and that they want to be
unionized.
I have no inherent problem with a fairly considered, fairly elected
union. However, this bill attempts to increase union strength through
an artificial, union-controlled ``card check'' certification procedure
which tosses away the traditional NLRB-supervised private ballot
election.
Where is the problem we are trying to fix? This bill would replace
the time-honored, NLRB-protected private ballot election, the
traditional system under which workers decide whether to be represented
or not represented by a union. Instead, the system would be supplanted
with the mandated ``card check'' procedure, where union organizers can
pressure employees to sign union authorization cards which are then
presented to the NLRB for certification of the union as the exclusive
collective bargaining representative of all of the employees.
It is important for us to consider that the U.S. Supreme Court has
repeatedly denounced union authorization cards as being ``inherently
unreliable'' because of the types of peer pressures, some subtle and
some not so subtle or benign, to sign the cards. In its 1969 Gissel
Packing decision, the Court acknowledged that the use of authorization
cards to determine majority support is unreliable and that private
ballot elections are the ``most satisfactory--indeed the preferred
method of ascertaining whether a union has majority support.''
Unions, likewise, prefer a NLRB-protected and supervised private
ballot election, at least when they are faced with a decertification
petition from their members to determine whether the union has majority
support. That was demonstrated once again last month by union
opposition to a proposed amendment to apply the ``card check''
provisions of the so-called Employee Free Choice Act to decertification
elections. That amendment was defeated in the House committee's markup.
As one court stated with regard to ``card check'' authorization:
It would be difficult to imagine a more unreliable method
of ascertaining the real wishes of employees than a ``card
check'' unless it were an employer's request for an open show
of hands. The one is no more reliable than the other.
That is in the NLRB v. Logan Packing Company of the Fourth Circuit.
It is hard to believe we are seriously considering a bill to deny
workers a private ballot vote so soon after the national elections. It
is also inconsistent with our Nation's history of promoting private
ballot elections for the disenfranchised members of society through the
suffragette and civil rights movements, especially when we are fighting
for the opportunity of individuals around the world to have the
democratic right to a private ballot election that is free of
intimidation and coercion.
[[Page 7575]]
I am reminded of a statement made on January 31 of this year by my
longtime friend and colleague from Massachusetts on the need for fair
elections:
For too long, we've ignored the festering problem of
deceptive practices intended to intimidate and deceive voters
in our national elections. . . .''
Although I am not able to say this very often, I can say that I am in
absolute agreement with my friend on that point. In every election,
whether it is for President, local dog catcher, or union organization,
we as representatives of the people whom we serve have an obligation to
ensure our constituents' votes will be cast without fear of
intimidation.
I assert--and I think many also would back this up--that a private
ballot election overseen by the NLRB, a Government agency, has a better
chance to be more free and fair than one in which it is left to the
union organizers to solicit cards in secret until they receive a
majority of 50 plus 1. What happens to the other 49%? Are they just
disenfranchised? The answer is yes.
Under the ``card check'' system, there is no inducement to allow
employees to make an informed decision, learn all the facts, and hear
arguments for and against unionization.
It is difficult for me to believe we would be considering a bill
which would mandate that the Government impose wages, terms, and
conditions of employment where the parties, new to collective
bargaining, have not reached agreement after 90 days. This would
destroy free collective bargaining and the entire labor law concept of
``impasse'' when the parties are unable to agree. Under the so-called
Employee Free Choice Act, for first contracts, ``impasse'' would be
defined as 90 days of bargaining before the Government steps in. Even
basic labor law textbooks term compulsory binding arbitration as the
``antithesis of collective bargaining.''
These are radical changes in collective bargaining which have little
to do with employee free choice. In fact, these amendments would
disenfranchise workers by denying them private ballot elections and a
vote on whether to accept wages, terms, and conditions the Government
arbitration panel would impose on them.
Who would benefit from the passage of the so-called Employee Free
Choice Act? I can tell you. Only unions. They would be virtually
guaranteed organizing success, increased union membership, and more
union dues.
As you can see from this chart, over the past 6 years, unions
traditionally win approximately 50 to 60 percent of NLRB-supervised
private ballot elections. In contrast, it is reported that ``card
check'' elections yield unions success approximately 80 to 85 percent
of the time. Who would benefit? I can tell you. Only unions.
Look at that chart again. ``Union Win Rates in Elections.'' The NLRB-
supervised election, in 2000, the unions won 51 percent; in 2001, the
unions won 54 percent; in 2002, they won 56 percent; in 2003, they won
57 percent; in 2004, they won 57 percent; in 2005, they won 61 percent;
and in 2006, they won 61 percent.
Where ``card check'' elections have been held--because the employers
have agreed to them, I guess, because they are certainly not law yet;
that is why they are bringing this up--80-85 percent have become
unionized even though 49 percent of the people in those companies have
had nothing to say about it. It is not right. It is not the way to go.
Unions would be guaranteed first contracts for a period of 2 years
under this bill.
Looking at the big picture, what would the so-called Employee Free
Choice Act mean for our economy? Let me read from a recent article
written by Jack and Suzy Welch in the March 12 issue of BusinessWeek
magazine. Jack Welch is one of the alltime important business leaders
in this country. Here is what they had to say:
We know it must sound strange to oppose legislation that
promises something as motherhood-y as ``free choice.'' But
the title of this bill is pure propaganda. It won't encourage
liberty or self-determination in the workplace; more likely
it will introduce intimidation and coercion by labor
organizers, who, after a long slide into near-oblivion,
finally see a glorious new route to millions of dues-paying
members. Their campaign could trigger a surge in unionization
across U.S. industry--and in time, a reversion to the bloated
economy that brought America to its knees in the late 1970s
and early '80s and that today cripples much of European
business. If you want to be reminded of what that looks like,
drive through Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley, as we did last
weekend, and take a look at all the shuttered factories.
Steel--like coal, autos, and so many other industries in the
global economy--paid the inevitable price of unionization run
amok.
. . . The advance of the Employee Free Choice Act
continues unabated. And so pretty soon, if enough business
leaders and legislators don't stand up, it may well be: Hello
again, unions. So long, American competitiveness. The change
will not happen instantly. Companies will fight unions as if
their lives depend on it, because they do. But given the
logistics of the Employee Free Choice Act, any management
campaign is hobbled. If you can't be at the kitchen table
with the organizers and their hard stares, you probably can't
win.
He sums it up:
In those areas where employers have agreed to a ``card
check,'' they have invariably become unionized and many
employees unionized against their will with the obligation of
paying dues.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full article be
printed in the Record.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I assert that this is the start of another
historic Senate debate on national labor policy. It is unfortunate that
I have to be involved in this because I was raised in the union
movement. I am one of the few people who have served in Congress who
actually earned a union card, who actually became a skilled building
tradesman, who worked in the building construction trade unions for 10
years. I believe unions are important, but I believe they should have
to earn their membership and not have it given to them.
In conclusion, as we enter this debate, let us not be fooled by the
misinformation from the other side.
Take a look at this chart. They claim employers coerce employees to
vote no. The truth is that in less than 2 percent of cases is it found
that an employer has inappropriately interfered in a union organizing
election.
They claim unions can't win elections under the current system. The
truth is that unions won 62 percent of NLRB elections in 2005, the last
year for which a complete set of statistics exists.
They claim American workers want to form unions using a ``card
check'' system. The truth is that, according to a recent poll, 79
percent of Americans disagree with the elimination of private ballots
when voting in union organizing elections.
The President has issued a Statement of Administration Policy that he
would veto the so-called Employee Free Choice Act if it reached his
desk. That should not make us complacent in the Senate. Even if a veto
were necessary, Senate passage of a bill like that which was passed by
the House would put us on record in future Congresses as being against
private ballot elections for workers in union representation decisions,
in support of Government-imposed wages, benefits, and other terms and
conditions of employment through union contracts where workers
themselves will be denied a ratification vote. Is that where we want to
be a year or two from now? I, for one, do not believe we as a nation
should head in that direction, and I urge my colleagues to resist any
attempt to force unionization on the American workforce.
To paraphrase the movie ``The Godfather,'' I believe union bosses
have made the American workforce a deal they can refuse. We must oppose
any attempt to pass any iteration of the Employee Free Choice Act, and
we must do it on behalf of the American worker.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
[[Page 7576]]
Exhibit 1
[From BusinessWeek, Mar. 12, 2007]
The Unemployment Act
(By Jack and Suzy Welch)
Are you at all concerned about American competitiveness in
the future?
--Srikanth Raghunathan, Irwin, Pa.
Yes. But not for the standard ``the sky is falling''
reasons, like the twin deficits, low-cost Chinese
manufacturing, or intellectual property piracy. We believe
those challenges will largely be ameliorated by market,
political, and legal forces. No, we're as worried as can be
that American competitiveness is about to be whacked by
something no one seems to be talking about: the Employee Free
Choice Act, which is currently weaving an insidious path
through Congress toward becoming law. If it does, the long-
thriving American economy will finally meet its match.
You didn't read wrong. We know it must sound strange to
oppose legislation that promises something as motherhood-y as
``free choice.'' But the title of this bill is pure
propaganda. It won't encourage liberty or self-determination
in the workplace; more likely it will introduce intimidation
and coercion by labor organizers; who, after a long slide
into near-oblivion, finally see a glorious new route to
millions of dues-paying members. Their campaign could trigger
a surge in unionization across U.S. industry--and in time, a
reversion to the bloated economy that brought America to its
knees in the late 1970s and early '80s and that today
cripples much of European business. If you want to be
reminded of what that looks like, drive through
Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley, as we did last weekend, and
take a look at all the shuttered factories. Steel--like coal,
autos, and so many other industries in the global economy--
paid the inevitable price of unionization run amok.
Make no mistake, We don't unilaterally oppose unions.
Indeed, if a company is habitually unfair or unreasonable, it
deserves what it gets from organized labor. But the problem
with unions is that they make a sport out of killing
productivity even when companies are providing good wages,
benefits, and working conditions. It is not uncommon in a
union shop to shut down production rather than allow a
nonunion worker to flip a switch. Only a union or millwright
electrician can do that job! Come on. Companies today can't
afford such petty bureaucracy or the other excesses unions so
often lead to, such as two people for every job and a
litigious approach to even the smallest matters. Yes,
managers and employees will sometimes disagree. But in the
global economy, they have to work through those differences
not as adversaries but as partners.
The Employee Free Choice Act undermines that. Here's how.
Currently, when labor organizers want to launch a
unionization effort, they ask each worker to sign a card as a
show of support. If 30% or more employees do so, a federally
supervised election can be called and conducted with one of
the most revered mechanisms in democracy, the secret ballot.
Thus, employees can vote their conscience, without fear of
retribution from either union leaders or management.
By contrast; under the Employee Free Choice Act, organizers
could start a union if 50% of employees, plus one more
worker, sign cards. That's right--no more secret ballot.
Instead, employees would likely get a phone call with a
pointed solicitation, or worse, a home visit from a small
team of organizers. You can just imagine the scenario. The
organizers sit around the kitchen table and make their case,
likely with a lot of passion. Then they slide a card in front
of the employee with a pen. Who would say no? Who could?
Now, union supporters will tell you that they won't
intimidate employees for votes, and regardless, management
intimidates all the time by threatening to fire employees who
vote union. But the system as it exists has safeguards,
including heavy fines against companies that misbehave and
automatic new elections.
Still, the advance of the Employee Free Choice Act
continues unabated. And so pretty soon, if enough business
leaders and legislators don't stand up, it may well be: Hello
again, unions. So long, American competitiveness. The change
won't happen instantly. Companies will fight unions as if
their lives depend on it, because they do. But given the
logistics of the Employee Free Choice Act; any management
campaign is hobbled. If you can't be at the kitchen table
with the organizers and their hard stares, you probably can't
win.
It's too bad. In fact, its terrible. And ironic. First,
because the ability to unionize already exists in America,
thanks to the secret ballot. And second, because the Employee
Free Choice Act ultimately only provides a free choice nobody
would ever want: how to spend a government issued
unemployment check.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Colorado.
____________________
ENERGY
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I come to the Senate floor to speak about
the issue of energy and the importance of this Senate and this Congress
and this country moving forward with an authentic picture with respect
to energy independence for our country. When I get up in the morning
and think about the major issues that are facing our country, there are
three issues which always come to mind.
The first is what is happening in Iraq and around the world and how
we restore America's greatness and how we put Humpty Dumpty together
again with respect to making sure America's greatness which we have
enjoyed for the last two centuries is something we enjoy in the 21st
century and beyond.
Second are the difficult and important domestic issues which we are
attempting to confront today--the issue of health care and how we move
forward to create a system of health insurance and health care
availability for all the people of America, an issue which continues to
confront us.
Third, the issue of energy and how we look forward. The issue of
energy is something many of us in this Chamber and in the House of
Representatives and the White House today will continue to work on,
which is so important to all of us.
With respect to Iraq, we will be facing that issue here in the weeks
and months ahead. I believe strongly there is unity in the United
States of America in terms of our support for our troops. I believe
there is a long-term desire for us to make sure what we do is establish
stability in the Middle East.
I believe all of us want to make sure we are doing everything we can
do to support our troops. Nonetheless, the debate will occur here on
this floor this week and beyond. It is an important debate. It is a
debate that involves perhaps the most important issue of our time. That
is the issue of war and peace and the debate that is certainly
appropriate to be held on the floor of the Senate.
With respect to health care, I am pleased with the efforts the Senate
Finance Committee and the HELP Committee are undertaking, with the
leadership of Senator Baucus and Senator Kennedy and others, as we try
to address the issue of health care. This year for sure we will move
forward with a program that hopefully will expand the coverage of
health insurance to the children of America. We think about 9 million
children in this country today who have no health insurance. The
expansion of the SCHIP program is something that is very important for
all of these children across our many States who today do not have
health insurance.
But the other issue, the energy issue, is one which is winding its
way through our various committees in the Senate today. In the
Agriculture Committee, under the leadership of Senator Tom Harkin, we
currently are looking at title 9 of the farm bill. We will have a
robust law that will move us forward with a new agenda with respect to
agriculture and energy.
In the Senate Energy Committee, under the leadership of Senators
Bingaman and Domenici, we are working on several bills that will help
us move forward toward energy independence.
In the Senate Finance Committee, under the leadership of Senator
Baucus and Senator Grassley, we have numerous initiatives on the table
that will create incentives for us to have the kind of biofuels, solar
energy, and the other kinds of energy that will create the new
environment for us to be successful in a program on energy
independence.
For me, when I think about energy, I see the dawning of a new age for
my State of Colorado and also for America. It is a dawning of an age
for America which we ought to embrace with vigor. It is the dawning of
the age of a clean energy future for the United States of America. One
year ago in my State I hosted the first Colorado Renewable Energy
Summit. At the summit, there were more than 500 of us brought together
to talk about our national energy policy and the energy opportunities
we face in my State.
We put renewable energy in the headlines for Colorado, and we have
kept
[[Page 7577]]
energy at the top of Colorado's agenda for the past year. This last
Saturday, 2 days ago, on March 24, 2007, we again summoned the people
of Colorado and we had over 1,000 people who attended a summit at the
Colorado Convention Center. We were joined in that summit by my
colleague Senator Wayne Allard, by Colorado Governor Ritter, the mayor,
six Members of the U.S. House of Representatives, the president of the
Colorado Senate, the speaker of the Colorado House of Representatives
and, as I said, more than 1,000 people in my State who were interested
in renewable energy and energy efficiency, not only for our State but
for the entire country.
Because of the work we have taken on in the last year in Colorado,
today we have a Colorado Renewable Energy collaboration. That
laboratory is an incredible association with the National Renewable
Energy Lab, the Colorado School of Mines, Colorado State University,
and the University of Colorado at Boulder.
Even though the ink is not yet dry on the formation of the
collaboration, these four great research institutions have already
launched a world-class research program. It is called the Colorado
Center for Bioresearch and Biofuels.
Colorado's private sector is moving forward, too, on a variety of
different fronts. First, with respect to wind, Colorado has added over
60 megawatts of wind generation in the last 4 years. But consider what
is on the agenda for 2007. In 2007, my State of Colorado will add
another 775 megawatts. That is more than tripling the State's
production of wind generation. That is an equivalent of the generation
we get from approximately two full-fledged powerplants.
Beyond wind, we have embraced solar. Since the passage of a citizens'
initiative in Colorado 2 years ago, Colorado's solar industries have
seen a growth of 40 percent every year. The State's first commercial
solar electricity project will be constructed in my native San Luis
Valley in 2007. We moved from wind to solar to biodiesel. In 2004,
there was no biodiesel produced in the State of Colorado. Today we have
three plants in my State that are producing more than 30 million
gallons a year, and a fourth plant is ready to start operations in the
production of biodiesel.
We go beyond biodiesel to ethanol. Two years ago we had no ethanol
plants in the State of Colorado. Today we have three ethanol plants
that are producing 90 million gallons of ethanol, and we have a fourth
plant that will come on line in 2007, adding 50 million more gallons
per year, and several other plants that are in the planning stages.
That is not all. In my State of Colorado, we have moved forward with
wind energy companies, with solar, photovoltaic designers, and
manufacturers who are opening facilities in places such as Larimer
County. Cellulosic ethanol companies, which are engaged in research and
development, inform us within 2 years they will be at a point where
cellulosic ethanol will be available in the commercial markets.
We have hybrid vehicle manufacturers who are doing the technology
development and research in my State, hybrid and plug-in vehicle
battery manufacturers, engine efficiency research companies, such as
German manufacturers in El Paso County and Colorado Springs.
There is a whole lot more that is happening with respect to clean
renewable energy in my State of Colorado. We have a long road ahead of
us, but we have found our stride and we know the destination. We want
America to be the world's center for renewable energy research, for
development and for production. I want my State to play a significant
role as we embrace that agenda.
Let's be clear about what is happening with respect to energy in the
United States of America. Some of us need to remind ourselves it was
not so long ago when President Nixon and then President Carter later on
said we needed to embrace a new ethic of energy independence. This was
in the 1970s, some 35, 40, 45 years ago when we were talking about the
importance of energy independence, frankly, because of the economics
that were driving it at the time. There was great concern with respect
to the formation of OPEC and with respect to the volatility of markets
that could disrupt the American economy.
We see what happened in response to the leadership in the 1970s where
there were great investments made in technologies that would look at
alternative fuels that would power our homes and cars in this country.
But the driver of economics went away when the price of oil dropped to
around $20, $21, $22, $23 per barrel. Over this last year, we saw the
price of oil get up to $60 and $70 per barrel, and we saw the price of
a gallon come up to $3 a gallon, in some places more than $3.50, $3.60
a gallon, the price of diesel following the same path. It became
apparent at the time the economic driver was not the only significant
driver here.
Mr. President, may I inquire as to the amount of time we have in
morning business?
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. We have 7\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. SALAZAR. May I inquire of my friend from West Virginia as to
whether he planned on using any of the time in morning business.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I do have an amendment, and I will speak to
that amendment.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. If the Senator from West Virginia
does have not objection, we will allow the Senator from Colorado to
finish his remarks, and then we will recognize the Senator from West
Virginia.
Mr. BYRD. Very well.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, so I am clear on my time, I have about 7
minutes in morning business allocated to me under the current order?
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. That is correct.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, let me continue with respect to the
comments I was making concerning the issue of energy.
If you think about the 1970s and the 1980s, it was the economy that
was at the root of what we were trying to do to develop solar energy
and wind energy and looking at biofuels and the like. A lot has changed
in those times. There is tremendous interest and a tremendous amount of
energy being spent in each of our committees here in the Senate and the
House of Representatives and in the White House and the Department of
Energy on a clean energy future for America.
Some people will ask the question today: Well, is this another short-
lived agenda in the same way it was in the 1970s and the 1980s? When
you look at the charts and you see what we were investing in clean
energy technology back in the 1970s and 1980s, it was significantly
higher than what we are investing in the 1980s and the 1990s and the
early 2000s.
I submit that things have changed because the drivers today are not
only the economic drivers of our time. Today when we look at the energy
issues we face in our world, it is not just about the volatility of the
energy markets we see around the world and here in the United States,
there are two other drivers that are equally as important. The first of
those drivers has to be our national security. When you think about the
fact that today we are importing about 60 percent of our oil from
foreign countries, in the next 10 to 15 years, if projections continue
the way they are, and growth continues the way it is expected to
continue, we will be importing 70 percent of our oil from foreign
countries.
If that occurs, then we will continue to compromise the foreign
policy, the national security of this Nation in a manner none of us
should ever allow to happen. In fact, it would be a dereliction of duty
for this Congress, for the Senate, and for this country to allow that
to happen.
In the latest skirmish with Israel and Lebanon, one has to ask the
question about where that money was coming from that was funding the
militia group of Hezbollah in its firing of nearly 10,000 rockets into
the northern city of Haifa in northern Israel. One has to ask that
question, where was the money coming from that would fund the 10,000
members of that militia
[[Page 7578]]
group called Hezbollah in Lebanon and other places around the world?
Well, we do not need to look very far for the answer to that
question. You and I know--you as the Presiding Officer are well aware
of the security interests here in our country--very well that the money
creating and funding the terrorist groups in places such as Lebanon is
coming from oil. It is coming from oil we are paying $60 and $70 a
barrel for today.
So the very national security of our country requires us, it demands
of us, and we can do no less than to move forward with an agenda that
grasps the imperative of energy independence in our world. That energy
independence will come about with great opportunities as we look at a
clean energy future for America. We will be able to derive jobs and
create the kind of national economic security we need in the United
States of America.
The final driver is the issue of global warming. The debate is about
whether global warming is an issue that needs to be confronted in the
United States of America, the debate that was being held several years
ago. But I would imagine most people in the United States of America
today are saying it is important for us to confront this issue.
In fact, as we are opening this day in the Senate, Senator Bingaman
and Senator Domenici are holding a hearing with members of the European
Union on the issue of global warming. Things have changed. Things have
changed from the 1970s and the 1980s and the 1990s when America slept,
and the only factor that was driving us to energy independence was the
volatility of the markets.
Today the driver is national security. We cannot afford to compromise
our national security by continuing to be overdependent, by continuing
our current addiction to foreign oil. We cannot afford to ignore the
issue of global warming that threatens the future of civilization. How
we approach those issues and how we develop solutions that bring us to
a positive movement forward is very important.
The issue of energy is one that can bring America together. To be
sure, the last 6 years have seen a divided America on many issues,
including Iraq. Energy can bring together Democrats and Republicans,
progressives and conservatives, much as the Energy Futures Coalition
has done in working with all of us. We crafted legislation that we call
Set America Free. It is my hope that by the time the Senate finishes
for the year or before we begin the August recess, we will have
legislation that is bipartisan in nature, that will move us forward
with a new energy future for America. That energy future will be one
that is bound by a vision of a clean energy future that includes
renewable energies, new technologies, and that goes after the low-
hanging fruit of energy efficiency and addresses the issue of global
warming.
I ask unanimous consent that a portion of a speech I gave at an
energy summit in Colorado be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Colorado New Energy Summit--2007
This is the dawning of a new age for Colorado and America--
this is the dawning of the age of America's clean energy
future!
One year ago, we hosted the first Colorado renewable energy
summit. That 2006 Summit brought more than 500 of us together
to talk about our national energy policy and Colorado's
energy opportunities. We put renewable energy in the
headlines for Colorado, and we've kept energy at the top of
Colorado's agenda for the past year.
This Saturday, March 24, 2007, over one thousand people
from Colorado joined us for Colorado's New Energy Summit. We
were joined by two United States Senators, the Colorado
Governor, the Mayor of Denver, six Members of the U.S. House
of Representatives, the President of the Colorado Senate, the
Speaker of the Colorado House of Representatives . . . and
more than one thousand Coloradans who want more renewable
energy, improved energy efficiency, and greater energy
independence.
One year ago, we talked about attracting more energy
research projects and more energy entrepreneurs to Colorado.
Today, we have the Colorado Renewable Energy Collaboratory,
an incredible association of the National Renewable Energy
Lab, the Colorado School of Mines, Colorado State University
and the University of Colorado at Boulder. And even though
the ink is not yet dry on the Collaboratory Agreement, these
four great research institutions have already launched a
world class research program: the Colorado Center for
Biorefining and Biofuels--C2B2.
And Colorado's private clean energy sector is taking off,
too.
Wind
Colorado has added 60 megawatts of wind capacity in the
last two years.
And by the end of 2007, we will add another 775 megawatts,
more than tripling the State's production of wind power to
more than 1,000 megawatts.
Solar
Since the passage of Amendment 37, Colorado's solar rooftop
industries have seen growth of 40% per year.
And the State's first commercial solar electricity project
will be constructed in the San Luis Valley in 2007.
Biodiesel
In 2004, there was no biodiesel produced in Colorado.
Today, we have three plants producing more than 30 million
gallons a year, and a fourth plant ready to start operations.
Ethanol
Two years ago, there were no ethanol plants in Colorado.
Today, three plants produce more than 90 million gallons
per year, and a fourth plant will come on line in 2007,
adding another 50 million gallons per year.
And that's not all. We have locally based:
Wind energy companies
Solar photovoltaic designers and manufacturers
Cellulosic ethanol companies, engaged in R&D and preparing
to build biorefineries
Hybrid vehicle manufacturers
Hybrid and plug-in vehicle battery manufacturers
Engine efficiency research companies
And that's only the beginning.
Colorado's clean, renewable energy economy is on the move.
We have got a long road ahead of us, but we have found our
stride and we know our destination: Colorado will be the
world's center for renewable energy research, development and
production.
america's energy challenges
We have come a long way in the past year, and we should be
proud, but we must be realistic about the energy challenges
that face us as a Nation and world.
energy security and independence
First, energy policy is at the heart of our national
security. The United States continues to import much more oil
than we produce. Nearly two-thirds of our oil supplies come
from abroad. And much of that oil, comes from unstable and
even politically hostile regions. Our deep dependence on
foreign oil means that our national security is constantly at
risk. Our oil supply lines are long and fragile. Even worse,
our dependence on foreign oil means that we're sending
hundreds of billions of dollars overseas, much of which flows
to regimes that are hostile or corrupt or both. Indeed, we
are funding the very regimes that threaten our interests. It
is foolish to think we can control our Nation's security if
we can't control our energy lifelines.
It may be decades before we get the majority of liquid
transportation fuels from renewable sources, but that doesn't
mean renewables can't make a significant difference
immediately. We produced nearly five billion gallons of
ethanol in 2006, biodiesel is on the rise and cellulosic
biofuels will be in commercial production by 2009. We can
also look to other current or emerging technologies--hybrids
and plug-in electrics--to reduce our thirst for oil.
There are a lot of good reasons to turn to renewable
energy, but I start with this one: the most effective step to
increase our national security in the twenty-first century is
to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
Energy and Economic Sustainability
The second energy challenge that we face is economic. We're
not going to run out of oil any time soon, but we're going to
run out of cheap oil. Oil from new reserves and alternative
sources, like the deep Gulf of Mexico reserves and Canadian
tar sands, will cost much more to find, to extract and to
refine. On top of increased costs, we are going to see
increasing competition from the rapidly growing economies qf
China and India and other developing nations. That means
demand pressures on top of supply pressures.
And it is not just our cars and trucks that run on oil--
much of our current economy depends on oil and natural gas.
We heat with it, we produce lubricants and fertilizers and
commercial chemicals with it, and we make plastics and fibers
and construction materials from it. The economic
competitiveness of our economy will be determined in
substantial part by how we cope with increasing energy costs.
In coming decades, those economies that develop reliable,
affordable sources of energy will thrive. Those economies
that remain dependent on imported oil and gas will suffer.
But, there is also an economic opportunity. There is money
to be made in creating new energy technologies, and there is
[[Page 7579]]
money to be made in using them. America has led the world in
developing renewable energy technologies, but we have lost
much of our advantage because other nations have been much
better at implementing those technologies. Solar energy, wind
energy, biofuels--most of these technologies were originally
developed here, but other nations have surpassed us in
manufacturing or implementing these technologies. We should
admire the Japanese and the Germans for their solar
photovoltaics, the Israelis for concentrating on solar power,
the Danes and Germans for their advances in wind technology,
and the Brazilians for their ethanol, but there is no reason
for us to import their technology when we can manufacture
this equipment right here in America.
Energy and Rural America
I believe our economic future depends on our ability to
create the energy technologies of tomorrow.
Nowhere is this more true than in rural America. With the
advent of new energy technologies--including biofuels, wind
and solar--rural America can become not only our food basket,
but also our energy basket. At a time when we have record
trade deficits and much of rural America is struggling
economically, we should be investing in renewable energy from
our farms and ranches instead of importing foreign oil.
And let me point out that all our energy does not have to
come from 500 megawatt electric power plants or 100 million
gallon a year ethanol plants. Big centralized plants will
always have their place, but much of our energy can come from
smaller production plants, whether it's a small wind farm or
a community-owned biodiesel plant. Distributed generation of
electricity and biofuels will play a major role in our energy
future, and much of that energy production will benefit rural
America, both by creating new sources of income and by
reducing the cost of locally produced and locally used
energy.
global warming
The two drivers of national security and economic
challenges and opportunities drive us toward a renewable
energy and energy efficiency future. But there is a third
driver, just as compelling: global warming. Average
temperatures are rising, glaciers and sea ice are melting,
and the overwhelming majority of scientists agree that our
use of fossil fuels is a significant part of the problem.
There is no single solution to this crisis, no silver
bullet. But there are lots of options that will contribute to
a solution, including technologies and investments that
increase energy efficiency and conservation. Currently
available technologies, like fuel-efficient cars and compact
fluorescent light bulbs, reduce energy consumption. Biofuels
replace billions of gallons of gasoline and diesel, and
biofuels reduce the net amount of greenhouse gas emissions
because next year's crop will capture the emissions from this
year's fuels. Once installed, solar and wind technologies
produce electricity without generating any carbon dioxide.
And new technologies may enable us to use some fossil fuels
without contributing to global warming. IGCC--integrated
gasification combined cycle--power plants, for example, may
allow us to capture the carbon dioxide in coal before it is
released to the atmosphere, so that the CO2 can be
used or can be sequestered deep underground.
With creativity and commitment, there are many actions that
we can take that will substantially reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and help to turn the tide of global warming.
Countless generations of human beings have in my State
enjoyed this beautiful planet. But it is not certain that our
grandchildren and great grandchildren will be able to enjoy
snowcapped peaks, mountain streams, Colorado skiing, lush
green forests and fields of grain. If we want them to see and
enjoy Colorado's beauty and enjoy our State's natural
resources, then we need to act--now. And what is true for
Colorado is true for the Nation. Those of us who walk the
Earth today are not solely responsible for the fact of global
warming--the roots of this crisis go back to the Industrial
Revolution--but it falls to us to do something about it. We
must not fail.
The three great energy challenges that confront us at the
dawn of the 21st century are daunting--national security,
economic sustainability and the future of our planet. But we
know we can and will confront these challenges. And part of
the solution to each of these challenges lies in renewable
energy and efficiency and other clean energy technologies.
For the past 25 years, America has lacked the consistent
political leadership and public commitment to pursue these
new technologies, but their time has come and today we can
unite America in the spirit of bipartisanship to confront
these challenges.
State and local leadership
Much of the leadership in the areas of renewable energy and
energy efficiency has come from local and state efforts. In
November, 2004, the people of Colorado were the first in the
Nation to enact a renewable energy standard by popular vote
with the adoption of Amendment 37. Our General Assembly and
our new Governor have taken up the baton and carried it
forward with exciting new programs that will expand wind and
solar power in Colorado. Other states have done the same.
Energy in the 110th Congress
So I applaud and encourage this kind of state and local
leadership, but the ultimate success of our new energy policy
and our new energy economy will also require national
leadership in this 110th Congress.
I am proud to be a sponsor, with Senator Chuck Grassley, of
Senate Concurrent Resolution 3 to adopt 25 25 as a national
goal. Many of you know about this initiative. The goal is to
produce 25% of our total energy needs from our farms, ranches
and forests by the year 2025. Independent studies confirm we
can achieve that goal. 25 25 makes economic sense. Achieving
this goal will yield over 700 billion dollars in economic
activity and create more than 4 million new jobs. A
combination of energy conservation, energy efficiency and
renewable energy can get us to our goal. We should establish
the 25 25 resolution this Congress.
As a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I am also
working on the 2007 Farm Bill with Senator Tom Harkin and my
colleagues on that Committee. This new Farm Bill will include
an expanded Energy Title that will create new programs and
build upon existing programs to make the goal of 25 25
achievable. Just two weeks ago, Senator Harkin, Chairman of
the Agriculture Committee, traveled to Colorado for two
purposes: to visit NREL and to hold a Committee hearing on
the Farm Bill. Senator Harkin and I agree that good farm
policy means good energy policy in this new world.
I am also enthused by Senator Max Baucus and my colleagues
on the Finance Committee as we do our part to address the
energy challenges of our time. I have introduced a series of
bills that will help us I produce more renewable energy,
adopt more energy efficient technologies and combat global
warming.
Senate Bill 672 is the Rural Community Energy Bonds Act. I
support our big wind farms, but we need a lot of small wind
farms, too, and we need a lot of small biomass and solar and
other renewable energy projects. This bill will allow small
renewable energy projects with at least 49 percent local
ownership to qualify for tax-exempt bonds. That will make it
easier for locally and community owned renewable energy
projects in rural and small town America to find investors.
And local ownership means that more of the profits from those
projects will stay on Main Street in Colorado's small towns.
I have also introduced the Rural Wind Energy Development
Act, Senate Bill 673. This bill will create a tax credit for
every residential wind turbine installed and will also allow
for accelerated depreciation on those turbines. For turbines
under 100 kilowatts, there's a tax credit of $1,500 for each
half-kilowatt of generating capacity. As I said earlier, we
need more distributed generation, and this bill will help us
develop it.
I am also working on several other bills to encourage
renewable energy production and energy efficiency
investments. The Securing America's Energy Independence Act
will extend the energy tax credit for solar technologies and
for residential energy efficiency improvements through 2016.
If we want manufacturers to build these technologies and we
want homeowners to buy them, we need to create reliable
incentives that encourage planning and investment.
I am also proud to co-sponsor the DRIVE Act with Senator
Bingaman and nearly 30 co-sponsors, with equal numbers of
Republicans and Democrats. The Drive Act stands for
Dependence Reduction through Innovation in Vehicles and
Energy. This bill, Senate Bill 339, and other related
legislation, will reduce oil consumption by 25% by 2025,
impose Federal fleet conservation requirements, support
research on electric vehicles, require the Federal government
to purchase 15% of its electricity from renewable sources by
2015, and would phase-out incandescent light bulbs in favor
of more energy efficient technologies. I am hopeful that this
bill will pass in this Congress.
I'm also working with other members of the Senate Energy
and Natural Resources Committee to draft a bill to require
the use of 30 billion gallons of renewable fuels by 2020, to
increase the funding for bioenergy research and development,
and to offer financial support for renewable fuel production
facilities, including cellulosic biofuel plants and
biorefineries.
We should all recognize that we are going to be dependent
on fossil fuels for a significant portion of our energy for
the next several decades, so I'm sponsoring legislation to
conduct a national assessment of our carbon sequestration
capacity. As we continue to burn fossil fuels, we must find a
way to reduce the volume of carbon dioxide released into the
atmosphere. IGCC technology can achieve its promise only if
we can effectively sequester the carbon dioxide that's
captured.
Conclusion
Together, the 110th Congress can lead our State and our
Nation to a new energy future.
Mr. SALAZAR. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Klobuchar). The clerk will call the roll.
[[Page 7580]]
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
U.S. TROOP READINESS, VETERANS' HEALTH, AND IRAQ ACCOUNTABILITY ACT,
2007
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will
proceed to the consideration of H.R. 1591, which the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 1591) making emergency supplemental
appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007,
and for other purposes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Amendment No. 641
(Purpose: An amendment in the nature of a substitute)
Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I send an amendment to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from West Virginia [Mr. Byrd] proposes an
amendment numbered 641.
Mr. BYRD. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be
dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of
Amendments.'')
Mr. BYRD. Madam President, today we take up a supplemental bill to
fund our troops in the field, to send a strong message about the
direction of the war in Iraq, to improve the veterans and defense
health care system, to help the victims of Hurricane Katrina rebuild,
to secure the homeland, and to provide emergency relief to farmers
impacted by major drought and freezes. We are now in the fifth year--
the fifth year--of the war, this terrible war.
I was against it. I voted against it. We are there. We are now in the
fifth year of the war in Iraq. The debate about the war has
deteriorated into a series of buzz words--preemptive war, mission
accomplished, exaggerated intelligence, inadequate body armor, and
surges--and on and on. Our job in the Senate is not to look backward
but to look forward.
The Constitution clearly gives the Congress the power--yes, it does;
it clearly gives the Congress, us, the power--to decide when this
Nation should go to war, and it gives Congress the power of the purse,
money. Money talks. Funding such conflicts is the responsibility of the
Senate Appropriations Committee, the Senate Appropriations Committee.
The buck stops here, and don't you ever forget it, the Senate
Appropriations Committee. Because of that power over the purse, it is
certainly our duty to debate the future of the war in Iraq.
The bill before the Senate includes a provision that would give the
war a new direction, and it points the way out--out, out--of the civil
war in Iraq. There is no restriction on funding for the troops--no
restriction on funding for the troops. We fully fund the needs of the
troops. We do that, yes. In fact, the bill provides more funds than the
President requested for the Department of Defense, with an increase of
$1.3 billion for the defense health care system, $1 billion for
equipping the Guard and Reserve, and $1.1 billion for military housing.
The language in the bill narrows the mission of our troops in Iraq,
keeps pressure on the Iraqi Government to meet benchmarks on national
reconciliation, requires the President--yes, hear me now; requires the
President--to send Congress a phased redeployment plan. It sets a goal
for the redeployment of most of the U.S. troops from Iraq by March 31,
2008.
This country was not attacked by Iraq on 9/11. There was not a single
Iraqi, not one, involved in the devastation in New York, Washington,
and Pennsylvania on that fateful day. According to our own Government,
the perpetrators of 9/11, Osama bin Laden and his organization, are
alive today and rebuilding in Afghanistan and Pakistan at this moment,
as I speak, so help me God. Language in this bill would allow the
President to refocus our military and our intelligence on the
terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11.
During the debate on this bill, assertions will be made, yes, that it
is inappropriate to add to this bill funding to meet domestic needs. In
fact, the White House has claimed that efforts to add funding for our
veterans, for Katrina victims, and for homeland security will hold
hostage the funds for the troops. What nonsense--hear me--nonsense.
Just more buzzwords.
In fact, funding for the war is not the only critical need worthy of
supplemental funding this year. The war must not obliterate every other
concern. Last week, the Director of the Office of Management and
Budget, Rob Portman, said the President would veto the bill if the Iraq
language and additional spending remain in the bill. He said:
We're disappointed the Senate is allowing politics--
humbug--
to interfere with getting needed resources to our troops.
Politics? Politics? I ask the Senate, is it politics to ensure that
the VA has a health care system that can provide first-rate care for
the wounded? Is it? No. It is a moral imperative--yes, a moral
imperative.
Is it politics to provide critical resources to help the gulf region
rebuild after Hurricane Katrina? Is it? Is it politics? No, it is not
politics. It is compassion--compassion.
Is it politics to help rural America recover from drought and freeze?
Is it? No. It is common sense, do you hear me, common sense and good
economics.
This bill meets some of the most urgent needs of our country. It
includes $1.7 billion to ensure that the VA has the resources it needs
to help the brave men and women wounded in the war. The VA needs
resources in order to provide first-rate care to profoundly wounded,
terribly wounded, horribly wounded soldiers. We are morally bound--hear
me; yes, we are morally bound, aren't we, to care for our wounded
troops. This is not politics. No. Shame. This is not politics; it is
common decency.
This bill also includes $3.3 billion above the administration's
request for the victims of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma. The
President proposes to pay for the increased costs of repairing the
existing levees in Louisiana by cutting the funding that Congress
provided to improve the capacity of the levees to protect New Orleans
from future hurricanes. Shame. That makes no sense.
The bill provides new resources to repair the levees. We will not
follow a nonsensical strategy of repairing the existing levee system
that failed during Katrina by cutting funding already appropriated for
actual improvements to the levee system. We will not. We also include
funding for health and education, for law enforcement, and for transit
systems in the gulf region to help rebuild, to bring people back to
work, and to bring the region back to life. Not politics, just plain
old common sense.
The bill includes $4.2 billion for agricultural disaster relief. The
agricultural economy has been hit with drought and freezes. In 2006, 69
percent of all counties in the United States were declared primary or
contiguous disaster areas. Fourteen States had 100 percent of their
counties declared disaster areas by the Department of Agriculture.
I commend Senator Dorgan and Senator Feinstein and Senator Bond for
their hard work on this disaster package.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter from
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger requesting agricultural
disaster assistance be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[[Page 7581]]
February 8, 2007.
Hon. Harry Reid,
Majority Leader, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Mitch McConnell,
Minority Leader, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Robert C. Byrd,
Chairman, Committee on Appropriations, Washington, DC.
Hon. Thad Cochran,
Ranking Member, Committee on Appropriations, Washington, DC.
Dear Majority Leader Reid, Chairman Byrd, Senator McConnell
and Senator Cochran: As you prepare to begin work on the
Emergency Supplemental to fund vital government programs, I
implore you to include the Emergency Farm Assistance Act of
2007. The Farm Assistance Act provides much needed relief to
California's multi-billion dollar agricultural industry,
which has suffered devastating losses due to the recent
record setting freeze, as well as the extreme heat wave in
2006 and flooding in 2005.
As you know, on January 11, 2007, an arctic air mass moved
into the state and extreme cold air conditions pushed
nighttime temperatures to record and near record lows
throughout the state for the next 8-10 days. These extreme
weather conditions had a devastating impact on California's
agricultural industry, exacting catastrophic losses on our
citrus, avocado, vegetable and strawberry crops. Agriculture
plays a central role in our local economies, and as a result
of the freeze, many farm communities and related businesses
have suffered massive losses. To provide immediate relief, I
directed state agencies to make state facilities available to
local agencies for use as warming centers. We also contacted
agricultural associations to ensure that growers were aware
of cold weather, so that appropriate protective actions could
be taken.
In response to these dire events, I directed the execution
of the State Emergency Plan. In accordance with Section 401
of the Stafford Act, on January 12, 2007, I proclaimed a
state of emergency for all 58 California counties. I also
issued additional proclamations to specifically address the
impacts of the freeze on the agricultural industry, small
businesses and individuals in an effort to expedite federal
assistance to the counties that were hardest hit. I have
since requested that the President declare a major disaster
for 31 California counties.
In spite of these significant efforts to protect crops,
agricultural communities in California have sustained
substantial crop losses and unknown long-term tree damage in
excess of $1.14 billion. With the loss of a major portion of
our agricultural crop, thousands of farmworkers and their
families in impacted counties have been displaced due to job
loss and loss of income. Despite the assistance farmers and
ranchers are now receiving through the United States
Department of Agriculture and the Small Business
Administration, more aid is needed. It is clear that the full
impact of this disaster wi11 be ongoing and systemic.
The California Delegation has played a critical role in the
development of the Farm Assistance Act. I applaud their
bipartisan work to provide crucial assistance to our farmers
and ranchers in need. To that end, I strongly support the
Farm Assistance Act and its inclusion in the Emergency
Supplemental. The unfolding crisis in our agricultural
communities requires swift assistance and attention.
California agriculture literally feeds the nation, and I urge
you to include the Emergency Farm Assistance Act of 2007 as
part of the Emergency Supplemental.
Thank you for your consideration of this important request.
Sincerely,
Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Mr. BYRD. Providing agricultural disaster relief is not politics, no.
It is good policy.
The bill that is before the Senate also includes $2 billion for
securing the homeland. In the State of the Union, the President said:
The evil that inspired and rejoiced in 9/11 is still at
work in the world. And so long as that's the case, America is
still a nation at war.
Despite hundreds of innocent people being killed in train bombings in
London, Madrid, Moscow, Tokyo, and Mombai, India, and despite the
aviation sector remaining at a high terrorist threat level since
August, the President did not request one extra dime--not one thin
dime--in the supplemental for securing the homeland. This bill includes
funding for purchasing explosive detection systems for our airports,
for grants to help secure our rail and transit systems, and for
securing our ports and borders. The money is needed now.
For 5\1/2\ years, since the attack on 9/11, this administration has
raised fears of another terrorist attack. The administration has
announced a high, or orange, threat level for possible terrorist
attacks on eight different occasions. In every State of the Union
Address, the President has stoked the fires of fear. Periodically, the
Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the FBI
Director helped to fan those flames. Yet the President consistently
sends to Congress budgets for homeland security that do not reflect
this perceived threat. Rather than spreading fear, the administration
should be reducing vulnerabilities by doing everything it can to deter
another attack. Providing funding to secure the homeland is not
politics; it is an essential duty.
The President's ``rob Peter to pay Paul'' approach to funding
domestic agencies has real and demonstrably severe consequences. The
failed response to Hurricane Katrina proved that. The inability to
provide first-class health care to our wounded veterans proved that.
But we never learn.
Another important aspect of this bill is in the oversight and
accountability that it mandates. For far too long--far too long--
oversight has been a lost cause, yes, around this Congress. Tough
questions are ditched in favor of softballs. Honest answers are buried
in political spin. This legislation says ``no more.'' Real oversight is
back, and it will not be denied. This legislation makes major
investments in inspectors general, from the Special Inspector General
for Iraq Reconstruction to inspectors general for the Department of
State, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Justice. Let's
hope we can begin to get the waste, fraud, and abuse in Government
under control. The legislation presses forward with GAO audits of the
use of these dollars as we try to put an end to the contractors'
bonanza of big dollars free from the prying eyes of Congress or the
public. Insisting that U.S. tax dollars are wisely spent is not
politics. What is it? It is our duty. Hear me. It is our duty.
The Appropriations Committee has made careful choices. The White
House assertion that spending in this bill is excessive or extraneous
or political--humbug. It simply has no foundation. The committee has
chosen to provide first-rate care to the war wounded, to provide
resources to help the gulf region rebuild after Katrina, to improve
homeland security, and to provide agricultural disaster assistance.
This is a good bill. I urge prompt action on this legislation.
Madam President, I yield the floor.
Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, this appropriations bill reported by
our Committee on Appropriations responds to the President's request for
supplemental funding for the Department of Defense and other
departments and agencies. The bill provides $121.6 billion in emergency
spending. Of this amount, $102.48 billion is provided to support Iraqi
security forces to continue operations in Afghanistan and to wage the
global war on terrorism. In testimony before our Appropriations
Subcommittee on Defense, we were told this funding is needed by the end
of April.
I am disappointed the bill contains language that sets forth a
timetable for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. The language amounts
to a restatement of S.J. Res. 9, which a majority of Senators voted
against, 50 to 48, on March 15. The Senate has spoken on this issue.
Inclusion of this language as reported by the Appropriations Committee
last week will only slow down the bill and invite a Presidential veto.
We need to approve the funding now. Unnecessarily extending this debate
is not going to serve the national interests. I will offer an amendment
to strike this language from the bill.
In this bill, the Appropriations Committee also approved $14.8
billion for additional emergencies, including $7.9 billion for
continuing the recovery from Hurricane Katrina. The affected States are
making good progress, slow but steady and sure. But additional Federal
resources are needed. The bill also includes $1.7 billion for veterans
health care facilities, which signals the committee's continuing
interest in ensuring that our veterans receive the quality care they
deserve.
I applaud the chairman's goal, the distinguished Senator from West
Virginia, of completing work on the bill this week. I am concerned,
however, that the bill is almost $19 billion above
[[Page 7582]]
the President's request. We need to be sure this spending is necessary
and responsible. I look forward to working with my good friend from
West Virginia to ensure that this is the case. It is imperative that we
provide funding to our troops promptly, and it will remain my goal to
put a bill on the President's desk that he can sign.
Amendment No. 643 to Amendment No. 641
Madam President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask that it be
reported.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Cochran], for himself,
Mr. McCain, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Graham, Mr. Warner, Mr.
Stevens, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Shelby, Mr. Craig, Mr. Allard,
Mr. Bennett, and Mr. Enzi, proposes an amendment numbered 643
to amendment No. 641.
Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
amendment no. 643
(Purpose: To strike language that would tie the hands of the Commander-
in-Chief by imposing an arbitrary timetable for the withdrawal of U.S.
forces from Iraq, thereby undermining the position of American Armed
Forces and jeopardizing the successful conclusion of Operation Iraqi
Freedom)
On page 24, strike line 16 and all that follows through
page 26, line 24 and insert:
``SEC. 1315. BENCHMARKS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAQ.--''
Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, this is an amendment to the committee
substitute which is now at the desk. The amendment will strike part of
section 1315 of the bill titled ``Revision of United States Policy on
Iraq.'' The majority of section 1315 of this act is a restatement of
S.J. Res. 9, the United States Policy in Iraq Resolution of 2007.
Two weeks ago, the Senate voted against adopting S.J. Res. 9 by a
vote of 50 to 48. Section 1315 calls for a prompt transition of the
mission in Iraq to a limited mission; a phased redeployment of U.S.
forces from Iraq within 120 days of enactment of this act; a goal of
redeployment of all U.S. combat forces from Iraq by March 31, 2008,
except for a limited number essential for protecting U.S. and coalition
personnel and infrastructure, training, and equipping Iraqi forces, and
conducting targeted counterterrorism operations.
Section 1315 also calls for a classified campaign plan for Iraq,
including benchmarks and projected redeployment dates of U.S. forces
from Iraq. Finally, it also includes an expression of the sense of
Congress concerning benchmarks for the Government of Iraq, along with a
reporting requirement by the commander, multinational forces, Iraq,
which is currently General Petraeus, to detail the progress being made
by the Iraqi Government on the benchmarks contained in this section.
This amendment does not remove the sense-of-the-Congress provision
that is important to a number of Senators. I think all Senators share
an earnest desire that the Iraqi Government move aggressively to
undertake the measures necessary to ensure a stable and free Iraq. The
language to be removed by my amendment is essentially a restatement of
S.J. Res. 9, which, as I said, on March 15 Senators defeated by a vote
of 50 to 48.
Before announcing his new plan in Iraq, the President sought input
from his top military and civilian advisers, along with Members of
Congress, foreign leaders, and other military and foreign policy
experts. He acknowledged there was no easy solution to the situation in
Iraq and the Middle East, and he determined a temporary deployment of
additional U.S. troops in Iraq to support Iraqi security forces would
provide a new window of opportunity for Iraqi political and economic
initiatives to take hold and reduce sectarian violence. This plan
provides the best hope to bring stability to the country and to hasten
the day when our troops will come home.
Earlier this year the National Intelligence Estimate entitled
``Prospects for Iraq's Stability: A Challenging Road Ahead,'' was
delivered to the Congress. The National Intelligence Estimate
indicated--and I am quoting now from an unclassified version:
Coalition capabilities, including force levels, resources,
and operations, remain an essential stabilizing element in
Iraq. If coalition forces were withdrawn rapidly during the
term of this Estimate--
Which is 12 to 18 months--
we judge that this almost certainly would lead to a
significant increase in the scale and scope of sectarian
conflict in Iraq, intensify Sunni resistance to the Iraqi
government, and have adverse consequences for national
reconciliation.
If such a rapid withdrawal were to take place, we judge
that the Iraqi security forces would be unlikely to survive
as a nonsectarian national institution; neighboring
countries--invited by Iraqi factions or unilaterally--might
intervene openly in the conflict; massive civilian casualties
and forced population displacement would be probable; Al-
Qaida in Iraq would attempt to use parts of the country--
particularly al Anbar province--to plan increased attacks in
and outside of Iraq; and spiraling violence and political
disarray in Iraq, along with Kurdish moves to control Kirkuk
and strengthen autonomy, could prompt Turkey to launch a
military incursion.
It is clear to me that it is in our national interests to support the
President's new strategy, to help provide an opportunity for political
and economic solutions in Iraq, and for more effective diplomatic
efforts in the Middle East region. Of course, we know there are no
guarantees of success, but according to the National Intelligence
Estimate and the perspective of some of our most experienced foreign
policy experts, maintaining the current course or withdrawal without
additional stability in Iraq will be harmful to our national interests
and to the entire region.
We need to do what we can to help stabilize this situation and bring
our troops home. As a beginning point, for this strategy to work, we
should show a commitment to success. I support the new initiative and
urge the Senate to give it a chance to work. This does not mean we
should not monitor the situation or that the plan should not be
adjusted as new developments occur, but we need to let the forces move
forward to brighten the prospects of stabilizing Iraq and bringing our
troops home.
As Commander in Chief, the President needs our support. I support his
efforts and the efforts of our troops. The Senate should provide the
resources necessary to accomplish this mission, and these funds are
included in this bill. Troop levels and missions need to be left to
General Petraeus and his commanders who ought to have the flexibility
to react to the situation on the ground in determining how to deploy
troops as needed. Congress should not be tying the hands of our
commanders or limiting their flexibility to respond to the threats on
the battlefield.
The inclusion of unnecessarily restrictive language will ensure a
Presidential veto, we are advised. In testimony before the
Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, we were told that the funding
provided by this bill is needed by the end of April. We need to speed
this funding to our troops, rather than slow it down by returning to a
debate already settled by the Senate by a recorded vote.
Madam President, I urge the support of my amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia is recognized.
Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I expect that a number of Senators will
want to debate the Iraq amendment tomorrow. I look forward to a good
debate on this matter.
I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. KYL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Arizona is recognized.
Mr. KYL. Madam President, I wish to speak to the amendment that was
laid down by Senator Cochran from Mississippi, an amendment to strike
language from the bill that is pending before us, language that would
inhibit
[[Page 7583]]
the ability of our commanders on the ground to carry out the message we
have asked them to perform in Iraq.
As we are all aware, this security supplemental is designed to
provide money for the conduct of our operations in Afghanistan and
Iraq. There is a timetable here. The commanders have said they need, by
April 15, the beginning part of this funding so they can carry out the
missions we have asked them to perform. When I was there about a month
ago, this message was given to me over and over when I would say: Is
there anything I can do for you: Senator make sure we get the funding
without the strings attached when we need that money.
So the President requested this security supplemental appropriations
bill. The House has acted. The Senate has the bill before us this week.
Madam President, this funding bill will do no good if it has
limitations imposed in it that prevent us from carrying out the
mission, and the President has already said if language that sets a
timetable for the withdrawal of our troops is included, he will be
forced to veto the bill. We understand that.
It makes no sense to me that we would go ahead and pass such a bill,
knowing the President will veto it, because there would be no way for
us to go back and redo it all before the April 15 time, when the troops
begin to need this money. Many have suggested that this is actually a
slow-bleed strategy on the part of some to put a poison pill in the
bill, forcing the President to veto it, knowing it means the troops
would not get the money they need when they need it. I would rather
like to think that this is a genuine point of view on the part of some
of my colleagues who believe we should put strings attached on this
funding and somehow that will provide a more clear way for us to
achieve our mission. I don't understand it, but I suspect somebody
could argue that.
What I would like to do is support Senator Cochran's amendment to
simply strike this language from the bill. If the President is able to
continue to carry out the Petraeus plan and we have funding to do that,
we will know soon enough whether it will enable us to achieve the
mission. By the summertime or thereabouts, if it appears this surge is
not working, then we will know that as well.
What I cannot understand is why anybody would want to pull the rug
out from under the troops just at the time it appears the President's
strategy is beginning to work. When I was there, there was already
cautious optimism, signs of success of the plan--nobody wants to
declare success or victory, of course, but that those elements of
success continue to be manifested and be reported on.
I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record, at the
conclusion of my remarks, a piece by William Kristol and Frederick
Kagan from the Weekly Standard of April 2, 2007, entitled ``Wrong on
Timetables.''
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. KYL. Madam President, this piece by William Kristol and Frederick
Kagan tries to take the arguments that have been offered by the
opposition in favor of a timetable and demonstrate why those arguments
are incorrect. The first of the arguments is that the Iraqi Government
needs stimulus by us, or a threat by us, that if they don't hurry up
and do what they are supposed to do, we are going to pull out. This
kind of strings attached, therefore, makes some sense. They point out
the fact that, first of all, the resolution itself that was defeated in
this body a week or so ago by a vote of 48 to 50, that resolution,
which would have established timetables, was defeated, among other
things, because the Iraqis have already gotten the message.
It is not so much about sending a message to them as it is about
sending a message to our enemies and to our allies and to our own
troops, which says regardless of what you do, we are going to be out by
a certain date. The problem with the goals and with the specifics that
are supposed to be achieved, the benchmarks, so-called, in the
legislation is that it matters not how well the Iraqi Government
performs; we are still going to be out by a date certain. So it is not
the kind of message we want to send to the Iraqi Government and,
clearly, not the kind we want to send to our enemies who simply know
they have to just wait us out.
Another argument is that American forces would be able to fight al-
Qaida, and we don't need to be involved in the civil war of the Iraqis.
It would take a lawyer to figure that out. You are going to have to
have a lawyer with every squad on patrol to figure out whether they are
fighting al-Qaida or somebody else or what kind of action can be taken.
It is very hard to distinguish whom you are fighting when the fighting
is going on. Al-Qaida is definitely a problem. What did al-Qaida do?
They went over to bomb the Golden Mosque in Samarra, which got the
Shiites to decide they had to provide protection with militias, which
went over and attacked the Sunnis, who then went over and attacked the
Shiites and achieved the objective that al-Qaida wanted: to foment
violence among different factions within the country.
Where do you draw the line against fighting al-Qaida and someone else
if someone else is doing al-Qaida's bidding? It is a very convoluted
proposition. Clearly, you cannot have troops there to fight one
specific enemy but not another, especially when they are so difficult
to identify.
Finally, some think it is too late, that we have already lost, and we
might as well figure out a way to get out. I haven't heard my
colleagues talk that way because, under that scenario, you ought to cut
off funding today and not wait for the 6 or 8 or 10 months called for
under the resolution. As I said, the Senate defeated the virtually
identical provision 2 weeks ago. One of the reasons is because our
military is making progress. It is finding that, for example, in Sadr
City, the mayor of Sadr City essentially invited the Iraqi and
coalition forces in without a shot being fired. The forces of Moqtada
al-Sadr have either gone underground or disbanded. Al-Sadr himself is
believed to have gone to Iran. Prime Minister Maliki has made it clear
he is not going to relent against the forces of the Sadr army. He has
fired the Deputy Health Minister, one of Sadr's allies. He has turned a
deaf ear to the complaints of al-Sadr. He oversaw the cleaning out of
the Interior Ministry, which was a stronghold that was corrupting the
Iraqi police. He has worked with other coalition leaders to deploy the
Iraqi units pursuant to the Baghdad security plan. Interestingly, he
has also visited the sheik in Ramadi, which is the capital of Anbar
Province and formally the real base of al-Qaida operations, and has
gotten cooperation with the tribal leaders in that area to join us in
the effort against al-Qaida and other insurgents.
All of this is demonstrating cooperation of the Government in
Baghdad, clearly refuting the notion that somehow the American policy
has to be to threaten the Iraqis to cooperate with us or else we will
leave and the only way to do that is by expressing that through a
timetable. Clearly, the Iraqi Government is cooperating, and setting
arbitrary deadlines would send exactly the wrong message both to our
allies and, of course, to our enemies.
We need to express the view to our allies that we will be there to
protect them when the going gets tough. The enemy is not simply going
to lie down and allow this plan to continue to work. They will fight
back. As somebody said, there are going to be good days and bad days,
but our allies need to know that we will be there in the bad days and
that we won't set an absolute deadline for getting out.
The other point I made earlier is the services need this supplemental
appropriations bill, and that is why it is necessary for us to strike
provisions of section 1315, provisions which would deny that funding
without the strings that are attached.
To this point, I also alluded to the fact that section 1315 is
internally contradictory and self-defeating. As I said, it provides
benchmarks for the Iraqi leaders to meet and then says it doesn't
matter whether they meet them, we are out of here. The resolution would
not send any message that
[[Page 7584]]
is constructive in any way and certainly is not changing the behavior
of the administration.
There are some who might believe they could support section 1315
because it is less restrictive than the House language. Indeed, it is
somewhat less restrictive, although essentially a distinction without a
difference.
This bill has to go to conference. There has been a great deal of
discussion by pundits and others that the more liberal element in the
House of Representatives is going to insist upon, at a bare minimum,
the language that passed the House of Representatives which they felt
was too moderate to begin with. We are likely to get change in a
conference that is language the President will have to veto, language
which is closer to the House language than the Senate language. I
think, therefore, Senators should not be acting under the illusion that
we can go ahead and pass this language and make sure that either in
conference everything gets taken out or at least this language, rather
than the more difficult House language, will be what is sent to the
President.
The reality is these are real bullets. This is not something with
which to play around. I don't think we can be voting for something just
because maybe in the conference committee we can try to make it a
little bit better.
Madam President, I wish to get to this point that will, perhaps, put
this in perspective. I can't remember another time in history when the
United States in the middle of a war has set a deadline and basically
told the world: We will be out by this specific date. To state the
proposition is to illustrate how odd and destructive a proposition it
is. If someone can come to the floor and tell me when this has been
done in the past and when it has had a salutary effect on the conflict,
I would be very interested and would certainly be willing to listen to
how that might have a positive effect here. But even colleagues on the
other side of the aisle several months ago expressed themselves on the
matter of timetables and deadlines, and they know who they are; they
acknowledge this is not the way to fight a war. One thing you cannot do
is tell the enemy when you are going to be leaving because it simply
allows the enemy to wait you out. Nothing has changed. That fact still
remains, and it seems almost inconceivable to me that Members now would
be deciding it is now OK to set a deadline and to set timetables.
Some might argue that it is just a goal, it is not a timetable. But
the reality is there are both embodied in this section which we seek to
strike. The beginning phrase is, ``The President shall commence the
phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq not later than
120 days after the date of enactment of the act.'' That is not a
``maybe,'' it is not an ``if everything goes well'' or ``if everything
doesn't go well,'' it is a ``shall commence'' redeployment. The goal is
``with the goal of redeploying by March 31, 2008,'' but the ``shall
commence'' is pursuant to that goal. So you have to start it, and then
you keep going, and your goal is to get it done by March 31, 2008. The
only exception is for the limited purposes of leaving troops behind to
protect our infrastructure and coalition personnel, training and
equipping Iraqi forces, and conducting targeted counterterrorism
operations.
How do you decide how many troops you need to leave behind to conduct
targeted counterterrorism operations when virtually everything we are
doing in Iraq right now is counterterrorism? How do you decide we are
going to be able to cut, say, in half the number of troops and still be
able to effectively conduct targeted counterterrorism operations? If
you are driving down a street to conduct a targeted counterterrorism
operation and somebody begins firing on you, do you have to ask them
whether they are a terrorist before you can return fire? Do you turn to
your lawyer sitting in the humvee with you: I want to comply with the
law, so can I shoot back or not?
This is ludicrous. We cannot impose these kinds of conditions on our
troops in the middle of combat and expect them to perform their mission
safely. We send the best trained and best equipped troops into harm's
way, and we need to give them the other tool they need to prevail; that
is, the ability to carry out their mission as their commanders have
defined it for them, not as it is micromanaged by a bunch of lawyers in
Washington or Members of the Congress.
So, No. 1, this isn't just a wish that we redeploy. It begins ``shall
commence the phased redeployment not later than 120 days after the date
of enactment of this act,'' and the goal is to have it all done by
March 31 of next year. That is so destructive in the middle of war that
I just can't believe my colleagues would actually contemplate doing
that or that they can believe putting these kinds of limitations on our
troops is a realistic way to fight a war--conducting targeted
counterterrorism operations but not returning fire against, what,
against somebody defined as an insurgent, maybe? I don't understand it,
and I don't know how many lawyers it is going to take to understand it.
Our troops on the ground who are in the middle of a conflict certainly
are not going to be able to fight and defend themselves under
restrictions such as these, which is, I gather, precisely why the
President says he will have to veto it.
That gets me to my last point. I can understand why, Madam President,
if you felt this was a lost cause, you would want to just say: Let's
have a vote to get out and be done with it and not fund the troops. But
instead, there are some--and I am not suggesting in the Congress but
there are some who have talked about this as a very clever strategy.
They say the opponents of the President and the Congress are going to
be able to say they voted to support the troops because they voted for
a supplemental appropriations bill for that purpose, knowing all along,
however, that it is a false exercise because it puts restrictions on
the troops fighting the war that they can't possibly live with, so the
President has to veto it. But he will get the blame, not them.
Well, that is too clever by half. The American people understand
this. I urge, if any of my colleagues are considering supporting this
for that reason, that they fail to appreciate that the American people,
yes, would like to bring our troops home, they would like to see this
conflict ended, but, no, they do not want it to end with an American
defeat. They do not want to see us defeated and, most especially, I
can't imagine anybody who wants to have our troops continue the war for
a limited duration of time under rules which put them in great danger,
which is what this would do. So the President has to veto it.
What happens when he vetoes the bill, if this is the form in which we
pass it? We are now beyond April 15, the time the troops need the
money, and yet Congress has still not acted to provide the security
supplemental funding. The Defense Department now has to terminate
contracts so they can switch money from this account over to this
account and begin a very costly and time-consuming process of trying to
make do while Congress makes up its mind, to make sure they can get the
money to the troops so they can continue their operations.
Maybe secretly there are some out there who hope all of this will
gradually reduce the ability of the troops to perform their mission so
that it becomes a proposition where our strategy, even under the best
of circumstances, can't succeed. In other words, the Petraeus plan
fails because we couldn't get the support to the troops when they
needed the support.
I hope that certainly my colleagues in the House and Senate will not
buy into that proposition, will not pull the rug out from under our
troops just when it appears this plan is showing signs of success. That
slow-bleed strategy would not only ensure that we would lose everything
we have gained so far, including the prospect of a success, but that
our troops would be put in more danger now than they would be either by
supporting them or simply by leaving. It would leave them in a middle
ground, in the middle of a fire but without the ability to properly
defend themselves.
[[Page 7585]]
Maybe some believe that would force our hand and just bring them home
anyway, acknowledge defeat, and be done with it. I don't think that is
what the American people want. If anybody is thinking that is the
strategy behind this proposition, I think they are not only misreading
American public opinion but do not have the best interests of our
troops in mind.
Since that is the rationale behind this resolution, as offered by my
colleagues, I am sure that is not the case. But that is why we need to
strike this particular section from the bill.
We will talk later about some other items that need to be stricken as
well. It is amazing to me, and I won't get into all the pork that is in
this bill, but here we have a security supplemental, emergency funding
to support the troops, and we decide to lard it up with all manner of
items that are not emergencies, have nothing to do with supporting the
troops, but because everybody knows this is a must-pass bill, they
figure this is a real good opportunity for them to get things in the
bill that might otherwise be very difficult to pass in the Congress.
Just a couple ideas: $3.5 million related to guided tours of the U.S.
Capitol. I am all for guided tours of the U.S. Capitol, but is this an
emergency?
There is $13 million for mine safety research. I am sure mine safety
is important to research. Is this an emergency which can't be put in a
regular appropriations bill?
We are targeting funding for sugar beets. I presume I like sugar
beets--I am not sure--but I don't think it is an emergency for which we
need to spend $24 million.
There is another $3 million funding for sugarcane, which I understand
goes to one Hawaiian cooperative.
Here is something which would appeal to all the politicians: $100
million for security related to the Republican and Democratic
Presidential nominating conventions. Is that next month, Madam
President? I have forgotten. Nominating conventions would be in July
and August, not of this year but the following year--not exactly an
emergency we need to fund in an emergency security supplemental to
conduct this war.
Do my colleagues hear what I am saying? Politicians have decided this
is a good train to get on board because it has to move, we have to fund
the troops. Since it is hard for us to get the Senate and the House to
act on these items otherwise, we will just try to attach them to this
bill.
We will have other amendments to try to remove these extraneous
matters from this funding bill. But what I wanted to talk about today
was primarily my concern that if we don't strike this section which has
the timetables for withdrawal, then one of two things is going to
happen: Either the President vetoes the bill and it then takes us
forever to get a clean bill to the President, with the result that the
troops don't have the funding they need and the strategy that is
currently working becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy for those who say
it can't work because they have denied the funds for it to work, or
these provisions remain and, of course, it is impossible to conduct
operations with these strings attached for our troops. Either way, it
is a heck of a way to fight a war. And it illustrates to me that we
ought not try to micromanage this conflict from the Halls of Congress.
We have plenty of other things that should occupy our time than
developing a strategy and the rules of engagement for fighting a war
when we have perfectly good people, such as General Petraeus who was
unanimously confirmed by this body, to develop a plan and see to it
that it is properly executed. We have sent him over to do it. I suggest
we give him and his troops the support they need to get the job done.
I would support the amendment of the Senator from Mississippi to
strike this section from the bill.
Madam President, I yield the floor.
[From the Weekly Standard, Apr. 2, 2007]
Wrong on Timetables
(By William Kristol and Frederick W. Kagan)
Let's give congressional Democrats the benefit of the
doubt: Assume some of them earnestly think they're doing the
right thing to insist on adding to the supplemental
appropriation for the Iraq war benchmarks and timetables for
withdrawal. Still, their own arguments--taken at face value--
don't hold up.
Democrats in Congress have made three superficially
plausible claims: (1) Benchmarks and timetables will
``incentivize'' the Maliki government to take necessary steps
it would prefer to avoid. (2) We can gradually withdraw over
the next year so as to step out of sectarian conflict in Iraq
while still remaining to fight al Qaeda. (3) Defeat in Iraq
is inevitable, so our primary goal really has to be to get
out of there. But the situation in Iraq is moving rapidly
away from the assumptions underlying these propositions, and
their falseness is easier to show with each passing day.
(1) The Iraqi government will not act responsibly unless
the imminent departure of American forces compels it to do
so. Those who sincerely believe this argument were horrified
by the president's decision in January to increase the
American military presence in Iraq. It has now been more than
ten weeks since that announcement--long enough to judge
whether the Maliki government is more or less likely to
behave well when U.S. support seems robust and reliable.
In fact, since January 11, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki
has permitted U.S. forces to sweep the major Shiite
strongholds in Baghdad, including Sadr City, which he had
ordered American troops away from during operations in 2006.
He has allowed U.S. forces to capture and kill senior leaders
of Moktada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army--terrifying Sadr into fleeing
to Iran. He fired the deputy health minister--one of Sadr's
close allies--and turned a deaf ear to Sadr's complaints. He
oversaw a clearing-out of the Interior Ministry, a Sadrist
stronghold that was corrupting the Iraqi police. He has
worked with coalition leaders deploy all of the Iraqi Army
units required by the Baghdad Security Plan. In perhaps the
most dramatic move of all, Maliki visited Sunni sheikhs in
Ramadi, the capital of Anbar province and formerly the base
of al Qaeda fighters and other Sunni Arab insurgents against
his government. The visit was made possible because Anbar's
sheikhs have turned against al Qaeda and are now reaching out
to the government they had been fighting. Maliki is reaching
back. U.S. strength has given him the confidence to take all
these important steps.
(2) American forces would be able to fight al Qaeda at
least as well, if not better, if they were not also engaged
in a sectarian civil war in Iraq. The idea of separating the
fight against al Qaeda from the sectarian fighting in Iraq is
a delusion. Since early 2004, al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) has
sought to plunge Iraq into sectarian civil war, so as to
critically weaken the government, which is fighting it. AQI
endeavors to clear Shiites out of mixed areas, terrorize
local Sunnis into tolerating and supporting AQI, and thereby
establish safe havens surrounded by innocent people it then
dragoons into the struggle. Now, heartened by the U.S.
commitment to stay, Sunni sheikhs in Anbar have turned on
AQI. In response, AQI has begun to move toward Baghdad and
mixed areas in Diyala, attempting to terrorize the locals and
establish new bases in the resulting chaos. The enemy
understands that chaos is al Qaeda's friend. The notion that
we can pull our troops back into fortresses in a climate of
chaos--but still move selectively against al Qaeda--is
fanciful. There can be no hope of defeating or controlling al
Qaeda in Iraq without controlling the sectarian violence that
it spawns and relies upon.
(3) Isn't it too late? Even if we now have the right
strategy and the right general, can we prevail? If there were
no hope left, if the Iraqis were determined to wage full-
scale civil war, if the Maliki government were weak or
dominated by violent extremists, if Iran really controlled
the Shiites in Iraq--if these things were true, then the new
strategy would have borne no fruit at all. Maliki would have
resisted or remained limp as before. Sadr's forces would have
attacked. Coalition casualties would be up, and so would
sectarian killings. But none of these things has happened.
Sectarian killings are lower. And despite dramatically
increased operations in more exposed settings, so are
American casualties. This does not look like hopelessness.
Hope is not victory, of course. The surge has just begun,
our enemies are adapting, and fighting is likely to intensify
as U.S. and Iraqi forces begin the main clear-and-hold phase.
The Maliki government could falter. But it need not, if we do
not. Unfortunately, four years of setbacks have conditioned
Americans to believe that any progress must be ephemeral. If
the Democrats get their way and Gen. Petraeus is undermined
in Congress, the progress may indeed prove short-lived. But
it's time to stop thinking so hard about how to lose, and to
think instead about how to reinforce and exploit the success
we have begun to achieve. The debate in Washington hasn't
caught up to the realities in Baghdad. Until it does, a
resolute president will need to prevent defeatists in
Congress from losing a winnable war in Iraq.
[[Page 7586]]
Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up
to 15 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I agree with the Senator from Arizona
that the consequences of playing politics with this important funding
for our troops is simply the wrong strategy; that what we have is a
game of chicken between the House of Representatives, which is larding
up a supplemental appropriations bill with a bunch of extraneous pork,
and the President, recognizing that there are nonsecurity provisions in
that supplemental appropriations, has said if that and the timetable
for withdrawal from Iraq is included as part of this emergency
supplemental, he will veto it. So this is a high-risk game of chicken,
with the impact of delaying passage of the supplemental being felt
directly by our troops on the ground, if that is in fact the result.
Last week, Secretary Gates made clear the consequences of not quickly
passing the supplemental funding necessary to support our troops. The
downstream effects will directly impact our soldiers, sailors, marines,
and airmen. By not moving expeditiously to pass a clean supplemental
bill that can pass the Senate and be signed by the President, the
majority risks extending the tours of our troops scheduled to come home
from Iraq and slowing the repair of equipment necessary to equip them,
as well as the training of Iraqi soldiers who are designed to replace
them.
Any delay in funding will not prevent a buildup of security forces in
Iraq but, instead, threaten to dramatically impact forces already on
the ground. Secretary Gates has said this kind of disruption to key
programs will have a genuinely adverse effect on the readiness of the
Army and the quality of life for soldiers and their families. So I
can't imagine why in the world our colleagues on the other side of the
aisle, the new majority, would want to risk that.
This supplemental is necessary to pay for training and equipping the
soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. If approved, the supplemental will
pay for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, repairing and
replacing equipment damaged or destroyed in combat, and new
technologies to protect U.S. servicemembers. This last provision
includes a new generation of body armor, better armored vehicles, and
countermeasures against improvised explosive devices. IEDs have caused
about 70 percent of the casualties in Iraq. The supplemental also will
provide funding for training and equipping the Iraqi and Afghan
security forces.
If this supplemental appropriations bill is not passed by April 15,
the military will be forced to consider the following: curtailing and
suspending home station training for Reserve and Guard units; slowing
the training of units slated to deploy next to Iraq and Afghanistan;
cutting the funding for upgrading and renovating the barracks and other
facilities that support quality of life for our troops and their
families; and stopping the repair of equipment necessary to support
predeployment training. This is what Secretary of Defense Robert Gates
has said on March 22, 2007.
If the supplemental is not passed by May 15, the military will be
forced to consider the following: reducing the repair work done at Army
depots; delaying or curtailing the deployment of brigade combat teams
to their training rotations. This, in turn, will cause additional units
in theater to have their tours extended because other units are not
ready to take their place. Delaying the formation of new brigade combat
teams; implementation of civilian hiring freeze; prohibiting the
execution of new contracts and service orders, including service
contracts for training events and facilities; and, finally, holding or
canceling the order of repair parts to nondeployed units in the Army.
All of these, according to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, on
March 22, 2007.
When the new majority took over Congress, they promised change. In
fact, the first bill passed in the Senate was an ethics bill that, in
part, helped improve transparency in the way we spend taxpayers' money
in Washington. While that ethics bill remains in limbo, the 110th
Congress has returned to the tried-and-true technique of inserting
mystery earmarks that have nothing to do with funding our troops or
fighting the war on terror into a war supplemental bill.
During the election season, many on the other side called the 109th
Congress the ``do-nothing'' Congress. The 110th Congress is quickly
becoming the ``say anything and do-nothing Congress'' when it comes to
fiscal discipline. Last week, when the Senate debated the budget, the
majority spoke of the need for fiscal discipline, even as it passed the
$700 billion tax hike for taxpayers over the next 5 years.
The chairman of the Senate Budget Committee was quoted as saying:
We have a responsibility to govern, and you can't govern
without a budget.
But governing takes more than simply passing a budget. Governing also
includes the discipline to live within a budget.
Unfortunately, both the Senate and the House failed in their first
test by including billions more in the war supplemental than the
President requested. As I mentioned, President Bush has already
threatened to veto the House bill; not all because of the timetable it
imposes for our troops' withdrawal from Iraq but also because the bill
is full of pork.
In today's edition of the Politico, they did a fine job of
identifying some of the most egregious examples of pork included in the
House bill. They highlighted $5 million for tropical fish breeders and
transporters for losses from a virus last year; $25 million for spinach
that growers and handlers were unable to market, up to 75 percent of
their losses; $60.4 million for the National Marine Fisheries Service
to be distributed among fishing communities, Indian tribes,
individuals, small businesses, including fishermen, fish processors,
and related businesses, and other persons for assistance to mitigate
the economic and other social effects by a commercial fishery failure.
It also includes $74 million for the payment of storage, handling,
and other associated costs for the 2007 crop of peanuts to ensure
proper storage of peanuts for which a loan is made, and the House bill
also includes $120 million for the shrimp and menhaden fishing
industries to cover consequences of Hurricane Katrina.
Now, I have to confess, even though I like to fish a little myself, I
had never even heard of menhaden, so I went on the Internet to
something called the Menhaden Fact Sheet. This is, if you will recall,
$120 million for the shrimp and menhaden fishing industries to cover
consequences of Hurricane Katrina. Well, as it turns out, according to
the Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia on the Internet, the menhaden are
fish of the--well, I can't even pronounce the Latin phrase, but they
are of the herring family.
It says here, describing this menhaden that the taxpayer is being
asked to pay $120 million in this emergency war supplemental: to
support the gulf menhaden and Atlantic menhaden which are characterized
by a series of smaller spots behind the main, humeral spot and larger
scales than yellowfin menhaden and finescale menhaden. In addition,
yellowfin menhaden tail rays are a bright yellow in contrast to those
of the Atlantic menhaden, which are grayish. Menhaden range in weight
up to 1 pound or more. At sea, schools of Atlantic menhaden may contain
millions of members. Common names for Atlantic menhaden are mossbunkers
and fatback. In Florida, yellowfin menhaden are called pogies, and are
the preferred species for use as strip bait.
This is important. It talks about the range, since this is supposedly
done as part of the Hurricane Katrina relief measure. It says gulf
menhaden range from the Yucatan Peninsula to Tampa Bay, FL, with
finescaled menhaden from the Yucatan to Louisiana--I guess we are
getting a little closer now to where Hurricane Katrina hit--yellowfin
menhaden from Louisiana to North Carolina, the Atlantic menhaden
[[Page 7587]]
ranges from Jupiter Inlet, FL, to Nova Scotia. The various species of
menhaden occur anywhere from estuarine waters outward to the
Continental Shelf.
It says that menhaden are essentially filter feeders, straining
microscopic plankton, algae, et cetera, from the water they swim
through open-mouthed. Unlike mullet, they are not bottom feeders. Due
to their feeding habits, they must be caught by cast netting to be used
as live bait.
This is the most interesting part of the article. It says: menhaden
are not used for human consumption. Most recently, menhaden has begun
to be exploited as a source of omega-3 fatty acid fish oil for
commercial human consumption, further threatening menhaden populations.
I certainly don't know what the purpose is of this $120 million for
shrimp and the menhaden fishing industries, but I can't see in this
description, or anywhere else in this legislation, why this is an
emergency or why it ought to be included in an emergency war
supplemental. If anything, the inclusion of this kind of appropriation
in this emergency war supplemental in the House bill trivializes the
importance of providing the money that will help our troops deployed in
Afghanistan and Iraq in harm's way.
Here is what the Senate bill included: $24 million for funding of
sugar beets; $3 million funding for sugar cane, all of which goes to a
Hawaiian cooperative; $100 million for dairy product losses; an
additional $31 million for a 1-month extension of the Milk Income Loss
Contract Program; 13 million for Ewe Lamb Replacement and Retention
Program; $115 million for the conservation security program; $100
million for small agricultural dependent businesses; $13 million for
mine safety technology research; $50 million for fisheries disaster
mitigation fund.
There is so much pork included in this supplemental appropriations
bill, both in the House version and in the Senate proposal, that it
warranted a front-page story and editorial in USA Today. An editorial
in USA Today questioned:
Which is worse: Leaders offering peanuts for a vote of this
magnitude, or Members allowing their votes to be bought for
peanuts.
The editorial went on to conclude:
These provisions demean a bill that, if enacted, would
affect the lives of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, the
balance of power in the Middle East and America's long-term
security.
In short, what we have is that my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle are willing to put money into pet projects--which may or may not
be worthy endeavors, we will never know--and yet are unwilling to
adequately fund the needs of our military. For all their talk of
earmark reform and transparency earlier this year, my colleagues seemed
to have forgotten all of that when they put together the supplemental
appropriations bill.
Madam President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a
quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Stabenow). The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The
Senator from Tennessee is recognized.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as
in morning business for up to 8 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
FIRING OF U.S. ATTORNEYS
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, my late friend Alex Haley, the author
of Roots, lived his life by 6 words: ``Find the Good and Praise It.'' I
thought of those 6 words in connection with the current discussion
about the firing of 8 United States Attorneys.
The Democrats are making political hay out of these firings at a time
when the Senate should be focused on Iraq, terrorism, health care
costs, excessive federal spending, energy independence and keeping our
brainpower advantage so we can keep our good jobs here instead of
seeing them move overseas.
U.S. Attorneys have always been political appointees serving at the
pleasure of the president. President Clinton fired them all on his
first day in office. Such partisanship is nothing new. Former Attorney
General Griffin Bell recently said that the custom once was for U.S.
attorneys simply to vacate their offices on the day a new president was
inaugurated, knowing that new political appointees would soon arrive to
take their desks.
In the summer of 1963, in between my first and second year at New
York University Law School, I worked in Attorney General Robert
Kennedy's office as an intern. I was so impressed that, after
graduation, I drove to Chattanooga to apply for a job as an Assistant
U.S. Attorney. The interview went fine until the U.S. Attorney for the
Eastern District of Tennessee asked about my politics.
``I'm a Republican,'' I said.
``Sorry,'' he said, ``We only hire Democrats.''
``But the Attorney General said the administration of justice was
non-partisan,'' I replied.
``That word hasn't gotten down here,'' the U.S. Attorney said.
Yet the historic political nature of these appointments is no excuse
for the excessive partisanship, amateurishness and bumbling exhibited
by the firing of these eight U.S. Attorneys in the middle of the
President's term. The best way to put in relief what is wrong with
these firings is to remember Alex Haley's admonition, ``Find the Good
and Praise It,'' and point to an example of how political appointees
can by their courageous action earn respect for the administration of
justice.
I have a personal interest in the example I offer. Nearly 30 years
ago--on January 17, 1979--I was sworn into office 3 days early as
Governor of Tennessee in order to prevent the incumbent Governor from
issuing 52 pardons and commutations to prisoners the FBI believed had
paid cash for their release.
The U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee, Hal Hardin--a
Democrat appointed by President Carter--telephoned to ask me to take
office early. Hardin was working with the State attorney general,
William Leech, another Democrat, to arrange the unprecedented early
swearing-in. Because Hardin and Leech were able to rise above
partisanship, the Speakers of the Senate and House and Chief Justice as
well as the Secretary of State--also all Democrats--participated in my
early swearing-in and the ouster of a Democratic incumbent Governor.
As it turned out, I was the only Republican in the group.
As then-Speaker of the House and later Governor Ned McWherter said,
``We are Tennesseans first.''
The story of January 17, 1979 was recently retold by Judge William C.
Koch, Jr., a member of the Tennessee Court of Appeals, in the March
2007 issue of the Nashville Bar Journal. Judge Koch was on the staff of
the State attorney general at that time and later was counsel when I
was Governor.
In the spirit of ``Find the Good and Praise It,'' I offer for the
Record Judge Koch's article as an example of how our system of
political appointment of U.S. Attorneys can and should operate, in
contrast to the example of the 8 firings and the response to those
firings that we are discussing today.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Nashville Bar Journal, Mar. 2007]
They Were Tennesseans First
(By Judge William C. Koch, Jr.)
Cries of ``let's kill all the lawyers'' have been heard
ever since Shakespeare wrote Henry VI. Some believe that
lawyers and judges have caused--or at least contributed to--
most of society's ills. Because the legal profession provides
such a convenient target, lawyer-bashing remains fashionable
in some circles.
Despite the din of criticism, the truth is that our nation
has looked to lawyers for guidance and leadership in times of
crisis. An appellate lawyer from Virginia wrote the
Declaration of Independence. A trial lawyer from Illinois
signed the Emancipation Proclamation. A former criminal
prosecutor led the citizens of New York during the dark days
following the destruction of the Twin Towers. And it was a
Tennessee lawyer who, as a member of the Senate Watergate
Committee, helped establish that not even the
[[Page 7588]]
President of the United States is above the law.
Lawyers and the courts have also been instrumental in
facilitating orderly transitions of governmental power in
times of controversy and unrest. Most recently, the nation
and the world looked on as lawyers and courts resolved the
legal disputes surrounding the 2000 presidential election.
Almost thirty years ago, two Tennessee lawyers orchestrated
one of this country's most unique transitions of governmental
power right here in Tennessee. My purpose is to recount some
of what Hal Hardin and Bill Leech did in less than twenty-
four hours on Wednesday, January 17, 1979.
Governor Ray Blanton's administration was clouded by
controversy from its very beginning in January 1975. Many of
these controversies involved state prisoners. In October
1976, a rumored federal ``clemency for cash'' investigation
made front page headlines when FBI agents raided the office
of Governor Blanton's lawyer and seized over one hundred
files. In August 1977, the Governor fired Marie Ragghianti,
his hand-picked chairman of the parole board. Ms. Rigghianti
hired Fred Thompson, and litigation followed.
Perhaps the most notorious controversy involved Roger
Humphreys, the son of one of Governor Blanton's political
allies, who had been convicted in 1975 of murdering his
former wife and her boyfriend. Humphreys shot his two victims
eighteen times with a two-shot derringer. Governor Blanton
arranged for Humphreys to become a trustee and then gave him
a job as a state photographer. When questioned, the governor
insisted that Humphreys was ``a fine young man'' and bragged
that he planned to pardon Humphreys before he left office.
The reaction to Governor Blanton's promise to pardon Roger
Humphreys was swift and furious. The Tennessee House of
Representatives passed HJR 271 urging Governor Blanton not to
pardon him. A bipartisan committee, chaired by former
Governor Winfield Dunn, a Republican, and John Jay Hooker, a
prominent Democrat, started a statewide petition drive to
urge the Governor not to pardon Humphreys. Governor Blanton
announced on the eve of the 1978 general election that
``after prayerful consideration'' he would not pardon
Humphreys. However, two weeks after the election, Governor
Blanton announced that he had changed his mind and that he
was again considering a pardon for Humphreys.
The public's outrage increased during December 1978. The
FBI arrested Governor Blanton's lawyer in his office at the
Capitol and charged him with selling pardons. The lawyer had
clemency papers and marked money in his possession when we
was arrested. One week later, Governor Blanton appeared
before a federal grand jury and proclaimed as he was leaving
the courthouse, ``I have nothing to hide.''
Governor Blanton's activities eventually prompted Senator
Victor Ashe, a Republican from Knoxville, to ask William M.
Leech, Jr., Tennessee's new Attorney General, to decide
whether the governor-elect could become governor before the
inauguration set by the legislature for January 20, 1979.
While Bill Leech, a populist Democrat from Santa Fe, had been
in the eye of the storm before, he did not relish answering
this question. On January 3, 1979, his office issued Opinion
No. 79-3 concluding that Republican Governor-elect Lamar
Alexander could take the oath of office and become governor
any time after midnight on January 15, 1979. General Leech
decided against releasing the opinion to the public
immediately.
On January 5, 1979, Governor Blanton confirmed that he had
been notified that he was a target of the federal grand jury
``clemency for cash'' investigation. In addition, the United
States Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee sent a
letter to the parole board identifying twenty-six prisoners
who were implicated in the growing ``clemency for cash''
investigation. Despite these developments, Governor Blanton
continued to joke with the press about his plans to pardon
Roger Humphreys.
Even though the Attorney General's opinion was not released
to the public until January 15, 1979, rumors about the
possibility of an early swearing-in began to circulate on
Capitol Hill. Speaker of the House Ned Ray McWherter
confirmed that the General Assembly might inaugurate the
Governor-elect early if Governor Blanton issued any mass
commutations. Lamar Alexander, an accomplished lawyer
himself, downplayed the Attorney General's opinion. After
consulting privately with the Speaker McWherter and
Lieutenant Governor John Wilder, he stated that it would be
``totally inappropriate for me to assume power wholly on my
own initiative.''
Speaker McWherter's fears were realized on Monday, January
15, 1979. Around 8:00 p.m. on that cold, rainy evening,
Governor Blanton returned to his office in the Capitol. He
was joined by his new lawyer and his Commissioner of
Correction, and later by Secretary of State Gentry Crowell.
Over the course of the next three hours, Governor Blanton
signed clemency papers for 52 prisoners, including Roger
Humphreys. As he signed Humphreys's papers, the Governor
commented, ``This takes guts.'' Mr. Crowell replied, ``Yeah,
well some people have more guts than they've got brains.''
The press corps quickly learned that Governor Blanton was
in his office, and the reporters were waiting for him when he
left the Capitol after 11:00 p.m. The Governor confirmed that
he had signed a number of clemency documents, but he was coy
about how many and for whom. Governor Blanton did not tell
the reporters that Rogers Humphreys's clemency was being
hand-carried to the state prison at that very moment. By the
time the Secretary of State confirmed that Humphreys was
among the 52 prisoners receiving clemencies, Humphreys had
already left the prison a free man.
News of the 52 late night clemencies hit like a bombshell
on January 16, 1979. State and federal officials--both
Democrat and Republican--expressed dismay and began looking
for ways to undo what Governor Blanton had done. The
Governor's office fueled the controversy when the Governor's
new lawyer announced that Governor Blanton might issue 18
more clemencies, including one ``big name,'' before the
governor-elect's inauguration.
General Leech was in Washington on January 16, 1979 to
argue a case before the United States Supreme Court. His
pregnant wife had also gone into labor. He completed the
argument and telephoned his office with directions to modify
Opinion No. 79-3 to state that a court might hold that the
Governor-elect could only take the oath of office at the
scheduled inauguration. General Leech arrived in Nashville
later that evening and went directly to the hospital. His son
was born the next morning.
It was at this point that Hal D. Hardin, the United States
Attorney in Nashville, stepped up to the plate. Hardin, a
``yellow dog'' Democrat, had been appointed United States
Attorney by President Jimmy Carter in July 1977. Prior to
that appointment, he had been the widely respected presiding
judge on the Circuit Court for Davidson County. In fact,
Governor Blanton himself had placed Mr. Hardin on the bench
in 1975. Despite Governor Blanton's protestations that the
``clemency for cash'' investigation was a partisan Republican
conspiracy, Hardin had been involved with the investigation
for more than a year.
Mr. Hardin had learned from a confidential source that
Governor Blanton was preparing to issue clemencies for 18 to
20 more prisoners who were implicated in the ongoing
``clemency for cash'' investigation. Rather than waiting for
events to unfold, Mr. Hardin, without the knowledge of the
FBI or his staff, telephoned Lamar Alexander on the morning
of January 17, 1979. He told Alexander that he was calling as
a Tennessean and explained that he had received reliable
information that Governor Blanton was preparing to issue
additional clemencies, and he recommended that the Governor-
elect consider taking office three days early in what Lamar
Alexander later described as a ``swift and secret coup.''
Lamar Alexander had high regard for Hal Hardin. However,
rather than acting on his own, he asked Hardin relay the
information to Speaker McWherter, Lieutenant Governor Wilder,
and General Leech. Hardin placed separate telephone calls to
Speaker McWherter and Lieutenant Governor Wilder. He
suggested a meeting among the three of them. Speaker
McWherter and Lieutenant Governor Wilder decided against the
meeting because they were concerned that a private meeting
might violate the Sunshine Law. Instead, they asked him to
meet with General Leech. Mr. Hardin telephoned General Leech,
and a short time later, General Leech and two senior members
of his staff met with Mr. Hardin in a hotel room across the
street from the federal courthouse that Hardin had rented
under an assumed name. Both Hardin and Leech understood that
they had been given the responsibility to chart a course of
action for the leaders of state government. The discussion
was tense and sometime heated despite their close personal
and professional relationship. For several hours, they
reviewed Opinion No. 79-3 and eventually determined that the
original opinion was correct. They also discussed how
Governor Blanton might react and formulated contingency
plans. When the meeting concluded, both General Leech and Mr.
Hardin agreed to advise the state officials that the only way
to prevent Governor Blanton from issuing more clemencies
would be for Lamar Alexander to take the oath of office
immediately.
Mr. Hardin returned to his office following the meeting in
the hotel room. General Leech telephoned Lamar Alexander. He
told the Governor-elect that despite his earlier misgivings
about Opinion No. 79-3, he was now convinced that state law
permitted the Governor-elect to assume office before the
inauguration and that removing Governor Blanton from office
was not only appropriate but necessary. Then General Leech
met with Speaker McWherter and Lieutenant Governor Wilder and
reiterated what he had told the Governor-elect. The
legislative leaders were convinced that Governor Blanton
should be removed from office, and Speaker McWherter
telephoned Lamar Alexander and told him, ``It's time for
leadership . . . We will support you.''
Numerous telephone conversations involving Lamar Alexander,
Speaker McWherter,
[[Page 7589]]
Lieutenant Governor Wilder, and General Leech followed.
They agreed that bipartisanship was essential and that
Tennessee's citizens should understand that Tennessee's
elected leaders were united in this decision. They decided
that the legislative leaders, the constitutional officers,
and the Attorney General--all Democrats--should be present at
the ceremony, and they agreed on a statement that Alexander
would read before he took the oath of office. They also
decided that the ceremony should take place in the courtroom
at the Supreme Court Building in Nashville and that Chief
Justice Joseph Henry, also a Democrat, should be invited to
administer the oath of office.
Shortly after 5:00 p.m., Speaker McWherter, Lieutenant
Governor Wilder, the constitutional officers, and the members
of the media walked from the Legislative Plaza to the Supreme
Court. They were joined there by Lamar Alexander, his family,
and several of Alexander's senior advisors. Chief Justice
Henry administered the oath. The somber ceremony lasted six
minutes. The press conference that followed lasted much
longer. It was not lost on the media that the new governor
was a Republican while most of the other officials involved
in the ceremony were Democrats. One television reporter
attempted to obtain a partisan comment from Speaker
McWherter. However, Speaker McWherter, who would later serve
as Governor with distinction, cut the reporter short saying,
``Let me say to you. First, I'm a Tennessean, and I think
this is in the interest of Tennessee regardless of the
party.''
Just before the ceremony began, General Leech telephoned
Governor Blanton to inform him he was no longer Governor.
Following the call, Governor Blanton complained that ``there
was no courtesy extended to me today.'' Agents of the FBI
circulated through the Capitol serving grand jury subpoenas
on Governor Blanton's staff. Hal Hardin decided not to attend
the ceremony. Rather than remaining in his office, he went
for a long drive to be alone with his thoughts and to reflect
on the events of the day.
As soon as the ceremony ended, several senior members of
now Governor Alexander's staff made their way to the Capitol
to secure the Governor's office. They found Governor
Blanton's lawyer in his office preparing clemency papers for
30 more prisoners. Lewis R. Donelson, a Memphis lawyer who
had already been named as the new Commissioner of Finance and
Administration, refused to permit the lawyer to leave the
building with the papers. When Governor Blanton telephoned to
question his authority, Mr. Donelson replied that he was
acting ``by the authority of the new governor.'' In response
to Governor Blanton's assertion that he was still the
governor, Mr. Donelson replied, ``Not anymore.''
A full discussion of the aftermath of the events of January
17, 1979 must await another day. Governor Alexander appointed
Fred Thompson as special counsel to oversee his
Administration's response to the clemency crisis. Governor
Alexander's formal inauguration took place as planned on
January 20, 1979. For the second time, Governor Alexander
took the oath administered by Chief Justice Henry in the
presence of Speaker McWherter, Lieutenant Governor Wilder and
the constitutional officers. While litigation in the federal
and state court would follow, the transition of governmental
power proceeded with bipartisan dignity. Governor Alexander
announced that ``today ought to be a happy one because the
people and their government are back together again.''
Courage does not always draw attention to itself. Hal
Hardin did not attend the inauguration. Bill Leech was
present but did not play a prominent role in the ceremonies.
While Lamar Alexander, Ned Ray McWherter, and John Wilder
deserve credit for their personal courage and decisive
demonstration of bipartisanship, the principal figures in
this political drama agree that the events of January 17,
1979 would not have unfolded the way they did had it not been
for Hal Hardin and Bill Leech. These lawyers placed the rule
of law and governmental integrity ahead of political
expediency and personal reputation. In the words of Speaker
McWherter, they were Tennesseans first and their actions
sprang from their desire to protect the interests of all
Tennesseans, regardless of party.
Mr. ALEXANDER. I thank the Senator from Washington. I yield the
floor.
____________________
MORNING BUSINESS
Mrs. MURRAY. I ask unanimous consent the Senate now proceed to
Morning Business with Senators allowed to speak for up to 10 minutes
each.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mrs. MURRAY. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. LIEBERMAN. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum
call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS
Mr. LIEBERMAN. Madam President, I rise to speak in support of the
amendment to strike section 1315 of the supplemental appropriations
bill now before the Senate. The motion to strike was proposed earlier
today by the Senator from Mississippi, Mr. Cochran. I am honored to be
a cosponsor of it. I wish to explain to my colleagues why I am
cosponsoring it.
This is a bill that is quite necessary to the funding of our military
effort in Iraq and more broadly. The bill has kind of grown like Topsy
and has a lot of other stuff in it. Maybe I am reflecting on the fact
that I am going to see my grandchildren soon. One of my favorite Dr.
Seuss books is about Thidwick the moose. Thidwick is a glorious moose
with large antlers. Various creatures in the forest begin to occupy,
ultimately quite unjustifiably, Thidwick's antlers until they fall off.
There are parts of this supplemental appropriations bill that in my
opinion, respectfully, do not belong there. Most significant of those
is section 1315, which our motion would strike.
Section 1315 would order a withdrawal of American troops in Iraq to
begin 120 days after passage, regardless of conditions on the ground,
regardless of the recommendations of General Petraeus, regardless of
the opinions of our partners in Iraq and throughout the region,
regardless of whether security is improving or deteriorating, the most
significant of all. The withdrawal would be ordered by this section of
the bill regardless of whether security was improving or deteriorating
on the ground. It is the wrong measure at the wrong time. Ultimately,
it will be a lot of sound and fury that signifies nothing but, more
importantly, that accomplishes nothing and may do harm.
Why do I say it will accomplish nothing? Because everyone in this
Chamber knows that the President of the United States could not have
been more clear: If section 1315 is in this bill and is sent to his
desk, he will veto it. In my opinion, he should veto it. Everyone in
this Chamber knows there are not the votes in either House of Congress
to override that veto. So that all that would have been accomplished is
a delay in getting essential support to our troops in Iraq and
Afghanistan, support they need and on which they are counting. That is
unacceptable.
Obviously, Iraq and what has happened there, what is happening now is
on our minds. We should discuss it. There are ways in which we can
appropriately legislate with regard to Iraq. In fact, in this bill
before us, there is a section on benchmarks which establishes for
ourselves and for the Iraqi Government some benchmarks, some goals that
we have in mind for what they primarily, on their own, should be
achieving as they move to secure Baghdad and the rest of the country
and to take control of their own destiny, an Iraqi Government governing
the Iraqi people, which was the aim of our overthrow of Saddam Hussein.
The benchmarks are in there, inspired by the good work done by
Senator Nelson of Nebraska, Senator Warner of Virginia. Senator McCain
and I, earlier in the debate on Iraq a couple of months ago, were
prepared to introduce an amendment to have such benchmarks. So there
was constructive work that could be done. The benchmarks in this bill
are in the form of a sense of Congress. They are a message. But they
are not tied to a deadline. The measure that passed the House last week
actually has some benchmarks that are tied to triggers that would begin
withdrawal from Iraq.
President Eisenhower, speaking as a general, once said, now famously
because it has been quoted often in these debates about Iraq, and I
paraphrase: Anyone who sets a deadline, who argues for a deadline to be
set in war doesn't understand war.
I believe what General Eisenhower was saying is that war is a dynamic
process, a terrible process, a deadly process, one we try, through the
exercise of all our diplomatic strength, to
[[Page 7590]]
avoid. But when you are in a war, you have to give some deference not
just to the generals you authorized to be in command but to the reality
on the ground. War is ever changing. I believe Eisenhower must have
intended, when he said deadlines should not be set in war, that there
are two occasions which would justify a withdrawal. One is when the
mission is accomplished. When the purpose for which a nation entered a
war is accomplished, then one withdraws in victory. The second occasion
when one would withdraw, based on what is happening on the ground, not
some arbitrary deadline set far from the battlefield, would be if those
in charge conclude that it is impossible to achieve the mission, to
achieve the purpose for which the military action, the war, was
commenced. Then a retreat occurs, a retreat which is a retreat in
defeat.
As difficult as it has gone in Iraq and as many mistakes as have been
made, as many setbacks as have occurred, as much as these mistakes and
setbacks have stirred feelings of anger and frustration among the
American people, which are totally understandable, justified, we have
not reached the point in Iraq, in my considered judgment, where it is
ready for a retreat because we have lost all hope of achieving our
purposes there, which are to create a self-governing, self-sustaining
Iraqi Government that will be our ally, particularly in the war against
terrorism, as opposed to our enemy, and would create a model, a path,
an alternative path to a better future in the Arab world, the Islamic
world, than the death, hatred, and suicidal ambitions of al-Qaida and
the other Islamic extremists, such as those who attacked us on
September 11.
We are in a long and difficult war, and the price paid by our heroic
soldiers and their families has been heavy. I understand the feelings
of anger and frustration among the American people. But what is not
understandable, with all respect, is for Congress now to let the
passions of this moment, in Washington, obscure what is happening at
this moment in Baghdad and in Anbar. Our actions should be driven by
the real-war conditions in Iraq, not by the mindset here in Washington.
So I ask my colleagues to keep their minds open as we begin this very
important and, critical debate. Our national security, in my opinion,
is on the line in the outcome of this debate. The lives of our troops
in Iraq and Afghanistan are on the line, quite literally, in the
outcome of this debate.
I ask my colleagues to keep their minds open and to make a judgment
as to whether this section--ordering a withdrawal from Iraq within 120
days, regardless of what happens on the ground; to be essentially
completed by March of next year when most American troops would be
withdrawn, regardless of what is happening on the ground in Iraq--to
keep their minds open as to whether this is the right time for such a
measure, whether it is the right measure, and whether it has any chance
to do anything but to send a mixed message from this Congress,
particularly to those who are fighting for us.
I ask my colleagues to look from here, for a moment, at what is
actually happening on the ground in Baghdad and in Anbar Province, to
the west, under the new security strategy with the new troops GEN David
Petraeus is implementing.
Here is what I hear people saying--this is preliminary, this is
early, but it is encouraging--sectarian fighting between Sunni and Shia
is down significantly in districts in Baghdad where American and Iraqi
forces have entered. That means the number of people killed in
sectarian conflict, violent acts, death squads in Baghdad is down
significantly in those districts where Iraqi and American forces have
entered and established a presence.
As security improves, many Iraqi families that fled from their homes
are returning to Baghdad. Moqtada al-Sadr, the head of the Mahdi
militia, who has been so anti-American, has disappeared and many of his
top lieutenants have been arrested.
The Government of Prime Minister Maliki, the Government in Iraq, has
shown the kind of strength and decisiveness that is an obvious and
necessary precondition for progress there.
I ask my colleagues to consider the testimony given to the Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which I am privileged to
chair, last Wednesday by Stuart Bowen, Jr., the Special Inspector
General for Iraqi Reconstruction. Anybody who has followed Mr. Bowen's
work knows this is a straight shooter. He is not in there to protect
anybody. He is not in there to spin. He has told it as he sees it. He
has been extremely critical of so much of what has happened in Iraq,
particularly, obviously, within the jurisdiction the law gives him as
Inspector General, which is to see how our money has been spent. He has
documented waste in ways that are truly infuriating.
So when Stuart Bowen says something encouraging about what he sees in
Iraq, that matters to me, and I believe it should matter to others.
Last Wednesday, before the committee, Mr. Bowen said the week before he
had returned from his 15th visit to Iraq. He said:
It's been about twenty months--
Almost 2 years--
since I have returned from Iraq with a sense of cautious
optimism. I have that now.
That is significant. Why on Earth--with independent testimony from
Iraq that there are preliminary, encouraging signs of the effect of the
new troops, the new plan, the new leader--why on Earth would we at this
time order a withdrawal of those troops to begin within 120 days
regardless?
Why, in the face of these encouraging developments, would this
Chamber demand that the essence of the plan that has brought about
these encouraging developments should end? Why, just several weeks
after confirming GEN David Petraeus to lead our effort in Iraq, would
this Chamber block him from carrying out the strategy he shaped, is now
implementing, and appears to be working?
In my opinion, the deadline for withdrawal from Iraq that is in this
bill now is a deadline for defeat, where victory and success are still
possible. There are no guarantees, of course, in war. That is why we
adjust our judgments according to what is happening on the ground. So
there are no guarantees that the encouraging first results of the
implementation of the Petraeus plan will continue and go to full
success--no guarantees.
But I can tell you this: If we adopt an arbitrary order to begin to
withdraw our troops, regardless of what is happening on the ground in
Iraq in the war, it will guarantee failure. That failure will have
profound consequences for Iraq, which I believe will break up into not
just full-fledged civil war but the kind of ethnic slaughter that drew
us a decade ago into Bosnia to stop. And we will have withdrawn and be
expected to stand by and let it happen.
Of course, ultimately it will lead to what will be claimed as a
victory for the forces of Islamic extremism, our enemies in this war we
are fighting. It will, in my opinion, ultimately embolden them to
strike us here at home again.
So I appeal to my colleagues, as this debate on this amendment to
strike begins, let's have a good debate. That is our nature. That is
the essence of our democracy and of this Senate in which we are
privileged to serve. But I ask my colleagues, in the end, to step back
and think carefully about what this section 1315 would bring about, and
instead of undermining General Petraeus, or at best sending a mixed
message to him and his troops, let's give him and his troops the
unified support and time they need to succeed for us.
I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
I withdraw the suggestion of an absence of a quorum, seeing my friend
and colleague from Oklahoma now on the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Whitehouse). The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, the Senate is going to take up, tomorrow,
in rather full detail, an emergency supplemental spending bill. I think
it is
[[Page 7591]]
real important, first, for the American people to know what an
emergency supplemental bill is supposed to be. It is supposed to be
about funding unforeseen problems we could not have anticipated in the
regular appropriations process. For a very small amount of this bill,
that may be true.
This bill is $121 billion of your grandchildren's and great-
grandchildren's money. This bill does not have to stay within the
budgetary limitations Congress sets on itself. This bill goes outside
every rule we have in terms of controlling the budget, living within
our means, and it says: Here is a credit card.
Now, by the way, on the way to funding the war in Iraq, the wisdom of
the Senate has added--and it is $21 billion in the House--about $18.9
billion in a wish list. It is a Christmas tree. If each of us in our
own personal lives ran our businesses or our households the way
Congress is running the emergency supplemental process, we would do it
for about 1 year. Then we would be going to bankruptcy court, and we
would be losing the vast majority of our possessions because we would
not have been deemed to be responsible with the assets we had.
There lies the problem. It is the culture of Congress that thinks we
can put a hood over the American people's eyes so they will not know
what we are about to do in the next 4 or 5 days in this Chamber. You
are going to hear all the reasons in the world why somebody needs
something, except it is never going to be held in contrast to the loss
of the standard of living of our grandchildren. Yes, there are
agricultural needs out there we should have funded a year ago.
The chairman of the Budget Committee said when he would get in power,
when the Democrats would get in power, they were going to pay for it--
except here we have an emergency agriculture supplemental bill, a good
portion of which is needed but it is not paid for. There is no offset
anywhere else in the hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of waste in
the discretionary side of the budget alone, to reduce something else so
we can take care of those who need us now.
There is another aspect to this funding bill; that is, the politics
that plays into it over the debate on the Iraq war. What we are seeing
play out is a double-edged sword of how do we hurt the troops in the
field by adding things to a supplemental bill to take care of them,
when there has already been a threatened veto over the bill because it
adds $18.9 billion more than what the President asked for to fund the
war.
So as you listen, in the next 4 or 5 days, to the Senate debate this
bill, there are a couple things you ought to pay attention to, and you
ought to ask yourself the question: Where is the money coming from to
pay for this bill? Where is the sacrifice from the generations today to
do what the Members of this body want to do?
There is no sacrifice. We are not calling on anybody to sacrifice.
What we are saying is: Those unborn, those young, those who are about
to be born, and the children of those who are young, unborn or about to
be born are the ones who are going to pay for it.
It portends a great moral question of our society today: How is it we
can totally turn upside down the heritage of this country, the heritage
of a country that has been built on the following premise: ``I am going
to work hard. I am going to sacrifice. And I am going to serve so that
my children and grandchildren get ahead''? Have we become such a
selfish country that we do not care about the next two generations?
I think the Senate has spoken, at least the appropriators have
spoken. They have said ``yes,'' it is OK to do things such as pay for
the conventions, in August, of the Democratic and Republican Parties
for the additional funds that will be needed for police enforcement
with an emergency bill. Our grandchildren are not going to benefit from
that. The political process today is. But we put it in this bill
because it means if we put it in this bill, it will not be charged
against the regular budget process. It is another way to spend more
money. So let's move more things into the emergency category, so we do
not have to be responsible when the rest of the appropriations bills
come through the Senate.
Think about this: You have a grandchild sitting on your knee and you
say: Yes, back in 2007, they had a party in Minneapolis and in Denver,
and they charged it to you. You may get to go to college, you may not,
but I just want you to know we had a good time at our conventions. How
about $100 million for businesses that have under $15 million in
revenue a year that have suffered some loss from a drought over the
last 2 or 3 years. We already have several organizations within the
Federal Government: Farm Service Agency, loan capabilities from the
Department of Agriculture, the Small Business Administration. All are
qualified to loan money to businesses that work in the agricultural
area but, no, we set aside. We expanded the farm program with this bill
to give $100 million to small businesses that have been hurt. If you
are not connected to agriculture and you have been hurt, where is the
bill to help you? Where does the precedent stop in terms of your small
business?
What about the fact that gas prices rose and some auto dealers went
out of business? Where is the $100 million for them? What about the
fact that energy prices have gone up and small business profits all
across the country have been severely damaged because if they are
energy dependent, their costs have risen significantly? Where is the
$100 million? Where does it stop? Where does it stop that we steal--
when do we stop stealing from our grandchildren?
There is also in this emergency provision $3.5 million for tours of
the Capitol. An emergency, that we have to have the money now,
otherwise we won't have tours in the Capitol? That isn't right, but
that is what is in the bill: $3.5 million. Why? So we can have $3.5
million more to play with when we get inside the budget now that we are
outside the budget.
Oh, and I forgot to mention the fact the administration isn't
innocent in this either, because the war in Iraq is hardly an
emergency. As a matter of fact, it is in its fourth year. The
administration should know what they need. Rather than send a
supplemental up here, it should be in the Defense appropriations bill.
It should have been in the bill we passed this last year. But instead,
even the administration is complicit.
Who is going to stand and speak for the future against the processes
the Congress uses today to fund and grow the Government, not worrying
about how we pay for it in the future? Will you? Will you challenge
this process? Will you say enough is enough? Will you do your part as a
citizen of this country to make a difference, to hold people
accountable here, rather than let the continued culture--and I call it
a culture which actually the majority party ran on. It is a culture of
corruption. When you do for you and steal from those who are weak and
have no access or ability to pay it, that is corruption. It is morally
corrupt. It is a process by which we undermine the very foundation upon
which our country has become strong. If we continue it, what we will
see is a weakened nation.
We now have $70 trillion of unfunded liabilities for Medicare,
Medicaid, and Social Security. Think about that for a minute. Go figure
out how many zeroes are associated with $1 trillion. If you had
everyone who was worth more than $1 billion in the world sell all of
their assets tomorrow and give every bit of that to the U.S.
Government, it wouldn't even pay the interest for 1 year. How is it we
can be going down this road? How is it we can be turning our backs on
the principles that made us great as a nation--the idea of personal
responsibility even applied to Senators, and accountability, and
transparency. We are going to hear a lot of stories about what is and
isn't happening with this bill over the next 3 or 4 days, but the
question I hope the American people will ask themselves is where is the
money coming from? Where is the money coming from? If it is not in a
pot somewhere and if it is not saved, somebody is going to have to pay
for it.
This money is coming from the big Visa card of the Federal
Government.
[[Page 7592]]
We are going to ``cha-ching'' and we are going to say: Grandchildren,
you have to pay for this war in Iraq, plus another $19 billion, because
we don't have the courage to hold this Government accountable. We don't
even have the courage to hold ourselves accountable. We don't have the
courage to eliminate the duplication, the fraud, and the waste that
accounts for over $200 billion every year in this $3 trillion budget.
There is no courage here to face that. We can do oversight hearings,
and we have done so. Senator Carper and myself did 46, more than any
other committee of Congress, over the last 2 years. What we found was
almost $200 billion of either duplicative programs, wasteful programs,
or outright fraud. Yet where is the Congress offsetting those with this
bill? No. It is too hard work. You might offend somebody. The next
election is more important than the next generation. Being here is more
important than doing what is the best thing for our Nation.
So I hope as we approach this bill, the American public will ask that
question about where the sacrifice comes from to do this. Where does
the sacrifice come from? Unfortunately, it is going to come from the
next 2 generations. It is hard to identify what that means, but with $9
trillion of actual outstanding debt we have now and the $70 trillion of
unfunded liability, it doesn't take a great imagination to understand
how that might impact our children and grandchildren, with high
interest rates, lack of ability to afford a college education,
inability to own a home, buy a new car. All of those things are coming
as we continue to steal the future from our children and our
grandchildren. The big government credit card. It is only available
because there is a lack of backbone and spine in the Congress to do
what is necessary to give the American people true value from their
Government. It is hard. A lot of people get upset. But I would much
rather stand here and try to change it now than try to explain to my
grandchildren why we didn't change it, why we didn't do that.
I have some hope the American people are starting to wake up to the
budgetary gimmicks and processes the Congress uses. When they really
awaken, what they are going to do is change who runs this place. It is
going to be real citizen legislators. It is going to be people who care
about the future more than they care about today. It is going to be
people who care about a heritage that continues to be and create and
hold forth the greatest experiment in freedom that has ever been.
Without that change, as Will Durant said:
Great societies are never conquered from without until they
rot from within.
This is part of the rotting process we are going to see over the next
5 days in the Senate. If people summon courage, summon long-term
viewpoint, summon sacrifice of giving up of themselves, whether it be
position or power so we can create something better, the country will
be all the better for that. If we don't, there won't be a headline that
says: ``Grandchildren hurt by supplemental bill,'' but it doesn't mean
they won't be. The fact is they will.
It is interesting the accounting that Washington uses. Last year the
official number on the deficit was $175 billion, but the real number,
the amount the debt went up, was $360 billion. If you are at home and
you have a checkbook and you spend $175 more than you had in the
checkbook, but at the end of the year you charged another $200 on top
of it, you really spent it all, and you went into debt for that whole
amount. But we don't do what national accounting standards say. We play
a game. We take the Social Security money and we lessen the effect of
what we are doing through Social Security and 30 some other trust funds
such as the inland waterway trust fund and several others, and the
retirement of the employees of the Federal Government that is not
funded, and we add all that back and we make it look better than it is.
The idea behind a half lie is a whole truth, but it is not. A half
truth is a whole lie.
So my hope is when we have this debate on this bill, this $121
billion bill, America will say: Wait a minute. Why aren't you paying
for it? Why aren't you trimming some of the fat? Why aren't you
trimming some of the problems? Why aren't you doing that? Because it is
hard. That is not a good enough reason to undermine the future of this
country.
Mr. President, I appreciate the opportunity to come and speak this
evening and the staff staying here.
Mr. President, I note the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
CONCLUSION OF MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask that morning business be closed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
U.S. TROOP READINESS, VETERANS' HEALTH, AND IRAQ ACCOUNTABILITY ACT,
2007--Continued
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the substitute
amendment be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be considered as original
text for the purpose of further amendments, and that no points of order
be considered waived by virtue of this agreement; further, that the
pending Cochran amendment remain in order, notwithstanding this
agreement.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 641) was agreed to.
Cloture Motion
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
do hereby move to bring to a close the debate on Calendar No.
84, H.R. 1591, the emergency supplemental 2007 appropriations
bill.
Harry Reid, Robert C. Byrd, Jack Reed, Patrick Leahy,
B.A. Mikulski, Byron L. Dorgan, Christopher J. Dodd,
Dianne Feinstein, Richard J. Durbin, Chuck Schumer,
Debbie Stabenow, Barbara Boxer, Herb Kohl, Jay
Rockefeller, Joe Biden, E. Benjamin Nelson, Daniel K.
Akaka, Ted Kennedy.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the live quorum
under rule XXII be waived.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there now be a
period for the transaction of morning business, with Senators permitted
to speak for up to 10 minutes each.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
S. CON. RES. 21
Amendment No. 589
Mr. KYL. The fiscal year 2006 and fiscal year 2007 budget resolutions
included an importation reserve fund for drugs imported from countries
``with strong safety laws.'' Yet the Dorgan-Snowe amendment omits that
language. Does the Senator from New Hampshire agree that under the
Dorgan-Snowe amendment, the term ``safe importation'' means from
countries ``with strong safety laws''?
Mr. GREGG. Yes. The term ``safe importation'' means importation only
from countries with strong safety laws. The additional language ``with
strong safety laws,'' which was included in last year's budget, was
redundant, but the absence of those words does not alter the meaning,
in my opinion. ``Safe importation'' refers to the importation of
prescription drugs from countries that require the review of
[[Page 7593]]
drugs for safety and effectiveness by an entity of the government of
the country; that require the methods used in and the facilities and
controls used for the manufacture, processing, and packing of drugs in
the country to be adequate to preserve their identity, quality, purity,
strength, and efficacy; that require the labeling and promotion of
drugs to be in accordance with the approval of the drug and whose valid
marketing authorization system is equivalent to the systems in the
United States.
____________________
GENOMICS AND PERSONALIZED MEDICINE ACT
Mr. BURR. Mr. President, I rise today to express my support for S.
976, the Genomics and Personalized Medicine Act of 2007, which my
distinguished colleague from Illinois, Senator Obama, and I introduced
on March 23, 2007. Senator Obama introduced this legislation last year.
We have worked together on some revisions, and I am proud to join him
in cosponsoring the legislation this year.
I believe this legislation will help improve the quality and safety
of health care by providing a better understanding of what causes
certain diseases. Through a coordinated research initiative and safer
genetic tests, patients and doctors will be empowered to make more
informed decisions about medical treatments.
This bill will advance the study of human genes and their functions
to better predict patients' susceptibility to certain diseases or
conditions and better customize drugs and medical treatments to meet
patients' unique needs. By facilitating genomics research, fostering a
capable genomics workforce, and encouraging the development of high
quality genetic tests, patients will be better informed about the
medical care they need.
I am proud that North Carolina is a leader in genomics and
personalized medicine research. Duke University's Institute for Genome
Sciences and Policy and the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill's Institute for Pharmacogenomics and Individualized Therapy are
both conducting significant research efforts in this area and support a
stronger Federal focus on genomics. This legislation will increase
Federal support for initiatives at Duke and Chapel Hill--a win-win for
North Carolina and patients.
Specifically, this bill establishes an Interagency Working Group at
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to pull together and
accelerate genomics research by developing standardized terminology and
establishing quality standards and guidelines for the collection,
processing, and storage of genomic samples and data. It advances
genomics research by establishing a national biobanking distributed
database that collects and integrates genomic data to simplify pooled
data analysis. The bill also develops biobanking initiatives at
academic medical centers across the country, including biobanks
containing biological specimens. It will improve genetics and genomics
training by developing model training programs, residency curricula and
teaching materials, and by integrating genetics and genomics into
clinical and public health practice by developing health professional
guidelines.
The bill will also encourage drug sponsors and device companies to
develop companion diagnostic tests, and it will improve Federal
oversight and regulation of genetic tests by identifying which tests
require review and which agency--the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services or the Food and Drug Administration--should have oversight
over specific categories of tests. It requires the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention to evaluate direct-to-consumer marketing of
genetic tests to which consumers have direct access and to educate the
public about genomics and its applications. It also asks the Agency for
Healthcare Research and Quality to assess the clinical utility and
cost-effectiveness of companion diagnostic tests that guide prescribing
decisions.
____________________
ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS
______
BURLINGTON COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, this spring, the new community
health center in Burlington, IA, officially opened for business. Having
secured funding for the center and attended the groundbreaking ceremony
last June, I know how important this health care facility is to
Burlington and the surrounding communities. At long last, Des Moines
County has a permanent, unified medical and dental clinic, which has
been sorely needed for many years.
This is a truly unique community health center. It is housed on the
grounds of Southeastern Community College, and there is an agreement
between the CHC board and the community college to allow nursing and
health aide students to do some of their training in the center. This
gives the center an edge in recruiting staff, and it gives students
hands-on training opportunities right there on campus. Clearly, this is
a win-win-win arrangement for the center, for the community college,
and for the entire Burlington community.
I salute Ron Kemp and others who had the vision to create this new
community health center, and the persistence to transform their vision
into bricks and mortar. The facility is welcoming, modern, and well-
equipped. The staff members are truly an inspiration. They have a
special passion for their work, and take pride in the fact that they
are providing first-rate health care to underserved communities.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., used to say that ``Life's most
persistent and urgent question is: What are you doing for others?'' The
staff members at the community health centers of Southeast Iowa have
answered that question in powerful ways. They have committed themselves
to providing high-quality health care to all comers, regardless of
ability to pay. All are welcomed equally. All are served with
professionalism and excellence. As chair of the Health and Human
Services Appropriations Subcommittee, I am 100 percent committed to
securing appropriate funding for community health centers all across
America. One thing I know for certain: Every dollar Congress
appropriates for centers like the one in Burlington is a dollar spent
wisely and frugally. It never ceases to amaze me how their staff
members are able to do so much--and to serve so many people--with such
limited resources.
I dare say that no one in the health care profession faces greater
challenges than those who choose to work in community health centers.
These challenges include chronic illness, cultural and linguistic
differences, geographical barriers, and homelessness, to name just a
few. Nothing stops these dedicated professionals.
And one more thing: community health centers have a well-deserved
reputation for caring and kindness. They offer a direct and personal
style of health care. They follow up. They care about prevention and
wellness.
So I am deeply grateful to Executive Director Ron Kemp, to President
Beverly Simone of Southeastern Community College, to the center's
dedicated board members, to Ted Boesen, executive director of the Iowa/
Nebraska Primary Care Association, and to all the other people who made
this new facility possible. They work their hearts out to provide the
very best health care to some of our most needy citizens. I deeply
appreciate their passion, their compassion, and their dedication to
public service.
____________________
HONORING LAS PLANTADAS
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, today I wish to honor Las Plantadas, a
group of women incarcerated for resisting the dictatorial regime of
Cuba for nearly half a century. The National Association of Cuban
American Women will gather on Saturday, March 24, 2007, to honor a
group of Las Plantadas--Ana Lazara Rodriguez, Miriam Ortega, Genoveva
Felixgraw, Clara Berta Canton Gomez, Olga Morgan and Gladys B.
[[Page 7594]]
Campaneria Herrera--with the Elena Mederos Award during a Women's
History Month Celebration at Schuetzen Park, in North Bergen, NJ.
The Elena Mederos Award was instituted by the National Association of
Cuban American Women in memory of Dr. Elena Mederos, 1900-1981, a human
rights activist, who is considered the most prominent Cuban woman of
the 20th Century.
Ana Lazara Rodriguez, a doctor, was imprisoned when she was a 19-
year-old medical student for participating in protests against the
Cuban dictatorship. She was released in 1979 and traveled to the United
States via Costa Rica. In May 1995, she published ``Diary of a
Survivor,'' a book detailing her experiences while incarcerated.
Miriam Ortega was born in Ciego de Avila, Cuba. She was imprisoned
for 18 years for working against the Castro regime. She was released
and moved to the United States, where she continues in her
determination to fight for a free Cuba.
Clara Berta Canton Gomez was born in Havana, Cuba. In 1962, State
security agents searched the home of her parents seeking her brother
who was involved in efforts against the Castro regime. Because they did
not speak against their family member, Clara and her parents were
incarcerated and sentenced to serve 30 years in prison. Released after
7 years, Clara has dedicated her time to fight for the release of
political prisoners. She dreams of returning to see a free Cuba.
Olga Morgan was born in Santa Clara, Las Villas. When she was working
against the Batista dictatorship, she met her husband, William
Alexander Morgan, with whom she has two children, Olguita and Loretta.
Olga and her husband were imprisoned in 1960 and 1961. Her husband was
executed with the regime proclaiming both he and Olga a ``high risk for
the revolution.'' Olga was released in 1971, and after being denied a
travel document in 1978, she reached the shores of the United States in
the 1980 Mariel boatlift.
Gladys B. Campaneria Herrera was born in Matanzas and raised in
Havana. Between 1959 to 1963 she fought against the Castro regime, for
which she was arrested in 1964 and sentenced to 3 years in prison.
While she was in prison, she suffered greatly. She was released and
moved to the United States, where she has lived in New York and worked
in New Jersey as a reporter for various Spanish media outlets. An avid
writer, Gladys has authored more than 150 poems and songs. She
continues to fight for a free Cuba.
The inspiring stories of these women, and of the nearly 3000 other
Cuban women who have been imprisoned, tortured, and endured many
punishments for refusing to accept a dictatorial regime are a symbol of
the dignity and courage of women and a reminder of the need to continue
to fight for human rights around the world.
There is no doubt that Las Plantadas are exemplary leaders and
profoundly committed individuals who are role models for the Nation.
Therefore, I am pleased to pay tribute to Las Plantadas, and I know my
colleagues will join in wishing them continued success in their quest
for human rights and a free Cuba.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO JUDGE ELSIJANE TRIMBLE ROY
Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, every year during the month of
March, we honor the women who have made a lasting impact on our
country's history with Women's History Month. This month, I want to pay
tribute to a true Arkansas pioneer who passed away earlier this year,
Judge Elsijane Trimble Roy.
Judge Roy has been referred to as ``Arkansas' Lady of Many Firsts.''
Only the third woman to graduate from the University of Arkansas law
school in 1939, Judge Roy was the first female in the state of Arkansas
to be appointed as circuit judge in 1966. In 1975, then-Governor David
Pryor appointed Judge Roy to the Arkansas Supreme Court, making her the
first woman to serve as an Arkansas Supreme Court Justice. Just 2 years
later, newly elected President Jimmy Carter selected Judge Roy to serve
on the Federal bench, and she was given the distinct honor of becoming
Arkansas' first female Federal judge, as well as the first female judge
appointed to the eighth Circuit.
The daughter of Federal judge Thomas C. Trimble, Judge Roy and her
father also held the distinction of being the first father and daughter
to serve as Federal judges. In fact, Judge Roy served in the same
courtroom that her father presided over for nearly 20 years. She often
mentioned that she could feel his presence, and in a 1996 interview
with the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, she noted that ``It's meant so much
to me to be able to try cases in the same court. I look up there, and
he helps me with the hard cases.''
A gifted athlete who loved sports, Judge Roy was a star player for
the Lonoke High School basketball team in Lonoke, AR, and was a two-
time women's singles champion at the University of Arkansas.
Judge Roy was devoted to both her family and her faith. She was a
proud mother, grandmother, and later in life, a great-grandmother.
Judge Roy was also an aunt to many nieces and nephews. She was a
longtime member of First Baptist Church in Lonoke and taught Sunday
school class when she lived in Blytheville, AR. According to her
obituary, Judge Roy gave credit to the Lord for her many judicial
appointments, saying, ``I have always felt I have been brought to these
positions by the Lord.'' The center of her faith was her favorite Bible
verse, Micah 6:8, which reads, ``What does the Lord require of you but
to do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with your God.''
A truly remarkable woman, Judge Roy received many honors in her life,
including the Outstanding Appellate Judge of 1976-1977 by the Arkansas
Trial Lawyers Association. One honor, however, stands out above others.
In 1976, Judge Roy was chosen as Arkansas Democrat's Woman of the Year,
a distinction her mother also earned. She received a plaque for that
honor, and in a 1979 Arkansas Democrat article, Judge Roy said, ``If
anything is ever written about me, I want it to contain the words on
that plaque. Throughout my career, the things written there are the
things I have lived for.''
The plaque reads:
As a law clerk, lawyer, and trial judge, Elsijane Trimble
Roy established a reputation for integrity, intelligence, and
independence. As the first woman on the Arkansas Supreme
Court, she has become a symbol of pride and inspiration to
all women.
Judge Roy, you have been a source of pride and inspiration to all
women, not only in Arkansas, but throughout our great land. You will
most certainly be missed.
____________________
DIERKS, ARKANSAS, CELEBRATES 100TH ANNIVERSARY
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, it is with the greatest pleasure
that today I honor Dierks, AR, which will soon be celebrating its 100th
anniversary. Dierks is located in Howard County which lies in the
southwestern part of my State. It was named after a German family that
immigrated to the United States in the mid-1800s. The family
established a major sawmill known as Hardscrabble, and when the
community was incorporated in 1907, it changed its name to Dierks.
The Weyerhaeuser Company purchased most of the Dierks' family
holdings in 1969. Weyerhaeuser employs some 600 people in Howard County
and is one of the county's largest employers.
Dierks is also one of many of Arkansas's fine recreation
destinations. Visitors take advantage of Dierks Lake which offers
boating, fishing, waterskiing, camping, and sightseeing. Among
fishermen, the lake is best known for its large-mouth bass and crappie.
Catfish and bream can also be caught in abundance. The beautiful
surroundings make it among one of the most scenic spots in the State.
Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me today in congratulating
Dierks on its 100th anniversary and in wishing its 1,300 citizens a
wonderful day of celebration.
[[Page 7595]]
____________________
MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT
Messages from the President of the United States were communicated to
the Senate by Ms. Evans, one of his secretaries.
____________________
EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED
As in executive session the Presiding Officer laid before the Senate
messages from the President of the United States submitting sundry
nominations which were referred to the appropriate committees.
(The nominations received today are printed at the end of the Senate
proceedings.)
____________________
MEASURES PLACED ON THE CALENDAR
The following bill was read the second time, and placed on the
calendar:
H.R. 545. An act to amend the Omnibus Crime Control and
Safe Streets Act of 1968 to clarify that territories and
Indian tribes are eligible to receive grants for confronting
the use of methamphetamine.
____________________
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
The following reports of committees were submitted:
By Mr. INOUYE, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, without amendment:
S. 93. A bill to authorize NTIA to borrow against
anticipated receipts of the Digital Television and Public
Safety Fund to initiate migration to a national IP-enabled
emergency network capable of receiving and responding to all
citizen activated emergency communications (Rept. No. 110-
38).
By Mr. LEAHY, from the Committee on the Judiciary, with an
amendment:
S. 261. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to
strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting, and for
other purposes.
By Mr. LEAHY, from the Committee on the Judiciary, without
amendment:
S. 627. A bill to amend the Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 to improve the health and
well-being of maltreated infants and toddlers through the
creation of a National Court Teams Resource Center, to assist
local Court Teams, and for other purposes.
S. 888. A bill to amend section 1091 of title 18, United
States Code, to allow the prosecution of genocide in
appropriate circumstances.
____________________
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the
first and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated:
By Ms. LANDRIEU:
S. 983. A bill for the relief of Michael Anthony Hurley; to
the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Ms. LANDRIEU:
S. 984. A bill for the relief of Jiao Ying Li; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. LEVIN:
S. 985. A bill to establish a pilot program to provide low
interest loans to nonprofit, community-based lending
intermediaries, to provide midsize loans to small business
concerns, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Small
Business and Entrepreneurship.
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. Sanders):
S. 986. A bill to expand eligibility for Combat-Related
Special Compensation paid by the uniformed services in order
to permit certain additional retired members who have a
service-connected disability to receive both disability
compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs for that
disability and Combat-Related Special Compensation by reason
of that disability; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Domenici):
S. 987. A bill to enhance the energy security of the United
States by promoting biofuels and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
By Ms. MIKULSKI (for herself, Mr. Warner, Mr. Levin,
Mr. Voinovich, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Gregg,
Ms. Collins, Mr. Enzi, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Sununu, Mr.
Stevens, Mr. Kennedy, and Mr. Cardin):
S. 988. A bill to extend the termination date for the
exemption of returning workers from the numerical limitations
for temporary workers; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mrs. LINCOLN:
S. 989. A bill to amend title XVI of the Social Security
Act to clarify that the value of certain funeral and burial
arrangements are not to be considered available resources
under the supplemental security income program; to the
Committee on Finance.
By Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself and Mr. Lautenberg):
S. 990. A bill to fight criminal gangs; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
____________________
SUBMISSION OF CONCURRENT AND SENATE RESOLUTIONS
The following concurrent resolutions and Senate resolutions were
read, and referred (or acted upon), as indicated:
By Mr. DeMint:
S. Res. 123. A resolution reforming the congressional
earmark process; to the Committee on Rules and
Administration.
By Mr. BIDEN:
S. Res. 124. A resolution congratulating the European Union
on the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Rome
creating the European Economic Community among 6 European
countries and laying the foundations for peace, stability,
and prosperity in Europe; considered and agreed to.
____________________
ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS
S. 57
At the request of Mr. Inouye, the names of the Senator from
California (Mrs. Feinstein) and the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Reid) were
added as cosponsors of S. 57, a bill to amend title 38, United States
Code, to deem certain service in the organized military forces of the
Government of the Commonwealth of the Philippines and the Philippine
Scouts to have been active service for purposes of benefits under
programs administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
S. 254
At the request of Mr. Enzi, the name of the Senator from Illinois
(Mr. Durbin) was added as a cosponsor of S. 254, a bill to award
posthumously a Congressional gold medal to Constantino Brumidi.
S. 406
At the request of Mrs. Hutchison, the name of the Senator from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey) was added as a cosponsor of S. 406, a bill to
ensure local governments have the flexibility needed to enhance
decision-making regarding certain mass transit projects.
S. 413
At the request of Mrs. Clinton, the name of the Senator from Alabama
(Mr. Sessions) was added as a cosponsor of S. 413, a bill to amend the
Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 and the Revised Statutes of the United
States to prohibit financial holding companies and national banks from
engaging, directly or indirectly, in real estate brokerage or real
estate management activities, and for other purposes.
S. 474
At the request of Mrs. Hutchison, the name of the Senator from North
Dakota (Mr. Conrad) was added as a cosponsor of S. 474, a bill to award
a congressional gold medal to Michael Ellis DeBakey, M.D.
S. 502
At the request of Mr. Crapo, the names of the Senator from Kansas
(Mr. Brownback) and the Senator from Texas (Mrs. Hutchison) were added
as cosponsors of S. 502, a bill to repeal the sunset on the reduction
of capital gains rates for individuals and on the taxation of dividends
of individuals at capital gains rates.
S. 506
At the request of Mr. Lautenberg, the name of the Senator from New
York (Mrs. Clinton) was added as a cosponsor of S. 506, a bill to
improve efficiency in the Federal Government through the use of high-
performance green buildings, and for other purposes.
S. 543
At the request of Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, the name of the Senator
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey) was added as a cosponsor of S. 543, a
bill to improve Medicare beneficiary access by extending the 60 percent
compliance threshold used to determine whether a hospital or unit of a
hospital is an inpatient rehabilitation facility under the Medicare
program.
S. 576
At the request of Mr. Dodd, the names of the Senator from Vermont
(Mr. Sanders) and the Senator from Iowa (Mr. Harkin) were added as
cosponsors of S. 576, a bill to provide for the effective prosecution
of terrorists and guarantee due process rights.
S. 582
At the request of Mr. Smith, the name of the Senator from Vermont
[[Page 7596]]
(Mr. Sanders) was added as a cosponsor of S. 582, a bill to amend the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to classify automatic fire sprinkler
systems as 5-year property for purposes of depreciation.
S. 597
At the request of Mrs. Feinstein, the name of the Senator from
Georgia (Mr. Isakson) was added as a cosponsor of S. 597, a bill to
extend the special postage stamp for breast cancer research for 2
years.
S. 604
At the request of Mr. Lautenberg, the name of the Senator from Ohio
(Mr. Brown) was added as a cosponsor of S. 604, a bill to amend title
10, United States Code, to limit increases in the certain costs of
health care services under the health care programs of the Department
of Defense, and for other purposes.
S. 638
At the request of Mr. Roberts, the name of the Senator from Wyoming
(Mr. Enzi) was added as a cosponsor of S. 638, a bill to amend the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for collegiate housing and
infrastructure grants.
S. 656
At the request of Mr. Reed, the name of the Senator from Minnesota
(Ms. Klobuchar) was added as a cosponsor of S. 656, a bill to provide
for the adjustment of status of certain nationals of Liberia to that of
lawful permanent residence.
S. 673
At the request of Mr. Salazar, the name of the Senator from Alaska
(Ms. Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of S. 673, a bill to amend the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide credits for the installation
of wind energy property, including by rural homeowners, farmers,
ranchers, and small businesses, and for other purposes.
S. 682
At the request of Mr. Kennedy, the names of the Senator from Georgia
(Mr. Isakson), the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. Feingold), the Senator
from New Hampshire (Mr. Sununu), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr.
Alexander), the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski), the Senator from
Texas (Mrs. Hutchison), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch), the Senator
from North Dakota (Mr. Conrad), the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Dodd)
and the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham) were added as
cosponsors of S. 682, a bill to award a congressional gold medal to
Edward William Brooke III in recognition of his unprecedented and
enduring service to our Nation.
S. 756
At the request of Mr. Dodd, the name of the Senator from Louisiana
(Ms. Landrieu) was added as a cosponsor of S. 756, a bill to authorize
appropriations for the Department of Defense to address the equipment
reset and other equipment needs of the National Guard, and for other
purposes.
S. 803
At the request of Mr. Rockefeller, the name of the Senator from Ohio
(Mr. Brown) was added as a cosponsor of S. 803, a bill to repeal a
provision enacted to end Federal matching of State spending of child
support incentive payments.
S. 831
At the request of Mr. Durbin, the names of the Senator from
California (Mrs. Feinstein), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr.
Kennedy) and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) were added
as cosponsors of S. 831, a bill to authorize States and local
governments to prohibit the investment of State assets in any company
that has a qualifying business relationship with Sudan.
S. 871
At the request of Mr. Lieberman, the name of the Senator from
Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu) was added as a cosponsor of S. 871, a bill to
establish and provide for the treatment of Individual Development
Accounts, and for other purposes.
S. 883
At the request of Mrs. Feinstein, the name of the Senator from
Mississippi (Mr. Cochran) was added as a cosponsor of S. 883, a bill to
amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to extend loan forgiveness for
certain loans to Head Start teachers.
S. 888
At the request of Mr. Durbin, the name of the Senator from
Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy) was added as a cosponsor of S. 888, a bill
to amend section 1091 of title 18, United States Code, to allow the
prosecution of genocide in appropriate circumstances.
S. 903
At the request of Mr. Durbin, the name of the Senator from New Mexico
(Mr. Bingaman) was added as a cosponsor of S. 903, a bill to award a
Congressional Gold Medal to Dr. Muhammad Yunus, in recognition of his
contributions to the fight against global poverty.
S. 914
At the request of Mr. Voinovich, the name of the Senator from
Kentucky (Mr. Bunning) was added as a cosponsor of S. 914, a bill to
authorize the States (and subdivisions thereof), the District of
Columbia, territories, and possessions of the United States to provide
certain tax incentives to any person for economic development purposes.
S. 959
At the request of Mrs. Clinton, the names of the Senator from Ohio
(Mr. Brown) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) were added as
cosponsors of S. 959, a bill to award a grant to enable Teach for
America, Inc., to implement and expand its teaching program.
S. 969
At the request of Mr. Dodd, the name of the Senator from New York
(Mrs. Clinton) was added as a cosponsor of S. 969, a bill to amend the
National Labor Relations Act to modify the definition of supervisor.
S. 980
At the request of Mrs. Feinstein, the name of the Senator from
Delaware (Mr. Biden) was added as a cosponsor of S. 980, a bill to
amend the Controlled Substances Act to address online pharmacies.
S. CON. RES. 3
At the request of Mr. Salazar, the name of the Senator from North
Dakota (Mr. Conrad) was added as a cosponsor of S. Con. Res. 3, a
concurrent resolution expressing the sense of Congress that it is the
goal of the United States that, not later than January 1, 2025, the
agricultural, forestry, and working land of the United States should
provide from renewable resources not less than 25 percent of the total
energy consumed in the United States and continue to produce safe,
abundant, and affordable food, feed, and fiber.
____________________
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. Sanders):
S. 986. A bill to expand eligibility for Combat-Related Special
Compensation paid by the uniformed services in order to permit certain
additional retired members who have a service-connected disability to
receive both disability compensation from the Department of Veterans
Affairs for that disability and Combat-Related Special Compensation by
reason of that disability; to the Committee on Armed Services.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, before I introduce my legislation, The
Combat Related Special Compensation Act of 2007, I would like to
briefly talk about the unfair treatment and the deplorable health care
conditions found at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. I feel that
the current situation there has some bearing on my legislation.
Walter Reed is one of the Army's best-known and premier medical
facilities for wounded service members in the country. Numerous reports
by the Government Accounting Office and transcripts of congressional
testimony indicate that many of our military facilities for wounded
outpatients are in disarray. These facilities are plagued by mold,
mice, stained carpets, and a system ill equipped to handle another
generation of psychologically scarred veterans.
Nearly 4,000 outpatients are currently in the military's Medical
Holding companies, which oversee the
[[Page 7597]]
wounded. Soldiers and veterans across the country report bureaucratic
neglect similar to Walter Reed's: untrained staff; misplaced paperwork;
lost computer generated medical appointments; and long waits for
consultations. These serious problems have resulted from bureaucratic
red tape and substandard health care conditions. This situation is
unacceptable. We have not fulfilled our covenant, nor have we kept our
promise to take care of our troops.
Our dedicated service members took an oath to serve our Nation. We as
policy makers have a moral obligation to take care of these dedicated
service men and women that have shown heroic patriotism in Afghanistan
and Iraq.
``As described in the Washington Post'', It is not just a problem at
Walter Reed: others describe depressing living conditions for
outpatients at military bases throughout the country. Let me share with
you the comments of a 70-year-old soldier, Mr. Oliva, who is worried
about the military health care our wounded will receive. He described
his own troubling experiences at the VA hospital in Livermore, CA.
``It is not just Walter Reed,'' Mr. Oliva states. ``The VA hospitals
are not good either except for the staff members who work so hard. It
brings tears to my eyes when I see my brothers and sisters having to
deal with these conditions.''
Mr. Oliva is but one voice in a vast outpouring of emotion and anger
about the treatment of wounded outpatients at Walter Reed. Stories of
neglect and substandard care have flooded in from soldiers, their
family members, veterans, doctors and nurses working inside the system.
This is appalling and an embarrassment to our Nation.
I am particularly concerned that some of the highest ranking
officials were aware of the problem for almost two years, but took no
action to correct the situation. While we have seen some positive signs
from the fallout over the scandal, such as the firing of the head of
Walter Reed and the establishment of a bipartisan commission, more must
be done.
Our soldiers receive first class care in combat, and they should
receive the same level of care in our own country. Congress must lead
the way in this effort. We must continue our efforts and pass
legislation that will improve the quality of life for all of America's
heroes, including providing them with the benefits they have earned.
Today, I join with many of my Senate colleagues to fight and end the
ban on current receipt so that disabled veterans can get the fair
benefits they deserve. We have made some progress over the last few
years, but as everyone knows, we still have a lot of work to do.
The legislation I am introducing today--the Combat-Related Special
Compensation Act of 2007, would continue to chip away at this unfair
policy, by giving pro-rated retirement benefits to our service men and
women who are forced into early retirement because of their combat-
related injuries.
Our veterans on a day-to-day basis sacrifice their life for our
country. As public servants, we Americans owe it to our dedicated
service men and women to end this inequity. We must support our troops;
we must ensure that those who serve us with dignity and valor receive
these deserving benefits. They have earned it and they deserve it.
My legislation will take care of soldiers who had hoped to make the
military a career, but were discharged prematurely for an injury
sustained in combat and forced to retire medically before attaining 20
years of service.
Like many of you, I have visited military hospitals on several
occasions and have seen first hand the injuries sustained by our
military personnel. Many of the members have reached the 10-, 12-, 14-
year marks of their military careers and have been forced to retire
medically before they meet the 20-year requirement to receive full
benefits. Right now, these soldiers receive combat-related disability
benefits, but are not eligible to receive retirement benefits because
they cannot fulfill the 20-year service requirement.
This is a travesty to treat our dedicated service men and women
inequitably. It's wrong.
We should not penalize veterans because they incurred a combat-
related injury while serving their country. This legislation will
ensure they will receive both their prorated military retirement pay,
along with their disability compensation.
Let me point out that this legislation is especially important given
the injuries sustained by these troops that are currently serving in
Afghanistan, Iraq, and other theaters throughout the world. This
legislation is essential for the more than 23,000 injured personnel who
are returning from war. The widespread use of improvised explosive
devices (IED) has created numerous amputees and therefore, result in an
increase in medically discharged veterans. As described in stories
reported by the Washington Post, a 25-year-old soldier got too close to
an IED in Iraq and was sent to Walter Reed, where doctors did all they
could before shipping the soldier to the VA for the remainder of his
life. Will this young soldier be one of the victims of war that do not
receive disability compensation and military retirement pay?
Mr. President, ensuring our veterans receive retirement benefits they
have earned is the right thing to do, especially in light of recent
issues surrounding the treatment of patients at Walter Reed. We must
never forget the sacrifices our service men and women have made to
protect our freedom. They serve because they love this great country.
Taking care of our veterans is not only the right thing to do; it is
also important for our efforts to win the war on terror. In our all-
volunteer military, it is critical to attract and retain professional
and dedicated soldiers. In turn, they expect that we will honor our
commitments to provide health care and other primary benefits for them
and their families.
By ending this unfair policy, we now have an opportunity to show our
gratitude to our veterans. If we are to truly honor the sacrifices of
our veterans, we need to ensure that those who were injured in defense
of our Nation receive these well deserved benefits.
While our Nation is at war, there is no better honor we could bestow
upon them than to pass this legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of this
legislation be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 986
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Combat-Related Special
Compensation Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF COMBAT-RELATED SPECIAL COMPENSATION
ELLGIBILITY FOR CHAPTER 61 MILITARY RETIREES.
(a) Eligibility.--Subsection (c) of section 1413a of title
10, United States Code, is amended by striking ``entitled to
retired pay who--'' and all that follows and inserting
``who--
``(1) is entitled to retired pay (other than by reason of
section 12731b of this title); and
``(2) has a combat-related disability.''.
(b) Computation.--Paragraph (3) of subsection (b) of such
section is amended--
(1) by designating the text of that paragraph as
subparagraph (A), realigning that text so as to be indented 4
ems from the left margin, and inserting before ``In the case
of'' the following heading: ``In general.--''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(B) Special rule for retirees with fewer than 20 years of
service.--In the case of an eligible combat-related disabled
uniformed services retiree who is retired under chapter 61 of
this title with fewer than 20 years of creditable service,
the amount of the payment under paragraph (1) for any month
shall be reduced by the amount (if any) by which the amount
of the member's retired pay under chapter 61 of this title
exceeds the amount equal to 21\1/2\ percent of the member's
years of creditable service multiplied by the member's
retired pay base under section 1406(b)(1) or 1407 of this
title, whichever is applicable to the member.''.
(c) Effective Date.---The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on January 1, 2008, and shall apply to
payments for months beginning on or after that date.
______
By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Domenici):
S. 987. A bill to enhance the energy security of the United States by
promoting biofuels and for other purposes;
[[Page 7598]]
to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. President, I am very pleased to introduce the Biofuels for Energy
Security and Transportation Act of 2007, along with my co-sponsor,
Senator Domenici. This bipartisan bill will increase our use of home-
grown biofuels and reduce our dependence on imported oil.
The bill establishes a new Renewable Fuel Standard. Starting in 2008,
the new renewable fuel standard will require 8.5 billion gallons of
renewable fuel. The standard increases gradually to 15 billion gallons
per year by 2015. After 2015, a complementary ``advanced biofuel''
standard takes effect. This standard requires 3 billion gallons per
year of advanced biofuels in 2016 and increases steadily to reach 21
billion gallons per year in 2022, for a total renewable fuel standard
of 36 billion gallons per year in 2022.
The bill includes a number of provisions to expand the renewable
transportation fuel infrastructure of the United States. A pilot
program for renewable fuel corridors is created. Funding for biofuels
research is increased, with new research centers established to include
more of the country's diverse biofuels feedstocks. To promote the
growth of local biorefineries, a national biorefinery information
center is established. Further toward that end, a competitive grant
program is established to develop infrastructure to support local
biorefineries.
Finally, the bill calls for a number of studies that will explore how
we should move forward with biofuels. Studies include: the feasibility
of nationwide ethanol blended gasoline at levels between 10 and 25
percent (E10 to E25); the feasibility of dedicated ethanol pipelines;
optimization of flex fuels vehicles, which are currently optimized to
run on gasoline, to run on E85; an assessment of the state of advanced
biofuels technology, in advance of the advanced biofuel standard in
2015; and allowing for renewable fuel standard credit generation
through plug in hybrids.
The introduction of this bill is the beginning of what I hope will be
a substantive exploration of the comprehensive set of issues
surrounding the role of biofue1s in meeting our future energy security.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the bill
be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 987
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Biofuels
for Energy Security and Transportation Act of 2007''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definitions.
TITLE I--RENEWABLE FUEL STANDARD
Sec. 101. Renewable fuel standard.
TITLE II--RENEWABLE FUELS INFRASTRUCTURE
Sec. 201. Infrastructure pilot program for renewable fuels.
Sec. 202. Bioenergy research and development.
Sec. 203. Bioresearch centers for systems biology program.
Sec. 204. Loan guarantees for renewable fuel facilities.
Sec. 205. Grants for renewable fuel production research and development
in certain States.
Sec. 206. Grants for infrastructure for transportation of biomass to
local biorefineries.
Sec. 207. Biorefinery information center.
Sec. 208. Conversion assistance for cellulosic biomass, waste-derived
ethanol, approved renewable fuels.
Sec. 209. Alternative fuel database and materials.
Sec. 210. Fuel tank cap labeling requirement.
TITLE III--STUDIES
Sec. 301. Study of advanced biofuels technologies.
Sec. 302. Study of increased consumption of ethanol-blended gasoline
with higher levels of ethanol.
Sec. 303. Pipeline feasibility study.
Sec. 304. Study of optimization of alternative fueled vehicles to use
E-85 fuel.
Sec. 305. Study of credits for use of renewable electricity in electric
vehicles.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Advanced biofuel.--
(A) In general.--The term ``advanced biofuel'' means fuel
derived from renewable biomass other than corn kernels.
(B) Inclusions.--The term ``advanced biofuel'' includes--
(i) ethanol derived from cellulose, hemicellulose, or
lignin;
(ii) ethanol derived from sugar or starch, other than
ethanol derived from corn kernels;
(iii) ethanol derived from waste material, including crop
residue, other vegetative waste material, animal waste, and
municipal solid waste;
(iv) diesel-equivalent fuel derived from renewable biomass,
including vegetable oil and animal fat;
(v) biogas produced by the anaerobic digestion or
fermentation of organic matter from renewable biomass; and
(vi) butanol produced by the fermentation of renewable
biomass.
(2) Cellulosic biomass ethanol.--The term ``cellulosic
biomass ethanol'' means ethanol derived from any cellulose,
hemicellulose, or lignin that is derived from renewable
biomass.
(3) Conventional biofuel.--The term ``conventional
biofuel'' means ethanol derived from corn kernels.
(4) Renewable biomass.--
(A) In general.--The term ``renewable biomass'' means any
organic matter that is available on a renewable or recurring
basis.
(B) Inclusions.--The term ``renewable biomass'' includes--
(i) renewable plant material, including--
(I) feed grains;
(II) other agricultural commodities;
(III) other plants and trees grown for energy production;
and
(IV) algae; and
(ii) waste material, including--
(I) crop residue;
(II) other vegetative waste material (including wood waste
and wood residues);
(III) animal waste and byproducts (including fats, oils,
greases, and manure); and
(IV) municipal solid waste.
(C) Exclusions.--The term ``renewable biomass'' does not
include old-growth timber of a forest from the late
successional stage of forest development.
(5) Renewable fuel.--
(A) In general.--The term ``renewable fuel'' means motor
vehicle fuel, boiler fuel, or home heating fuel that is--
(i) produced from renewable biomass; and
(ii) used to replace or reduce the quantity of fossil fuel
present in a fuel mixture used to operate a motor vehicle,
boiler, or furnace that would otherwise operate using fossil
fuel.
(B) Inclusion.--The term ``renewable fuel'' includes--
(i) conventional biofuel; and
(ii) advanced biofuel.
(6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.
(7) Small refinery.--The term ``small refinery'' means a
refinery for which the average aggregate daily crude oil
throughput for a calendar year (as determined by dividing the
aggregate throughput for the calendar year by the number of
days in the calendar year) does not exceed 75,000 barrels.
TITLE I--RENEWABLE FUEL STANDARD
SEC. 101. RENEWABLE FUEL STANDARD.
(a) Renewable Fuel Program.--
(1) Regulations.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the President shall promulgate
regulations to ensure that motor vehicle fuel, home heating
oil, and boiler fuel sold or introduced into commerce in the
United States (except in noncontiguous States or
territories), on an annual average basis, contains the
applicable volume of renewable fuel determined in accordance
with paragraph (2).
(B) Provisions of regulations.--Regardless of the date of
promulgation, the regulations promulgated under subparagraph
(A)--
(i) shall contain compliance provisions applicable to
refineries, blenders, distributors, and importers, as
appropriate, to ensure that the requirements of this
subsection are met; but
(ii) shall not--
(I) restrict geographic areas in the contiguous United
States in which renewable fuel may be used; or
(II) impose any per-gallon obligation for the use of
renewable fuel.
(C) Relationship to other regulations.--Regulations
promulgated under this paragraph shall, to the maximum extent
practicable, incorporate the program structure, compliance,
and reporting requirements established under the final
regulations promulgated to implement the renewable fuel
program established by the amendment made by section
1501(a)(2) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-
58; 119 Stat. 1067).
(2) Applicable volume.--
(A) Calendar years 2008 through 2022.--
(i) Renewable fuel.--For the purpose of paragraph (1),
subject to clause (ii), the applicable volume for any of
calendar years 2008 through 2022 shall be determined in
accordance with the following table:
[[Page 7599]]
Applicable volume of
renewable fuel
(in billions of
Calendar year: gallons):
2008..........................................................8.5....
2009.........................................................10.5....
2010.........................................................12.0....
2011.........................................................12.6....
2012.........................................................13.2....
2013.........................................................13.8....
2014.........................................................14.4....
2015.........................................................15.0....
2016.........................................................18.0....
2017.........................................................21.0....
2018.........................................................24.0....
2019.........................................................27.0....
2020.........................................................30.0....
2021.........................................................33.0....
2022.........................................................36.0....
(ii) Advanced biofuels.--For the purpose of paragraph (1),
of the volume of renewable fuel required under clause (i),
the applicable volume for any of calendar years 2016 through
2022 for advanced biofuels shall be determined in accordance
with the following table:
Applicable volume of
advanced biofuels
(in billions of
Calendar year: gallons):
2016..........................................................3.0....
2017..........................................................6.0....
2018..........................................................9.0....
2019.........................................................12.0....
2020.........................................................15.0....
2021.........................................................18.0....
2022.........................................................21.0....
(B) Calendar year 2023 and thereafter.--Subject to
subparagraph (C), for the purposes of paragraph (1), the
applicable volume for calendar year 2023 and each calendar
year thereafter shall be determined by the President, in
coordination with the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of
Agriculture, and the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, based on a review of the implementation of
the program during calendar years 2007 through 2022,
including a review of--
(i) the impact of renewable fuels on the energy security of
the United States;
(ii) the expected annual rate of future production of
renewable fuels, including advanced biofuels; and
(iii) the impact of the use of renewable fuels on other
factors, including job creation, the price and supply of
agricultural commodities, rural economic development, and the
environment.
(C) Minimum applicable volume.--Subject to subparagraph
(D), for the purpose of paragraph (1), the applicable volume
for calendar year 2023 and each calendar year thereafter
shall be equal to the product obtained by multiplying--
(i) the number of gallons of gasoline that the President
estimates will be sold or introduced into commerce in the
calendar year; and
(ii) the ratio that--
(I) 36,000,000,000 gallons of renewable fuel; bears to
(II) the number of gallons of gasoline sold or introduced
into commerce in calendar year 2022.
(D) Maximum quantity derived from conventional biofuel
feedstocks.--For the purpose of paragraph (1), the applicable
volume for calendar year 2023 and each calendar year
thereafter shall not exceed 15,000,000,000 gallons of
conventional biofuel.
(b) Applicable Percentages.--
(1) Provision of estimate of volumes of gasoline sales.--
Not later than October 31 of each of calendar years 2008
through 2021, the Administrator of the Energy Information
Administration shall provide to the President an estimate,
with respect to the following calendar year, of the volumes
of gasoline projected to be sold or introduced into commerce
in the United States.
(2) Determination of applicable percentages.--
(A) In general.--Not later than November 30 of each of
calendar years 2008 through 2022, based on the estimate
provided under paragraph (1), the President shall determine
and publish in the Federal Register, with respect to the
following calendar year, the renewable fuel obligation that
ensures that the requirements of subsection (a) are met.
(B) Required elements.--The renewable fuel obligation
determined for a calendar year under subparagraph (A) shall--
(i) be applicable to refineries, blenders, and importers,
as appropriate;
(ii) be expressed in terms of a volume percentage of
gasoline sold or introduced into commerce in the United
States; and
(iii) subject to paragraph (3)(A), consist of a single
applicable percentage that applies to all categories of
persons specified in clause (i).
(3) Adjustments.--In determining the applicable percentage
for a calendar year, the President shall make adjustments--
(A) to prevent the imposition of redundant obligations on
any person specified in paragraph (2)(B)(i); and
(B) to account for the use of renewable fuel during the
previous calendar year by small refineries that are exempt
under subsection (g).
(c) Volume Conversion Factors for Renewable Fuels Based on
Energy Content or Requirements.--
(1) In general.--For the purpose of subsection (a), the
President shall assign values to specific types of advanced
biofuels for the purpose of satisfying the fuel volume
requirements of subsection (a)(2) in accordance with this
subsection.
(2) Energy content relative to ethanol.--For advanced
biofuel, 1 gallon of the advanced biofuel shall be considered
to be the equivalent of 1 gallon of renewable fuel multiplied
by the ratio that--
(A) the number of British thermal units of energy produced
by the combustion of 1 gallon of the advanced biofuel (as
measured under conditions determined by the Secretary); bears
to
(B) the number of British thermal units of energy produced
by the combustion of 1 gallon of pure ethanol (as measured
under conditions determined by the Secretary to be comparable
to conditions described in subparagraph (A)).
(3) Transitional energy-related conversion factors for
cellulosic biomass ethanol.--For any of calendar years 2008
through 2015, 1 gallon of cellulosic biomass ethanol shall be
considered to be the equivalent of 2.5 gallons of renewable
fuel.
(d) Credit Program.--
(1) In general.--The President, in consultation with the
Secretary and the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, shall implement a credit program to manage
the renewable fuel requirement of this section in a manner
consistent with the credit program established by the
amendment made by section 1501(a)(2) of the Energy Policy Act
of 2005 (Public Law 109-58; 119 Stat. 1067).
(2) Market transparency.--In carrying out the credit
program under this subsection, the President shall facilitate
price transparency in markets for the sale and trade of
credits, with due regard for the public interest, the
integrity of those markets, fair competition, and the
protection of consumers and agricultural producers.
(e) Seasonal Variations in Renewable Fuel Use.--
(1) Study.--For each of calendar years 2007 through 2020,
the Administrator of the Energy Information Administration
shall conduct a study of renewable fuel blending to determine
whether there are excessive seasonal variations in the use of
renewable fuel.
(2) Regulation of excessive seasonal variations.--If, for
any calendar year, the Administrator of the Energy
Information Administration, based on the study under
paragraph (1), makes the determinations specified in
paragraph (3), the President shall promulgate regulations to
ensure that 25 percent or more of the quantity of renewable
fuel necessary to meet the requirements of subsection (a) is
used during each of the 2 periods specified in paragraph (4)
of each subsequent calendar year.
(3) Determinations.--The determinations referred to in
paragraph (2) are that--
(A) less than 25 percent of the quantity of renewable fuel
necessary to meet the requirements of subsection (a) has been
used during 1 of the 2 periods specified in paragraph (4) of
the calendar year;
(B) a pattern of excessive seasonal variation described in
subparagraph (A) will continue in subsequent calendar years;
and
(C) promulgating regulations or other requirements to
impose a 25 percent or more seasonal use of renewable fuels
will not significantly--
(i) increase the price of motor fuels to the consumer; or
(ii) prevent or interfere with the attainment of national
ambient air quality standards.
(4) Periods.--The 2 periods referred to in this subsection
are--
(A) April through September; and
(B) January through March and October through December.
(f) Waivers.--
(1) In general.--The President, in consultation with the
Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, may
waive the requirements of subsection (a) in whole or in part
on petition by one or more States by reducing the national
quantity of renewable fuel required under subsection (a),
based on a determination by the President (after public
notice and opportunity for comment), that--
(A) implementation of the requirement would severely harm
the economy or environment of a State, a region, or the
United States; or
(B) extreme and unusual circumstances exist that prevent
distribution of an adequate supply of domestically-produced
renewable fuel to consumers in the United States.
(2) Petitions for waivers.--The President, in consultation
with the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of Agriculture,
and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency,
shall approve or disapprove a State petition for a waiver of
the requirements of subsection (a) within 90 days after the
date on which the petition is received by the President.
(3) Termination of waivers.--A waiver granted under
paragraph (1) shall terminate after 1 year, but may be
renewed by the
[[Page 7600]]
President after consultation with the Secretary of Energy,
the Secretary of Agriculture, and the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency.
(g) Small Refineries.--
(1) Temporary exemption.--
(A) In general.--The requirements of subsection (a) shall
not apply to small refineries until calendar year 2013.
(B) Extension of exemption.--
(i) Study by secretary.--Not later than December 31, 2008,
the Secretary shall submit to the President and Congress a
report describing the results of a study to determine whether
compliance with the requirements of subsection (a) would
impose a disproportionate economic hardship on small
refineries.
(ii) Extension of exemption.--In the case of a small
refinery that the Secretary determines under clause (i) would
be subject to a disproportionate economic hardship if
required to comply with subsection (a), the President shall
extend the exemption under subparagraph (A) for the small
refinery for a period of not less than 2 additional years.
(2) Petitions based on disproportionate economic
hardship.--
(A) Extension of exemption.--A small refinery may at any
time petition the President for an extension of the exemption
under paragraph (1) for the reason of disproportionate
economic hardship.
(B) Evaluation of petitions.--In evaluating a petition
under subparagraph (A), the President, in consultation with
the Secretary, shall consider the findings of the study under
paragraph (1)(B) and other economic factors.
(C) Deadline for action on petitions.--The President shall
act on any petition submitted by a small refinery for a
hardship exemption not later than 90 days after the date of
receipt of the petition.
(3) Opt-in for small refineries.--A small refinery shall be
subject to the requirements of subsection (a) if the small
refinery notifies the President that the small refinery
waives the exemption under paragraph (1).
(h) Penalties and Enforcement.--
(1) Civil penalties.--
(A) In general.--Any person that violates a regulation
promulgated under subsection (a), or that fails to furnish
any information required under such a regulation, shall be
liable to the United States for a civil penalty of not more
than the total of--
(i) $25,000 for each day of the violation; and
(ii) the amount of economic benefit or savings received by
the person resulting from the violation, as determined by the
President.
(B) Collection.--Civil penalties under subparagraph (A)
shall be assessed by, and collected in a civil action brought
by, the Secretary or such other officer of the United States
as is designated by the President.
(2) Injunctive authority.--
(A) In general.--The district courts of the United States
shall have jurisdiction to--
(i) restrain a violation of a regulation promulgated under
subsection (a);
(ii) award other appropriate relief; and
(iii) compel the furnishing of information required under
the regulation.
(B) Actions.--An action to restrain such violations and
compel such actions shall be brought by and in the name of
the United States.
(C) Subpoenas.--In the action, a subpoena for a witness who
is required to attend a district court in any district may
apply in any other district.
(i) Effective Date.--Except as otherwise specifically
provided in this section, this section takes effect on
January 1, 2008.
TITLE II--RENEWABLE FUELS INFRASTRUCTURE
SEC. 201. INFRASTRUCTURE PILOT PROGRAM FOR RENEWABLE FUELS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary, in consultation with the
Secretary of Transportation and the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, shall establish a
competitive grant pilot program (referred to in this section
as the ``pilot program''), to be administered through the
Vehicle Technology Deployment Program of the Department of
Energy, to provide not more than 10 geographically-dispersed
project grants to State governments, local governments,
metropolitan transportation authorities, or partnerships of
those entities to carry out 1 or more projects for the
purposes described in subsection (b).
(b) Grant Purposes.--A grant under this section shall be
used for the establishment of refueling infrastructure
corridors, as designated by the Secretary, for gasoline
blends that contain at least 85 percent renewable fuel or
diesel fuel that contains at least 10 percent renewable fuel,
including--
(1) installation of infrastructure and equipment necessary
to ensure adequate distribution of renewable fuels within the
corridor;
(2) installation of infrastructure and equipment necessary
to directly support vehicles powered by renewable fuels; and
(3) operation and maintenance of infrastructure and
equipment installed as part of a project funded by the grant.
(c) Applications.--
(1) Requirements.--
(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), not later
than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall issue requirements for use in applying for
grants under the pilot program.
(B) Minimum requirements.--At a minimum, the Secretary
shall require that an application for a grant under this
section--
(i) be submitted by--
(I) the head of a State or local government or a
metropolitan transportation authority, or any combination of
those entities; and
(II) a registered participant in the Vehicle Technology
Deployment Program of the Department of Energy; and
(ii) include--
(I) a description of the project proposed in the
application, including the ways in which the project meets
the requirements of this section;
(II) an estimate of the degree of use of the project,
including the estimated size of fleet of vehicles operated
with renewable fuel available within the geographic region of
the corridor;
(III) an estimate of the potential petroleum displaced as a
result of the project, and a plan to collect and disseminate
petroleum displacement and other relevant data relating to
the project to be funded under the grant, over the expected
life of the project;
(IV) a description of the means by which the project will
be sustainable without Federal assistance after the
completion of the term of the grant;
(V) a complete description of the costs of the project,
including acquisition, construction, operation, and
maintenance costs over the expected life of the project; and
(VI) a description of which costs of the project will be
supported by Federal assistance under this subsection.
(2) Partners.--An applicant under paragraph (1) may carry
out a project under the pilot program in partnership with
public and private entities.
(d) Selection Criteria.--In evaluating applications under
the pilot program, the Secretary shall--
(1) consider the experience of each applicant with
previous, similar projects; and
(2) give priority consideration to applications that--
(A) are most likely to maximize displacement of petroleum
consumption;
(B) demonstrate the greatest commitment on the part of the
applicant to ensure funding for the proposed project and the
greatest likelihood that the project will be maintained or
expanded after Federal assistance under this subsection is
completed;
(C) represent a partnership of public and private entities;
and
(D) exceed the minimum requirements of subsection
(c)(1)(B).
(e) Pilot Project Requirements.--
(1) Maximum amount.--The Secretary shall provide not more
than $20,000,000 in Federal assistance under the pilot
program to any applicant.
(2) Cost sharing.--The non-Federal share of the cost of any
activity relating to renewable fuel infrastructure
development carried out using funds from a grant under this
section shall be not less than 20 percent.
(3) Maximum period of grants.--The Secretary shall not
provide funds to any applicant under the pilot program for
more than 2 years.
(4) Deployment and distribution.--The Secretary shall seek,
to the maximum extent practicable, to ensure a broad
geographic distribution of project sites funded by grants
under this section.
(5) Transfer of information and knowledge.--The Secretary
shall establish mechanisms to ensure that the information and
knowledge gained by participants in the pilot program are
transferred among the pilot program participants and to other
interested parties, including other applicants that submitted
applications.
(f) Schedule.--
(1) Initial grants.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish in the
Federal Register, Commerce Business Daily, and such other
publications as the Secretary considers to be appropriate, a
notice and request for applications to carry out projects
under the pilot program.
(B) Deadline.--An application described in subparagraph (A)
shall be submitted to the Secretary by not later than 180
days after the date of publication of the notice under that
subparagraph.
(C) Initial selection.--Not later than 90 days after the
date by which applications for grants are due under
subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall select by competitive,
peer-reviewed proposal up to 5 applications for projects to
be awarded a grant under the pilot program.
(2) Additional grants.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish in the
Federal Register, Commerce Business Daily, and such other
publications as the Secretary considers to be appropriate, a
notice and request for additional applications to carry out
projects under the pilot program that incorporate the
information and knowledge obtained through the implementation
of the first round of projects authorized under the pilot
program.
(B) Deadline.--An application described in subparagraph (A)
shall be submitted to the
[[Page 7601]]
Secretary by not later than 180 days after the date of
publication of the notice under that subparagraph.
(C) Initial selection.--Not later than 90 days after the
date by which applications for grants are due under
subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall select by competitive,
peer-reviewed proposal such additional applications for
projects to be awarded a grant under the pilot program as the
Secretary determines to be appropriate.
(g) Reports to Congress.--
(1) Initial report.--Not later than 60 days after the date
on which grants are awarded under this section, the Secretary
shall submit to Congress a report containing--
(A) an identification of the grant recipients and a
description of the projects to be funded under the pilot
program;
(B) an identification of other applicants that submitted
applications for the pilot program but to which funding was
not provided; and
(C) a description of the mechanisms used by the Secretary
to ensure that the information and knowledge gained by
participants in the pilot program are transferred among the
pilot program participants and to other interested parties,
including other applicants that submitted applications.
(2) Evaluation.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter until the
termination of the pilot program, the Secretary shall submit
to Congress a report containing an evaluation of the
effectiveness of the pilot program, including an assessment
of the petroleum displacement and benefits to the environment
derived from the projects included in the pilot program.
(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section
$200,000,000, to remain available until expended.
SEC. 202. BIOENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
Section 931(c) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C.
16231(c)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``$213,000,000'' and
inserting ``$326,000,000'';
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``$251,000,000'' and
inserting ``$377,000,000''; and
(3) in paragraph (3), by striking ``$274,000,000'' and
inserting ``$398,000,000''.
SEC. 203. BIORESEARCH CENTERS FOR SYSTEMS BIOLOGY PROGRAM.
Section 977(a)(1) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42
U.S.C. 16317(a)(1)) is amended by inserting before the period
at the end the following: ``, including the establishment of
at least 7 bioresearch centers that focus on biofuels, of
which at least 1 center shall be located in each of the 4
Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts with no
subdistricts and 1 center shall be located in each of the
subdistricts of the Petroleum Administration for Defense
District with subdistricts''.
SEC. 204. LOAN GUARANTEES FOR RENEWABLE FUEL FACILITIES.
(a) In General.--Section 1703 of the Energy Policy Act of
2005 (42 U.S.C. 16513) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(f) Renewable Fuel Facilities.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary may make guarantees under
this title for projects that produce advanced biofuel (as
defined in section 2 of the Biofuels for Energy Security and
Transportation Act of 2007).
``(2) Requirements.--A project under this subsection shall
employ new or significantly improved technologies for the
production of renewable fuels as compared to commercial
technologies in service in the United States at the time that
the guarantee is issued.
``(3) Issuance of first loan guarantees.--The requirement
of section 20320(b) of division B of the Continuing
Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 109-289, Public
Law 110-5), relating to the issuance of final regulations,
shall not apply to the first 6 guarantees issued under this
subsection.
``(4) Project design.--A project for which a guarantee is
made under this subsection shall have a project design that
has been validated through the operation of a continuous
process pilot facility with an annual output of at least
50,000 gallons of ethanol.
``(5) Maximum guaranteed principal.--The total principal
amount of a loan guaranteed under this subsection may not
exceed $250,000,000 for a single facility.
``(6) Amount of guarantee.--The Secretary shall guarantee
100 percent of the principal and interest due on 1 or more
loans made for a facility that is the subject of the
guarantee under paragraph (3).
``(7) Deadline.--The Secretary shall approve or disapprove
an application for a guarantee under this subsection not
later than 90 days after the date of receipt of the
application.
``(8) Report.--Not later than 30 days after approving or
disapproving an application under paragraph (7), the
Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the approval
or disapproval (including the reasons for the action).''.
(b) Improvements to Underlying Loan Guarantee Authority.--
(1) Definition of commercial technology.--Section 1701(1)
of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16511(1)) is
amended by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the
following:
``(B) Exclusion.--The term `commercial technology' does not
include a technology if the sole use of the technology is in
connection with--
``(i) a demonstration plant; or
``(ii) a project for which the Secretary approved a loan
guarantee.''.
(2) Specific appropriation or contribution.--Section 1702
of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16512) is amended
by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
``(b) Specific Appropriation or Contribution.--
``(1) In general.--No guarantee shall be made unless--
``(A) an appropriation for the cost has been made; or
``(B) the Secretary has received from the borrower a
payment in full for the cost of the obligation and deposited
the payment into the Treasury.
``(2) Limitation.--The source of payments received from a
borrower under paragraph (1)(B) shall not be a loan or other
debt obligation that is made or guaranteed by the Federal
Government.
``(3) Relation to other laws.--Section 504(b) of the
Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 661c(b)) shall
not apply to a loan or loan guarantee made in accordance with
paragraph (1)(B).''.
(3) Amount.--Section 1702 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(42 U.S.C. 16512) is amended by striking subsection (c) and
inserting the following:
``(c) Amount.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary
shall guarantee up to 100 percent of the principal and
interest due on 1 or more loans for a facility that are the
subject of the guarantee.
``(2) Limitation.--The total amount of loans guaranteed for
a facility by the Secretary shall not exceed 80 percent of
the total cost of the facility, as estimated at the time at
which the guarantee is issued.''.
(4) Subrogation.--Section 1702(g)(2) of the Energy Policy
Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16512(g)(2)) is amended--
(A) by striking subparagraph (B); and
(B) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B).
SEC. 205. GRANTS FOR RENEWABLE FUEL PRODUCTION RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT IN CERTAIN STATES.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall provide grants to
eligible entities to conduct research into, and develop and
implement, renewable fuel production technologies in States
with low rates of ethanol production, including low rates of
production of cellulosic biomass ethanol.
(b) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
the section, an entity shall--
(1)(A) be an institution of higher education (as defined in
section 2 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15801))
located in a State described in subsection (a); or
(B) be a consortium of such institutions of higher
education, industry, State agencies, or local government
agencies located in the State; and
(2) have proven experience and capabilities with relevant
technologies.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $25,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2008 through 2010.
SEC. 206. GRANTS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE FOR TRANSPORTATION OF
BIOMASS TO LOCAL BIOREFINERIES.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a program
under which the Secretary shall provide grants to local
governments and other eligible entities (as determined by the
Secretary) (referred to in this section as ``eligible
entities'') to promote the development of infrastructure to
support the transportation of biomass to local biorefineries,
including by portable processing equipment.
(b) Phases.--The Secretary shall conduct the program in the
following phases:
(1) Development.--In the first phase of the program, the
Secretary shall make grants to eligible entities to assist
the eligible entities in the development of local projects to
promote the development of infrastructure to support the
transportation of biomass to local biorefineries, including
by portable processing equipment.
(2) Implementation.--In the second phase of the program,
the Secretary shall make competitive grants to eligible
entities to implement projects developed under paragraph (1).
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this section.
SEC. 207. BIOREFINERY INFORMATION CENTER.
(a) In General.--The Secretary, in cooperation with the
Secretary of Agriculture, shall establish a biorefinery
information center to make available to interested parties
information on--
(1) renewable fuel resources, including information on
programs and incentives for renewable fuels;
(2) renewable fuel producers;
(3) renewable fuel users; and
(4) potential renewable fuel users.
(b) Administration.--In administering the biorefinery
information center, the Secretary shall--
(1) continually update information provided by the center;
[[Page 7602]]
(2) make information available to interested parties on the
process for establishing a biorefinery; and
(3) make information and assistance provided by the center
available through a toll-free telephone number and website.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this section.
SEC. 208. CONVERSION ASSISTANCE FOR CELLULOSIC BIOMASS,
WASTE-DERIVED ETHANOL, APPROVED RENEWABLE
FUELS.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Approved renewable fuel.--The term ``approved renewable
fuels'' means an alternative or replacement fuel that--
(A) has been approved under title III of the Energy Policy
Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13211 et seq.); and
(B) is made from renewable biomass.
(2) Producer.--The term ``producer'' means--
(A) a merchant producer;
(B) a farm or dairy cooperative; or
(C) an association of agricultural producers.
(3) Waste-derived ethanol.--The term ``waste-derived
ethanol'' means ethanol derived from--
(A) animal waste (including poultry fat and poultry waste)
and other waste material; or
(B) municipal solid waste.
(b) Conversion Assistance.--The Secretary may provide
grants to producers of cellulosic biomass ethanol, waste-
derived ethanol, and approved renewable fuels in the United
States to assist the producers in building eligible
production facilities described in subsection (c) for the
production of ethanol or approved renewable fuels.
(c) Eligible Production Facilities.--A production facility
shall be eligible to receive a grant under this section if
the production facility--
(1) is located in the United States; and
(2) uses renewable biomass.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section--
(1) $400,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
(2) $500,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
(3) $600,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.
SEC. 209. ALTERNATIVE FUEL DATABASE AND MATERIALS.
The Secretary and the Director of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology shall jointly establish and make
available to the public--
(1) a database that describes the physical properties of
different types of alternative fuel; and
(2) standard reference materials for different types of
alternative fuel.
SEC. 210. FUEL TANK CAP LABELING REQUIREMENT.
Section 406(a) of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C.
13232(a)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``The Federal Trade Commission'' and
inserting the following:
``(1) In general.--The Federal Trade Commission''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Fuel tank cap labeling requirement.--Beginning with
model year 2010, the fuel tank cap of each alternative fueled
vehicle manufactured for sale in the United States shall be
clearly labeled to inform consumers that such vehicle can
operate on alternative fuel.''.
TITLE III--STUDIES
SEC. 301. STUDY OF ADVANCED BIOFUELS TECHNOLOGIES.
(a) In General.--Not later than October 1, 2012, the
Secretary shall offer to enter into a contract with the
National Academy of Sciences under which the Academy shall
conduct a study of technologies relating to the production,
transportation, and distribution of advanced biofuels.
(b) Scope.--In conducting the study, the Academy shall--
(1) include an assessment of the maturity of advanced
biofuels technologies;
(2) consider whether the rate of development of those
technologies will be sufficient to meet the advanced biofuel
standards required under section 101;
(3) consider the effectiveness of the research and
development programs and activities of the Department of
Energy relating to advanced biofuel technologies; and
(4) make policy recommendations to accelerate the
development of those technologies to commercial viability, as
appropriate.
(c) Report.--Not later than November 30, 2014, the
Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and
Commerce of the House of Representatives a report describing
the results of the study conducted under this section.
SEC. 302. STUDY OF INCREASED CONSUMPTION OF ETHANOL-BLENDED
GASOLINE WITH HIGHER LEVELS OF ETHANOL.
(a) In General.--The Secretary (in cooperation with the
Secretary of Agriculture, the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, and the Secretary of
Transportation) shall conduct a study of the feasibility of
increasing consumption in the United States of ethanol-
blended gasoline with levels of ethanol that are not less
than 10 percent and not more than 25 percent, including a
study of production and infrastructure constraints on
increasing the consumption.
(b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report describing the results of the study conducted under
this section.
SEC. 303. PIPELINE FEASIBILITY STUDY.
(a) In General.--The Secretary, in coordination with the
Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Transportation,
shall conduct a study of the feasibility of the construction
of dedicated ethanol pipelines.
(b) Factors.--In conducting the study, the Secretary shall
consider--
(1) the quantity of ethanol production that would make
dedicated pipelines economically viable;
(2) existing or potential barriers to dedicated ethanol
pipelines, including technical, siting, financing, and
regulatory barriers;
(3) market risk (including throughput risk) and means of
mitigating the risk;
(4) regulatory, financing, and siting options that would
mitigate risk in those areas and help ensure the construction
of 1 or more dedicated ethanol pipelines;
(5) financial incentives that may be necessary for the
construction of dedicated ethanol pipelines, including the
return on equity that sponsors of the initial dedicated
ethanol pipelines will require to invest in the pipelines;
(6) technical factors that may compromise the safe
transportation of ethanol in pipelines, identifying remedial
and preventative measures to ensure pipeline integrity; and
(7) such other factors as the Secretary considers
appropriate.
(c) Report.--Not later than 15 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report describing the results of the study conducted under
this section.
SEC. 304. STUDY OF OPTIMIZATION OF ALTERNATIVE FUELED
VEHICLES TO USE E-85 FUEL.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study of
methods of increasing the fuel efficiency of alternative
fueled vehicles by optimizing alternative fueled vehicles to
operate using E-85 fuel.
(b) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and
the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of
Representatives a report that describes the results of the
study, including any recommendations of the Secretary.
SEC. 305. STUDY OF CREDITS FOR USE OF RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY
IN ELECTRIC VEHICLES.
(a) Definition of Electric Vehicle.--In this section, the
term ``electric vehicle'' means an electric motor vehicle (as
defined in section 601 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42
U.S.C. 13271)) for which the rechargeable storage battery--
(1) receives a charge directly from a source of electric
current that is external to the vehicle; and
(2) provides a minimum of 80 percent of the motive power of
the vehicle.
(b) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study on the
feasibility of issuing credits under the program established
under section 101(d) to electric vehicles powered by
electricity produced from renewable energy sources.
(c) Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and
the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives a report that describes the results of the
study, including a description of--
(1) existing programs and studies on the use of renewable
electricity as a means of powering electric vehicles; and
(2) alternatives for--
(A) designing a pilot program to determine the feasibility
of using renewable electricity to power electric vehicles as
an adjunct to a renewable fuels mandate;
(B) allowing the use, under the pilot program designed
under subparagraph (A), of electricity generated from nuclear
energy as an additional source of supply;
(C) identifying the source of electricity used to power
electric vehicles; and
(D) equating specific quantities of electricity to
quantities of renewable fuel under section 101(d).
______
BY Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself and Mr. Lautenberg):
S. 990. A bill to fight criminal gangs; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. MENDENEZ. Mr. President, today, all across America, organized
criminal gangs plague our communities, destroying the lives of
thousands of young children and adults each and every year.
Unfortunately, this plague is currently not being treated effectively,
and as a result has grown in size and power in almost every State in
the Nation. In order to effectively counter this growing threat, we
cannot continue to believe it is only
[[Page 7603]]
a State and local issue that predominantly occurs in highly urbanized
areas. Instead, we must recognize that it has escalated into a national
issue--reaching small rural towns, suburban areas, and big cities
alike--and affecting our country as a whole.
In light of this, it is clear that we must recalibrate our efforts
and--in addition to our local initiatives--comprehensively confront
gang violence at the national level. That is why I rise today, along
with my colleague, Senator Lautenberg, to introduce the Fighting Gangs
and Empowering Youth Act of 2007.
Combining the efforts of Federal, State, and local agencies, this
legislation would utilize a multi-pronged approach in order to
comprehensively deal with all aspects of gang violence. From rigorously
enforcing and appropriately sentencing criminal acts, to exposing and
eliminating the root causes of gang pervasiveness, this bill would
simultaneously deter gang violence while proactively targeting the
sources that have led to its expanding prevalence.
Like most of the problems we face as a society, gang violence can
most effectively be handled by addressing its root causes. In order to
grow in size and power, gangs need a large, self-replenishing pool of
recruits to draw upon. They prey on areas that suffer from high dropout
rates, crippling poverty, and rampant unemployment--areas where hope is
often in short supply. All too often children who live in these areas
are caught in a tragic web of gang violence simply because they can
envision no other alternative.
It is in these circumstances, where a 15-year-old child sees life in
a gang as not just their best option, but often their only option--that
gang membership thrives. It is in these circumstances, where children
do not anticipate living to celebrate their 30th birthday--that gangs
flourish. Not only does this environment destroy the life of the
individual recruited--it also serves to strengthen the gang, further
reinforcing a vicious cycle.
Thus, any effort undertaken to combat gang violence must address the
environment that transforms promising, young adolescents into ruthless
tools of a criminal enterprise. While we will probably never be able to
completely eliminate all acts of violence from our society, there is
much we can do to instill in our children the skills they need to
pursue a law abiding life. To this end, my legislation would authorize
funds for afterschool and community-based programs designed to
economically empower young people. Disadvantaged students will be given
the opportunity to realize their potential, through tutoring,
mentoring, and job training programs as well as college preparation
classes and tuition assistance. Additionally, millions of dollars would
be authorized to enhance and expand anti-gang and anti-violence
programs in elementary and secondary schools, ensuring that students
can focus solely on learning, without having to be concerned for their
personal safety. By providing ``at-risk'' youth with the resources and
opportunities necessary to succeed in life, they will be far less
susceptible to the pressures to join a criminal gang.
This bill would also attack one of the roots of gang violence--gang
recruiters, who seek out young, economically disadvantaged, at-risk
youth and pressure them to join. Currently, there is no Federal law
specifically forbidding gang recruitment. This legislation would change
that--making it illegal for a gang member to solicit or recruit others
into a gang--and would incarcerate an offender for up to 10 years if
the person being recruited was 18 or older, or up to 20 years if the
individual was under the age of 18. This provision would effectively
target the kingpins of gangs, who cowardly order younger members to do
their violent bidding, callously sacrificing their lives like pawns on
a chessboard.
For those who have made wrong choices in life, but are still capable
of rehabilitation, this bill would expand adult and juvenile offender
reentry demonstration projects to help with post-release and
transitional housing, while promoting programs that hire former
prisoners, and establish reentry planning procedures within
communities. To be eligible for early release, prisoners with drug
addictions would be required to participate in treatment programs both
while they are imprisoned as well as during their transition period
back into society. All offenders would be encouraged to participate in
educational initiatives such as job training, GED preparation, and a
myriad of other programs designed to provide offenders with the skills
necessary to become legally employed when they are released from
prison. By providing such individuals with an alternative choice to a
life of crime, lives can be transformed and recidivism rates amongst
ex-convicts will be reduced.
In addition to programs focused on gang violence prevention, we must
provide law enforcement officials at every level of government with all
of the tools and resources necessary for them to safely and effectively
protect and serve their communities. All too often these heroic
officers are caught in the crossfire of gang violence, and all too
often they make the ultimate sacrifice so that others may live.
One tragic example involves the late Detective Kiernan Shields from
East Orange, New Jersey. Detective Shields was a rising star in the
East Orange Police Department, living his lifelong dream of serving his
community as an officer of the peace. He was a devoted, loving husband
and proud father of three children, who was remembered by his peers and
colleagues not just as a multi-talented person with a great sense of
humor, but as the epitome of a role model in an area that desperately
needed one. Unfortunately, New Jersey lost one of its bravest and
finest sons on the evening of August 7, 2006, when Detective Shields
was ruthlessly shot-gunned to death by a reputed member of the Bloods
gang, as he valiantly ran toward the sound of echoing gunfire--Ran
toward the gunfire.
This single act of heroism is consistent with the way police officers
across this Nation live their daily lives. These are the people who are
fighting day in and day out to keep our communities safe. The best way
to honor the victims of gang violence and those who are still fighting
it is to fully commit ourselves to eradicating this cancer.
To assist our frontline warriors in their daily struggle against gang
violence, my proposal would provide law enforcement officials on every
level of government with the resources and information they need to
accurately track and effectively neutralize criminal gangs.
Specifically, this legislation would establish a program similar to the
current Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program to augment
the number of police officers combating gangs in our local communities,
and would authorize $700 million annually for it. Additional funds
would be used to provide more forensic examiners to investigate, and
more attorneys to prosecute, gang crimes. These measures would show
that we pay homage not just with our words, but more importantly, with
our actions, as we recognize the heroic deeds performed by law
enforcement officials every single day.
As is true with almost all problems, a better understanding of how
gangs operate translates into a better understanding of how best to
counter them. That is why this bill would authorize additional funding
for the National Youth Gang Survey to increase the number of law
enforcement agencies whose data is collected and included in the annual
survey and provide money to upgrade technology to better identify gang
members and include them in the National Gang Database. Additionally,
this legislation would expand the Uniform Crime Reports (UCRs) to
include local gang and other crime statistics from the municipal level,
while also requiring the Attorney General to distinguish those crimes
committed by juveniles. The bill also requires consolidation and
standardization of criminal databases, enabling law enforcement all
across the country to better share information.
For those who still choose a life of crime, this proposal would
increase the penalties for crimes committed in the furtherance of a
gang. Gangs are dependent on committing crimes such as
[[Page 7604]]
witness intimidation, illegal firearm possession, and drug
trafficking--implementing these violent instruments to augment their
power. Subsequently, when these crimes are committed in the furtherance
of gang activity, they can be more detrimental to society than if they
were committed in isolation. Thus, these tougher sentencing
requirements for crimes committed in the furtherance of a gang are not
only appropriate, but necessary to deter gang violence and shield
society from its most dangerous and unremorseful criminals.
Taken together, the provisions of this bill develop a comprehensive
approach to gang violence by focusing on prevention, deterrence, and
enforcement. Failure to address all of these gang violence catalysts in
their entirety would leave us with an incomprehensive approach that
would do little to quell the scourge of gang violence. Therefore, I
urge my colleagues to support the Fighting Gangs and Empowering Youth
Act, and by doing so, give law enforcement and our communities the
means to thoroughly and comprehensively counter the growing specter of
gang violence that afflicts our great Nation.
____________________
SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
______
SENATE RESOLUTION 123--REFORMING THE CONGRESSIONAL EARMARK PROCESS
Mr. DeMINT submitted the following resolution; which was referred to
the Committee on Rules and Administration:
S. Res. 123
Resolved,
SECTION 1. CONGRESSIONAL EARMARK REFORM.
The Standing Rules of the Senate are amended by adding at
the end the following:
``RULE XLIV
``earmarks
``1. It shall not be in order to consider----
``(a) a bill or joint resolution reported by a committee
unless the report includes a list, which shall be made
available on the Internet in a searchable format to the
general public for at least 48 hours before consideration of
the bill or joint resolution, of congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, and limited tariff benefits in the bill
or in the report (and the name of any Member who submitted a
request to the committee for each respective item included in
such list) or a statement that the proposition contains no
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited
tariff benefits;
``(b) a bill or joint resolution not reported by a
committee unless the chairman of each committee of
jurisdiction has caused a list, which shall be made available
on the Internet in a searchable format to the general public
for at least 48 hours before consideration of the bill or
joint resolution, of congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, and limited tariff benefits in the bill (and the
name of any Member who submitted a request to the committee
for each respective item included in such list) or a
statement that the proposition contains no congressional
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits to
be printed in the Congressional Record prior to its
consideration; or
``(c) a conference report to accompany a bill or joint
resolution unless the joint explanatory statement prepared by
the managers on the part of the House and the managers on the
part of the Senate includes a list, which shall be made
available on the Internet in a searchable format to the
general public for at least 48 hours before consideration of
the conference report, of congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, and limited tariff benefits in the conference
report or joint statement (and the name of any Member,
Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or Senator who submitted a
request to the House or Senate committees of jurisdiction for
each respective item included in such list) or a statement
that the proposition contains no congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits.
``2. For the purpose of this rule--
``(a) the term `congressional earmark' means a provision or
report language included primarily at the request of a
Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or Senator
providing, authorizing or recommending a specific amount of
discretionary budget authority, credit authority, or other
spending authority for a contract, loan, loan guarantee,
grant, loan authority, or other expenditure with or to an
entity, or targeted to a specific State, locality or
Congressional district, other than through a statutory or
administrative formula-driven or competitive award process;
``(b) the term `limited tax benefit' means--
``(1) any revenue provision that--
``(A) provides a Federal tax deduction, credit, exclusion,
or preference to a particular beneficiary or limited group of
beneficiaries under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; and
``(B) contains eligibility criteria that are not uniform in
application with respect to potential beneficiaries of such
provision; or
``(2) any Federal tax provision which provides one
beneficiary temporary or permanent transition relief from a
change to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; and
``(c) the term `limited tariff benefit' means a provision
modifying the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
in a manner that benefits 10 or fewer entities.
``3. A Member may not condition the inclusion of language
to provide funding for a congressional earmark, a limited tax
benefit, or a limited tariff benefit in any bill or joint
resolution (or an accompanying report) or in any conference
report on a bill or joint resolution (including an
accompanying joint explanatory statement of managers) on any
vote cast by another Member, Delegate, or Resident
Commissioner.
``4. (a) A Member who requests a congressional earmark, a
limited tax benefit, or a limited tariff benefit in any bill
or joint resolution (or an accompanying report) or in any
conference report on a bill or joint resolution (or an
accompanying joint statement of managers) shall provide a
written statement to the chairman and ranking member of the
committee of jurisdiction, including--
``(1) the name of the Member;
``(2) in the case of a congressional earmark, the name and
address of the intended recipient or, if there is no
specifically intended recipient, the intended location of the
activity;
``(3) in the case of a limited tax or tariff benefit,
identification of the individual or entities reasonably
anticipated to benefit, to the extent known to the Member;
``(4) the purpose of such congressional earmark or limited
tax or tariff benefit; and
``(5) a certification that the Member or spouse has no
financial interest in such congressional earmark or limited
tax or tariff benefit.
``(b) Each committee shall maintain the written statements
transmitted under subparagraph (a). The written statements
transmitted under subparagraph (a) for any congressional
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits
included in any measure reported by the committee or
conference report filed by the chairman of the committee or
any subcommittee thereof shall be published in a searchable
format on the committee's or subcommittee's website not later
than 48 hours after receipt on such information.
``5. It shall not be in order to consider any bill,
resolution, or conference report that contains an earmark
included in any classified portion of a report accompanying
the measure unless the bill, resolution, or conference report
includes to the greatest extent practicable, consistent with
the need to protect national security (including intelligence
sources and methods), in unclassified language, a general
program description, funding level, and the name of the
sponsor of that earmark.''.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 124--CONGRATULATING THE EUROPEAN UNION ON THE 50TH
ANNIVERSARY OF THE SIGNING OF THE TREATY OF ROME CREATING THE EUROPEAN
ECONOMIC COMMUNITY AMONG 6 EUROPEAN COUNTRIES AND LAYING THE
FOUNDATIONS FOR PEACE, STABILITY, AND PROSPERITY IN EUROPE
Mr. BIDEN submitted the following resolution; which was considered
and agreed to:
S. Res. 124
Whereas after a half century of war and upheaval, and in
the face of economic and political crises and the threat of
communism, European visionaries began a process to bring the
countries of Europe into closer economic and political
cooperation to help secure peace and prosperity for the
peoples of Europe;
Whereas, on March 25, 1957, 6 European countries--the
Federal Republic of Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, the
Netherlands, and Luxembourg--signed the Treaty of Rome,
creating the European Economic Community;
Whereas the Treaty of Rome established a customs union
between the signatory countries, but also did much more,
creating a framework that has broadened and deepened over
time into the European Union, promoting the free movement of
people, services, and capital, and common policies among the
countries in important areas, and that has helped secure the
spread of peace and stability in Europe;
Whereas the European Economic Community expanded to bring
more European countries into closer union, with the United
Kingdom, Denmark, and Ireland joining in 1973, Greece joining
in 1981, and Spain and Portugal joining in 1986;
[[Page 7605]]
Whereas the member countries of the European Economic
Community agreed to the Single European Act in 1987, paving
the way for a single European market, and on February 7,
1992, the member countries of the European Community signed
the Treaty of Maastricht, furthering the economic and
political ties among the member countries and creating the
European Union;
Whereas the European Union has continued to grow so that
the European Union now comprises 27 countries with a
population of over 450,000,000, after the successful
unification of Germany in 1990 and the joining of Austria,
Finland, and Sweden in 1995, Cyprus, the Czech Republic,
Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia,
and Slovenia in 2004, and Bulgaria and Romania in 2007, and
the European Union continues to consider expanding to include
other countries central to the history and future of Europe;
Whereas the European Union has developed a broad acquis
communautaire covering policies in the economic, security,
diplomatic, and political areas, has established a single
market, has built an economic and monetary union, including
the Euro currency, and has built an area of freedom,
security, peace, and justice, extending stability to its
neighbors;
Whereas the European Union played a key role at the end of
the Cold War in helping to spread free markets, democratic
institutions and values, and respect for human rights to the
former central European communist states;
Whereas the United States and the European Union have
shared a unique partnership based on a common heritage,
shared values, and mutual interests, and have worked together
to strengthen international cooperation and institutions, to
create a more open international trading system, to ensure
transatlantic and global security, to preserve and promote
peace, freedom, and democracy, and to advance human rights;
and
Whereas the United States has supported the European
integration process and has consistently supported the
objective of European unity and the enlargement of the
European Union to promote prosperity, peace, and democracy:
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) congratulates the European Union and the member
countries of the European Union on the 50th anniversary of
the historic signing of the Treaty of Rome;
(2) commends the European Union for the critical role it
and its predecessor organizations have played in spreading
peace, stability, and prosperity throughout Europe; and
(3) affirms the desire of the United States to strengthen
the transatlantic partnership with the European Union and
with all of its member countries.
AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED AND PROPOSED
SA 641. Mr. BYRD proposed an amendment to the bill H.R.
1591, making emergency supplemental appropriations for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for other
purposes.
SA 642. Ms. LANDRIEU submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 641 proposed by Mr. Byrd to the bill
H.R. 1591, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 643. Mr. COCHRAN (for himself, Mr. McCain, Mr.
Lieberman, Mr. Graham, Mr. Warner, Mr. Stevens, Mr.
Brownback, Mr. Shelby, Mr. Craig, Mr. Allard, Mr. Bennett,
and Mr. Enzi) proposed an amendment to amendment SA 641
proposed by Mr. Byrd to the bill H.R. 1591, supra.
SA 644. Mr. REID submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill H.R. 1591, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 645. Mr. REID submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill H.R. 1591, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 646. Mrs. HUTCHISON submitted an amendment intended to
be proposed by her to the bill H.R. 1591, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 647. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill H.R. 1591, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
____________________
TEXT OF AMENDMENTS
SA 641. Mr. BYRD proposed an amendment to the bill H.R. 1591, making
emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2007, and for other purposes; as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in
the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes, namely:
TITLE I
GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS
CHAPTER 1
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Foreign Agricultural Service
Public Law 480 Title II Grants
For an additional amount for ``Public Law 480 Title II
Grants'', during the current fiscal year, not otherwise
recoverable, and unrecovered prior years' costs, including
interest thereon, under the Agricultural Trade Development
and Assistance Act of 1954, for commodities supplied in
connection with dispositions abroad under title II of said
Act, $475,000,000, to remain available until expended.
GENERAL PROVISION--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 1101. There is hereby appropriated $82,000,000 to
reimburse the Commodity Credit Corporation for the release of
eligible commodities under section 302(f)(2)(A) of the Bill
Emerson Humanitarian Trust Act (7 U.S.C. 1736f-1): Provided,
That any such funds made available to reimburse the Commodity
Credit Corporation shall only be used to replenish the Bill
Emerson Humanitarian Trust.
CHAPTER 2
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
General Administration
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
For an additional amount for ``Office of the Inspector
General'', $500,000, to remain available until September 30,
2008.
Legal Activities
salaries and expenses, general legal activities
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses,
General Legal Activities'', $4,093,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2008.
Salaries and Expenses, United States Attorneys
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses,
United States Attorneys'', $5,000,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2008.
United States Marshals Service
Salaries and Expenses, United States Marshals Service
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses,
United States Marshals Service'', $25,000,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2008.
National Security Division
Salaries and Expenses
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses,''
$1,736,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Salaries and Expenses
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'',
$348,260,000, of which $338,260,000 is to remain available
until September 30, 2008 and $10,000,000 is to remain
available until expended to implement corrective actions in
response to the findings and recommendations in the
Department of Justice Office of Inspector General report
entitled, ``A Review of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's
Use of National Security Letters''.
Drug Enforcement Administration
Salaries and Expenses
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'',
$25,100,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
Salaries and Expenses
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'',
$4,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.
Federal Prison System
Salaries and Expenses
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'',
$17,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.
CHAPTER 3
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--MILITARY
MILITARY PERSONNEL
Military Personnel, Army
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Army'',
$8,870,270,000.
Military Personnel, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Navy'',
$1,100,410,000.
Military Personnel, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Marine
Corps'', $1,495,827,000.
Military Personnel, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Air
Force'', $1,218,587,000.
Reserve Personnel, Army
For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Army'',
$147,244,000.
Reserve Personnel, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Navy'',
$77,523,000.
Reserve Personnel, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Air
Force'', $9,073,000.
National Guard Personnel, Army
For an additional amount for ``National Guard Personnel,
Army'', $474,978,000.
National Guard Personnel, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``National Guard Personnel,
Air Force'', $41,533,000.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Operation and Maintenance, Army
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army'', $20,373,379,000.
[[Page 7606]]
Operation and Maintenance, Navy
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Navy'', $4,865,003,000, of which $120,293,000 shall be
transferred to Coast Guard, ``Operating Expenses'', for
reimbursement for activities in support of activities
requested by the Navy.
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Marine Corps'', $1,101,594,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Air Force'', $6,685,881,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide'', $2,790,669,000, of which--
(1) not to exceed $25,000,000 may be used for the Combatant
Commander Initiative Fund, to be used in support of Operation
Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom; and
(2) not to exceed $200,000,000, to remain available until
expended, may be used for payments to reimburse Pakistan,
Jordan, and other key cooperating nations, for logistical,
military, and other support provided to United States
military operations, notwithstanding any other provision of
law: Provided, That such payments may be made in such amounts
as the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the
Secretary of State, and in consultation with the Director of
the Office of Management and Budget, may determine, in his
discretion, based on documentation determined by the
Secretary of Defense to adequately account for the support
provided, and such determination is final and conclusive upon
the accounting officers of the United States, and 15 days
following notification to the appropriate congressional
committees: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense
shall provide quarterly reports to the congressional defense
committees on the use of funds provided in this paragraph.
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army Reserve'', $74,049,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Navy Reserve'', $111,066,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Marine Corps Reserve'', $13,591,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Air Force Reserve'', $10,160,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army National Guard'', $83,569,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Air National Guard'', $38,429,000.
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund
For an additional amount for ``Afghanistan Security Forces
Fund'', $5,906,400,000, to remain available until September
30, 2008.
Iraq Security Forces Fund
For an additional amount for ``Iraq Security Forces Fund'',
$3,842,300,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.
Iraq Freedom Fund
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Iraq Freedom Fund'',
$455,600,000, to remain available for transfer until
September 30, 2008.
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund
For an additional amount for ``Joint Improvised Explosive
Device Defeat Fund'', $2,432,800,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2009.
PROCUREMENT
Aircraft Procurement, Army
For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement,
Army'', $619,750,000, to remain available until September 30,
2009.
Missile Procurement, Army
For an additional amount for ``Missile Procurement, Army'',
$111,473,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009.
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Weapons and
Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army'', $3,400,315,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2009.
Procurement of Ammunition, Army
For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Ammunition,
Army'', $681,500,000, to remain available until September 30,
2009.
Other Procurement, Army
For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Army'',
$10,589,272,000, to remain available until September 30,
2009.
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement,
Navy'', $963,903,000, to remain available until September 30,
2009.
Weapons Procurement, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Weapons Procurement, Navy'',
$163,813,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009.
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Ammunition,
Navy and Marine Corps'', $159,833,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2009.
Other Procurement, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Navy'',
$722,506,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009.
Procurement, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Procurement, Marine Corps'',
$1,703,389,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009.
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement, Air
Force'', $1,431,756,000, to remain available until September
30, 2009.
Missile Procurement, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Missile Procurement, Air
Force'', $78,900,000, to remain available until September 30,
2009.
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Ammunition,
Air Force'', $6,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2009.
Other Procurement, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Air
Force'', $1,972,131,000, to remain available until September
30, 2009.
Procurement, Defense-Wide
For an additional amount for ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'',
$903,092,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009.
National Guard and Reserve Equipment
For an additional amount for ``National Guard and Reserve
Equipment'', $1,000,000,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2009.
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army
For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Army'', $125,576,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2008.
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Navy'', $308,212,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2008.
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Air Force'', $233,869,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2008.
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide
For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'', $522,804,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2008.
REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS
National Defense Sealift Fund
For an additional amount for ``National Defense Sealift
Fund'', $5,000,000.
Defense Working Capital Funds
For an additional amount for ``Defense Working Capital
Funds'', $1,315,526,000.
OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS
Defense Health Program
For an additional amount for ``Defense Health Program'',
$2,466,847,000; of which $2,277,147,000 shall be for
operation and maintenance; of which $118,000,000, to remain
available for obligation until September 30, 2009, shall be
for Procurement; and of which $71,700,000, to remain
available for obligation until September 30, 2008, shall be
for Research, development, test and evaluation.
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Drug Interdiction and
Counter-Drug Activities, Defense'', $254,665,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That these funds may be
used only for such activities related to Afghanistan and
Central Asia: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense
may transfer such funds only to appropriations for military
personnel; operation and maintenance; procurement; and
research, development, test and evaluation: Provided further,
That the funds transferred shall be merged with and be
available for the same purposes and for the same time period
as the appropriation to which transferred: Provided further,
That the transfer authority provided in this paragraph is in
addition to any other transfer authority available to the
Department of Defense: Provided further, That upon a
determination that all or part of the funds transferred from
this appropriation are not necessary for the purposes
provided herein, such
[[Page 7607]]
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation.
RELATED AGENCY
Intelligence Community Management Account
For an additional amount for ``Intelligence Community
Management Account'', $71,726,000.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 1301. Appropriations provided in this chapter are
available for obligation until September 30, 2007, unless
otherwise provided in this chapter.
(transfer of funds)
Sec. 1302. Upon his determination that such action is
necessary in the national interest, the Secretary of Defense
may transfer between appropriations up to $3,500,000,000 of
the funds made available to the Department of Defense in this
title: Provided, That the Secretary shall notify the Congress
promptly of each transfer made pursuant to the authority in
this section: Provided further, That the authority provided
in this section is in addition to any other transfer
authority available to the Department of Defense and is
subject to the same terms and conditions as the authority
provided in section 8005 of the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 2007 (Public Law 109-289; 120 Stat.
1257), except for the fourth proviso: Provided further, That
funds previously transferred to the ``Joint Improvised
Explosive Device Defeat Fund'' and the ``Iraq Security Forces
Fund'' under the authority of section 8005 of Public Law 109-
289 and transferred back to their source appropriations
accounts shall not be taken into account for purposes of the
limitation on the amount of funds that may be transferred
under section 8005.
Sec. 1303. Funds appropriated in this chapter, or made
available by the transfer of funds in or pursuant to this
chapter, for intelligence activities are deemed to be
specifically authorized by the Congress for purposes of
section 504(a)(1) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50
U.S.C. 414(a)(1)).
Sec. 1304. None of the funds provided in this chapter may
be used to finance programs or activities denied by Congress
in fiscal years 2006 or 2007 appropriations to the Department
of Defense or to initiate a procurement or research,
development, test and evaluation new start program without
prior written notification to the congressional defense
committees.
Sec. 1305. During fiscal year 2007, the Secretary of
Defense may transfer not to exceed $6,300,000 of the amounts
in or credited to the Defense Cooperation Account, pursuant
to 10 U.S.C. 2608, to such appropriations or funds of the
Department of Defense as he shall determine for use
consistent with the purposes for which such funds were
contributed and accepted: Provided, That such amounts shall
be available for the same time period as the appropriation to
which transferred: Provided further, That the Secretary shall
report to the Congress all transfers made pursuant to this
authority.
Sec. 1306. (a) Authority To Provide Support.--Of the amount
appropriated by this title under the heading, ``Drug
Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense'', not to
exceed $60,000,000 may be used for support for counter-drug
activities of the Governments of Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, and
Pakistan: Provided, That such support shall be in addition to
support provided for the counter-drug activities of such
Governments under any other provision of the law.
(b) Types of Support.--
(1) Except as specified in subsection (b)(2) of this
section, the support that may be provided under the authority
in this section shall be limited to the types of support
specified in section 1033(c)(1) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85, as
amended by Public Laws 106-398, 108-136, and 109-364) and
conditions on the provision of support as contained in
section 1033 shall apply for fiscal year 2007.
(2) The Secretary of Defense may transfer vehicles,
aircraft, and detection, interception, monitoring and testing
equipment to said Governments for counter-drug activities.
Sec. 1307. (a) From funds made available for operations and
maintenance in this title to the Department of Defense, not
to exceed $456,400,000 may be used, notwithstanding any other
provision of law, to fund the Commander's Emergency Response
Program, for the purpose of enabling military commanders in
Iraq and Afghanistan to respond to urgent humanitarian relief
and reconstruction requirements within their areas of
responsibility by carrying out programs that will immediately
assist the Iraqi and Afghan people.
(b) Quarterly Reports.--Not later than 15 days after the
end of each fiscal year quarter, the Secretary of Defense
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report
regarding the source of funds and the allocation and use of
funds during that quarter that were made available pursuant
to the authority provided in this section or under any other
provision of law for the purposes of the programs under
subsection (a).
Sec. 1308. During fiscal year 2007, supervision and
administration costs associated with projects carried out
with funds appropriated to ``Afghanistan Security Forces
Fund'' or ``Iraq Security Forces Fund'' in this chapter may
be obligated at the time a construction contract is awarded:
Provided, That for the purpose of this section, supervision
and administration costs include all in-house Government
costs.
Sec. 1309. Section 1005(c)(2) of the National Defense
Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364) is
amended by striking ``$310,277,000'' and inserting
``$376,446,000''.
Sec. 1310. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this or any other Act shall be obligated or
expended by the United States Government for a purpose as
follows:
(1) To establish any military installation or base for the
purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United
States Armed Forces in Iraq.
(2) To exercise United States control over any oil resource
of Iraq.
Sec. 1311. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used in contravention of the following laws enacted or
regulations promulgated to implement the United Nations
Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment (done at New York on
December 10, 1984):
(1) Section 2340A of title 18, United States Code;
(2) Section 2242 of the Foreign Affairs Reform and
Restructuring Act of 1998 (division G of Public Law 105-277;
112 Stat. 2681-822; 8 U.S.C. 1231 note) and regulations
prescribed thereto, including regulations under part 208 of
title 8, Code of Federal Regulations, and part 95 of title
22, Code of Federal Regulations; and
(3) Sections 1002 and 1003 of the Department of Defense,
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes
in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006
(Public Law 109-148).
Sec. 1312. Section 9007 of Public Law 109-289 is amended by
striking ``20'' and inserting ``287''.
Sec. 1313. Inspection of Military Medical Treatment
Facilities, Military Quarters Housing Medical Hold Personnel,
and Military Quarters Housing Medical Holdover Personnel. (a)
Periodic Inspection Required.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the
Secretary of Defense shall inspect each facility of the
Department of Defense as follows:
(A) Each military medical treatment facility.
(B) Each military quarters housing medical hold personnel.
(C) Each military quarters housing medical holdover
personnel.
(2) Purpose.--The purpose of an inspection under this
subsection is to ensure that the facility or quarters
concerned meets acceptable standards for the maintenance and
operation of medical facilities, quarters housing medical
hold personnel, or quarters housing medical holdover
personnel, as applicable.
(b) Acceptable Standards.--For purposes of this section,
acceptable standards for the operation and maintenance of
military medical treatment facilities, military quarters
housing medical hold personnel, or military quarters housing
medical holdover personnel are each of the following:
(1) Generally accepted standards for the accreditation of
non-military medical facilities, or for facilities used to
quarter individuals with medical conditions that may require
medical supervision, as applicable, in the United States.
(2) Standards under the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.).
(c) Additional Inspections on Identified Deficiencies.--
(1) In general.--In the event a deficiency is identified
pursuant to subsection (a) at a facility or quarters
described in paragraph (1) of that subsection--
(A) the commander of such facility or quarters, as
applicable, shall submit to the Secretary a detailed plan to
correct the deficiency; and
(B) the Secretary shall reinspect such facility or
quarters, as applicable, not less often than once every 180
days until the deficiency is corrected.
(2) Construction with other inspections.--An inspection of
a facility or quarters under this subsection is in addition
to any inspection of such facility or quarters under
subsection (a).
(d) Reports on Inspections.--A complete copy of the report
on each inspection conducted under subsections (a) and (c)
shall be submitted in unclassified form to the applicable
military medical command and to the congressional defense
committees.
(e) Report on Standards.--In the event no standards for the
maintenance and operation of military medical treatment
facilities, military quarters housing medical hold personnel,
or military quarters housing medical holdover personnel exist
as of the date of the enactment of this Act, or such
standards as do exist do not meet acceptable standards for
the maintenance and operation of such facilities or quarters,
as the case may be, the Secretary shall, not later than 30
days after that date, submit to Congress a report setting
forth the plan of the Secretary to ensure--
(1) the adoption by the Department of standards for the
maintenance and operation
[[Page 7608]]
of military medical facilities, military quarters housing
medical hold personnel, or military quarters housing medical
holdover personnel, as applicable, that meet--
(A) acceptable standards for the maintenance and operation
of such facilities or quarters, as the case may be; and
(B) standards under the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990; and
(2) the comprehensive implementation of the standards
adopted under paragraph (1) at the earliest date practicable.
Sec. 1314. From funds made available for the ``Iraq
Security Forces Fund'' for fiscal year 2007, up to
$155,500,000 may be used, notwithstanding any other provision
of law, to provide assistance, with the concurrence of the
Secretary of State, to the Government of Iraq to support the
disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration of militias
and illegal armed groups.
Sec. 1315. Revision of United States Policy on Iraq. (a)
Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Congress and the American people will continue to
support and protect the members of the United States Armed
Forces who are serving or have served bravely and honorably
in Iraq.
(2) The circumstances referred to in the Authorization for
Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public
Law 107-243) have changed substantially.
(3) United States troops should not be policing a civil
war, and the current conflict in Iraq requires principally a
political solution.
(4) United States policy on Iraq must change to emphasize
the need for a political solution by Iraqi leaders in order
to maximize the chances of success and to more effectively
fight the war on terror.
(b) Prompt Commencement of Phased Redeployment of United
States Forces From Iraq.--
(1) Transition of mission.--The President shall promptly
transition the mission of United States forces in Iraq to the
limited purposes set forth in paragraph (2).
(2) Commencement of phased redeployment from iraq.--The
President shall commence the phased redeployment of United
States forces from Iraq not later than 120 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, with the goal of
redeploying, by March 31, 2008, all United States combat
forces from Iraq except for a limited number that are
essential for the following purposes:
(A) Protecting United States and coalition personnel and
infrastructure.
(B) Training and equipping Iraqi forces.
(C) Conducting targeted counter-terrorism operations.
(3) Comprehensive strategy.--Paragraph (2) shall be
implemented as part of a comprehensive diplomatic, political,
and economic strategy that includes sustained engagement with
Iraq's neighbors and the international community for the
purpose of working collectively to bring stability to Iraq.
(4) Reports required.--Not later than 60 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, and every 90 days
thereafter, the President shall submit to Congress a report
on the progress made in transitioning the mission of the
United States forces in Iraq and implementing the phased
redeployment of United States forces from Iraq as required
under this subsection, as well as a classified campaign plan
for Iraq, including strategic and operational benchmarks and
projected redeployment dates of United States forces from
Iraq.
(c) Benchmarks for the Government of Iraq.--
(1) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(A) achieving success in Iraq is dependent on the
Government of Iraq meeting specific benchmarks, as reflected
in previous commitments made by the Government of Iraq,
including--
(i) deploying trained and ready Iraqi security forces in
Baghdad;
(ii) strengthening the authority of Iraqi commanders to
make tactical and operational decisions without political
intervention;
(iii) disarming militias and ensuring that Iraqi security
forces are accountable only to the central government and
loyal to the constitution of Iraq;
(iv) enacting and implementing legislation to ensure that
the energy resources of Iraq benefit all Iraqi citizens in an
equitable manner;
(v) enacting and implementing legislation that equitably
reforms the de-Ba'athification process in Iraq;
(vi) ensuring a fair process for amending the constitution
of Iraq so as to protect minority rights; and
(vii) enacting and implementing rules to equitably protect
the rights of minority political parties in the Iraqi
Parliament; and
(B) each benchmark set forth in subparagraph (A) should be
completed expeditiously and pursuant to a schedule
established by the Government of Iraq.
(2) Report.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and every 60 days thereafter, the
Commander, Multi-National Forces-Iraq shall submit to
Congress a report describing and assessing in detail the
current progress being made by the Government of Iraq in
meeting the benchmarks set forth in paragraph (1)(A).
CHAPTER 4
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
National Nuclear Security Administration
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation
For an additional amount for ``Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation'', $63,000,000.
CHAPTER 5
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
United States Customs and Border Protection
Salaries and Expenses
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'',
$140,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.
Air and Marine Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement
For an additional amount for ``Air and Marine Interdiction,
Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement'', for air and
marine operations on the Northern Border and the Great Lakes,
including the final Northern Border air wing, $75,000,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2008.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Salaries and Expenses
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'',
$20,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.
Transportation Security Administration
Aviation Security
For an additional amount for ``Aviation Security'',
$660,000,000; of which $600,000,000 shall be for procurement
and installation of checked baggage explosives detection
systems, to remain available until expended; and $60,000,000
shall be for air cargo security, to remain available until
September 30, 2008.
Federal Air Marshals
For an additional amount for ``Federal Air Marshals'',
$15,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.
Preparedness
management and administration
For an additional amount for ``Office of the Chief Medical
Officer'' for nuclear preparedness and other activities,
$18,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.
Infrastructure Protection and Information Security
For an additional amount for ``Infrastructure Protection
and Information Security'' for chemical site security
activities, $18,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2008.
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Administrative and Regional Operations
For an additional amount for ``Administrative and Regional
Operations'' for necessary expenses related to title V of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et seq. (as
amended by section 611 of the Post-Katrina Emergency
Management Reform Act of 2006 (6 U.S.C. 701 note; Public Law
109-295))), $20,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2008: Provided, That none of the funds available under
this heading may be obligated until the Committees on
Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives
receive and approve a plan for expenditure.
State and Local Programs
For an additional amount for ``State and Local Programs'',
$850,000,000; of which $190,000,000 shall be for port
security pursuant to section 70107(l) of title 46 United
States Code; $625,000,000 shall be for intercity rail
passenger transportation, freight rail, and transit security
grants; and $35,000,000 shall be for regional grants and
technical assistance to high risk urban areas for
catastrophic event planning and preparedness: Provided, That
none of the funds made available under this heading may be
obligated for such regional grants and technical assistance
until the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the
House of Representatives receive and approve a plan for
expenditure: Provided further, That funds for such regional
grants and technical assistance shall remain available until
September 30, 2008.
Emergency Management Performance Grants
For an additional amount for ``Emergency Management
Performance Grants'' for necessary expenses related to the
Nationwide Plan Review, $100,000,000.
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
For an additional amount for expenses of ``United States
Citizenship and Immigration Services'' to address backlogs of
security checks associated with pending applications and
petitions, $30,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2008: Provided, That none of the funds made available
under this heading shall be available for obligation until
the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the
United States Attorney General, submits to the Committees on
Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives
a plan to eliminate the backlog of security checks that
establishes information sharing protocols to ensure United
States Citizenship and Immigration Services has the
information it needs to carry out its mission.
[[Page 7609]]
Science and Technology
Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations
For an additional amount for ``Research, Development,
Acquisition, and Operations'' for air cargo research,
$15,000,000, to remain available until expended.
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
Research, Development, and Operations
For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, and
Operations'' for non-container, rail, aviation and intermodal
radiation detection activities, $39,000,000, to remain
available until expended.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 1501. None of the funds provided in this Act, or
Public Law 109-295, shall be available to carry out section
872 of Public Law 107-296.
Sec. 1502. Section 550 of the Department of Homeland
Security Appropriations Act, 2007 (6 U.S.C. 121 note) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(h) This section shall not preclude or deny any right of
any State or political subdivision thereof to adopt or
enforce any regulation, requirement, or standard of
performance with respect to chemical facility security that
is more stringent than a regulation, requirement, or standard
of performance issued under this section, or otherwise impair
any right or jurisdiction of any State with respect to
chemical facilities within that State, unless there is an
actual conflict between this section and the law of that
State.''.
CHAPTER 6
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Military Construction, Army
For an additional amount for ``Military Construction,
Army'', $1,261,390,000, to remain available until September
30, 2008: Provided, That such funds may be obligated and
expended to carry out planning and design and military
construction projects not otherwise authorized by law:
Provided further, That of the funds provided under this
heading, $280,300,000 shall not be obligated or expended
until the Secretary of Defense certifies that none of the
funds are to be used for the purpose of providing facilities
for the permanent basing of U.S. military personnel in Iraq.
Military Construction, Navy and Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Military Construction, Navy
and Marine Corps'', $347,890,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2008: Provided, That such funds may be
obligated and expended to carry out planning and design and
military construction projects not otherwise authorized by
law.
Military Construction, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Military Construction, Air
Force'', $34,700,000, to remain available until September 30,
2008: Provided, That such funds may be obligated and expended
to carry out planning and design and military construction
projects not otherwise authorized by law.
CHAPTER 7
DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND RELATED AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Administration of Foreign Affairs
Diplomatic and Consular Programs
For an additional amount for ``Diplomatic and Consular
Programs'', $815,796,000, to remain available until September
30, 2008, of which $70,000,000 for World Wide Security
Upgrades is available until expended: Provided, That of the
funds appropriated under this heading, not more than
$20,000,000 shall be made available for public diplomacy
programs: Provided further, That prior to the obligation of
funds pursuant to the previous proviso, the Secretary of
State shall submit a report to the Committees on
Appropriations describing a comprehensive public diplomacy
strategy, with goals and expected results, for fiscal years
2007 and 2008: Provided further, That within 15 days of
enactment of this Act, the Office of Management and Budget
shall apportion $15,000,000 from amounts appropriated or
otherwise made available by chapter 8 of title II of division
B of Public Law 109-148 under the heading ``Emergencies in
the Diplomatic and Consular Service'' for emergency
evacuations: Provided further, That of the amount made
available under this heading for Iraq, not to exceed
$20,000,000 may be transferred to, and merged with, funds in
the ``Emergencies in the Diplomatic and Consular Service''
appropriations account, to be available only for emergency
evacuations and terrorism rewards.
Office of Inspector General
For an additional amount for ``Office of Inspector
General'', $36,500,000, to remain available until December
31, 2008: Provided, That of the funds appropriated under this
heading, not less than $1,500,000 shall be made available for
activities related to oversight of assistance furnished for
Iraq and Afghanistan with funds appropriated in this Act and
in prior appropriations Acts: Provided further, That
$35,000,000 of these funds shall be transferred to the
Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction for
reconstruction oversight.
Educational and Cultural Exchange Programs
For an additional amount for ``Educational and Cultural
Exchange Programs'', $25,000,000, to remain available until
expended.
International Organizations
Contributions to International Organizations
For an additional amount for ``Contributions to
International Organizations'', $59,000,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2008.
Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities
For an additional amount for ``Contributions for
International Peacekeeping Activities'', $200,000,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2008.
RELATED AGENCY
Broadcasting Board of Governors
International Broadcasting Operations
For an additional amount for ``International Broadcasting
Operations'' for activities related to broadcasting to the
Middle East, $10,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2008.
FOREIGN OPERATIONS
BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE
FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT
United States Agency for International Development
Child Survival and Health Programs Fund
For an additional amount for ``Child Survival and Health
Programs Fund'', $161,000,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2008: Provided, That notwithstanding any other
provision of law, funds made available under the heading
``Millennium Challenge Corporation'' and ``Global HIV/AIDS
Initiative'' in prior Acts making appropriations for foreign
operations, export financing and related programs may be made
available to combat the avian influenza, subject to the
regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations.
International Disaster and Famine Assistance
For an additional amount for ``International Disaster and
Famine Assistance'', $187,000,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That of the funds appropriated under this
heading, not less than $65,000,000 shall be made available
for assistance for internally displaced persons in Iraq, not
less than $18,000,000 shall be made available for emergency
shelter, fuel and other assistance for internally displaced
persons in Afghanistan, not less than $10,000,000 shall be
made available for assistance for northern Uganda, not less
than $10,000,000 shall be made available for assistance for
eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, and not less than
$10,000,000 shall be made available for assistance for Chad.
Operating Expenses of the United States Agency for International
Development
For an additional amount for ``Operating Expenses of the
United States Agency for International Development'',
$5,700,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.
OPERATING EXPENSES OF THE UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
For an additional amount for ``Operating Expenses of the
United States Agency for International Development Office of
Inspector General'', $4,000,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2008: Provided, That of the funds appropriated
under this heading, not less than $3,000,000 shall be made
available for activities related to oversight of assistance
furnished for Iraq with funds appropriated in this Act and in
prior appropriations Acts, and not less than $1,000,000 shall
be made available for activities related to oversight of
assistance furnished for Afghanistan with funds appropriated
in this Act and in prior appropriations Acts.
OTHER BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE
Economic Support Fund
For an additional amount for ``Economic Support Fund'',
$2,602,200,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008:
Provided, That of the funds appropriated under this heading
that are available for assistance for Iraq, not less than
$100,000,000 shall be made available to the United States
Agency for International Development for continued support
for its Community Action Program in Iraq, of which not less
than $5,000,000 shall be made available for the fund
established by section 2108 of Public Law 109-13: Provided
further, That of the funds appropriated under this heading
that are available for assistance for Afghanistan, not less
than $10,000,000 shall be made available to the United States
Agency for International Development for continued support
for its Afghan Civilian Assistance Program: Provided further,
That of the funds appropriated under this heading, not less
than $6,000,000 shall be made available for assistance for
elections, reintegration of ex-combatants, and other
assistance to support the peace process in Nepal: Provided
further, That of the funds appropriated under this heading,
not less than $3,200,000
[[Page 7610]]
shall be made available, notwithstanding any other provision
of law, for assistance for Vietnam for environmental
remediation of dioxin storage sites and to support health
programs in communities near those sites: Provided further,
That funds made available pursuant to the previous proviso
should be matched, to the maximum extent possible, with
contributions from other governments, multilateral
organizations, and private sources: Provided further, That of
the funds made available under this heading, not less than
$6,000,000 shall be made available for typhoon reconstruction
assistance for the Philippines: Provided further, That of the
funds made available under this heading, not less than
$110,000,000 shall be made available for assistance for
Pakistan, of which not less than $5,000,000 shall be made
available for political party development and election
monitoring activities: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not less than $2,000,000
shall be made available to support the peace process in
northern Uganda: Provided further, That of the funds made
available under the heading ``Economic Support Fund'' in
Public Law 109-234 for Iraq to promote democracy, rule of law
and reconciliation, $2,000,000 should be made available for
the United States Institute of Peace for programs and
activities in Afghanistan to remain available until September
30, 2008.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States
For an additional amount for ``Assistance for Eastern
Europe and the Baltic States'', $214,000,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2008, for assistance for
Kosovo.
Democracy Fund
For an additional amount for ``Democracy Fund'',
$465,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008:
Provided, That of the funds appropriated under this heading,
not less than $385,000,000 shall be made available for the
Human Rights and Democracy Fund of the Bureau of Democracy,
Human Rights and Labor, Department of State, for democracy,
human rights, and rule of law programs in Iraq: Provided
further, That prior to the initial obligation of funds made
available under this heading for Iraq for the Political
Participation Fund or the National Institutions Fund, the
Secretary of State shall submit a report to the Committees on
Appropriations describing a comprehensive, long-term
strategy, with goals and expected results, for strengthening
and advancing democracy in Iraq: Provided further, That of
the funds appropriated under this heading, not less than
$5,000,000 shall be made available for media and
reconciliation programs in Somalia.
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement
(including rescission of funds)
For an additional amount for ``International Narcotics
Control and Law Enforcement'', $210,000,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2008.
Of the amounts made available for procurement of a maritime
patrol aircraft for the Colombian Navy under this heading in
Public Law 109-234, $13,000,000 are rescinded.
Migration and Refugee Assistance
For an additional amount for ``Migration and Refugee
Assistance'', $143,000,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2008: Provided, That of the funds appropriated
under this heading, not less than $65,000,000 shall be made
available for assistance for Iraqi refugees including not
less than $5,000,000 to rescue Iraqi scholars, and not less
than $18,000,000 shall be made available for assistance for
Afghan refugees.
United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund
For an additional amount for ``United States Emergency
Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund'', $55,000,000, to
remain available until expended.
Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining and Related Programs
For an additional amount for ``Nonproliferation, Anti-
Terrorism, Demining and Related Programs'', $27,500,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2008.
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
International Affairs Technical Assistance Program
For an additional amount for ``International Affairs
Technical Assistance'', $2,750,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2008.
MILITARY ASSISTANCE
FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT
Foreign Military Financing Program
For an additional amount for ``Foreign Military Financing
Program'', $220,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2008, for assistance for Lebanon.
Peacekeeping Operations
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Peacekeeping Operations'',
$323,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008,
of which up to $128,000,000 may be transferred, subject to
the regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations, to ``Contributions to International
Peacekeeping Activities'', to be made available,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, for assessed
costs of United Nations Peacekeeping Missions: Provided, That
of the funds appropriated under this heading, not less than
$45,000,000 shall be made available, notwithstanding section
660 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, for assistance for
Liberia for security sector reform.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
authorization of funds
Sec. 1701. Funds appropriated by this title may be
obligated and expended notwithstanding section 10 of Public
Law 91-672 (22 U.S.C. 2412), section 15 of the State
Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2680),
section 313 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act,
Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (22 U.S.C. 6212), and section
504(a)(1) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C.
414(a)(1)).
extension of availability of funds
Sec. 1702. Section 1302(a) of Public Law 109-234 is amended
by striking ``one additional year'' and inserting in lieu
thereof ``two additional years''.
EXTENSION OF OVERSIGHT AUTHORITY
Sec. 1703. Section 3001(o)(1)(B) of the Emergency
Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the
Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004 (Public Law 108-
106; 117 Stat. 1238; 5 U.S.C. App., note to section 8G of
Public Law 95-452), as amended by section 1054(b) of the John
Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2007 (Public Law 109-364; 120 Stat. 2397) and section 2 of
the Iraq Reconstruction Accountability Act of 2006 (Public
Law 109-440), is amended by inserting ``or fiscal year 2007''
after ``fiscal year 2006''.
DEBT RESTRUCTURING
Sec. 1704. Amounts appropriated for fiscal year 2007 for
``Bilateral Economic Assistance--Department of the Treasury--
Debt Restructuring'' may be used to assist Liberia in
retiring its debt arrearages to the International Monetary
Fund, the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, and the African Development Bank.
JORDAN
(Including Transfer of Funds)
Sec. 1705. Of the funds appropriated by this Act for
assistance for Iraq under the heading ``Economic Support
Fund'' that are available to support Provincial
Reconstruction Team activities, up to $100,000,000 may be
transferred to, and merged with, funds appropriated by this
Act under the headings ``Foreign Military Financing Program''
and ``Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining and Related
Programs'' for assistance for Jordan: Provided, That funds
transferred pursuant to this section shall be subject to the
regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations.
LEBANON
Sec. 1706. Prior to the initial obligation of funds made
available in this Act for assistance for Lebanon under the
headings ``Foreign Military Financing Program'' and
``Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining and Related
Programs'', the Secretary of State shall certify to the
Committees on Appropriations that all practicable efforts
have been made to ensure that such assistance is not provided
to or through any individual, or private or government
entity, that advocates, plans, sponsors, engages in, or has
engaged in, terrorist activity: Provided, That this section
shall be effective notwithstanding section 534(a) of Public
Law 109-102, which is made applicable to funds appropriated
for fiscal year 2007 by the Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2007, as amended.
HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRACY FUND
Sec. 1707. The Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy,
Human Rights and Labor shall be responsible for all policy,
funding, and programming decisions regarding funds made
available under this Act and prior Acts making appropriations
for foreign operations, export financing and related programs
for the Human Rights and Democracy Fund of the Bureau of
Democracy, Human Rights and Labor.
INSPECTOR GENERAL OVERSIGHT OF IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN
Sec. 1708. (a) In General.--Subject to paragraph (2), the
Inspector General of the Department of State and the
Broadcasting Board of Governors (referred to in this section
as the ``Inspector General'') may use personal services
contracts to engage citizens of the United States to
facilitate and support the Office of the Inspector General's
oversight of programs and operations related to Iraq and
Afghanistan. Individuals engaged by contract to perform such
services shall not, by virtue of such contract, be considered
to be employees of the United States Government for purposes
of any law administered by the Office of Personnel
Management. The Secretary of State may determine the
applicability to such individuals of any law administered by
the Secretary concerning the performance of such services by
such individuals.
(b) Conditions.--The authority under paragraph (1) is
subject to the following conditions:
(1) The Inspector General determines that existing
personnel resources are insufficient.
[[Page 7611]]
(2) The contract length for a personal services contractor,
including options, may not exceed 1 year, unless the
Inspector General makes a finding that exceptional
circumstances justify an extension of up to 2 additional
years.
(3) Not more than 20 individuals may be employed at any
time as personal services contractors under the program.
(c) Termination of Authority.--The authority to award
personal services contracts under this section shall
terminate on December 31, 2008. A contract entered into prior
to the termination date under this paragraph may remain in
effect until not later than December 31, 2009.
(d) Other Authorities Not Affected.--The authority under
this section is in addition to any other authority of the
Inspector General to hire personal services contractors.
FUNDING TABLES
Sec. 1709. (a) Funds provided in this Act for the following
accounts shall be made available for programs and countries
in the amounts contained in the respective tables included in
the report accompanying this Act:
``Diplomatic and Consular Programs''.
``Educational and Cultural Exchange Programs''.
``International Disaster and Famine Assistance''.
``Economic Support Fund''.
``Assistance for Eastern Europe and Baltic States''.
``Democracy Fund''.
``Migration and Refugee Assistance''.
``Nonproliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining and Related
Programs''.
``Peacekeeping Operations''.
(b) Any proposed increases or decreases to the amounts
contained in the tables in the accompanying report shall be
subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations and section 634A of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961.
BENCHMARKS FOR CERTAIN RECONSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE FOR IRAQ
Sec. 1710. (a) Benchmarks.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, fifty percent of the funds appropriated by
this Act for assistance for Iraq under the headings
``Economic Support Fund'' and ``International Narcotics and
Law Enforcement'' shall be withheld from obligation until the
President certifies to the Committees on Appropriations and
Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committees on
Appropriations and Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives that the Government of Iraq has--
(1) enacted a broadly accepted hydro-carbon law that
equitably shares oil revenues among all Iraqis;
(2) adopted legislation necessary for the conduct of
provincial and local elections, taken steps to implement such
legislation, and set a schedule to conduct provincial and
local elections;
(3) reformed current laws governing the de-Baathification
process to allow for more equitable treatment of individuals
affected by such laws;
(4) amended the Constitution of Iraq consistent with the
principles contained in Article 137 of such constitution; and
(5) allocated and begun expenditure of $10,000,000,000 in
Iraqi revenues for reconstruction projects, including
delivery of essential services, on an equitable basis.
(b) Exemptions.--The requirement to withhold funds from
obligation pursuant to subsection (a) shall not apply with
respect to funds made available under the heading ``Economic
Support Fund'' that are administered by the United States
Agency for International Development for continued support
for the Community Action Program, assistance for civilian
victims of the military operations, and the Community
Stabilization Program in Iraq, or for programs and activities
to promote democracy, governance, human rights, and rule of
law.
(c) Report.--At the time the President certifies to the
Committees on Appropriations and Foreign Relations of the
Senate and the Committees on Appropriations and Foreign
Affairs of the House of Representatives that the Government
of Iraq has met the benchmarks described in subsection (a),
the President shall submit to such Committees a report that
contains a detailed description of the specific actions that
the Government of Iraq has taken to meet each of the
benchmarks referenced in the certification.
RELIEF FOR IRAQI, HMONG AND OTHER REFUGEES WHO DO NOT POSE A THREAT TO
THE UNITED STATES
Sec. 1711. (a) Amendment to Authority to Determine the Bar
to Admission Inapplicable.--Section 212(d)(3)(B)(i) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(3)(B)(i))
is amended to read as follows: ``The Secretary of State,
after consultation with the Attorney General and the
Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Secretary of Homeland
Security, after consultation with the Secretary of State and
the Attorney General, may determine in such Secretary's sole
unreviewable discretion that subsection (a)(3)(B) shall not
apply with respect to an alien within the scope of that
subsection, or that subsection (a)(3)(B)(vi)(III) shall not
apply to a group. Such a determination shall neither
prejudice the ability of the United States Government to
commence criminal or civil proceedings involving a
beneficiary of such a determination or any other person, nor
create any substantive or procedural right or benefit for a
beneficiary of such a determination or any other person.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law (statutory or non-
statutory), including but not limited to section 2241 of
title 28, or any other habeas corpus provision, and sections
1361 and 1651 of such title, no court shall have jurisdiction
to review such a determination or revocation except in a
proceeding for review of a final order of removal pursuant to
section 242 and only to the extent provided in section
242(a)(2)(D). The Secretary of State may not exercise the
discretion provided in this clause with respect to an alien
at any time during which the alien is the subject of pending
removal proceedings under section 1229a of title 8.''.
(b) Automatic Relief for the Hmong and Other Groups That Do
Not Pose a Threat to the United States.--Section 212(a)(3)(B)
of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1182(a)(3)(B)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi) in the matter preceding section (I), by
striking ``As'' and inserting ``Except as provided in clause
(vii), as''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(vii) Notwithstanding clause (vi), for purposes of this
section the Hmong, the Montagnards, the Karen National Union/
Karen Liberation Army (KNU/KNLA), the Chin National Front/
Chin National Army (CNF/CNA), the Chin National League for
Democracy (CNLD), the Kayan New Land Party (KNLP), the Arakan
Liberation Party (ALP), the Mustangs, the Alzados, and the
Karenni National Progressive Party shall not be considered to
be a terrorist organization on the basis of any act or event
occurring before the date of enactment of this section.
Nothing in this subsection may be construed to alter or limit
the authority of the Secretary of State and Secretary of
Homeland Security to exercise their discretionary authority
pursuant to 212(d)(3)(B)(i) (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(3)(B)(i)).''.
(c) Duress Exception.--Section 212(a)(3)(B)(iv)(VI) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1182(a)(3)(B)(iv)(VI)) is amended by adding ``other than an
act carried out under duress'' after ``act'' and before
``that the actor knows''.
(d) Technical Correction.--Section 212(a)(3)(B)(ii) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B)(ii))
is amended by striking ``Subclause (VII)'' and inserting
``Subclause (IX)''.
(e) Regulations.--Section 212(d)(3)(B) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(3)(B)) is amended by
adding the following subsection:
``(iii) Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland
Security and Secretary of State shall each publish in the
Federal Register regulations establishing the process by
which the eligibility of a refugee, asylum seeker, or
individual seeking to adjust his immigration status is
considered eligible for any of the exceptions authorized by
clause (i), including a timeline for issuing a
determination.''.
(f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on the date of enactment of this section,
and these amendments and sections 212(a)(3)(B) and
212(d)(3)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1182(a)(3)(B) and 1182(d)(3)(B)), as amended by these
sections, shall apply to--
(1) removal proceedings instituted before, on, or after the
date of enactment of this section; and
(2) acts and conditions constituting a ground for
inadmissibility, excludability, deportation, or removal
occurring or existing before, on, or after such date.
SPENDING PLAN AND NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES
Sec. 1712. Not later than 45 days after enactment of this
Act the Secretary of State shall submit to the Committees on
Appropriations a report detailing planned expenditures for
funds appropriated under the headings in this chapter, except
for funds appropriated under the headings ``International
Disaster and Famine Assistance'', ``Office of the United
States Agency for International Development Inspector
General'', and ``Office of the Inspector General'': Provided,
That funds appropriated under the headings in this chapter,
except for funds appropriated under the headings named in
this section, shall be subject to the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.
TITLE II
KATRINA RECOVERY, VETERANS' CARE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
CHAPTER 1
GENERAL PROVISION--THIS CHAPTER
emergency forestry conservation reserve program
Sec. 2101. Section 1231(k)(2) of the Food Security Act of
1985 (16 U.S.C. 3831(k)(2)) is amended by striking ``During
calendar year 2006, the'' and inserting ``The''.
[[Page 7612]]
CHAPTER 2
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Office of Justice Programs
STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE
For an additional amount for ``State and Local Law
Enforcement Assistance'', for discretionary grants authorized
by subpart 2 of part E, of title I of the Omnibus Crime
Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, notwithstanding the
provisions of section 511 of said Act, $170,000,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2008: Provided, That of
the amount made available under this heading, $70,000,000
shall be for local law enforcement initiatives in the gulf
coast region related to the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina
and Rita, of which no less than $55,000,000 shall be for the
State of Louisiana: Provided further, That of the amount made
available under this heading, $100,000,000 shall be for
reimbursing State and local law enforcement entities for
security and related costs, including overtime, associated
with the 2008 Presidential Candidate Nominating Conventions,
of which $50,000,000 shall be for the city of Denver,
Colorado and $50,000,000 shall be for the city of St. Paul,
Minnesota: Provided further, That the Department of Justice
shall report to the Committees on Appropriations of the House
and the Senate on a quarterly basis on the expenditure of the
funds provided in the previous proviso.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
OPERATIONS, RESEARCH, AND FACILITIES
For an additional amount for ``Operations, Research, and
Facilities'', for necessary expenses related to fisheries
disasters, $165,900,000, to remain available until September
30, 2008: Provided, That of the amount provided under this
heading, the National Marine Fisheries Service shall cause
$60,400,000 to be distributed among eligible recipients of
assistance for the commercial fishery failure designated
under section 312(a) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1861a(a)) and
declared by the Secretary of Commerce on August 10, 2006:
Provided further, That of the amount provided under this
heading, $105,500,000 shall be for necessary expenses related
to the consequences of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita on shrimp
and fishing industries.
PROCUREMENT, ACQUISITION, AND CONSTRUCTION
For an additional amount for ``Procurement, Acquisition and
Construction'', for necessary expenses related to disaster
response and preparedness of the Gulf of Mexico coast,
$6,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.
fisheries disaster mitigation fund
For an additional amount for a ``Fisheries Disaster
Mitigation Fund'', $50,000,000, to remain available until
expended for use in mitigating the effects of commercial
fisheries failures and fishery resource disasters as
determined under the Magnuson Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et
seq.) or the Interjurisdictional Fisheries Act (16 U.S.C.
4101 et seq.): Provided, That the Secretary of Commerce shall
obligate funds provided under this heading according to the
Magnuson Stevens Conservation Act, as amended, the
Interjurisdictional Fisheries Act, as amended, or other Acts
as the Secretary determines to be appropriate.
GENERAL PROVISION--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 2201. Up to $48,000,000 of amounts made available to
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in Public
Law 109-148 and Public Law 109-234 for emergency hurricane
and other natural disaster-related expenses may be used to
reimburse hurricane-related costs incurred by NASA in fiscal
year 2005.
CHAPTER 3
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Corps of Engineers--Civil
CONSTRUCTION
For an additional amount for ``Construction'' for necessary
expenses related to the consequences of Hurricane Katrina and
other hurricanes of the 2005 season, $150,000,000, to remain
available until expended, which may be used to continue
construction of projects related to interior drainage for the
greater New Orleans metropolitan area.
operation and maintenance
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance''
to dredge navigation channels related to the consequences of
Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of the 2005 season,
$3,000,000, to remain available until expended.
Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies
For an additional amount for ``Flood Control and Coastal
Emergencies'', as authorized by section 5 of the Act of
August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n), for necessary expenses
relating to the consequences of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
and for other purposes, $1,557,700,000, to remain available
until expended: Provided, That $1,300,000,000 of the amount
provided may be used by the Secretary of the Army to carry
out projects and measures to provide the level of protection
necessary to achieve the certification required for the 100-
year level of flood protection in accordance with the
national flood insurance program under the base flood
elevations in existence at the time of construction of the
enhancements for the West Bank and Vicinity and Lake
Ponchartrain and Vicinity, Louisiana, projects, as described
under the heading ``Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies'',
in chapter 3 of Public Law 109-148: Provided further, That
$150,000,000 of the amount provided may be used to support
emergency operations, repairs and other activities in
response to flood, drought and earthquake emergencies as
authorized by law: Provided further, That $107,700,000 of the
amount provided may be used to implement the projects for
hurricane storm damage reduction, flood damage reduction, and
ecosystem restoration within Hancock, Harrison, and Jackson
Counties, Mississippi substantially in accordance with the
Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 31, 2006, and
entitled ``Mississippi, Coastal Improvements Program Interim
Report, Hancock, Harrison, and Jackson Counties,
Mississippi'': Provided further, That projects authorized for
implementation under this Chief's report shall be carried out
at full Federal expense, except that the non-Federal
interests shall be responsible for providing any lands,
easements, rights-of-way, disposal areas, and relocations
required for construction of the project and for all costs
associated with operation and maintenance of the project:
Provided further, That any project using funds appropriated
under this heading shall be initiated only after non-Federal
interests have entered into binding agreements with the
Secretary requiring the non-Federal interests to pay 100
percent of the operation, maintenance, repair, replacement,
and rehabilitation costs of the project and to hold and save
the United States free from damages due to the construction
or operation and maintenance of the project, except for
damages due to the fault or negligence of the United States
or its contractors.
DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation
WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES
For an additional amount for ``Water and Related
Resources'', $18,000,000, to remain available until expended
for drought assistance: Provided, That drought assistance may
be provided under the Reclamation States Drought Emergency
Act or other applicable Reclamation authorities to assist
drought plagued areas of the West.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 2301. The Secretary is authorized and directed to
reimburse local governments for expenses they have incurred
in storm-proofing pumping stations, constructing safe houses
for operators, and other interim flood control measures in
and around the New Orleans metropolitan area, provided the
Secretary determines those elements of work and related
expenses to be integral to the overall plan to ensure
operability of the stations during hurricanes, storms and
high water events and the flood control plan for the area.
Sec. 2302. The limitation concerning total project costs in
section 902 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986,
as amended (33 U.S.C. 2280), shall not apply during fiscal
year 2008 to any water resources project for which funds were
made available during fiscal year 2007.
Sec. 2303. (a) The Secretary of the Army is authorized and
directed to utilize funds remaining available for obligation
from the amounts appropriated in chapter 3 of Public Law 109-
234 under the heading ``Flood Control and Coastal
Emergencies'' for projects in the greater New Orleans
metropolitan area to prosecute these projects in a manner
which promotes the goal of continuing work at an optimal
pace, while maximizing, to the greatest extent practicable,
levels of protection to reduce the risk of storm damage to
people and property.
(b) The expenditure of funds as provided in subsection (a)
may be made without regard to individual amounts or purposes
specified in chapter 3 of Public Law 109-234.
(c) Any reallocation of funds that are necessary to
accomplish the goal established in subsection (a) are
authorized. Reallocation of funds in excess of $250,000,000
or 50 percent, whichever is less, of the individual amounts
specified in chapter 3 of Public Law 109-234 require
notifications of the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriation.
CHAPTER 4
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Disaster Loans Program Account
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Disaster Loans Program
Account'' for administrative expenses to carry out the
disaster loan program, $25,069,000, to remain available until
expended, which may be transferred to and merged with ``Small
Business Administration, Salaries and Expenses''.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 2401. Economic Injury Disaster Loans. (a)
Definitions.--In this section--
(1) the term ``Administrator'' means the Administrator of
the Small Business Administration;
(2) the term ``covered small business concern'' means a
small business concern--
[[Page 7613]]
(A) that is located in any area in Louisiana or Mississippi
for which the President declared a major disaster because of
Hurricane Katrina of 2005 or Hurricane Rita of 2005;
(B) that has not more than 50 full-time employees; and
(C) that--
(i)(I) suffered a substantial economic injury as a result
of Hurricane Katrina of 2005 or Hurricane Rita of 2005,
because of a reduction in travel or tourism to the area
described in subparagraph (A); and
(II) demonstrates that, during the 1-year period ending on
August 28, 2005, not less than 45 percent of the revenue of
that small business concern resulted from tourism or travel
related sales; or
(ii)(I) suffered a substantial economic injury as a result
of Hurricane Katrina of 2005 or Hurricane Rita of 2005; and
(II) operates in a parish or county for which the
population on the date of enactment of this Act, as
determined by the Administrator, is not greater than 75
percent of the population of that parish or county before
August 28, 2005, based on the most recent United States
population estimate available before August 28, 2005;
(3) the term ``major disaster'' has the meaning given that
term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122); and
(4) the term ``small business concern'' has the meaning
given that term in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 632).
(b) Appropriation.--
(1) In general.--There are appropriated, out of any money
in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $25,000,000 to
the Administrator, which, except as provided in paragraph (2)
or (3), shall be used for loans under section 7(b)(2) of the
Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)(2)) to covered small
business concerns.
(2) Administrative expenses.--Of the amounts made available
under paragraph (1), not more than $8,750,000 may be
transferred to and merged with ``Salaries and Expenses'' to
carry out the disaster loan program of the Small Business
Administration.
(3) Other uses of funds.--The Administrator may use amounts
made available under paragraph (1) for other purposes
authorized for amounts in the ``Disaster Loans Program
Account'' or transfer such amounts to and merge such amounts
with ``Salaries and Expenses'', if--
(A) such amounts are--
(i) not obligated on the later of 5 months after the date
of enactment of this Act and August 29, 2007; or
(ii) necessary to provide assistance in the event of a
major disaster; and
(B) not later than 5 days before any such use or transfer
of amounts, the Administrator provides written notification
of such use or transfer to the Committee on Appropriations of
the Senate and the Committee on Appropriations of the House
of Representatives.
Sec. 2402. Other Programs. (a) HUBZones.--Section 3(p) of
the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(p)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``or'';
(B) in subparagraph (E), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; or''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(F) an area in which the President has declared a major
disaster (as that term is defined in section 102 of the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act (42 U.S.C. 5122)) as a result of Hurricane Katrina of
August 2005 or Hurricane Rita of September 2005, during the
time period described in paragraph (8).''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(8) Time period.--The time period for the purposes of
paragraph (1)(F)--
``(A) shall be the 2-year period beginning on the later of
the date of enactment of this paragraph and August 29, 2007;
and
``(B) may, at the discretion of the Administrator, be
extended to be the 3-year period beginning on the later of
the date of enactment of this paragraph and August 29,
2007.''.
(b) Relief From Test Program.--Section 711(d) of the Small
Business Competitive Demonstration Program Act of 1988 (15
U.S.C. 644 note) is amended--
(1) by striking ``The Program'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
Program''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Exception.--
``(A) In general.--The Program shall not apply to any
contract related to relief or reconstruction from Hurricane
Katrina of 2005 or Hurricane Rita of 2005 during the time
period described in subparagraph (B).
``(B) Time period.--The time period for the purposes of
subparagraph (A)--
``(i) shall be the 2-year period beginning on the later of
the date of enactment of this paragraph and August 29, 2007;
and
``(ii) may, at the discretion of the Administrator, be
extended to be the 3-year period beginning on the later of
the date of enactment of this paragraph and August 29,
2007.''.
CHAPTER 5
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Disaster Relief
For an additional amount for ``Disaster Relief'' for
necessary expenses under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.),
$4,310,000,000, to remain available until expended.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 2501. (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, including any agreement, the Federal share
of assistance, including direct Federal assistance, provided
for the States of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas
in connection with Hurricanes Katrina and Rita under sections
403, 406, 407, and 408 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170b, 5172,
5173, and 5174) shall be 100 percent of the eligible costs
under such sections.
(b) Applicability.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Federal
share provided by subsection (a) shall apply to disaster
assistance applied for before the date of enactment of this
Act.
(2) Limitation.--In the case of disaster assistance
provided under sections 403, 406, and 407 of the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, the
Federal share provided by subsection (a) shall be limited to
assistance provided for projects for which applications have
been prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency
before the date of enactment of this Act.
Sec. 2502. (a) Section 2(a) of the Community Disaster Loan
Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-88; 119 Stat. 2061) is amended by
striking ``: Provided further, That notwithstanding section
417(c)(1) of the Stafford Act, such loans may not be
canceled''.
(b) Chapter 4 of title II of the Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and
Hurricane Recovery, 2006 (Public Law 109-234; 120 Stat. 471)
is amended under the heading ``Disaster Assistance Direct
Loan Program Account'' under the heading ``Federal Emergency
Management Agency'' under the heading ``Department of
Homeland Security'', by striking ``Provided further, That
notwithstanding section 417(c)(1) of such Act, such loans may
not be canceled:''.
Sec. 2503. Section 2401 of the Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and
Hurricane Recovery, 2006 (Public Law 109-234; 120 Stat. 460)
is amended by striking ``12 months'' and inserting ``24
months''.
CHAPTER 6
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
Wildland Fire Management
(Including Transfer of Funds)
For an additional amount for ``Wildland Fire Management'',
$100,000,000, to remain available until expended, for urgent
wildland fire suppression activities: Provided, That such
funds shall only become available if funds previously
provided for wildland fire suppression will be exhausted
imminently and the Secretary of the Interior notifies the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in writing of
the need for these additional funds: Provided further, That
such funds are also available for repayment to other
appropriations accounts from which funds were transferred for
wildfire suppression.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Resource Management
For an additional amount for ``Resource Management'' for
the detection of highly pathogenic avian influenza in wild
birds, including the investigation of morbidity and mortality
events, targeted surveillance in live wild birds, and
targeted surveillance in hunter-taken birds, $7,398,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2008.
National Park Service
Operation of the National Park System
For an additional amount for ``Operation of the National
Park System'' for the detection of highly pathogenic avian
influenza in wild birds, including the investigation of
morbidity and mortality events, $525,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2008.
Historic Preservation Fund
For an additional amount for the ``Historic Preservation
Fund'' for necessary expenses related to the consequences of
Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of the 2005 season,
$15,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008:
Provided, That the funds provided under this heading shall be
provided to the State Historic Preservation Officer, after
consultation with the National Park Service, for grants for
disaster relief in areas of Louisiana impacted by Hurricanes
Katrina or Rita: Provided further, That grants shall be for
the preservation, stabilization, rehabilitation, and repair
of historic properties listed in or eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places, for planning and technical
assistance: Provided further, That grants shall only be
available for areas that the President determines to be a
major disaster under section 102(2) of the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C.
5122(2)) due to Hurricanes Katrina or Rita: Provided further,
That individual grants shall not be subject to a non-Federal
matching requirement: Provided further, That no more than 5
percent of funds provided under this heading for disaster
relief grants may be used for administrative expenses.
[[Page 7614]]
United States Geological Survey
Surveys, Investigations, and Research
For an additional amount for ``Surveys, Investigations, and
Research'' for the detection of highly pathogenic avian
influenza in wild birds, including the investigation of
morbidity and mortality events, targeted surveillance in live
wild birds, and targeted surveillance in hunter-taken birds,
$5,270,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
National Forest System
For an additional amount for ``National Forest System'' for
the implementation of a nationwide initiative to increase
protection of national forest lands from foreign drug-
trafficking organizations, including funding for additional
law enforcement personnel, training, equipment and
cooperative agreements, $12,000,000, to remain available
until expended.
Wildland Fire Management
(Including Transfer of Funds)
For an additional amount for ``Wildland Fire Management'',
$400,000,000, to remain available until expended, for urgent
wildland fire suppression activities: Provided, That such
funds shall only become available if funds provided
previously for wildland fire suppression will be exhausted
imminently and the Secretary of Agriculture notifies the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in writing of
the need for these additional funds: Provided further, That
such funds are also available for repayment to other
appropriation accounts from which funds were transferred for
wildfire suppression.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 2601. (a) For fiscal year 2007, payments shall be made
from any revenues, fees, penalties, or miscellaneous receipts
described in sections 102(b)(3) and 103(b)(2) of the Secure
Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000
(Public Law 106-393; 16 U.S.C. 500 note), not to exceed
$100,000,000, and the payments shall be made, to the maximum
extent practicable, in the same amounts, for the same
purposes, and in the same manner as were made to States and
counties in 2006 under that Act.
(b) There is appropriated $425,000,000 to be used to cover
any shortfall for payments made under this section.
(c) Titles II and III of Public Law 106-393 are amended,
effective September 30, 2006, by striking ``2006'' and
``2007'' each place they appear and inserting ``2007'' and
``2008'', respectively.
Sec. 2602. Disaster relief funds from Public Law 109-234,
120 Stat. 418, 461, (June 30, 2006), chapter 5, ``National
Park Service--Historic Preservation Fund,'' for necessary
expenses related to the consequences of Hurricane Katrina and
other hurricanes of the 2005 season, may be used to
reconstruct destroyed properties that at the time of
destruction were listed in the National Register of Historic
Places and are otherwise qualified to receive these funds:
Provided, That the State Historic Preservation Officer
certifies that, for the community where that destroyed
property was located, that the property is iconic to or
essential to illustrating that community's historic identity,
that no other property in that community with the same
associative historic value has survived, and that sufficient
historical documentation exists to ensure an accurate
reproduction.
CHAPTER 7
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
DISEASE CONTROL, RESEARCH AND TRAINING
For an additional amount for ``Department of Health and
Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
Disease Control, Research and Training'', to carry out
section 501 of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977
and section 6 of the Mine Improvement and New Emergency
Response Act of 2006, $13,000,000 for research to develop
mine safety technology, including necessary repairs and
improvements to leased laboratories: Provided, That progress
reports on technology development shall be submitted to the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations and the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions of the
Senate and the Committee on Education and Labor of the House
of Representatives on a quarterly basis: Provided further,
That the amount provided under this heading shall remain
available until September 30, 2008.
Administration for Children and Families
LOW-INCOME HOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE
For an additional amount for ``Low-Income Home Energy
Assistance'' under section 2604(a) through (d) of the Low-
Income Home Energy Assistance Act of 1981 (42 U.S.C. 8623(a)
through (d)), $320,000,000.
For an additional amount for ``Low-Income Home Energy
Assistance'' under section 2604(e) of the Low-Income Home
Energy Assistance Act of 1981 (42 U.S.C. 8623(e)),
$320,000,000.
Office of the Secretary
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES EMERGENCY FUND
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
For an additional amount for ``Public Health and Social
Services Emergency Fund'' to prepare for and respond to an
influenza pandemic, $820,000,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That this amount shall be for activities
including the development and purchase of vaccine,
antivirals, necessary medical supplies, diagnostics, and
other surveillance tools: Provided further, That products
purchased with these funds may, at the discretion of the
Secretary of Health and Human Services, be deposited in the
Strategic National Stockpile: Provided further, That
notwithstanding section 496(b) of the Public Health Service
Act, funds may be used for the construction or renovation of
privately owned facilities for the production of pandemic
vaccine and other biologicals, where the Secretary finds such
a contract necessary to secure sufficient supplies of such
vaccines or biologicals: Provided further, That funds
appropriated herein may be transferred to other appropriation
accounts of the Department of Health and Human Services, as
determined by the Secretary to be appropriate, to be used for
the purposes specified in this sentence.
COVERED COUNTERMEASURE PROCESS FUND
For carrying out section 319F-4 of the Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 247d-6e) to compensate individuals for
injuries caused by H5N1 vaccine, in accordance with the
declaration regarding avian influenza viruses issued by the
Secretary of Health and Human Services on January 26, 2007,
pursuant to section 319F-3(b) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 247d-
6d(b)), $50,000,000, to remain available until expended.
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Higher Education
For an additional amount under part B of title VII of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (``HEA'') for institutions of
higher education (as defined in section 102 of that Act) that
are located in an area in which a major disaster was declared
in accordance with section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act related to
hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico in calendar year 2005,
$30,000,000: Provided, That such funds shall be available to
the Secretary of Education only for payments to help defray
the expenses (which may include lost revenue, reimbursement
for expenses already incurred, and construction) incurred by
such institutions of higher education that were forced to
close, relocate or significantly curtail their activities as
a result of damage directly caused by such hurricanes and for
payments to enable such institutions to provide grants to
students who attend such institutions for academic years
beginning on or after July 1, 2006: Provided further, That
such payments shall be made in accordance with criteria
established by the Secretary and made publicly available
without regard to section 437 of the General Education
Provisions Act, section 553 of title 5, United States Code,
or part B of title VII of the HEA.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 2701. Section 105(b) of title IV of division B of
Public Law 109-148 is amended by adding at the end the
following new sentence: ``With respect to the program
authorized by section 102 of this Act, the waiver authority
in subsection (a) of this section shall be available until
the end of fiscal year 2008.''
(including rescission)
Sec. 2702. (a) From unexpended balances of the amounts made
available in the 2001 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on
the United States (Public Law 107-38) for the Employment
Training Administration, Training and Employment Services
under the Department of Labor, $3,589,000 are rescinded.
(b) For an additional amount for the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention for carrying out activities under
section 5011(b) of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
Act to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Pandemic
Influenza, 2006 (Public Law 109-148), $3,589,000.
Sec. 2703. Notwithstanding section 2002(c) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397a(c)), funds made available under
the heading ``Social Services Block Grant'' in division B of
Public Law 109-148 shall be available for expenditure by the
States through the end of fiscal year 2008.
Sec. 2704. Elimination of Remainder of SCHIP Funding
Shortfalls for Fiscal Year 2007. (a) Elimination of Remainder
of Funding Shortfalls, Tiered Match, and Other Limitation on
Expenditures.--Section 2104(h) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1397dd(h)), as added by section 201(a) of the National
Institutes of Health Reform Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-482),
is amended--
(1) in the heading for paragraph (2), by striking
``remainder of reduction'' and inserting ``part''; and
(2) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:
``(4) Additional amounts to eliminate remainder of fiscal
year 2007 funding shortfalls.--
[[Page 7615]]
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall allot to each
remaining shortfall State described in subparagraph (B) such
amount as the Secretary determines will eliminate the
estimated shortfall described in such subparagraph for the
State for fiscal year 2007.
``(B) Remaining shortfall state described.--For purposes of
subparagraph (A), a remaining shortfall State is a State with
a State child health plan approved under this title for which
the Secretary estimates, on the basis of the most recent data
available to the Secretary as of the date of the enactment of
this paragraph, that the projected federal expenditures under
such plan for the State for fiscal year 2007 will exceed the
sum of--
``(i) the amount of the State's allotments for each of
fiscal years 2005 and 2006 that will not be expended by the
end of fiscal year 2006;
``(ii) the amount of the State's allotment for fiscal year
2007; and
``(iii) the amounts, if any, that are to be redistributed
to the State during fiscal year 2007 in accordance with
paragraphs (1) and (2).
``(C) Appropriation; allotment authority.--For the purpose
of providing additional allotments to remaining shortfall
States under this paragraph there is appropriated, out of any
funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sums
as are necessary for fiscal year 2007.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 2104(h) of such Act (42
U.S.C. 1397dd(h)) (as so added), is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ``subject to paragraph
(4)(B) and'';
(2) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking ``subject to paragraph
(4)(B) and'';
(3) in paragraph (5)(A), by striking ``and (3)'' and
inserting ``(3), and (4)''; and
(4) in paragraph (6)--
(A) in the first sentence_
(i) by inserting ``or allotted'' after ``redistributed'';
and
(ii) by inserting ``or allotments'' after
``redistributions''; and
(B) by striking ``and (3)'' and inserting ``(3), and (4)''.
(c) General Effective Date; Applicability.--Except as
otherwise provided, the amendments made by this section take
effect on the date of enactment of this Act and apply without
fiscal year limitation.
Sec. 2705. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary of Health and Human Services shall not, prior to
the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment of this
Act, take any action to finalize, or otherwise implement
provisions--
(1) contained in the proposed rule published on January 18,
2007, on pages 2236 through 2258 of volume 72, Federal
Register (relating to parts 433, 447, and 457 of title 42,
Code of Federal Regulations) or any other rule that would
affect the Medicaid program established under title XIX of
the Social Security Act or the State Children's Health
Insurance Program established under title XXI of such Act in
a similar manner; or
(2) restricting payments for graduate medical education
under the Medicaid program.
(b) Increase in Basic Rebate for Single Source Drugs and
Innovator Multiple Source Drugs.--Section 1927(c)(1)(B)(i) of
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396r-8(c)(1)(B)(i)) is
amended--
(1) in subclause (IV), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(2) in subclause (V)--
(A) by inserting ``and before April 1, 2007,'' after
``1995,''; and
(B) by striking the period and inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(VI) after March 31, 2007, is 20 percent.''.
Sec. 2706. (a) For grant years beginning in 2006-2007, the
Secretary of Health and Human Services may waive the
requirements of, with respect to Louisiana, Mississippi,
Alabama, and Texas and any eligible metropolitan area in
Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas, the following
sections of the Public Health Service Act:
(1) Section 2612(e)(1) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 300ff-
21(b)(1)).
(2) Section 2617(b)(7)(E) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 300ff-
27(b)(7)(E)).
(3) Section 2617(d) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 300ff-27(d)),
except that such waiver shall apply so that the matching
requirement is reduced to $1 for each $4 of Federal funds
provided under the grant involved.
(b) If the Secretary of Health and Human Services grants a
waiver under subsection (b), the Secretary--
(1) may not prevent Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and
Texas or any eligible metropolitan area in Louisiana,
Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas from receiving or utilizing,
or both, funds granted or distributed, or both, pursuant to
title XXVI of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300ff-
11 et seq.) because of the failure of Louisiana, Mississippi,
Alabama, and Texas or any eligible metropolitan area in
Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas to comply with the
requirements of the sections listed in paragraphs (1) through
(3) of subsection (a);
(2) may not take action due to such noncompliance; and
(3) shall assess, evaluate, and review Louisiana,
Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas or any eligible metropolitan
area's eligibility for funds under such title XXVI as if
Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas or such eligible
metropolitan area had fully complied with the requirements of
the sections listed in paragraphs (1) through (3) of
subsection (a).
(c) For grant years beginning in 2008, Louisiana,
Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas and any eligible metropolitan
area in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas shall
comply with each of the applicable requirements under title
XXVI of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300ff-11 et
seq.).
CHAPTER 8
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
Capitol Power Plant
For an additional amount for ``Capitol Power Plant'',
$25,000,000, for emergency utility tunnel repairs and
asbestos abatement, to remain available until September 30,
2011: Provided, That the Architect of the Capitol may not
obligate any of the funds appropriated under this heading
without approval of an obligation plan by the Committees on
Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives.
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Salaries and Expenses
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'' of
the Government Accountability Office, $374,000, to remain
available until expended.
CHAPTER 9
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Military Construction, Air Force Reserve
(Including Rescission of Funds)
For an additional amount for ``Military Construction, Air
Force Reserve'', $3,096,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2011: Provided, That such funds may be
obligated and expended to carry out planning and design and
military construction projects not otherwise authorized by
law.
Of the funds appropriated for ``Military Construction, Air
Force Reserve'' under Public Law 109-114, $3,096,000 are
hereby rescinded.
Department of Defense Base Closure Account, 2005
For deposit into the Department of Defense Base Closure
Account 2005, established by section 2906(a)(1) of the
Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (10 U.S.C.
2687 note), $3,136,802,000, to remain available until
expended.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Veterans Health Administration
MEDICAL SERVICES
For an additional amount for ``Medical Services'',
$454,131,000, to remain available until expended, of which
$50,000,000 shall be for the establishment of new Level I
comprehensive polytrauma centers; $9,440,000 shall be for the
establishment of polytrauma residential transitional
rehabilitation programs; $20,000,000 shall be for additional
transition caseworkers; $30,000,000 shall be for substance
abuse treatment programs; $20,000,000 for readjustment
counseling; $10,000,000 shall be for blind rehabilitation
services; $100,000,000 shall be for enhancements to mental
health services; $8,000,000 shall be for polytrauma support
clinic teams; $5,356,000 for additional polytrauma points of
contacts; and $201,335,000 shall be for treatment of
Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom
veterans.
MEDICAL ADMINISTRATION
For an additional amount for ``Medical Administration'',
$250,000,000, to remain available until expended.
MEDICAL FACILITIES
For an additional amount for ``Medical Facilities'',
$595,000,000, to remain available until expended, of which
$45,000,000 shall be used for facility and equipment upgrades
at the Department of Veterans Affairs polytrauma
rehabilitation centers and the polytrauma network sites; and
$550,000,000 shall be for non-recurring maintenance as
identified in the Department of Veterans Affairs Facility
Condition Assessment report: Provided, That the amount
provided under this heading for non-recurring maintenance
shall be allocated in a manner outside of the Veterans
Equitable Resource Allocation and specific to the needs and
geographic distribution of Operation Enduring Freedom and
Operation Iraqi Freedom veterans: Provided further, That
within 30 days of enactment of this Act the Secretary shall
submit to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of
Congress an expenditure plan for non-recurring maintenance
prior to obligation.
MEDICAL AND PROSTHETIC RESEARCH
For an additional amount for ``Medical and Prosthetic
Research'', $30,000,000, to remain available until expended,
which shall be used for research related to the unique
medical needs of returning Operation Enduring Freedom and
Operation Iraqi Freedom veterans.
Departmental Administration
GENERAL OPERATING EXPENSES
For an additional amount for ``General Operating
Expenses'', $46,000,000, to remain available until expended,
for the hiring and training of new pension and compensation
claims processing personnel.
[[Page 7616]]
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS
For an additional amount for ``Information Technology
Systems'', $36,100,000, to remain available until expended,
of which $20,000,000 shall be for information technology
support and improvements for processing of OIF/OEF veterans
benefits claims, including making electronic DOD medical
records available for claims processing and enabling
electronic benefits applications by veterans; $1,000,000
shall be for the digitization of benefits records; and
$15,100,000 shall be for electronic data breach and
remediation and prevention.
CONSTRUCTION, MINOR PROJECTS
For an additional amount for ``Construction, Minor
Projects'', $355,907,000, to remain available until expended,
of which $36,000,000 shall be for construction costs
associated with the establishment of polytrauma residential
transitional rehabilitation programs.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 2901. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
none of the funds in this or any other Act shall be used to
downsize staff or to close, realign or phase out essential
services at Walter Reed Army Medical Center until equivalent
medical facilities at the Walter Reed National Military
Medical Center at Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland,
and/or the Fort Belvoir, Virginia, Community Hospital have
been constructed and equipped, and until the Secretary of
Defense has certified in writing to the Congress that:
(1) the new facilities at Walter Reed National Military
Medical Center at Bethesda and/or the Fort Belvoir Community
Hospital are complete and fully operational, and
(2) replacement medical facilities at Walter Reed National
Military Medical Center at Bethesda have adequate capacity to
meet both the existing and projected demand for complex
medical care and services, including outpatient and medical
hold facilities, for combat veterans and other military
personnel.
(b) Not later than 30 days after enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Defense shall provide to the Committees on
Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives a
report and proposed timetable outlining the Department's plan
to transition patients, staff and medical services to the new
facilities at Bethesda and Fort Belvoir without compromising
patient care, staffing requirements or facility maintenance
at the Walter Reed Medical Center.
(c) To ensure that the quality of care provided by the
Military Health System is not diminished during this
transition, the Walter Reed Army Medical Center shall be
adequately funded, to include necessary renovation and
maintenance of existing facilities, to continue the maximum
level of inpatient and outpatient services.
Sec. 2902. Within existing funds appropriated to
Departmental Administration, General Operating Expenses for
fiscal year 2007, and within 30 days after enactment of this
Act, the Department of Veterans Affairs shall contract with
the National Academy of Public Administration for the purpose
of conducting an independent study and analysis of the
organizational structure, management and coordination
processes, including Seamless Transition, utilized by the
Department of Veterans affairs to:
(1) provide health care to active duty and veterans of
Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom; and
(2) provide benefits to veterans of Operation Enduring
Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Sec. 2903. The Director of the Congressional Budget Office
shall, not later than November 15, 2007, submit to the
Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives
and the Senate a report projecting appropriations necessary
for the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs to
continue providing necessary health care to veterans of the
conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The projections should
span several scenarios for the duration and number of forces
deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and more generally, for the
long-term health care needs of deployed troops engaged in the
global war on terrorism over the next ten years.
CHAPTER 10
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
Federal-Aid Highways
Emergency Relief Program
(including rescission of funds)
For an additional amount for the Emergency Relief Program
as authorized under section 125 of title 23, United States
Code, $388,903,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That of the unobligated balances of funds
apportioned to each State under chapter 1 of title 23, United
States Code, $388,903,000 are rescinded: Provided further,
That such rescission shall not apply to the funds distributed
in accordance with sections 130(f) and 104(b)(5) of title 23,
United States Code; sections 133(d)(1) and 163 of such title,
as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of
Public Law 109-59; and the first sentence of section
133(d)(3)(A) of such title: Provided further, That section
4103 of title III of this Act shall not apply to the first
proviso under this paragraph.
Federal Transit Administration
Formula Grants
For an additional amount to be allocated by the Secretary
to recipients of assistance under chapter 53 of title 49,
United States Code, directly affected by Hurricanes Katrina
and Rita, $75,000,000, for the operating and capital costs of
transit services, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That the Federal share for any project funded from
this amount shall be 100 percent.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Office of Inspector General
For an additional amount for the Office of Inspector
General, for the necessary costs related to the consequences
of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, $5,000,000, to remain
available until expended.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 3001. Notwithstanding part 750 of title 23, Code of
Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation), if permitted
by State law, a nonconforming sign that is or has been
damaged, destroyed, abandoned, or discontinued as a result of
a hurricane that is determined to be an act of God (as
defined by State law) may be repaired, replaced, or
reconstructed if the replacement sign has the same dimensions
as the original sign, and said sign is located within a State
found within Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV or
VI. The provisions of this section shall cease to be in
effect twenty-four months following the date of enactment of
this Act.
Sec. 3002. Section 21033 of the Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2007 (division B of Public Law 109-289, as
amended by Public Law 110-5) is amended by adding after the
third proviso: ``: Provided further, That notwithstanding the
previous proviso, except for applying the 2007 Annual
Adjustment Factor and making any other specified adjustments,
public housing agencies that are eligible for assistance
under section 901 in Public Law 109-148 (119 Stat. 2781)
shall receive funding for calendar year 2007 based on the
amount such public housing agencies were eligible to receive
in calendar year 2006''.
TITLE III
OTHER MATTERS
CHAPTER 1
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Farm Service Agency
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'' of
the Farm Service Agency, $75,000,000, to remain available
until expended: Provided, That this amount shall only be
available for the modernization and repair of the computer
systems used by the Farm Service Agency (including all
software, hardware, and personnel required for modernization
and repair): Provided further, That of this amount
$27,000,000 shall be made available 60 days after the date on
which the Farm Service Agency submits to the Committee on
Appropriations of the Senate, the Committee on Appropriations
of the House of Representatives, and the Government
Accountability Office a spending plan for the funds.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
(rescission)
Sec. 3101. Of the unobligated balances of funds made
available pursuant to section 298(a) of the Trade Act of 1974
(19 U.S.C. 2401G(a)), $75,000,000 are rescinded.
Sec. 3102. (a) Section 1237A(f) of the Food Security Act of
1985 (16 U.S.C. 3837a(f)) is amended in the first sentence by
striking ``fair market value of the land less the fair market
value of such land encumbered by the easement'' and inserting
``fair market value of the land as determined in accordance
with the method of valuation used by the Secretary as of
January 1, 2003''.
(b) Section 1238I(c)(1) of the Food Security Act of 1985
(16 U.S.C. 3838i(c)(1)) is amended by inserting at the end
the following:
``(C) Valuation.--The Secretary shall determine fair market
value under this paragraph in accordance with the method of
valuation used by the Secretary as of January 1, 2003.''.
Sec. 3103. Subsection (b)(1) of section 313A of the Rural
Electrification Act shall not apply in the case of a
cooperative lender that has previously received a guarantee
under section 313A and such additional guarantees shall not
exceed the amount provided for in Public Law 110-5.
CHAPTER 2
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 3201. Section 20314 of the Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2007 (division B of Public Law 109-289, as
amended by Public Law 110-5) is amended by striking
``Resources.'' and inserting in lieu thereof: ``Resources:
Provided, That $22,762,000 of the amount provided be for
geothermal research and development activities.''.
Sec. 3202. Hereafter, federal employees at the National
Energy Technology Laboratory shall be classified as
inherently governmental for the purpose of the Federal
Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998 (31 U.S.C. 501 note).
Sec. 3203. Prohibition on Certain Uses of Funds by BPA.
None of the funds made available under this or any other Act
shall be used during fiscal year 2007 to make, or
[[Page 7617]]
plan or prepare to make, any payment on bonds issued by the
Administrator of the Bonneville Power Administration
(referred in this section as the ``Administrator'') or for an
appropriated Federal Columbia River Power System investment,
if the payment is both--
(1) greater, during any fiscal year, than the payments
calculated in the rate hearing of the Administrator to be
made during that fiscal year using the repayment method used
to establish the rates of the Administrator as in effect on
October 1, 2006; and
(2) based or conditioned on the actual or expected net
secondary power sales receipts of the Administrator.
CHAPTER 3
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 3301. The structure of any of the offices or
components within the Office of National Drug Control Policy
shall remain as they were on October 1, 2006. None of the
funds appropriated or otherwise made available in the
Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 110-5)
may be used to implement a reorganization of offices within
the Office of National Drug Control Policy without the
explicit approval of the Committees on Appropriations of the
House of Representatives and the Senate.
Sec. 3302. Funds made available in section 21075 of the
Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 110-5)
shall be made available to a 501(c)(3) entity: (1) with a
wide anti-drug coalition network and membership base, and one
with a demonstrated track record and specific expertise in
providing technical assistance, training, evaluation,
research, and capacity building to community anti-drug
coalitions; (2) with authorization from Congress, both prior
to fiscal year 2007, and in fiscal years 2008 through 2012,
to perform the duties described in subsection (1) of this
section; and (3) that has previously received funding from
Congress, including through a competitive process as well as
direct funding, for providing the duties described in
subsection (1) of this section: Provided, That funds
appropriated in section 21075 shall be obligated within sixty
days after enactment of this Act.
Sec. 3303. Funds made available under section 613 of Public
Law 109-108 (119 Stat. 2338) for Nevada's Commission on
Economic Development shall be made available to the Nevada
Center for Entrepreneurship and Technology (CET).
Sec. 3304. From the amount provided by section 21067 of the
Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 110-
5), the National Archives and Records Administration may
obligate monies necessary to carry out the activities of the
Public Interest Declassification Board.
Sec. 3305. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available in section 21063 of the Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 110-5) for the ``General
Services Administration, Real Property Activities, Federal
Buildings Fund'', may be obligated for design, construction,
or acquisition until the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations approve a revised detailed plan, by project,
on the use of such funds: Provided, That the new plan shall
include funding for completion of courthouse construction
projects which received funding in fiscal year 2006 above a
level of $5,000,000: Provided further, That such plan shall
be provided by the Administrator of the General Services
Administration to the House of Representatives and the Senate
Committees on Appropriations within seven days of enactment.
Sec. 3306. Notwithstanding the notice requirement of the
Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the
Judiciary, the District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2006, 119 Stat. 2509 (Public Law 109-
115), as continued in section 104 of the Continuing
Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 110-5), the
District of Columbia Courts may reallocate not more than
$1,000,000 of the funds provided for fiscal year 2007 under
the Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Courts for
facilities among the items and entities funded under that
heading for operations.
Sec. 3307. (a) Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury, in
coordination with the Securities and Exchange Commission and
in consultation with the Departments of State and Energy,
shall prepare and submit to the Senate Committee on
Appropriations, the House of Representatives Committee on
Appropriations, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and
the House Foreign Affairs Committee an unclassified report,
suitable to be made public, that contains the names of (1)
all companies trading in securities that are registered under
section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
781) which either directly or through a parent or subsidiary
company, including partly-owned subsidiaries, conduct
business operations in Sudan relating to natural resource
extraction, including oil-related activities and mining of
minerals; and (2) the names of all other companies, which
either directly or through a parent or subsidiary company,
including partly-owned subsidiaries, conduct business
operations in Sudan relating to natural resource extraction,
including oil-related activities and mining of minerals. The
reporting provision shall not apply to companies operating
under licenses from the Office of Foreign Assets Control or
otherwise expressly exempted under United States law from
having to obtain such licenses in order to operate in Sudan.
(b) Not later than 20 days after enactment, the Secretary
of the Treasury shall inform the aforementioned committees of
Congress of any statutory or other legal impediments to the
successful completion of this report.
(c) Not later than 45 days following the submission to
Congress of the list of companies conducting business
operations in Sudan relating to natural resource extraction
required above, the General Services Administration shall
determine whether the United States Government has an active
contract for the procurement of goods or services with any of
the identified companies, and provide notification to the
appropriate committees of Congress of the companies, nature
of the contract, and dollar amounts involved.
(including rescission)
Sec. 3308. (a) Of the funds provided for the General
Services Administration, ``Office of Inspector General'' in
section 21061 of the Continuing Appropriations Resolution,
2007 (division B of Public Law 109-289, as amended by Public
Law 110-5), $8,000,000 are rescinded.
(b) For an additional amount for the General Services
Administration, ``Office of Inspector General'', $8,000,000,
to remain available until September 30, 2008.
Sec. 3309. Section 21073 of the Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 110-5) is amended by adding a
new subsection (j) as follows:
``(j) Notwithstanding section 101, any appropriation or
funds made available to the District of Columbia pursuant to
this division for `Federal Payment for Foster Care
Improvement in the District of Columbia' shall be available
in accordance with an expenditure plan submitted by the Mayor
of the District of Columbia not later than 60 days after the
enactment of this section which details the activities to be
carried out with such Federal Payment.''.
CHAPTER 4
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 3401. Any unobligated balances remaining from prior
appropriations for United States Coast Guard, ``Retired Pay''
shall remain available until expended in the account and for
the purposes for which the appropriations were provided,
including the payment of obligations otherwise chargeable to
lapsed or current appropriations for this purpose.
Sec. 3402. Integrated Deepwater System. (a) Competition for
Acquisition and Modification of Assets.--
(1) In general.--The Commandant of the Coast Guard shall
utilize full and open competition for any contract entered
into after the date of enactment of this Act that provides
for the acquisition or modification of assets under, or in
support of, the Integrated Deepwater System Program of the
Coast Guard.
(2) Exceptions.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the
following:
(A) The acquisition or modification of the following asset
classes for which assets of the class and related systems and
components under the Integrated Deepwater System are under a
contract for production:
(i) National Security Cutter;
(ii) Maritime Patrol Aircraft;
(iii) Deepwater Command, Control, Communications, Computer,
Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR)
System; and
(iv) HC-130J Fleet Introduction.
(B) The modification of any legacy asset class under the
Integrated Deepwater System Program being performed by a
Coast Guard entity.
(b) Chair of Product and Oversight Teams.--The Commandant
of the Coast Guard shall assign an appropriate officer or
employee of the Coast Guard to act as chair of each of the
following:
(1) Each integrated product team under the Integrated
Deepwater System Program.
(2) Each higher-level team assigned to the oversight of a
product team referred to in paragraph (1).
(c) Life-cycle Cost Estimate.--The Commandant of the Coast
Guard may not enter into a contract for lead asset production
under the Integrated Deepwater System Program until the
Commandant obtains an independent estimate of life-cycle
costs of the asset concerned.
(d) Review of Acquisitions and Major Design Changes.--
(1) In general.--With the exception of assets covered under
(a)(2) of this section, the Commandant of the Coast Guard may
not carry out an action described in paragraph (2) unless an
independent third party with no financial interest in the
development, construction, or modification of any component
of the Integrated Deepwater System Program, selected by the
Commandant for purposes of the subsection, determines that
such action is advisable.
(2) Covered actions.--The actions described in the
paragraph are as follows:
(A) The acquisition or modification of an asset under the
Integrated Deepwater System Program.
(B) The implementation of a major design change for an
asset under the Integrated Deepwater System Program.
[[Page 7618]]
(e) Linking of Award Fees to Successful Acquisition
Outcomes.--The Commandant of the Coast Guard shall require
that all contracts under the Integrated Deepwater System
Program that provide award fees link such fees to successful
acquisition outcomes (which shall be defined in terms of
cost, schedule, and performance).
(f) Contractual Agreements.--
(1) In general.--The Commandant of the Coast Guard may not
award or issue any contract, task or delivery order, letter
contract modification thereof, or other similar contract, for
the acquisition or modification of an asset under the
Integrated Deepwater System Program unless the Coast Guard
and the contractor concerned have formally agreed to all
terms and conditions.
(2) Exception.--A contract, task or delivery order, letter
contract, modification thereof, or other similar contract
described in paragraph (1) may be awarded or issued if the
head of contracting activity of the Coast Guard determines
that a compelling need exists for the award or issue of such
instrument.
(g) Designation of Technical Authority.--The Commandant of
the Coast Guard shall designate the Assistant Commandant of
the Coast Guard for Engineering and Logistics as the
technical authority for all engineering, design, and
logistics decisions pertaining to the Integrated Deepwater
System Program.
(h) Report on Personnel Required for Acquisition
Management.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Commandant of the Coast Guard
shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations of the
Senate and the House of Representatives; the Committee on
Commerce, Science and Transportation of the Senate; and the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives a report on the resources (including
training, staff, and expertise) required by the Coast Guard
to provide appropriate management and oversight of the
Integrated Deepwater System Program.
(i) Comptroller General Report on Progress.--Not later than
60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the
Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of
Representatives; the Committee on Commerce, Science and
Transportation of the Senate; and the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives a report describing and assessing the
progress of the Coast Guard in complying with the
requirements of this section.
Sec. 3403. None of the funds provided in this Act or any
other Act may be used to alter or reduce operations within
the Civil Engineering Program of the Coast Guard nationwide,
including the civil engineering units, facilities, design and
construction centers, maintenance and logistics command
centers, the Coast Guard Academy and the Coast Guard Research
and Development Center, except as specifically authorized by
a statute enacted after the date of enactment of this Act.
CHAPTER 5
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 3501. Section 20515 of the Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2007 (division B of Public Law 109-289, as
amended by Public Law 110-5) is amended by inserting before
the period: ``; and of which, not to exceed $143,628,000
shall be available for contract support costs under the terms
and conditions contained in Public Law 109-54''.
Sec. 3502. Section 20512 of the Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2007 (division B of Public Law 109-289, as
amended by Public Law 110-5) is amended by inserting after
the first dollar amount: ``, of which not to exceed
$7,300,000 shall be transferred to the `Indian Health
Facilities' account; the amount in the second proviso shall
be $18,000,000; the amount in the third proviso shall be
$525,099,000; the amount in the ninth proviso shall be
$269,730,000; and the $15,000,000 allocation of funding under
the eleventh proviso shall not be required''.
Sec. 3503. Section 20501 of the Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2007 (division B of Public Law 109-289, as
amended by Public Law 110-5) is amended by inserting after
$55,663,000: ``of which $13,000,000 shall be for Save
America's Treasures''.
Sec. 3504. Of the funds made available to the United States
Fish and Wildlife Service for fiscal year 2007 under the
heading ``Land Acquisition'', not to exceed $1,980,000 may be
used for land conservation partnerships authorized by the
Highlands Conservation Act of 2004.
Sec. 3505. The Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency shall grant to the Water Environment
Research Foundation (WERF) such sums as were directed in
fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year 2006 for the On-Farm
Assessment and Environmental Review program: Provided, That
not less than 95 percent of funds made available shall be
used by WERF to award competitively a contract to perform the
program's environmental assessments: Provided further, That
WERF shall not retain more than 5 percent of such sums for
administrative expenses.
CHAPTER 6
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
National Institutes of Health
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
(TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Of the amount provided by the Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2007 for ``National Institute of Allergy and
Infectious Diseases'', $49,500,000 shall be transferred to
``Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund'' to carry
out activities relating to advanced research and development
as provided by section 319L of the Public Health Service Act.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
(TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Sec. 3601. Section 20602 of the Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2007 (division B of Public Law 109-289, as
amended by Public Law 110-5) is amended by inserting the
following after ``$5,000,000'': ``(together with an
additional $7,000,000 which shall be transferred by the
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation as an authorized
administrative cost)''.
Sec. 3602. Section 20625(b)(1) of the Continuing
Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (division B of Public Law
109-289, as amended by Public Law 110-5) is amended by--
(1) striking ``$7,172,994,000'' and inserting
``$7,176,431,000'';
(2) amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
``(A) $5,454,824,000 shall be for basic grants under
section 1124 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (ESEA), of which up to $3,437,000 shall be available to
the Secretary of Education on October 1, 2006, to obtain
annually updated educational-agency-level census poverty data
from the Bureau of the Census;''; and
(3) amending subparagraph (C) to read as follows:
``(C) not to exceed $2,352,000 may be available for section
1608 of the ESEA and for a clearinghouse on comprehensive
school reform under part D of title V of the ESEA;''.
Sec. 3603. (a) From the amounts available for Department of
Education, Safe Schools and Citizenship Education as provided
by the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007,
$321,500,000 shall be available for Safe and Drug-Free
Schools State Grants and $247,335,000 shall be available for
Safe and Drug-Free Schools National Programs.
(b) Of the amount available for Safe and Drug-Free National
Programs, not less than $25,000,000 shall be for competitive
grants to local educational agencies to address youth
violence and related issues.
(c) The competition under subsection (b) shall be limited
to local educational agencies that operate schools currently
identified as persistently dangerous under section 9532 of
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.
Sec. 3604. The provision in the first proviso under the
heading ``Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research''
in the Department of Education Appropriations Act, 2006,
relating to alternative financing programs under section
4(b)(2)(D) of the Assistive Technology Act of 1998 shall not
apply to funds appropriated by the Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2007.
(transfer of funds)
Sec. 3605. Notwithstanding sections 20639 and 20640 of the
Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007, as amended by
section 2 of the Revised Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 110-5), the Chief Executive
Officer of the Corporation for National and Community Service
may transfer an amount of not more than $1,360,000 from the
account under the heading ``National and Community Service
Programs, Operating Expenses'' under the heading
``Corporation for National and Community Service'', to the
account under the heading ``Salaries and Expenses'' under the
heading ``Corporation for National and Community Service''.
Sec. 3606. Section 1310.12(a) of title 45 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (October 1, 2004) shall be effective 30
days after enactment of this Act except that any vehicles in
use to transport Head Start children as of January 1, 2007,
shall not be subject to a requirement under that part
regarding rear emergency exit doors for two years after the
date of enactment.
The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall revise the
allowable alternate vehicle standards described in that part
1310 (or any corresponding similar regulation or ruling) to
exempt from Federal seat spacing requirements and supporting
seating requirements related to compartmentalization any
vehicle used to transport children for a Head Start program
if the vehicle meets federal motor vehicle safety standards
for seating systems, occupant crash protection, seat belt
assemblies, and child restraint anchorage systems consistent
with that part 1310 (or any corresponding similar regulation
or ruling). Such revision shall be made in a manner
consistent with the findings of the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, pursuant to its study on occupant
protection on Head Start transit vehicles, related to the
Government Accountability Office report GAO-06-767R.
(including rescission)
Sec. 3607. (a) From the amounts made available by the
Continuing Appropriations
[[Page 7619]]
Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 109-289, as amended by the
Revised Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (Public
Law 110-5)) for the Office of the Secretary, General
Departmental Management under the Department of Health and
Human Services, $1,000,000 are rescinded.
(b) For the activities carried out by the Secretary of
Education under section 3(a) of Public Law 108-406 (42 U.S.C.
15001 note), $1,000,000.
(including RESCISSION)
Sec. 3608. (a) From the amounts made available by the
Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007 for ``Department
of Education, Student Aid Administration'', $2,000,000 are
rescinded.
(b) For an additional amount for ``Department of Education,
Higher Education'' under part B of title VII of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 which shall be used to make a grant to
the University of Vermont for the Educational Excellence
Program, $2,000,000.
Sec. 3609. Section 1820 of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1395i-4) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (j) as subsection (k); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (i) the following new
subsection:
``(j) Delta Health Initiative.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary is authorized to award a
grant to the Delta Health Alliance, a nonprofit alliance of
academic institutions in the Mississippi Delta region, to
solicit and fund proposals from local governments, hospitals,
health care clinics, academic institutions, and rural public
health-related entities and organizations for research
development, educational programs, health care services, job
training, planning, construction, and the equipment of public
health-related facilities in the Mississippi Delta region.
``(2) Federal interest in property.--With respect to funds
used under this subsection for construction or alteration of
property, the Federal interest in the property shall last for
a period of 1 year following completion or until the Federal
Government is compensated for its proportionate interest in
the property if the property use changes or the property is
transferred or sold, whichever time period is less. At the
conclusion of such period, the Notice of Federal Interest in
such property shall be removed.
``(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary
to carry out this subsection in fiscal year 2007 and in each
of the five succeeding fiscal years.''.
CHAPTER 7
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 3701. Section 2(c) of the Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 1993 (2 U.S.C. 121d(c)) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(3) The Secretary of the Senate may transfer from the
fund to the Senate Employee Child Care Center proceeds from
the sale of holiday ornaments by the Senate Gift Shop for the
purpose of funding necessary activities and expenses of the
Center, including scholarships, educational supplies, and
equipment.''.
(including rescission)
Sec. 3702. (a) Of the funds provided for the ``Capitol
Guide Service and Special Services Office'' in section
20703(a) of the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007
(as added by section 2 of the Revised Continuing
Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 110-5)),
$3,500,000 are rescinded.
(b) For an additional amount for ``Capitol Guide Service
and Special Services Office'', $3,500,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2008.
CHAPTER 8
GENERAL PROVISION--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 3801. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
appropriations made by Public Law 110-5, or any other Act,
which the Secretary of Veterans Affairs contributes to the
Department of Defense/Department of Veterans Affairs Health
Care Sharing Incentive Fund under the authority of section
8111(d) of title 38, United States Code, shall remain
available until expended for any purpose authorized by
section 8111 of title 38, United States Code.
CHAPTER 9
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
CONSULTATION REQUIREMENT
Sec. 3901. Of the funds provided in the Revised Continuing
Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 110-5) for the
United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
$1,000,000 shall be available for obligation only in
accordance with a spending plan submitted to and approved by
the Committees on Appropriations which addresses the
recommendations of the Government Accountability Office's
audit of the Commission.
TECHNICAL AMENDMENT
Sec. 3902. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
subsection (c) under the heading ``Assistance for the
Independent States of the Former Soviet Union'' in Public Law
109-102, shall not apply to funds appropriated by the
Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 109-
289, division B) as amended by Public Laws 109-369, 109-383,
and 110-5.
(b) Section 534(k) of the Foreign Operations, Export
Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2006
(Public Law 109-102) is amended, in the second proviso, by
inserting after ``subsection (b) of that section'' the
following: ``and the requirement that a majority of the
members of the board of directors be United States citizens
provided in subsection (d)(3)(B) of that section''.
(c) Subject to section 101(c)(2) of the Continuing
Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (division B of Public Law
109-289, as amended by Public Law 110-5), the amount of funds
appropriated for ``Foreign Military Financing Program''
pursuant to such Resolution shall be construed to be the
total of the amount appropriated for such program by section
20401 of that Resolution and the amount made available for
such program by section 591 of the Foreign Operations, Export
Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2006
(Public Law 109-102) which is made applicable to the fiscal
year 2007 by the provisions of such Resolution.
CHAPTER 10
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight
Salaries and Expenses
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount to carry out the Federal Housing
Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992,
$4,800,000, to remain available until expended, to be derived
from the Federal Housing Enterprises Oversight Fund and to be
subject to the same terms and conditions pertaining to funds
provided under this heading in Public Law 109-115: Provided,
That not to exceed the total amount provided for these
activities for fiscal year 2007 shall be available from the
general fund of the Treasury to the extent necessary to incur
obligations and make expenditures pending the receipt of
collections to the Fund: Provided further, That the general
fund amount shall be reduced as collections are received
during the fiscal year so as to result in a final
appropriation from the general fund estimated at not more
than $0.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER
Sec. 4001. Hereafter, funds limited or appropriated for the
Department of Transportation may be obligated or expended to
grant authority to a Mexican motor carrier to operate beyond
United States municipalities and commercial zones on the
United States-Mexico border only to the extent that--
(1) granting such authority is first tested as part of a
pilot program;
(2) such pilot program complies with the requirements of
section 350 of Public Law 107-87 and the requirements of
section 31315(c) of title 49, United States Code, related to
pilot programs; and
(3) simultaneous and comparable authority to operate within
Mexico is made available to motor carriers domiciled in the
United States.
Sec. 4002. Section 21033 of the Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2007 (division B of Public Law 109-289, as
amended by Public Law 110-5) is amended by adding after the
second proviso: ``: Provided further, That paragraph (2)
under such heading in Public Law 109-115 (119 Stat. 2441)
shall be funded at $149,300,000, but additional section 8
tenant protection rental assistance costs may be funded in
2007 by using unobligated balances, notwithstanding the
purposes for which such amounts were appropriated, including
recaptures and carryover, remaining from funds appropriated
to the Department of Housing and Urban Development under this
heading, the heading ``Annual Contributions for Assisted
Housing'', the heading ``Housing Certificate Fund'', and the
heading ``Project-Based Rental Assistance'' for fiscal year
2006 and prior fiscal years: Provided further, That paragraph
(3) under such heading in Public Law 109-115 (119 Stat. 2441)
shall be funded at $47,500,000: Provided further, That
paragraph (4) under such heading in Public Law 109-115 (119
Stat. 2441) shall be funded at $5,900,000: Provided further,
That paragraph (5) under such heading in Public Law 109-115
(119 Stat. 2441) shall be funded at $1,281,100,000, of which
$1,251,100,000 shall be allocated for the calendar year 2007
funding cycle on a pro rata basis to public housing agencies
based on the amount public housing agencies were eligible to
receive in calendar year 2006, and of which up to $30,000,000
shall be available to the Secretary to allocate to public
housing agencies that need additional funds to administer
their section 8 programs, with up to $20,000,000 to be for
fees associated with section 8 tenant protection rental
assistance''.
Sec. 4003. The dates for subsidy reductions and
demonstrations for discontinuance of reductions in operating
subsidy under the new operating fund formula, pursuant to HUD
regulations at 24 CFR 990.230, shall be moved forward so that
the first demonstration date for asset management compliance
shall be September 1, 2007, and reductions in subsidy for
calendar year 2007 shall be limited to the 5 percent amount
referred to in such regulations. Any public housing agency
that has filed information to demonstrate compliance on or
prior to April 15, 2007 shall be permitted to re-file the
same or different information to demonstrate such compliance
on or before September 1, 2007.
[[Page 7620]]
CHAPTER 11
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS ACT
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS
Sec. 4101. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current
fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
EMERGENCY DESIGNATION FOR TITLE I
Sec. 4102. Amounts provided in title I of this Act are
designated as emergency requirements pursuant to section 402
of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress), the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.
EMERGENCY DESIGNATION FOR TITLE II
Sec. 4103. Amounts provided in title II of this Act are
designated as emergency requirements pursuant to section 402
of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress), the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.
TITLE IV--EMERGENCY FARM RELIEF
SEC. 401. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Emergency Farm Relief Act
of 2007''.
SEC. 402. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) Additional coverage.--The term ``additional coverage''
has the meaning given the term in section 502(b)(1) of the
Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1502(b)(1)).
(2) Applicable crop.--The term ``applicable crop'' means 1
or more crops planted, or prevented from being planted,
during, as elected by the producers on a farm, 1 of--
(A) the 2005 crop year;
(B) the 2006 crop year; or
(C) that part of the 2007 crop year that takes place before
the end of the applicable period.
(3) Applicable period.--The term ``applicable period''
means the period beginning on January 1, 2005 and ending on
February 28, 2007.
(4) Disaster county.--The term ``disaster county'' means--
(A) a county included in the geographic area covered by a
natural disaster declaration; and
(B) each county contiguous to a county described in
subparagraph (A).
(5) Hurricane-affected county.--The term ``hurricane-
affected county'' means--
(A) a county included in the geographic area covered by a
natural disaster declaration related to Hurricane Katrina,
Hurricane Rita, Hurricane Wilma, or a related condition; and
(B) each county contiguous to a county described in
subparagraph (A).
(6) Insurable commodity.--The term ``insurable commodity''
means an agricultural commodity (excluding livestock) for
which the producers on a farm are eligible to obtain a policy
or plan of insurance under the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7
U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
(7) Livestock.--The term ``livestock'' includes--
(A) cattle (including dairy cattle);
(B) bison;
(C) poultry;
(D) sheep;
(E) swine; and
(F) other livestock, as determined by the Secretary.
(8) Natural disaster declaration.--The term ``natural
disaster declaration'' means a natural disaster declared by
the Secretary during the applicable period under section
321(a) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7
U.S.C. 1961(a)).
(9) Noninsurable commodity.--The term ``noninsurable
commodity'' means a crop for which the producers on a farm
are eligible to obtain assistance under section 196 of the
Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7
U.S.C. 7333).
(10) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Agriculture.
Subtitle A--Agricultural Production Losses
SEC. 411. CROP DISASTER ASSISTANCE.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall use such sums as are
necessary of funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to
make emergency financial assistance authorized under this
section available to producers on a farm that have incurred
qualifying losses described in subsection (c).
(b) Administration.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
Secretary shall make assistance available under this section
in the same manner as provided under section 815 of the
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law
106-387; 114 Stat. 1549A-55), including using the same loss
thresholds for quantity and economic losses as were used in
administering that section, except that the payment rate
shall be 55 percent of the established price, instead of 65
percent.
(2) Noninsured producers.--For producers on a farm that
were eligible to acquire crop insurance for the applicable
production loss and failed to do so or failed to submit an
application for the noninsured assistance program for the
loss, the Secretary shall make assistance in accordance with
paragraph (1), except that the payment rate shall be 20
percent of the established price, instead of 50 percent.
(c) Qualifying Losses.--Assistance under this section shall
be made available to producers on farms, other than producers
of sugar beets, that incurred qualifying quantity or quality
losses for the applicable crop due to damaging weather or any
related condition (including losses due to crop diseases,
insects, and delayed harvest), as determined by the
Secretary.
(d) Quality Losses.--
(1) In general.--In addition to any payment received under
subsection (b), the Secretary shall use such sums as are
necessary of funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to
make payments to producers on a farm described in subsection
(a) that incurred a quality loss for the applicable crop of a
commodity in an amount equal to the product obtained by
multiplying--
(A) the payment quantity determined under paragraph (2);
(B)(i) in the case of an insurable commodity, the coverage
level elected by the insured under the policy or plan of
insurance under the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1501
et seq.); or
(ii) in the case of a noninsurable commodity, the
applicable coverage level for the payment quantity determined
under paragraph (2); by
(C) 55 percent of the payment rate determined under
paragraph (3).
(2) Payment quantity.--For the purpose of paragraph (1)(A),
the payment quantity for quality losses for a crop of a
commodity on a farm shall equal the lesser of--
(A) the actual production of the crop affected by a quality
loss of the commodity on the farm; or
(B)(i) in the case of an insurable commodity, the actual
production history for the commodity by the producers on the
farm under the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.); or
(ii) in the case of a noninsurable commodity, the
established yield for the crop for the producers on the farm
under section 196 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and
Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7333).
(3) Payment rate.--
(A) In general.--For the purpose of paragraph (1)(B), the
payment rate for quality losses for a crop of a commodity on
a farm shall be equal to the difference between (as
determined by the applicable State committee of the Farm
Service Agency)--
(i) the per unit market value that the units of the crop
affected by the quality loss would have had if the crop had
not suffered a quality loss; and
(ii) the per unit market value of the units of the crop
affected by the quality loss.
(B) Factors.--In determining the payment rate for quality
losses for a crop of a commodity on a farm, the applicable
State committee of the Farm Service Agency shall take into
account--
(i) the average local market quality discounts that
purchasers applied to the commodity during the first 2 months
following the normal harvest period for the commodity;
(ii) the loan rate and repayment rate established for the
commodity under the marketing loan program established for
the commodity under subtitle B of title I of the Farm
Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 7931 et
seq.);
(iii) the market value of the commodity if sold into a
secondary market; and
(iv) other factors determined appropriate by the committee.
(4) Eligibility.--
(A) In general.--For producers on a farm to be eligible to
obtain a payment for a quality loss for a crop under this
subsection--
(i) the amount obtained by multiplying the per unit loss
determined under paragraph (1) by the number of units
affected by the quality loss shall be reduced by the amount
of any indemnification received by the producers on the farm
for quality loss adjustment for the commodity under a policy
or plan of insurance under the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7
U.S.C. 1501 et seq.); and
(ii) the remainder shall be at least 25 percent of the
value that all affected production of the crop would have had
if the crop had not suffered a quality loss.
(B) Ineligibility.--If the amount of a quality loss payment
for a commodity for the producers on a farm determined under
this paragraph is equal to or less than zero, the producers
on the farm shall be ineligible for assistance for the
commodity under this subsection.
(5) Eligible production.--The Secretary shall carry out
this subsection in a fair and equitable manner for all
eligible production, including the production of fruits and
vegetables, other specialty crops, and field crops.
(e) Election of Crop Year.--If a producer incurred
qualifying crop losses in more than 1 of the crop years
during the applicable period, the producers on a farm shall
elect to receive assistance under this section for losses
incurred in only 1 of the crop years.
(f) Payment Limitation.--
(1) Limitation.--Assistance provided under this section to
the producers on a farm for losses to a crop, together with
the amounts specified in paragraph (2) applicable to the same
crop, may not exceed 95 percent of what the value of the crop
would have been in the absence of the losses, as estimated by
the Secretary.
(2) Other payments.--In applying the limitation in
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall include the following:
(A) Any crop insurance payment made under the Federal Crop
Insurance Act (7
[[Page 7621]]
U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) or payment under section 196 of the
Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7
U.S.C. 7333) that the producers on the farm receive for
losses to the same crop.
(B) The value of the crop that was not lost (if any), as
estimated by the Secretary.
(g) Timing.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary
shall make payments to producers on a farm for a crop under
this section not later than 60 days after the date the
producers on the farm submit to the Secretary a completed
application for the payments.
(2) Interest.--If the Secretary does not make payments to
the producers on a farm by the date described in paragraph
(1), the Secretary shall pay to the producers on a farm
interest on the payments at a rate equal to the current (as
of the sign-up deadline established by the Secretary) market
yield on outstanding, marketable obligations of the United
States with maturities of 30 years.
SEC. 412. DAIRY ASSISTANCE.
The Secretary shall use $95,000,000 of funds of the
Commodity Credit Corporation to make payments to dairy
producers for dairy production losses in disaster counties.
SEC. 413. MILK INCOME LOSS CONTRACT PROGRAM.
Section 1502(c)(3) of the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 7982(c)(3)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by adding ``and'' at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``August'' and all
that follows through the end and inserting ``September 30,
2007, 34 percent.''; and
(3) by striking subparagraph (C).
SEC. 414. LIVESTOCK ASSISTANCE.
(a) Livestock Compensation Program.--
(1) Use of commodity credit corporation funds.--Effective
beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall use funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to carry
out the 2002 Livestock Compensation Program announced by the
Secretary on October 10, 2002 (67 Fed. Reg. 63070), to
provide compensation for livestock losses during the
applicable period for losses (including losses due to
blizzards that began in calendar year 2006 and continued in
January 2007) due to a disaster, as determined by the
Secretary, except that the payment rate shall be 80 percent
of the payment rate established for the 2002 Livestock
Compensation Program.
(2) Eligible applicants.--In carrying out the program
described in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall provide
assistance to any applicant for livestock losses during the
applicable period that--
(A)(i) conducts a livestock operation that is located in a
disaster county, including any applicant conducting a
livestock operation with eligible livestock (within the
meaning of the livestock assistance program under section
101(b) of division B of Public Law 108-324 (118 Stat. 1234));
or
(ii) produces an animal described in section 10806(a)(1) of
the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (21 U.S.C.
321d(a)(1));
(B) demonstrates to the Secretary that the applicant
suffered a material loss of pasture or hay production, or
experienced substantially increased feed costs, due to
damaging weather or a related condition during the calendar
year, as determined by the Secretary; and
(C) meets all other eligibility requirements established by
the Secretary for the program.
(3) Mitigation.--In determining the eligibility for or
amount of payments for which a producer is eligible under the
livestock compensation program, the Secretary shall not
penalize a producer that takes actions (recognizing disaster
conditions) that reduce the average number of livestock the
producer owned for grazing during the production year for
which assistance is being provided.
(4) Payments for reduction in grazing on federal land.--
(A) In general.--In carrying out this subsection, the
Secretary shall make payments to livestock producers that are
in proportion to any reduction during calendar year 2007 in
grazing on Federal land in a disaster county leased by the
producers a result of actions described in subparagraph (B).
(B) Federal actions.--Actions referred to in subparagraph
(A) are actions taken during calendar year 2007 by the Bureau
of Land Management or other Federal agency to restrict or
prohibit grazing otherwise allowed under the terms of the
lease of the producers in order to expedite the recovery of
the Federal land from drought, wildfire, or other natural
disaster declared by the Secretary during the applicable
period.
(5) Limitation.--The Secretary shall ensure, to the maximum
extent practicable, that producers on a farm do not receive
duplicative payments under this subsection and another
Federal program with respect to any loss.
(b) Livestock Indemnity Payments.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall use such sums as are
necessary of funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to
make livestock indemnity payments to producers on farms that
have incurred livestock losses during the applicable period
(including losses due to blizzards that began in calendar
year 2006 and continued in January 2007) due to a disaster,
as determined by the Secretary, including losses due to
hurricanes, floods, anthrax, wildfires, and extreme heat.
(2) Payment rates.--Indemnity payments to a producer on a
farm under paragraph (1) shall be made at a rate of not less
than 30 percent of the market value of the applicable
livestock on the day before the date of death of the
livestock, as determined by the Secretary.
(c) Ewe Lamb Replacement and Retention.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall use $13,000,000 of
funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to make payments to
producers located in disaster counties under the Ewe Lamb
Replacement and Retention Payment Program under part 784 of
title 7, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor
regulation) for each qualifying ewe lamb retained or
purchased during the period beginning on January 1, 2006, and
ending on December 31, 2006, by the producers.
(2) Ineligibility for other assistance.--A producer that
receives assistance under this subsection shall not be
eligible to receive assistance under subsection (a).
(d) Election of Production Year.--If a producer incurred
qualifying production losses in more than one of the
production years, the producers on a farm shall elect to
receive assistance under this section in only one of the
production years.
(e) Exception.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this
section, livestock producers on a farm shall be eligible to
receive assistance under subsection (a) or livestock
indemnity payments under subsection (b) if the producers on a
farm--
(1) have livestock operations in a county included in the
geographic area covered by a major disaster or emergency
designated by the President under the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121
et seq.) due to blizzards, ice storms, or other winter-
related causes during the period of December 2006 through
January 2007; and
(2) meet all eligibility requirements for the assistance or
payments other than the requirements relating to disaster
declarations by the Secretary under subsections (a) and
(b)(1).
SEC. 415. FLOODED CROP AND GRAZING LAND.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall compensate eligible
owners of flooded crop and grazing land in the State of North
Dakota.
(b) Eligibility.--
(1) In general.--To be eligible to receive compensation
under this section, an owner shall own land described in
subsection (a) that, during the 2 crop years preceding
receipt of compensation, was rendered incapable of use for
the production of an agricultural commodity or for grazing
purposes (in a manner consistent with the historical use of
the land) as the result of flooding, as determined by the
Secretary.
(2) Inclusions.--Land described in paragraph (1) shall
include--
(A) land that has been flooded;
(B) land that has been rendered inaccessible due to
flooding; and
(C) a reasonable buffer strip adjoining the flooded land,
as determined by the Secretary.
(3) Administration.--The Secretary may establish--
(A) reasonable minimum acreage levels for individual
parcels of land for which owners may receive compensation
under this section; and
(B) the location and area of adjoining flooded land for
which owners may receive compensation under this section.
(c) Sign-up.--The Secretary shall establish a sign-up
program for eligible owners to apply for compensation from
the Secretary under this section.
(d) Compensation Payments.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), the
rate of an annual compensation payment under this section
shall be equal to 90 percent of the average annual per acre
rental payment rate (at the time of entry into the contract)
for comparable crop or grazing land that has not been flooded
and remains in production in the county where the flooded
land is located, as determined by the Secretary.
(2) Reduction.--An annual compensation payment under this
section shall be reduced by the amount of any conservation
program rental payments or Federal agricultural commodity
program payments received by the owner for the land during
any crop year for which compensation is received under this
section.
(3) Exclusion.--During any year in which an owner receives
compensation for flooded land under this section, the owner
shall not be eligible to participate in or receive benefits
for the flooded land under--
(A) the Federal crop insurance program established under
the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.);
(B) the noninsured crop assistance program established
under section 196 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and
Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7333); or
(C) any Federal agricultural crop disaster assistance
program.
(e) Relationship to Agricultural Commodity Programs.--The
Secretary, by regulation, shall provide for the preservation
of
[[Page 7622]]
cropland base, allotment history, and payment yields
applicable to land described in subsection (a) that was
rendered incapable of use for the production of an
agricultural commodity or for grazing purposes as the result
of flooding.
(f) Use of Land.--
(1) In general.--An owner that receives compensation under
this section for flooded land shall take such actions as are
necessary to not degrade any wildlife habitat on the land
that has naturally developed as a result of the flooding.
(2) Recreational activities.--To encourage owners that
receive compensation for flooded land to allow public access
to and use of the land for recreational activities, as
determined by the Secretary, the Secretary may--
(A) offer an eligible owner additional compensation; and
(B) provide compensation for additional acreage under this
section.
(g) Funding.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall use $6,000,000 of
funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to carry out this
section.
(2) Pro-rated payments.--In a case in which the amount made
available under paragraph (1) for a fiscal year is
insufficient to compensate all eligible owners under this
section, the Secretary shall pro-rate payments for that
fiscal year on a per acre basis.
SEC. 416. SUGAR BEET AND SUGAR CANE DISASTER ASSISTANCE.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall use $24,000,000 of
funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to provide
assistance to sugar beet producers that suffered production
losses (including quality losses) for the applicable crop.
(b) Requirement.--The Secretary shall make payments under
subsection (a) in the same manner as payments were made under
section 208 of the Agricultural Assistance Act of 2003
(Public Law 108-7; 117 Stat. 544), including using the same
indemnity benefits as were used in carrying out that section.
(c) Hawaii.--The Secretary shall use $3,000,000 of funds of
the Commodity Credit Corporation to assist sugarcane growers
in Hawaii by making a payment in that amount to an
agricultural transportation cooperative in Hawaii, the
members of which are eligible to obtain a loan under section
156(a) of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act
of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7272(a)).
(d) Election of Crop Year.--If a producer incurred
qualifying crop losses in more than one of the crop years
during the applicable period, the producers on a farm shall
elect to receive assistance under this section for losses
incurred in only one of the crop years.
SEC. 417. NONINSURED CROP ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
Section 196(c) of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and
Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7333(c)) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(5) Loss assessment for grazing.--The Secretary shall
permit the use of 1 claims adjustor certified by the
Secretary to assess the quantity of loss on the acreage or
allotment of a producer devoted to grazing for livestock
under this section.''.
SEC. 418. REDUCTION IN PAYMENTS.
The amount of any payment for which a producer is eligible
under this subtitle shall be reduced by any amount received
by the producer for the same loss or any similar loss under--
(1) the Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico,
and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006 (Public Law 109-148; 119
Stat. 2680);
(2) an agricultural disaster assistance provision contained
in the announcement of the Secretary on January 26, 2006, or
August 29, 2006;
(3) the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for
Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery,
2006 (Public Law 109-234; 120 Stat. 418); or
(4) the Livestock Assistance Grant Program announced by the
Secretary on August 29, 2006.
Subtitle B--Small Business Economic Loss Grant Program
SEC. 421. SMALL BUSINESS ECONOMIC LOSS GRANT PROGRAM.
(a) Definition of Qualified State.--In this section, the
term ``qualified State'' means a State in which at least 50
percent of the counties of the State were declared to be
primary agricultural disaster areas by the Secretary during
the applicable period.
(b) Grants to Qualified States.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall use $100,000,000 of
funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to make grants to
State departments of agriculture or comparable State agencies
in qualified States.
(2) Amount.--
(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the Secretary
shall allocate grants among qualified States described in
paragraph (1) based on the average value of agricultural
sector production in the qualified State, determined as a
percentage of the gross domestic product of the qualified
State.
(B) Minimum amount.--The minimum amount of a grant under
this subsection shall be $500,000.
(3) Requirement.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
this subsection, a qualified State shall agree to carry out
an expedited disaster assistance program to provide direct
payments to qualified small businesses in accordance with
subsection (c).
(c) Direct Payments to Qualified Small Businesses.--
(1) In general.--In carrying out an expedited disaster
assistance program described in subsection (b)(3), a
qualified State shall provide direct payments to eligible
small businesses in the qualified State that suffered
material economic losses during the applicable period as a
direct result of weather-related agricultural losses to the
crop or livestock production sectors of the qualified State,
as determined by the Secretary.
(2) Eligibility.--
(A) In general.--To be eligible to receive a direct payment
under paragraph (1), a small business shall--
(i) have less than $15,000,000 in average annual gross
income from all business activities, at least 75 percent of
which shall be directly related to production agriculture or
agriculture support industries, as determined by the
Secretary;
(ii) verify the amount of economic loss attributable to
weather-related agricultural losses using such documentation
as the Secretary and the head of the qualified State agency
may require;
(iii) have suffered losses attributable to weather-related
agricultural disasters that equal at least 50 percent of the
total economic loss of the small business for each year a
grant is requested; and
(iv) demonstrate that the grant will materially improve the
likelihood the business will--
(I) recover from the disaster; and
(II) continue to service and support production
agriculture.
(B) Emergency grants to assist low-income migrant and
seasonal farmworkers.--
(i) Funds made available by this subtitle may be used to
carry out assistance programs in States that are consistent
with the purpose and intent of the program authorized at
section 2281 of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade
Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 5177a).
(ii) In carrying out this subparagraph, a qualified State
may waive the gross income requirement at subparagraph (A)(i)
of this paragraph.
(3) Requirements.--A direct payment to small business under
this subsection shall--
(A) be limited to not more than 2 years of documented
losses; and
(B) be in an amount of not more than 75 percent of the
documented average economic loss attributable to weather-
related agriculture disasters for each eligible year in the
qualified State.
(4) Insufficient funding.--If the grant funds received by a
qualified State agency under subsection (b) are insufficient
to fund the direct payments of the qualified State agency
under this subsection, the qualified State agency may apply a
proportional reduction to all of the direct payments.
Subtitle C--Forestry
SEC. 431. TREE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
(a) Definition of Tree.--In this section, the term ``tree''
includes--
(1) a tree (including a Christmas tree, ornamental tree,
nursery tree, and potted tree);
(2) a bush (including a shrub, nursery shrub, nursery bush,
ornamental bush, ornamental shrub, potted bush, and potted
shrub); and
(3) a vine (including a nursery vine and ornamental vine).
(b) Program.--Except as otherwise provided in this section,
the Secretary shall use such sums as are necessary of the
funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to provide
assistance under the terms and conditions of the tree
assistance program established under subtitle C of title X of
the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C.
8201 et seq.) to--
(1) producers who suffered tree losses in disaster
counties; and
(2) fruit and tree nut producers in disaster counties.
(c) Costs.--Funds made available under this section shall
also be made available to cover costs associated with tree
pruning, tree rehabilitation, and other appropriate tree-
related activities as determined by the Secretary.
(d) Scope of Assistance.--Assistance under this section
shall compensate for losses resulting from disasters during
the applicable period.
Subtitle D--Conservation
SEC. 441. EMERGENCY CONSERVATION PROGRAM.
The Secretary shall use an additional $35,000,000 of funds
of the Commodity Credit Corporation to carry out emergency
measures, including wildfire recovery efforts in Montana and
other States, identified by the Administrator of the Farm
Service Agency as of the date of enactment of this Act
through the emergency conservation program established under
title IV of the Agricultural Credit Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C.
2201 et seq.), of which $3,000,000 shall be to repair broken
irrigation pipelines and damaged and collapsed water tanks,
$1,000,000 to provide emergency loans for losses of
agricultural income, and $2,000,000 to repair ditch
irrigation
[[Page 7623]]
systems in conjunction with the Presidential declaration of a
major disaster (FEMA-1664-DR), dated October 17, 2006, and
related determinations issued under the authority of the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act): Provided, That
the Secretary may transfer a portion of these funds to the
Natural Resources Conservation Service, to include Resource
Conservation and Development councils.
SEC. 442. EMERGENCY WATERSHED PROTECTION PROGRAM.
The Secretary shall use an additional $50,000,000 of funds
of the Commodity Credit Corporation to carry out emergency
measures identified by the Chief of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service as of the date of enactment of this Act
through the emergency watershed protection program
established under section 403 of the Agricultural Credit Act
of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2203).
SEC. 443. CONSERVATION SECURITY PROGRAM.
Section 20115 of Public Law 110-5 is amended by striking
``section 726'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``section 726;
section 741''.
Subtitle E--Farm Service Agency
SEC. 451. FUNDING FOR ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT.
The Secretary shall use $30,000,000 of funds of the
Commodity Credit Corporation--
(1) of which $9,000,000 shall be used to hire additional
County Farm Service Agency personnel to expedite the
implementation of, and delivery under, the agricultural
disaster and economic assistance programs under this title;
and
(2) to be used as the Secretary determines to be necessary
to carry out this and other agriculture and disaster
assistance programs.
Subtitle F--Miscellaneous
SEC. 461. CONTRACT WAIVER.
In carrying out this title and section 101(a)(5) of the
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Hurricane Disasters
Assistance Act, 2005 (Public Law 108-324; 118 Stat. 1233),
the Secretary shall not require participation in a crop
insurance pilot program relating to forage.
SEC. 462. INSECT INFESTATIONS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary, acting through the
Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service, shall use not less than $20,000,000 of funds made
available from the Commodity Credit Corporation for the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service to survey and
control insect infestations in the States of Nevada, Idaho,
and Utah.
(b) Use of Funds.--Funds described in subsection (a) shall
be used in a manner that promotes cooperative efforts between
Federal programs (including the plant protection and
quarantine program of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service) and State and local programs carried out, in whole
or in part, with Federal funds to fight insect outbreaks.
SEC. 463. FUNDING.
The Secretary shall use the funds, facilities, and
authorities of the Commodity Credit Corporation to carry out
this title, to remain available until expended.
SEC. 464. REGULATIONS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary may promulgate such
regulations as are necessary to implement this title.
(b) Procedure.--The promulgation of the regulations and
administration of this title shall be made without regard
to--
(1) the notice and comment provisions of section 553 of
title 5, United States Code;
(2) the Statement of Policy of the Secretary of Agriculture
effective July 24, 1971 (36 Fed. Reg. 13804), relating to
notices of proposed rulemaking and public participation in
rulemaking; and
(3) chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code (commonly
known as the ``Paperwork Reduction Act'').
(c) Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking.--In carrying
out this section, the Secretary shall use the authority
provided under section 808 of title 5, United States Code.
Subtitle G--Emergency Designation
SEC. 471. EMERGENCY DESIGNATION.
The amounts provided under this title are designated as an
emergency requirement pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res.
95 (109th Congress).
This Act may be cited as the ``U.S. Troop Readiness,
Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability
Appropriations Act, 2007''.
______
SA 642. Ms. LANDRIEU submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 641 proposed by Mr. Byrd to the bill H.R. 1591, making
emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2007, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on
the table; as follows:
On page 60, line 13, strike ``$150,000,000'' and insert
``$755,000,000''.
On page 60, line 16, insert after ``area'' the following:
``Provided, That $605,000,000 shall be for construction of
the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal Lock replacement project,
to remain available until expended''.
______
SA 643. Mr. COCHRAN (for himself, Mr. McCain, Mr. Lieberman, Mr.
Graham, Mr. Warner, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Shelby, Mr. Craig,
Mr. Allard, Mr. Bennett, and Mr. Enzi) proposed an amendment to
amendment SA 641 proposed by Mr. Byrd to the bill H.R. 1591, making
emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2007, and for other purposes; as follows:
On page 24, strike line 16 and all that follows through
page 26, line 24 and insert:
``SEC. 1315. BENCHMARKS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAQ.--''
______
SA 644. Mr. REID submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill H.R. 1591, making emergency supplemental appropriations
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 41, line 19 strike $214,000,000 and insert
$214,000,001
______
SA 645. Mr. REID submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill H.R. 1591, making emergency supplemental appropriations
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
In the amendment strike $214,000,001 and insert
$214,000,002.
______
SA 646. Mrs. HUTCHISON submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by her to the bill H.R. 1591, making emergency supplemental
appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place insert the following:
``Sec. ___. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs is authorized to convey without
consideration to the State of Texas all right, title, and
interest of the United States in and to a parcel of real
property comprising the location of the Marlin, Texas
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center. In so
conveying, the Secretary need not comply with Federal laws
relating to the environment and historic preservation.
However, the Secretary may at his discretion undertake
environmental cleanup at a cost not to exceed $500,000
utilizing appropriations available for the environmental
cleanup of sites under the Department's jurisdiction. The
purpose of the conveyance is to permit the State of Texas to
utilize the property for purposes of a prison.''
______
SA 647. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill H.R. 1591, making emergency supplemental
appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 72, between lines 7 and 8, insert the following:
SEC. 2504. MAJOR DISASTER OR EMERGENCY BENEFITS.
(a) Fraud in Connection With Major Disaster or Emergency
Benefits.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 47 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 1040. Fraud in connection with major disaster or
emergency benefits
``(a) Whoever, in a circumstance described in subsection
(b) of this section, knowingly--
``(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick,
scheme, or device any material fact; or
``(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent
statement or representation, or makes or uses any false
writing or document knowing the same to contain any
materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or
representation,
in any matter involving any benefit authorized, transported,
transmitted, transferred, disbursed, or paid in connection
with a major disaster declaration under section 401 of the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act (42 U.S.C. 5170) or an emergency declaration under
section 501 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5191), or in connection
with any procurement of property or services related to any
emergency or major disaster declaration as a prime contractor
with the United States or as a subcontractor or supplier on a
contract in which there is a prime contract with the United
States, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more
than 30 years, or both.
``(b) A circumstance described in this subsection is any
instance where--
``(1) the authorization, transportation, transmission,
transfer, disbursement, or payment of the benefit is in or
affects interstate or foreign commerce;
[[Page 7624]]
``(2) the benefit is transported in the mail at any point
in the authorization, transportation, transmission, transfer,
disbursement, or payment of that benefit; or
``(3) the benefit is a record, voucher, payment, money, or
thing of value of the United States, or of any department or
agency thereof.
``(c) In this section, the term `benefit' means any record,
voucher, payment, money or thing of value, good, service,
right, or privilege provided by the United States, a State or
local government, or other entity.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
47 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following new item:
``1040. Fraud in connection with major disaster or emergency
benefits.''.
(b) Increased Criminal Penalties for Engaging in Wire,
Radio, and Television Fraud During and Relation to a
Presidentially Declared Major Disaster or Emergency.--Section
1343 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
inserting: ``occurs in relation to, or involving any benefit
authorized, transported, transmitted, transferred, disbursed,
or paid in connection with, a presidentially declared major
disaster or emergency (as those terms are defined in section
102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122)), or'' after ``If the
violation''.
(c) Increased Criminal Penalties for Engaging in Mail Fraud
During and in Relation to a Presidentially Declared Major
Disaster or Emergency.--Section 1341 of title 18, United
States Code, is amended by inserting: ``occurs in relation
to, or involving any benefit authorized, transported,
transmitted, transferred, disbursed, or paid in connection
with, a presidentially declared major disaster or emergency
(as those terms are defined in section 102 of the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42
U.S.C. 5122)), or'' after ``If the violation''.
(d) Directive to Sentencing Commission.--
(1) In general.--Pursuant to its authority under section
994(p) of title 28, United States Code, and in accordance
with this subsection, the United States Sentencing Commission
forthwith shall--
(A) promulgate sentencing guidelines or amend existing
sentencing guidelines to provide for increased penalties for
persons convicted of fraud or theft offenses in connection
with a major disaster declaration under section 401 of the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act (42 U.S.C. 5170) or an emergency declaration under
section 501 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5191); and
(B) submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate
and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives an explanation of actions taken by the
Commission pursuant to subparagraph (A) and any additional
policy recommendations the Commission may have for combating
offenses described in that subparagraph.
(2) Requirements.--In carrying out this subsection, the
Sentencing Commission shall--
(A) ensure that the sentencing guidelines and policy
statements reflect the serious nature of the offenses
described in paragraph (1) and the need for aggressive and
appropriate law enforcement action to prevent such offenses;
(B) assure reasonable consistency with other relevant
directives and with other guidelines;
(C) account for any aggravating or mitigating circumstances
that might justify exceptions, including circumstances for
which the sentencing guidelines currently provide sentencing
enhancements;
(D) make any necessary conforming changes to the sentencing
guidelines; and
(E) assure that the guidelines adequately meet the purposes
of sentencing as set forth in section 3553(a)(2) of title 18,
United States Code.
(3) Emergency authority and deadline for commission
action.--The Commission shall promulgate the guidelines or
amendments provided for under this subsection as soon as
practicable, and in any event not later than the 30 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, in accordance with
the procedures set forth in section 21(a) of the Sentencing
Reform Act of 1987, as though the authority under that Act
had not expired.
____________________
NOTICES OF HEARINGS/MEETINGS
committee on rules and administration
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I wish to announce that the Committee
on Rules and Administration will meet on Wednesday, April 11, 2007, at
10 a.m., to conduct an oversight hearing on the Smithsonian
Institution.
For further information regarding this hearing, please contact Howard
Gantman at the Rules and Administration Committee on 224-6352.
____________________
AUTHORITY FOR COMMITTEES TO MEET
committee on energy and natural resources
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to hold a
Roundtable Discussion during the session of the Senate on Monday, March
26, 2007, at 2:30 p.m. in room SD-G50 of the Dirksen Senate Office
Building.
The purpose of the Roundtable is to discuss the progress of the
European Union's Emissions Trading Scheme and to receive information on
lessons learned for policymakers who want to better understand how a
market-based trading program could operate efficiently and effectively
in the United States.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
subcommittee on emerging threats and capabilities
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities be authorized to meet
during the session of the Senate on Monday, March 26, 2007, at 2 p.m.,
to receive a briefing on the reorganization of the office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
subcommittee on human rights and the law
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law be authorized to meet on
Monday, March 26, 2007, at 3 p.m., to conduct a hearing on ``Legal
Options to Stop Human Trafficking,'' in Room 226 of the Dirksen Senate
Office Building.
Grace Chung Becker, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Civil
Rights, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC; Katherine
Kaufka, Supervising Attorney, Counter-Trafficking Services Program,
National Immigrant Justice Center, Heartland Alliance for Human Needs &
Human Rights, Chicago, IL; Martina E. Vandenberg, Attorney, Jenner &
Block, Washington, DC; and Holly J. Burkhalter, Vice President,
International Justice Mission, Washington, DC.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
subcommittee on oversight of Government management, the federal
workforce and the district of columbia
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal
Workforce and the District of Columbia be authorized to meet on Monday,
March 26, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., for a hearing entitled, Understanding the
Realities of REAL ID: A Review of Efforts to Secure Drivers' Licenses
and Identification Cards.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR
Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Yvonne
Stone, a detailee from the Department of Veterans Affairs, be granted
floor privileges for the duration of the debate on H.R. 1591, the
emergency war supplemental.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. COCHRAN. I also ask unanimous consent that Earl Rilington and
Eric Perritt, Fellows serving in my office, be granted floor privileges
for the duration of the debate on H.R. 1591, the fiscal year 2007
emergency supplemental appropriations bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Adam Morrison
and Tad Gallion be granted floor privileges during the debate on this
measure.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. KENNEDY. I ask unanimous consent that my State Department fellow,
Mike Stanton, and my Marine Corps fellow, Mark Carlton, be granted
floor privileges for the duration of debate on H.R. 1591 supplemental
appropriations bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered
[[Page 7625]]
____________________
UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT--NOMINATION OF GEORGE WU
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that tomorrow at
11:50 a.m., the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the
nomination of George Wu to be a U.S. district judge, Calendar No. 38;
that there be 20 minutes for debate equally divided between the
chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee; that at the
conclusion of or yielding back of time, the Senate vote on the
confirmation of the nomination; that following the vote, the motion to
reconsider be laid on the table, the President be immediately notified
of the Senate's action, and the Senate then resume legislative session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
CONGRATULATING THE EUROPEAN UNION
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed
to the consideration of S. Res. 124 submitted earlier today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 124) congratulating the European
Union on the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of
Rome creating the European Economic Community among 6
European countries and laying the foundations for peace,
stability, and prosperity in Europe.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the
resolution.
Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the
preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table,
and any statements be printed in the Record.
The resolution (S. Res. 124) was agreed to.
The preamble was agreed to.
The resolution, with its preamble, reads as follows:
S. Res. 124
Whereas after a half century of war and upheaval, and in
the face of economic and political crises and the threat of
communism, European visionaries began a process to bring the
countries of Europe into closer economic and political
cooperation to help secure peace and prosperity for the
peoples of Europe;
Whereas, on March 25, 1957, 6 European countries--the
Federal Republic of Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, the
Netherlands, and Luxembourg--signed the Treaty of Rome,
creating the European Economic Community;
Whereas the Treaty of Rome established a customs union
between the signatory countries, but also did much more,
creating a framework that has broadened and deepened over
time into the European Union, promoting the free movement of
people, services, and capital, and common policies among the
countries in important areas, and that has helped secure the
spread of peace and stability in Europe;
Whereas the European Economic Community expanded to bring
more European countries into closer union, with the United
Kingdom, Denmark, and Ireland joining in 1973, Greece joining
in 1981, and Spain and Portugal joining in 1986;
Whereas the member countries of the European Economic
Community agreed to the Single European Act in 1987, paving
the way for a single European market, and on February 7,
1992, the member countries of the European Community signed
the Treaty of Maastricht, furthering the economic and
political ties among the member countries and creating the
European Union;
Whereas the European Union has continued to grow so that
the European Union now comprises 27 countries with a
population of over 450,000,000, after the successful
unification of Germany in 1990 and the joining of Austria,
Finland, and Sweden in 1995, Cyprus, the Czech Republic,
Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia,
and Slovenia in 2004, and Bulgaria and Romania in 2007, and
the European Union continues to consider expanding to include
other countries central to the history and future of Europe;
Whereas the European Union has developed a broad acquis
communautaire covering policies in the economic, security,
diplomatic, and political areas, has established a single
market, has built an economic and monetary union, including
the Euro currency, and has built an area of freedom,
security, peace, and justice, extending stability to its
neighbors;
Whereas the European Union played a key role at the end of
the Cold War in helping to spread free markets, democratic
institutions and values, and respect for human rights to the
former central European communist states;
Whereas the United States and the European Union have
shared a unique partnership based on a common heritage,
shared values, and mutual interests, and have worked together
to strengthen international cooperation and institutions, to
create a more open international trading system, to ensure
transatlantic and global security, to preserve and promote
peace, freedom, and democracy, and to advance human rights;
and
Whereas the United States has supported the European
integration process and has consistently supported the
objective of European unity and the enlargement of the
European Union to promote prosperity, peace, and democracy:
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) congratulates the European Union and the member
countries of the European Union on the 50th anniversary of
the historic signing of the Treaty of Rome;
(2) commends the European Union for the critical role it
and its predecessor organizations have played in spreading
peace, stability, and prosperity throughout Europe; and
(3) affirms the desire of the United States to strengthen
the transatlantic partnership with the European Union and
with all of its member countries.
____________________
PERMITTING USE OF THE ROTUNDA OF THE CAPITOL
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed
to the consideration of H. Con. Res. 66.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 66) permitting the
use of the rotunda of the Capitol for a ceremony as part of
the commemoration of the days of remembrance of victims of
the Holocaust.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the
concurrent resolution.
Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent the concurrent resolution be agreed
to and the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, with no
intervening action or debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 66) was agreed to.
____________________
ORDERS FOR TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 2007
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate
completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m.,
Tuesday, March 27; that on Tuesday, following the prayer and pledge,
the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be
deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use
later in the day, that there then be a period for morning business for
60 minutes with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10
minutes each, the first 30 minutes under the control of the
Republicans, and the final 30 minutes under the control of the
majority; that at the close of morning business, the Senate resume
consideration of H.R. 1591; that on Tuesday, following the vote on the
judicial nomination, the Senate stand in recess until 2:15 p.m. in
order to accommodate the respective party conference work periods. I
further ask unanimous consent that Members have until 2:30 to file
first-degree amendments for the matter pending.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
ADJOURNMENT UNTIL 10 A.M. TOMORROW
Mr. REID. If there is no further business today, I ask unanimous
consent the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.
There being no objection, the Senate, at 6:56 p.m., adjourned until
Tuesday, March 27, 2007, at 10 a.m.
____________________
NOMINATIONS
Executive nominations received by the Senate March 26, 2007:
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
R. LYLE LAVERTY, OF COLORADO, TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
FISH AND WILDLIFE, VICE HAROLD CRAIG MANSON.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
JANET E. GARVEY, OF MASSACHUSETTS, A CAREER MEMBER OF THE
SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF
[[Page 7626]]
MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND
PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE
REPUBLIC OF CAMEROON.
R. NIELS MARQUARDT, OF CALIFORNIA, A CAREER MEMBER OF THE
SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO BE
AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF MADAGASCAR, AND TO SERVE
CONCURRENTLY AND WITHOUT ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION AS
AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA TO THE UNION OF COMOROS.
IN THE NAVY
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE UNITED
STATES NAVY TO THE GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C.,
SECTION 624:
To be rear admiral
REAR ADM. (LH) MICHAEL J. LYDEN, 0000
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICERS FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE UNITED
STATES NAVY TO THE GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C.,
SECTION 624:
To be rear admiral
REAR ADM. (LH) CHRISTINE S. HUNTER, 0000
REAR ADM. (LH) ADAM M. ROBINSON, JR., 0000
IN THE AIR FORCE
THE FOLLOWING NAMED AIR NATIONAL GUARD OF THE UNITED STATES
OFFICERS FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE GRADE INDICATED IN THE
RESERVE OF THE AIR FORCE UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTIONS
12203 AND 12212:
To be colonel
THOMAS I. ANDERSON, 0000
GLEN M. BAKER, 0000
WAYNE E. BALE, 0000
RONALD D. BLUNCK, 0000
MARY J. BRANDT, 0000
PHILLIP R. BROWN, 0000
STANLEY D. BRUNTZ, 0000
THADDEUS E. BURR, 0000
CONRAD C. CALDWELL III, 0000
WILLIAM S. CARLE, 0000
WENZELL E. CARTER, JR., 0000
DAVID R. CHESSER, 0000
EDWARD J. CHUPEIN, JR., 0000
ROBERT J. CLARK, 0000
CARL E. CROFT, 0000
PAUL D. CUMMINGS, 0000
WILLIAM E. DAY III, 0000
JOHN W. DUGAN, 0000
JAMES K. EDENFIELD, 0000
TIMOTHY J. EVANS, 0000
DOUGLAS A. FARNHAM, 0000
DAVID K. FAUST, 0000
BRENT J. FEICK, 0000
JAMES E. FREDREGILL, 0000
DENNIS J. GALLEGOS, 0000
KENNETH L. GAMMON, 0000
DAVID R. GANN, 0000
ROBERT M. GENTRY, 0000
RICHARD P. GREENWOOD, 0000
MURRAY A. HANSEN, 0000
JAMES C. HAY, JR., 0000
THOMAS J. HAYEK, 0000
PAIGE P. HUNTER, 0000
DOUGLAS R. JACOBSON, 0000
MATTHEW P. JAMISON, 0000
JOHN S. JOSEPH, 0000
RICHARD W. KELLY, 0000
BRIAN W. LEAKWAY, 0000
JEROME P. LIMOGE, JR., 0000
DALE R. MARKS, 0000
BETTY J. MARSHALL, 0000
JAMES T. MATLOCK III, 0000
JOHN E. MCNEIL, 0000
SCOTT A. MCPHERSON, 0000
PHILLIP S. MICHAEL, 0000
DONALD F. MOFFORD, 0000
JAMES J. MONTAGUE, 0000
CLAYTON W. MOUSHON, 0000
MARTIN J. PARK, 0000
MITCHELL L. PERRY, 0000
JEFFREY W. PETTIGREW, 0000
EDWARD J. PIECEK, 0000
WILLIAM Q. PLATT III, 0000
CHARLES B. POWLEY, 0000
SAMUEL H. RAMSAY III, 0000
JAMES F. REAGAN, 0000
KEVIN F. REILLY, 0000
DAVID L. REYNOLDS, 0000
DEREK P. ROGERS, 0000
JEFFERY A. SABOTKA, 0000
GEORGE E. SCHERZER, JR., 0000
STEPHEN P. SHAFFER, 0000
DANEIL C. SHEA, 0000
MARK E. SHEEHY, 0000
JEFFREY M. SILVER, 0000
DAVID C. SNAKENBERG, 0000
RONALD W. SOLBERG, 0000
KURT D. SONDERMAN, 0000
CHRISTOPHER A. STRATMANN, 0000
JASVANT S. SURANI, 0000
WILLIAM R. SWANSON, 0000
MICHAEL T. THOMAS, 0000
CAROL A. TIMMONS, 0000
ANDREW P. URBANSKY, 0000
PHILIP M. VANEAU, 0000
MARK J. VANKOOTEN, 0000
BRIAN L. VOGNILD, 0000
THERESA A. VOTINELLI, 0000
CHARLES W. WEDDLE, JR., 0000
HAROLD L. WESTBROOK, JR., 0000
GREGORY T. WHITE, 0000
WILLIAM C. WOLFARTH, 0000
HARRY W. YOUNG, JR., 0000
MUSSARET A. ZUBERI, 0000
[[Page 7627]]
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES--Monday, March 26, 2007
The House met at 12:30 p.m. and was called to order by the Speaker
pro tempore (Ms. Castor).
____________________
DESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following
communication from the Speaker:
Washington, DC,
March 26, 2007.
I hereby appoint the Honorable Kathy Castor to act as
Speaker pro tempore on this day.
Nancy Pelosi,
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
____________________
MORNING HOUR DEBATES
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of
January 4, 2007, the Chair will now recognize Members from lists
submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour
debates. The Chair will alternate recognition between the parties, with
each party limited to not to exceed 30 minutes, and each Member, except
the majority leader, the minority leader, or the minority whip, limited
to not to exceed 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) for 5
minutes.
____________________
THE VICE PRESIDENT AND THE IRAQ ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
Mr. DeFAZIO. I thank the Chair.
Well, Vice President Cheney was in form last weekend in Florida
addressing a small group behind closed doors. He attacked the House of
Representatives for passing the Iraq Accountability Act. I am not
certain whether it is because he objects to the fact that we are going
to make this administration review the readiness of our troops, their
equipment, before they're rushed to Iraq in an attempt to escalate the
war. They don't want that kind of accountability, because it failed our
troops, from day one, on equipment and readiness.
And then maybe it's the other part, the part where we are going to
demand accountability of the Iraqi Government. Time and time again
President Bush sets benchmarks. ``Those benchmarks will be met.'' They
are never met. There has to be a diplomatic and political component.
You cannot resolve a civil war with military force in Iraq. But time
and time again the Bush administration has let the Iraqi Government
skate. This bill says they will meet the President's own chosen,
President Bush and al Maliki's, own chosen guidelines and benchmarks or
we will begin to bring our troops home. Plain and simple, not a war
without end, not a war that will be settled by future Presidents, as
George Bush said a year ago, but if this administration and the Iraqi
Government fail to do what's necessary for our troops, we are not going
to strand them in the middle of a civil war.
But the Vice President objects to those things. He says if they
really support the troops, then we should take them at their word and
expect them to meet the needs of our military on time, in full, no
strings attached.
Let's review the administration's record on those issues. Let's
review how the Bush-Cheney administration met the needs of our troops.
First of all, it was an unnecessary war. They were pursuing a necessary
war against al Qaeda, the Taliban, Osama bin Laden. Remember them? Dead
or alive? Dead or alive? They abandoned that war for an unnecessary war
launched under false pretenses in Iraq.
Now, something called the Office of Special Plans phonied up the
intelligence. Dick Cheney put together the Office of Special Plans with
some of his own hand-picked people, I think one of whom is now on the
way to jail, in fact, Scooter Libby. In fact, he personally,
unprecedented for a Vice President, kept visiting the CIA and saying,
no, they didn't have the intelligence right yet. I.e., they didn't say
what he wanted. Niger yellow cake, Chalabi, all that stuff. He was so
wrong. And then he said, ``Simply stated, there's no doubt that Saddam
Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.'' Vice President Cheney in
August of 2002 as he was pushing us toward war.
But then on the eve of the war, even after their myths about weapons
of mass destruction, the yellow cake, the aluminum tubes had started to
fall apart, he said, ``We believe that Saddam has in fact reconstituted
nuclear weapons.'' Vice President Cheney. A man who has been so wrong
and put our troops in harm's way unnecessarily, jeopardized the
security of the United States by distracting us from the real fight in
Afghanistan, challenges this Congress on the Iraq Accountability Act?
No, I think last November the American people started to ask about
accountability for him and his supposed boss, George Bush.
And then let's look at their military planning. General Shinseki, a
good man. They fired him. It was said we didn't need 350,000 people.
Rummy said, ``Oh, don't worry. We can do it with 100,000 or so.''
Shinseki said, that would lead to strife, civil war and chaos. He was
right. They fired him. But presidential economic adviser Larry Lindsey
said, ``It's going to be very expensive. Very expensive.'' No, Cheney
and his cohorts said, ``No, don't worry. Iraq can pay for it
themselves.'' Well, we are now at $2 billion a week, hundreds of
billions of dollars on this war. So wrong.
And then our troops, how did they serve them? Vice President Cheney
again, ``We believe we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. I think
it will go relatively quick. Weeks rather than months.'' So they didn't
give our men and women body armor, didn't have armored Humvees, they
didn't have the equipment they needed. Congress had to uncover those
scandals after we heard from the troops in the field. We had to provide
it over the objections of this administration, and this guy has the
gall to say we aren't serving the troops as they want to keep our
troops mired down forever in the middle of a civil war?
This is extraordinary. And, most recently, Vice President Cheney last
year, no, 2 years ago, ``I think they're in the last throes, if you
will, of the insurgency.'' I guess he still believes that.
These people have done an extraordinary disservice to our troops, our
country, our national security and the fight against true terrorism
that attacked us on 9/11. We will not be distracted or bullied anymore.
The Iraq Accountability Act is a strong response to their mismanagement
and it offers the United States a way to bring this war to a successful
conclusion and soon.
Bring the troops home.
____________________
CONGRATULATING BARTON COLLEGE'S BASKETBALL TEAM
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of
January 4, 2007, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Butterfield) is
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker, there was great cause for celebration in eastern North
Carolina over this past weekend, as Wilson, North Carolina's Barton
College captured the NCAA Division II
[[Page 7628]]
men's college basketball championship. What a game.
Barton College, Madam Speaker, is a small but proud college with a
rich academic history. With a student body of about 1,000 students, it
is located not only in my congressional district but located in my
community. I am so proud of them.
Barton College captured the national championship Saturday afternoon,
scoring an amazing come-from-behind 77-75 victory over previously
undefeated and defending national champion Winona State University.
Barton won the title game at the buzzer, with one-tenth of a second
remaining. They won their semifinal game by one point on a last-second
free throw. And it won its quarterfinal game on a three-pointer at the
buzzer in overtime. This will be a game that will long be remembered.
Madam Speaker, it is a great honor for me to recognize the success,
efforts and achievements of these outstanding young student athletes.
It is my pleasure to recognize their head coach, Ron Lievense, and his
staff. Their hard work and dedication to teamwork is something that we
are all proud of in Wilson, North Carolina and throughout the First
Congressional District.
I ask my colleagues today to rise and join me in paying tribute to
Barton College's basketball team of 2007 and to recognize their
extraordinary championship.
____________________
RECESS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the
Chair declares the House in recess until 2 p.m. today.
Accordingly (at 12 o'clock and 39 minutes p.m.), the House stood in
recess until 2 p.m.
____________________
{time} 1400
AFTER RECESS
The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the
Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Salazar) at 2 p.m.
____________________
PRAYER
The Chaplain, the Reverend Daniel P. Coughlin, offered the following
prayer:
``Go down, Moses,
Way down in Egypt land.
Tell ole Pharaoh,
Let my people go.''
These lines from the old spiritual, Lord, gave human slavery voice
and hope. Its rundown rhythm muffled the sound of the Underground
Railroad traveling through darkness to bring people freedom's light.
Lord, we pray that You help now all those held captive in human
bondage. May the thousands caught in the clutches of slave labor and
worse, in our own country, find a new exodus. Bring their hidden
stories to the brightness of news in our day, so they may live with the
glimmer of hope. Lead them through the complexity of economic and legal
systems to breathe in the common air of freedom.
May our preparations for Passover and Easter shake off our
indifference, change obstinate hearts of unscrupulous employers and
profiteers in human trafficking that the redeemed may rejoice in You,
our God and Savior, both now and forever. Amen.
____________________
THE JOURNAL
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has examined the Journal of the
last day's proceedings and announces to the House his approval thereof.
Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved.
____________________
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Will the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Ross)
come forward and lead the House in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Mr. ROSS led the Pledge of Allegiance as follows:
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of
America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
____________________
DEMOCRATS CONTINUE TO TAX AND SPEND
(Mr. WILSON of South Carolina asked and was given permission to
address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, Democrats are as
predictable as the sun: it continues to rise in the east, and they
continue to tax and spend.
The Democratic budget released last week proposes the largest tax
increase in American history: $392.5 billion. Not only does it allow
for the expiration of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, but it does nothing
to control unsustainable entitlement spending.
Republicans believe fiscal restraint and pro-growth economic policies
will lead to budget surpluses and new jobs. Democrats believe out-of-
control government spending should be subsidized with the hard-earned
money of American taxpayers.
Unfortunately, the Democratic budget continues to squeeze taxpayers'
pocketbooks without tightening the belt of Big Government. Such
reckless policies will chill our growing economy by reducing job
creation.
In conclusion, God bless our troops, and we will never forget
September 11.
____________________
PHOTO IDENTIFICATION SECURITY ACT
(Mrs. BLACKBURN asked and was given permission to address the House
for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, you know, one of the things that we
heard about so often during the campaign last year was illegal
immigration. And coming back to Congress, one of the things we are
hearing about as we hold our town hall meetings is the impact of
illegal immigrants having access to credit cards and to financial
services in this country. Banking institutions, the Federal Reserve,
the U.S. Treasury, and the IRS are allowing illegal immigrants the
ability to sign up for credit cards, mortgages, taxpayer identification
numbers, and to transfer money back to their country.
It is a problem, and there is a solution. H.R. 1314 is a piece of
legislation I have filed. It is bipartisan legislation with over 50
cosponsors. The Photo ID Security Act will close the loophole that
illegal immigrants are using to obtain valid financial service
information and access to these services. What it will do is change the
identification that is required, requiring them to present a photo ID
issued from their home country or the U.S. Everyone in the U.S. can
legally obtain these documents.
I encourage all Members to cosponsor H.R. 1314.
____________________
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair announces that the Speaker's
appointment of the remaining 19 members of the Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence on January 17, 2007, without objection, is
made notwithstanding the requirement of clause 11(a)(1)(C) of rule X.
There was no objection.
____________________
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Chair
will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules
on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered, or on which
the vote is objected to under clause 6 of rule XX.
Record votes on postponed questions will be taken after 6:30 p.m.
today.
____________________
CLIFFORD DAVIS/ODELL HORTON FEDERAL BUILDING
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 753) to redesignate the Federal building located at 167 North
Main Street in Memphis, Tennessee, as the ``Clifford Davis/Odell Horton
Federal Building,'' as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
[[Page 7629]]
H.R. 753
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION.
The Federal building located at 167 North Main Street in
Memphis, Tennessee, commonly known as the Clifford Davis
Federal Building, shall be known and designated as the
``Clifford Davis and Odell Horton Federal Building''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES.
Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,
or other record of the United States to the Federal building
referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to
the ``Clifford Davis and Odell Horton Federal Building''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Tennessee (Mr. Cohen) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I am joined in H.R. 753 by the entire
Tennessee delegation, and I am joined in a companion bill with its
authorship/sponsorship of each of our Senators, Lamar Alexander and Bob
Corker.
General Leave
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on H.R. 753.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Tennessee?
There was no objection.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
H.R. 753, sponsored by the entire Tennessee delegation of both the
House and the Senate, is to designate the Federal building in Memphis,
Tennessee, located at 167 North Main Street as the Clifford Davis and
Odell Horton Federal Building.
Judge Odell Horton was appointed to the United States District Court
for the Western District of Tennessee by President Jimmy Carter on May
12, 1980. He was brought to the attention of President Carter by then-
Senator Jim Sasser and through a proposal by Lieutenant Governor John
Wilder who represented the district that Judge Horton grew up in
Bolivar, Tennessee.
Judge Horton in 1980 was the first African American Federal judge
appointed to the bench in Tennessee since Reconstruction. He has many
firsts as an African American, but he has more regard simply as an
outstanding jurist, attorney, soldier and human being.
He was born May 13, 1929, in Bolivar, Tennessee, and grew up during
the Depression and the Second World War. His father was a laborer and
his mother took in laundry. The children, four boys and a girl, picked
cotton, stacked lumber, and took other odd jobs to make ends meet.
Judge Horton graduated from Bolivar High School in 1946 and enlisted
in the Marine Corps ``as a vehicle to find a way out of Bolivar.''
After an early discharge, he enrolled in Morehouse College in Atlanta,
Georgia, using Federal aid under the GI bill to finance his tuition.
The Korean War was under way by the time he graduated in 1951, and he
returned for a second tour with the Marines. After a second tour,
during which he graduated from the U.S. Navy School of Journalism,
Horton entered Howard University Law School in Washington, DC. He
received his degree from Howard in 1956, then moved to Memphis to begin
private practice in a one-room office upstairs at 145 Beale Street in
Memphis, the legendary Beale Street in Memphis.
He served in private practice for 5 years from 1957 until 1962 and
then was appointed Assistant U.S. Attorney in Memphis. After being
Assistant U.S. Attorney, he served in other capacities. First of all,
during Mayor Henry Lobe's city administration, he was the first African
American member of that administration, head of health and hospitals.
That was a tumultuous time in Memphis' history. During that time, Dr.
King was killed in Memphis on April 4, 1968, and we will observe that
tragedy soon in Memphis. But Judge Horton, as an African American, had
a difficult task. As such, he ordered the desegregation of the Bowld
Hospital which was the public hospital. That was a great thing that he
did in bringing Memphis forward.
A year after he did that in 1968, he received the L.M. Graves
Memorial Health Award for his efforts to advance the cause of health
care in Memphis. He later became a criminal court judge appointed by
then-Governor Buford Ellington. After serving on the criminal court
bench, he went on to serve as president of LeMoyne-Owen College, an
historically black college in Memphis, a liberal arts school where he
served for 4 years from 1970 to 1974.
In 1974, Judge Horton ran for Shelby County district attorney
general. Although he lost by just about 4,000 votes, he came very
close, and it was a historic election that set a precedent for other
individuals running for office and being elected on their merits and
not based on their race. He received over 23 percent of the Caucasian
vote, which was unheard of at the time, and it showed the respect that
he had from all sections of the community.
He returned to Federal service after being at LeMoyne-Owen and after
having unsuccessfully sought the DA's job as reporter for the Speedy
Trial Act Implementation Committee by the Western District Court. After
that, he served as a U.S. bankruptcy judge from 1976 to 1980. Then he
received the appointment from President Carter. Then from January 1,
1987, until December 31, 1993, he served as the chief judge for the
Western District of Tennessee. On May 16, 1995, he took senior judge
status, and 2 years later closed his Memphis office.
He is remembered in Memphis as a calm and patient judge who carefully
and deliberately explained legal concepts to jurors. He was a model for
judges because of his judicial temperament and set a standard in such
regards. Judge Horton and his wife, Evie Randolf, were married for over
50 years and have two sons, Odell Horton, Jr., and Christopher, who
graduated from his alma mater, Morehouse College in Atlanta. Judge
Horton's widow spoke for so many in his profession and personal life
when she stated after his death, ``He was a rare and precious jewel in
the crown of humanity and made all of our lives richer and better
because he passed this way.'' Indeed, Mrs. Horton was correct.
Judge Horton received many honors for his work from different bar
associations and institutions. He was a member of the American Bar
Association and Chair of the National Conference of Federal Trial
Judges. He served as a member of the Judicial Conference Committee on
Defender Services, and Morehouse College awarded him an honorary degree
of Doctor of Laws.
In the year 2000, the Memphis Bar Association awarded Judge Horton
with a Public Service Award. He died February 22, 2006. In honor of
Judge Horton's significant contributions to the legal community in
Memphis and his pioneering career, it is both fitting and proper to
designate the courthouse located at 167 North Main Street in Memphis as
the Clifford Davis and Odell Horton Federal Building.
As Senator Alexander mentioned on the Senate floor, it is appropriate
that this building have both the names of Judge Horton, a great pioneer
of the latter half of the 20th century, and Clifford Davis, who was
part of the first half of the 20th century, served as United States
Congressman from 1940 to 1965. It shows a continuum of history, a
growth of history, and history is a process. The naming of this
building for Judge Horton as well as former Congressman Clifford Davis
shows progress in Memphis, progress in race relations, and progress
among human beings.
Accordingly, I ask for unanimous passage of the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
H.R. 753, as amended, designates the Clifford Davis Federal Building
in Memphis, Tennessee, as the Clifford Davis and Odell Horton Federal
Building. The bill honors Judge Horton's dedication to public service.
After service in the United States Marines during the Korean War and
acquiring a law degree from Howard University, Judge Horton engaged in
the
[[Page 7630]]
private practice of law from 1957 until 1962.
{time} 1415
His career included serving as an Assistant United States Attorney in
Memphis, an appointment to the Shelby County Criminal Court, and
serving as the President of LeMoyne-Owen College.
Judge Horton was appointed to the United States District Court for
the Western District of Tennessee by President Carter in 1980. He
served as its chief judge from 1987 to 1993 and became a senior judge
on May 16, 1995. Two years later, he retired from the Federal bench;
and, sadly, Judge Horton passed away last year on February 22.
I support this legislation and encourage our colleagues to do the
same.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 753, a
bill to re-designate the Federal building located at 167 North Main
Street in Memphis, Tennessee, as the ``Clifford Davis and Odell Horton
Federal Building''.
Odell Horton was appointed to the United States District Court for
the Western District of Tennessee by President Jimmy Carter on May 12,
1980. He was the first African-American Federal Judge appointed in
Tennessee since Reconstruction.
Judge Horton was born in Boliver, Tennessee. He grew up during the
Depression and World War II in an environment he described as
``typically rural Southern and typically segregated, with all the
attendant consequences of that.'' He was the oldest of five children to
hard-working parents. During his childhood, he and his brothers and
sister picked cotton to help support the family.
Horton graduated from high school in 1946 and enlisted in the Marine
Corps ``as a vehicle to find a way out of Bolivar.'' Ten months later,
he took advantage of an early discharge program designed to reduce the
number of men in the military, and enrolled in Morehouse College in
Atlanta, Georgia, using Federal aid under the GI bill to finance his
tuition. The Korean War was underway by the time he graduated in 1951,
and he returned for a second tour of duty in the Marines.
During his second tour, he graduated from the U.S. Navy School of
Journalism. After returning home, Horton entered Howard University Law
School in Washington, DC. He received his law degree in 1956 and moved
to Memphis, Tennessee, where he started a private law practice.
In 1962, Horton became Assistant United States Attorney in Memphis.
He remained in that position until his appointment to the Shelby County
Criminal Court by Governor Buford Ellington. In 1968, Judge Horton
ordered the desegregation of Bowld Hospital. A year later, he received
the L.M. Graves Memorial Health Award for his efforts to advance the
cause of health care in Memphis. Judge Horton stepped down from his
Federal judgeship to serve as President of LeMayne-Owen College, a
predominately African-American liberal arts college.
He returned to Federal service upon his appointment as reporter for
the Speedy Trial Act Implementation Committee by the Western District
Court of Tennessee. He later served as U.S. Bankruptcy Judge from 1976
to 1980. Judge Horton also served as Chief Judge for the Western
District of Tennessee from January 1, 1987, until December 31, 1993. On
May 16, 1995, he took senior status and retired two years later.
Judge Horton was a member of the American Bar Association and Chair
of the National Conference of Federal Trial Judges. He also served as a
member of the Judicial Conference Committee on Defender Services.
Morehouse College honored him with an Honorary Degree of Doctor of
Laws. In 2000, the Memphis Bar Association awarded Judge Horton with a
Public Service Award.
Judge Horton died February 22, 2006, at Baptist Memorial Hospital in
Memphis, Tennessee, and was buried in Elmwood Cemetery in Memphis.
In honor of Judge Horton's outstanding contributions to the legal
community in Memphis and his exemplary professional career, it is both
fitting and proper to designate the courthouse located on 167 North
Main Street in Memphis, Tennessee, as the ``Clifford Davis and Odell
Horton Federal Building''.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 753, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
The title was amended so as to read: ``A bill to redesignate the
Federal building located at 167 North Main Street in Memphis,
Tennessee, as the ``Clifford Davis and Odell Horton Federal
Building'.''.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
RAFAEL MARTINEZ NADAL UNITED STATES CUSTOMHOUSE BUILDING
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 1019) to designate the United States Customhouse Building located
at 31 Gonzalez Clemente Avenue in Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, as the
``Rafael Martinez Nadal United States Customhouse Building''.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 1019
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.
The United States customhouse building located at 31
Gonzalez Clemente Avenue in Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, shall be
known and designated as the ``Rafael Martinez Nadal United
States Customhouse Building''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES.
Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,
or other record of the United States to the United States
customhouse building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed
to be a reference to the ``Rafael Martinez Nadal United
States Customhouse Building''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Tennessee (Mr. Cohen) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.
General Leave
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on H.R. 1019.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Tennessee?
There was no objection.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1019 is a bill to designate the United States
Customhouse Building located at 31 Gonzalez Clemente Avenue in
Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, as the Rafael Martinez Nadal United States
Customhouse Building.
Although Don Rafael Martinez Nadal was born in the city of Mayaguez
on April 22, 1877, he resided and passed away in Guaynabo. He received
his college degree in philosophy and letters from the Provincial
Institute of Secondary Education in San Juan. At 16, he was sent to
Barcelona, Spain, to study law.
In August, 1904, he returned to Mayaguez and began to study coffee
growing agriculture. Simultaneously, he began his first successful
attempts in the media and politics with the Puerto Rican Republican
Party. In 1908, he founded the political newspaper El Combate. In 1912,
he obtained his law degree and became one of the most prominent men in
the Puerto Rican political arena. He was considered one of the most
famous criminal lawyers of the time.
In 1914, he was elected as a member of the Chamber of Delegates for
the city of Ponce by the Puerto Rican Republican Party. In 1920, he was
chosen by the same party to serve in the Senate and was re-elected in
the next five general elections. When the alliance of the Union of
Puerto Rico Party and the Puerto Rican Republican Party formed in 1924,
Nadal left the Republican Party and initiated a political movement
called the Pure Republican Party, which registered officially as the
Historical Constitutional Party.
Later, he founded the Republican Union, working to advance the ideal
of statehood for Puerto Rico. In coalition with the Socialist Party,
the Republican Union triumphed in the general elections of 1932 and
1936. In both terms, Nadal presided over the Senate.
[[Page 7631]]
Before the election of 1940, because of a serious illness, he returned
to his Guaynabo residence. He died there on July 6, 1941.
In honor of Rafael Martinez Nadal's outstanding contributions to the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and his exemplary professional writing
career, it is both fitting and proper to designate the courthouse
located at 31 Gonzalez Clemente Avenue in Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, as the
``Rafael Martinez Nadal United States Customhouse Building.''
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1019, introduced by my friend and colleague,
Congressman Fortuno of Puerto Rico, designates the United States
Customhouse Building located at 31 Gonzalez Clemente Avenue in
Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, as the ``Rafael Martinez Nadal United States
Customhouse Building.'' This bill honors Rafael Martinez Nadal's
contributions to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
Rafael Martinez Nadal was born in the city of Mayaguez on April 22,
1877. In 1912, he became a lawyer and entered the Puerto Rican
political arena. He was considered one of the most famous criminal
lawyers in Puerto Rico at that time.
In 1914, Rafael Martinez Nadal was elected to Puerto Rico's House of
Representatives for the District of Ponce. In 1920, he was elected to
Puerto Rico's Senate, where he served as its President from 1932 to
1940.
Rafael Martinez Nadal was a strong defender of statehood in Puerto
Rico and has been described as a political leader, a writer, a
successful businessman, a brilliant orator and a distinguished lawyer.
He passed away in July of 1941.
I support this legislation, congratulate my friend Congressman
Fortuno, and urge our colleagues to do the same.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1019, a
bill to designate the United States customhouse building located at 31
Gonzalez Clemente Avenue in Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, as the ``Rafael
Martinez Nadal United States Customhouse Building''.
Don Rafael Martinez Nadal was born in the city of Mayaguez on April
22, 1877. He received his college degree in Philosophy and Letters from
the Provincial Institute of Secondary Education in San Juan.
He pursued studies in Barcelona, Spain, and Paris, France. He
returned to Mayaguez in 1904 and began studying the cultivation of
coffee. Simultaneously, he pursued his interest in media and politics
and joined the Puerto Rican Republican Party. In 1908, he founded the
political newspaper El Combate. In 1912, he obtained his law degree,
and became one of the most prominent men of the Puerto Rican political
arena. He was considered one of the most famous criminal lawyers in
Puerto Rico of his time.
In 1914, he was elected as a member of the Chamber of Delegates for
the city of Ponce by the Puerto Rican Republican Party. In 1920, he was
chosen by the same party to serve in the Senate and was re-elected in
the next five general elections. Nadal left the Puerto Rican Republican
Party and launched a political movement that became known as the
Historical Constitutional Party. Later, he founded the Republican
Union, working to advance the cause of Puerto Rican statehood. In
coalition with the Socialist Party, the Republican Union triumphed in
the general elections of 1932 and 1936. In both terms, Martinez Nadal
presided over the Senate. Before the election of 1940, because of a
serious illness, he returned to his Guaynabo residence. He died on July
6, 1941.
In honor of Rafael Martinez Nadal's outstanding contributions to the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, it is both fitting and proper to designate
the courthouse located at 31 Gonzalez Clemente Avenue in Mayaguez,
Puerto Rico, as the ``Rafael Martinez Nadal United States Customhouse
Building''.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, if the majority has no additional
speakers, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be here on this bipartisan
Federal customs building, and I yield back my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 1019.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
J. HERBERT W. SMALL FEDERAL BUILDING AND UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 1138) to designate the Federal building and United States
courthouse located at 306 East Main Street in Elizabeth City, North
Carolina, as the ``J. Herbert W. Small Federal Building and United
States Courthouse''.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 1138
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.
The Federal building and United States courthouse located
at 306 East Main Street in Elizabeth City, North Carolina,
shall be known and designated as the ``J. Herbert W. Small
Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES.
Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,
or other record of the United States to the Federal building
and United States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall
be deemed to be a reference to the ``J. Herbert W. Small
Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Tennessee (Mr. Cohen) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.
General Leave
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on H.R. 1138.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Tennessee?
There was no objection.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1138 is a bill to designate the Federal building
and United States courthouse located at 306 East Main Street, Elizabeth
City, North Carolina, as the J. Herbert W. Small Federal Building and
United States Courthouse.
J. Herbert W. Small, a lifelong resident of Elizabeth City, North
Carolina, is a graduate of the University of Virginia Engineering
School and the University of North Carolina Law School. He began the
practice of law in 1949 and continued in his chosen field for over five
decades. During his professional career, he was a member of the First
Judicial District Bar Association, the American Bar Association and the
North Carolina Bar Association.
In 1974, Judge Small was elected judge of Superior Court of the First
Judicial District and served as Senior Resident Judge for 17 years.
Judge Small is an active volunteer, serving on the Board of Directors
of the Albemarle Hospital and the American Red Cross. He has received
numerous awards and honors from the Jaycees, Boy Scouts, Volunteer
Firemen, Chamber of Commerce, and the Rotary and Elks clubs. Further,
Judge Small, a World War II veteran, served in the United States Navy
for 3 years.
Judge Small is an outstanding jurist, civic leader, mentor and
volunteer. I support this bill and urge its passage.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1138 designates the Federal building and United
States courthouse located at 306 East Main Street in Elizabeth City,
North Carolina, as the J. Herbert W. Small Federal Building and United
States Courthouse. The bill honors Judge Small's service to the legal
profession.
Judge Small served in the United States Navy during the Second World
War and received a law degree from the University of North Carolina Law
[[Page 7632]]
School at Chapel Hill. He began the practice of law in 1949 and
practiced for over five decades.
His career included serving on the Congressional Committee on
Intergovernmental Relations, as county attorney for Pasquotank County,
and as judge of the Superior Court of the First Judicial District.
Judge Small served as Senior Resident Judge for 17 years.
I support this legislation and encourage my colleagues to do the
same.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
honorable gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Butterfield), the sponsor
of the bill.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Speaker, let me first thank the gentleman from
Tennessee for yielding the time to me to speak to this very important
piece of legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor an outstanding jurist and
community leader by seeking to name the Federal building in Elizabeth
City, North Carolina, as the J. Herbert Small Federal Building and
United States Courthouse.
I want to thank my good friend, Chairman Oberstar, and Ranking Member
Mica for their outstanding leadership in quickly moving this
legislation through their committee. I would also like to thank each
member of the entire North Carolina delegation, Democrat and
Republican, for their collective support of this important bill.
Mr. Speaker, J. Herbert Small is a lifelong resident of Elizabeth
City, North Carolina. He has devoted 52 long years of his professional
life to the practice of law and to the administration of justice in
eastern North Carolina.
Herb Small began his law practice in Elizabeth City in 1949 after
graduating from the School of Law at the University of North Carolina
at Chapel Hill. He served as Special Counsel to the Congressional
Committee on Intergovernmental Relations and later served 8 years as
county attorney for the County of Pasquotank.
He was elected as district attorney for the First Judicial District
of North Carolina for three consecutive terms. During his tenure, he
served as chairman of the District Attorneys Advisory Committee, was
President of the District Attorneys Association and was appointed by
the Governor to the Jail Study Commission.
It was when Mr. Small was a district attorney that our paths first
met. As a young lawyer, I opposed him in the courtroom on several
occasions. He was a strong and effective district attorney.
In 1979, Herb Small was elected as Resident Superior Court Judge for
the First Judicial District of North Carolina. He served in this
capacity for 17 years. He was honored by his peers when he was elected
President of the North Carolina Conference of Superior Court Judges.
During this time, he represented the conference on the North Carolina
Policy and Sentencing Commission.
In the early days of Judge Small's service as a trial judge, I
appeared before him as a lawyer, representing both civil and criminal
clients. He was a firm but fair judge, treating everyone who came
before his court with respect.
And then Mr. Speaker, I had the privilege of being able to call Judge
Small my judicial colleague. When I was elected as a Superior Court
Judge in 1988, Judge Small had preceded me to the bench by several
years. He welcomed me among the ranks of Superior Court Judges, and our
friendship continued to evolve.
Mr. Speaker, Herb Small is a legal scholar; and our courts benefited
in so many ways because of his intellect.
Now, I am very proud to call Judge Small a constituent. He is
retired. He is happily retired, living in Elizabeth City, North
Carolina, which is one of my 23 communities in my congressional
district. Herb Small is a trusted friend and a good adviser.
Judge Small served as chairman of the Albemarle Hospital Board of
Directors and as Chairman of the American Red Cross Chapter. He has
been actively engaged in other civic and charitable and service
organizations, including the Jaycees and the Boy Scouts and Volunteer
Firemen, Chamber of Commerce and the Rotary Club and the Elks Club and
the Red Men and so on. He was given the Distinguished Service Award by
the Jaycees, the Volunteer of the Year Award by the Chamber of
Commerce, and the Order of the Long Leaf Pine by the State of North
Carolina for outstanding community involvement.
Very importantly, Mr. Speaker, during World War II, Judge Small
served 3 years in the United States Navy; and our country is proud of
and thanks him for his service.
Judge Small has been married to a wonderful individual, Mrs. Annette
Ward Small, for many years. They have four children, Elizabeth, John
Herbert, Fran and Carol; and they have nine grandchildren, Rachel,
Matthew, John, Mary, Margaret, Ruth, Allison Katie, and Chris.
{time} 1430
Mr. Speaker, I can think of no finer individual and no person who is
more deserving of this high honor than Judge J. Herbert Small. I can
assure you that Judge Small is humbled and honored by this recognition.
The people of Elizabeth City and the First Congressional District of
North Carolina are grateful for his community service, for his
dedication, and his great and extraordinary leadership.
I thank the gentleman from Maryland for yielding me time, and I thank
the gentleman from Ohio for his work on this matter.
I urge my colleagues today to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 1138.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I might
consume to congratulate the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr.
Butterfield) for his legislation today and also to advise my friend
from Tennessee I have no further speakers and if he is in the same
position, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. COHEN. I join in congratulating the gentleman from North
Carolina.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speak, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1138, a
bill to designate the Federal building and United States courthouse
located at 306 East Main Street, in Elizabeth City, North Carolina, as
the ``J. Herbert W. Small Federal Building and United States
Courthouse''.
J. Herbert W. Small is a life-long resident of Elizabeth City, North
Carolina. He is a graduate of the University of Virginia Engineering
School, and the University of North Carolina Law School at Chapel Hill.
He began practicing law in 1949 and continued in his chosen field for
more than five decades. During his professional career, he was a member
of the First Judicial District Bar Association, the American Bar
Association, and the North Carolina Bar Association.
He began his career as Special Counsel to the Congressional Committee
on Intergovernmental Relations. Judge Small later served as County
Attorney for Pasquotank County. In 1979, Judge Small was elected Judge
of Superior Court of the First Judicial District and served as senior
resident judge for 17 years. Judge Small is an active volunteer,
serving on the Board of Director of the Albemarle Hospital and the
American Red Cross. He has received numerous awards and honors from the
Jaycees, the Boy Scouts, the Volunteer Fireman, the Chamber of
Commerce, and the Rotary and Elks clubs. Further, Judge Small was a
World War II veteran and served in the U.S. Navy for three years.
Judge Small is an outstanding mentor and volunteer. For more than
five decades, he has been an exceptional jurist and civic leader. It is
fitting and proper to honor his outstanding contributions with this
designation.
I urge my colleagues to support the bill.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 1138.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
[[Page 7633]]
____________________
MARITIME POLLUTION PREVENTION ACT OF 2007
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 802) to amend the Act to Prevent Pollution from ships to
implement MARPOL Annex VI, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 802
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Maritime Pollution
Prevention Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES.
Wherever in this Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in
terms of an amendment to or a repeal of a section or other
provision, the reference shall be considered to be made to a
section or other provision of the Act to Prevent Pollution
from Ships (33 U.S.C. 1901 et seq.).
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
Section 2(a) (33 U.S.C. 1901(a)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating the paragraphs (1) through (12) as
paragraphs (2) through (13), respectively;
(2) by inserting before paragraph (2) (as so redesignated)
the following:
``(1) `Administrator' means the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency.'';
(3) in paragraph (5) (as so redesignated) by striking ``and
V'' and inserting ``V, and VI'';
(4) in paragraph (6) (as so redesignated) by striking
```discharge' and `garbage' and `harmful substance' and
`incident''' and inserting ```discharge', `emission',
`garbage', `harmful substance', and `incident'''; and
(5) by redesignating paragraphs (7) through (13) (as
redesignated) as paragraphs (8) through (14), respectively,
and inserting after paragraph (6) (as redesignated) the
following:
``(7) `navigable waters' includes the territorial sea of
the United States (as defined in Presidential Proclamation
5928 of December 27, 1988) and the internal waters of the
United States;''.
SEC. 4. APPLICABILITY.
Section 3 (33 U.S.C. 1902) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (3);
(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (4) and
inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) with respect to Annex VI to the Convention, and other
than with respect to a ship referred to in paragraph (1)--
``(A) to a ship that is in a port, shipyard, offshore
terminal, or the internal waters of the United States;
``(B) to a ship that is bound for, or departing from, a
port, shipyard, offshore terminal, or the internal waters of
the United States, and is in--
``(i) the navigable waters of the United States;
``(ii) an emission control area designated pursuant to
section 4; or
``(iii) any other area that the Administrator, in
consultation with the Secretary and each State in which any
part of the area is located, has designated by order as being
an area from which emissions from ships are of concern with
respect to protection of public health, welfare, or the
environment;
``(C) to a ship that is entitled to fly the flag of, or
operating under the authority of, a party to Annex VI, and is
in--
``(i) the navigable waters of the United States;
``(ii) an emission control area designated under section 4;
or
``(iii) any other area that the Administrator, in
consultation with the Secretary and each State in which any
part of the area is located, has designated by order as being
an area from which emissions from ships are of concern with
respect to protection of public health, welfare, or the
environment; and
``(D) to the extent consistent with international law, to
any other ship that is in--
``(i) the exclusive economic zone of the United States;
``(ii) the navigable waters of the United States;
``(iii) an emission control area designated under section
4; or
``(iv) any other area that the Administrator, in
consultation with the Secretary and each State in which any
part of the area is located, has designated by order as being
an area from which emissions from ships are of concern with
respect to protection of public health, welfare, or the
environment.'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1) by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and
inserting ``paragraphs (2) and (3)''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) With respect to Annex VI the Administrator, or the
Secretary, as relevant to their authorities pursuant to this
Act, may determine that some or all of the requirements under
this Act shall apply to one or more classes of public
vessels, except that such a determination by the
Administrator shall have no effect unless the head of the
Department or agency under which the vessels operate concurs
in the determination. This paragraph does not apply during
time of war or during a declared national emergency.'';
(3) by redesignating subsections (c) through (g) as
subsections (d) through (h), respectively, and inserting
after subsection (b) the following:
``(c) Application to Other Persons.--This Act shall apply
to all persons to the extent necessary to ensure compliance
with Annex VI to the Convention.''; and
(4) in subsection (e), as redesignated--
(A) by inserting ``or the Administrator, consistent with
section 4 of this Act,'' after ``Secretary'';
(B) by striking ``of section (3)'' and inserting ``of this
section''; and
(C) by striking ``Protocol, including regulations
conforming to and giving effect to the requirements of Annex
V'' and inserting ``Protocol (or the applicable Annex),
including regulations conforming to and giving effect to the
requirements of Annex V and Annex VI''.
SEC. 5. ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT.
Section 4 (33 U.S.C. 1903) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections
(c) and (d), respectively, and inserting after subsection (a)
the following:
``(b) Duty of the Administrator.--In addition to other
duties specified in this Act, the Administrator and the
Secretary, respectively, shall have the following duties and
authorities:
``(1) The Administrator shall, and no other person may,
issue Engine International Air Pollution Prevention
certificates in accordance with Annex VI and the
International Maritime Organization's Technical Code on
Control of Emissions of Nitrogen Oxides from Marine Diesel
Engines, on behalf of the United States for a vessel of the
United States as that term is defined in section 116 of title
46, United States Code. The issuance of Engine International
Air Pollution Prevention certificates shall be consistent
with any applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act or
regulations prescribed under that Act.
``(2) The Administrator shall have authority to administer
regulations 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 of Annex VI to
the Convention.
``(3) The Administrator shall, only as specified in section
8(f), have authority to enforce Annex VI of the
Convention.'';
(2) in subsection (c), as redesignated, by redesignating
paragraph (2) as paragraph (4), and inserting after paragraph
(1) the following:
``(2) In addition to the authority the Secretary has to
prescribe regulations under this Act, the Administrator shall
also prescribe any necessary or desired regulations to carry
out the provisions of regulations 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18,
and 19 of Annex VI to the Convention.
``(3) In prescribing any regulations under this section,
the Secretary and the Administrator shall consult with each
other, and with respect to regulation 19, with the Secretary
of the Interior.''; and
(3) by adding at the end of subsection (c), as
redesignated, the following:
``(5) No standard issued by any person or Federal
authority, with respect to emissions from tank vessels
subject to regulation 15 of Annex VI to the Convention, shall
be effective until 6 months after the required notification
to the International Maritime Organization by the
Secretary.''.
SEC. 6. CERTIFICATES.
Section 5 (33 U.S.C. 1904) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) by striking ``The Secretary'' and
inserting ``Except as provided in section 4(b)(1), the
Secretary'';
(2) in subsection (b) by striking ``Secretary under the
authority of the MARPOL protocol.'' and inserting ``Secretary
or the Administrator under the authority of this Act.''; and
(3) in subsection (e) by striking ``environment.'' and
inserting ``environment or the public health and welfare.''.
SEC. 7. RECEPTION FACILITIES.
Section 6 (33 U.S.C. 1905) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) The Secretary and the Administrator, after consulting
with appropriate Federal agencies, shall jointly prescribe
regulations setting criteria for determining the adequacy of
reception facilities for receiving ozone depleting
substances, equipment containing such substances, and exhaust
gas cleaning residues at a port or terminal, and stating any
additional measures and requirements as are appropriate to
ensure such adequacy. Persons in charge of ports and
terminals shall provide reception facilities, or ensure that
reception facilities are available, in accordance with those
regulations. The Secretary and the Administrator may jointly
prescribe regulations to certify, and may issue certificates
to the effect, that a port's or terminal's facilities for
receiving ozone depleting substances, equipment containing
such substances, and exhaust gas cleaning residues from ships
are adequate.'';
(2) in subsection (b) by inserting ``or the Administrator''
after ``Secretary'';
(3) in subsection (e) by striking paragraph (2) and
inserting the following:
``(2) The Secretary may deny the entry of a ship to a port
or terminal required by the MARPOL Protocol, this Act, or
regulations prescribed under this section relating to the
provision of adequate reception facilities for garbage, ozone
depleting substances, equipment containing those substances,
or exhaust gas cleaning residues, if the port or
[[Page 7634]]
terminal is not in compliance with the MARPOL Protocol, this
Act, or those regulations.'';
(4) in subsection (f)(1) by striking ``Secretary is'' and
inserting ``Secretary and the Administrator are''; and
(5) in subsection (f)(2) by striking ``(A)''.
SEC. 8. INSPECTIONS.
Section 8(f) (33 U.S.C. 1907(f)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(f)(1) The Secretary may inspect a ship to which this Act
applies as provided under section 3(a)(5), to verify whether
the ship is in compliance with Annex VI to the Convention and
this Act.
``(2) If an inspection under this subsection or any other
information indicates that a violation has occurred, the
Secretary, or the Administrator in a matter referred by the
Secretary, may undertake enforcement action under this
section.
``(3) Notwithstanding subsection (b) and paragraph (2) of
this subsection, the Administrator shall have all of the
authorities of the Secretary, as specified in subsection (b)
of this section, for the purposes of enforcing regulations 17
and 18 of Annex VI to the Convention to the extent that
shoreside violations are the subject of the action and in any
other matter referred to the Administrator by the
Secretary.''.
SEC. 9. AMENDMENTS TO THE PROTOCOL.
Section 10(b) (33 U.S.C. 1909(b)) is amended by inserting
``or the Administrator as provided for in this Act,'' after
``Secretary,''.
SEC. 10. PENALTIES.
Section 9 (33 U.S.C. 1908) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Protocol,,'' each place it appears and
inserting ``Protocol,'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by inserting ``, or the Administrator as provided for
in this Act'' after ``Secretary'' the first place it appears;
(B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``, or the Administrator
as provided for in this Act,'' after ``Secretary''; and
(C) in the matter after paragraph (2)--
(i) by inserting ``, or the Administrator as provided for
in this Act'' after ``Secretary'' the first place it appears;
and
(ii) by inserting ``, or the Administrator as provided for
in this Act,'' after ``Secretary'' the second and third
places it appears;
(3) in subsection (c), by inserting ``, or the
Administrator as provided for in this Act,'' after
``Secretary'' each place it appears; and
(4) in subsection (f), by inserting ``, or the
Administrator as provided for in this Act'' after
``Secretary'' the first place appears.
SEC. 11. EFFECT ON OTHER LAWS.
Section 15 (33 U.S.C. 1911) is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 15. EFFECT ON OTHER LAWS.
``Authorities, requirements, and remedies of this Act
supplement and neither amend nor repeal any other
authorities, requirements, or remedies conferred by any other
provision of law. Nothing in this Act shall limit, deny,
amend, modify, or repeal any other authority, requirement, or
remedy available to the United States or any other person,
except as expressly provided in this Act.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Cummings) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
As the chairman of the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation
Subcommittee, I am pleased that the first piece of maritime legislation
to be brought to the floor by the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure is a bill that will enable us to combat pollution
emitted by ships.
The Maritime Pollution Prevention Act of 2007, H.R. 802, would
institute the legal changes needed to bring the United States into
compliance with the International Convention for the Prevention of
Pollution from Ships, the MARPOL Convention Annex VI.
MARPOL Annex VI limits the emissions from ships of sulfur oxide and
nitrogen oxide, which are ozone-depleting substances. The Annex VI
treaty was ratified by the Senate in April 2006 and came into force
internationally in May of 2006.
According to the United States Department of Transportation, ocean-
going ships transport 80 percent by weight of all goods and services
moved into and out of the United States. The volume of trade through
U.S. ports is only expected to increase.
In fact, the United States Maritime Administration estimates that the
total volume of trade handled by United States ports will double in the
next 15 years. Unfortunately, the ships on which we rely to carry the
trade that keeps our economy growing release excessive amounts of
pollution.
In fact, according to a very disturbing study released just last week
by the International Council on Clean Transportation, the sulfur oxide
emissions from ocean-going ships may exceed the total amount of such
emissions produced by cars, trucks and buses in the world. Further, the
International Maritime Organization, also known as IMO, estimates that
as much as 80 percent of all ship emissions may be released within 250
miles of shore.
That means that much of the pollution emitted by ships is affecting
the residents of port communities such as my hometown of Baltimore. The
emissions of sulfur oxide from ships are also high because the bunker
fuel used in ships may contain as much as 3 percent sulfur content by
weight, or an astounding 28,000 parts per million of sulfur.
By comparison, the new ultralow sulfur diesel fuel that is mandated
for use in trucks in most of the United States is not allowed to
contain more than 15 parts per million of sulfur. Given the nature of
shipping, it is not possible for any single nation to unilaterally
regulate emissions produced by ships.
Instead, regulations applied to ocean-going vessels are usually
developed through negotiations conducted by IMO, a specialized agency
of the United Nations responsible for developing multinational
conventions regulating international shipping.
The member states of IMO developed the International Convention for
the Prevention of Pollution from Ships treaty, known as MARPOL, which
was adopted in 1973. This groundbreaking convention has already
successfully limited all pollution and pollution from ships' garbage
and sewage. The most recent annex to MARPOL convention, Annex VI, sets
limits on emissions from ships of sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide. This
annex also establishes specific limits on the sulfur content of fuel
oil used in ships.
The measure before us today, H.R. 802, is a bipartisan measure that
would bring United States law into compliance with the requirements of
MARPOL Annex VI. The substitute amendment clarifies that the MARPOL
Annex VI amendments apply only to vessels in the United States'
exclusive economic zone once Annex VI becomes customary maritime law.
The amendment also requires the EPA to consult with a State when
establishing an emission area and requires that regulations regarding
reception facilities be jointly prescribed by the Environmental
Protection Agency and the United States Coast Guard. Through our
participation in Annex VI, the United States will contribute to a
global effort to control a large source of ozone-depleting emissions
that has been virtually unregulated to this point.
Mr. Speaker, our natural resources are our most precious gifts, and
we are merely the stewards of these resources, responsible for
preserving them for generations yet unborn.
When you go into Sea World and Disney World, one of the things the
signs that are written there say, ``We do not inherit our environment
from our parents; we borrow it from our children.''
I applaud Chairman Oberstar for his outstanding leadership on this
issue and for his commitment to implementing measures that will help us
combat the release of emissions from mobile sources that are
contributing to global warming.
I also thank our ranking member, the very distinguished gentleman,
Congressman Mica, and the ranking member of our subcommittee on Coast
Guard and Maritime Transportation, Congressman LaTourette, for their
leadership in helping us to get this very, very important bill to the
floor of the House so that we can send it on to the Senate.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 802, the Maritime Pollution
Prevention Act of 2007. H.R. 802 was introduced by our full committee
chairman, Jim Oberstar, and is similar language that was approved by
voice vote in the House during the last Congress. I say ``similar to''
because there are some
[[Page 7635]]
differences, and we noted those differences at the time of the markup
of this legislation.
I want to thank the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Oberstar, and
I also want to thank the distinguished chairman of our subcommittee,
Mr. Cummings, for working with me and others on my side of the aisle to
address our concerns with the introduced version of the bill.
The bill will implement international requirements for air emissions
from ships for purposes of U.S. law. Under this bill, the Coast Guard
and the Environmental Protection Agency will be required to develop
regulations that establish standards for emissions of ozone-depleting
substances and other pollutants as well as marine fuel oil quality that
are used in U.S. waters. I am happy to see that we are considering this
legislation that will reduce our emissions from vessels operating in
U.S. waters this early in the year.
Again, I want to thank Chairman Oberstar and Chairman Cummings for
working with us to improve the bill. I urge our colleagues to support
this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield to the
distinguished chairman of the Transportation Committee, Mr. Oberstar,
such time as he may consume.
Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I especially want
to thank the chairman of the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime
Affairs for his leadership, absorbing so quickly in such a short period
of time the complexities under the jurisdiction of this subcommittee. I
also would like to express my appreciation to the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. LaTourette) for his partnership and working so diligently to bring
this important legislation to the floor.
Mr. Speaker, this is an international issue. In fact, just moments
ago, just before arriving to the floor, I had a meeting with a
representative of the transportation ministry of the European Union. He
is the deputy in charge of the Transport Ministry of the European
Union, and we were discussing the MARPOL legislation and the need for
international participation and cooperation on these issues.
In fact, the European Transport Ministry has established a new
section dealing with maritime pollution issues which go beyond that of
the subject of this legislation to include pollution at sea from
accidents to maritime vessels, the first most serious of which was the
Torrey Canyon disaster in the English Channel in 1967, which alerted
all of the maritime sector to the need for double-hulled vessels, to
the need for international standards on shipping.
We have moved beyond the water pollution issue, ocean pollution
issue, which continues to be a matter of great concern, to that of air
pollution, which is the subject of this legislation, the discharge of
nitrogen oxides from maritime diesel engines, the sulfur content of
diesel fuel, ozone-depleting substances, volatile organic compounds and
standards for shipboard incinerators, fuel oil quality, platforms for
drill rigs at sea. All of these are the subject of this legislation and
of the International Maritime Pollution Convention.
At the beginning of next week, our committee will travel to Brussels
to meet with members of the European Transport Ministry and members of
the European Parliament Transport Committee to discuss this issue and
other issues including emissions from aircraft at altitude, which are
the subject of the ongoing discussions in the international community
on emissions trading and steps that the international community
together can take to reduce impact on factors that are accelerating
global climate change.
This legislation, in other words, is not just a relatively
noncontroversial matter that we attempted to accomplish in the last
Congress; but for various reasons, we were not able to do so with the
other body. But this is one step in a global issue of international
concern that brings the United States and its maritime partners into
cooperation on matters that involve air quality at sea.
I want to thank the gentleman from Maryland, the chairman of the
subcommittee, for his diligent work, and Mr. LaTourette and Ranking
Member Mica for their participation and working with us to bring this
legislation to the floor. I hope that the other body will cooperate
promptly and move this bill to the President.
We have incorporated recommendations by the administration in this
legislation to accommodate their interests.
{time} 1445
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might
consume for the purposes of engaging in a colloquy with the
distinguished chairman of the subcommittee.
Chairman Cummings, if I could clarify, through this colloquy, the
language that was included in sections 4 and 5.
First, section 4 authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency, in
consultation with the Coast Guard, to designate special areas where
vessels would be required to comply with vessel emission regulations
under Annex VI to the MARPOL Convention. This section also directs the
EPA to consult with a State if such an area is established in an area
that is under the jurisdiction of that State.
Is it the chairman's understanding that the committee does not intend
to require the agencies to consult with a State or to give a State any
authority over a special area that is not wholly established outside of
the three or, in some cases, nine nautical mile belt of waters that
fall within the jurisdiction of a State?
Mr. CUMMINGS. The gentleman is absolutely correct.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the chairman.
Additionally, Mr. Chairman, section 5 of the bill grants the EPA
certain authorities to establish, administer and enforce regulations to
implement MARPOL Annex VI. Is it the chairman's understanding that this
language does not replace or reduce the Coast Guard's parallel
authorities to administer and enforce regulations to implement Annex VI
or other regulations under the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships?
Mr. CUMMINGS. The gentleman is absolutely correct.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the chairman very much for his response. And,
again, my congratulations to both chairmen, the chairman of the full
committee, Mr. Oberstar, and the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr.
Cummings, for bringing this legislation forward. And, again, my thanks
for working with us to make the slight improvements to the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Again, I want to thank Chairman Oberstar and certainly Ranking Member
Mica. But I also thank you very much, Mr. LaTourette, for your
cooperation in moving this bill along.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to Mr. Oberstar.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, although it has been discussed previously
before I reached the Chamber, I just want to be sure to emphasize the
important change to allow EPA to enforce the standards in addition to
the Coast Guard. These are changes requested by the administration. The
Coast Guard acknowledging that EPA has far more experience than does
the Coast Guard on air quality emission standards.
It is important for EPA to develop standards jointly with the Coast
Guard because, on the Coast Guard side, they have more knowledge and
understanding and expertise in vessel safety issues that have to be
incorporated into any air quality emission standards that may be
promulgated.
I want to emphasize this role of EPA, an important step forward, and
I am very pleased the administration was emphatic in asking for an EPA
role, and Coast Guard similarly has been very insistent on including
EPA in this process. I think this will, overall, strengthen the result
of the legislation that we are considering today.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to strongly support H.R. 802, the
``Maritime Pollution Prevention
[[Page 7636]]
Act of 2007''. The gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Cummings, and I
introduced this legislation in February to provide the U.S. Coast Guard
and the Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'') with the legal
authority they need to implement Annex VI of the International
Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships.
Global climate change is a critical issue, not only for the United
States, but for every man, woman, and child that live on this planet
called Earth. The international maritime community has recognized this
problem and developed an international convention to help address air
pollutants from diesel ships.
For many years, the International Maritime Organization, an
organization of the United Nations, has been developing international
standards to prevent pollution from ships that ply the world's oceans.
The international convention is called the International Convention for
the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973. The United States has
implemented these environmental laws by enacting and amending the Act
to Prevent Pollution from Ships (``APPS'').
On May 19, 2005, Annex VI of that Convention came into force
internationally. Annex VI limits the discharge of nitrogen oxides from
large marine diesel engines, governs the sulfur content of marine
diesel fuel, prohibits the emission of ozone-depleting substances,
regulates the emission of volatile organic compounds during the
transfer of cargoes between tankers and terminals, sets standards for
shipboard incinerators and fuel oil quality, and establishes
requirements for platforms and drilling rigs at sea. In April 2006, the
Senate ratified this treaty by unanimous consent.
H.R. 802 is the necessary implementing legislation for Annex VI of
that Convention. This legislation will give the Coast Guard and the
Environmental Protection Agency the authority they need to develop the
U.S. standards and to enforce these requirements on the thousands of
U.S.- and foreign-flag vessels that enter the United States each year
from overseas.
Everyone here recognizes the challenge that the world faces in
combating global climate change. We must pursue all avenues in the
effort to turn around the rising temperatures on this planet. I am
pleased that the International Maritime Organization stepped up to the
plate and developed amendments to the International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships to regulate air pollution from
ships.
Last year, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
reported H.R. 5811, the MARPOL Annex VI Implementation Act of 2006,
favorably to the House. This bill was subsequently added to H.R. 5681,
the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2006, and passed the House on
October 28, 2006.
H.R. 802 is very similar to H.R. 5811, but includes changes to allow
the EPA to enforce the standards, in addition to the Coast Guard. These
changes were requested by the Administration. The Coast Guard
acknowledges that the EPA has far more experience than they do on air
quality emission standards. However, it is important for the EPA to
develop the standards jointly with Coast Guard because of the Coast
Guard's expertise over vessel safety issues.
During Committee consideration of the bill, the Committee adopted an
amendment in the nature of a substitute that clarifies that MARPOL
Annex VI will only apply to vessels in the United State's 200-mile
Exclusive Economic Zone when the Executive Branch determines that
MARPOL Annex VI is customary international law. In addition, the
amendment clarified that MARPOL Annex VI will not apply to public
vessels owned by the U.S. Government until the head of the agency that
operates the vessels agrees with the EPA Administrator that MARPOL VI
should apply to that agency's vessels.
The amendment in the nature of a substitute that the House considers
today further clarifies that the application of MARPOL VI to the U.S.
Exclusive Economic Zone and territorial sea takes effect when it
becomes customary international law; requires EPA to consult with a
State when establishing an emission area; and requires the regulations
regarding reception facilities to be jointly prescribed by EPA and the
Coast Guard.
I would like to take the opportunity to thank our new Chairman of the
Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, Mr. Cummings,
for his help in developing this bill.
I strongly urge my colleagues to support passage of H.R. 802, the
Maritime Pollution Prevention Act of 2007.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 802, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. CUMMINGS. 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 and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this question will
be postponed.
____________________
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
on H.R. 802.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Maryland?
There was no objection.
____________________
SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF PROFESSIONAL SOCIAL WORK MONTH AND
WORLD SOCIAL WORK DAY
Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree
to the resolution (H. Res. 266) supporting the goals and ideals of
Professional Social Work Month and World Social Work Day.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The text of the resolution is as follows:
H. Res. 266
Whereas social workers have the demonstrated education and
experience to guide individuals, families, and communities
through complex issues and choices;
Whereas social workers connect individuals, families, and
communities to available resources;
Whereas social workers are dedicated to improving the
society in which we live;
Whereas social workers are positive and compassionate
professionals;
Whereas social workers stand up for others to make sure
everyone has access to the same basic rights, protections,
and opportunities;
Whereas social workers have been the driving force behind
important social movements in the United States and abroad;
and
Whereas Professional Social Work Month, and World Social
Work Day, which is March 27, 2007, will build awareness of
the role of professional social workers and their commitment
and dedication to individuals, families, and communities
everywhere though service delivery, research, education, and
legislative advocacy: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
(1) supports the goals and ideals of Professional Social
Work Month and World Social Work Day;
(2) acknowledges the diligent efforts of individuals and
groups who promote the importance of social work and who are
observing Professional Social Work Month and World Social
Work Day;
(3) encourages the American people to engage in appropriate
ceremonies and activities to further promote awareness of the
life-changing role of social workers;
(4) recognizes with gratitude the contributions of the
millions of caring individuals who have chosen to serve their
communities through social work; and
(5) encourages young people to seek out educational and
professional opportunities to become social workers.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter) and the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr.
David Davis) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New Hampshire.
General Leave
Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I request 5 legislative days during
which Members may insert material relevant to House Resolution 266 into
the Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from New Hampshire?
There was no objection.
Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to offer House Resolution
266, which honors the dedication and compassion of professional social
workers. Our highest calling as humans is to provide service to others,
especially those less fortunate than ourselves.
[[Page 7637]]
At the turn of the 20th century, thousands of people lived in despair
and poverty, and it was the early progressive moment in which the
social work movement was born, providing food, clothing, health care
and education to the less fortunate.
Social workers had a role in civil rights and in women's freedom.
Today, social workers continue this fight to ensure that vulnerable
families have the support and the health care that they need.
Social workers are everywhere in our society, caring for all of us.
They help people in all stages of life, from children to the elderly,
and in all situations, from adoption to hospice care. You can find
social workers in hospitals, police departments, mental health clinics,
military facilities and corporations.
Professional social workers are the Nation's largest providers of
mental health care services. They provide more mental health services
than psychologists, psychiatrists and psychiatric nurses combined.
More than 600,000 people in the United States hold social work
degrees. The Veterans Administration employs more than 4,400 social
workers to assist veterans and their families with individual and
family counseling, client education, end-of-life planning, substance
abuse treatment, crisis intervention and other services.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DAVID DAVIS of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House
Resolution 266. This resolution would recognize the important work of
our Nation's social workers and support the goals and ideals of
Professional Social Worker Month and World Social Worker Day.
Social work is a profession for those with a strong desire to help
improve people's lives and play a valuable role in the Nation's health
care system. Social workers help people function the best way they can
in their environment, deal with their relationships, and solve personal
and family problems.
Social workers often see clients who face life-threatening disease or
social problems such as inadequate housing, unemployment, a serious
illness, a disability, or substance abuse. Social workers also assist
families that have serious domestic conflicts, sometimes involving a
child or spousal abuse.
For example, child, family and school social workers provide social
services and assistance to improve the social and psychological
functioning of children and their families and to maximize the family
well-being and academic functioning of children. They assist single
parents, arrange adoption, or help find foster homes for neglected,
abandoned or abused children.
In schools, they address problems such as teenage misbehavior and
truancy and advise teachers on how they can cope with problem students.
Social workers also specialize in services for senior citizens, running
support groups for family caregivers or for the adult children of aging
parents, advising elderly people or family members about choices in
areas such as housing, transportation, and long-term care and
coordination and monitoring of these services.
Through employee assistance programs, they may help workers cope with
job-related pressures or with personal problems that affect the quality
of their work.
Medical and public health social workers provide persons, families,
and vulnerable populations with psychosocial support needed to cope
with chronic, acute and terminal illnesses such as Alzheimer's disease
and cancer. They also assess and treat individuals with mental illness
or substance abuse, including abuse of alcohol, tobacco and other
drugs. They also may help plan for supportive services to ease
patients' return into the community.
In my State of Tennessee, we have a long tradition of recognizing the
vital role of social workers. In 2005, the Tennessee legislature, of
which I was honored to serve as a member for many years, passed
important legislation which required social workers to have received a
B.S. or master's degree in social work from an accredited school,
received a doctorate or Ph.D. in social work, or have a specialized
certificate or license from the State.
As a society, we have come to trust that the people using a certain
title have completed specific training to prepare them for their work
in assisting the public. Thanks to this legislation, Tennessee now
ensures that positions requiring the skills and training of
professional social workers are filled with fully qualified
professionals.
In addition, the East Tennessee State University Department of Social
Work has a long and proud history of preparing the majority of social
workers in the region that I represent. In addition to providing high-
quality education to future social workers, the Department hosts a
Social Work Career Day where students, community agencies and
practitioners come together and share educational experience and
information on a career in social work. Students and faculty are also
involved in a number of community based interdisciplinary learning and
service activities.
According to the United States Department of Labor, the need for
additional social workers is expected to increase faster than the
average of all other occupations through the year 2014 due to the
rapidly growing elderly population which is expected to create greater
demand for health and social careers. The growth in social work is
expected to occur most rapidly in home health care services, assisted
living and senior living communities and the school setting. In
addition, there is expected to be a significant need for those social
workers specializing in substance abuse.
Nearly 50 percent of the United States population, age 15 to 54,
report having at least one psychiatric disorder. Both severe and
persistent mental disorders, including addictions, have profound
consequences for individuals, their families and society, affecting
their ability to learn, to grow into healthy adults and to nurture
children, to work and secure housing and to engage in other routines of
living. Recognizing the prevalence of mental disorders and the cost
they exact on our society, social workers provide more than 40 percent
of all mental health services available to Americans, making them an
integral part of our Nation's health care delivery system.
So we stand here to recognize the importance of our Nation's social
workers and support the Professional Social Work Month and World Social
Work Day. We also stand to encourage more young adults to seek out
educational and professional opportunities as social workers where they
can play a positive impact on changing people's lives.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in highlighting the
contributions of social workers and to support House Resolution 266.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1500
Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Today we thank all those who have toiled in the
fields of our community, including my maternal grandmother, who left
the comfort of her home each day at the turn of the century and went to
the Lower East Side to help immigrants. And we praise all of those who
reach out to others every day in their community.
Social workers' service makes our communities stronger. March is
National Professional Work Month, and Tuesday, March 27 is World Social
Work Day. I honor their service and thank them for caring for all of us
each day.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank my colleague Congressman Ciro
Rodriguez for arranging this time on the floor for us to celebrate
World Social Work Day and to acknowledge the contributions of social
workers to the well-being of our society.
I'm proud to say that I'm a social worker and that my predecessor,
former Congressman and now mayor of Oakland, Ron Dellums, was also a
social worker. I believe our records, interests and efforts here in
Congress and outside reflect the influence of our social work
background. This education has helped me to form my principles and has
helped me to fight injustice and inequality, not just here in the U.S.
but also abroad.
[[Page 7638]]
Social workers make a difference in people's lives everyday and at
all levels. They're in the streets working one-on-one with the
homeless. They're in the hospitals and clinics helping people through
their health crises. They're in the schools making our kids safe,
adjusted, and prepared to take on the world. They're advocating for the
rights of our country's most vulnerable citizens--our children, the
elderly, the mentally ill, the poor, and others in our society that may
not have a strong voice. They're fighting for social justice and human
rights internationally and they're creating policies and programs here
in the halls of both the Congress and the Senate that address the needs
of our society.
The hallmark trait of a social worker is their ability to empathize--
their ability and willingness to put themselves in someone else's
place. This is not always an easy thing to do. Many times social
workers encounter people who are in extreme states of crisis. Times
when their lives are feeling out of control. It's no easy feat to step
into someone else's nightmare and help them find the strength to cope,
to problem-solve, and to move forward. But this is what social workers
do on a daily basis.
Nonetheless, there are also times that are incredibly heartening and
rewarding--times that renew your faith in humanity. They are the times
when you see the first trusting smile on the face of a child that came
from the chaos of an abusive home and you feel that connection. They
are the times when you're able to help a family--homeless and
devastated by the ravages of a massive natural disaster. They are times
when the grassroots movement you've been working with is able to
achieve its goal. They're the times when you're able to help a young
man who seemed like he was starting down the path to a life of crime to
find a better road and to make better decisions.
One of the ways that I think I've best used my social work education
has been in the work I have done here in Congress. As a social worker,
I am concerned about the many things that ail our community as a whole.
That is why I have made the fight against AIDS a priority--not just
domestically, but also abroad. We need to stop crimes against humanity,
like the genocide that continues to ravage the Darfur region. I also
believe we need to fully fund No Child Left Behind. Our education
system is failing--No Child Left Behind is failing our children, our
teachers, our parents, and our community as a whole.
Recognizing the importance that social workers bring to our schools,
I'd also like to take this opportunity to thank my colleagues who have
cosponsored H.R. 171, the Student Support Act. I hope more of my
colleagues will consider supporting this legislation, which helps
ensure that our schools have the necessary amount of mental health
professionals at their schools, including school social workers, school
psychologists, counselors and psychiatrists. Almost all States fall
below the recommended guidelines by the American Counseling Association
of 1 counselor for every 250 students. My own State of California has
966 students for every one counselor. So I hope my colleagues can
cosponsor this important act, and maybe we can see this legislation
make some progress here in the House.
Social workers don't just make an impact on our students--social
workers give back to our society by helping to make better citizens of
us all. They strive to help their clients become the best that they can
be, to improve their communities and to confront the injustices that
they see. They foster a new way of looking at the world around you--one
where you see promise and possibility. Social workers help us to
realize a world where mediation, coalition building and effective
communication are used to find peaceful solutions instead of military
posturing.
I'd like to close by saying, I'm grateful to be part of a profession
that is devoted to service to our people and that is so necessary to
our society's well-being. I know that many of my dedicated colleagues
work quietly in the field and that their contributions are not always
given the attention they deserve, so I'm very pleased to be able to
celebrate this day and to publicly acknowledge their contributions.
Thank you again, Congressman Ciro Rodriguez for organizing this
special order, and also thank you to all of my colleagues who were able
to participate tonight.
Mr. DAVID DAVIS of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance
of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter) that the House suspend
the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 266.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Ms. SHEA-PORTER. 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 and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this question will
be postponed.
____________________
DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS DISASTER ELIGIBILITY ACT
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 1468) to ensure that, for each small business participating
in the 8(a) business development program that was affected by Hurricane
Katrina of 2005, the period in which it can participate is extended by
18 months, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 1468
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Disadvantaged Business
Disaster Eligibility Act''.
SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PARTICIPATION TERM FOR VICTIMS OF
HURRICANE KATRINA.
(a) Retroactivity.--If a small business concern, while
participating in any program or activity under the authority
of paragraph (10) of section 7(j) of the Small Business Act
(15 U.S.C. 636(j)), was located in a parish or county
described in subsection (b) and was affected by Hurricane
Katrina of 2005, the period during which the small business
concern is permitted continuing participation and eligibility
in such program or activity shall be extended for an
additional 18 months.
(b) Parishes and Counties Covered.--Subsection (a) applies
to any parish in the State of Louisiana, or any county in the
State of Mississippi or in the State of Alabama, that has
been designated by the Administrator of the Small Business
Administration as a disaster area by reason of Hurricane
Katrina under disaster declaration 10176, 10177, 10178,
10179, 10180, or 10181.
(c) Review and Compliance.--The Administrator of the Small
Business Administration shall ensure that the case of every
small business concern participating before the date of the
enactment of this Act in a program or activity covered by
subsection (a) is reviewed and brought into compliance with
this section.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
New York (Ms. Velazquez) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
General Leave
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from New York?
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, Hurricane Katrina forced evacuation of individuals and
business owners who are only recently recovering and rebuilding.
Clearly, through no fault of their own, these firms have been
disrupted.
A number of these businesses are participants in the SBA's 8(a)
program, the primary way that minority entrepreneurs enter the Federal
marketplace. 8(a) is a business development initiative, and that is
what the companies in the gulf region need right now.
Because of the magnitude of the disaster, these companies need
additional time in the 8(a) program. This will counterbalance the
period of inoperability these firms experienced due to Hurricane
Katrina. And I commend my colleague Mr. Jefferson from Louisiana for
offering this solution.
As currently structured, the program allows businesses to participate
for a limited length of time. They are given 9 years and 9 years only.
Even if the companies fail, they can never reapply and get back in.
In this way 8(a) is different than any other SBA procurement
initiative, which allow companies to be certified for increments of 3
years. As long as they meet the eligibility criteria, they
[[Page 7639]]
can continue being recertified without end.
It is because of this limitation that the 8(a) program is simply not
structured to respond to companies that have been victimized by
disasters.
This bill is targeted and narrow. It applies only to 8(a) program
participants in Alabama, Mississippi, or Louisiana that were impacted
by this disaster. At most, this represents barely 4 percent of all 8(a)
participants. Eighteen months is not a significant amount of time, but
it could play a major role in ensuring that these businesses are able
to participate in the rebuilding of their home States.
I urge support of this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1468, the Disadvantaged
Business Disaster Eligibility Act. This legislation, as the chairwoman
indicated, would simply extend for 18 months the period of time that
8(a) Small Business Development Program participants who enrolled in
the program prior to August 29 of 2005 could stay in the program by 18
months if they had their businesses primarily located in the area
devastated by Hurricane Katrina.
The 8(a) Small Business Development Program, administered by the
Small Business Administration, provides a useful mechanism for aspiring
entrepreneurs and existing small business owners who, for social or
economic reasons, may not have the same opportunities other small
business owners have had and face challenging barriers to their
success.
Entrepreneurs who participate in the 8(a) program undergo an
extensive 9-year process, where they obtain specialized business
training, counseling, marketing assistance, and high-level executive
development. They also receive additional help in the form of low-
interest loans, access to government surplus office equipment, and
bonding assistance.
The Small Business Development Program provides many of the tools
needed for any small business to succeed. Most significantly, the
program assists these entrepreneurs in obtaining Federal Government
contracts as a base from which to grow their businesses. Given the
devastation to the gulf coast region by Hurricane Katrina, access to
Federal Government contracts constitutes an important component of the
region's rebirth, and I think we all agree that we all want to see the
rebirth in that area occur.
Tragically, as every American remembers, the late summer of 2005
proved to be one of the most catastrophic in American history. The 9.7
million Americans residing on the gulf coast of Alabama, Louisiana, and
Mississippi were victims of an unprecedented natural disaster, which,
unfortunately, has become a nightmare that is etched in all our
memories and a daily challenge for those who lived through it.
The storms of 2005 drowned 80 percent of New Orleans in seawater,
killed in excess of 1,600 people, destroyed more than 200,000 gulf
coast homes, and displaced more than 1 million of our fellow Americans.
Starting a new business is challenging under normal circumstances. Only
two-thirds of them make it through their first 2 years. And needless to
say, the devastation along the gulf coast compounds this difficulty
exponentially.
This legislation provides some additional time for those businesses
facing the 9-year participation deadline provided for in the 8(a)
program to get back on their feet. Nothing in the Small Business Act
currently allows for an extension of participation as a result of
extraordinary circumstances such as those created by Hurricane Katrina.
For business owners that may not have had access to their businesses
or their customers for months, the rigidity of the Small Business Act
seems unduly harsh. An additional 18 months of assistance to firms who
face an uphill battle before the storms hit who are now hanging on by a
thread after the storms have passed is truly the least that we can do.
Today I encourage my colleagues to support this necessary
legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Jefferson).
Mr. JEFFERSON. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding, and I am pleased
to sponsor H.R. 1468, the Disadvantaged Business Disaster Eligibility
Act. I would like to thank Chairwoman Velazquez as well as Ranking
Member Chabot for their leadership in committee on this important bill.
I would also like to thank the other members of the committee for
voting in a bipartisan spirit to bring this measure to the floor in an
expeditious manner.
This bill provides that if a small business affected by Hurricane
Katrina that participates in any section 8(a) business development
program, the eligibility period for its participation in such program
is extended by 18 months.
The 8(a) program was designed as a 9-year business development
program geared toward small businesses owned by citizens who are
socially and economically disadvantaged. This program is of benefit to
emerging African American, Hispanic, Asian American, and nonminority
women-owned firms included in the program's coverage. Once the
eligibility for the 9-year program has run out, the small business
participating in the program is ineligible to re-enter it. When
Hurricane Katrina ripped through New Orleans on August 29, 2005, it
left 80,000 businesses damaged or destroyed, 97 percent of which were
small businesses. A significant percentage were participating in the
8(a) program and were forced to shut down for an extended period of
time, losing time in the program through a series of events far beyond
their control. It is only right and fair that we extend the period of
eligibility so that the affected disadvantaged businesses are allowed
to grow and flourish and enjoy the full 9 years of the program.
Nineteen months since Katrina struck, most of our 8(a) firms across
the gulf coast are still struggling to return.
This bill is about equity and fairness at a time when the road to
recovery has been anything but fair for disadvantaged firms in the
region. For example, in the time just following the storm, 90 percent
of the $2 billion in initial contracts were awarded to companies based
outside of the three primary affected States and to large concerns.
Minority businesses received just 1.5 percent of the first $1.6 billion
spent there. Women-owned businesses received even less. This was the
outcome in spite of laws such as the Stafford Act, which require
contracting officials to prioritize awards to local businesses and to
reach a goal of 5 percent of contracts to minority-owned businesses.
The continued recovery from Katrina is made up of many interconnected
issues, and we cannot fully recover without addressing all of them.
Helping small businesses, as this and other bills such as the RECOVER
Act do, restores jobs that our citizens can return home to and puts our
businesses back on track. It broadens the tax base of our region and
helps with our recovery.
I look forward to continuing to work on the Small Business Committee
with Ms. Velazquez and Mr. Chabot to address the needs of small
businesses in the gulf region.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Chabot) for his support and cooperation in helping expedite
this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1468, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
[[Page 7640]]
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
RECESS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the
Chair declares the House in recess subject to the call of the Chair.
Accordingly (at 3 o'clock and 13 minutes p.m.), the House stood in
recess subject to the call of the Chair.
____________________
{time} 1700
AFTER RECESS
The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the
Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Salazar) at 5 p.m.
____________________
ANIMAL FIGHTING PROHIBITION ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 2007
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
pass the bill (H.R. 137) to amend title 18, United States Code, to
strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting, and for other
purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 137
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Animal Fighting Prohibition
Enforcement Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. ENFORCEMENT OF ANIMAL FIGHTING PROHIBITIONS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 3 of title 18, United States Code,
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 49. Enforcement of animal fighting prohibitions
``Whoever violates subsection (a), (b), (c), or (e) of
section 26 of the Animal Welfare Act shall be fined under
this title, imprisoned for not more than 3 years, or both,
for each violation.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents for such
chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to
section 48 the following:
``49. Enforcement of animal fighting prohibitions.''.
SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO THE ANIMAL WELFARE ACT.
Section 26 of the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2156) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (c), by striking ``interstate
instrumentality'' and inserting ``instrumentality of
interstate commerce for commercial speech'';
(2) in subsection (d), by striking ``such subsections'' and
inserting ``such subsection'';
(3) by striking subsection (e) and inserting the following:
``(e) It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly
sell, buy, transport, or deliver in interstate or foreign
commerce a knife, a gaff, or any other sharp instrument
attached, or designed or intended to be attached, to the leg
of a bird for use in an animal fighting venture.'';
(4) in subsection (g)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``or animals, such as
waterfowl, bird, raccoon, or fox hunting''; and
(B) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(3) the term `instrumentality of interstate commerce'
means any written, wire, radio, television or other form of
communication in, or using a facility of, interstate
commerce;''; and
(5) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(i) The criminal penalties for violations of subsection
(a), (b), (c), or (e) are provided in section 49 of title 18,
United States Code.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Scott) and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
General Leave
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 137 is a bipartisan effort by the Judiciary
Committee, led by the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly) as the
chief sponsor and the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) as the
lead Democratic sponsor. Both have worked long and hard on this issue.
I would also like to express my appreciation to Chairman Conyers,
Ranking Member Smith, and Subcommittee Ranking Member Forbes for their
leadership and support in moving this matter forward, and also the
former chairman of the committee, Mr. Coble, who is with us today.
The Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007 addresses the
growing problem of staged animal fighting in this country. It increases
the penalties under the current Federal law for transporting animals in
interstate commerce for the purpose of fighting and for interstate and
foreign commerce in knives and gaffs designed for use in cockfighting.
Specifically, H.R. 137 makes violations of the law a felony
punishable by up to 3 years in prison. Currently, these offenses are
limited to misdemeanor treatment with the possibility of a fine and up
to 1 year of imprisonment. Most States make all staged animal fighting
illegal. Just one State currently allows cockfighting to occur legally.
The transport of game birds for the purpose of animal fighting and
the implements of cockfighting are already prohibited by Federal law,
though the current law only allows, as I have indicated, the
misdemeanor treatment. In 1976 Congress amended title 7, U.S. Code,
section 2156, the Animal Welfare Act, to make it illegal to knowingly
sell, buy, transport, deliver, or receive a dog or other animal in
interstate or foreign commerce for the purposes of participation in an
animal fighting venture or knowingly sponsoring or exhibiting an animal
in a fighting venture if any animal in the venture was moved in
interstate or foreign commerce. Amendments to the Animal Welfare Act
contained a loophole, however, that allowed shipments of birds across
State lines for fighting purposes if the destination State allowed
cockfighting.
While Congress did amend section 26 of the Animal Welfare Act to
close this loophole in 2002, the penalty section and other provisions
of the act have not been updated since their original enactment in
1976. This bill is designed to address those shortfalls to more
effectively cover modern problems associated with animal fighting
ventures.
As I have already mentioned, the legislation increases current
penalties to provide a meaningful deterrent. One of the primary reasons
for enacting the increased penalties under title 18 is the reluctance
of U.S. Attorneys to pursue animal fighting cases under the current
misdemeanor provisions because they view the penalties as ineffective
against an animal fighting industry, which has continued unabated
nationwide.
H.R. 137 further makes it a felony to transport cockfighting
implements in interstate or foreign commerce. These implements take the
form of razor-sharp knives, known as slashers; or gaffs, instruments
shaped in the form of curved ice picks that are attached to birds' legs
for fighting. Proponents of these implements within the game fowl
community apparently contend that they inflict cleaner wounds upon the
birds which are then quicker and easier to heal.
Since penalties against animal fighting were codified in 1976,
Federal authorities have pursued less than half a dozen animal fighting
cases, despite the fact that the USDA has received numerous tips from
informants and requests to assist with State and local prosecutions.
In addition, despite the fact that all 50 States have banned dog
fighting and all but one State has banned cockfighting, the animal
fighting industry continues to thrive within the United States.
Numerous nationally circulated animal fighting magazines advertise
fighting animals, and paid lobbyists continue to advocate for animal
fighters' interests. Thankfully, H.R. 137 will seek to bring an end to
these practices.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, this bill affects matters within the
jurisdiction of the
[[Page 7641]]
Committee on Agriculture and the Judiciary Committee. Both committees
have worked closely together to ensure that all matters are dealt with
appropriately. We appreciate their assistance in bringing this bill
expeditiously to the floor, and I will insert into the Congressional
Record at this point an exchange of letters between Chairman Peterson
of the Agriculture Committee and Chairman Conyers of Judiciary.
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC, March 8, 2007.
Hon. Collin C. Peterson,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your recent letter
regarding the Agriculture Committee's jurisdictional interest
in H.R. 137, the ``Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement
Act of 2007,'' which the Committee on the Judiciary reported
by voice vote. As ordered reported, the bill establishes
criminal penalties for violations of Federal prohibitions on
animal fighting.
I appreciate your willingness to discharge the bill from
further consideration by your Committee, in order to expedite
its floor consideration. I understand and agree that this is
without prejudice to your Committee's jurisdictional
interests in this or similar legislation in the future. In
the event a House-Senate conference on this or similar
legislation is convened, I would support your request for an
appropriate number of conferees.
I will include a copy of your letter and this response as
part of the Congressional Record during consideration of the
legislation on the House floor. Thank you for your
cooperation as we work towards enactment of H.R. 137.
Sincerely,
John Conyers, Jr.,
Chairman.
____
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, DC, March 8, 2007.
Hon. John Conyers,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your recent letter
regarding Judiciary Committee action on H.R. 137, a bill to
establish criminal penalties for violations of Federal
prohibitions on animal fighting.
In the interest of expediting the consideration of H.R.
137, I agree to the discharge of the bill from further
consideration by the Committee on Agriculture. I do so with
the understanding that the Committee on Agriculture does not
waive any future jurisdictional claim over this or similar
matters. In the event a conference with the Senate is
requested on this bill, the Committee on Agriculture reserves
the right to seek appointment of conferees.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Collin C. Peterson,
Chairman.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the
legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 137, the Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement
Act of 2007, creates Federal felony penalties for animal fighting. The
distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly) is the lead
sponsor of this bill with over 300 cosponsors from both sides of the
aisle.
The Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act increases criminal
penalties for illegal dog fighting and cockfighting. The act,
furthermore, imposes penalties for the interstate promotion of animal
fighting and the interstate transportation of animals for use in an
animal fighting venture.
All 50 States, Mr. Speaker, prohibit dog fighting, and 48 States
prohibit cockfighting. Louisiana and New Mexico, the two States that
do, in fact, allow cockfighting, may take up legislation to ban the
practice as early as this year.
According to the Humane Society, animal fighting, particularly
cockfighting, has become an interstate venture with small syndicates of
cockfighters moving across the country staging these different fights.
Animal fighting is also linked oftentimes with other criminal conduct
such as drug trafficking, illegal firearms sales, and gang activity.
By raising this offense from a misdemeanor to a felony, we are more
likely to deter illegal animal fighting and increase the likelihood
that Federal prosecutors will pursue these cases.
I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), chairman of the
Judiciary Committee.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, to subcommittee Chairman Bobby Scott we owe
a debt of gratitude, as well as to subcommittee Ranking Member Coble
and, of course, the author of this bill, Elton Gallegly, who through
the years has persevered to make us finally come to this day. I guess
we should also thank about 303 Members of the House of Representatives
that have stuck with us and supported this legislation all this time.
My congratulations to all of you. I never thought that a measure that
was not considered as grave and large as some of the issues that come
before the House Judiciary Committee would meet with so much
encouragement and support to get us to this day. I congratulate the
House of Representatives and the leadership on both sides.
I join, of course, in this measure and would like to make this point:
this legislation includes a special provision clarifying the fact that
it only supersedes State law in the case of a direct or irreconcilable
conflict. The Humane Society is with us. The American Veterinary
Medical Association is with us. The National Association of Sheriffs is
with us, and hundreds and hundreds of local law enforcement agencies in
every State of the Union have all come out in support of this basic,
commonsense, long overdue legislation.
I thank those who have worked so tirelessly across the years to bring
us to this day where this bill has now come before the floor.
I'm pleased to join the growing list of supporters, including the 30
or so Members of the Judiciary Committee, that have decided to lend
their support to this measure.
For far too long, the sponsors of abusive animal fighting events
(including cockfight and dog fight promoters) have been permitted to
freely engage in such activities without any real fear of prosecution.
Fortunately, the bill before us seeks to change that.
First, the legislation provides up to the three years in jail for
people who transport animals in interstate commerce with the purpose of
participating in an animal fighting venture. Current law only treats
such offenses as a mere misdemeanor. However, research has shown us
that simple misdemeanor criminal penalties don't provide enough of a
meaningful deterrent, especially when thousands of dollars are wagered
on a single dog or cock fight.
Second, the legislation makes it unlawful to sell or ship instruments
in interstate commerce that are designed to be attached to the leg of a
bird for use in an animal fighting venture. Razor sharp knives,
commonly known as ``slashers'', are oftentimes attached to the legs of
a bird to make cockfights even more violent. This provision would
prohibit such activity, and subject any violators to a term of
imprisonment of up to three years in jail.
Finally, the legislation includes a special provision clarifying that
this measure only supersedes state law in the case of a direct or
irreconcilable conflict.
The Humane Society, the American Veterinary Medical Association, the
National Sheriffs Association, and nearly 400 local law enforcement
agencies covering all 50 states have all come out in support of this
legislation.
I strongly urge my colleagues to lend their support to this
bipartisan, commonsense measure as well.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly), member of the House Judiciary
Committee and original sponsor of this legislation.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
As you know, along with my good friend Earl Blumenauer and Roscoe
Bartlett, we have been trying to federally criminalize this brutal,
inhumane practice of animal fighting for the past several Congresses.
When Congress enacted legislation to tighten Federal animal fighting
laws, we left in place weak penalties that have proven ineffective and
allowed the barbaric practice to thrive, in spite of bans in virtually
every State. Misdemeanor penalties simply don't provide a meaningful
deterrent. Animal fighters consider misdemeanor penalties as a ``slap
on the wrist'' or merely the ``cost of doing business.''
[[Page 7642]]
State and local law enforcement officials are increasingly concerned
about animal fighting not only because of the animal cruelty involved
but because of the other crimes that often go hand in hand with animal
fighting, including illegal gambling, drug trafficking, and acts of
human violence. In the last 6 months, virtually every reported arrest
in an animal fight has also led to additional arrests for at least one
of these criminal activities.
Cockfighting has also spread diseases that jeopardize poultry and
even public health. California experienced this firsthand when
cockfighters spread exotic Newcastle disease in 2002 and 2003. That
outbreak cost U.S. taxpayers nearly $200 million to eradicate, and the
cost to the U.S. poultry industry was in the millions. Cockfighting has
been identified as the major contributor to the spread of avian flu
throughout Thailand and other parts of Asia, where the strain
originated.
I want to express my sincere thanks to you, Earl Blumenauer, and to
Roscoe Bartlett for their work on this legislation. I also commend and
thank my good friend and neighbor Mr. John Conyers, the chairman of the
committee; Lamar Smith, the ranking member; Bobby Scott, the chairman
of the subcommittee; and Randy Forbes, the ranking member, for
recognizing the importance of this issue and moving H.R. 137 through
the Judiciary Committee so quickly.
{time} 1715
Also I want to recognize Collin Peterson on the Ag Committee for his
assistance.
Finally, more important than all, is recognizing the 303-plus Members
that have co-sponsored this legislation. It is hard to believe that we
have that many people agreeing on something like this when it is not
often that we have that many people in the House agreeing on what day
of the week it is. So I want to thank all of them for their support.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join with all of us in passing
this legislation when we bring it to a vote here in a couple of
minutes.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), the lead Democratic sponsor of
this measure.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate Mr. Scott's courtesy in
permitting me to speak and the leadership in taking what is seemingly a
simple and innocuous bill and bringing it to the floor of the House. I
appreciate working with my friend, Elton Gallegly. This has been a long
haul, lots of ups and downs, but today we reach an important milestone.
This is my fifth year of working on this issue. We were exposed to it
during the last farm bill. We found that this got caught up in back-
room machinations that really just defy description.
You have already heard about the despicable cruelty. You have heard
about the association with illegal activity, gambling, violence, drugs
and firearms trade. Louisiana is now poised to become the last State to
make it illegal, making it illegal in every State in the Union.
Why then is this even an issue? Well, it is an underground and
pervasive activity. It is in fact active across the country.
I just heard from one of our floor staff as we walked in today that
he saw accounts from small town newspapers in Alabama the last 2 weeks
in articles there. In Portland, Oregon, in recent months we have had
officers break into a meth and coke den where there were 43 live
chickens and all the equipment, as well as illegal weapons and large
amounts of cash. In another high-profile case in my community, a
professional basketball player was involved with illegal fighting of
his pit bull.
This is something that has been an area, frankly, where Congress has
shamefully been complicit. We have ignored the fact that inadequate
penalties, as has been said by the chairman of the committee, by my
friend from California, which have just been the ``cost of doing
business,'' We have looked the other way.
This is an important vote today. I am confident with over 300 co-
sponsors it will pass, and it will pass overwhelmingly. But the battle
is not done. Never underestimate the power of the apologists, the
allies and the enablers of this vicious and cruel, I won't even call it
a ``sport,'' it is a vicious practice.
I am hopeful that we will move forward with not just voting today,
but make sure that it passes the other body, and it is not subjected,
as it has been time and time again over the last 5 years, to some other
devious action.
Do not sell short the people who are apologists for this sport. Join
with us not just with your vote but to make sure that we get this
legislation enacted and then enforced around the country.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the
gentlelady from California, Ms. Sanchez.
Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in
proud support of H.R. 137, the Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement
Act of 2007, because it is time for the Federal Government to up the
ante in its efforts to curb this cruel and gruesome abuse of animals.
The current misdemeanor penalties in Federal law have not been
effective. They are considered a cost of doing business by the animal
fighting industry, which continues to operate across the country.
This bill addresses the growing problem of animal fighting by
amending Federal law to prohibit moving animals through interstate
commerce for the purpose of fighting.
Do we want to make a Federal case out of this? Yes, we do. Those who
profit from animal fighting often drug dogs and roosters to make them
hyper-aggressive and to keep fighting even after suffering severe
injuries. The animals are in a closed pit from which they cannot
escape. Often, they die during the fight. This is a gruesome and
inhumane practice. The American people agree. Dog fighting is illegal
in 50 States and cockfighting is illegal in most.
Current law is simply not strong enough. Animal fighting often leads
to additional criminal behavior. It is associated with illegal
gambling, narcotics trafficking, public corruption, gang activity, and
violent behavior toward people.
The National Sheriffs' Association supports the legislation, and more
than 400 individual sheriffs and police departments in every State in
the country have endorsed it. They recognize that animal fighting often
involves movement of animals across interstate and foreign borders, and
they can't do the job on their own. They need the Federal Government to
do its part to curb this dangerous activity.
I am proud to be a part of this bipartisan effort to curb this
appalling treatment of animals. I urge my colleagues to join me in
voting yes on H.R. 137.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia
for this time.
This is my first year in the Congress. In my 24 years in the State
senate, I was the leading spokesperson for animal welfare legislation,
and I took great pride in that. So I am particularly appreciative of
standing up on this bill.
I incorporate by reference all the things that have been said about
the harmful effects of this practice, and they are well known. I think
that the spread of avian flu and all the other pertinent conduct is to
be prohibited.
But the main thing is, dogs are our best friends. Harry Truman said,
if you want a friend in Washington, get a dog. So far, I haven't been
here 90 days, I have made lots of friends. I haven't needed a dog yet,
but I have thought about the day. I saw a Congressman come in the other
day, Congressman Whitfield from Kentucky, he had his dog with him. He
has been here more years than me.
Dogs are our friends. We all have dogs that we feel that are part of
our families. We shouldn't treat any of God's creatures the way that
people
[[Page 7643]]
treat dogs and cocks; and I guess if I was from Kentucky, Congressman
Yarmuth, I could speak more fondly about chickens, because the Colonel
and KFC have done a lot for his district.
But my particular interest is dogs, and we should treat them well.
They are our friends. You can go back in TV lore, Lassie and Asta, and
you think about Snoopy. To teach them to fight, to require them to
fight, to watch them die is just not what God intended and not what we
should encourage and condone.
Children shouldn't be exposed to this, and sometimes they are. This
type of conduct leads to other types of harmful conduct and violence
against women, violence against seniors. People who enjoy this type of
violence and watching it are more often than not going to be the most
likely people to pick on others who are unable to take care of
themselves.
I am very proud to be a cosponsor of H.R. 137. I look forward to its
passage and the day that we don't have people who get some type of
great enjoyment out of watching dogs, cocks or any other of God's
creatures fight to the death and find pleasure and enjoyment in it and
teach their children by that association that violence is something
good, when it isn't.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I am advised the distinguished gentleman from
Virginia would like me to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) which I am pleased to do.
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank both my friend from North
Carolina and my friend from Virginia, as well as the chairman of the
Judiciary Committee, for bringing this forward, as well as those who
have spoken on behalf of this bill.
This is not just a nuisance industry. This is a malicious industry
that represents a very, very serious public health threat. We are very
much concerned that the interstate or international transport,
especially of birds used for cockfighting, could spread an influenza
outbreak. The World Health Organization has reported at least nine
confirmed human cases of avian flu in Thailand and Vietnam that they
expect is related directly to cockfighting activity.
The American Veterinary Medical Association, the poultry industry,
all the animal protection associations, of course, but the National
Sheriffs' Association as well has urged us to pass this bill.
Yes, there are 50 different State bills against dog fighting, 49
against cockfighting, but many of them are different. And the fact is
there is a great deal of interstate commerce that takes place, so you
need a Federal law banning this, because it is so closely associated,
and this is what the National Sheriffs' Association tells us, so
closely associated to illegal gambling, trafficking of narcotics,
public corruption, dangerous gang activity. There are so many reasons
why we should ban this practice.
As has been said, it is cruel, and it is inhumane. They drug these
animals so that they are hyper-aggressive, so that they will continue
fighting until they kill or are killed. That is not right. It is not
moral. But even beyond the cruel and inhumane aspect of this practice,
it represents a very dangerous public health threat, as well as a
source of a great deal of other illegal criminal activity.
This House would be well-served to listen to the more than 300
Members who have cosponsored this legislation and pass it today.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the author of the
bill and certainly the chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime, the
chairman of the full committee and ranking members as well.
I rise to enthusiastically support H.R. 137 and announce that it is
impacting so many different communities that it is imperative that
there be a Federal prohibition on transporting animals interstate.
There is a question of disease, there is a question of violence, and
certainly with the increasing numbers of dangerous animals that attack
human beings, fighting animals certainly pose a severe threat to the
community.
This is a good bill. I am delighted to be a co-sponsor. The good news
is that we are getting it through the House today. This bill has been
around since the last session. I congratulate all of the authors. It is
time now to spell relief by passing this bill and protecting the lives
of our children and saving the lives of those who would be endangered
by cockfighting and other dangerous activities with animals.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 137, the ``Animal
Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007.'' I was a co-sponsor of
this legislation when it was considered in the 109th Congress and a
strong supporter and co-sponsor when the bill was re-introduced in this
Congress.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 137 establishes felony-level jail time (up to 3
years) for violators of the Federal animal fighting law. The bill
amends Title 18 of the U.S. Code to strengthen the maximum jail time
from the 1-year misdemeanor level in current law. The bill also
prohibits interstate and foreign commerce in cockfighting weapons.
1. DOGFIGHTING AND COCKFIGHTING ARE INHUMANE AND BARBARIC ACTIVITIES
In a typical fight, animals are drugged to heighten their aggression
and forced to keep fighting even after injuries such as pierced lungs
and gouged eyes--all for the amusement and illegal wagering of handlers
and spectators. Dogfighting and cockfighting are also associated with
other criminal conduct, such as drug traffic, illegal firearms use, and
violence toward people. Children are often present at these spectacles.
Some dogfighters steal pets to use as bait for training their dogs;
some allow trained fighting dogs to roam neighborhoods and endanger the
public.
2. FELONY PENALTIES ARE NEEDED
Misdemeanor penalties don't provide a meaningful deterrent; they're
considered a ``slap on the wrist'' or a ``cost of doing business.'' And
prosecutors are reluctant to pursue animal fighting cases carrying only
a misdemeanor penalty. Since the Federal animal fighting law was first
enacted in 1976, authorities have pursued only a handful of cases,
despite receiving innumerable informant tips about illegal interstate
activity and requests to assist with state and local busts and
prosecutions.
3. THE ANIMAL FIGHTING PROHIBITION ENFORCEMENT ACT BRINGS FEDERAL LAW
IN LINE WITH STATE LAWS
When the Federal animal fighting law was enacted in 1976, only one
state had felony penalties for animal fighting. Today, dogfighting is a
felony in 48 states, and cockfighting is a felony in 33 states. State
laws commonly authorize jail time of 3 to 5 years or more for animal
fighting.
4. OTHER RECENT FEDERAL ANIMAL PROTECTION LAWS THAT AMENDED TITLE 18 OF
THE U.S. CODE HAVE FELONY PENALTIES
In 1999, Congress authorized imprisonment of up to 5 years for
interstate commerce in videos depicting animal cruelty, including
animal fighting (P.L. 106-152), and mandatory jail time of up to 10
years for willfully harming or killing a federal police dog or horse
(P.L. 106-254).
5. THERE IS NO REASON TO ALLOW INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE IN SHARP
IMPLEMENTS DESIGNED EXCLUSIVELY FOR COCKFIGHTS
Razor-sharp knives known as ``slashers'' and ice pick-like gaffs are
attached to the legs of birds to make cockfights more violent. These
weapons, used only in cockfights, are sold through cockfighting
magazines and through the Internet.
6. THE ANIMAL FIGHTING INDUSTRY CONTINUES TO THRIVE ACROSS THE U.S
All 50 states ban dogfighting, 48 states ban cockfighting, and there
has been a dramatic increase in the number of animal fighting raids by
state and local authorities. Yet numerous nationally circulated animal
fighting magazines still promote these cruel practices and advertise
fighting animals and the accoutrements of animal fighting. There are
also several active websites for animal fighting enthusiasts, and paid
lobbyists advocating animal fighters' interests.
7. COCKFIGHTERS HAVE SPREAD DISEASES AND POSE A CONTINUING THREAT TO
FARMERS AND PUBLIC HEALTH
As former Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman wrote in a May 2004
letter indicating the Bush Administration's endorsement of the animal
fighting felony legislation:
``[cockfighting has] been implicated in the introduction
and spread of exotic Newcastle disease in California in 2002-
2003, which cost U.S. taxpayers nearly $200 million to
eradicate, and cost the U.S. poultry industry many millions
more in lost export markets. . . . We believe that tougher
penalties
[[Page 7644]]
and prosecution will help to deter illegal movement of birds
as well as the inhumane practice of cockfighting itself.''
According to government officials, interstate and international
transport of fighting birds posed the greatest risk of transmission,
since cockfighters move their birds often and participants from as many
as a dozen states gather at illegal fighting derbies.
Cockfighting also has been implicated in the deaths of at least 9
people in Asia who were reportedly exposed through cockfighting
activity to bird flu. The National Chicken Council, which represents 95
percent of U.S. poultry producers/processors, has called on Congress to
enact the animal fighting felony legislation, noting ``we are concerned
that the nationwide traffic in game birds creates a continuing hazard
for the dissemination of animal diseases.'' We can't afford not to act.
The economic consequences of an avian influenza outbreak are
staggering--with U.S. losses estimated at between $185 and $618 billion
(Congressional Budget Office) and worldwide losses projected from $1.5
to $2 trillion (The World Bank).
8. H.R. 137 ENJOYS OVERWHELMING BIPARTISAN SUPPORT
H.R. 137 currently has more than 300 sponsors. More than 400 local
and state law enforcement agencies covering every state in the country
have endorsed this legislation, along with animal welfare, poultry
industry, and other organizations. Enacting this animal fighting
legislation is long overdue.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 137.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support
this legislation. It is bipartisan legislation. We have listened to all
of the people who have worked long and hard on this legislation. I hope
it will be the pleasure of the House to pass the bill.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I support the Animal Fighting
Prohibition Act, which would raise the penalty for violators of the
federal animal welfare law, from a class 1 misdemeanor to a felony. In
an industry where thousands of dollars change hands with each fight,
misdemeanor fines and charges are simply considered ``the costs of
doing business''. This bill would close this loophole and keep
criminals from traveling to states with weaker penalties to conduct
their business.
Animal fights are not only despicable for their cruelty to animals,
but they are commonly associated with illegal gambling, drug traffic,
firearms trades, and numerous other illicit activities. Recently in
Oregon, officers found meth, cocaine, $10,000 in cash, along with 43
live chickens, cockfighting equipment including metal spurs and gaffs
in a Portland man's home. Drugs are often the impetus for the discovery
of gamecocks and illegal weapons. In another high profile Oregon case,
a former Portland Trailblazer pled guilty to animal abuse for fighting
his pit bull. Officials found her bloody, scarred, and covered in tar
which is used by fighters as a cheap antiseptic to fresh wounds.
But animal fighting doesn't just pose a threat to the people and
animals who engage in them, it has enormous costs to the United States
health and economy. Cockfighting has been implicated in the
introduction and spread of exotic Newcastle disease in California in
2002-2003, which cost the U.S. taxpayers nearly $200 million to
eradicate. The disease spread further to large scale egg farms in
Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Texas; costing the U.S. poultry
industry many millions of dollars in lost export markets. Cockfighting
has also been implicated in the deaths of at least 9 people in Asia who
contracted avian flu after exposure to fighting birds. If avian flu
were to reach the shores of America, the economic and human
consequences would be staggering.
This bill has widespread support across the country, including 303
cosponsors in the House and 35 cosponsors in the Senate. HR 137 is
endorsed by the Humane Society of the United States, the National
Chicken Council which represents 95 percent of the Nation's poultry
producers, the American Veterinary Medical Association, the National
Sheriff's Association, and more than 400 local law enforcement
agencies. Currently there is only one bastion left for cock fighters;
the State of Louisiana. Although gamers have attempted to use tribal
lands as exemptions from state and federal laws, a federal jury
recently convicted four men for their participation in a cockfight, and
70 others entered guilty pleas. It is my understanding that the
increase in penalties contained within this bill would be equally
applicable to animal fights held on tribal lands or Indian
Reservations.
It is far past time that Congress give our law enforcement agencies
the tools they need to end this barbaric and consequential practice.
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 137, the Animal
Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act, of which I am also a cosponsor.
The way a society treats its animals speaks to the core values and
priorities of its citizens. I am committed to animal welfare because I
believe humankind has an obligation to all animals.
Currently, it is a misdemeanor to sell, buy, or transport an animal
to be used in a fight.
This legislation would make the crime a felony and increase the
imprisonment penalty from 1 year to 3 years. The legislation also makes
it unlawful to ship in interstate commerce a knife, gaff, or other
sharp instrument used in cockfighting, and makes it a felony to use the
postal service to promote an animal fight.
Dog fighting is banned in 50 states and cockfighting is banned in all
but two, so I believe the Federal government is simply codifying a
value that our States governments have already individually expressed.
Animal fighting is a cruel pastime where, in a typical fight, animals
are drugged to heighten their aggression and forced to keep fighting,
even after injuries, for the amusement and illegal wagering of handlers
and spectators. We must put an end to this form of entertainment, which
results in the brutal treatment of animals.
As a co-chair of the Congressional Friends of Animals Caucus, I will
continue to work on a bipartisan basis to help protect animals at the
Federal level.
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, with my colleagues Mr.
Gallegly and Mr. Blumenauer, I have introduced H.R. 137 to establish
felony-level jail time of up to 3 years for those who violate the law
against animal fighting. H.R. 137 would amend current law to toughen
the maximum jail time from a one-year misdemeanor.
The penalties in the existing federal animal fighting statute are too
weak. The upgraded penalty better aligns federal law with state law.
Almost all states have established felony-level penalties for illegal
animal fighting activities. State laws commonly authorize jail time of
3 to 5 years or more for animal fighting.
George Bernard Shaw once stated, ``The worst sin toward our fellow
creatures is not to hate them, but to be indifferent to them, that's
the essence of inhumanity.'' We should not be indifferent to the
reprehensible underground organized crime of animal fighting, which is
not only cruel but poses threats to public health and safety.
The Humane Society of the U.S. estimates that there are at least
40,000 dogfighters in America. Cockfighting has been tied to the spread
of bird flu. Animal fighting spawns a number of other criminal
activities, such as illegal gambling and using and selling drugs. Even
more disturbing is the conclusion by many experts that acts of cruelty
against animals are precursors to violence against humans. The felony-
level penalties against animal fighting in H.R. 137 are necessary, and
I urge my colleagues to support the bill.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 137,
the Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007.
As many of my colleagues know, I have had a lifelong love and
compassion for animals of all kinds. That is why I am simply shocked
that it is not already illegal to take animals across state lines for
the purpose of fighting. This is an inhumane and cruel practice that
must not be allowed to continue. Another reason why this practice must
be outlawed is because animal fighting spreads disease and poses an
enormous public health risk. At a time when avian flu is at the
forefront of this county's health-related worries, it should be of the
utmost concern to people that animal fighting is occurring all across
the country. It makes one wonder, what kind of person could enjoy a
``sport'' like this?
In the forty-eight states where animal fighting is already outlawed,
illegal gambling goes hand-in-hand with this gruesome activity. H.R.
137, the Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007, makes it
a felony to knowingly sponsor or exhibit an animal or to use interstate
commerce for the purposes of fighting. This bill would impose a prison
sentence of up to 3 years.
I have supported this legislation since 2003. I am pleased that this
legislation has overwhelming bipartisan support, with 303 cosponsors.
Obviously we need stronger laws on this because this practice still
continues.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass H.R. 137, the Animal
Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 137, the
Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007. It is hard to
believe that an act as horrendous and brutal as animal fighting still
takes place today.
H.R. 137 would make engaging in animal fighting a felony. This
legislation will ensure
[[Page 7645]]
that those who choose to fight animals illegally will be met with the
appropriate penalty when they disregard the law.
Despite the fact that the vast majority of states have banned this
atrocious and deplorable act, animal fighting continues to plague our
communities. Animals such as dogs and chickens are fought to the death
in the name of sport. This is unhealthy, violent behavior on the part
of humans and is inhumane and merciless to the animals.
I commend both local and state officials for stepping up raids on
animal fighting rings. Now it is time for this body of Congress to do
our part by making these offenses a felony under Federal law. I urge my
colleagues to join me and vote in favor of the Animal Fighting
Prohibition Enforcement Act, H.R. 137.
Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support
of H.R. 137, the Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007. I
want to thank my colleagues Representative Gallegly and Representative
Blumenauer for their hard work on this issue.
This important legislation will make it illegal to transport an
animal across State or international borders for the purpose of
fighting, prohibits use of the mail system to promote animal fighting,
and criminalizes interstate buying, selling, or transportation of
knives or gaffs used for animal fighting.
Animal fighting is a deplorable activity with a purely negative
impact on society. In cockfights, when two birds fight with blades or
gaffs attached to their feet, at least one, and sometimes both of the
birds are killed. Dogs who are made to fight often sustain severe
injuries such as deep wounds and broken bones. Subsequent to fights,
many dogs die of blood loss, exhaustion, or shock. Fighting animals are
usually subject to inhumane living conditions intended to make them
more aggressive, sometimes denied adequate nutrition, and made to
exercise until they are physically exhausted.
In addition to the inexcusable harm inflicted on the animals, the
fights also have negative effects on humans. Illegal gambling and drug
trafficking are often closely tied to animal fighting operations. Also,
animals bred to fight are abnormally aggressive, and pose a danger to
the communities they live in if they were to get loose.
I applaud the passage of this bill, which will end an inhumane
practice that is an embarrassment to our country. I am proud that this
democratic majority has made animal welfare a priority in the 110th
Congress.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, as you know, I, along with Mr. Blumenauer
and Mr. Bartlett, have been trying to federally criminalize the brutal,
inhumane practice of animal fighting for the past several Congresses.
A few years ago, Congress enacted legislation to tighten Federal laws
with regard to animal fighting; however, this law created some
loopholes that allowed the barbaric practices of animal fighting to
thrive nationwide, in spite of bans in virtually every State. We left
in place weak penalties that have proven ineffective. Misdemeanor
penalties simply don't provide a meaningful deterrent. We've heard from
U.S. Attorneys that they are reluctant to pursue animal fighting cases
with just a misdemeanor penalty. Those involved in animal fighting
ventures consider misdemeanor penalties a ``slap on the wrist'' or
merely a ``cost of doing business.''
In recent years, we've seen a marked rise in the frequency of animal
fighting busts in communities across the country. Local police and
sheriffs are increasingly concerned about animal fighting, not only
because of the animal cruelty involved, but also because of the other
crimes that often go hand-in-hand, including illegal gambling, drug
trafficking, and acts of human violence. In the last 6 months, every
reported bust of an animal fight also led to additional arrests for at
least one of these criminal activities.
Furthermore, there is an inherent danger for the children of animal
fighters to be close to these animals. Children are often brought to
these gruesome spectacles. Some dog fighters steal pets to use as bait
for training their dogs; some allow trained fighting dogs to roam
neighborhoods and endanger the public.
There is the additional concern that cockfighters spread diseases
that jeopardize poultry flocks and even public health. We in California
experienced this first-hand, when cockfighters spread exotic Newcastle
disease, which was so devastating to many of our poultry producers in
2002 and 2003. That outbreak cost U.S. taxpayers nearly $200 million to
eradicate, and cost the U.S. poultry industry many millions more in
lost export markets.
Cockfighting has been identified as the major contributor of the
spread of avian flu throughout Thailand and other parts of Asia, where
the strain originated. At least nine people who contracted avian flu
and died from it reportedly contracted it from fighting birds. Among
those who are reported to have died from avian influenza as a result of
exposure through cockfighting, include 4-year-old, 6-year-old, and 18-
year-old boys in Thailand and a 6-year-old girl in Vietnam.
Fortunately, bird flu has not yet jumped the species barrier in this
country, but we ought to do all we can to minimize the risk.
Opponents of H.R. 137 have said this bill should be blocked because
it will drive them underground, increasing the public health risks.
That's a ludicrous argument. They're already underground (it's illegal
in 49 States and various localities in the remaining State, Louisiana).
They're coaching each other, as documented in chat rooms and other
communications that have been intercepted, to hide their birds to avoid
detection in the event of an outbreak. We're not talking about stellar
citizens who are planning to contact health officials to ``do their
part'' in stemming a pandemic. We'll be much better off cracking down
on illegal cockfighting than allowing this high-risk industry to
continue thriving and hoping they'll work with the government
cooperatively to stem the threat of disease.
We need to help State and local law enforcement officials who have
requested this strengthening of Federal laws to rid animal fighting
from communities that do not want it. This legislation makes violations
of federal animal fighting law a felony punishable by up to 3 years in
prison, makes it a felony to transport an animal across State or
international borders for the purpose of animal fighting, and prohibits
the interstate and foreign commerce in knives and gaffs designed for
use in cockfighting.
This bill simply promotes meaningful enforcement of current Federal
law that bars interstate and foreign movement of animals for fighting
purposes, including both dog fighting and cockfighting, by upgrading
current misdemeanor penalties to a felony level. The bill is explicitly
limited to interstate and foreign commerce, so it protects States'
rights in the 2 States where cockfighting is allowed, yet further
protects States' rights in the other 48 States where weak Federal law
compromises the ability to keep animal fighting outside their borders.
I also wanted to clarify for the Record that subsection (c) of
section 26 of the Animal Welfare Act, which is about interstate
instrumentalities and commercial speech, prohibits the websites and the
magazines where fighting animals are advertised for sale. These
publications are commercial speech, and also clearly promote animal
fighting. They advertise fighting animals and weapons for sale in
interstate commerce. For example, over the last 12 months, there have
been over 1,600 pages worth of advertisements for illegal interstate
commercial transactions in the two main cockfighting magazines.
Subsection (d) is meant to limit subsection (c) with respect to the
magazines and other commercial speech promoting cockfights in States
where that is legal. It acts as a limitation upon subsection (c), but,
as under current law, only if the effect of that promotion is limited
to cockfights in the one State where cockfighting is still legal. So as
a practical matter, (d) does not limit enforcement of (c) against the
cockfighting magazines and website advertisements, because these
materials promote animal fights in every State--they are sent to or
read by buyers in many States, who buy the fighting animals and
implements and then use them in animal fights in States where
cockfighting is illegal.
Finally, I also want to say that these provisions in current law,
which are mirrored in H.R. 137, pose no problem in terms of the First
Amendment. Animal fighting magazines and websites aren't protected by
the First Amendment. The Supreme Court has been clear on this score--
there is no First Amendment protection for commercial speech where the
underlying commercial transaction is lawfully prohibited, as is the
case here. Subsection (c) is clearly constitutional. It is narrowly
tailored with this in mind. First Amendment consideration is built
right into the language. It only prohibits ``commercial speech''--like
the cockfighting magazines with all of their advertisements for
contraband. These animal fighting magazines are not political speech,
they are basically just catalogs, with hundreds of advertisements per
issue for illegal transactions. The sellers are just soliciting the
buyers to commit criminal acts. They can't cloak it in the First
Amendment just by throwing a little bit of non-commercial speech in
there either, and the Supreme Court has been clear on that as well.
This is the perfect example of a bipartisan bill. The bill I
cosponsored in the last Congress, the Animal Fighting Prohibition Act
of 2006, had 324 cosponsors and was passed through the Senate by
unanimous consent. Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Bartlett, and I rounded up 300
Democrat and Republican co-sponsors in just a few weeks.
[[Page 7646]]
I want to express my sincere thanks to Mr. Blumenauer and Mr.
Bartlett for their work on this legislation. We have all been working
on this legislation for quite some time. I also want to commend Mr.
Conyers, Mr. Smith, Mr. Scott, and Mr. Forbes for recognizing the
importance of this issue and thank them for moving H.R. 137 through the
Judiciary Committee so quickly. I also want to thank Mr. Peterson of
the Agriculture Committee for his assistance on this matter. Finally, I
want to thank my 300+ colleagues who cosponsored H.R. 137. Without your
help, we would not have been able to show the amount of support this
Congress has for ending this deplorable practice and all of the
destructive behavior associated with it.
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, on February 7, 2007, the House
Committee of the Judiciary passed by voice vote H.R. 137, the Animal
Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007. This is a bad piece of
legislation that will greatly devalue human life in the eyes of the
law.
H.R. 137 would make it a federal felony to transport a chicken across
state lines for the purpose of exhibiting it in a fight. Currently, 49
states have laws on the books to address this issue. To add a federal
law would add another layer of bureaucracy to an already complicated
legal code.
I believe that human life is diminished by our making it a felony to
transport animals for fighting, without first making it a felony to
take a minor girl across a state line for an abortion. It is a strong
conviction of mine to fight for the sanctity of life.
While I believe that it is important that we act humanely in our
treatment of animals, I do not believe that we should put their welfare
ahead of unborn babies or minor girls. I call upon the Humane Society
to work for humanity to humanity first.
Until we provide a higher standard of protection for human life, I
will oppose making interstate transportation of animals for purposes of
animal fighting a felony. In the U.S., we are faced with the alarming
practice of people taking a minor girl across state lines for an
abortion to avoid their own state's laws that require the minor's
parents to be notified. Federal legislation, CIANA, the Child
Interstate Abortion Notification Act, would only make this abhorrent
activity, which exploits a young woman and kills her child, a
misdemeanor. Though this legislation has not yet become law, it is a
step forward in the right direction. Many who I know opposed CIANA in
the past will vote today for the misdemeanor in current law,
transporting a chicken, to become a felony, thereby placing animal
welfare over that of a young girl and her unborn baby.
I believe that we should not place more value on animal life than we
do on human life. It makes no sense that killing a person is a
misdemeanor offense while transporting animals to a fight is a felony,
punishable by three years in a federal penitentiary.
Mr. Speaker, while on the topic of valuing human life, I would like
to talk briefly about bio-medical research, which is opposed by animal
rights activists. I would like to mention that there is bio-medical
research being done demonstrating, through transgenics, that the immune
system from a baboon, or a human for that matter, can be spliced into
the DNA of a hog to grow a heart a baboon can use.
The heart was then harvested from the hog and transplanted to a
baboon. The baboon lived another 6 months with a heart that was grown
in a pig. This is longer then the first human heart transplant patient.
But what has been proven now is that humans can transplant through
transgenics the human immune system into a hog. In doing so, and we are
only 3 years, maybe 4 years away from being able to custom build the
human organ. rejection genetics into a pig.
We will be able to very soon custom raise human organs in hogs. Today
we are already transplanting out of hogs and into humans anterior
cruciate ligaments and heart valves.
We can raise in hogs 28 different organs. Not just hearts, but lungs,
esophagus, stomach, bladder, but other important organs as well,
kidneys, pancreas, liver, even skin for bum patients; name your organ.
Except for the brain.
The reason for bringing up these pigs is that it further illustrates
how the animal rights community, through legislation such as H.R. 137,
seeks to pass their agenda for animals on the rest of America. They
oppose using animals for lifesaving research like I just mentioned.
My home state of Iowa is an agricultural state. We understand the
importance of animal husbandry and good stewardship of our animals.
However, we also understand that animals are less important than
humans. Animal rights activists seek to place heifers and hogs on the
same level as people. I disagree.
I strongly oppose this legislation because animals should not be
elevated above humans. Mr. Speaker, I would urge my colleagues to
oppose this legislation.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 137, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. 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 and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this question will
be postponed.
____________________
{time} 1730
INTERIM APPOINTMENT OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 580) to amend chapter 35 of title 28, United States Code, to
provide for a 120-day limit to the term of a United States attorney
appointed on an interim basis by the Attorney General, and for other
purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 580
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. INTERIM APPOINTMENT OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS.
Section 546 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by
striking subsection (c) and inserting the following new
subsections:
``(c) A person appointed as United States attorney under
this section may serve until the earlier of--
``(1) the qualification of a United States attorney for
such district appointed by the President under section 541 of
this title; or
``(2) the expiration of 120 days after appointment by the
Attorney General under this section.
``(d) If an appointment expires under subsection (c)(2),
the district court for such district may appoint a United
States attorney to serve until the vacancy is filled. The
order of appointment by the court shall be filed with the
clerk of the court.
``(e) This section is the exclusive means for appointing a
person to temporarily perform the functions of a United
States attorney for a district in which the office of United
States attorney is vacant.''.
SEC. 2. APPLICABILITY.
(a) In General.--The amendments made by this Act shall take
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Application.--
(1) In general.--Any person serving as a United States
attorney on the day before the date of the enactment of this
Act who was appointed under section 546 of title 28, United
States Code, for a district may serve until the earlier of--
(A) the qualification of a United States attorney for that
district appointed by the President under section 541 of that
title; or
(B) 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) Expired appointments.--If an appointment expires under
paragraph (1)(B), the district court for the district
concerned may appoint a United States attorney for that
district under section 546(d) of title 28, United States
Code, as added by this Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr.
Coble) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
General Leave
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Michigan?
There was no objection.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the measure before us today has been introduced by the
gentleman from California, a ranking member of the committee and a
subcommittee Chair, Howard Berman. It is intended to restore the
historical checks and balances to the process by which interim U.S.
Attorneys are appointed. It will repair a breach in the
[[Page 7647]]
law that has been a major contributing factor in the recent termination
of eight able and experienced United States Attorneys and their
replacement with interim appointments. It has gathered much attention
across this Nation, and not just in government and legal circles.
The full circumstances surrounding these terminations are still
coming to light, but what we know is already very troubling. The
reports about these terminations are particularly troubling in that the
United States Attorneys are among the most powerful government
officials we have. They have the power to seek convictions and bring
the full weight of the United States Government against any citizen or
company that they deem important and eligible for prosecution. They can
negotiate plea agreements. They can send people to prison for years and
years. And frequently, the mere disclosure of a criminal investigation
can destroy reputations and careers.
These are awesome powers. And so we on the Judiciary Committee
consider it absolutely essential that the American people have full
confidence in those entrusted to exercise these powers and that they do
so with complete integrity and free from political influence of any
kind.
The committee's investigation into these troubling circumstances is
continuing. The longer time goes on, the more we know; and the more we
know, the more we are troubled about what has been going on in the
Department of Justice. It has already become abundantly clear that the
gaping vulnerability in the law, which has placed the independence and
integrity of our prosecutorial system in jeopardy, needs to be repaired
as quickly as possible; and that is what we are here to do today.
What helped bring these troubling circumstances about, what helped
make it possible for high-level Justice Department and White House
officials to even entertain the notion that they could, as appears to
be the case, target certain U.S. Attorneys for an unprecedented mid-
course purge was an obscure provision adequately and anonymously
slipped into the USA PATRIOT Reauthorization Act conference report in
March of 2006. Without any debate, let alone the benefit of a single
hearing in either body, this provision, added at the behest of the
Justice Department's top political appointees to significantly enhance
the power to appoint interim U.S. Attorneys without having to subject
their appointments to customary safeguard of Senate confirmation. It
was a middle-of-the-night insertion, and we are here to correct that.
Indeed, the administration's plan to exploit the new provision to
bypass the Senate confirmation process is now well documented. As
bluntly explained by internal e-mails we received, and they now number
in the hundreds, although we get them late on Friday nights, by the
Attorney General's then-chief of staff, for example, discussing their
plan to install the former Republican National Committee political
operative, the new provision would enable them to ``give far less
deference to home State Senators and thereby get our preferred person
appointed and do it far faster and more efficiently at less political
cost to the White House.''
This is outrageous. The Senate has already acted. The time is now. We
need to move as rapidly as we can to correct this very serious error
that casts a question upon the integrity of a very, very important part
of our government, the Department of Justice.
Speaker, the bill before us today, introduced by my friend Howard
Berman, will restore the historical checks and balances to the process
by which interim U.S. Attorneys are appointed. It will repair a breach
in the law that has been a major contributing factor in the recent
termination of eight able and experienced United States Attorneys and
their replacement with interim appointments.
The full circumstances surrounding these terminations are still
coming to light, but what we know already is very troubling.
In one instance, the primary apparent qualification for the
President's chosen replacement was that he had been an aggressive
political operative at the Republican National Committee, thereby
putting himself on Karl Rove's A list. In several other instances, the
U.S. Attorney was in the midst of a sensitive public corruption
investigation, and there were reportedly complaints from Republicans
that the investigation was being pursued too aggressively against a
fellow Republican, or was not being pursued aggressively enough against
a Democrat.
The reports about these terminations are particularly troubling in
that U.S. Attorneys are among our most powerful government officials.
They not only have power to seek convictions and negotiate plea
agreements that can send people to prison for years. The mere
disclosure of a criminal investigation can destroy reputations and
careers.
These are awesome powers, and it is absolutely essential that the
American people can have full confidence those entrusted to exercise
these powers do so with complete integrity and free from improper
political influence.
The Committee's investigation into these troubling circumstances is
continuing, and we will know more, and we will leave extended
discussion of them for another day. But it has already become
abundantly clear that the gaping vulnerability in the law, which has
placed the independence and integrity of our prosecutorial system in
jeopardy, needs to be repaired as quickly as possible. And that is what
we are here to do today.
What helped bring these troubling circumstances about--what helped
make it possible for high-level Justice Department and White House
officials to even entertain the notion that they could, as appears to
be the case, target certain U.S. Attorneys for an unprecedented mid-
course purge--was an obscure provision quietly and anonymously slipped
into the USA PATRIOT Reauthorization Act conference report in March
2006.
Without any I debate, let alone the benefit of a single hearing in
either body, this provision was added at the behest of the Justice
Department's top political appointees, to significantly enhance their
power to appoint interim U.S. Attorneys, without having to subject the
appointments to the customary safeguard of Senate confirmation.
Indeed, the Administration's deliberate plan to exploit the new
provision to bypass the Senate confirmation process is now well
documented. As bluntly explained in an internal e-mail by the Attorney
General's then chief of staff, for example, discussing their plan to
install the former RNC political operative, the new provision would
enable them to ``give far less deference to home-State Senators and
thereby get (1) our preferred person appointed and (2) do it far faster
and more efficiently, at less political cost to the White House.''
Traditionally--since the Civil War--whenever a U.S. Attorney left
office, and until the Senate could confirm a replacement, the local
federal district court has appointed someone to fill the position on an
interim basis. This was a neutral means of ensuring that permanent
appointments remained the shared responsibility of the President and
the Senate--to encourage the President to send a nomination to the
Senate promptly, and to encourage the Senate to act promptly on the
nomination.
In 1986, at the request of Attorney General Ed Meese, the law was
modified to authorize the Attorney General to make short-term interim
U.S. Attorney appointments, for up to 120 days. But if a permanent U.S.
Attorney had not been confirmed by the end of that 120 days, the
district court retained authority to make the appointment for the
remainder of the interim period. This procedure, codified in 28 U.S.C.
Sec. 546, preserved the incentives on the Executive and Legislative
Branches to work together on the nomination and confirmation of a
permanent replacement.
That balanced approach was unceremoniously jettisoned a year ago, and
with it respect for the Senate's role in ensuring that the President's
power to hire and fire U.S. Attorneys at will was not abused at the
expense of prosecutorial integrity.
The stealth provision in the 2006 USA PATRIOT Reauthorization Act
completely removed the district court as a backstop in the interim
appointment process, turning over sole power to the Attorney General,
to unilaterally make interim appointments, for an unlimited time, with
no obligation to involve the Senate, or the Judicial Branch, or anyone
else.
H.R. 580 will restore the checks and balances that have historically
provided a critical safeguard against politicization of U.S. Attorneys.
First, it repeals the 2006 change to section 546, keeping the Attorney
General's interim appointment role, but limiting it to 120 days, as it
was before.
Second, the bill clarifies that section 546 is the only way to make
interim U.S. Attorney appointments. This additional change has become
necessary in light of indications, documented by the Congressional
Research Service, that the Justice Department has used, and could again
use, the Federal Vacancies Reform Act to evade the intent of a
tightened section 546.
[[Page 7648]]
Mr. Speaker, this bill is an important step in restoring legal
safeguards against abuse of Executive power to politicize core
government functions that need to be above political calculations in
their execution. I urge my colleagues to support this important
legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in mild opposition to H.R. 580, primarily against
the process rather than substantively.
Scrutiny over the dismissal of several U.S. Attorneys in recent days
may have triggered this legislation. While we are still learning the
facts surrounding those dismissals, it does remain clear that the U.S.
Attorneys do indeed serve at the pleasure of the President. Some are
calling for oversight investigation because of the political appearance
surrounding those dismissals, and this is fine; but amending the
appointment process for interim U.S. Attorneys I believe is the wrong
response.
Prior to 1986, the district court appointed interim U.S. Attorneys to
fill vacancies until a Presidential appointee had been nominated and
confirmed by the Senate. In 1986, the process was changed to authorize
the Attorney General to appoint an interim United States Attorney for
120 days, at which time, if the Senate had not confirmed a new United
States Attorney, the district court would then appoint an interim to
serve until a new permanent United States Attorney was indeed
confirmed.
This process was not infallible. Some said authorizing the judiciary
to appoint the prosecutors before their court created a conflict of
interest, and I think a good argument can be made for that. Others said
the Executive could maneuver the Constitution by terminating a court-
appointed interim by repeatedly substituting its own interim for 120-
day stints. A good argument could well be made for that as well.
In 2005, the process for appointing interim United States Attorneys,
however, was changed once again. This was an amendment to section 546
of title 28, which eliminated the 120-day time limit for an Executive-
appointed interim to serve and eliminated the authority for the
district court to appoint an interim.
Unfortunately, one of these responses to the recent dismissals had
been H.R. 580, which would return the process of appointing interim
United States Attorneys for 120 days and authorizing the judiciary to
appoint interims if a permanent United States Attorney is not confirmed
prior to the 120-day passes.
The bill, H.R. 580, was accelerated through the Judiciary Committee.
Only one hearing was held on the bill. That hearing focused mostly on
the current U.S. Attorney controversy, not the bill itself. It was then
heard by the full committee, but there was no opportunity for the
Judiciary Subcommittee on Commercial Administrative Law markup to
therefore improve the bill.
Republicans on the Judiciary Committee, many of us, would have liked
to have worked with the Democrats in a bipartisan fashion more
thoroughly, and I think we may have come at the finish line with a more
favorable finished product. Given more time, we might have considered
some promising ideas. For instance, this bill does not address the
problem of appointing and confirming United States Attorneys in a
timely fashion. Senators Kyl and Sessions introduced amendments in the
Senate proposing several other responses to inherent conflicts created
by United States Attorney vacancies and possible ways to provide for
interims.
In these times of the war on terror, Mr. Speaker and colleagues, and
the continuing age-old war on crime, the service of the United States
Attorneys, indeed the front line of Federal law enforcement, is more
than ever a matter of first importance to the Nation. Their appointment
is serious business. We should not have rushed to judgment in attending
to this business, but instead have given the legislative process more
time to work. I think we missed an opportunity to improve the bill as a
result.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds only to say, Mr.
Howard Coble, I recognize you as a sincere and experienced and valued
member of this committee, and I appreciate the circumstances that you
are in this evening.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the subcommittee chairwoman, Linda
Sanchez of California, and I thank her for the excellent job that she
has done.
Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of
H.R. 580, a bill to revoke the Attorney General's unfettered authority
to appoint U.S. Attorneys indefinitely.
This legislation would repeal a small provision, with enormous
repercussions, that was placed into the USA PATRIOT Reauthorization Act
conference report. The provision, which removed the 120-day limit for
interim appointment of U.S. Attorneys, allows interim appointees to
serve indefinitely and without Senate confirmation.
We now know that the provision was inserted into the conference
report at the request of a Justice Department official. Clearly, the
Justice Department's effort to insert this provision was just one part
of the Bush administration's coordinated plan to purge U.S. Attorneys
across the country for political reasons.
My suspicions about the role of this provision in the firing of at
least eight U.S. Attorneys have been confirmed after reading the
documents turned over by the Justice Department. We learned, for
example, that in an e-mail to former White House Counsel Harriet Miers,
former Attorney General Chief of Staff Kyle Sampson wrote: ``I strongly
recommend that as a matter of administration policy we utilize the new
statutory provisions that authorize the Attorney General to make U.S.
Attorney appointments.''
The Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan entity, has
completed a report finding that these firings are unprecedented. Prior
to the forced resignation of eight U.S. Attorneys in recent months, and
outside the normal turnover of U.S. Attorneys that occurs with a new
administration, only 10 U.S. Attorneys were forced to resign in the
last 25 years. The 10 U.S. Attorneys cited in the CRS report were all
fired for cause, most under a cloud of scandal.
H.R. 580, legislation offered by my friend and colleague from
California, Representative Howard Berman, provides the necessary
legislative response to restore checks and balances in the U.S.
Attorney appointment process by reinstating the 120-day limit on all
interim appointments.
The bill also closes other potential loopholes through which Senate
confirmation could be bypassed. It clarifies that section 546 of title
28 of the United States Code is the exclusive means of appointing
interim U.S. Attorneys.
Additionally, the bill would apply retroactively to all U.S.
Attorneys currently serving in an interim capacity. This would ensure
that interim U.S. Attorneys appointed since the purge scheme was
hatched are not permitted to serve indefinitely and without Senate
confirmation.
At a legislative hearing on H.R. 580 before the Subcommittee on
Commercial and Administrative Law on March 6, this bill received strong
support from the president of the National Association of Former U.S.
Attorneys, as well as a former Republican-appointed U.S. Attorney. It
is also important to note that the Attorney General himself has
expressed that he is not opposed to rolling back this provision of the
PATRIOT Act. And if the Attorney General's claim that he was not aware
of the Justice Department efforts to quietly insert this provision are
true, it would seem he never wanted the PATRIOT Act changes to the U.S.
Attorney selection process in the first place.
Additionally, the corresponding bill in the Senate received strong
bipartisan support and passed by an overwhelming margin of 94-2.
Mr. Speaker, we must begin to restore the independence of U.S.
Attorneys across the country and return to
[[Page 7649]]
the bedrock principle of our court system that justice must be served
objectively and without fear or favor.
{time} 1745
While the consideration of H.R. 580 will not end the Judiciary
Committee's ongoing investigation of the U.S. Attorney purge scheme,
the passage of this legislation is a critical step in this process to
close the loophole in the PATRIOT Act that this administration has
improperly exploited for political purposes.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I recognize Howard Berman, the senior
member on the Judiciary Committee, and thank him for his authorship of
the measure that brings us to the floor this evening. I yield to him 5
minutes.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman who cosponsored this
bill with me, along with the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott),
chairman of the Crime Subcommittee of Judiciary Committee.
H.R. 580 does only one thing, it restores the checks and balances
that, until last year, had long been part of the process for filling
vacancies in U.S. Attorneys' offices.
I won't go through the history of how interim U.S. Attorneys were
appointed, because the chairman has spelled it out, and the gentleman
from North Carolina has reaffirmed that history. But I want to address
the one issue my friend from North Carolina raised, which is, were we
to take a longer time, this might have been, at least to his way of
thinking, a better approach.
The whole goal of this bill is to restore the status quo ante before
a sneak attack change on the law utilized in the PATRIOT Act without
anyone calling special attention to it, undiscussed by the conferees or
by the members of either this House or the other body, change that law
to give the executive bench total authority in this particular area.
The Senator, a member of the other body who was chairman of the
Judiciary Committee of the other body during this time, has said that
he didn't know about the provision until a colleague alerted him to it
last month. The former chairman's staff told him that the Department of
Justice provided the language and that it was inserted in the
conference report by a member of his staff who was made U.S. Attorney
in Utah only 4 months later.
Now we have a different story from the Department of Justice. Will
Moschella, the former head of the Office of Legislative Affairs, now
claims sole responsibility for the provision and says he pursued the
change on his own, without the knowledge or coordination of his
superiors at the Justice Department or the White House.
This is a Department, the Department of Justice, that says it fired
eight U.S. Attorneys for not coordinating their work 100 percent with
the priorities of the Department, and yet we are supposed to believe
that they are permitting a relatively low-level official to fly solo in
changing Federal law on the appointment of U.S. Attorneys without any
other departmental involvement. It is for this reason, I say to my
friend from North Carolina, that the first thing we need to do is to go
back to the status quo ante, the compromise worked out in the Reagan
administration with Attorney General Ed Meese, a Democratic House and
the Republican Senate in 1986, which allowed for this process where we
gave for the first time the Attorney General the right to name an
interim U.S. Attorney, providing the district court with the
theoretical ability, should that court choose to do so, to replace or,
as has been much more likely, simply reaffirm the naming of the interim
U.S. Attorney if no full U.S. Attorney had been confirmed yet by the
Senate.
What is clear from the e-mails provided to the Judiciary Committee is
that the Department of Justice and White House employees, whatever
their motivation in pushing this proposal originally, whatever their
motivation, they quickly figured out that the provision created the
possibility to circumvent the Senate and decided to exploit that power.
One e-mail between the Department of Justice and the White House
depicts an effort to slow-walk a nomination so an interim appointee can
stay in place. The two employees discussed an interim appointee in
Arkansas who they knew was unlikely to get Senate confirmation.
An employee in the White House Counsel's Office writes, ``If this is
a section 546 appointment for unlimited duration, he can call himself
U.S. Attorney. Our talkers should avoid referring to him as
'interim.'''
The Attorney General's chief of staff replies, and I quote, ``We
should gum this to death. Our guy is in there so the status quo is good
for us. Pledge a desire for a Senate-confirmed U.S. Attorney and
otherwise hunker down.''
I suggest there is ample opportunity in the record to recognize that
the change we made in the PATRIOT Act without the knowledge, as far as
I can tell, of any representative of either House was an ill-considered
change; and the first thing we need to do and what this bill does is
bring the law back to what had existed.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on either side?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Michigan has 5 minutes;
the gentleman from North Carolina has 15\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. I recognize the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer)
for 1 minute.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the chairman's courtesy in
permitting me to speak on this bill. I appreciate also what Ranking
Member Coble talked about in terms of outlining these issues.
But it seems to me that there was just one area where I would take
modest exception with him, and that is the notion that we should have
been taking more time to vet this and look at alternatives. Because I
fully agree with the gentleman from California, where there was not
adequate time for Congress to be involved is when this was slipped into
the PATRIOT Act revisions in the first place. Without the knowledge of
anybody, it seems, in the House or the Senate, this change was done by
the staff behind closed doors. We didn't know about it. I haven't heard
yet from any of my Republican friends that did.
By restoring the status quo ante the way that it had been for years,
we get back to a situation where we can remove this from the table. We
can have a dispassionate discussion about what has happened with the
Department of Justice and its future; and, if we want to make any
change, then at least we have something that has stood the test of
time.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee) is recognized
for 2 minutes.
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, this bill could not be more timely. As I was
walking across the street in front of the Supreme Court, I saw the
inscription chiseled in the marble of the Supreme Court. It says,
``Equal justice under law.'' But we have witnessed now in the last few
weeks the unpeeling of a scandal where the executive branch fired eight
well-performing U.S. Attorneys because they would not do the political
dirty work of the White House. And it is apparent now, as much as it
has ever been, that we have to have a check and balance on the
executive branch with Senate confirmation.
I want to know why this is so viscerally important. In my district in
western Washington, we had a gentleman named John McKay who was doing,
by all rights, a good job as a U.S. Attorney for western Washington.
But then there was this contentious election out there for Governor in
2004, and a bunch of Republicans were leaning on him to start a grand
jury investigation alleging voter fraud because the vote came out in
favor of the Democrat. He refused to do so because he said he didn't
see any evidence of voter fraud.
A little later what happens is he goes to the White House for a
meeting about a prospective judgeship, and what do they ask him about?
They say: How
[[Page 7650]]
come Republicans are mad at you, at the White House. And he knows what
they are mad about, is because they wouldn't go after this case where
there was no evidence of voter fraud. It was apparent they were leaning
on him; and, when he did not collapse, he was fired.
Now, this is a situation where it is clear that we need Senate
confirmation. And, by the way, I have written a letter to the President
today saying the President should reinstate that U.S. Attorney while
this matter is investigated. This thing smells like a mackerel in the
moonlight, and it needs to be resolved. Until it is resolved, Congress
is going to be investigating; and to prevent this from happening again,
we need to be sure we have Senate confirmation.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Washington referred to it
as scandal. It may well end up being a scandal, but I think to use that
word today might well be premature. But, meanwhile, I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas,
Sheila Jackson-Lee, 1 minute.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished
gentleman, and I rise with sadness to support this legislation that
clears up the obviously ongoing abuse and disrespect of the integrity
of the three branches of government.
We passed the PATRIOT Act that some of us did not support, but we did
not intend for it to be used to avoid the constitutional Senate
confirmation process. That is what has happened. We understand now that
the Attorney General unfortunately may have been in meetings, may have
been informed of issues dealing with the termination of U.S. Attorneys
without providing that direct information to the United States
Congress.
This legislation again sets the Constitution back on its feet. It
allows for Senate confirmation for U.S. Attorneys, and it puts back on
track the integrity in terms of the respect and integrity that is
necessary for the judiciary and legal system that the American people
have come to understand and believe. I believe we should support this
bill, and I hope we will get back on track with the relationship
between Congress, the executive, and the judiciary.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 580, which amends
chapter 35 of title 28 of the United States Code to restore the 120-day
limit on the term of a United States Attorney appointed on an interim
basis by the Attorney General. The shocking disclosures of the last few
weeks provide all the justification needed to adopt this salutary
measure promptly and by an overwhelming margin. Our friends in the
other body passed companion legislation last week by a vote of 94-2.
Mr. Speaker, United States Attorneys are appointed by the President
with the advice and consent of the Senate. Each United States Attorney
so appointed is authorized to serve a 4-year term but is subject to
removal by the President without cause. The Senate's advise and consent
process formally checks the power of the President by requiring the
United States Attorney nominee to go through a confirmation process. In
addition, Senators also play a particularly influential informal role
in the nomination of United States Attorneys.
Typically, a President, prior to appointing a new United States
Attorney, consults with the Senators from the State where the vacancy
exists if they are members of the President's political party. The
President usually accepts the nominee recommended by the Senator or
other official. This tradition, called ``senatorial courtesy,'' serves
as an informal check on the President's appointment power.
Since the Civil War, the judiciary has been empowered to fill
vacancies in the office of the United States Attorney. In 1966, that
authority was codified at 28 U.S.C. Sec. 546. When a United States
Attorney position became vacant, the district court in the district
where the vacancy occurred named a temporary replacement to serve until
the vacancy was filled. In 1986, in response to a request by the
Attorney General that its office be vested with authority to appoint
interim United States Attorneys, Congress amended the statute to add
former section 546(d).
Pursuant to this authority, the Attorney General was authorized to
appoint an interim United States Attorney for 120 days and, if the
Senate did not confirm a new United States Attorney within such period,
the district court was then authorized to appoint an interim United
States Attorney to serve until a permanent replacement was confirmed.
By having the district court play a role in the selection of an interim
United States Attorney, former section 546(d) allowed the judicial
branch to act as a check on executive power. In practice, if a vacancy
was expected, the Attorney General would solicit the opinion of the
chief judge of the relevant district regarding possible temporary
appointments.
Twenty years later, section 546 was amended again in the USA PATRIOT
Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005. This legislation amended
section 546(c) to provide that ``[a] person appointed as United States
attorney under this section may serve until the qualification of a
United States Attorney for such district appointed by the President''
under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 541. The extent of the legislative history of this
provision is one sentence appearing in the conference report
accompanying the act: ``Section 502 [effecting the amendments to
section 546] is a new section and addresses an inconsistency in the
appointment process of United States Attorneys.''
Although the legislative purpose is unclear, the practical effect is
not. The act amended section 546 in two critical respects. First, it
effectively removed district court judges from the interim appointment
process and vested the Attorney General with the sole power to appoint
interim United States Attorneys. Second, the act eliminated the 120-day
limit on the term of an interim United States Attorney appointed by the
Attorney General. As a result, judicial input in the interim
appointment process was eliminated. Even more problematic, it created a
possible loophole that permits United States Attorneys appointed on an
interim basis to serve indefinitely without ever being subjected to a
Senate confirmation process, which is plainly a result not contemplated
by the Framers.
Mr. Speaker, excluding changes in administration, it is rare for a
United States Attorney to not complete his or her 4-year term of
appointment. According to the Congressional Research Service, only 54
United States Attorneys between 1981 and 2006 did not complete their 4-
year terms. Of these, 30 obtained other public sector positions or
sought elective office, 15 entered or returned to private practice, and
1 died. Of the remaining eight United States Attorneys, two were
apparently dismissed by the President, and three apparently resigned
after news reports indicated they had engaged in questionable personal
actions.
Mr. Speaker, in the past few months disturbing stories appeared in
the news media reporting that several United States Attorneys had been
asked to resign by the Justice Department. It has now been confirmed
that at least seven United States Attorneys were asked to resign on
December 7, 2006. An eighth United States Attorney was subsequently
asked to resign. They include the following: H.E. Cummins, III, U.S.
Attorney, E.D. Ark.; John McKay, U.S. Attorney, W.D. Wash.; David
Iglesias, U.S. Attorney, D. N.M.; Paul K. Charlton, U.S. Attorney, D.
Ariz.; Carol Lam, U.S. Attorney, S.D. Calif.; Daniel Bogden, U.S.
Attorney, D. Nev.; Kevin Ryan, N.D. Calif.; and Margaret Chiara, W.D.
Mich.
On March 6, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative
Law held a hearing entitled, ``H.R. 580, Restoring Checks and Balances
in the Confirmation Process of United States Attorneys.'' Witnesses at
the hearing included six of the eight former United States Attorneys
and William Moschella, Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General,
among other witnesses.
Six of the six former United States Attorneys testified at the
hearing and each testified that he or she was not told in advance why
he or she was being asked to resign. Upon further inquiry, however,
Messrs. Charlton and Bogden were advised by the then Acting Assistant
Attorney General, William Mercer, that they were terminated essentially
to make way for other Republicans to enhance their credential and pad
their resumes. In addition, Messrs. Iglesias and McKay testified about
inappropriate inquiries they received from Members of Congress
concerning pending investigation, which they surmised may have led to
their forced resignations.
Mr. Speaker, the USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization provision on interim
U.S. Attorneys should be repealed for two reasons. First, Members of
Congress did not get an opportunity to vet or debate the provision that
is current law. Rather the Republican leadership of the 109th Congress
slipped the provision into the conference report at the request of the
Department of Justice. Not even Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen
Specter, whose chief of staff was responsible for inserting the
provision, knew about its existence.
Second, it is now clear that the manifest intention of the proponents
of the provision was
[[Page 7651]]
to allow interim appointees to serve indefinitely and to circumvent
Senate confirmation. We know now, for example, that in a September 13,
2006 e-mail to former White House Counsel Harriet Miers, Attorney
General Chief of Staff Kyle Sampson wrote:
I strongly recommend that, as a matter of Administration
policy, we utilize the new statutory provisions that
authorize the Attorney General to make U.S. Attorney
appointments.
Mr. Sampson further said that by using the new provision, DOJ could
``give far less deference to home-State Senators and thereby get (1)
our preferred person appointed and (2) do it far faster and more
efficiently, at less political cost to the White House.''
Regarding the interim appointment of Tim Griffin at the request of
Karl Rove and Harriet Miers, Mr. Sampson wrote to Monica Goodling,
Senior Counsel to the White House and Liaison to the White House on
December 19, 2006 the following:
I think we should gum this to death: ask the Senators to
give Tim a chance, meet with him, give him some time in
office to see how he performs, etc. If they ultimately say,
`no never' (and the longer we can forestall that, the
better), then we can tell them we'll look for other
candidates, and otherwise run out the clock. All of this
should be done in `good faith,' of course.
Finally, we now know that after gaining this increased authority to
appoint interim U.S. Attorneys indefinitely, the administration has
exploited the provision to fire U.S. Attorneys for political reasons. A
mass purge of this sort is unprecedented in recent history. The
Department of Justice and the White House coordinated this purge.
According to an administration ``hit list'' released on Tuesday, U.S.
Attorneys were targets for the purge based on their rankings. The
ranking relied in large part on whether the U.S. Attorney ``exhibit[ed]
loyalty to the President and Attorney General.''
Mr. Speaker, until exposed by this unfortunate episode, United States
Attorneys were expected to, and in fact did exercise, wide discretion
in the use of resources to further the priorities of their districts.
Largely a result of its origins as a distinct prosecutorial branch of
the Federal Government, the office of the United States Attorney
traditionally operated with an unusual level of independence from the
Justice Department in a broad range of daily activities. That practice
served the Nation well for more than 200 years. The practice that has
been in place for less than 2 years has served the Nation poorly. It
needs to end.
Mr. Speaker, during the full committee markup of H.R. 580, I brought
to my colleagues' attention the value of including in the bill or
committee report the core congressional findings that forms the
justification for this legislation. Briefly stated, those findings are
as follows:
The Congress finds as follows:
(1) That United States Attorneys are ``inferior officers'' and
therefore are subject to the Constitution's discretionary appointment
provisions authorizing the Congress to vest the appointment power in
the President alone or the judiciary.
(2) Vesting the authority in the United States Attorney General to
appoint an interim United States Attorney to serve an indefinite term
undermines the confirmation process of the United States Senate and
removes a legislative check on executive power.
(3) Vesting residual power to appoint an interim United States
Attorney in the Federal district court in which the vacancy occurs
constitutes an important judicial check on executive power.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 580 is a thoughtful and well crafted legislative
measure which will restore public confidence in the process by which
interim United States Attorneys are appointed. I strongly support the
bill and urge all Members to do likewise.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, the American people
must have full confidence in the integrity and the independence of the
United States Attorneys in charge of Federal prosecutions throughout
the country, in every State. While they owe the President their
appointments, once they are in their jobs their enforcement decisions
must be unquestionably above politics; and that is why we are here
today.
Senate confirmation is required for each one of them in an open and
public process, and it is a critical safeguard against politicization
of our prosecutorial system. This safeguard has been severely
compromised by the secret change that has been referred to, and this
bill restores the safeguards.
{time} 1800
I ask my colleagues to fully support this measure on both sides of
the aisle.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this legislation would return the
procedures for appointing interim U.S. Attorneys to what it was before
Congress reauthorized the PATRIOT Act.
Some have claimed that the PATRIOT Act's reform was used to avoid
Senate confirmation of permanent U.S. attorneys. To prevent that
alleged abuse, this bill, H.R. 580, was rushed headlong through the
Judiciary Committee.
One hearing was held on the bill. But that hearing focused mostly on
the current U.S. Attorney controversy, not the bill, itself. It was
then pushed immediately to the full committee, without an opportunity
for subcommittee mark-up.
Republicans on the Judiciary Committee would have liked to have
worked more with the Democrats in a bipartisan fashion to improve the
existing law. We might well have found a better solution.
The majority's own witnesses at the hearing, for example, testified
that much of the problem with the interim appointments process is the
time it takes to obtain Senate confirmation. This bill, however, does
not address that problem.
Given more time, we might have considered some promising ideas from
the other side of the Capitol.
Senator Kyl, for example, proposed a 120-day interim appointment
power for the Executive Branch, and a 120-day clock for the Senate to
confirm permanent appointees. This would have addressed the principal
problem.
Senator Sessions proposed to set qualification standards for judicial
appointments of interim appointees. These standards would have helped
prevent unsuitable judicial appointees--assuming, for the purposes of
argument, that there should be any judicial appointees of Executive
Branch prosecutors.
This bill would allow judges to appoint the very Executive Branch
prosecutors practicing before them, and would raise legal, ethical and
practical concerns. Surely we could have done better than return to a
flawed law of the past.
The rush to legislation also led to an under-considered amendment
adopted at committee mark-up. That amendment would preclude the use of
the full range of tried and true tools in the Vacancy Reform Act to
obtain interim U.S. Attorneys.
Specifically, it would preclude the President from reaching out to
Senate-confirmed, Presidential appointees serving in other capacities,
rather than just career civil servants, to serve in these important
posts on an interim basis.
The amendment limits the pool of qualified individuals to serve
temporarily as U.S. Attorneys, so it weakens the federal government's
ability to fight crime.
In these times of the War on Terror and the continuing, age-old war
on crime, the service of U.S. Attorneys--the front line of federal law
enforcement--is more than ever a matter of first importance to the
Nation. Their appointment is serious business.
We should not have rushed to judgment in attending to this business,
but instead have given the legislative process the time that it
deserves.
We have missed an opportunity to improve this bill. The American
people have not been well-served.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 580, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. CONYERS. 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 and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this question will
be postponed.
____________________
SAFETEA-LU TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS ACT
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 1195) to amend the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users to make technical
corrections, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
[[Page 7652]]
H.R. 1195
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
TITLE I--HIGHWAY PROVISIONS
SECTION 101. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.
(a) Correction of Internal References in Disadvantaged
Business Enterprises.--Paragraphs (3)(A) and (5) of section
1101(b) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat.
1156) are amended by striking ``paragraph (1)'' each place it
appears and inserting ``paragraph (2)''.
(b) Correction of Distribution of Obligation Authority.--
Section 1102(c)(5) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119
Stat. 1158) is amended by striking ``among the States''.
(c) Correction of Federal Lands Highways.--Section 1119 of
the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1190) is amended by
striking subsection (m) and inserting the following:
``(m) Forest Highways.--Of the amounts made available for
public lands highways under section 1101--
``(1) not more than $20,000,000 for each fiscal year may be
used for the maintenance of forest highways;
``(2) not more than $1,000,000 for each fiscal year may be
used for signage identifying public hunting and fishing
access; and
``(3) not more than $10,000,000 for each fiscal year shall
be used by the Secretary of Agriculture to pay the costs of
facilitating the passage of aquatic species beneath forest
roads (as defined in section 101(a) of title 23, United
States Code), including the costs of constructing,
maintaining, replacing, and removing culverts and bridges, as
appropriate.''.
(d) Correction of Description of National Corridor
Infrastructure Improvement Project.--Item number 1 of the
table contained in section 1302(e) of the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (119 Stat. 1205) is amended in the State column by
inserting ``LA,'' after ``TX,''.
(e) Correction of Interstate Route 376 High Priority
Designation.--
(1) In general.--Section 1105(c)(79) of the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat.
2032; 119 Stat. 1213) is amended by striking ``and on United
States Route 422''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 1105(e)(5)(B)(i)(I) of
the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991
(105 Stat. 2033; 119 Stat. 1213) is amended by striking ``and
United States Route 422''.
(f) Correction of Infrastructure Finance Section.--Section
1602(d)(1) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat.
1247) is amended by striking ``through 189 as sections 601
through 609, respectively'' and inserting ``through 190 as
sections 601 through 610, respectively''.
(g) Transportation Systems Management and Operations
Defined.--Section 101(a) of title 23, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(39) Transportation systems management and operations.--
``(A) In general.--The term `transportation systems
management and operations' means an integrated program to
optimize the performance of existing infrastructure through
the implementation of multimodal and intermodal, cross-
jurisdictional systems, services, and projects designed to
preserve capacity and improve security, safety, and
reliability of the transportation system.
``(B) Inclusions.--The term `transportation systems
management and operations' includes--
``(i) regional operations collaboration and coordination
activities between transportation and public safety agencies;
and
``(ii) improvements to the transportation system, such as
traffic detection and surveillance, arterial management,
freeway management, demand management, work zone management,
emergency management, electronic toll collection, automated
enforcement, traffic incident management, roadway weather
management, traveler information services, commercial vehicle
operations, traffic control, freight management, and
coordination of highway, rail, transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian operations.''.
(h) Correction of Reference in Apportionment of Highway
Safety Improvement Program Funds.--Effective October 1, 2006,
section 104(b)(5)(A)(iii) of title 23, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``the Federal-aid system'' each place it
appears and inserting ``Federal-aid highways''.
(i) Correction of Amendment To Advance Construction.--
Section 115 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by
redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (c).
(j) Correction of High Priority Projects.--Section 117 of
title 23, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (d) through (h) as
subsections (e) through (i), respectively;
(2) by redesignating the second subsection (c) (relating to
Federal share) as subsection (d);
(3) in subsection (a)(2)(A) by inserting ``(112 Stat.
257)'' after ``21st Century''; and
(4) in subsection (a)(2)(B)--
(A) by striking ``subsection (b)'' and inserting
``subsection (c)''; and
(B) by striking ``SAFETEA-LU'' and inserting ``Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1256)''.
(k) Correction of Transfer of Unused Protective-Device
Funds to Other Highway Safety Improvement Program Projects.--
Section 130(e)(2) of title 23, United States Code, is amended
by striking ``purposes under this subsection'' and inserting
``highway safety improvement program purposes''.
(l) Metropolitan Transportation Planning.--
(1) Section 134(j)(3)(D) of title 23, United States Code,
is amended--
(A) by inserting ``or the identified phase'' before
``within the time''; and
(B) by inserting ``or the identified phase'' before the
period at the end.
(2) Section 134(k)(2) of such title is amended by striking
``a metropolitan planning area serving''.
(m) Correction of Highway Bridge Program.--
(1) In general.--Section 144 of title 23, United States
Code, is amended--
(A) in the section heading by striking ``replacement and
rehabilitation'';
(B) in subsections (b), (c)(1), and (e) by striking
``Federal-aid system'' each place it appears and inserting
``Federal-aid highway'';
(C) in subsections (c)(2) and (o) by striking ``the
Federal-aid system'' each place it appears and inserting
``Federal-aid highways'';
(D) in the heading to paragraph (4) of subsection (d) by
inserting ``systematic'' before ``preventive'';
(E) in subsection (e) by striking ``off-system bridges''
each place it appears and inserting ``bridges not on Federal-
aid highways'';
(F) by striking subsection (f);
(G) by redesignating subsections (g) through (s) as
subsections (f) through (r), respectively;
(H) in paragraph (2) of subsection (f) (as redesignated by
subparagraph (G)) by striking the paragraph heading and
inserting ``Bridges not on federal-aid highways'';
(I) in subsection (m) (as redesignated by subparagraph (G))
by striking the subsection heading and inserting ``Program
for Bridges Not on Federal-Aid Highways''; and
(J) in subsection (n)(4)(B) (as redesignated by
subparagraph (G)) by striking ``State highway agency'' and
inserting ``State transportation department''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Metropolitan planning.--Section 104(f)(1) of such title
is amended by striking ``replacement and rehabilitation''.
(B) Equity bonus program.--Subsections (a)(2)(C) and
(b)(2)(C) of section 105 of such title are amended by
striking ``replacement and rehabilitation'' each place it
appears.
(C) Analysis.--The analysis for chapter 1 of such title is
amended in the item relating to section 144 by striking
``replacement and rehabilitation''.
(n) Correction of National Scenic Byways Program
Coverage.--Section 162 of title 23, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(3)(B) by striking ``a National Scenic
Byway under subparagraph (A)'' and inserting ``a National
Scenic Byway, an All-American Road, or one of America's
Byways under paragraph (1)''; and
(2) in subsection (c)(3) by striking ``or All-American
Road'' each place it appears and inserting ``All-American
Road, or one of America's Byways''.
(o) Correction of Reference in Toll Provision.--Section
166(b)(5)(C) of title 23, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``paragraph (3)'' and inserting ``paragraph (4)''.
(p) Correction of Recreational Trails Program Apportionment
Exceptions.--Section 206(d)(3)(A) of title 23, United States
Code, is amended by striking ``(B), (C), and (D)'' and
inserting ``(B) and (C)''.
(q) Consolidation of Grant Applications.--Section 402(m) of
title 23, United States Code, is amended in the first
sentence--
(1) by striking ``through'' and inserting ``for which'';
and
(2) by inserting ``is appropriate'' before the period at
the end.
(r) Correction of Infrastructure Finance.--Section
601(a)(3) of title 23, United States Code, is amended by
inserting ``bbb minus, BBB (low),'' after ``Baa3,''.
(s) Correction of Miscellaneous Typographical Errors.--
(1) Section 1401 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119
Stat. 1226) is amended by redesignating subsections (d) and
(e) as subsections (c) and (d), respectively.
(2) Section 1404(e) of such Act (119 Stat. 1229) is amended
by inserting ``tribal,'' after ``local,''.
(3) Section 10211(b)(2) of such Act (119 Stat. 1937) is
amended by striking ``plan administer'' and inserting ``plan
and administer''.
[[Page 7653]]
(4) Section 10212(a) of such Act (119 Stat. 1937) is
amended--
(A) by inserting ``equity bonus,'' after ``minimum
guarantee,'';
(B) by striking ``freight intermodal connectors'' and
inserting ``railway-highway crossings'';
(C) by striking ``high risk rural road,''; and
(D) by inserting after ``highway safety improvement
programs'' the following: ``(and separately the set aside for
the high risk rural road program)''.
SEC. 102. MAGLEV.
(a) Funding.--Section 1101(a)(18) of the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (119 Stat. 1155) is amended by striking subparagraphs
(A) and (B) and inserting the following:
``(A) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
``(B) $35,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 and
2009.''.
(b) Contract Authority.--Section 1307 of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1217) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(e) Contract Authority.--Funds authorized under section
1101(a)(18) shall be available for obligation in the same
manner as if the funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of
title 23, United States Code; except that the funds shall not
be transferable and shall remain available until expended,
and the Federal share of the cost of a project to be carried
out with such funds shall be 80 percent.''.
SEC. 103. PROJECTS OF NATIONAL AND REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE AND
NATIONAL CORRIDOR INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT
PROJECTS.
(a) Project of National and Regional Significance.--The
table contained in section 1301(m) of the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity: A Legacy for Users
(119 Stat. 1203) is amended in item number 4 by striking the
project description and inserting ``$7,400,000 for planning,
design, and construction of a new American border plaza at
the Blue Water Bridge in or near Port Huron; $12,600,000 for
integrated highway realignment and grade separations at Port
Huron to eliminate road blockages from NAFTA rail traffic''.
(b) National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Project.--
The table contained in section 1302(e) of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1205) is amended in item number
23 by striking the project description and inserting
``Improvements to State Road 312, Hammond''.
SEC. 104. IDLING REDUCTION FACILITIES.
Section 111(d) of title 23, United States Code, is
repealed.
SEC. 105. PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS.
(a) In General.--The table contained in section 1702 of the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1256) is amended--
(1) in item number 34 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Removal and Reconfiguration of Interstate
ramps, I-40, Memphis'';
(2) by striking item number 61;
(3) in item number 87 by striking the project description
and inserting ``M-291 highway outer road improvement
project'';
(4) in item number 128 by striking ``$2,400,000'' and
inserting ``$4,800,000'';
(5) in item number 154 by striking ``Virginia'' and
inserting ``Eveleth'';
(6) in item number 193 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Improvements to or access to Route 108 to
enhance access to the business park near Rumford'';
(7) in item number 240 by striking ``$800,000'' and
inserting ``$2,400,000'';
(8) by striking item number 248;
(9) in item number 274 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Intersection improvements at Belleville and
Ecorse Roads and approach roadways, and widen Belleville Road
from Ecorse to Tyler, Van Buren Township, Michigan'';
(10) in item number 277 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Construct connector road from Rushing Drive
North to Grand Ave., Williamson County'';
(11) in item number 395 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Plan and construct interchange at I-65, from
existing SR-109 to I-65'';
(12) in item number 463 by striking ``Cookeville'' and
inserting ``Putnam County'';
(13) in item number 576 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Design, right-of-way, and construction of
Nebraska Highway 35 between Norfolk and South Sioux City,
including an interchange at Milepost 1 on I-129'';
(14) in item number 595 by striking ``Street Closure at''
and inserting ``Transportation improvement project near'';
(15) in item number 649 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Construction and enhancement of the Fillmore
Avenue Corridor, Buffalo'';
(16) in item number 655 by inserting ``, safety improvement
construction,'' after ``Environmental studies'';
(17) in item number 676 by striking the project description
and inserting ``St. Croix River crossing project, Wisconsin
State Highway 64, St. Croix County, Wisconsin, to Minnesota
State Highway 36, Washington County'';
(18) in item number 770 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Improve existing Horns Hill Road in North
Newark, Ohio, from Waterworks Road to Licking Springs Road'';
(19) in item number 777 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Akutan Airport access'';
(20) in item number 829 by striking the project description
and inserting ``$400,000 to conduct New Bedford/Fairhaven
Bridge modernization study; $1,000,000 to design and build
New Bedford Business Park access road'';
(21) in item number 881 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Pedestrian safety improvements near North
Atlantic Boulevard, Monterey Park'';
(22) in item number 923 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Improve safety of a horizontal curve on
Clarksville St. 0.25 miles north of 275th Rd. in Grandview
Township, Edgar County'';
(23) in item number 947 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Third East/West River Crossing, St. Lucie
River'';
(24) in item numbers 959 and 3327 by striking ``Northern
Section,'' each place it appears;
(25) in item number 963 by striking the project description
and inserting ``For engineering, right-of-way acquisition,
and reconstruction of 2 existing lanes on Manhattan Road from
Baseline Road to Route 53'';
(26) in item number 983 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Land acquisition for highway mitigation in
Cecil, Kent, Queen Annes, and Worcester Counties'';
(27) in item number 1039 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Widen State Route 98, including
storm drain developments, from D. Navarro Avenue to State
Route 111'';
(28) in item number 1047 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Bridge and road work at Little
Susitna River Access road in Matanuska-Susitna Borough'';
(29) in item number 1124 by striking ``bridge over
Stillwater River, Orono'' and by inserting ``routes'';
(30) in item number 1206 by striking ``Pleasantville'' and
inserting ``Briarcliff Manor'';
(31) in item number 1281 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Upgrade roads in Attala County
District 4 (Roads 4211 and 4204), Kosciusko, Ward 2, and
Ethel, Attala County'';
(32) in item number 1487 by striking ``$800,000'' and
inserting ``$1,600,000'';
(33) in item number 1575 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Highway and road signage, and
traffic signal synchronization and upgrades, in Shippensburg
Boro, Shippensburg Township, and surrounding
municipalities'';
(34) in item number 1661 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Sheldon West Extension in
Matanuska-Susitna Borough'';
(35) in item number 1810 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Design, engineering, ROW
acquisition, construction, and construction engineering for
the reconstruction of TH 95, from 12th Avenue to CSAH 13,
including bridge and approaches, ramps, intersecting
roadways, signals, turn lanes, and multiuse trail, North
Branch'';
(36) in item number 1852 by striking ``Milepost 9.3'' and
inserting ``Milepost 24.3'';
(37) in item numbers 1926 and 2893 by striking the project
descriptions and inserting ``Grading, paving roads, and the
transfer of rail-to-truck for the intermodal facility at
Rickenbacker Airport, Columbus, Ohio'';
(38) in item number 1933 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Enhance Byzantine Latino Quarter
transit plazas at Normandie and Pico, and Hoover and Pico,
Los Angeles, by improving streetscapes, including expanding
concrete and paving'';
(39) in item number 1975 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Point MacKenzie Access Road
improvements in Matanuska-Susitna Borough'';
(40) in item number 2015 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Heidelberg Borough/Scott
Township/Carnegie Borough for design, engineering,
acquisition, and construction of streetscaping enhancements,
paving, lighting and safety upgrades, and parking
improvements'';
(41) in item number 2087 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Railroad crossing improvement on
Illinois Route 82 in Geneseo'';
(42) in item number 2211 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Construct road projects and
transportation enhancements as part of or connected to
RiverScape Phase III, Montgomery County, Ohio'';
(43) in item number 2234 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``North Atherton Signal
Coordination Project in Centre County'' and ``$400,000'',
respectively;
(44) in item number 2316 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Construct a new bridge at Indian
Street, Martin County'';
(45) in item number 2420 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Preconstruction and construction
activities of U.S. 51 between the Assumption Bypass and
Vandalia'';
[[Page 7654]]
(46) in item number 2482 by striking ``Country'' and
inserting ``County'';
(47) in item number 2663 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Rosemead Boulevard safety
enhancement and beautification, Temple City'';
(48) in item number 2671 by striking ``from 2 to 5 lanes
and improve alignment within rights-of-way in St. George''
and inserting ``, St. George'';
(49) in item number 2743 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Improve safety of culvert
replacement on 250th Rd. between 460th St. and Cty Hwy 20 in
Grandview Township, Edgar County'';
(50) by striking item number 2800;
(51) in item number 2826 by striking ``State Street and
Cajon Boulevard'' and inserting ``Palm Avenue'';
(52) in item number 2931 by striking ``Frazho Road'' and
inserting ``Martin Road'';
(53) in item number 3047 by inserting ``and roadway
improvements'' after ``safety project'' ;
(54) in item number 3078 by striking the project
description and inserting ``U.S. 2/Sultan Basin Road
improvements in Sultan'';
(55) in item number 3174 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Improving Outer Harbor access
through planning, design, construction, and relocations of
Southtowns Connector-NY Route 5, Fuhrmann Boulevard, and a
bridge connecting the Outer Harbor to downtown Buffalo at the
Inner Harbor'';
(56) in item number 3219 by striking ``Forest'' and
inserting ``Warren'';
(57) in item number 3254 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Reconstruct PA Route 274/34
Corridor, Perry County'';
(58) in item number 3260 by striking ``Lake Shore Drive''
and inserting ``Lakeshore Drive and parking facility/entrance
improvements serving the Museum of Science and Industry'';
(59) in item number 3368 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Plan, design, and engineering,
Ludlam Trail, Miami'';
(60) in item number 3410 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Design, purchase land, and
construct sound walls along the west side of I-65 from
approximately 950 feet south of the Harding Place interchange
south to Hogan Road'';
(61) in item number 3537 by inserting ``and the study of
alternatives along the North South Corridor,'' after
``Valley'';
(62) in item number 3582 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Improving Outer Harbor access
through planning, design, construction, and relocations of
Southtowns Connector-NY Route 5, Fuhrmann Boulevard, and a
bridge connecting the Outer Harbor to downtown Buffalo at the
Inner Harbor'';
(63) in item number 3604 by inserting
``/Kane Creek Boulevard'' after ``500 West'';
(64) in item number 3632 by striking the State, project
description, and amount and inserting ``FL'', ``Pine Island
Road pedestrian overpass, city of Tamarac'', and
``$610,000'', respectively;
(65) in item number 3634 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``FL'', ``West Avenue Bridge, city of Miami Beach'', and
``$620,000'', respectively;
(66) in item number 3673 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Improve marine dry-dock and
facilities in Ketchikan'';
(67) in item number 2942 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Redesigning the intersection of
Business U.S. 322/High Street and Rosedale Avenue and
constructing a new East Campus Drive between High Street
(U.S. 322) and Matlock Street at West Chester University,
West Chester, Pennsylvania'';
(68) in item number 2781 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Highway and road signage, road
construction, and other transportation improvement and
enhancement projects on or near Highway 26, in Riverton and
surrounding areas'';
(69) in item number 2430 by striking ``200 South
Interchange'' and inserting ``400 South Interchange'';
(70) by striking item number 20;
(71) in item number 424 by striking ``$264,000'' and
inserting ``$644,000'';
(72) in item number 1210 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Town of New Windsor--Riley Road,
Shore Drive, and area road improvements'';
(73) by striking item numbers 68, 905, and 1742;
(74) in item number 1059 by striking ``$240,000'' and
inserting ``$420,000'';
(75) in item number 2974 by striking ``$120,000'' and
inserting ``$220,000'';
(76) by striking item numbers 841, 960, and 2030;
(77) in item number 1278 by striking ``$740,000'' and
inserting ``$989,600'';
(78) in item number 207 by striking ``$13,600,000'' and
inserting ``$13,200,000'';
(79) in item number 2656 by striking ``$12,228,000'' and
inserting ``$8,970,000'';
(80) in item number 1983 by striking ``$1,600,000'' and
inserting ``$1,000,000'';
(81) in item number 753 by striking ``$2,700,000'' and
inserting ``$3,200,000'';
(82) in item number 64 by striking ``$6,560,000'' and
inserting ``$8,480,000'';
(83) in item number 2338 by striking ``$1,600,000'' and
inserting ``$1,800,000'';
(84) in item number 1533 by striking ``$392,000'' and
inserting ``$490,000'';
(85) in item number 1354 by striking ``$40,000'' and
inserting ``$50,000'';
(86) in item number 3106 by striking ``$400,000'' and
inserting ``$500,000'';
(87) in item number 799 by striking ``$1,600,000'' and
inserting ``$2,000,000'';
(88) in item number 159--
(A) by striking ``Construct interchange for 146th St. and
I-69'' and inserting ``Upgrade 146th St. to I-69 Access'';
and
(B) by striking ``$2,400,000'' and inserting
``$3,200,000'';
(89) by striking item number 2936;
(90) in item number 3138 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Elimination of highway-railway
crossing along the KO railroad from Salina to Osborne to
increase safety and reduce congestion'';
(91) in item number 2274 by striking ``between Farmington
and Merriman'' and inserting ``between Hines Drive and
Inkster, Flamingo Street between Ann Arbor Trail and Joy
Road, and the intersection of Warren Road and Newburgh
Road'';
(92) in item number 52 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Pontiac Trail between E. Liberty and McHattie
Street'';
(93) in item number 1544 by striking ``connector'';
(94) in item number 2573 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Rehabilitation of Sugar Hill Road
in North Salem, NY'';
(95) in item number 1450 by striking ``III-VI'' and
inserting ``III-VII'';
(96) in item number 2637 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Construction, road and safety
improvements in Geauga County, OH'';
(97) in item number 2342 by inserting ``and to Heisley
Road'' after ``Interchange'';
(98) in item number 161 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Construct False Pass causeway and road to the
terminus of the south arm breakwater project'';
(99) in item number 2002 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Providence Hospital public access
road and enhancements, including access connections between
the proposed Providence Regional Administration Building and
Piper Street, to improve access and circulation in the
Providence Southwest Campus'';
(100) in item number 2023 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Biking and pedestrian trail
construction, Kentland'';
(101) in item number 2035 by striking ``Replace'' and
inserting ``Repair'';
(102) in item number 2511 by striking ``Replace'' and
inserting ``Rehabilitate'';
(103) in item number 2981 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Roadway improvements on Highway
262 on the Navajo Nation in Aneth'';
(104) in item number 2068 by inserting ``and approaches''
after ``capacity'';
(105) in item number 98 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Right-of-way and construction for the 77th
Street reconstruction project, including the Lyndale Avenue
Bridge over I-494, Richfield'';
(106) in item number 1783 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Clark Road access improvements,
Jacksonville'';
(107) in item number 2711 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Main Street Road Improvements
through Springfield, Jacksonville'';
(108) in item number 3485 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Improve SR 105 (Hecksher Drive)
from Drummond Point to August Road, including bridges across
the Broward River and Dunns Creek, Jacksonville'';
(109) in item number 3486 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Construct improvements to NE 19th
Street/NE 19th Terrace from NE 3rd Avenue to NE 8th Avenue,
Gainesville'';
(110) in item number 3487 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Construct improvements to NE 25th
Street from SR 26 (University Blvd.) to NE 8th Avenue,
Gainesville'';
(111) in item number 803 by striking ``St. Clair County''
and inserting ``city of Madison'';
(112) in item number 615 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Roadway improvements to Jackson
Avenue between Jericho Turnpike and Teibrook Avenue'';
(113) in item number 889 by striking the project
description and inserting ``U.S. 160, State Highway 3 to east
of the Florida River'';
(114) in item number 324 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Paving a portion of H-58 from
Buck Hill to 4,000 feet east of Hurricane River'';
(115) in item number 301 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Improvements for St. Georges
Avenue between East Baltimore Avenue on the southwest and
Chandler Avenue on the northeast'';
(116) in item number 1519 by inserting ``at the
intersection of Quincy/West Drinker/Electric Streets near the
Dunmore School complex'' after ``roadway redesign'';
[[Page 7655]]
(117) in item number 2604 by inserting ``on Coolidge,
Bridge (from Main to Monroe), Skytop (from Gedding to
Skytop), Atwell (from Bear Creek Rd. to Pittston Township),
Wood (to Bear Creek Rd.), Pine, Oak (from Penn Avenue to
Lackawanna Avenue), McLean, Second, and Lolli Lane'' after
``roadway redesign'';
(118) in item number 1157 by inserting ``on Mill Street
from Prince Street to Roberts Street, John Street from
Roberts Street to end, Thomas Street from Roberts Street to
end, Williams Street from Roberts Street to end, Charles
Street from Roberts Street to end, Fair Street from Roberts
Street to end, Newport Avenue from East Kirmar Avenue to
end'' after ``roadway redesign'';
(119) in item number 805 by inserting ``on Oak Street from
Stark Street to the township line at Mayock Street and on
East Mountain Boulevard'' after ``roadway redesign'';
(120) in item number 2704 by inserting ``on West Cemetery
Street and Frederick Courts'' after ``roadway redesign'';
(121) in item number 3136 by inserting ``on Walden Drive
and Greenwood Hills Drive'' after ``roadway redesign'';
(122) in item number 1363 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Design, engineering, right-of-way
acquisition, and construction of streetscaping enhancements,
paving, lighting, safety improvements, handicap access ramps,
parking, and roadway redesign on Bilbow Street from Church
Street to Pugh Street, on Pugh Street from Swallow Street to
Main Street, Jones Lane from Main Street to Hoblak Street,
Cherry Street from Green Street to Church Street, Main Street
from Jackson Street to end, Short Street from Cherry Street
to Main Street, and Hillside Avenue in Edwardsville Borough,
Luzerne County'';
(123) in item number 883 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Design, engineering, right-of-way
acquisition, and construction of streetscaping enhancements,
paving, lighting, parking, roadway redesign, and safety
improvements (including curbing, stop signs, crosswalks, and
pedestrian sidewalks) at and around the 3-way intersection
involving Susquehanna Avenue, Erie Street, and Second Street
in West Pittston, Luzerne County'';
(124) in item number 625 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Design, engineering, right-of-way
acquisition, and construction of streetscaping enhancements,
paving, lighting, safety improvements, parking, and roadway
redesign on Sampson Street, Dunn Avenue, Powell Street,
Josephine Street, Pittston Avenue, Railroad Street, McClure
Avenue, and Baker Street in Old Forge Borough, Lackawanna
County'';
(125) in item number 372 by inserting ``, replacement of
the Nesbitt Street Bridge, and placement of a guard rail
adjacent to St. Vladimir's Cemetery on Mountain Road (S.R.
1007)'' after ``roadway redesign'';
(126) in item number 2308 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Design, engineering, right-of-way
acquisition, and construction of streetscaping enhancements,
paving, lighting, safety improvements, parking, and roadway
redesign, including a project to establish emergency access
to Catherino Drive from South Valley Avenue in Throop
Borough, Lackawanna County'';
(127) in item number 967 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Design, engineering, right-of-way
acquisition, and construction of streetscaping enhancements,
paving, lighting, safety improvements, parking, roadway
redesign, and catch basin restoration and replacement on
Cherry Street, Willow Street, Eno Street, Flat Road, Krispin
Street, Parrish Street, Carver Street, Church Street,
Franklin Street, Carolina Street, East Main Street, and Rear
Shawnee Avenue in Plymouth Borough, Luzerne County'';
(128) in item number 989 by inserting ``on Old Ashley Road,
Ashley Street, Phillips Street, First Street, Ferry Road, and
Division Street'' after ``roadway redesign'';
(129) in item number 342 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Design, engineering, right-of-way
acquisition, and construction of streetscaping enhancements,
paving, lighting, safety improvements, parking, roadway
redesign, and cross pipe and catch basin restoration and
replacement on Northgate, Mandy Court, Vine Street, and 36th
Street in Milnesville West, and on Hillside Drive (including
the widening of the bridge on Hillside Drive), Club 40 Road,
Sunburst and Venisa Drives, and Stockton #7 Road in Hazle
Township, Luzerne County'';
(130) in item number 2332 by striking ``Monroe County'' and
inserting ``Carbon, Monroe, Pike, and Wayne Counties'';
(131) in item number 2436 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``For Wilkes-Barre to
design, acquire land, and construct a parking garage or
parkade, streetscaping enhancements, paving, lighting, safety
improvements, and roadway redesign at and around the Sterling
Hotel in Wilkes-Barre, including on River Street, Market
Street, or Franklin Street (or any combination thereof) to
the vicinity of the Irem Temple'' and ``$3,000,000'',
respectively;
(132) in item number 2723 by striking ``$4,000,000'' and by
inserting ``$3,150,000'';
(133) in item number 61 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``AL'', ``Grade crossing improvements along Wiregrass Central
RR at Boll Weevil Bypass in Enterprise, AL'', and
``$250,000'', respectively;
(134) in item number 314 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``Streetscape
enhancements to the transit and pedestrian corridor, Fort
Lauderdale, Downtown Development Authority'' and
``$610,000'', respectively;
(135) in item number 1639 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Operational and highway safety
improvements on Hwy 94 between the 20 mile marker post in
Jamul and Hwy 188 in Tecate'';
(136) in item number 2860 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Roadway improvements from
Halchita to Mexican Hat on the Navajo Nation'';
(137) in item number 2549 by striking ``on Navy Pier'';
(138) in item number 2804 by striking ``on Navy Pier'';
(139) in item number 1328 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Construct public access roadways
and pedestrian safety improvements in and around Montclair
State University in Clifton'';
(140) in item number 2559 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Construct sound walls on Route
164 at and near the Maersk interchange'';
(141) in item number 1849 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Highway, traffic-flow, pedestrian
facility, and streetscape improvements, Pittsburgh'';
(142) in item number 697 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Highway, traffic-flow, pedestrian
facility, and streetscape improvements, Pittsburgh'';
(143) in item number 3597 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Road Alignment from IL Route 159
to Sullivan Drive, Swansea'';
(144) in item number 2352 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Streetscaping and transportation
enhancements on 7th Street in Calexico, traffic signalization
on Highway 78, construction of the Renewable Energy and
Transportation Learning Center, improve and enlarge parking
lot, and create bus stop, Brawley'';
(145) in item number 3482 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Conduct a study to examine multi-
modal improvements to the I-5 corridor between the Main
Street Interchange and State Route 54'';
(146) in item number 1275 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Scoping, permitting, engineering,
construction management, and construction of Riverbank Park
Bike Trail, Kearny'';
(147) in item number 726 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Grade Separation at Vanowen and
Clybourn, Burbank'';
(148) in item number 1579 by striking the project
description and inserting ``San Gabriel Blvd. rehabilitation
project, Mission Road to Broadway, San Gabriel'';
(149) in item number 2690 by striking the project
description and inserting ``San Gabriel Blvd. rehabilitation
project, Mission Road to Broadway, San Gabriel'';
(150) in item number 2811 by striking the project
description and inserting ``San Gabriel Blvd. rehabilitation
project, Mission Road to Broadway, San Gabriel'';
(151) in item number 259 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Design and construction of the
Clair Nelson Intermodal Center in Finland, Lake County'';
(152) in item number 3456 by striking the project
description and by inserting ``Completion of Phase II/Part I
of a project on Elizabeth Avenue in Coleraine to west of
Itasca County State Aid Highway 15 in Itasca County'';
(153) in item number 2429 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Upgrade streets, undertake
streetscaping, and implement traffic and pedestrian safety
signalization improvements and highway-rail crossing safety
improvements, Oak Lawn'';
(154) in item number 766 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Design and construction of the
walking path at Ellis Pond, Norwood'';
(155) in item number 3474 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Yellow River Trail, Newton
County'';
(156) in item number 3291 by striking the amount and
inserting ``$200,000'';
(157) in item number 3635 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``GA'', ``Access Road in Montezuma'', and ``$200,000'',
respectively;
(158) in item number 716 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Conduct a project study report
for new Highway 99 Interchange between SR 165 and Bradbury
Road, and safety improvements/realignment of SR 165, serving
Turlock/Hilmar region'';
(159) in item number 1386 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``Pedestrian and bicycle
facilities, and street lighting in Haddon Heights'' and
``$300,000'', respectively;
(160) in item number 2720 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``Pedestrian and bicycle
facilities and street lighting in Barrington and streetscape
improvements to Clements Bridge Road from the circle at the
White Horse Pike to NJ Turnpike overpass in Barrington'' and
``$700,000'', respectively;
[[Page 7656]]
(161) in item number 2523 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Penobscot Riverfront Development
for bicycle trails, amenities, traffic circulation
improvements, and waterfront access and stabilization, Bangor
and Brewer'';
(162) in item number 545 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Planning, design, and
construction of improvements to the highway systems
connecting to Lewistown and Auburn downtowns'';
(163) in item number 2168 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``Study and design,
engineering, right-of-way acquisition, and construction of
street improvements, streetscaping enhancements, paving,
lighting, safety improvements, along the Rt. 315 corridor
from Dupont to Wilkes Barre'' and ``$1,000,000'',
respectively;
(164) in item number 170 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``Study of a Maglev
train route from Northeast Pennsylvania through New Jersey
and New York'' and ``$1,600,000'', respectively;
(165) in item number 2366 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Design, engineering, right-of-way
acquisition, and paving of the parking lot at the Casey Plaza
in Wilkes-Barre Township'';
(166) in item number 826 by striking ``and Interstate 81''
and inserting ``and exit 168 on Interstate 81 or the
intersection of the connector road with Northampton St.'';
(167) in item number 2144 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Design, engineering, right-of-way
acquisition and construction of streetscaping enhancements,
paving, lighting, safety improvements, parking, and roadway
redesign on Third Street from Pittston Avenue to Packer
Street; Swift Street from Packer Street to Railroad Street;
Clark Street from Main Street to South Street; School Street
from Main Street to South Street; Plane Street from Grove
Street to William Street; John Street from 4 John Street to
William Street; Grove Street from Plane Street to Duryea
Borough line; Wood Street from Cherry Street to Hawthorne
Street in Avoca Borough, Luzerne County'';
(168) in item number 1765 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``Design, engineering,
right-of-way acquisition, and construction of street
improvements, streetscaping enhancements, paving, lighting,
safety improvements, parking, roadway redesign in Pittston,
including right-of-way acquisition, structure demolition, and
intersection safety improvements in the vicinity and
including the intersection of Main and William Streets in
Pittston'' and ``$1,600,000'', respectively;
(169) in item number 2957 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``Design, engineering,
land acquisition, right-of-way acquisition, and construction
of a parking garage, streetscapping enhancements, paving,
lighting, safety improvements, parking, and roadway redesign
in the city of Wilkes-Barre'' and ``$2,800,000'',
respectively;
(170) in item number 3283 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``Pedestrian access
improvements, including installation of infrastructure and
equipment for security and surveillance purposes at subway
stations in Astoria, New York'' and ``$1,300,000'',
respectively;
(171) in item number 3556 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``Design and
rehabilitate staircases used as streets due to the steep
grade of terrain in Bronx County'' and ``$1,100,000'',
respectively;
(172) by striking item number 203;
(173) by striking item number 552;
(174) by striking item number 590;
(175) by striking item number 759;
(176) by striking item number 879;
(177) by striking item number 1071;
(178) by striking item number 1382;
(179) by striking item number 1897;
(180) by striking item number 2553;
(181) in item number 3014 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``Design and Construct
school safety projects in New York City'' and ``$2,500,000'',
respectively;
(182) in item number 2375 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``Subsurface
environmental study to measure presence of methane and
benzene gasses in vicinity of Greenpoint, Brooklyn, and the
Kosciusko Bridge, resulting from the Newtown Creek oil
spill'' and ``$100,000'';
(183) in item number 221 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Study and implement
transportation improvements in the Breezy Point neighborhood
of Queens County'';
(184) in item number 2732 striking the project description
and inserting ``Pedestrian safety improvements in the
vicinity of LIRR stations'';
(185) by striking item number 99;
(186) in item number 398 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Construct a new 2-lane road
extending north from University Park Drive and improvements
to University Park Drive'';
(187) in item number 446 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Transportation improvements for
development of the Williamsport-Pile Bay Road corridor'';
(188) in item number 671 by striking ``and Pedestrian Trail
Expansion'' and inserting ``, including parking facilities
and Pedestrian Trail Expansion'';
(189) in item number 674 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``AL'', ``Grade crossing improvements along Conecuh Valley RR
at Henderson Highway (CR-21) in Troy, AL'', and ``$300,000'',
respectively;
(190) in item number 739 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``AL'', ``Grade crossing improvements along Luxapalila Valley
RR in Lamar and Fayette Counties, AL (Crossings at CR-6, CR-
20, SH-7, James Street, and College Drive)'', and
``$300,000'', respectively;
(191) in item number 746 by striking ``Planning and
construction of a bicycle trail adjacent to the I-90 and SR
615 Interchange in'' and inserting ``Planning, construction,
and extension of bicycle trails adjacent to the I-90 and SR
615 Interchange, along the Greenway Corridor and
throughout'';
(192) in item number 749 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``PA'', ``UPMC Heliport in Bedford'', and ``$750,000'',
respectively;
(193) in item number 813 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Preliminary design and study of
long-term roadway approach alternatives to TH 36/SH 64 St.
Croix River Crossing Project'';
(194) in item number 816 by striking ``$800,000'' and
inserting ``$880,000'';
(195) in item number 852 by striking ``Acquire Right-of-Way
for Ludlam Trail, Miami, Florida'' and inserting ``Planning,
design, and engineering, Ludlam Trail, Miami'';
(196) in item number 994 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``PA'', ``Construct 2 flyover ramps and S. Linden Street exit
for access to industrial sites in the cities of McKeesport
and Duquesne'', and ``$500,000'', respectively;
(197) in item number 1015 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Mississippi River Crossing
connecting I-94 and US 10 between US 160 and TH 101, MN'';
(198) in item number 1101 by striking the project
description and inserting ``I-285 underpass/tunnel assessment
and engineering and interchange improvements in Sandy
Springs'';
(199) in item number 1211 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``PA'', ``Road improvements and upgrades related to the
Pennsylvania State Baseball Stadium'', and ``$500,000'',
respectively;
(200) in item number 1345 by striking ``to Stony Creek
Park, 25 Mile Road in Shelby Township'' and inserting ``south
to the city of Utica'';
(201) in item number 1501 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Construction and right-of-way
acquisition of TH 241, CSAH 35 and associated streets in the
city of St. Michael'';
(202) in item number 1525 by striking ``north of CSX RR
Bridge'' and inserting ``US Highway 90'';
(203) in item number 1847 by striking ``Ferry'' and
inserting ``Dock'';
(204) in item number 2031 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Construct and improve Westside
Parkway in Fulton County'';
(205) in item number 2103 by striking ``$2,000,000'' and
inserting ``$3,000,000'';
(206) in item number 2219 by striking ``SR 91 in City of
Twinsburg, OH'' and inserting ``Center Valley Parkway in
Twinsburg, OH'';
(207) in item number 2302 by inserting ``and other road
improvements to Safford Street'' after ``crossings'';
(208) in item number 2560 by striking the project
description and inserting ``I-285 underpass/tunnel assessment
and engineering and interchange improvements in Sandy
Springs'';
(209) in item number 2563 by striking the project
description and amount and inserting ``Construct hike and
bike path as part of Bridgeview Bridge replacement in Macomb
County'' and ``$486,400'', respectively;
(210) in item number 2698 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Interchanges at I-95/Ellis Road
and between Grant Road and Micco Road, Brevard County'';
(211) in item number 3141 by striking ``$2,800,000'' and
inserting ``$1,800,000'';
(212) by striking item number 3160;
(213) in item number 3353 by inserting ``and construction''
after ``mitigation'';
(214) in item number 996 by striking ``$2,000,000'' and
inserting ``$687,000'';
(215) in item number 2166 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Design, right-of-way acquisition,
and construction for I-35 and CSAH2 interchange and CSAH2
corridor to TH61 in Forest Lake'';
(216) in item number 3251 by striking the project
description and inserting ``I-94 and Radio Drive Interchange
and frontage road project, design, right-of-way, and
construction, Woodbury'';
(217) in item number 1488 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Construct a 4-lane highway
between Maverick Junction and the Nebraska border'';
(218) in item number 3240 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Railroad-highway crossings in
Pierre'';
[[Page 7657]]
(219) in item number 1738 by striking ``Paving'' and
inserting ``Planning, design, and construction'';
(220) in item number 3672 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Pave remaining stretch of BIA
Route 4 from the junction of the BIA Route 4 and N8031 in
Pinon, AZ, to the Navajo and Hopi border'';
(221) in item number 2424 by striking ``Construction'' and
inserting ``preconstruction (including survey and
archeological clearances) and construction'';
(222) in item number 1216 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``PA'', ``For roadway construction improvements to Route 222
relocation, Lehigh County'', and ``$1,313,000'',
respectively;
(223) in item number 2956 by striking ``$1,360,000'' and
inserting ``$2,080,000'';
(224) in item number 1256 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``PA'', ``Construction of a bridge over Brandywine Creek as
part of the Boot Road extension project, Downingtown
Borough'', and ``$700,000'', respectively;
(225) in item number 1291 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``PA'', ``Enhance parking facilities in Chester Springs,
Historic Yellow Springs'', and ``$20,000'', respectively;
(226) in item number 1304 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``PA'', ``Improve the intersection at SR 100/SR 4003
(Kernsville Road), Lehigh County'', and ``$250,000'',
respectively;
(227) in item number 1357 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``PA'', ``Intersection signalization at SR 3020 (Newburg
Road)/Country Club Road, Northampton County'', and
``$250,000'', respectively;
(228) in item number 1395 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``PA'', ``Improve the intersection at SR 100/SR 29, Lehigh
County'', and ``$220,000'', respectively;
(229) in item number 80 by striking ``$4,544,000'' and
inserting ``$4,731,200'';
(230) in item number 2096 by striking ``$4,800,000'' and
inserting ``$5,217,600'';
(231) in item number 1496 by striking the matters in the
State, project description, and amount columns and inserting
``PA'', ``Study future needs of East-West road infrastructure
in Adams County'', and ``$115,200'', respectively;
(232) in item number 2193 by striking the project
description and inserting ``710 Freeway Study to
comprehensively evaluate the technical feasibility of a
tunnel alternative to close the 710 Freeway gap, considering
all practicable routes, in addition to any potential route
previously considered, and with no funds to be used for
preliminary engineering or environmental review except to the
extent necessary to determine feasibility'';
(233) in item number 2445 by striking the project
description and by inserting ``$600,000 for road and
pedestrian safety improvements on Main Street in the Village
of Patchogue; $900,000 for road and pedestrian safety
improvements on Montauk Highway, between NYS Route 112 and
Suffolk County Road 101 in Suffolk County'';
(234) in item number 346 by striking the project
description and by inserting ``Hansen Dam Recreation Area
access improvements, including hillside stabilization and
parking lot rehabilitation along Osborne Street between
Glenoaks Boulevard and Dronfield Avenue''; and
(235) in item number 449 by striking the project
description and inserting ``Route 30 and Mount Pleasant Road
Interchange Safety Improvements, Westmoreland County, install
light installations at intersection and consolidate entrances
and exits to Route 30''.
(b) Unused Obligation Authority.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, unused obligation authority made available
for an item in section 1702 of the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (119 Stat. 1256) that is repealed, or authorized
funding for such an item that is reduced, by this section
shall be made available--
(1) for an item in section 1702 of that Act that is added
or increased by this section and that is in the same State as
the item for which obligation authority or funding is
repealed or reduced;
(2) in an amount proportional to the amount of obligation
authority or funding that is so repealed or reduced; and
(3) individually for projects numbered 1 through 3676
pursuant to section 1102(c)(4)(A) of that Act (119 Stat.
1158).
(c) Additional Discretionary Use of Surface Transportation
Program Funds.--Of the funds apportioned to each State under
section 104(b)(3) of title 23, United States Code, a State
may expend for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2009 not
more than $1,000,000 for the following activities:
(1) Participation in the Joint Operation Center for Fuel
Compliance established under section 143(b)(4)(H) of title
23, United States Code, within the Department of the
Treasury, including the funding of additional positions for
motor fuel tax enforcement officers and other staff dedicated
on a full-time basis to participation in the activities of
the Center.
(2) Development, operation, and maintenance of electronic
filing systems to coordinate data exchange with the Internal
Revenue Service by States that impose a tax on the removal of
taxable fuel from any refinery and on the removal of taxable
fuel from any terminal.
(3) Development, operation, and maintenance of electronic
single point of filing in conjunction with the Internal
Revenue Service by States that impose a tax on the removal of
taxable fuel from any refinery and on the removal of taxable
fuel from any terminal.
(4) Development, operation, and maintenance of a
certification system by a State of any fuel sold to a State
or local government (as defined in section 4221(d)(4) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986) for the exclusive use of the
State or local government or sold to a qualified volunteer
fire department (as defined in section 150(e)(2) of such
Code) for its exclusive use.
(5) Development, operation, and maintenance of a
certification system by a State of any fuel sold to a
nonprofit educational organization (as defined in section
4221(d)(5) of such Code) that includes verification of the
good standing of the organization in the State in which the
organization is providing educational services.
(d) Project Federal Share.--Section 1964 of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity: A
Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1519) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(c) Special Rule.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Federal share of the cost of the projects described
in item numbers 1284 and 3093 in the table contained in
section 1702 of this Act shall be 100 percent.''.
SEC. 106. NONMOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PILOT PROGRAM.
Section 1807(a)(3) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119
Stat. 1460) is amended by striking ``Minneapolis-St. Paul,
Minnesota'' and inserting ``Minneapolis, Minnesota''.
SEC. 107. CORRECTION OF INTERSTATE DESIGNATION.
Section 1908(a) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119
Stat. 1469) is amended by striking paragraph (3).
SEC. 108. FUTURE OF SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM.
Section 1909(b) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119
Stat. 1471) is amended--
(1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) of paragraph
(9) by striking ``July 1, 2007'' and inserting ``December 31,
2007'';
(2) in paragraph (11)(C) by striking ``the Administrator of
the Federal Highway Administration'' and inserting ``the
Secretary'';
(3) in paragraph (11)(D)(i) by striking ``, on a
reimbursable basis,'';
(4) in paragraph (15) by striking ``$1,400,000 for each of
fiscal years 2006 and 2007'' and inserting ``$1,400,000 for
fiscal year 2006 and $3,400,000 for fiscal year 2007'';
(5) by redesignating paragraphs (14), (15), (16), and (17)
as paragraphs (15), (16), (17), and (18), respectively; and
(6) by inserting after paragraph (13) the following:
``(14) Limitations.--Funds made available to carry out this
section may be expended only to support the activities of the
Commission. No data, analyses, reports, or any other
documents prepared for the Commission to fulfill its duties
may be provided to or shared with other commissions or task
forces until such data, analyses, reports, or documents have
been made available to the public.''.
SEC. 109. BUDGET JUSTIFICATION; BUY AMERICA.
(a) Budget Justification.--Section 1926 of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1483) is amended by striking
``The Department'' and inserting ``Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the Department''.
(b) Buy America.--Section 1928 of the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (119 Stat. 1484) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (5) as
paragraphs (3) through (6), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
``(2) the current application by the Federal Highway
Administration of the Buy America test is only applied to
components or parts of a bridge project and not the entire
bridge project and this is inconsistent with this sense of
Congress;''.
SEC. 110. TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS.
The table contained in section 1934(c) of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1486) is amended--
(1) in item number 436 by inserting ``, Saole,'' after
``Sua'';
(2) in item number 448 by inserting ``by removing asphalt
and concrete and reinstalling blue cobblestones'' after
``streets'';
(3) by striking item number 451; and
(4) in item number 452 by striking ``$2,000,000'' and
inserting ``$3,000,000''.
[[Page 7658]]
SEC. 111. BIA INDIAN ROAD PROGRAM.
Section 1939(b) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119
Stat. 1511) is amended--
(1) by striking ``For the villages'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--For the villages'';
(2) by striking ``, and the Secretary'' and inserting a
period and the following:
``(2) Fiscal year 2006.--The Secretary''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) Fiscal year 2007.--The Secretary shall pay, from
amounts made available to carry out section 202(d) of title
23, United States Code, for fiscal year 2007, the tribal
organizations listed in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection
(a) the difference between the Federal share of the costs of
the projects listed in such paragraphs and the amounts paid
to the respective tribal organizations for such projects
under this section in fiscal year 2006.''.
SEC. 112. I-95/CONTEE ROAD INTERCHANGE DESIGN.
Section 1961 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat.
1518) is amended--
(1) in the section heading by striking ``study'' and
inserting ``design'' ;
(2) by striking subsections (a), (b), and (c) and inserting
the following:
``(a) Design.--The Secretary shall make available the funds
authorized to be appropriated by this section for the design
of the I-95/Contee Road interchange in Prince George's
County, Maryland.'';
(3) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (b); and
(4) in subsection (b)(1) (as so redesignated) by striking
``2006'' and inserting ``2007''.
SEC. 113. HIGHWAY RESEARCH FUNDING.
(a) F-SHRP Funding.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2009, at any time
at which an apportionment is made of the sums authorized to
be appropriated for the surface transportation program, the
congestion mitigation and air quality improvement program,
the National Highway System, the Interstate maintenance
program, the bridge program, or the highway safety
improvement program, the Secretary of Transportation shall--
(1) deduct from each apportionment an amount not to exceed
0.205 percent of the apportionment; and
(2) transfer or otherwise make that amount available to
carry out section 510 of title 23, United States Code.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Funding.--Section 5101 of the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (119 Stat. 1779) is amended--
(A) in subsection (a)(1) by striking ``509, and 510'' and
inserting ``and 509'';
(B) in subsection (a)(4) by striking ``$69,700,000'' and
all that follows through ``2009'' and inserting ``$40,400,000
for fiscal year 2005, $69,700,000 for fiscal year 2006,
$76,400,000 for each of fiscal years 2007 and 2008, and
$78,900,000 for fiscal year 2009''; and
(C) in subsection (b) by inserting after ``50 percent'' the
following ``or, in the case of funds appropriated by
subsection (a) to carry out section 5201, 5202, or 5203 of
this Act, 80 percent''.
(2) Future strategic highway research program.--Section
5210 of such Act (119 Stat. 1804) is amended--
(A) by striking subsection (c); and
(B) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (c).
(c) Contract Authority.--Funds made available under this
section shall be available for obligation in the same manner
as if the funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23,
United States Code, except that the Federal share shall be
determined under section 510(f) of that title.
(d) Applicability of Obligation Limitation.--Funds made
available under this section shall be subject to any
limitation on obligations for Federal-aid highways and
highway safety construction programs under section 1102 the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (23 U.S.C. 104 note; 119 Stat. 1157)
or any other Act.
(e) Equity Bonus Formula.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, in allocating funds for the equity bonus
program under section 105 of title 23, United States Code,
for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2009, the Secretary of
Transportation shall make the required calculations under
that section as if this section had not been enacted.
(f) Funding for Research Activities.--Of the amount made
available by section 5101(a)(1) of the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (119 Stat. 1779)--
(1) at least $1,000,000 shall be made available for each of
fiscal years 2007 through 2009 to carry out section 502(h) of
title 23, United States Code; and
(2) at least $4,900,000 shall be made available for each of
fiscal years 2007 through 2009 to carry out section 502(i) of
that title.
(g) Technical Amendments.--
(1) Surface transportation research.--Section 502 of title
23, United States Code, is amended by striking the first
subsection (h), relating to infrastructure investment needs
reports beginning with the report for January 31, 1999.
(2) Advanced travel forecasting procedures program.--
Section 5512(a)(2) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119
Stat. 1829) is amended by striking ``Program appreciation.--
'' and inserting ``Program application.--''.
(3) University transportation research.--Section 5506 of
title 49, United States Code, is amended--
(A) in subsection (i)--
(i) by striking ``In order to'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--In order to''; and
(ii) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Special rule.--Nothing in paragraph (1) requires a
nonprofit institution of higher learning designated as a Tier
II university transportation center to maintain total
expenditures as described in paragraph (1) in excess of the
amount of the grant awarded to the institution.''; and
(B) in subsection (k)(3) by striking ``The Secretary'' and
all that follows through ``to carry out this section'' and
inserting ``For each of fiscal years 2007 through 2009, the
Secretary shall expend not more than 1.5 percent of amounts
made available to carry out this section''.
SEC. 114. RESCISSION.
Section 10212 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (as amended by
section 1302 of the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (Public
Law 109-280)) (119 Stat. 1937; 120 Stat. 780) is amended by
striking ``$8,593,000,000'' each place it appears and
inserting ``$8,710,000,000''.
SEC. 115. TEA-21 TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.
(a) Surface Transportation Program.--Section 1108(f)(1) of
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (23 U.S.C.
133 note; 112 Stat. 141) is amended by striking ``2003'' and
inserting ``2009''.
(b) Project Authorizations.--The table contained in section
1602 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
(112 Stat. 257) is amended in item number 1096 (as amended by
section 1703(a)(11) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119
Stat. 1454)) by inserting ``, and planning and construction
to Heisley Road,'' before ``in Mentor, Ohio''.
SEC. 116. DEFINITION OF REPEAT INTOXICATED DRIVER LAW.
Section 164(a)(5) of title 23, United States Code, is
amended by striking subparagraphs (A) and (B) and inserting
the following:
``(A) receive--
``(i) a driver's license suspension for not less than 1
year; or
``(ii) a combination of suspension of all driving
privileges for the first 45 days of the suspension period
followed by a reinstatement of limited driving privileges for
the purpose of getting to and from work, school, or an
alcohol treatment program if an ignition interlock device is
installed on each of the motor vehicles owned or operated, or
both, by the individual;
``(B) be subject to the impoundment or immobilization of,
or the installation of an ignition interlock system on, each
motor vehicle owned or operated, or both, by the
individual;''.
SEC. 117. RESEARCH TECHNICAL CORRECTION.
Section 5506(e)(5)(C) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``$2,225,000''and inserting
``$2,250,000''.
SEC. 118. BUY AMERICA.
Section 313 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(g) Waivers.--
``(1) Written justifications.--If the Secretary determines
that it is necessary to waive the application of subsection
(a) in accordance with subsection (b), the Secretary shall,
before the waiver becomes effective--
``(A) publish in the Federal Register a detailed written
justification as to why the waiver is needed; and
``(B) provide the public with a reasonable period of time
for notice and comment.
``(2) Annual report.--Not later than one year after the
date of enactment of this subsection, and annually
thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee and
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on the Environment and
Public Works of the Senate a report on any waivers granted
under subsection (b).''.
SEC. 119. EFFICIENT USE OF EXISTING HIGHWAY CAPACITY.
(a) Study.--The Secretary of Transportation shall conduct a
study on the impacts of converting left and right highway
safety shoulders to travel lanes.
(b) Contents.--In conducting the study, the Secretary
shall----
(1) analyze instances in which safety shoulders are used
for general purpose vehicle traffic, high occupancy vehicles,
and public transportation vehicles;
(2) analyze instances in which safety shoulders are not
part of the roadway design;
(3) evaluate whether or not conversion of safety shoulders
or the lack of a safety shoulder in the original roadway
design has a significant impact on the number of accidents or
has any other impact on highway safety; and
(4) compile relevant statistics.
[[Page 7659]]
(c) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to
Congress a report on the results of the study.
SEC. 120. EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) In General.--Except as otherwise provided in this Act
(including subsection (b)), this Act and the amendments made
by this Act take effect on the date of enactment of this Act.
(b) Exception.--
(1) In general.--The amendments made by this Act (other
than the amendments made by sections 103, 105, 110, and
201(o)) to the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (Public Law
109-59; 119 Stat. 1144) shall--
(A) take effect as of the date of enactment of that Act;
and
(B) be treated as being included in that Act as of that
date.
(2) Effect of amendments.--Each provision of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (Public Law 109-59; 119 Stat. 1144)
(including the amendments made by that Act) (as in effect on
the day before the date of enactment of this Act) that is
amended by this Act (other than sections 103, 105, 110, and
201(o)) shall be treated as not being enacted.
TITLE II--TRANSIT PROVISIONS
SEC. 201. TRANSIT TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.
(a) Section 5302.--Section 5302(a)(10) of title 49, United
States Code, is amended by striking ``charter,'' and
inserting ``charter, sightseeing,''.
(b) Section 5303.--
(1) Section 5303(j)(3)(D) of such title is amended--
(A) by inserting ``or the identified phase'' before
``within the time''; and
(B) by inserting ``or the identified phase'' before the
period at the end.
(2) Section 5303(k)(2) of such title is amended by striking
``a metropolitan planning area serving''.
(c) Section 5307.--Section 5307(b) of such title is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (2)(A) by striking ``mass transportation''
and inserting ``public transportation''; and
(2) in paragraph (3) by striking ``section 5305(a)'' and
inserting ``section 5303(k)''.
(d) Section 5309.--Section 5309(m) of such title is
amended--
(1) in the heading for paragraph (2)(A) by striking ``Major
capital'' and inserting ``Capital''; and
(2) in paragraph (7)(B) by striking ``section 3039'' and
inserting ``section 3045''.
(e) Section 5311.--Section 5311 of such title is amended--
(1) in subsection (g)(1)(A) by striking ``for any purpose
other than operating assistance'' and inserting ``for a
capital project or project administrative expenses'';
(2) in subsections (g)(1)(A) and (g)(1)(B) by striking
``capital'' after ``net''; and
(3) in subsection (i)(1) by striking ``Sections
5323(a)(1)(D) and 5333(b) of this title apply'' and inserting
``Section 5333(b) applies''.
(f) Section 5312.--The heading for section 5312(c) of such
title is amended by striking ``Mass Transportation'' and
inserting ``Public Transportation''.
(g) Section 5314.--Section 5314(a)(3) is amended by
striking ``section 5323(a)(1)(D)'' and inserting ``section
5333(b)''.
(h) Section 5319.--Section 5319 of such title is amended by
striking ``section 5307(k)'' and inserting ``section
5307(d)(1)(K)''.
(i) Section 5320.--Section 5320 of such title is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1)(A) by striking ``intra--agency''
and inserting ``intraagency'';
(2) in subsection (b)(5)(A) by striking ``5302(a)(1)(A)''
and inserting ``5302(a)(1)'' ;
(3) in subsection (d)(1) by inserting ``to administer this
section and'' after ``5338(b)(2)(J)''; and
(4) by adding at the end of subsection (d) the following:
``(4) Transfers to land management agencies.--The Secretary
may transfer amounts available under paragraph (1) to the
appropriate Federal land management agency to pay necessary
costs of the agency for such activities described in
paragraph (1) in connection with activities being carried out
under this section.''.
(j) Section 5323.--Section 5323(n) of such title is amended
by striking ``section 5336(e)(2)'' and inserting ``section
5336(d)(2)''.
(k) Section 5325.--Section 5325(b) of such title is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1) by inserting before the period at the
end ``adopted before August 10, 2005'';
(2) by striking paragraph (2); and
(3) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2).
(l) Section 5336.--
(1) Apportionments of formula grants.--Section 5336 of such
title is amended--
(A) in subsection (a) by striking ``Of the amount'' and all
that follows before paragraph (1) and inserting ``Of the
amount apportioned under subsection (i)(2) to carry out
section 5307--'';
(B) in subsection (d)(1) by striking ``subsections (a) and
(h)(2) of section 5338'' and inserting ``subsections
(a)(1)(C)(vi) and (b)(2)(B) of section 5338''; and
(C) by redesignating subsection (c), as added by section
3034(c) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat.
1628), as subsection (k).
(2) Technical amendments.--Section 3034(d)(2) of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1629), is amended by striking
``paragraph (2)'' and inserting ``subsection (a)(2)''.
(m) Section 5337.--Section 5337(a) of title 49, United
States Code, is amended by striking ``for each of fiscal
years 1998 through 2003'' and inserting ``for each of fiscal
years 2005 through 2009''.
(n) Section 5338.--Section 5338(d)(1)(B) of such title is
amended by striking ``section 5315(a)(16)'' and inserting
``section 5315(b)(2)(P)''.
(o) SAFETEA-LU.--
(1) Section 3037.--Section 3037(c)(3) of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1636) is amended by striking
``Phase II''.
(2) Section 3040.--Section 3040(4) of such Act (119 Stat.
1639) is amended by striking ``$7,871,895,000'' and inserting
``$7,872,893,000''.
(3) Section 3043.--
(A) Portland, oregon.--Section 3043(b)(27) of such Act (119
Stat. 1642) is amended by inserting ``/Milwaukie'' after
``Mall''.
(B) San diego.--Section 3043(c)(105) of such Act (119 Stat.
1645) is amended by striking ``LOSSAN Del Mar-San Diego--Rail
Corridor Improvements'' and inserting ``LOSSAN Rail Corridor
Improvements''.
(C) San diego.--Section 3043(c)(217) of such Act (119 Stat.
1648) is amended by striking ``San Diego'' and inserting
``San Diego Transit''.
(D) Livermore.--Section 3043(c) of such Act (119 Stat.
1645) is amended by inserting after paragraph (102) the
following:
``(102A) Livermore, California--Livermore Amador Valley
Transit Authority BRT.''.
(E) Sacramento.--Section 3043(c)(204) of such Act (119
Stat. 647) is amended by striking ``Downtown''.
(4) Section 3044.--
(A) Projects.--The table contained in section 3044(a) of
such Act (119 Stat. 1652) is amended--
(i) in item 25--
(I) by striking ``$217,360'' and inserting ``$167,360'';
and
(II) by striking ``$225,720'' and inserting ``$175,720'';
(ii) in item number 36 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Transportation Authority (LACMTA) for bus and bus-related
facilities in the LACMTA's service area'';
(iii) in item number 71 by inserting ``Metropolitan Bus
Authority'' after ``Puerto Rico'';
(iv) in item number 84 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Improvements to the existing Sacramento
Intermodal Facility (Sacramento Valley Station)'';
(v) in item number 94 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Pacific Transit, WA Vehicle Replacement'';
(vi) in item number 120 by striking ``Dayton Airport
Intermodal Rail Feasibility Study'' and inserting ``Greater
Dayton Regional Transit Authority bus facilities'';
(vii) in item number 152 by inserting ``Metropolitan Bus
Authority'' after ``Puerto Rico'';
(viii) in item number 416 by striking ``Improve marine
intermodal'' and inserting ``Improve marine dry-dock and'';
(ix) by adding at the end--
(I) in the project description column ``666. New York City,
NY, rehabilitation of subway stations to include passenger
access improvements including escalators or installation of
infrastructure for security and surveillance purposes''; and
(II) in each of the FY08 and FY09 columns by inserting
``$50,000'';
(x) in item number 457--
(I) by striking ``$65,000'' and inserting ``$0''; and
(II) by striking ``$67,500'' and inserting ``$0''; and
(xi) in item number 458--
(I) by striking ``$65,000'' and inserting ``$130,000'';
(II) by striking ``$67,500'' and inserting ``$135,000'';
and
(xii) in item number 57 by striking the project description
and inserting ``Wilmington, NC, maintenance, operations and
administration, transfer facilities''.
(B) Special rule.--Section 3044(c) of such Act (119 Stat.
1705) is amended--
(i) by inserting ``, or other entity,'' after ``State or
local governmental authority''; and
(ii) by striking ``projects numbered 258 and 347'' and
inserting ``projects numbered 258, 347, and 411''.
(5) Section 3046.--Section 3046(a)(7) of such Act (119
Stat. 1708) is amended--
(A) by striking ``hydrogen fuel cell vehicles'' and
inserting ``hydrogen fueled vehicles'';
(B) by striking ``hydrogen fuel cell employee shuttle
vans'' and inserting ``hydrogen fueled employee shuttle
vans''; and
(C) by striking ``in Allentown, Pennsylvania'' and
inserting ``to the DaVinci Center in Allentown,
Pennsylvania''.
[[Page 7660]]
(6) San gabriel valley--gold line foothill extension phase
ii.--In evaluating the local share of the San Gabriel Valley-
-Gold Line Foothill Extension Phase II project authorized by
section 3043(b)(33) of such Act (119 Stat. 1642) in the new
starts rating process, the Secretary of Transportation shall
give consideration to project elements of the San Gabriel
Valley--Gold Line Foothill Extension Phase I project advanced
with 100 percent non-Federal funds.
TITLE III--OTHER PROVISIONS
SEC. 301. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS RELATING TO MOTOR CARRIER
SAFETY.
(a) Conforming Amendment Relating to High-Priority
Activities.--Section 31104(f) of title 49, United States
Code, is amended by striking the designation and heading for
paragraph (1) and by striking paragraph (2).
(b) New Entrant Audits.--
(1) Corrections of references.--Section 4107(b) of the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1720) is amended--
(A) by striking ``Section 31104'' and inserting ``Section
31144''; and
(B) in paragraph (1) by inserting ``(c)'' after ``the
second subsection''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 7112 of such Act (119
Stat. 1899) is amended by striking subsection (c).
(c) Prohibited Transportation.--Section 4114(c)(1) of the
such Act (119 Stat. 1726) is amended by striking ``the second
subsection (c)'' and inserting ``(f)''.
(d) Effective Date Relating to Medical Examiners.--Section
4116(f) of such Act (119 Stat. 1728) is amended by striking
``amendment made by subsection (a)'' and inserting
``amendments made by subsections (a) and (b)''.
(e) Roadability Technical Correction.--Section
31151(a)(3)(E)(ii) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``Act'' and inserting ``section''.
(f) Correction of Subsection Reference.--Section 4121 of
the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1734) is amended by
striking ``31139(f)(5)'' and inserting ``31139(g)(5)''.
(g) CDL Learner's Permit Program Technical Correction.--
Section 4122(2)(A) of such Act (119 Stat. 1734) is amended by
striking ``license'' and inserting ``licenses''.
(h) CDL Information System Funding Reference.--Section
31309(f) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``31318'' and inserting ``31313''.
(i) Clarification of Reference.--Section 229(a)(1) of the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999 (49
U.S.C. 31136 note; 119 Stat. 1743) is amended by inserting
``of title 49, United States Code,'' after ``31502''.
(j) Registration of Brokers.--Section 4142(c)(2) of the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1747) is amended by
inserting ``each place it appears'' before the semicolon.
(k) Redesignation of Section.--The second section 39 of
chapter 2 of title 18, United States Code, relating to
commercial motor vehicles required to stop for inspections,
and the item relating to such section in the analysis for
such chapter, are redesignated as section 40.
(l) Office of Intermodalism.--Section 5503 of title 49,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (f)(2) by striking ``Surface
Transportation Safety Improvement Act of 2005'', and
inserting ``Motor Carrier Safety Reauthorization Act of
2005''; and
(2) by redesignating the first subsection (h), relating to
authorization of appropriations, as subsection (i) and moving
it after the second subsection (h).
(m) Use of Fees for Unified Carrier Registration System.--
Section 13908 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by
redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f) and by
inserting after subsection (d) the following:
``(e) Use of Fees for Unified Carrier Registration
System.--Fees collected under this section may be credited to
the Department of Transportation appropriations account for
purposes for which such fees are collected and shall be
available for expenditure for such purposes until
expended.''.
(n) Commercial Motor Vehicle Definition.--Section
14504a(a)(1)(B) of title 49, United States Code, is amended
by striking ``a motor carrier required to make any filing or
pay any fee to a State with respect to the motor carrier's
authority or insurance related to operation within such
State, the motor carrier'' and inserting ``determining the
size of a motor carrier or motor private carrier's fleet in
calculating the fee to be paid by a motor carrier or motor
private carrier pursuant to subsection (f)(1), the motor
carrier or motor private carrier''.
(o) Clarification of Unreasonable Burden.--Section
14504a(c)(2) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``interstate'' the last place it appears and
inserting ``intrastate''.
(p) Contents of Agreement Typo.--Section
14504a(f)(1)(A)(ii) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``or'' the last place it appears.
(q) Other Unified Carrier Registration System Technical
Corrections.--Section 14504a of title 49, United States Code,
is amended--
(1) in subsection (c)(1)(B) by striking ``the a'' and
inserting ``a''; and
(2) in subsection (f)(1)(A)(i) by striking ``in connection
with the filing of proof of financial responsibility''.
(r) Termination of Registration Provisions.--Section
4305(a) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat.
1764) is amended by striking ``12 months'' and inserting ``24
months''.
(s) Identification of Vehicles.--Section 14506(b)(2) of
title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting before
the semicolon at the end the following: ``or under an
applicable State law if, on October 1, 2006, the State has a
form of highway use taxation not subject to collection
through the International Fuel Tax Agreement''.
(t) Driveaway Saddlemount Vehicle.--
(1) Definition.--Section 31111(a)(4) of title 49, United
States Code, is amended--
(A) in the paragraph heading by striking ``Drive-away
saddlemount with fullmount'' and inserting ``Driveaway
saddlemount'' ;
(B) by striking ``drive-away saddlemount with fullmount''
and inserting ``driveaway saddlemount'' ; and
(C) by inserting ``Such combination may include one
fullmount.'' after the period at the end.
(2) In general.--Section 31111(b)(1)(D) of such title is
amended by striking ``a driveaway saddlemount with
fullmount'' and inserting ``all driveaway saddlemount''.
SEC. 302. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS RELATING TO HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION.
(a) Definition of Hazmat Employees.--Section 7102(2) of the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1892) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(3)(A)'' and inserting ``(3)'';
(2) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``clause (i)'' and
inserting ``clause (i) of subparagraph (A)''; and
(3) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``clause (ii)'' and
inserting ``subparagraph (A)(ii)''.
(b) Technical Correction.--Section 5103a(g)(1)(B)(ii) of
title 49, United States Code, is amended by striking ``Act''
and inserting ``subsection''.
(c) Relationship to Other Laws.--Section 7124(3) of the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1908) is amended by
inserting ``the first place it appears'' before ``and
inserting''.
(d) Report.--Section 5121(h) of title 49, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2) by striking ``exemptions'' and
inserting ``special permits''; and
(2) in paragraph (3) by striking ``exemption'' and
inserting ``special permit''.
(e) Section Heading.--Section 5128 of title 49, United
States Code, is amended by striking the section designation
and heading and inserting the following:
``Sec. 5128. Authorization of appropriations''.
(f) Chapter Analysis.--The analysis for chapter 57 of title
49, United States Code, is amended in the item relating to
section 5701 by striking ``Transportation'' and inserting
``transportation''.
(g) Norman Y. Mineta Research and Special Programs
Improvement Act.--Section 5(b) of the Norman Y. Mineta
Research and Special Programs Improvement Act (49 U.S.C. 108
note; 118 Stat. 2427) is amended by inserting ``(including
delegations by the Secretary of Transportation)'' after ``All
orders''.
(h) Shipping Papers.--Section 5110(d)(1) of title 49,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) in the subsection heading by striking ``Shippers'' and
inserting ``Offerors''; and
(2) by striking ``shipper's'' and inserting ``offeror's''.
(i) NTSB Recommendations.--Section 19(1) of the Pipeline
Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006
(49 U.S.C. 60102 note; 120 Stat. 3498) is amended by striking
``165'' and inserting ``1165''.
SEC. 303. HIGHWAY SAFETY.
(a) State Minimum Apportionments for Highway Safety
Programs.--Effective October 1, 2007, section 402(c) of the
title 23, United States Code, is amended by striking ``The
annual apportionment to each State shall not be less than
one-half of 1 per centum'' and inserting ``The annual
apportionment to each State shall not be less than three-
quarters of 1 percent''.
(b) Technical Corrections.--
(1) Section 2002(b) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119
Stat. 1521) is amended--
(A) by striking paragraph (2); and
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as (2) and (3),
respectively.
(2) Section 2007(b)(1) of such Act (119 Stat. 1529) is
amended--
(A) by inserting ``and'' after the semicolon at the end of
subparagraph (A);
(B) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B); and
(C) by striking subparagraph (C).
(3) Effective August 10, 2005, section 410(c)(7)(B) of
title 23, United States Code, is amended by striking ``clause
(i)'' and inserting ``clauses (i) and (ii)''.
[[Page 7661]]
(4) Section 411 of title 23, United States Code, is amended
by redesignating the second subsection (c), relating to
administration expenses, and subsection (d) as subsections
(d) and (e), respectively.
SEC. 304. REPEAL OF NATIONAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION.
Section 11142 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat.
1961), and the item relating to such section in the table of
contents contained in section 1(b) of such Act, are repealed.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) and the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
General Leave
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 1195.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Oregon?
There was no objection.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this legislation is truly a compendium of technical
corrections. When you look at a bill the magnitude of SAFETEA-LU and
its extraordinary importance in our economy, and I believe the
signature accomplishment of the last Congress, there are bound to be
some drafting errors and other minor concerns in the legislation. We
recognized those quite early on and had hoped to pass this bill, this
technical corrections bill, during the last Congress; but it was never
considered by the Senate, as are so many things that we do around here.
Hopefully, this time we will get this needed work done.
There are some essential things to be accomplished in this
legislation. There is an oversight in the bill that results in the
Surface Transportation Research Development and Deployment account
being oversubscribed. People say, who cares.
Well, actually it means that critical programs for the Federal
Highway Administration Legacy Research and research programs will not
be funded, and that creates a major problem. For instance, this would
mean that we would not get the biennial ``Conditions and Performance
Report.'' If we are going to maintain and improve our Nation's
transportation infrastructure, we need to understand its status, its
condition, and its need for future investment as we move toward yet
another transportation bill in the coming Congress.
It provides appraisals of highways, bridges, and transit finance,
their expenditures in those accounts, and compares it to the needs we
have, operational performance and future investment requirements.
It also would free up additional funding for the National Surface
Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission, something that was
created as part of SAFETEA-LU and has yet to get its work accomplished.
We have charged them with both looking at and assessing the future
needs, building on the requirements I just mentioned, the annual
reports of the Department of Transportation, but even going beyond that
to determine our infrastructure needs both to maintain the current
infrastructure, to enhance it, and to mitigate congestion and to move
toward a less congested and more fuel-efficient transportation future.
They have also been charged with looking at how we pay for these
vital investments and assessing the current revenue source, the gas
tax, and some assorted excise taxes with future needs. This is again
critical work to be done by that commission.
This will better fund their work and give them some of the staff
assistance they need, give them the capability of obtaining the data
that they need, and extend the deadline for the report to Congress,
which will be a crucial building block in the next transportation bill,
by 6 months. We have now set a deadline of December 31, 2007.
The bill also clarifies something regarding a sense of Congress
regarding the buy America requirement. We feel that the Federal Highway
Administration is not implementing the Buy America Act consistent with
our, Congress's, statutory intent. They are beginning to break projects
down into segments in a way that was not anticipated so that they can
basically go around some of the buy America requirements. We want to
reinforce here that the separate component test is not what we
intended, and the amendment included in this bill is intended to
clarify congressional intent and provide guidance to the Federal
Highway Administration in the implementation of that section of the
bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the chairman for
leading the charge on this important technical corrections bill. I want
to voice my support for H.R. 1195, and I encourage my colleagues to do
the same.
In the time that has passed since SAFETEA-LU was signed into law, we
have heard from the Department of Transportation and several States
regarding fixes to different programs and high-priority projects. H.R.
1195 addresses most of the areas that need correction.
It is important to note that this bill does not make substantial
policy changes to SAFETEA-LU. Rather, this bill corrects provisions
that were not workable in SAFETEA-LU. After we pass this bill, SAFETEA-
LU will finally be able to accomplish what Congress voted to do 2 years
ago.
The bulk of this bill is section 105, which makes changes to over 200
of the high-priority projects in section 1702 of SAFETEA-LU. These
changes address surface transportation projects in the bill that were
unable to be executed, clarifying recipients, and increasing certain
project funding levels, and decreasing others to achieve budget
neutrality.
The bill also makes a critical correction in the Transportation
Research Program authorized in SAFETEA-LU. Errors were made in the
research section of SAFETEA-LU that weakened the legacy research
programs carried out by the Department of Transportation. This bill
addresses that problem.
The bill also extends the reporting deadline for the National Surface
Transportation Policy and Review Study Commission established in
SAFETEA-LU. This important commission is tasked with recommending a new
direction in funding and policy for our surface transportation
programs, and we look forward to seeing their final report.
Again, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for revitalizing this technical
corrections bill. I hope all of my colleagues will join me in
supporting the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may desire to the
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young).
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) for bringing this bill forth, and Mr.
Oberstar, the chairman of the full committee. This was our bill. We
worked on this jointly. Some people say, Why do you need a technical
corrections bill?
If you remember, every highway bill we have ever passed has gone
through a series of technical correction adjustments because when we
write a bill, sometimes it is misinterpreted by highway departments and
municipalities. This is purely a technical corrections bill. It adds
nothing; it takes nothing away.
Again, we passed a good piece of legislation 2 years ago. It has been
implemented, but it will be implemented in a better way with these
corrections.
I have talked with the gentleman from Oregon and all he has to say is
``yes'' or ``no.'' Regarding Providence Hospital of Anchorage, we are
looking for a solution to a problem. I agree that we shouldn't be
paying for something that is already done, but I would like to have
those moneys available to improve the transportation to the center hub
of health care in the city of Anchorage. It is my understanding that
the gentleman has agreed to work with me in conference to try to solve
that problem.
[[Page 7662]]
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. I yield to the gentleman from Oregon.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Absolutely. The gentleman from Alaska has had extensive
conversation with the chairman of the committee. It is my understanding
that he is fully committed to helping resolve this issue.
There is a problem with retroactive reimbursement, but we are looking
at other ways to deal with critical access to a vital health facility
in Anchorage.
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. I thank the gentleman, and I look forward to
working with the gentleman and the chairman of the full committee on
the new highway bill.
I believe that the adjustments in this bill for the commission are
set up for finding ways to fund, and it is crucially important to make
sure that they have enough time to do that job. We are right in the
process of not only finishing up SAFETEA-LU, but now we are in the
process of beginning to write another bill which has to address the
issue of transportation in this country.
As you know how strong I supported the funding and the methods of
funding previously was not successful, I think this Congress has a
responsibility to provide the transportation for the Nation as a whole
that can do the job.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I want to thank the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) for his
leadership as chairman of the full committee as we went through that
process in the last Congress, and also the fact that he is willing to
get out front at the beginning to begin to try to address what is
actually an investment deficit so far as it goes to transportation in
the United States, something that can be easily recognized if one
travels to other countries and sees how committed they are,
particularly to competitors like China and the investments they are
making which are absolutely on a massive scale to make their economy
more efficient to move their people more efficiently.
We need to not only maintain what we have and live on the benefits of
our past investment; we need to ensure more robust future investments.
I assure the gentleman I have begun a series of hearings that are on
two tracks in the subcommittee I chair to look both at the future
investment needs and also potential ways to raise the funds we need to
make those investments.
I look forward to working with the gentleman and others as we go
through that process.
I do want to assure Members since there is a new sensitivity around
here about PAYGO that H.R. 1195 complies fully with House budget rules;
and although it only addresses changes to previously authorized
projects, not new projects, it also fully adheres to the new House
Member earmark disclosure requirements.
This is legislation that I recommend wholly to my colleagues, and
they can vote for it in good conscience. It will help build our future
and realize the full dream of SAFETEA-LU as we move through its full
term.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I want to thank Mr. DeFazio,
Mr. Duncan, Mr. Oberstar, and Mr. Mica, and certainly their staffs, for
working so hard together to rectify the technical corrections that we
are addressing in SAFETEA-LU. And I also want to thank our former
chairman, the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), for his hard work in
providing the leadership that we had in the last Congress to get the
SAFETEA-LU bill done.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1195 makes technical corrections to the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users, or SAFETEA-LU.
This is the third time we have worked to finalize these technical
corrections to SAFETEA-LU. During the 109th Congress, the House passed
H.R. 5689, a bill to make technical corrections to SAFETEA-LU in June
2006.
During the summer and fall of 2006, we worked with the Senate to
create H.R. 6233, which is a very similar product to the bill we are
considering today. Now, we are trying again.
As my colleagues have just said, H.R. 1195 makes numerous technical
corrections to Federal surface transportation programs authorized by
SAFETEA-LU. The technical corrections included in this bill have been
identified by the Department of Transportation and are mostly of a
conforming nature, or to correct drafting errors. The most important
correction we are making is to strengthen the Federal Highway research
program by ensuring the continuation of the legacy research programs
carried out by the Department of Transportation.
The majority of this bill is section 105, which makes changes to over
200 of the high priority projects in sec. 1702 of SAFETEA-LU. These
changes address ``broken'' surface transportation projects, clarifying
recipients and increasing certain project funding levels and decreasing
others to achieve budget neutrality.
There is one purely technical correction that is not included in this
package. SAFETEA-LU inadvertently changed certain regulations for
trucks with a gross vehicle weight of less than 10,000 pounds.
One of the implications of this error is that operators of these
trucks no longer have to register or file insurance with DOT.
Consequently, DOT can not regulate them for safety purposes.
When Congress passed SAFETEA-LU, this change was not a policy change
Congress knew about or intended to make. If Congress wanted to make
this change, we would have debated and discussed it. Rather, this was
something we were not aware of and has had very serious unintended
consequences--especially for small businesses.
I hope the Chairman, along with our colleagues in the Senate, will
work with me to correct this technical problem.
Despite the omission of this important correction, I still support
this legislation and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1195, a
bill to make technical corrections to the surface transportation act,
SAFETEA-LU.
H.R. 1195 makes technical corrections to the surface transportation
act, Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act:
A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), enacted in 2005. This is a non-
controversial, bipartisan bill that is intended to correct drafting
errors, make technical fixes, and clarify Congressional intent on
several provisions of the SAFETEA-LU.
This legislation is very similar to the two bills that passed the
House last year, but were never considered by the Senate.
Although H.R. 1195, as amended, only addresses changes to previously
authorized projects, the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, per my direction, has required Members of Congress to
submit earmark disclosure certifications pursuant to Rule XXI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives. In addition, the bill, as
amended, complies with pay-as-you-go budget rules.
SAFETEA-LU has been very successful and effective. Building on
previous surface transportation acts, SAFETEA-LU provides the
programmatic framework and investments necessary to begin addressing
the nation's growing surface transportation needs. However, as with
legislation of this magnitude, there were inadvertent drafting errors.
The changes in this bill are required to ensure that all policies,
programs, and projects embodied in the authorization act are
implemented as intended by Congress.
In particular, this bill makes critical fixes to the transportation
research program authorized in SAFETEA-LU. Errors were made in the
research program funding calculations that resulted in lower than
intended funding levels in several research programs. These technical
fixes will recapture critical research funds for many essential
programs, including:
The Future Strategic Highway Research Program, a concentrated,
results-oriented research program focused on solving the top problems
of highway safety, reliability, capacity, and renewal; and
The University Transportation Center Program which advances U.S.
technology and expertise in the many disciplines comprising
transportation through the mechanisms of education, research, and
technology.
The bill also clarifies section 1928 of SAFETEA-LU regarding the
Sense of Congress concerning Buy America requirements for Federal-aid
highway bridge projects. Congress does not believe that the Federal
Highway Administration (``FHWA'') is implementing the Buy America Act
consistent with the statutory intent. Specifically, the ``additional
cost test'' should be conducted on the basis of an entire bridge
project, not on separate components of the bridge project. Regrettably,
FHWA has applied the test to separate components of a bridge project if
the project is broken into several components for contracting purposes.
The original Sense of Congress, as well as the amendment included in
[[Page 7663]]
this bill, is intended to clarify Congressional intent and to provide
guidance to the FHWA in its implementation.
Finally, H.R. 1195 modifies the Repeat Intoxicated Driver Law to
allow for the use of ignition interlock devices. This change gives
States more flexibility to either continue with the current one-year
license suspension requirement for repeat offenders, or permit a 45-day
license suspension, after which limited driving privileges are
reinstated provided an ignition interlock device is placed on the
offender's vehicle.
Repeat offenders are a significant part of the United States drunk
driving problem, representing about one-third of all Driving Under the
Influence (DUI) arrests each year. It is estimated that between 50 and
75 percent of repeat offenders whose licenses have been suspended
continue to drive illegally. An ignition interlock device prevents
offenders who have alcohol in their system from operating their
vehicle, but allows them to continue to drive to work, school, or an
alcohol treatment program.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R.
1195.
Mr. Speaker, I submit the following exchange of letters between Mr.
Gordon and myself regarding this bill.
House of Representatives, Committee on Science and
Technology,
Washington, DC, March 26, 2007.
Hon. James L. Oberstar,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning the
jurisdictional interest of the Committee on Science and
Technology in matters being considered in H.R. 1195, to amend
the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users to make technical corrections,
and for other purposes. The bill amends research portions of
H.R. 3, Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (P.L. 109-59), which are
within the Committee on Science and Technology's
jurisdiction.
The Committee on Science and Technology acknowledges the
importance of H.R. 1195 and the need for the legislation to
move expeditiously. Therefore, while we have a valid claim to
jurisdiction over the bill, I agree not to request a
sequential referral. This, of course, is conditional on our
mutual understanding that nothing in this legislation or my
decision to forgo a sequential referral waives, reduces or
otherwise affects the jurisdiction of the Committee on
Science and Technology and that a copy of this letter and of
your response will be included in the Congressional Record
when the bill is considered on the House Floor.
The Committee on Science and Technology also asks that you
support our request to be conferees on any provisions over
which we have jurisdiction during any House-Senate conference
on this legislation.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Bart Gordon,
Chairman.
____
House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure,
Washington, DC, March 26, 2007.
Hon. Bart Gordon,
Chairman, Committee on Science and Technology, Washington,
DC.
Dear Chairman Gordon: Thank you for your March 26, 2007
letter regarding H.R. 1195, to amend the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users to make technical corrections, and for other purposes.
Your support for this legislation and your assistance in
ensuring its timely consideration are greatly appreciated.
I agree that the research provisions in the bill are of
jurisdictional interest to the Committee on Science and
Technology. I acknowledge that by forgoing a sequential
referral, your Committee is not relinquishing its
jurisdiction and I will fully support your request to be
represented in a House Senate conference on those provisions
over which the Committee on Science and Technology has
jurisdiction in H.R. 1195.
I value your cooperation and look forward to working with
you as we move ahead with this important clean air
legislation.
Sincerely,
James L. Oberstar, M.C.,
Chairman.
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the Chairman for
revitalizing this important technical corrections bill and voice my
support for H.R. 1195. I encourage my colleagues to do the same.
There were many minor errors--in policy and in Members projects--in
SAFETEA-LU that need technical correction.
Most people may not remember, but the House and Senate actually
passed a SAFETEA-LU technical corrections bill that was signed into law
in October 2005. That bill was taken up with extreme urgency because it
prevented the accidental shutdown of boat safety programs.
In the time that has passed since the October 2005 SAFETEA-LU
technical corrections bill was signed into law, we have heard from DOT
and various states regarding fixes to different programs and high
priority projects. I believe H.R. 1195 addresses most of the areas
which need correction.
It is important to note that this bill does not make substantial
policy changes to SAFETEA-LU. Rather, this bill corrects provisions
that were not ``workable'' in SAFETEA-LU. After we pass this bill,
SAFETEA-LU will finally be able to accomplish what Congress voted to do
2 years ago.
H.R. 1195 addresses all of the true technical corrections except one.
This bill does not include a correction to an error in the motor
carrier title of SAFETEA-LU.
In SAFETEA-LU, we attempted to harmonize the definition of
``commercial motor vehicle'' with ``motor vehicle''. Unintentionally,
this change removed trucks weighing 10,000 lbs or less from the truck
exemption of the Fair Labor Standards Act and from DOT's safety
oversight.
I am very concerned with this change in policy that was never
negotiated for or discussed during the bill's original conference.
Now, small trucking business, who will have to change their business
plan in order to comply with the law, are going to suffer the most.
These are the small businesses who have high overhead and small
profits, but are providing necessary services and products to urban
areas and rural towns across the country.
This change is going to create great hardships on the small companies
who are already in the business and most likely will inhibit others
from entering the business.
It is disappointing this Congress has not addressed this problem, but
I hope we can do so before final passage of this bill.
Again, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for revitalizing this technical
correction bill and I hope all my colleagues will join me in supporting
this bill.
Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my strong support for
H.R. 1195. This bill will make essential technical corrections to the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act.
I want to thank my friend, Rep. James Oberstar, and the Members of
the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for bringing this
legislation to the floor.
This legislation will provide support for vital projects to my home
state of California, and in particular to the city of San Bernardino,
located in my district. I commend the Chairman for his foresight in
giving states the flexibility our districts need to carry out these
important transportation projects.
I am particularly pleased this bill includes a technical correction
for High Priority Project # 2826. This change will allow transportation
officials in the Inland Empire to double the number of grade
separations constructed on the Alameda Corridor East.
There is no doubt this project will go a long way to help reduce
congestion and improve road safety for residents in my home district
and all Californians traveling to and from the Inland Empire. I urge my
colleagues to support our local communities and cast a vote in favor of
H.R. 1195.
Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend my colleagues for their
work on the SAFETEA-LU technical corrections bill. After extensive
conversations with the local transportation authority in New York City,
it has become apparent that several changes are necessary in order for
very important transportation infrastructure improvements to be
implemented in New York City. Included in this bill are a number of
projects that will enhance transportation throughout New York City and
in my district in particular.
At my urging, the technical corrections bill includes: $1,100,000 for
the New York City Department of Transportation to design and
rehabilitate roads commonly known as step streets, which connect
streets on steep grades, in Bronx County in coordination with my
colleagues Mr. Engel, Mr. Crowley, and Mr. Serrano; $2,500,000 to
design and construct school safety projects in New York City to be used
as part of the recently launched Safe Routes to Schools project,
spearheaded by the New York City Department of Transportation;
$1,300,000 for the New York Metropolitan Transit Authority to install
security cameras at the Steinway Street, Broadway, 30th Avenue, and
Astoria Boulevard subway stations in Astoria, New York, at the
suggestion and urging of New York Assemblyman Michael Gianaris;
$100,000 to provide for an
[[Page 7664]]
independent study of the Newtown Creek oil spill in coordination with
my colleague Ms. Velazquez; $500,000 for the New York City Department
of Transportation to study and implement transportation improvements in
the Breezy Point neighborhood of Queens County; $500,000 for the New
York Metropolitan Transit Authority's interagency task force on fencing
to fence exposed track along the Long Island Railroad.
These high priority projects will make a considerable contribution to
the lives of New York City residents.
Chairman Oberstar, Mr. Mica, Chairman DeFazio, and Mr. Duncan deserve
the thanks and appreciation of every Member of this House for their
tireless efforts to improve America's transportation system.
I also could not have secured these and other programs within TEA-LU
without the help and counsel of individuals here in Washington, and New
York City. I would like to thank Joshua Fay-Hurvitz of my staff. I
would also like to thank both the Democratic and Republican staff of
the Transportation Committee. In particular, I would like to thank
Jackie Schmitz and Ward McCarragher of Mr. Oberstar's staff. I would
also like to thank Commissioner Iris Weinshall, David Woloch, and Andra
Horsch at the New York City Department of Transportation. Additionally,
I'd like to thank Derrick Douglas with the State of New York, and Judy
Chesser and Bill Daly with the City of New York. Finally I'd like to
thank Lee Sander and Chris Boylan with the New York Metropolitan
Transit Authority, Mike Weiss at the Federal Highway Administration,
and Jessie Torres at the Department of Transportation.
Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to thank our Chairman, James
Oberstar, for his dedication to our Nation's highways, and for his
willingness to work with me on an issue of great importance to Arizona
as H.R. 1195 continues its way through the legislative process.
H.R. 1195 makes technical corrections to the law that funds our
Nation's highways: the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (``SAFETEA-LU'').
Unfortunately, when the law was drafted, Arizona was left out of a
key provision. That provision concerns the Federal funding share that
is made available for certain highway projects.
Under existing law, the Federal Government is supposed to assume a
larger share for Federal highway projects in states with large
proportions of Federal lands.
Currently, SAFETEA-LU identifies 6 such states with large amounts of
public land.
Unfortunately, Arizona . . . which ranks 3rd in the Nation in public
lands . . . was left off that list.
I believe this was a mistake, and should be corrected along with all
the other mistakes that H.R. 1195 addresses.
At the time SAFETEA-LU was initially drafted, no one from Arizona
served on the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and
thus, there was no one to bring this omission to the Committee's
attention.
I am now proud to serve on that committee.
When we marked up H.R. 1195 earlier this month, I offered an
amendment to add Arizona to the list of states with large amounts of
public lands which are supposed to receive a higher Federal share.
My amendment was budget-neutral. It would have cost nothing. It would
not have reduced any other state's highway funding. Rather, it would
have merely given our state . . . a state with more public lands than
47 other states . . . the flexibility it needs to allocate its Federal
funding between our various highway projects.
At the Chairman's request, and in exchange for his commitment to work
with me on this issue as H.R. 1195 goes to conference comittee, I
withdrew my amendment. I know the Chairman understands how important
this is to Arizona, and I am grateful for his assistance.
I would also like to publicly thank Senator Jon Kyl, who has been a
champion of this issue for years. He has fought hard for this in the
Senate, and I know he will do the same again this year. I look forward
to working with him as well, for the good of Arizona, when the bill
reaches conference committee.
Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 1195, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
RECESS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the
Chair declares the House in recess until approximately 6:30 p.m. today.
Accordingly (at 6 o'clock and 15 minutes p.m.), the House stood in
recess until approximately 6:30 p.m.
____________________
{time} 1830
AFTER RECESS
The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the
Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Salazar) at 6 o'clock and 30 minutes p.m.
____________________
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, proceedings
will resume on motions to suspend the rules previously postponed.
Votes will be taken in the following order:
H.R. 802, by the yeas and nays;
H.R. 137, by the yeas and nays;
H.R. 580, by the yeas and nays.
The vote on H. Res. 266 will be taken tomorrow.
The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote.
Remaining electronic votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes.
____________________
MARITIME POLLUTION PREVENTION ACT OF 2007
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the
motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 802, as amended, on
which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 802, as amended.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 359,
nays 48, not voting 26, as follows:
[Roll No. 187]
YEAS--359
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bono
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown (SC)
Buchanan
Burgess
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Castle
Castor
Chabot
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hulshof
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jindal
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Jordan
Kagen
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
[[Page 7665]]
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neugebauer
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Pearce
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shadegg
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--48
Alexander
Bachmann
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Cantor
Carter
Cubin
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Deal (GA)
Everett
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Hastert
King (IA)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Mack
McCrery
McHenry
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Paul
Pence
Poe
Price (GA)
Rogers (AL)
Sali
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Thornberry
Westmoreland
NOT VOTING--26
Brady (PA)
Brown, Corrine
Cardoza
Carson
Crowley
Davis, Jo Ann
Edwards
Feeney
Flake
Gordon
Hunter
Kanjorski
Lampson
Marchant
Millender-McDonald
Neal (MA)
Payne
Peterson (PA)
Price (NC)
Shuster
Smith (WA)
Souder
Udall (NM)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Wexler
{time} 1854
Mr. POE and Mr. ROGERS of Alabama changed their vote from ``yea'' to
``nay.''
Mr. CANNON changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and
the bill, as amended, was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The title was amended so as to read: ``A bill to amend the Act to
Prevent Pollution from Ships to implement MARPOL Annex VI.''.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
ANIMAL FIGHTING PROHIBITION ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 2007
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the
motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 137, as amended, on
which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 137, as amended.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 368,
nays 39, not voting 26, as follows:
[Roll No. 188]
YEAS--368
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Braley (IA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carter
Castle
Castor
Chabot
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Cubin
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Granger
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Herger
Herseth
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hulshof
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jindal
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Jordan
Kagen
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (FL)
NAYS--39
Barton (TX)
Blunt
Boehner
Boren
Brady (TX)
Cannon
Cantor
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Davis, David
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Foxx
Garrett (NJ)
Gohmert
Graves
Hayes
Hensarling
Hinojosa
Johnson, Sam
King (IA)
Kingston
Lamborn
Lewis (KY)
Lucas
Mack
Neugebauer
Paul
Poe
Rogers (AL)
Sali
Sensenbrenner
Smith (NE)
Stearns
Sullivan
Thornberry
Westmoreland
Young (AK)
NOT VOTING--26
Brady (PA)
Brown, Corrine
Cardoza
Carson
Crowley
Davis, Jo Ann
Feeney
Flake
Goode
Gordon
Hunter
Kanjorski
Lampson
Marchant
[[Page 7666]]
Millender-McDonald
Neal (MA)
Payne
Peterson (PA)
Price (NC)
Shuster
Smith (WA)
Souder
Udall (NM)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Wexler
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised that
there are 2 minutes remaining in this vote.
{time} 1903
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and
the bill, as amended, was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
INTERIM APPOINTMENT OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the
motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 580, as amended, on
which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 580, as amended.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 329,
nays 78, not voting 26, as follows:
[Roll No. 189]
YEAS--329
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Braley (IA)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Castle
Castor
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herseth
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hulshof
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jindal
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neugebauer
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Rodriguez
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shadegg
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Whitfield
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
NAYS--78
Aderholt
Akin
Bachmann
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Barton (TX)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Carter
Chabot
Coble
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Deal (GA)
Doolittle
Duncan
English (PA)
Everett
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gingrey
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastert
Hayes
Herger
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Lamborn
LaTourette
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Manzullo
McCarthy (CA)
McCrery
McHenry
Mica
Miller (FL)
Musgrave
Myrick
Nunes
Poe
Price (GA)
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Roskam
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Smith (NE)
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Westmoreland
Wicker
Wilson (SC)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--26
Brady (PA)
Brown, Corrine
Cardoza
Carson
Crowley
Davis, Jo Ann
Feeney
Flake
Gordon
Hunter
Jefferson
Kanjorski
Lampson
Marchant
Millender-McDonald
Neal (MA)
Payne
Peterson (PA)
Price (NC)
Shuster
Smith (WA)
Souder
Udall (NM)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Wexler
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised that
there are 2 minutes remaining in this vote.
{time} 1911
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and
the bill, as amended, was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
NATO FREEDOM CONSOLIDATION ACT OF 2007
Mr. TANNER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the
Speaker's table the Senate bill (S. 494) to endorse further enlargement
of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and to facilitate the
timely admission of new members to NATO, and for other purposes, and
ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Watson). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Tennessee?
There was no objection.
The Clerk read the Senate bill, as follows:
S. 494
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``NATO Freedom Consolidation
Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The sustained commitment of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) to mutual defense has made possible the
democratic transformation of Central and Eastern Europe.
Members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization can and
should play a critical role in addressing the security
challenges of the post-Cold War era in creating the stable
environment needed for those emerging democracies in Europe.
(2) Lasting stability and security in Europe requires the
military, economic, and political integration of emerging
democracies into existing European structures.
(3) In an era of threats from terrorism and the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization is increasingly contributing to
security in the face of global security challenges for the
protection and interests of its member states.
[[Page 7667]]
(4) In the NATO Participation Act of 1994 (title II of
Public Law 103-447; 22 U.S.C. 1928 note), Congress declared
that ``full and active participants in the Partnership for
Peace in a position to further the principles of the North
Atlantic Treaty and to contribute to the security of the
North Atlantic area should be invited to become full NATO
members in accordance with Article 10 of such Treaty at an
early date. . .''.
(5) In the NATO Enlargement Facilitation Act of 1996 (title
VI of section 101(c) of title I of division A of Public Law
104-208; 22 U.S.C. 1928 note), Congress called for the prompt
admission of Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and
Slovenia to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and
declared that ``in order to promote economic stability and
security in Slovakia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania,
Bulgaria, Albania, Moldova, and Ukraine . . . the process of
enlarging NATO to include emerging democracies in Central and
Eastern Europe should not be limited to consideration of
admitting Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovenia
as full members of the NATO Alliance''.
(6) In the European Security Act of 1998 (title XXVII of
division G of Public Law 105-277; 22 U.S.C. 1928 note),
Congress declared that ``Poland, Hungary, and the Czech
Republic should not be the last emerging democracies in
Central and Eastern Europe invited to join NATO'' and that
``Romania, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Bulgaria . . .
would make an outstanding contribution to furthering the
goals of NATO and enhancing stability, freedom, and peace in
Europe should they become NATO members [and] upon complete
satisfaction of all relevant criteria should be invited to
become full NATO members at the earliest possible date''.
(7) In the Gerald B. H. Solomon Freedom Consolidation Act
of 2002 (Public Law 107-187; 22 U.S.C. 1928 note), Congress
endorsed ``. . . the vision of further enlargement of the
NATO Alliance articulated by President George W. Bush on June
15, 2001, and by former President William J. Clinton on
October 22, 1996''.
(8) At the Madrid Summit of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization in July 1997, Poland, Hungary, and the Czech
Republic were invited to join the Alliance, and the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization heads of state and government
issued a declaration stating ``[t]he alliance expects to
extend further invitations in coming years to nations willing
and able to assume the responsibilities and obligations of
membership . . . [n]o European democratic country whose
admission would fulfill the objectives of the [North
Atlantic] Treaty will be excluded from consideration''.
(9) At the Washington Summit of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization in April 1999, the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization heads of state and government issued a
communique declaring ``[w]e pledge that NATO will continue to
welcome new members in a position to further the principles
of the [North Atlantic] Treaty and contribute to peace and
security in the Euro-Atlantic area . . . [t]he three new
members will not be the last . . . [n]o European democratic
country whose admission would fulfill the objectives of the
Treaty will be excluded from consideration, regardless of its
geographic location . . .''.
(10) In May 2000 in Vilnius, Lithuania, the foreign
ministers of Albania, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania,
the Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), Romania, Slovakia, and
Slovenia issued a statement (later joined by Croatia)
declaring that--
(A) their countries will cooperate in jointly seeking
membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in the
next round of enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization;
(B) the realization of membership in the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization by one or more of these countries would
be a success for all; and
(C) eventual membership in the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization for all of these countries would be a success
for Europe and for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
(11) On June 15, 2001, in a speech in Warsaw, Poland,
President George W. Bush stated ``[a]ll of Europe's new
democracies, from the Baltic to the Black Sea and all that
lie between, should have the same chance for security and
freedom--and the same chance to join the institutions of
Europe--as Europe's old democracies have . . . I believe in
NATO membership for all of Europe's democracies that seek it
and are ready to share the responsibilities that NATO brings
. . . [a]s we plan to enlarge NATO, no nation should be used
as a pawn in the agenda of others . . . [w]e will not trade
away the fate of free European peoples . . . [n]o more
Munichs . . . [n]o more Yaltas . . . [a]s we plan the Prague
Summit, we should not calculate how little we can get away
with, but how much we can do to advance the cause of
freedom''.
(12) On October 22, 1996, in a speech in Detroit, Michigan,
former President William J. Clinton stated ``NATO's doors
will not close behind its first new members . . . NATO should
remain open to all of Europe's emerging democracies who are
ready to shoulder the responsibilities of membership . . .
[n]o nation will be automatically excluded . . . [n]o country
outside NATO will have a veto . . . [a] gray zone of
insecurity must not reemerge in Europe''.
(13) At the Prague Summit of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization in November 2002, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia were invited to
join the Alliance in the second round of enlargement of the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization since the end of the Cold
War, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization heads of
state and government issued a declaration stating ``NATO's
door will remain open to European democracies willing and
able to assume the responsibilities and obligations of
membership, in accordance with Article 10 of the Washington
Treaty''.
(14) On May 8, 2003, the United States Senate unanimously
approved the Resolution of Ratification to Accompany Treaty
Document No. 108-4, Protocols to the North Atlantic Treaty of
1949 on Accession of Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania,
Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia, inviting Bulgaria, Estonia,
Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia to join
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
(15) At the Istanbul Summit of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization in June 2004, the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization heads of state and government issued a
communique reaffirming that NATO's door remains open to new
members, declaring ``[w]e celebrate the success of NATO's
Open Door Policy, and reaffirm tody that our seven new
members will not be the last. The door to membership remains
open. We welcome the progress made by Albania, Croatia, and
the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (1) in implementing
their Annual National Programmes under the Membership Action
Plan, and encourage them to continue pursuing the reforms
necessary to progress toward NATO membership. We also commend
their contribution to regional stability and cooperation. We
want all three countries to succeed and will continue to
assist them in their reform efforts. NATO will continue to
assess each country's candidacy individually, based on the
progress made towards reform goals pursued through the
Membership Action Plan, which will remain the vehicle to keep
the readiness of each aspirant for membership under review.
We direct that NATO Foreign Ministers keep the enlargement
process, including the implementation of the Membership
Action Plan, under continual review and report to us. We will
review at the next Summit progress by aspirants towards
membership based on that report''.
(16) Georgia and Ukraine have stated their desire to join
the Euro-Atlantic community, and in particular, are seeking
to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Georgia and
Ukraine are working closely with the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization and its members to meet criteria for eventual
membership in NATO.
(17) At a press conference with President Mikhail
Saakashvili of Georgia in Washington, D.C. on July 5, 2006,
President George W. Bush stated that ``. . . I believe that
NATO would benefit with Georgia being a member of NATO, and I
think Georgia would benefit. And there's a way forward
through the Membership Action Plan . . . And I'm a believer
in the expansion of NATO. I think it's in the world's
interest that we expand NATO''.
(18) Following a meeting of NATO Foreign Ministers in New
York on September 21, 2006, NATO Secretary General Jaap de
Hoop Scheffer announced the launching of an Intensified
Dialogue on membership between the Alliance and Georgia.
(19) At the NATO-Ukraine Commission Summit in Brussels in
February 2005, President of Ukraine Victor Yushchenko
declared membership in NATO as the ultimate goal of Ukraine's
cooperation with the Alliance and expressed Ukraine's desire
to conclude a Membership Action Plan.
(20) At the NATO-Ukraine Commission Foreign Ministerial
meeting in Vilnius in April 2005, NATO and Ukraine launched
an Intensified Dialogue on the potential membership of
Ukraine in NATO.
(21) At the Riga Summit of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization in November 2006, the Heads of State and
Government of the member countries of NATO issued a
declaration reaffirming that NATO's door remains open to new
members, declaring that ``all European democratic countries
may be considered for MAP (Membership Action Plan) or
admission, subject to decision by the NAC (North Atlantic
Council) at each stage, based on the performance of these
countries towards meeting the objectives of the North
Atlantic Treaty. We direct that NATO Foreign Ministers keep
that process under continual review and report to us. We
welcome the efforts of Albania, Croatia, and the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to prepare themselves for the
responsibilities and obligations of membership. We reaffirm
that the Alliance will continue with Georgia and Ukraine its
Intensified Dialogues which cover the full range of
political, military, financial and security issues relating
to those countries' aspirations to membership, without
prejudice to any eventual Alliance decision. We reaffirm the
importance of the NATO-Ukraine Distinctive Partnership,
[[Page 7668]]
which has its 10th anniversary next year and welcome the
progress that has been made in the framework of our
Intensified Dialogue. We appreciate Ukraine's substantial
contributions to our common security, including through
participation in NATO-led operations and efforts to promote
regional cooperation. We encourage Ukraine to continue to
contribute to regional security. We are determined to
continue to assist, through practical cooperation, in the
implementation of far-reaching reform efforts, notably in the
fields of national security, defence, reform of the defence-
industrial sector and fighting corruption. We welcome the
commencement of an Intensified Dialogue with Georgia as well
as Georgia's contribution to international peacekeeping and
security operations. We will continue to engage actively with
Georgia in support of its reform process. We encourage
Georgia to continue progress on political, economic and
military reforms, including strengthening judicial reform, as
well as the peaceful resolution of outstanding conflicts on
its territory. We reaffirm that it is of great importance
that all parties in the region should engage constructively
to promote regional peace and stability.''.
(22) Contingent upon their continued implementation of
democratic, defense, and economic reform, and their
willingness and ability to meet the responsibilities of
membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and a
clear expression of national intent to do so, Congress calls
for the timely admission of Albania, Croatia, Georgia,
Macedonia (FYROM), and Ukraine to the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization to promote security and stability in Europe.
SEC. 3. DECLARATIONS OF POLICY.
Congress--
(1) reaffirms its previous expressions of support for
continued enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization contained in the NATO Participation Act of 1994,
the NATO Enlargement Facilitation Act of 1996, the European
Security Act of 1998, and the Gerald B. H. Solomon Freedom
Consolidation Act of 2002;
(2) supports the commitment to further enlargement of the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization to include European
democracies that are able and willing to meet the
responsibilities of Membership, as expressed by the Alliance
in its Madrid Summit Declaration of 1997, its Washington
Summit Communique of 1999, its Prague Summit Declaration of
2002, its Istanbul Summit Communique of 2004, and its Riga
Summit Declaration of 2006; and
(3) endorses the vision of further enlargement of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization articulated by President George
W. Bush on June 15, 2001, and by former President William J.
Clinton on October 22, 1996, and urges our allies in the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization to work with the United
States to realize a role for the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization in promoting global security, including
continued support for enlargement to include qualified
candidate states, specifically by entering into a Membership
Action Plan with Georgia and recognizing the progress toward
meeting the responsibilities and obligations of NATO
membership by Albania, Croatia, Georgia, Macedonia (FYROM),
and Ukraine.
SEC. 4. DESIGNATION OF ALBANIA, CROATIA, GEORGIA, MACEDONIA
(FYROM), AND UKRAINE AS ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE
ASSISTANCE UNDER THE NATO PARTICIPATION ACT OF
1994.
(a) Designation.--
(1) Albania.--The Republic of Albania is designated as
eligible to receive assistance under the program established
under section 203(a) of the NATO Participation Act of 1994
(title II of Public Law 103-447; 22 U.S.C. 1928 note), and
shall be deemed to have been so designated pursuant to
section 203(d)(1) of such Act.
(2) Croatia.--The Republic of Croatia is designated as
eligible to receive assistance under the program established
under section 203(a) of the NATO Participation Act of 1994,
and shall be deemed to have been so designated pursuant to
section 203(d)(1) of such Act.
(3) Georgia.--Georgia is designated as eligible to receive
assistance under the program established under section 203(a)
of the NATO Participation Act of 1994, and shall be deemed to
have been so designated pursuant to section 203(d)(1) of such
Act.
(4) Macedonia (fyrom).--The Republic of Macedonia (FYROM)
is designated as eligible to receive assistance under the
program established under section 203(a) of the NATO
Participation Act of 1994, and shall be deemed to have been
so designated pursuant to section 203(d)(1) of such Act.
(5) Ukraine.--Ukraine is designated as eligible to receive
assistance under the program established under section 203(a)
of the NATO Participation Act of 1994, and shall be deemed to
have been so designated pursuant to section 203(d)(1) of such
Act.
(b) Rule of Construction.--The designation of the Republic
of Albania, the Republic of Croatia, Georgia, the Republic of
Macedonia (FYROM), and Ukraine pursuant to subsection (a) as
eligible to receive assistance under the program established
under section 203(a) of the NATO Participation Act of 1994--
(1) is in addition to the designation of Poland, Hungary,
the Czech Republic, and Slovenia pursuant to section 606 of
the NATO Enlargement Facilitation Act of 1996 (title VI of
section 101(c) of title I of division A of Public Law 104-
208; 22 U.S.C. 1928 note), the designation of Romania,
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Bulgaria pursuant to section
2703(b) of the European Security Act of 1998 (title XXVII of
division G of Public Law 105-277; 22 U.S.C. 1928 note), and
the designation of Slovakia pursuant to section 4(a) of the
Gerald B. H. Solomon Freedom Consolidation Act of 2002
(Public Law 107-187; 22 U.S.C. 1928 note) as eligible to
receive assistance under the program established under
section 203(a) of the NATO Participation Act of 1994; and
(2) shall not preclude the designation by the President of
other countries pursuant to section 203(d)(2) of the NATO
Participation Act of 1994 as eligible to receive assistance
under the program established under section 203(a) of such
Act.
SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF SECURITY ASSISTANCE FOR COUNTRIES
DESIGNATED UNDER THE NATO PARTICIPATION ACT OF
1994.
Of the amounts made available for fiscal year 2008 under
section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2763)
such sums as may be necessary are authorized to be
appropriated for assistance to the Republic of Albania, the
Republic of Croatia, Georgia, the Republic of Macedonia
(FYROM), and Ukraine.
The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the
third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.
____________________
{time} 1915
REPORT ON RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 835, HAWAIIAN
HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITY ACT OF 2007
Ms. CASTOR, from the Committee on Rules, submitted a privileged
report (Rept. No. 110-73) on the resolution (H. Res. 269) providing for
consideration of the bill (H.R. 835) to reauthorize the programs of the
Department of Housing and Urban Development for housing assistance for
Native Hawaiians, which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered
to be printed.
____________________
REPORT ON RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1401, RAIL AND
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ACT OF 2007
Ms. CASTOR, from the Committee on Rules, submitted a privileged
report (Rept. No. 110-74) on the resolution (H. Res. 270) providing for
consideration of the bill (H.R. 1401) to improve the security of
railroads, public transportation, and over-the-road buses in the United
States, and for other purposes, which was referred to the House
Calendar and ordered to be printed.
____________________
PROTECT IMPORTANT TAX RELIEF
(Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida asked and was given permission to
address the House for 1 minute.)
Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise today to
express my concern that the Democrats will not extend tax measures
critical to the American people. Residents in my own State are at risk.
Floridians currently can deduct their sales tax from the Federal income
tax. However, this deduction expires this year.
As Democrats set their agenda for the coming year, there is talk of
offsetting increases in Federal spending by raising taxes for millions
of Americans. Quite frankly, I worry that the use of this provision
will be to pay for additional spending. Constituents don't want
additional taxes. They want us to be more conservative in spending.
Listen up, America. Congress needs to be sure that taxpayers do not
face unnecessary tax increases. I appeal to my colleagues on both sides
of the aisle to ensure that our constituents are able to keep more of
their hard-earned money.
____________________
GRANDMOTHER AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
(Mr. POE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. POE. Madam Speaker, the U.S. Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales,
is the chief law enforcement officer in this Nation. He is the most
powerful
[[Page 7669]]
prosecutor in America. As such, his credibility is based on his word.
He must never deceive, mislead or misstate.
There have been two different accounts by his office about the
firings of some U.S. Attorneys. Gonzalez says he never has discussed
the firings, but secret memos show a meeting to discuss such was held
in his very office where he was present. Both statements cannot be
true. His word is tarnished.
The issue is not whether the administration can fire U.S. Attorneys.
It can do so for almost any reason under the law.
Madam Speaker, growing up, my grandmother was the Chief Law
Enforcement Officer. Her word was the law. I never doubted what she
said. I respected her because she was always bluntly truthful. If she
had told me it was raining in my house, I would have rushed home and
started putting plastic over the furniture, because she never misled or
misstated the truth.
This Nation deserves better than to have an Attorney General who
cannot be forthright with Congress and misleads the citizens he has
been sworn to protect. He has a credibility issue. His word should be
as bluntly truthful as my grandmother's.
And that's just the way it is.
____________________
AMERICA MUST BECOME ENERGY INDEPENDENT
(Mr. KINGSTON asked and was given permission to address the House for
1 minute.)
Mr. KINGSTON. Madam Speaker, in 2004, the United States of America
spent $103 billion buying oil from non-democratic countries, such
countries as Venezuela, as Iran, as Russia, and even ones who are our
allies like Saudi Arabia, where some of that money finds its way into
the hands of terrorist groups.
We are funding both sides in the war on terrorism. It is a national
security issue. We have to get off Middle East oil, and we need to
reduce our oil dependency. We import 60 percent of our oil today.
Congressman Eliot Engel and I have introduced H.R. 670. The goal of
it is to reduce our oil consumption by 20 percent in 20 years. It has
overwhelming bipartisan support, both in the House and the Senate.
Now, if you don't buy that, there is another reason to focus on this,
and it has to do with your pocketbook. Just think about the flexibility
that we have out there in fuel choices, from ethanol to biodiesel to
battery operated cars.
Madam Speaker, we need to move in this direction. I recommend H.R.
670 to my colleagues and hope they will cosponsor it with me.
____________________
SPECIAL ORDERS
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Watson). Under the Speaker's announced
policy of January 18, 2007, and under a previous order of the House,
the following Members will be recognized for 5 minutes each.
____________________
PUBLICATION OF THE RULES OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, 110TH
CONGRESS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, in accordance with clause 2(a) of rule XI
of the Rules of the House of Representatives, I respectfully submit the
rules of the Committee on the Judiciary for printing in the
Congressional Record. The Committee on the Judiciary adopted these
rules by voice vote, a quorum being present, at our organizational
meeting on January 24, 2007.
Committee on the Judiciary, Rules of Procedure, One Hundred Tenth
Congress, Adopted January 24, 2007
Rule I. The Rules of the House of Representatives are the
rules of the Committee on the Judiciary and its Subcommittees
with the following specific additions thereto.
rule ii. committee meetings
(a) The regular meeting day of the Committee on the
Judiciary for the conduct of its business shall be on
Wednesday of each week while the House is in session.
(b) Additional meetings may be called by the Chairman and a
regular meeting of the Committee may be dispensed with when,
in the judgment of the Chairman, there is no need therefor.
(c) At least 24 hours (excluding Saturdays, Sundays and
legal holidays when the House is not in session) before each
scheduled Committee or Subcommittee meeting, each Member of
the Committee or Subcommittee shall be furnished a list of
the bill(s) and subject(s) to be considered and/or acted upon
at the meeting. Bills or subjects not listed shall be subject
to a point of order unless their consideration is agreed to
by a two-thirds vote of the Committee or Subcommittee.
(d) In an emergency that does not reasonably allow for 24
hours' notice, the Chairman may waive the 24-hour notice
requirement with the agreement of the Ranking Minority
Member.
(e) Committee and Subcommittee meetings for the transaction
of business, i.e. meetings other than those held for the
purpose of taking testimony, shall be open to the public
except when the Committee or Subcommittee determines by
majority vote to close the meeting because disclosure of
matters to be considered would endanger national security,
would compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or
would tend to defame, degrade or incriminate any person or
otherwise would violate any law or rule of the House.
(f) Every motion made to the Committee and entertained by
the Chairman shall be reduced to writing upon demand of any
Member, and a copy made available to each Member present.
(g) For purposes of taking any action at a meeting of the
full Committee or any Subcommittee thereof, a quorum shall be
constituted by the presence of not less than one-third of the
Members of the Committee or subcommittee, except that a full
majority of the Members of the Committee or Subcommittee
shall constitute a quorum for purposes of reporting a measure
or recommendation from the Committee or Subcommittee, closing
a meeting to the public, or authorizing the issuance of a
subpoena.
(h)(1) Subject to subparagraph (2), the Chairman may
postpone further proceedings when a record vote is ordered on
the question of approving any measure or matter or adopting
an amendment. The Chairman may resume proceedings on a
postponed request at any time.
(2) In exercising postponement authority under subparagraph
(1), the Chairman shall take all reasonable steps necessary
to notify Members on the resumption of proceedings on any
postponed record vote.
(3) When proceedings resume on a postponed question,
notwithstanding any intervening order for the previous
question, an underlying proposition shall remain subject to
further debate or amendment to the same extent as when the
question was postponed.
(i) Transcripts of markups shall be recorded and may be
published in the same manner as hearings before the
Committee.
(j) Without further action of the Committee, the Chairman
is directed to offer a motion under clause 1 of rule XXII of
the Rules of the House of Representatives whenever the
Chairman considers it appropriate.
rule iii. hearings
(a) The Committee Chairman or any Subcommittee chairman
shall make public announcement of the date, place, and
subject matter of any hearing to be conducted by it on any
measure or matter at least one week before the commencement
of that hearing. If the Chairman of the Committee, or
Subcommittee, with the concurrence of the Ranking Minority
Member, determines there is good cause to begin the hearing
sooner, or if the Committee or Subcommittee so determines by
majority vote, a quorum being present for the transaction of
business, the Chairman or Subcommittee chairman shall make
the announcement at the earliest possible date.
(b) Committee and Subcommittee hearings shall be open to
the public except when the Committee or Subcommittee
determines by majority vote to close the meeting because
disclosure of matters to be considered would endanger
national security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement
infor- mation, or would tend to defame, degrade or
incriminate any person or otherwise would violate any law or
rule of the House.
(c) For purposes of taking testimony and receiving evidence
before the Committee or any Subcommittee, a quorum shall be
constituted by the presence of two Members.
(d) In the course of any hearing each Member shall be
allowed five minutes for the interrogation of a witness until
such time as each Member who so desires has had an
opportunity to question the witness.
(e) The transcripts of those hearings conducted by the
Committee which are decided to be printed shall be published
in verbatim form, with the material requested for the record
inserted at that place requested, or at the end of the
record, as appropriate. Individuals, including Members of
Congress, whose comments are to be published as part of a
Committee document shall be given the opportunity to verify
the accuracy of the transcription in advance of publication.
Any requests by those Members, staff or witnesses to correct
any errors other than errors in the transcription, or
disputed errors in transcription, shall be appended to the
[[Page 7670]]
record, and the appropriate place where the change is
requested will be footnoted. Prior to approval by the
Chairman of hearings conducted jointly with another
congressional Committee, a memorandum of understanding shall
be prepared which incorporates an agreement for the
publication of the verbatim transcript.
Rule IV. Broadcasting
Whenever a hearing or meeting conducted by the Committee or
any Subcommittee is open to the public, those proceedings
shall be open to coverage by television, radio and still
photography except when the hearing or meeting is closed
pursuant to the Committee Rules of Procedure.
Rule V. Standing Subcommittees
(a) The full Committee shall have jurisdiction over the
following subject matters: antitrust law, tort liability,
including medical malpractice and product liability, legal
reform generally, and such other matters as determined by the
Chairman.
(b) There shall be five standing Subcommittees of the
Committee on the Judiciary, with jurisdictions as follows:
(1) Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual
Property: copyright, patent and trademark law, information
technology, administration of U.S. courts, Federal Rules of
Evidence, Civil and Appellate Procedure, judicial ethics,
other appropriate matters as referred by the Chairman, and
relevant oversight.
(2) Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and
Civil Liberties: constitutional amendments, constitutional
rights, federal civil rights laws, ethics in government,
other appropriate matters as referred by the Chairman, and
relevant oversight.
(3) Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law:
bankruptcy and commercial law, bankruptcy judgeships,
administrative law, independent counsel, state taxation
affecting interstate commerce, interstate compacts, other
appropriate matters as referred by the Chairman, and relevant
oversight.
(4) Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland
Security: Federal Criminal Code, drug enforcement,
sentencing, parole and pardons, terrorism, internal and
homeland security, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure,
prisons, criminal law enforcement, other appropriate matters
as referred by the Chairman, and relevant oversight.
(5) Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees,
Border Security, and International Law: immigration and
naturalization, border security, admission of refugees,
treaties, conventions and international agreements, claims
against the United States, federal charters of incorporation,
private immigration and claims bills, non-border enforcement,
other appropriate matters as referred by the Chairman, and
relevant oversight.
(c) The Chairman of the Committee and Ranking Minority
Member thereof shall be ex officio Members, but not voting
Members, of each Subcommittee to which such Chairman or
Ranking Minority Member has not been assigned by resolution
of the Committee. Ex officio Members shall not be counted as
present for purposes of constituting a quorum at any hearing
or meeting of such Subcommittee.
Rule VI. Powers and Duties of Subcommittees
Each Subcommittee is authorized to meet, hold hearings,
receive evidence, and report to the full Committee on all
matters referred to it or under its jurisdiction.
Subcommittee chairmen shall set dates for hearings and
meetings of their respective Subcommittees after consultation
with the Chairman and other Subcommittee chairmen with a view
toward avoiding simultaneous scheduling of full Committee and
Subcommittee meetings or hearings whenever possible.
Rule VII. Non-Legislative Reports
No report of the Committee or Subcommittee which does not
accompany a measure or matter for consideration by the House
shall be published unless all Members of the Committee or
Subcommittee issuing the report shall have been apprised of
such report and given the opportunity to give notice of
intention to file supplemental, additional, or dissenting
views as part of the report. In no case shall the time in
which to file such views be less than three calendar days
(excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays when the
House is not in session).
Rule VIII. Committee Records
The records of the Committee at the National Archives and
Records Administration shall be made available for public use
according to the Rules of the House. The Chairman shall
notify the Ranking Minority Member of any decision to
withhold a record otherwise available, and the matter shall
be presented to the Committee for a determination on the
written request of any Member of the Committee.
Rule IX. Official Committee Website
The Chairman shall maintain an official website on behalf
of the Committee for the purpose of furthering the
Committee's legislative and oversight responsibilities,
including communicating information about the Committee's
activities to Committee Members and other Members of the
House. The Ranking Member is authorized to maintain a similar
official website on behalf of the Committee Minority for the
same purpose, including communicating information about the
activities of the Minority to Committee Members and other
Members of the House.
____________________
THE NEED FOR FAIR TRADE POLICIES
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. ALLEN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my opposition to
trade policies that are unfair to American workers.
Congress must insist on a new model for trade that makes American
workers the top priority. Trade agreements must also take into account
protections for the environment and ensure access to life-saving
medicines.
Developing trade agreements that take these priorities into account
will be difficult, but we must not rush into obligations which will
ultimately harm our own interests, and we must reject the false choice
between expanding our trade opportunities and fairness to U.S. workers.
It is simply wrong to follow the old model that we know hurts the
livelihoods of so many of our constituents. That is why Democrats are
pushing for new priorities in the trade deals that the administration
is negotiating with Colombia, Peru, Panama, South Korea and other
countries.
Congress must continue to press the administration to change its
trade policies and provide specific, constructive suggestions to
advance the goals of our workers and our economy.
Unfortunately, the Bush administration doesn't act as though it
believes that Congress should have a real say in trade negotiations.
One example, though it is certainly not the only one, is the matter of
allowing access to life-saving medications.
Congress has passed legislation directing the administration to
respect the Doha Declaration, an agreement that allows countries
flexibility under WTO rules to provide for public health. Although the
administration signed the Doha Declaration, USTR has completely ignored
Congress' directive to respect it.
Every trade pact negotiated since 2002 has contained stringent
intellectual property rules sought by the major drug companies. By
keeping medicine prices high, these rules increase industry profits but
restrict access to needed medicines for citizens in developing
countries. Even in current free trade negotiations, USTR continues to
ignore the will of Congress to respect the Doha Declaration.
That is why a new framework for trade must include a stronger role
for Congress. The current model of nonbinding negotiating objectives
permits the President to ignore the wishes of this Congress.
It is no surprise that the administration has favored large corporate
interests at the expense of American workers, the environment and
global health. But it is wrong. However, our new majority in Congress
will respond to workers who have been hurt by previous trade
agreements. After all, trade agreements have affected my home State of
Maine's manufacturing, farming and service sectors.
Soon Congress may be asked to consider renewing fast track authority.
I voted against the Trade Act of 2002, which granted fast track
authority to the President. I urge my colleagues to reject renewal of
fast track in its current form. It is vital that Congress continue to
press for change, firmly and constructively.
____________________
INJUSTICE AGAINST FORMER U.S. BORDER PATROL AGENTS RAMOS AND COMPEAN
CONTINUES
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, today is the 69th day
since a great injustice took place in this country. On January 17,
2007, two
[[Page 7671]]
U.S. Border Patrol agents entered Federal prison to begin serving 11
and 12 year sentences, respectively.
Agents Compean and Ramos were convicted last spring for shooting a
Mexican drug smuggler who brought 743 pounds of marijuana across our
border into Texas. These agents never should have been prosecuted. The
U.S. Attorney's Office prosecuted the agents and granted immunity to
the drug smuggler, who claimed he was unarmed. The illegal drug
smuggler received full medical care in El Paso, Texas, was permitted to
return to Mexico, and is suing the Border Patrol for $5 million for
violating his civil rights.
Madam Speaker, he is not an American citizen. He is a criminal.
Madam Speaker, it is ironic that one of the Federal prosecutors
dismissed by the Justice Department, who never should have been
terminated, was criticized for not doing more to try cases of illegal
immigration. Yet we have a Federal prosecutor in western Texas, Johnny
Sutton, who, instead of prosecuting an illegal alien, who was also a
known drug smuggler, decided to give immunity to the illegal alien drug
smuggler and prosecuted the two Hispanic-American border agents who
tried to apprehend the smuggler.
Madam Speaker, this makes absolutely no sense. Johnny Sutton also
prosecuted another law enforcement agent, Deputy Sheriff Gilmer
Hernandez. Hernandez was recently sentenced to a year in jail for
shooting the tires of a car transporting illegal aliens after the
driver attempted to escape a routine traffic stop by aiming the vehicle
at the deputy. Hernandez was charged with violating the civil rights of
one of the passengers, an illegal Mexican national, who was struck in
the lip by bullet or metal fragments.
Citizens across this country and many of us in Congress want to know
why does the U.S. Attorney's Office in western Texas choose to go after
law enforcement officers while protecting the illegal aliens who commit
crimes?
The President has the power to immediately reverse this injustice by
granting a pardon to these two men, who were doing their jobs to
protect the American people. But, so far, the President has refused to
stand up for justice in this case.
Madam Speaker, I hope the White House will agree with many of us in
Congress who believe Mr. Sutton's actions in prosecuting these agents
raises serious questions and need to be investigated.
I thank House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers and his staff for their
interest in this situation involving the two border agents, who should
have been commended instead of indicted. I am hopeful that the House,
under the leadership of John Conyers, will soon hold hearings to look
into this injustice.
____________________
NEW POLLS REGARDING VIEWS OF IRAQI PEOPLE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, on the fourth anniversary of the invasion
of Iraq, several new polls looking at the opinions of the Iraqi people
were released. It is important that we heed this call and that we
listen to their choices, because it has been 4 years.
Some frightening stories were illuminated by the new polls. For
example, one in four Iraqi adults have had a family relative murdered
in the last 3 years, while 23 percent of those living in Baghdad have
had a family relative kidnapped in the last 3 years.
{time} 1930
More than half of Iraqis have a close friend or relative who has been
hurt or killed in the current violence. One in six say someone in their
own household has been harmed. Eighty-six percent worry about a loved
one being hurt, two-thirds worry deeply. Huge numbers limit their daily
activities to minimize risk. Seven in 10 report multiple signs of
traumatic stress. The number of Iraqis who describe their lives as good
has dropped from 71 percent 3 years ago to under 40 percent today.
This is shameful, Madam Speaker. Every day the evidence against
President Bush's so-called war plan mounts. It makes one wonder if
there is even a plan at all. How much of the Bush Iraq policy has been
forced on the Iraqi people? How much real involvement have the Iraqi
people had in deciding the future of their own country. How are the
Bush policies affecting Iraqi families?
I voted against the authorization to go to war. And Madam Speaker, I
say to my colleagues, whether they voted ``yes'' or ``no,'' now is the
time to make a change in direction. Let us empower the Iraqi people;
let us restore their sovereignty.
Last week, I had the opportunity to testify before the Foreign
Affairs Committee about my legislation, H.R. 508, the Bring the Troops
Home and Restoration of Iraq Sovereignty bill. This bill is a
comprehensive proposal. It has 49 cosponsors, and it will end the
occupation of Iraq within 6 months of enactment. It will accelerate the
training and equipping of Iraqi military and security forces, preparing
the Iraqis to take over their own security after U.S. troops and
contractors leave at the end of the 6 months. It will fully fund the
health care commitment to our returning veterans. It will make veterans
health care an entitlement, something they deserve because, for heavens
sakes, they have done so much for us.
Additionally, the legislation revokes the President's Iraq war
powers, it prevents establishment of permanent bases in Iraq, and it
returns the oil rights to the Iraqi people. Actually, it gives Iraq
back to the Iraqis.
Madam Speaker, our most solemn obligation is to the brave and capable
men and women who have been placed in harm's way. This legislation, as
I said, guarantees physical and mental health care for U.S. veterans of
military operations in Iraq and other conflicts. It is the least we can
do. It is the very least we can do to show the gratitude of a grateful
Nation.
H.R. 508 will fulfill our commitment to our Nation's brave troops and
to the Iraqi people. The polls here and the polls in Iraq are clear: it
is time to bring our troops home.
To those who are watching and wondering about the future of our Iraq
policy, I say I will not stop, I will not rest, and I will not back
down in my fight until every single last soldier and marine is home
safe with his or her family.
____________________
PRIVATE CLARENCE SPENCER AND SERGEANT FIRST CLASS ALLEN MOSTEIRO
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Granger) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. GRANGER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor one of the bravest
and most dedicated young heroes of north Texas and of our Nation.
Army Private Clarence Spencer was killed in Bilad, Iraq while
fighting against enemy forces in one of the most important conflicts
our Nation has ever engaged in. Clarence Spencer gallantly and
selflessly gave his life for his country while fighting alongside his
fellow soldiers of the 1st Cavalry Division of Fort Hood, Texas.
Private Spencer is survived by his mother and son and his loving
wife, Army Private Charlotte Spencer, who has also devoted herself to
our Nation's noble military profession.
Clarence Spencer served three tours in Iraq, two of which were as a
marine. Wounded in Iraq on a previous tour, he demonstrated tremendous
courage by deploying into harm's way once again. Private Clarence
Spencer is gone, but he will never be forgotten. His memory lives in
our hearts, and America is eternally grateful for his spirit and his
dedication.
As Clarence's Dunbar High School football coach said about Clarence,
``I have coached faster, stronger and more talented students, but I've
never coached anyone I was more proud of.'' That is precisely the way
that the Fort Worth community and our Nation feel about soldiers such
as Private Clarence Spencer, a true American hero.
Madam Speaker, I also rise to honor a second hero of the Fort Worth
community and of our Nation. A graduate of Fort Worth's Eastern Hills
High School, Sergeant First Class Allan
[[Page 7672]]
Mosteiro was an 18-year veteran of the Army, who was assigned as a
scout leader in the 1st Cavalry Division based at Fort Hood, Texas. He
gallantly and selflessly gave his life for his country as a result of
wounds he received during a fire fight against enemy forces in Taji,
Iraq on February 13, 2007.
Sergeant Mosteiro is survived by his loving wife, son, parents, one
brother and three sisters.
The American people recognize their sacrifice and honor the Mosteiro
family's patriotism. As a career soldier and senior noncommissioned
officer, Sergeant Mosteiro's leadership was instrumental in developing
younger soldiers, and he did not take his responsibility lightly. A
veteran of Operation Desert Storm and of the current war, Allan
Mosteiro dedicated his life to securing the freedoms that all Americans
so rightfully cherish.
Sergeant First Class Allan Mosteiro is gone, but he will never be
forgotten. His memory lives on through the wonderful family that he
left behind and the dedicated soldiers he so ably led.
____________________
MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE
A message from the Senate by Ms. Curtis, one of its clerks, announced
that the Senate has passed without amendment concurrent resolutions of
the House of the following titles:
H. Con. Res. 44. Concurrent resolution honoring and
praising the National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People on the occasion of its 98th anniversary.
H. Con. Res. 66. Concurrent resolution permitting the use
of the Rotunda of the Capitol for a ceremony as part of the
commemoration of the days of remembrance of victims of the
Holocaust.
The message also announced that pursuant to Public Law 100-696, the
Chair, on behalf of the President pro tempore, appoints the following
Senators as members of the United States Capitol Preservation
commission:
The Senator from Illinois (Mr. Durbin).
The Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu).
The message also announced that pursuant to Public Law 100-696, the
Chair, on behalf of the Republican Leader, announced the appointment of
the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Allard) as a member of the United States
Capitol Preservation Commission.
____________________
FAILED TRADE POLICY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Michaud) is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
I rise with my colleagues here this evening to talk about our failed
trade policy.
As a former mill worker at Great Northern Paper Company in East
Millinocket, Maine, I know firsthand how these trade deals have
crippled our manufacturing base in the State of Maine.
When I ran for Congress, I told the people of the State of Maine I
would fight for them, for their jobs and for their families every
single day. Mainers know that these trade deals have left them behind.
You can go almost anywhere in my district and find an abandoned mill or
a vacant factory. They are painful reminders of what was and is no
longer to be. Their jobs have been outsourced to countries that pay
slave wages. How can we compete when our own workforce has been left
behind?
The election results proved that the American public is sick and
tired of their jobs being outsourced. They want a Congress that fights
for our workers and businesses. They want this country to move in a new
direction. They want this Congress to move in a new direction.
I will be the first to say that I am concerned when I am hearing from
my fellow colleagues that we can't cut side deals on trade agreements.
Some say maybe we can make a few concessions on both sides and a deal
is cut. The American workforce is sick of these trade deals, these side
deals being cut. They don't want more trade adjustment assistance; they
want their jobs.
Some say that the pending free trade agreements, that we should do a
side letter to appease labor, or maybe a couple tiny provisions that
fix the environment. My mom always told me, you can't fix what's
broken. Our trade policies are broken.
It is time to start from the ground up. It is time to renegotiate the
Peru, the Colombia and the Panama Free Trade Agreements. With the TPA
deadlines quickly approaching, we cannot rush something through. The
American public deserves to have the new majority renegotiate these
trade deals.
This election sent a strong message. It is to change course in what
the Bush administration has done with our failed trade policies. There
is no quick fix to this solution, not when these agreements are based
on a flawed model. These agreements compromise our port security, they
privatize Social Security, they threaten our intellectual property
rights, they undermine States' rights, and they infringe on access to
medicines.
I strongly agree with Chairman Levin that we need to address these
issues, and we need to do it now. Nonbinding side letters are not good
enough.
Regarding the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, there is no fix that can
make this agreement acceptable. It is highly offensive that the Bush
administration even initiated negotiations with a country infamous for
having the highest rate of trade unionists assassinated. More than
2,000 labor union activists have been murdered in Colombia since 1990.
More than 2,000 labor unionists murdered since 1990, with 60
assassinated in 2006 alone, one per week. Until the Colombian
Government changes this abominable situation, the United States should
not offer any enhanced trade relations to Colombia.
And then let me touch on the biggest issue of them all: fast track.
Fast track delegates away Congress' constitutional authority. It
undermines our right to have a say in what goes on in these trade
deals. We must replace this outdated, failed trade negotiating system.
Over 3 million American manufacturing jobs, one out of every six
manufacturing jobs, have been lost during the fast track era. Before
fast track, we had balanced trade. The United States trade deficit has
exploded as imports surged. The worldwide gulf between the rich and the
poor has widened since fast track.
I could go on and on and on about fast track. Fast track has put us
on the wrong track, and it is time to turn it around. Any acceptable
version of fast track must include the bare minimum of some of the
following:
It would restore Congress' right to decide which countries it is in
our national interest to negotiate new agreements. It would set
mandatory requirements for what must and must not be in every
agreement, including core labor and environmental standards. It would
require Congress to vote on a trade agreement content before it can be
signed, and it would not allow for secretive negotiations. A new
negotiating system must include more oversight on how past agreements
are actually working. It would reinstate our system of checks and
balances.
I am pleased that some of my colleagues are here this evening to join
me in this trade discussion, and I look forward to their remarks. I
would like to thank them for their leadership as well in this area.
I now would like to introduce Congressman Phil Hare, a newly elected
freshman from Illinois, to be the next speaker. Phil knows firsthand
about how these trade agreements affect our manufacturing industries.
Prior to working for Congressman Lane Evans, Phil's first job was at
the Seaford Clothing Factory in Rock Island. During the 13 years, he
cut linen for men's suits there.
Phil served as a union leader and as the president of Unite Here
Local 617. As district director for then-Congressman Lane Evans, Phil
Hare fought for the working men and women in his district. Phil is a
leader among the freshman class on trade issues.
[[Page 7673]]
Phil, I want to thank you for your tremendous leadership on this very
important issue that affects men and women throughout the United
States. I yield to the good gentleman.
{time} 1945
Mr. HARE. I thank the gentleman from Maine, and I also want to just
commend you for your leadership on this whole issue of trade.
When I first came to this body, I campaigned on the sole issue of
trade; and they said there are a couple of people you need to look up
right away. I needed to look up Representative Marcy Kaptur and Mike
Michaud for standing up for ordinary people.
With all due respect to the President, I don't consider this fast
track legislation; it is wrong track legislation. I am a card-carrying
capitalist, and I have said this many, many times. But I came out of an
industry, the clothing and textile industry. But, for the life of me, I
don't understand, this President just doesn't seem to get it. We keep
losing good-paying jobs overseas, and for the life of me we are one of
the few countries I know that actually subsidize our manufacturers for
going overseas, if you look at the east coast and look what happened in
your area from Maine all the way down and you look what happened in the
Midwest with Maytag.
Today I sat and I listened to a person from my district, Dave Bevard,
who worked at the Maytag plant. He had 32 years in and his wife had 30,
62 years between the both of them. Here, these workers gave up two wage
concessions, if you can believe that, to keep this plant open, $24
million from our State of Illinois in tax breaks to this company; and
at the end of the day they ended up moving to Sonora, Mexico. The CEO
of the company said, ``I don't care about the workers and the
community. I am here to make a dollar for my shareholders.'' It didn't
matter about the health care and the pensions.
And Dave brought up today, you know, we have trade readjustment funds
and things of that nature, but, as the gentleman knows, by the time you
get them you have to decide between your unemployment compensation and
whether you are going to be retrained. Then they tell you, well, you
should go into a field that is growing, maybe like health care. So he
said, of the 2,500 people that lost their jobs at that plant, 400
people tried the medical care, thinking they were going to get into
medical care. Well, that worked great for the schooling, but when it
came to practical exercise to go in and be able to learn the trade and
be able to do it, they only had room for 30 people. So, 370 people are
left out in the cold.
Another woman wanted to go through and wanted to get into daycare and
needed a 1-year program at the community college. They only had a 2-
year program; and they said, well, maybe she should just try being a
cosmetologist instead.
When you take a look at the way we do this and the way we treat our
workers, I said today this is a moral issue that I think we in this
Congress have.
I support trade. I will always support trade. I know our country
needs it. But I ask, at what price? And I want to know why is it that
this President feels he doesn't have to basically come to Congress for
anything, as you know, but particularly when it comes to the trade
issue. He can outsource it, he can fast track, and he can do whatever
he wants to do, and there is no congressional accountability, no
oversight. We are left with a package we can't even vote up or down
half the time because he has the secret back-door deals.
I, for one, as a freshman am tired. I am tired of going back to my
district and seeing people like Dave Bevard and his wife who, by the
way, has cancer. He is going to lose his health care.
And I ask a question very simply of this administration and for those
on the other side of the aisle and maybe some within my own party who
think that this is the way to go. I want you to come to Gifford, and I
want you to see what is left of that Maytag plant, and I want you to
see the people whose lives have been affected by this and the lack of
health care.
Their prescription programs that they had, now they have lost their
prescription drug program that they had, it equals for some of them
their prescriptions per month, the pension that they receive. Now, they
don't even get a pension, they have no health care, and somebody is
going to try to convince me that this trade deal is going to work and
that this was in the best interest of our manufacturing base?
Now I can't in good conscience do that. I think we had some
interesting hearings today, but, ultimately, we have to be able to
stand up.
And I agree with the gentleman from Maine. We had a directive I think
this past election. I campaigned on this issue, as you know; and I
campaigned very strongly about it. I said, look, I support trade, I
support fair trade. So I am a fair trader, and I think that is what we
should all be. And I think we have an obligation, as I said before, to
ask this administration but also ask of ourselves: Are we here to
represent the Dave Bevards of this country? Or are we here to represent
the CEO that took the jobs to Sonora, Mexico?
And they are going to keep doing it. Every single day we read of
another small factory going. My clothing factory that I worked in was
shut down, and now I hear that the remaining 350 people that were
working there are hanging by a thread. Translation: In about a year,
that plant is going to go simply because nobody wants to have the
initiative and the courage to stand up for an industry that has been
hit, or dumping its steel. It goes on and on.
I don't want to use up the whole hour, but if the gentleman would
just let me conclude by saying this. I would like to ask some of our
folks on the other side that call me a protectionist, and I looked in
the dictionary, and I think that means you are trying to protect
something, and I am, and I know we are. We are trying to protect a
basic fundamental right for people to have a decent-paying job.
You know, these aren't CEOs. These are ordinary people who want to
put their kids through school, have health care. They want to be able
to work, and work very hard, and be able to retire and not have to
worry about it.
I am not going to stop on this issue, and I again applaud the
gentleman from Maine for courage that he has. And I will promise you
this, that I have said many times: I don't know how long I am going to
be in this body, but as long as I am I am going to continue to come to
this floor, I am going to continue to talk about those lost jobs and
say we have to start thinking differently than we have before.
We have an obligation, and our obligation is to stand up for ordinary
people. That is what I have always been about. And I think the basic
job of a Member of Congress, when you really get down to it, after all
is said and done, is all of us are here to do the best we can to help
ordinary people out, to make their lives better, not complicated.
So to my friends on the other side that might think I am off base, I
am not going to support fast track. I will vote against it. I am not
going to have any part of outsourcing one more job from my district or
from this country. I am going to stand up for workers, whether they are
from Illinois or Maine or Ohio or Florida or wherever they are from,
because we have a responsibility to do it. It is the right thing to do.
And, again, I just can't thank you enough, Congressman, for taking
the lead on this. You and Representative Kaptur have been great
inspirations to me as a freshman here and campaigned on this issue of
trade.
And, by the way, I would just say to people listening, it is okay to
run on things you believe in and lead with your heart and on the right
issues, and every now and then the good guys do come out on top. So I
thank the gentleman for allowing me to participate this evening and
look forward to any questions or discussion you might have.
Mr. MICHAUD. I thank you very much, Congressman Hare.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Watson). All Members are reminded to
address their comments to the Chair.
Mr. MICHAUD. I apologize, Madam Speaker.
[[Page 7674]]
I would like to thank the gentleman for his kind remarks. It is I who
ought to thank you and the freshman class for your leadership in this
area. You have actually brought forward a whole new fresh discussion
about trade and what it has done to this country. So I really
appreciate your leadership and look forward to continuing working with
you as we move forward in this area.
There is another Member I would like to recognize, not a member of
the freshman class, but this Member has been a true advocate for fair
trade. Congresswoman Kaptur has been a tremendous leader in this fair
trade fight.
Marcy came to Congress from a working-class background. Her family
operated a small grocery where her mother worked, after serving on the
original organizing committee of an auto trade union at Champion Spark
Plug. Marcy knows firsthand how these unfair trade deals have affected
industry throughout her congressional district in Ohio and has been a
key player in our trade working group in the House.
I really appreciate all the leadership and expertise that you have
brought forward on this issue, Congresswoman Kaptur. You have been a
true leader, and you have been a mentor to me ever since I got elected
to Congress. So thank you, and I yield you such time as you may
consume.
Ms. KAPTUR. Congressman Michaud, thank you so much for bringing us
together tonight and for your great contributions to this debate. That
is probably the major economic debate this Nation faces. It is a real
pleasure to be here with you this evening. I thank you for yielding me
some time.
And to Congressman Phil Hare from Illinois, who has just hit the
ground running here and who I think is such a tremendous addition to
our membership and to this great struggle for the cause of all people
in our country, the dignity of their work, the future for their
families and the future of our communities.
And to Congressman Steve Lynch of Massachusetts, who works so
respectably as an ironworker. He looks like that man that they have on
that iron beam over New York City, that famous poster. Whenever I look
at him, I think I see him. He is the one who is swinging the golf club
with the ball or something.
It is a pleasure to be here with these gentlemen tonight, because
they have all worked for a living, their families have worked for a
living, and we need more people who bring this experience to the
Congress of the United States.
The plant that Congressman Michaud discussed, Champion spark plugs,
no longer exists in Toledo. Back when I was first elected, we tried so
hard to get the Japanese to buy the spark plugs, the best plugs that
were made in the whole country, Champion spark plugs.
I took them to Japan in 1985, and I said to Prime Minister Nakasone,
``Your companies aren't buying from our premier companies.'' Our trade
deficit was beginning to really get bad back then, so I said, ``So I
would like to suggest that we give you these plugs for free for your
manufacturers, and let them try them.''
And we learned a lot about the keiratsu system of Japan and what a
closed system indeed it is and that other companies couldn't bid into
that production and that these very tight buying chains exist globally.
Japan has been eating our lunch in the automotive market for a very
long time now, but the Japanese market still remains closed, with less
than 3 percent of the cars on their streets from anywhere else in the
world. They didn't even take Yugos or bugs, VW bugs. So that market is
a closed market, and we began to see how difficult it was to engage in
trade with nations who truly were protectionists.
Congressman Hare talked about protectionist countries. You can see
pretty clearly which ones they are when you look at what is on their
shelves and what is on their streets.
I am here tonight to say that I have never supported fast track,
because I don't believe Congress should ever let a fast ball go through
here that we don't grab ahold of. And the problem is you can't amend a
trade agreement. So even if you want to, as happened when we debated
NAFTA, I can't remember a more piercing debate in this Congress other
than votes on war. That NAFTA debate was the most significant economic
debate we had here in 1993; and at the time that we debated that, it
was purposefully brought to the floor in a way that we could not amend.
So let me just take one issue. We are going to have discussions this
year on the issue of immigration. When that bill came down here, there
were many of us who said we have to deal with the displacement that is
going to happen in Mexico in the farm sector, because there is no
transition provision in NAFTA and no currency exchange, that we knew
that the Mexican farmers were going to be thrown off of their community
oriented farming ejido systems. It has happened. No one wants to
recognize it has happened, but over 2 million people were disgorged
from their villages and towns, and they are wandering the continent,
providing an endless stream of labor that is dirt cheap there and here.
It is almost as if they didn't want us to talk about it because that
fast track bill came through here.
Now, the NAFTA model is being used, they want to expand it to
Colombia, they want to put it to Peru.
I wanted to say a word about Colombia this evening. I agree with
Congressman Michaud. There is no nation in the world that allows the
assassination of their labor leaders more than Colombia. Why would we
want to sign a free trade agreement with a country that isn't free? Our
cardinal rule ought to be: Free trade among free people.
When we look at what happened in Colombia recently, Chiquita brands,
remember Chiquita Banana, which is headquartered in my State of Ohio,
has just pleaded guilty to funding terrorism in Colombia. Several what
are called unidentified high-ranking corporate officers of a subsidiary
of Chiquita paid $1.7 million from 1997 through 2004 to fund the United
Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, a group that our country says is a
terrorist organization. And Chiquita also bribed other groups inside of
Colombia.
The company has now admitted to this wrongdoing and agreed to pay $25
million in fines. They said that the money was paid to protect
employees from violent paramilitaries who fight over the banana
plantations. I wouldn't wish working on a Colombian banana plantation
to any living human being.
{time} 2000
And yet we are about to sign a free trade agreement under fast track
that we can't amend and stand up for the dignity of people in Colombia.
We know that the Colombian worker isn't safe; yet the President
evidently thinks it is okay to sign an agreement where there is no
transparent justice system, where bribes and protections and murders
are every-day occurrences. Where are our values as a country? Why has
it taken us almost 20 years from 1985 to 1995 to 2005, now it is 2007,
to bring this issue up? We had to have so many casualties in this
country. We tried 23 years ago so the hurt would not be so bad. And the
gentlemen that are here this evening, Mr. Lynch, Mr. Michaud, Mr. Hare,
Mr. Ellison, they represent those who are suffering in our country.
There are people suffering in other countries, too.
I want to say I associate myself with the gentleman's remarks this
evening. And what you said about those who have been murdered in
Colombia, we know 72 were murdered in 2006, and the gentleman talked
about prior assassinations of those who were trying to form groups
there so they could earn a decent wage. Almost none have been
prosecuted. It is like their lives have no meaning. So we need to set a
higher standard. Maybe our Constitution really should stand for
something and we should look for an agreement among the peoples of the
Americas that uses democracy and liberty as its fundamental principles,
not the diminishing of workers, be they farmers or industrial workers.
I oppose the Colombian free trade agreement and stand up for human
rights, the middle class, the rule of
[[Page 7675]]
law, and everything that this Nation should be committed to.
Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you, and I look forward to working with you as we
move forward.
We also have been joined by Mr. Ellison, who represents the Fifth
District in Minnesota with distinction. Congressman Ellison believes
NAFTA and CAFTA have encouraged the movement of manufacturing and
agricultural jobs out of Minnesota to be done under sweat-shop
conditions in other countries.
A 2003 report by the Minnesota Fair Trade Coalition reported that at
least a quarter and likely one-third of the net 45,000 manufacturing
jobs that Minnesota lost from 2001 to 2003 were directly attributable
to trade deals such as NAFTA.
Congressman Ellison has been a leader among the freshman class, along
with Congressman Hare, in fighting for fairer trade deals. I yield to
Congressman Ellison.
Mr. ELLISON. Thank you. I thank you for your leadership on this issue
of fair trade. I think that the time is right, the time is now to begin
talking about fair trade. I want to commend all of the Members here
tonight talking about this critical issue.
This election sent a strong message: no staying the course on Bush's
failed trade policy. So now what do we hear, that the Bush
administration wants to send to Congress NAFTA expansion agreements
with Peru and Colombia. Consider the problems that Democrats have
endlessly raised in writing, in hearings, on the floor, think about
these problems and the administration's trade agreement model, how we
have continually demonstrated that the Bush trade model is killing
American jobs and is an enemy of the middle class.
Then consider what the administration chose to put in the deals
anyway. Democrats are for consumers' right to affordable medicine. The
2002 trade negotiation authority instructed the Bush administration not
to lard up and pack up these trade deals with new protections for big
pharmaceuticals that could cut poor consumers off from access to
medications and cause endless deaths in poor countries. But the
administration inserted this poison pill into the FTAs. The TRIPS-plus
requirement needs to come out.
Democrats are against privatization of Social Security. We believe
the elderly in whatever nation they are in should have safeguards for
their security as they age. Yet the Peru free trade agreement requires
Peru to open its social security system for privatization. That has to
come out.
Democrats believe that foreign businesses operating on U.S. soil
shouldn't have greater rights than U.S. businesses. And we believe that
our environmental and health safeguards cannot be exposed to attack in
international tribunals. But the administration included the extreme
foreign investor rights and investor state enforcement of NAFTA's
Chapter 11. That needs to come out as well.
Democrats believe in the right of Congress and the President to
protect this Nation's security. We have made it clear that the trade
pacts cannot subject our decisions about who should operate U.S. ports
to attacks in international tribunals or demands for compensation. Yet
although the Dubai Ports World operates Peru's ports and thus would
have the right to such a claim, you included the ``landslide port
activities'' in the Peru and Colombian agreements. That has to come
out.
Democrats believe in reducing poverty in the developing world. We
believe in providing farmers in the Andean nations opportunities to
earn a living without resorting to illegal drugs that will end up on
our streets here in the United States. But despite the warnings from
Peruvian and Colombian Governments and the record of NAFTA displacing
1.7 million compesinos, the President has insisted on zeroing out corn,
rice and bean tariffs in those things. That has to come out.
Democrats believe consumers have a right to safe food. But the
administration included provisions allowing food imports that don't
meet our standards. That needs to come out.
Democrats believe that when governments spend tax dollars, they must
do so in the best interest of the taxpayers. But the administration
included language in these FTA procurement texts that could expose
Davis-Bacon prevailing wage laws, renewable energy standards and more
to challenge. That must come out.
It would only require striking a sentence here or a word there to
remove the FTA terms that directly conflict with these core Democratic
Party values and goals.
And then there is what is missing, the enforceable labor and
environmental standards in the core of the text of the agreement equal
to the commercial provisions.
Regarding the Colombia FTA, there is no fix to that and there is
nothing that can make this agreement acceptable in my view. It is
highly offensive that the Bush administration would exploit the
enormous discretion fast track provides even to initiate negotiations
with a country infamous and, unfortunately, famous for having the
highest rate of trade union assassinations. More than 2,000 labor
activists have been murdered in Colombia since 1990. Sixty were
assassinated in 2006 alone; one per week. The Colombian Army is
implicated in many of these murders, but few have been prosecuted.
Until the Colombian Government changes its situation, the United States
should not offer any enhanced trade relations to Colombia.
Mr. Michaud, thank you for your excellent work and leadership. The
American people deserve fair trade agreements. The American Congress
must take back its constitutional authority to make sure that any
agreement that the United States engages in is an agreement that is in
the best interest of the American working people.
Mr. MICHAUD. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to introduce my co-
founder of the Congressional Labor and Working Families Caucus, a
member of the House Trade Working Group, Mr. Steve Lynch.
During his career as an ironworker, Congressman Lynch worked at a
General Motors plant in Framingham, Massachusetts, the General Dynamics
shipyard in Quincy, Massachusetts, and the United States Steel plant in
Gary, Indiana, all of which were shut down due to foreign competition
and unfavorable trade conditions.
Mr. Lynch's firsthand experience in seeing the effects of plant
closures on American workers and on local communities has led him to
focus on efforts to improve United States trade policy and help protect
not only American workers but also American businesses which also feel
strongly about these trade deals and have been working very closely
with the United States Business and Industry Council to make sure that
we have fair trade deals. I look forward to hearing Congressman Lynch's
remarks.
Mr. LYNCH. Thank you very much. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I
want to join the rest of the Members here tonight to say how proud we
are of the fashion in which you have defended American workers and led
this cause for all Americans.
I rise tonight to address the House on the matter of the pending
trade agreements with Peru and Colombia and the general trade promotion
authority.
There has been much talk over the past couple of weeks and all of us
have heard it about the desire of our country to export democracy to
the Middle East. I just have to say that I am a firm believer that you
do not export democracy through the Defense Department, as has been
suggested by this administration.
What we are talking about here in these trade agreements, this is how
you export democracy. If you are going to do it at all, it is through
trade agreements which give other workers in other countries a fair
opportunity to have a decent standard of living, and it is really
incumbent upon us through the Commerce Department and these trade
agreements to make sure that at the same time we protect our own
workers, we also give a fair chance at a decent living to those of our
neighbors internationally.
Just like the job loss that has been described by Mr. Hare, Ms.
Kaptur, Mr. Ellison, and Mr. Michaud, as the
[[Page 7676]]
gentleman from Maine indicated, I worked at a General Motors plant in
Framingham, Massachusetts, and I saw the impact in Massachusetts and in
Framingham of those 2,300 workers getting laid off.
The same thing happened at the General Dynamics shipyard where I
worked in Quincy, Massachusetts, and I saw the impact there, as well as
the steel plants in the Midwest that I worked at which have also been
closed down.
What really gets me is as an ironworker hearing the talk in
Washington, especially this administration, they talk about job loss
like they talk about the weather, like it is something beyond their
control, like it is a natural disaster that they have nothing to do
with, when in reality when you look at the policies this administration
has put forward, it is a deliberate cause and effect. The reason we are
losing jobs is because of the policies that we have adopted.
Just like so many other so-called free trade agreements, this
Colombia and Peru trade agreement contain no meaningful language or
effective labor and environmental standards for workers in those
countries, nor does it provide adequate protections to our own workers.
Madam Speaker, these trade agreements are based on deeply flawed
models of NAFTA and CAFTA. We continually repeat the same mistakes and
offer the same problematic language in our trade agreements. Instead of
enforceable labor provisions, these free trade agreements merely
suggest that those nations that we deal with adopt and enforce their
own labor laws. They offer no assurance that existing labor problems
will be resolved, and they allow labor law to be weakened or eliminated
in the future with no possibility of recourse for those workers.
From our experience, we understand that attaching nonbinding side
letters is not enough; especially when you consider, as my colleagues
mentioned tonight, the record of deplorable labor conditions in the two
countries under consideration: Peru and Colombia. They are among the
worst examples of labor laws and protections and enforcements in the
world.
Peru, as my colleague from Maine has pointed out, the U.S. State
Department documented the failure of Peru's own labor laws to comply
with U.S. internationally recognized worker rights and ILO core labor
standards. Our own State Department included violations of child labor
laws with an estimated one-quarter of all Peruvian children between the
ages of 6 and 17 employed.
The State Department also indicated Peru's noncompliance with minimum
wage guidelines with roughly half of the workforce, about 50 percent of
the workforce in Peru, earning the minimum wage or below. These
conditions are a far cry from free trade.
Instead, American workers are being asked to compete with underpaid,
exploited and child labor workforces. One would think with such
deplorable conditions in Peru, that the U.S. would insert enforceable
labor standards in the agreement. However, the labor protections are
weak and nonbinding.
The same goes for Colombia, a country that is infamous for having the
highest trade union assassinations in the world. Mr. Michaud pointed
out that more than 2,000 labor activists have been murdered in Colombia
since 1990.
{time} 2015
Until the Colombian government takes action to change this volatile
situation, the United States should not offer any enhanced trade
agreements with Colombia.
We also must consider the national security implications of these
agreements. Both Peru and Colombia harbor terrorist organizations with
heavy involvement in narcotrafficking. While both countries have
established financial intelligence units for analyzing and
disseminating financial information connected with anti-terrorist
financing regimes, greater cooperation from the Peruvian and Colombian
government is crucial in undermining the funding mechanisms for these
organizations. This crucial issue of national security cannot be
overlooked when we consider these trade agreements.
Madam Speaker, while sanctions and serious remedies are granted to
the commercial trade and investment provisions of these free trade
agreements, the labor, environmental and international security
standards are completely ineffectual.
There is no quick fix that can make trade agreements with these
countries work for Colombian and Peruvian workers.
To truly strengthen the trade agreements, Congress must also
strengthen its negotiating mechanism. Not only are free trade
agreements flawed trade models, it is paired with a flawed blueprint
for negotiation, and that is the trade promotion authority. Congress
needs a new procedure for trade negotiations because we are being held
responsible for the damage all over the world. Under the TPA, Congress
cedes its ability to control the content of these U.S. trade pacts. Yet
we are stuck time and time again with the political liability for the
damage that these trade pacts cause.
This damage falls mainly to the American middle class, but also the
Peruvian and Colombian agreements are replicating the same model of
NAFTA and CAFTA that have been disastrous for the U.S. economy. Since
NAFTA, over 1 million jobs have been lost nationwide, with over 23,000
jobs lost in my State of Massachusetts alone. This has reduced wage
payments to U.S. workers by $7.6 billion for just 2004. The
administration's trade agreement model is killing the American middle
class, plain and simple.
Not only has NAFTA been harmful for American workers in Mexico, it
displaced 1.7 million campesinos and forced them towards overcrowded
cities and to enter the U.S. illegally. Yet the administration has
evidently not learned from NAFTA's mistakes. Instead, the
administration insisted on zeroing out corn, rice and bean tariffs,
even in the face of warnings from the Peruvian and Colombian
governments. Such measures will expand the NAFTA disaster to Peru and
Colombia.
In their current form, the Peru and Colombian trade agreements will
only export more economic hardship rather than democracy for foreign
workers.
So I urge my colleagues and I urge everyone to reject the Peru and
Colombian trade agreements until the rights of labor and the
environmental issues are contained in these agreements. They should be
rejected.
I believe in the potential of free trade, like my colleagues Mr. Hare
and Ms. Kaptur and Mr. Michaud, but along with power, as the major
world power, we have a responsibility to use that power in a way that
softens the impact of globalization on our own American workers, as
well as the workers from Peru and Colombia.
Mr. MICHAUD. Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman for
his comments. We have talked a lot about the individual workers, but,
also, this really devastates the community.
Three days after I got sworn in as a Member of Congress, the company
I worked for filed bankruptcy. The Great Northern paid approximately 65
percent of the tax base in the town of East Millinocket. That had a
devastating effect on what is going to happen to the school system as
far as being able to get the taxes owed because of the mill going
through bankruptcy. But also other small businesses in the community
actually had to close down because they relied on the workers in the
mill to help keep the small businesses going and running.
When you talk about getting retrained, my colleagues I worked with at
the mill, they were up in the age of 50 or 60 years old. Now they have
got to go back to school. A lot of them never went to school beyond
high school. Now they had to go back and try to further their
education, which is very difficult, and get trained. For what?
If you look at what happened in our State, we had mill after mill,
paper machine after paper machine, shut down. It has been very, very
difficult to find jobs in these communities, and it is very
disheartening to see grown men and women for the first time in their
lives that they actually had to go and ask for help for food. They had
to raise funds to fund the food bank, and it is very difficult.
[[Page 7677]]
I just hope that our colleagues on both sides of the aisle have seen
the failed trade policy that has come about starting with NAFTA, and I
know it was a Democratic administration, but probably conceptually
sounded good. But now we have got a track record of what NAFTA has
brought us; and, hopefully, we have learned our lesson and will be able
to move forward in the manner that we do have fair trade deals.
I will open it up for any discussion that my colleagues might have.
Mr. HARE. Madam Speaker, one of the things that I think we need to do
here is we have to start bringing some commonsense back to all of this.
I think sometimes we think in too broad of thoughts. For example, some
of the questions I would ask is, why can we not make a television in
this country anymore, why can we not make stereos, and why can we not
have textile mills in this country? We have quality workers. They were
trained. They knew what they were doing.
My colleague, Representative Kaptur, and I have been talking about
getting a group of Members of Congress to go around to areas that have
been hit and to interview those workers who have lost their jobs and to
put it on tape and to show that to people. I would appreciate the
gentlewoman might want to comment about that.
But what we are talking about here, Madam Speaker, is letting
ordinary people tell us what has happened to them. These are people who
are our veterans. They fought in the wars. They have come back, and
they are working in the factory. They lose everything they have ever
had, and some of them with very little or no notice at all, and yet we
are so quick to want to find work outside of this country when we have
people going to bed in this country hungry. Those jobs in Ohio and in
Maine and in Illinois, they are gone.
I think we have to start doing something proactive. We have to stop
this hemorrhaging of jobs, and we have to start thinking about how we
are going to keep the jobs that we have here and expanding them.
The late Senator Humphrey said that the American worker was the most
productive worker in the world, and that has never changed. So I
appreciate the gentleman for giving me a little bit of time. I thank
you for allowing me to speak this evening, but perhaps the gentlewoman
from Ohio might want to comment.
Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Congressman Hare and I are thinking about going to track the whole
Maytag saga, starting in his home community but then going over to Iowa
and the whole buyout of Maytag by Wall Street and the shedding of jobs,
thousands, thousands of jobs.
Then, in my home State of Ohio, 2,000 more jobs hang in the balance
at a place called Hoover Vacuum, which was part of this leveraged
buyout. There was an article recently in the paper about the Maytags
now being made by Samsung in South Korea, 250,000 of them being
recalled in this country because they are burning up. They are actually
catching on fire because water is dripping off the back onto the
electrical panel. That never happened with Maytag. The Maytag repairman
really was in that little room, and nobody bothered him.
I think it is important for us as Members to tell the story, whether
it is Maytag, whether it is Champion, Dixon Ticonderoga, companies that
Congressman Michaud worked for, and whether it is Maytag. We need to
help America give full voice to what is happening.
It is interesting how little is on television, because some of the
very same advertisers that own the airwaves do not want this story on
there.
I understand Lou Dobbs is coming to Congress this week for a hearing
that Congressman Sherman is going to have. That is one of the few
reporters that even talks about this, but for the most part you do not
see this on the evening news.
So I am very anxious to travel and tell the Maytag story and then
maybe tell the story of Brachs Candy and tell the story of some our
steel mills and to give these workers, first, appreciation for the fine
products that they have built and it is not their fault and to say that
we understand, but we know we are outnumbered sometimes, but our
numbers are growing.
Mr. HARE. They are.
Ms. KAPTUR. But our numbers are growing.
We said when NAFTA passed it was the first battle in a long war, and
we knew there were going to be casualties, and it literally broke our
heart because we knew what was going to happen on this continent.
But now we have the next wave that came in when Congressman Michaud
arrived; and now, with 39 new Members in your class, Congressman Hare,
to come here, and you cannot imagine what that means to the more senior
Members.
Our only sadness is all the casualties that are out there and all the
people that have had to suffer. We had hoped to protect America from
that. We had hoped to protect those families, but we did not have the
votes. But now I think we have the votes.
I know one thing, we have the American people. Sometimes things get a
little convoluted once it comes into this city, but we know the
American people are with us. Let us make them famous. They are the ones
that have lived this. Let us put it on our Web sites. Let us tell their
stories. If others will not, let us do that. They surely deserve that.
They have lived it.
Mr. MICHAUD. You are absolutely right. The American people, they do
get it, and that is why they sent so many freshmen Members here in this
Congress on the very issue that they talked about in their campaigns,
and that issue is trade.
We are heading for disaster, a perfect storm. We have the largest
budgetary deficit in the United States history, with over 45 percent
approximately is owned by foreigners. We have the largest trade deficit
in our history, over $202 billion with China alone. It is over I think
approximately, what, 7 percent of our GDP?
We are heading on a collision course. We must make sure that we have
a strong manufacturing base here in the United States, and that is why
I look forward to working with my colleagues here on the floor, look
forward to working with a good, diverse group of the United States
Business and Industry Council, labor, environmental groups, my
colleagues across the aisle, Congressman Walter Jones, Duncan Hunter,
Tim Ryan on our side of the aisle and Betty Sutton.
So I am really excited. We see new life here in Congress as it
relates to trade, and we have just got to keep talking about trade so
that our colleagues will start paying attention to what is going on
here.
Ms. KAPTUR. I think that if we look at those people that are trying
to sell off chunks of America piece by piece, I am offended by that. I
am truly offended by it.
When I heard the announcement that Hershey, one of America's logo
companies, right, was going to move production to Mexico, they are
already making those big kisses there, I guess. I did not know that.
When you think of all the dairy jobs in Pennsylvania, you think of all
of the factory jobs, you think of all of the distribution jobs. I mean,
this is a massive American company. It was America. It was America. And
so now we are going to let that go? And then they dumbed down the
recipe so the chocolate is not as good? They put more wax in it or
whatever. Come on.
Do not take the American people for fools. We understand what is
going on, and we know that we are being sold out. America is being sold
out from under us, and the American people do not like it at all. They
expect us to stand up for them.
So it is just a joy to have you here, to be a part of this effort,
and to say that the Peru and Colombian free trade agreement that is
supposed to come through here on fast track, again, it is more just of
NAFTA. It is more of the same. We should not approve it.
But what has surprised me the most, as much as the American people
have been hurt by NAFTA, if we go back, what has shocked me, what I
never expected or anticipated, was all the casualties across the
continent in terms of job loss and people hurt. I never
[[Page 7678]]
thought I would see the people of Latin America rise up in Mexico, in
Brazil, in these massive demonstrations. That has literally humbled me
as a citizen of the continent to think that the poorest among us, many
have been risking their lives, to say the pain on them is even greater
than on us. Their wages have been cut in half. They are losing their
little stakeholds in Mexico, for example, and they are just being
thrown off their land, and yet they are going to Mexico City and
demonstrating by the millions.
I never anticipated that that would happen, and I think what is going
to happen here, those folks in Wall Street and other places thought
they were going to be so smart. I think you are going to see another
generation come behind us. They are going to create a charter for the
people of the Americas that we should have created. Some of us wanted
to, but we did not have the votes here, and I think that the backlash
on NAFTA and on these kinds of free trade agreements that cause so much
harm, I think Wall Street has only begun to see what is going to
happen.
So I put my faith in the people, I put my faith in the institutions
of good governance, and I hope that, I do not know how harshly God will
judge those who have done so much harm, but it did not have to happen.
{time} 2030
We don't have to repeat the mistakes of the past, so I thank my dear
colleagues here this evening, Congressman Michaud and Congressman Hare
and Congressman Lynch and Congressman Ellison, for understanding what
it is going to take to turn this continent and our values to put the
values forward that were the ideals.
When I think about John Kennedy and his Alliance For Progress, and
you go down in Latin America and in every home there is a picture of
John Kennedy because he cared for them. He cared for them first. I
thought how did we go so far? Why couldn't we get a majority here? What
was wrong with us back in the 1990s, that is, that we couldn't put that
together? I see a rebirth of that spirit of idealism here this evening,
and I know that the continent is waiting for us.
I thank my dear colleagues for sponsoring this Special Order this
evening and for helping us speak on behalf of the people who expect us
to be here for them.
Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you, and I thank Congressman Hare once again for
coming to the floor this evening to talk about it. We have a lot to
talk about. We have fast track, we have the trade deals we are talking
about. We will be talking more about the value-added tax as that comes
forward in a couple of weeks, and also the trade balancing act, which I
will be resubmitting again in this Congress to look at trade in a
comprehensive manner.
I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the
aisle. This is an American issue. This is an issue that is important to
this country, important to our long-term stability.
____________________
2008 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell) is
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Madam Speaker, tonight, and the next 60
minutes, we are going to talk a little bit about one of the major
issues that will be on the floor here in the House of Representatives
as people vote later this week, and that will be the budget of the
United States Government for the next fiscal year, the fiscal year that
begins later this year. It's called the 2008 fiscal year budget.
There will be several budgets offered; but if history is any guide,
the one that is most likely to pass is the one that is being offered by
the majority party, or the majority Democrats, in this case.
That budget is a travesty. Tonight, we are going to show you why, why
that is not the budget that should pass, why that is not the budget
that should govern the United States taxpayers' money over the next
year. This budget that we will see later this week proposed by the
Democrat majority has the largest tax increase in American history. Let
me say that again: this budget you will see the Democrats propose this
week has the largest tax increase in American history. It has no reform
of any of the entitlements.
If we are going to save Medicare, we are going to save Social
Security for future generations, as we will explain to you later, they
are unsustainable. They have to be reformed. They have no reform
whatsoever.
They do not save or preserve the Social Security surplus. You know,
people pay Social Security taxes. When they do, they presume that money
goes to pay for Social Security. Makes sense. That is why it's called a
Social Security tax.
But, no, every year, a portion of that money is used to pay various
other priorities of the Federal Government. The budget that the
Democrats will propose this year for the next 5 years will not change
that one little bit. Yes, this budget, Democrat budget later this week,
is full of empty promises except one, to give you the largest tax
increase in American history.
Now, let's bore into a few of these things. Let's look into a little
bit of this in detail. In order to do that I have a few charts here. I
don't want to have anyone have some flashback to Ross Perot, I know he
had charts, so I have charts too. I have charts to show you what's
happening.
This first one shows there is a misconception there, particularly on
the Democratic side of the aisle, in spite of all the statistics, that
somehow the deficit that we are in today was caused by the tax relief
that was enacted back in 2003, that somehow allowing people at home to
keep more of their own money to spend on their priorities, rather than
Washington's priorities, that somehow allowing people to do that caused
the deficit that we have today. It's absolutely not true.
If you look at this chart, you will see that total Federal revenues
declined until 2003, when the tax relief was enacted, and they have
risen and are now up somewhere around 46 percent. Since then, the
Federal Government has 46 percent more revenue, 46 percent more money
than it did in 2003.
I would ask the average American taxpayer at home, do you have 46
percent more money, more revenue, more income than you had in 2003? If
you don't, you should understand, the Democrats believe that the 46
percent increase for the Federal Government wasn't enough, and that
whatever you got, it was too much. Because they want to take some of
what you have and put it right here in Washington, right here in the
midst of the Federal Government.
So the tax relief did not cause the deficit, actually caused an
increase in revenue. Spending caused the deficit, too much spending,
something the budget, the Democrats are proposing the majority party
does, is more. Their proposal over the next 5 years is to spend more
and more and more, yet raise your taxes to do it. So they are taking
the thing that is reducing the deficit and getting rid of it, and
taking the problem that has created the deficit spending and giving you
more of it. Let me show you a few more things why these tax reductions
actually resulted in more revenue.
They stimulate the economy. When you have more money, what do you do
with it? You save it, you invest it. You spend it, you create jobs, you
do all kinds of good things with it. That is why after the tax relief
was enacted in 2003, we created more jobs, lots more jobs, every single
month, not a single month without more jobs created in this country
since the tax relief was enacted.
What else did the tax relief do? It also increased gross domestic
product. That is basically the size of the total economy. If you look,
after 2003, it's not so good, but after 2003, gross domestic product
has increased dramatically every single quarter. So many charts, they
are falling down. The chart fell down and so did the unemployment rate
after the enactment of the tax decreases. Again, here they go.
Unemployment up close to 6.5 percent,
[[Page 7679]]
and where is it now? Down around 4.5 percent.
These things are not coincidences. These good things that happened to
the economy did not suddenly hit just when the tax relief went into
effect by coincidence. No. The tax relief left billions and billions of
dollars in the American public's hands and in the American taxpayers'
hands so they could use it for their purposes and help the economy
grow. That is what we should be doing more of, not less of.
But the proposed Democratic budget does a lot less of that. Let's
talk for a second about how much less. This proposed budget has the
greatest increase in taxes in American history.
Now, I could tell average taxpayers, people at home, how much is
that? Oh, it's $392.5 billion a year. What does that mean? They don't
know what that means. But let me tell you and bring it home a little
better. It means $3,035 for the average tax return in America per year,
per year, folks.
As people sit at home and they watch this, imagine the Democrats'
budget is saying to you, $3,000 per year, you have to pay more here to
Washington so they can spend it on more of their priorities.
We often hear, gee, in Washington, the spenders like to say, the tax
and spenders like to say, oh, we need to do this, and we have to get
the money. Where are we going to find the money if we don't raise
taxes?
Well, I would say this, where is the average American going to find
that money? Do you think they just will say, $3,000 a year, oh, that is
no problem. That is just about $250 a month. That is nothing. I have
got lots of that. That is no problem, we are happy to do that.
I don't think so. I think that would cause a tremendous impact on the
average American family, a tremendous impact on their budget, and not a
good one if it would have the reverse of all these effects. It would
start to drive unemployment up. It would start to drive job growth
down. It would start to the drive the economy down. We need to stop
this budget that will appear here on the floor this week.
Now, I would like to introduce the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr.
Barrett). Mr. Barrett, before you begin speaking, I would like to point
out to you, because I have these figures broken down by State, that the
average South Carolinian under the Democrats' tax proposal would pay
$2,482.66 more tax per year. So you might tell me, Mr. Barrett of South
Carolina, how do you think the average taxpayer in South Carolina is
going to pay for that?
Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina. My friend was exactly right. We are
talking about the largest tax increase in our history, $292 billion. My
friend from California was exactly right. When you talk about facts and
figures, it's one thing. But when you try to bring it home and let
people understand exactly what it means to them personally, it's
another thing.
Let me just give you some examples. Nationwide, if the Democrat
budget were to happen to pass, we are talking about some nationwide
impacts. Here we go, a family of four earning $40,000 will face a tax
increase of $2,052. That is a family of four nationwide and 113 million
taxpayers will see their taxes go up by an average $2,200. Actually,
$2,216, but what the heck, it's government work, let's round it off a
little bit. Over 5 million individuals and families who would have seen
their income tax liabilities completely eliminated will now have to pay
taxes.
So not only people that haven't paid taxes in the past now, another 5
million individuals are going to have to hit the tax rolls; 45 million
families with children will face an average tax increase of $2,864; 15
million elderly individuals, elderly. Now, most of these are on fixed
incomes, will pay an average tax increase of $2,934. And 27 million
small business owners will pay an average tax increase, listen to this
one now, listen to this one, $4,712. Let me read that one again, 27
million small business owners will pay an average tax increase of
$4,712. Unbelievable.
Let's bring it home. I am from South Carolina, born and raised there.
Let's put it in South Carolina terms. In South Carolina the impact of
repealing the Republican tax relief would be felt. Here is how. It's
higher than I thought: 1,300,000 taxpayers statewide who are benefiting
from the new lower 10 percent bracket would see their taxes go up.
In South Carolina alone, 1.3 million people added to the 10 percent
bracket; 447,000 married couples in the State of South Carolina would
see higher taxes because of the increase in the marriage penalty. We
are penalizing people to be married; 427,000 families with children
would pay more taxes because the child tax credit would expire; and
212,000 investors, including seniors, would pay more because of an
increase on tax rates on the capital gains and dividends.
The gentleman from California was there last Wednesday into Thursday
morning when we passed it, we voted against it, but the Democrats
passed their budget. It's full of empty promises, with the exception of
two, more spending and higher taxes. That is a done deal; it's going to
happen. The Democrat budget says it's the largest tax increase in
American history. The Republican budget will say no tax increases.
{time} 2045
The Democrat budget will say, immense new spending. The Republican
will say, we will hold the line and we were going to increase
accountability.
Entitlements, on the Democratic side, it is a complete failure, $77
million worth of entitlement savings, $77 million when we are talking
about literally hundreds of billions of dollars in entitlement spending
that they are going to do. The Republican budget says reforms,
improvements in reforms, trying to make entitlement more sustainable
and adding to the longevity of it. So it is plain and simple.
Again, the figure that the gentleman from California, Madam Speaker,
quoted a little bit earlier, when you bring it home in South Carolina
terms where everybody can understand it, where it hits their
pocketbook, we are talking per year average for 5 years if the
Democratic budget passes, $2,482.66 that my people in South Carolina
will have to pay more.
And I ask the gentleman from California, I don't think that is a
pretty good deal, do you?
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I don't think it is a very good deal at all. What are they going to
get for that? I think that is part of the question here. What exactly
are they going to get for that?
Are they going to get some of the spending like we just saw passed in
the bill last week, you know, maybe some things to help shrimp and
peanuts and a few things like that? Is that the sort of stuff they are
going to get? Are they going to get a bunch of earmarks? What are they
going to get? I don't think they are going to get very much.
I yield back to the gentleman from South Carolina. Do you see much
that your South Carolinian constituents will get for their $2,500 a
year?
Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina. I thank the gentleman for yielding;
and, no, I don't. Again, broken promises.
One of the ways that the Democrats want to fund all this new spending
is reserve funds. And you talk about a shell game. We are talking about
setting up reserve funds so we can spend more money, but there is
actually no money in the reserve funds because we are going to put the
money in there later on.
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Will the gentleman yield?
Can you explain that to me again?
Wait a minute. A reserve fund? I mean, a reserve fund to me is
something where I put some money aside. You are telling me that they
are saying they are setting up a reserve fund, the Democrats are, with
zero money it.
I yield back to the gentleman.
Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina. Exactly. And as the gentleman from
California knows, we had an empty jar, a big empty jar in our committee
to illustrate that view.
One of the ways that the Democrats in their budget spend more money
is they set up this empty reserve fund to
[[Page 7680]]
be funded later, that the committees and the agencies and organizations
can draw money out to spend more money, but yet there is no money in
the reserve fund to spend. So you talk about a shell game. It is a
shell game at its finest.
One of the things that I was proud of several weeks ago, I guess
maybe it was 2 weeks ago, I was proud to be part of an RSC, the
Republican Study Committee, a press conference that we had to talk
about a Taxpayer Bill of Rights.
And, Madam Speaker, what we are talking about here is giving the
taxpayers across the country more accountability for their government.
Four simple things, things that we have talked about and things that we
would like to see come to fruition. Let me tell you what they are.
Taxpayers should have the right to a Federal government that does not
grow beyond their ability to pay for it. I don't think we see that in
this budget, Madam Speaker.
Taxpayers should have the right to receive back every dollar they
entrust to the government for their retirement. It is incredible what
we have done and what we are continuing to do, Madam Speaker, in this
Democratic budget.
Number three, taxpayers have a right to expect the government to
balance the budget without having their taxes raised. As the gentleman
from California well knows, the Republican budget that we will present
later this week will do that in 5 years. We will balance the budget,
save the Social Security fund, and do it all without raising taxes. The
Democratic budget does not. It does not. Now they may say one thing,
but the figures show something else.
And, last, taxpayers have a right to a simple and fair Tax Code that
they understand. Boy, that is a tough one there. But it is a game of
trying to be responsible to the taxpayers, as my friend from California
knows. It is a game of making sure that our people keep their money.
They know how to spend it more than we do in Washington, DC, and I
trust my people more.
Unfortunately, Madam Speaker, as my friend from California knows,
this budget trusts the government more than it trusts the American
taxpayer.
With that, I yield back.
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Will the gentleman yield one more minute?
Let me just ask you one more question, and then we will go on.
The gentleman from South Carolina, so narrow it down. There will be a
Republican alternative to the Democratic budget here that everyone on
this floor will vote on this week. What are the major differences? I
mean, could you lay out for me and for Madam Speaker and for anyone
watching what are those differences?
And I yield.
Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I think it is very simple. Number one, we will balance the budget
without raising taxes; and, number two, we will reform entitlements.
Because, as you well know, over the next 5 years, Madam Speaker,
entitlement spending will grow 19 percent. Now that is without me,
without my friend from California, without anybody in this House
lifting a single finger. Entitlement spending will grow 19 percent.
So the budget we bring to the floor this week will be very simple. We
will slow the growth, not cut. We will slow the growth, because
entitlement spending will still continue to grow. We will slow the
growth of entitlement spending, and we will balance the budget without
raising taxes.
And I yield back.
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Thank you, Mr. Barrett from South
Carolina.
Now, Madam Speaker, so you don't think that we are just trying to do
rhyming people here, we go from Mr. Barrett of South Carolina to Mr.
Garrett of New Jersey. But before I yield to Mr. Garrett from New
Jersey, you know, I am from California, and California taxpayers, under
the Democrats' proposal, would pay $3,331.09 more per taxpayer in
California.
Now, I thought that was a lot. I thought that was a lot. It is one of
the higher numbers on the page. But it is not as much as New Jersey.
Taxpayers in New Jersey would pay $3,779.88 more in taxes under the
Democrats proposal than they do now. And that is an average, again, per
tax return filed per year. Almost $4,000.
I am glancing here and I think, Mr. Garrett, there is only one other
State that is going to pay, have more of an increase and that is
Connecticut than New Jersey. So I am curious, Scott Garrett from New
Jersey, what exactly do you think and what will people in New Jersey
think and how will they deal with $4,000 a year more taxes?
I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. I appreciate the gentleman from California
yielding.
New Jersey is proud to be number one in a number of things. But,
quite honestly, we do not like to be proud, we are not proud of the
fact that we are number one when it comes to paying taxes in this
country, whether you are talking about local taxes, sales taxes, State
income taxes, property taxes. I think we are just about number one in
all of those combined.
Yet when you take that and you add what is happening here, this could
be one of the most expensive weeks for the citizens of the State of New
Jersey if this House proceeds with what the Democrat leadership plans
to do.
Now, I have the privilege of serving with you, the gentleman from
California, on the Budget Committee. And as you know, we just debated,
if you will, the Democrats' budget proposal just last week. Actually,
we had a number of hearings over the last 3 months now, during which
time we have had a number of experts come and testify on various
aspects of the Federal budget and the ramifications of not doing some
things in the area of mandatory spending.
When you think about all the rhetoric that we have heard from the
other side of the aisle, and maybe it was disquieting at some times, I
think the one thing that maybe we can reach across the aisle here and
maybe hear one language, one word that we are on the same page on at
least, in rhetoric at least, is they agree with us on this one point
and that is that we should get to a balanced budget at some point. The
distinction, of course, is how they get there and how we get there.
Now, anyone who tuned in to C-SPAN, if people did tune in C-SPAN and
listen to those budget hearings that we had, they may realize, or they
watch the stuff on the floor, what have you, might realize just how
complex the Federal budget is. With talk of rescissions and special
orders and earmarks and everything, it is a hugely complex matter that
we deal with; and I appreciate your expertise that you come to the
House with to be able to handle this.
But, in reality, if you just step back for a minute, what we all do
here on the House floor and in Budget Committee isn't a heck of a lot
different than what every single American family, my own included, and
the residents of the State of California and New Jersey have to do
every single year, every week, every month when it comes to their own
family budget, and that is to say they have to live within their means.
Now, Washington doesn't have a good track record on this, but that is
what families have to do. When it comes to families, I guess families
don't really have a choice to say whether we are going to have a
balanced budget or not. Washington does. People know how much money
they are earning.
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Absolutely.
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. I was going to say, one thing that you
can do here in Washington is print money. The average family can't. If
the Democrats were to pass this budget and give them that $4,000 or
$3,800 tax increase in New Jersey, your citizens in New Jersey can't
print money like the Federal Government to just run a deficit, can
they?
I yield back to the gentleman.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. No, you are absolutely right on point. The
average family has to sit down and say,
[[Page 7681]]
this is what my income is going to be for the week, the month or the
year for the year ahead and say I am going to live within those means.
At the same time, what they have to do is they have to set priorities.
And I think that what the gentleman was also trying to elicit from the
Democrats during this last budget hearing was to set priorities. What
are your top-ranking priorities? What must we spend on and where should
we spend it? And if there are other things that you don't want to spend
on now because you don't have the money, what are they?
They would never agree to do that, if the gentleman recalls. That is
why I think they came up with this hollow, empty trust fund which, in
reality, they could have said the trust fund is this big, since it is
empty, or they could have said it is this large. Because if there is no
money in it, there is no limit to how large the empty promises are.
But the family budget can't do that, just like you said.
But the other thing that the Democrats in Washington are able to do,
besides print money, that the average family can't do, you know what
else the family can't do? They can't raise taxes. A family cannot
simply go out and say, I am short on cash this week, so I am going to
raise taxes. That is why I started off by saying, as you pointed out,
that this is the most expensive week for a family in the Fifth
Congressional District for the State of New Jersey.
Let me just give you one other number while I stand here. It was the
New York Times, that paper did a study just recently looking at what
the Democrats in the House and the Senate are proposing. They looked at
it a little bit slightly differently but came up with a little bit
different number, but still draws the point.
They looked at an average family of four making $70,000 in the State
of New Jersey. Now, if you are from the State of New Jersey, I don't
think anyone from either side of the aisle would say that a family
making $70,000 is rich by any means. It is expensive to live in our
State.
But they said that family, who did very well under the Republican tax
decreases in 2003 that we passed with the creation of jobs and the
like, that family, under the Democrats' budget that may pass this House
this week, would see their taxes go up by $1,500.
So if you think you are rich at $70,000, which I guess the other side
of the aisle thinks New Jerseyans making $70,000 are able to pay more
in taxes, those taxes are going up by $1,500. I think that is a burden
that that average family should not have to bear in light of the
property tax.
The overall average is the number that you brought out for the entire
State of New Jersey, approximately $3,000. You may have it in front of
you. I don't have it here.
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Will the gentleman yield? $3,779.98 for
the entire State of New Jersey.
I yield back.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. So around $3,800 or almost $4,000. And you
think about it. What could that $4,000 be used for? If you are the
family and the husband and wife sitting down with your family, well, I
would like to use that $4,000 to go on vacation this year. I would like
to be able to use it on some other niceties or what have you. Or maybe,
if they can't use it on that, maybe they have health expenses.
I have a daughter in college right now. Maybe they have college
expenses, other things like that. I am sure they could find a use for
$4,000 to spend.
I will yield.
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. I think this discussion we are having
right now gets to the core of the difference between what Democrats in
Washington, how they look at things and how we Republicans in
Washington look at things. They look at it from the sense of, well, if
we don't raise these taxes, how is the government going to spend more
money on this or spend more money on that, or how are they going to get
to take that? Because that is what it amounts to. When you tax
everybody else, you come here, the 435 of us, plus the 100 people in
the other body, get to spend the money on the stuff they want to spend
it on.
{time} 2100
And so how can we spend that money if we don't do this?
You and I, Mr. Garrett, look at it from the standpoint of families,
of taxpayers, of people. What are they not going to be able to do in
New Jersey with that almost $350 a month? I mean, that is a nice car
payment. That is substantial child care. That is a chunk of a house
payment. It is a lot of different things to a lot of people. And we
look at everything from the sense of the family, the taxpayer. They
come first and the government comes second. That is not the way the
Democrats in this town look at it, is it?
I yield back to the gentleman.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's
yielding. I remember one of the comments from the other side of the
aisle during budget process, I think you shook your head when they said
this as well, where they said, Well, if we do a tax cut, the Federal
Government is subsidizing that taxpayer. And we just shook our head at
that because a tax cut is not a subsidy to the American taxpayer. A tax
cut is simply saying to Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer and family that you don't
have to send quite as much of your hard-earned money each week to
Washington. You are able to keep $3,800 of that money. And maybe you
want to use that $3,800 in New Jersey to go on vacation to a beautiful
State like the State of California.
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, it is a
matter of it is your money. When you earn it, when people earn the
money, it is their money. It is not the government's money. It is their
money and the government takes some of it for necessary operation to
run government. But it is not like it is all the government's money and
the government allows you to keep some. That is not the way we look at
it.
I yield back to the gentleman
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. I will just close on these thoughts: the
difference that we are seeing here between what the Democrats will be
proposing in their budget and the Republican alternative budget that
should also come before the floor is in three areas, I think. We are
both aiming towards the same goal, fortunately, of trying to reach a
balanced budget by 2012, 5 years from now. But the Republican budget
will reach that goal of 2012 without raising taxes by almost $400
billion, which is what your chart behind you shows. And that is
critical.
So, number one, we will not put a burden of almost $4,000, $3,800, on
the families in the State of New Jersey, $1,500 if you are a family of
four making $70,000.
Secondly, by not raising taxes we will not be undermining the pro-
growth policies of this administration and of this government over the
last 10 years. Those pro-growth policies, for New Jerseyans at least,
have created tremendous employment, very low unemployment, so that that
family that is making that $70,000 a year or more or less in New Jersey
at least knows that the unemployment rate is almost at historic lows at
this point. So they know there is the opportunity for jobs, and because
of that, there is great opportunity to improve yourselves in careers
and what have you. And because of that pro-growth policy, we have seen
the deficit shrink by 26 percent.
And, thirdly, and I think this is very important to everyone at home,
is that we are making sure on the Republican proposal that those
dollars that we do spend, because we are always going to have some
spending by the Federal Government, that those dollars will not be
wasted, not waste, fraud, and abuse, but will be spent on those things
that are critical to my State, to your State, to national security, to
homeland security, and to our veterans as well.
So balance the budget without raising taxes, make sure we continue
the pro-growth tax policies that we have had in the past to create
jobs, and make sure that those dollars are wisely spent. They all come
under the umbrella of one thing, and you said it: to
[[Page 7682]]
realize that these dollars come from the family budget. And our focus
should be on the family budget and not on the Washington budget all the
time.
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Garrett) so much for his comments and his hard work on
these efforts and on these proposals to recognize that it is your money
first, taxpayers. It is your money first. It is not the government's
first that they let you keep some of. It is your money, and you should
keep all of it except for the minimum amount necessary to properly run
the government.
Now let us talk about a few more things on these taxes. Some of the
rhetoric that people may hear from the majority party here is that this
tax relief in 2003, 2001, this just gave tax cuts to the rich. We hear
that over and over: ``tax cuts to the rich.'' Well, as Mr. Garrett
pointed out, a $70,000-a-year family of four in New Jersey is probably
not rich, and they would be paying $1,500 or whatever the amount was
that you said.
Let us look at some of this. Now, these are numbers in billions of
dollars, Mr. Speaker; so they can't relate to per person. This is the
total Democrat proposed tax increase. This orange slice stands for the
people who save money because of the 10 percent income tax bracket.
Now, the 10 percent income tax bracket is the lowest tax bracket that
exists. It is at $15,000 of income for a married couple. So this amount
of this tax is going to people with roughly a taxable income of about
$15,000. That is rich? I don't think so.
Look at this slice right here, this red slice. This is people who get
the child tax credit and the marriage penalty credit, these benefits
which the Democrats have proposed to raise, to cut in half the child
tax credit and to eliminate what was put in place sometime ago so that
people don't get a penalty, don't pay more tax if two people both earn
income get married. Under the old law, a lot of them pay more tax. Now
a lot fewer of them pay more tax. This would get rid of that. Both of
these phase out over a certain income level. So all of these are geared
only for people at lower income levels.
Let us look at this chunk. This is the death tax, which can affect
all kinds of people, whether it is the person who is deceased or
whether it is one of the many beneficiaries of someone who is deceased.
And we know how the death tax has been destructive for family farms,
family businesses, people wanting to pass their home that maybe has
been in the family for generations, maybe only for a short period of
time, but they want their children to have it, and they can't because
the death tax got in the way.
We are scheduled to have the death tax continue to decline. But the
Democrat budget has proposed to put it way back into full force and
effect with a rate, I believe, of up to 55 percent.
And then look at this chunk, the biggest chunk of all the marginal
rates. That means seniors with dividends and capital gains income and
people at all other schedules in the different tax brackets within the
Tax Code. These tax increases affect everyone, not just the supposed
rich.
And let us look at what this would do to certain tax rates: the 35
percent tax rate would go to 39.6. A capital gains tax rate of 15 would
go to 20. The estate tax would go from 0 to 55 percent. The child tax
credit, from $1,000 to $500. And the very lowest tax bracket starting
at taxable income, technically, of 0 would go from 10 to 15 percent.
So, again, tax increases on everybody all across the board.
We talked a lot about taxes tonight. But as I said when we started
this conversation, the reason we have a deficit is not because we
lowered taxes. Lowering taxes stimulated the economy, created more
revenue for the Federal Government. Mr. Speaker, the reason we have a
deficit is because we spend too much. And here is a chart showing how
spending drives the long-term problems:
Here is our spending today, roughly 20 percent of the economy; so
already the Federal Government is spending about $1 out of $5 that
exists in the economy. But if we leave things alone, if we allow
spending to go forward and grow as it is in law now and if we just left
all these things alone, it will go by 2049, you see here, up to nearly
double that, nearly 40 percent of the economy. So $4 out of every $10
in the economy would be government spending.
Now, what this chart doesn't show is in countries where they have
done this sort of thing before. The private part of the economy
contracts. It doesn't have money for investment. It doesn't have money
for growth. If government takes 3,331 more dollars out of each taxpayer
in California, as the Democrats have proposed to do to spend on some of
this stuff, they don't have that money to save. They don't have that
money to invest. They don't have that money to buy things that help
stimulate the economy. The government has it. The government doesn't
save it. The government doesn't invest it. The government just spends
it. And as we know, in a lot of cases not particularly wisely. So that
is what happens if we leave spending alone. That is why we have a
deficit.
Even with the Democrats' proposed tax cuts, which is the orange line
here, Mr. Speaker, you see it isn't going to work. The spending
increases much faster than even after those tax increases.
So I say to the people who have put together the majority budget,
what do you plan to do here? Are we ever going to deal with this rapid
exponential growth in spending? Or are you planning to raise these
taxes further? Is the $3,331 per taxpayer in California just the
beginning? Are we looking over a 10- or 15-year period of time at twice
that? Three times that? Four times that? The sort of thing it would
take to get anywhere near this spending level?
Chairman Bernanke is the Chairman of the Federal Reserve. And the
Federal Reserve, I think there is pretty general unanimity on both
sides of the aisle, as well as with the economists, that the Federal
Reserve has done a pretty good job of managing our economy for some
time, interest rates and inflation; and they tend to know what could
set this economy off course and what could keep it on course. And I
think they deserve a lot of credit for keeping the economy on course,
not just over the last 3 or 4 years but over the last 15 or 20 years.
But Chairman Bernanke said just earlier this year that ``without
early and meaningful action to address entitlements, the U.S. economy
could be seriously weakened with future generations bearing much of the
cost.''
What does he mean by that? When he talks about entitlements, he is
talking about Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, things like that
that the government does. And he said if we don't deal with it early
and meaningfully, if we don't take early and meaningful action to deal
with the growth in these retirements, that the economy is in trouble.
Now, the Democrat budget that will be on this floor later this week,
let's see, it is a 5-year budget. What reform of entitlements does it
include? Oh, yes. Zero. None. Not one change. Nothing in the
entitlements over the next 5 years. Is that early reform? I don't think
so. Is that meaningful reform? Well, if zero is meaningful, then maybe;
but I don't think it is meaningful reform.
So let us look at what happens if we don't reform. Again, here is
revenue, this black line. That is income coming into the Federal
Government, roughly the same tax rates that we have today. But look at
what happens to spending. It goes from a little more than we are taking
in right now to nearly double. Nearly double if we don't reform. That
is why Chairman Bernanke said, Mr. Speaker, that we need early and
meaningful reform or this economy is in trouble, as he said, with
future generations bearing much of the cost.
Mr. Speaker, we have a lot of discussion about children around here
and what is good for children and how we are going to help children.
Let me tell you something I know is not good for children, and that is
sending them this kind of price tag for us, for our Medicare, our
Social Security, our Medicaid over the next 15, 20 years, and asking
them to pay double, at least, the tax rates, the tax burden, that we
pay because we didn't act.
[[Page 7683]]
{time} 2115
We know this is coming. This is not a Republican chart. This is not a
Democratic chart. This is prepared by the Congressional Budget Office,
the Office of Management and Budget. Any number of nonpartisan
government agencies agree. All the experts agree. On the Budget
Committee that Mr. Garrett and Mr. Barrett and I sit on, every single
expert who came in said that this entitlement spending, this planned
growth in spending, is a disaster, a budget disaster, that we can see.
It is a train coming down the track right into our eyes. But we are not
blinded. It is not like we can't see it, Mr. Speaker. It is right here.
We can see it. It is right here on this chart. We know it is coming,
and we know the only way to deal with it is to reform these things.
So where are they? Where are those reforms? What will people do if
that top tax rate rises?
Let me pull out one of these other charts. Just think about it.
Doubling taxes. I realize it is quite a few years off, but if we don't
deal with it now, we will get there. What does that mean? I guess that
means the 39 percent rate would go almost 80 percent. That capital
gains would have to go to 40. The estate tax, I guess you just take it
all, which has happened in some countries before. The child tax credit,
you probably get rid of it. And the lowest tax bracket would probably
need to go up to 20 or 25 percent.
Those obviously aren't exact figures or anything like that, Mr.
Speaker, but just to give a sense of what we are talking about here if
we don't do something, if we don't change these processes and change
this. Because if you look at this chart again, the reason we can see
the train coming is, if we do nothing, absolutely nothing, to change
Social Security, that is this one, Medicare and Medicaid is this one,
interest on the debt is that one. If we did nothing to change existing
law, it is not like you have to do more, that we have to take action to
spend this money. This is the money that will get spent if we do
nothing, if we leave it alone under existing law. That is why we have
to take action, and it is for the kids.
Our kids can't bear this burden. People have said that if we allow
this to happen that my children will be the first generation of
Americans to have a lower standing of living than their parents. We
have never had that happen in this country, and we should never let it
happen in this country. The only way it is going to happen is if we
shirk our responsibility today, because, gosh, it is 15 years off,
let's deal with it later.
This isn't about destroying Social Security. This is about saving
Social Security. Because you really can't pay for this. There isn't
enough money in the economy. So we have to reform it. We have to change
the way it works to save it.
That is why Republican budgets will say we should save the Social
Security system. We shouldn't spend it. That is why it is part of the
American Taxpayers' Bill of Rights, which a group of us Republicans
introduced a few weeks ago, where we said if you pay money for your
retirement it should only be spent on your retirement. It shouldn't be
spent on something else.
This isn't about destroying Medicare or wrecking Medicare, as you
will probably hear demagoguery on the other side. It is about saving
it. It won't continue this way. There isn't enough money. We have to
save it, and to save it we must reform it.
You will see proposals, you will see reform, but not in the
Democratic budget that we see today. And that is what is so
disappointing, Mr. Speaker. We can't ignore it. We shouldn't ignore it.
It is right there. It is right before us.
Our children will look back at this time in the future as to what we
did with their inheritance. And I don't mean about the death tax
necessarily. I mean the inheritance of optimism that is so much a part
of the American ethos, the optimism that the average American can
always do better, that anyone can lift themselves up, that they can
move things forward.
Instead, this is saying, no, we have to take more of your money. We
have to move things backwards. You may not be able to have the same
things that your parents had because we need more of your money for a
failed and inefficient system.
That is not the America my parents left me, it is not the America
that I want to leave my children, but it is the America that this
Democratic budget is heading us towards.
Mr. Speaker, we do not need the largest tax increase in American
history. We need to let people keep more of their money, not less.
Families will not struggle because government doesn't spend enough.
Families will struggle when government spends too much and takes too
much of their money.
Mr. Speaker, we need a solvent Social Security system, a solvent
retirement system, not one that takes the money that that is taken out
of people's paycheck for their retirement and spends it on other things
and not one that is unsustainable, that won't exist 20 or 30 years from
now.
Mr. Speaker, we need a Medicare system, a healthcare system, where
people control their own healthcare, where people control their own
destiny, not where the government is telling them what to do and
telling them how to do it and using one of the most inefficient methods
and high cost to do so. We have to reform that, or it won't exist in
the future.
Yes, this Democratic budget is full of empty promises. You will hear
about them over the next few days and weeks. You will hear that they
promise to spend more money on this and spend more money on that and
spend more money on the other thing, and in some cases they are
definitely planning to do that. What they are not telling you is where
they are getting it, and they are getting it right out of your pocket.
In some cases, they are going to say we are going to spend more money
on this and spend more money on that and grow this program and grow
that program; and, as Mr. Barrett from South Carolina said earlier,
they don't actually have the money in the budget to do it. They are
just telling you, oh, yeah, we are going to do it. But we will find the
money later.
Well, you can be sure where they are going to get that money,
probably the place they get the other money, right out of the American
taxpayer. It is the only place to go, unless you cut spending somewhere
else, which we are very happy to talk about, very willing to do. That
is always something you do in budgets, you set those priorities.
Yes, it is a budget filled with empty promises, except one, the
largest tax increase in American history.
Mr. Speaker, American taxpayers deserve better, and I hope that we
will defeat this budget later this week.
____________________
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Altmire). All Members are reminded to
address their comments to the Chair.
____________________
30-SOMETHING WORKING GROUP
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Murphy) is
recognized for 60 minutes.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, it is good to see you in the
Chair this evening.
This has been a pretty amazing first 3 months for a new Member such
as myself, who just joined this Chamber after having watched it from
afar for a number of years. As our majority leader said at an
engagement earlier tonight, this has really been one of the most
remarkably productive Congresses in as long as he can remember being
here. That is important. That is important to me.
Mr. Speaker, we are going to be joined later tonight by Ms. Wasserman
Schultz, who is just beginning her second term. I think she shares a
lot of the same frustration that the new Members do, that for all of
the important policy changes that this Congress has started, whether
you want to talk about raising the minimum wage, starting to repeal
some of these massive tax breaks we have given to the oil
[[Page 7684]]
industry, the very important action that we took on Friday that we will
talk about in terms of Iraq and the new direction that this Democratic
Congress is beginning to set on what we do in Iraq, maybe the most
important thing was that we started getting this place to work again
and starting to give our constituents out there faith that Congress is
back to work for the people of this country. Instead of sort of waiting
for the special interests and the lobbyists to line up and come into
the offices of the prior leadership to tell them what they wanted, now
actually we have got the American people, middle-class families,
working class families, their priorities are back in charge here again.
That is what makes me proud to be part of this group.
This is the hour that the 30-Something Working Group gets to spend on
the floor of the House. I am proud to be a member of that group, a new
member, proud that Speaker Pelosi has allowed us this opportunity.
We are going to cover I think a couple of subjects tonight. We will
certainly talk about what happened here on Friday.
But I want to first just rewind for a second, to rewind to what
happened when we first got here in January. Because it is interesting.
I watched C-SPAN occasionally when I got home from the campaign trail,
I got home from the State capital where I served in Connecticut for a
few years, so I have some familiarity with some of the talk that goes
on in this place.
But now I get to sort of listen it to with new ears, because now I
listen to a lot of the revisionist history that gets thrown around this
place late at night, listen to our friends on the other side of the
aisle, and they are friends.
It is important to put up this chart, Mr. Speaker, to remind the
American people that we actually can be friends when it actually comes
to putting on the floor of the House of Representatives up or down
votes on issues that matter to regular, middle-class families out
there.
We can talk about 68 Republican votes along with the Democrats voting
to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. When we raised
the minimum wage, set that bill on a path forward in this House, we got
82 Republican votes for that. Stem cell research, passed 253-174, 37
Republicans. Better prescription drug programs for our elderly, 24
Republicans. And on and on and on.
When it matters, where you put up-or-down votes in front of this
House for things that make lives better for regular people out there,
you are going to have Republicans and Democrats agreeing. So we are
friends. We are friends when we put things before us we can all agree
on.
But there has been some revisionist history. There has been some
interesting 20-20 hindsight happening on this floor often. We heard
just a little bit of it before. A lot the decrying about the situation
that our Federal budget has gotten into is pretty curious, seeing that
the reason that I am here in large part is because a whole bunch of
people out in northwestern Connecticut who voted for one person for 24
years decided that the budget priorities, along with the priorities on
our foreign policy, were gravely out of whack.
A $9 trillion deficit, Mr. Speaker. A President that inherited a
budget surplus, who ran on very fiscally conservative principles,
managed to turn that into a record deficit in his first 6 years in
office. A Republican Congress, I am sure there were some Democrats that
were at the trough as well, but a Republican-led Congress that was
complicit in racking up record amounts of debt that we know are not
owned in large part by domestic banks but are increasingly owned by
foreign banks, Asian banks and, in fact, it will put us in a very
difficult position with when we are sitting down at a table to
negotiate foreign policy with a lot of these foreign debt holders that
have fairly decent leverage over us.
So we hear a lot about how we need to do something about this
deficit. How it is our children, our children are going to be crippled
under the weight of this deficit. They absolutely are. They absolutely
are.
{time} 2130
We had 6 years with a Republican President, 6 years with a Republican
House, a Republican Senate for much of that time. Could have fixed it
during that time; didn't get the job done.
Let's take a look at this chart for just one second. Let's make this
clear, when we borrow money, all of this debt that we have racked up
over the past several years, it is owned by Japan, China, the United
Kingdom, Caribbean nations, Taiwan, OPEC nations, right down the line.
That is who owns our foreign debt. That is what places us in incredibly
compromising positions when we try to bring them to the table to be a
multilateral player in actions throughout this world.
So here is why I am here: I am here because people in northwestern
Connecticut wanted us to finally challenge this President on his
disastrous policy in Iraq. I am here because they were sick and tired
of the programs that make communities strong, the health care programs,
education programs, job training programs, we are getting slashed and
burned and cut to the bone by this Congress, while they gave away more
and more massive tax breaks to their friends in the upper .1 percent of
income earners in this Nation.
But they are also upset because the party that I think they thought
was, you know, you see it in the polls, people for years and years and
years thought that the Republicans were the ones that could manage
their money and the Democrats they weren't so sure on. Well, they
finally wised up after a while to realize that this place wasn't so
responsible even under Republican rule; that in fact after budget after
budget that got put before here, that President Bush put before this
Congress was rubber-stamped over and over and over again and led to
some of the most fiscally irresponsible policies that this Congress has
ever seen, that this Nation, in fact, has ever seen. Largest Federal
debt in the history of this country, growing by the day.
Now, here is the good news: It's changing. Now, as many times as
folks on the other side of the aisle want to talk and use the term
``biggest tax increase in the history of the Federal Government,''
well, I'm still searching through that budget resolution, I'm still
searching through what I am going to vote on this week and I don't see
it. I don't see it because it's not there because we are actually going
to do the responsible thing. Because what happened to create this
Federal budget deficit was not just these massive tax breaks that they
gave away to the folks way at the top, top, top of the income bracket,
but they also spent money in a way that would have your eyes spin to
the back of your head if you dug into some of the things they were
doing here.
A Medicare prescription drug program that deliberately ties the hands
of the Federal Government, doesn't allow the Federal Government to
negotiate lower prices with the drug industry, Mr. Speaker, making
millions, hundreds of millions, in dollars in profit for the drug
industry at the expense of American taxpayers.
A defense policy which asks virtually no questions of how we spend
our money in Iraq. We find out that there was $9 billion sent over to
Iraq on pallets, thrown out of SUVs in duffel bags, unaccounted for;
disappeared in that country. Stories of these pork barrel projects that
would make your head spin, the ``bridge to nowhere'' in Alaska, simply
the tip of the iceberg when it comes to some of the frivolous spending
that happens from this supposedly fiscally conservative Congress.
You could run through the examples over and over and over again. Mr.
Speaker, we just had a hearing in the Government Oversight Committee
that I sit on where we found out that the government does audits, each
Department does an audit every year to try to make sure that we are
spending money in a fiscally sound manner, just like any business
would, that government should act like a business. Well, the analogy
isn't particularly apt in a lot of facets. But when you are talking
about at least having generally accepted accounting principles to make
sure
[[Page 7685]]
that money comes in and goes out in an efficient manner, well, yes, we
should start acting like a business does.
The only agency in the Federal Government that can't give a clean
audit year after year after year, the Department of Defense. Nobody
here is putting pressure on them to account for how they spend money,
to make sure that the billions of dollars that we hand to the
Department of Defense in order to protect this country is being spent
in the means that make sure that we are not saddling our children or
grandchildren with the enormous amount of debt that we have racked up
in this Congress.
I mean, you want to talk about spending money wisely, our friends on
the other side of the aisle have to look themselves in the mirror, have
to wonder why this election happened. I know that this war was a major
factor in people's choice at the polls. I also know that were a lot of
people in my district, and I have got the run of the economic spectrum
in the Fifth Congressional District, from people living in places like
New Britain and Waterbury that used to have good, solid middle-class
jobs who are still struggling to get back to that level of sustenance,
to folks that are doing pretty well with their lives that have made a
buck in this economy. Those folks at the upper end of the economic
spectrum are wondering how this government is spending their money.
So this week we are going to put a budget before this House. And Mr.
Meek, who has joined us and Ms. Wasserman Schultz, who sits on the
Appropriations Committee, can talk more intelligently than I can about
this. We are going to finally put a budget before this House that is
going to start to reflect the priorities of the American people; we are
going to get our financial ship in order. All the things that folks
over there talk about are actually going to be reality in this budget.
We are going to make sure that we invest in the programs that make
America strong. We are going to make sure that we end this disastrous
policy of unbalanced budgets. We can do it in the next 5 years. That
budget says that we can and we will. And it is going to continue at a
pretty important precedent that we have set in this Congress, which is
to change course on some of the most disastrous policies of this
administration, particularly the vote that we took on Friday on the war
in Iraq, and I know that we will talk about that, but also start to get
our fiscal ship in order, to put our money where our mouth is.
It is one thing for people to come up to this dais day after day
after day and talk about fiscal responsibility. It is another thing to
actually do it and put it into practice.
The budget that we are going to vote on will be, as I have learned,
this place calls a pay-as-you-go budget. It is simply this, what every
family lives with every day. You want to spend some new money, show how
you are going to pay for it. You want to cut some taxes, show how you
are going to account for it. Pretty simple budget rule, Mr. Speaker.
But not to be too partisan here, it took a Democratic Congress in order
to start playing by those very simple rules.
So, Mr. Speaker, I want to want to hand it over to Mr. Meek for some
words, who normally gets to kick off this hour. But let me say that it
has been a proud first three months. Probably the proudest day I have
had was on Friday, when we came together to stand up to the President's
policy in Iraq. It is going to be another proud week this week when we
set the budget policies of this country straight and we finally stand
up to the President and don't do what every other Congress has done,
which is take this massive document, throwing our deficit into an
increasingly upward spiral, throwing our families into turmoil. We are
going to finally take this very weighted document and hold it up to the
light, not just rubber-stamp it.
It is going to be another good week here, Mr. Speaker. And with that,
I yield to Mr. Meek.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Thank you so very much, Mr. Murphy. It is an
honor to be here on the floor with you. I look forward to having a
discussion not only with you, but also other Members of the House about
what is coming up this week. I know that you alluded to last week's
action that took place here on this floor. Democrats and Republicans
and the majority were able to pass an emergency supplemental war bill
that would not only put benchmarks in to make sure that the Iraqi
Government is doing all that they should do to make sure that they
carry out their responsibility since the U.S. taxpayer will be spending
over $100 billion and counting over in Iraq in this piece of
legislation, this supplemental, but also the $400-plus billion that
have already been spent.
And also security for the troops, making sure that Department of
Defense regulations, Mr. Speaker, that have been put forth to protect
our troops, that they have what they need: the up-armor that they need,
the training that they need, the equipment that they need, the personal
equipment that they need.
And also making sure that our troops, as it relates to their rotation
into theater, that they actually get an opportunity to have a Defense
Department that has to do what they said they would do, and making sure
they have enough time to be with their families, make sure they are
able to maintain a job, those that are Reservists and National Guard
men and women back home. And to also make sure that their families have
an opportunity to be a part of their father or their mother's lives, or
their parents having an opportunity to enjoy their son or daughter. And
I think that is so very, very important as family values, and it is
also standing by our word.
If we can't stand by our word while they are enlisted or federalized
to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan, then how do they expect for us to
stand next to them and behind them when they are veterans and they are
out in the world of veterans health care?
I can tell you also, Mr. Speaker, that I am very pleased with the
fact that we did put something in the legislation that will hopefully
point towards redeployment of our troops. This war will continue and
continue and continue if left up to the President of the United States.
But before I start talking about the action really that we took,
passing that legislation, seeing the voice vote that took place in the
Senate last week, moving on legislation even with a closer time line
and different benchmarks, which, Mr. Speaker, you know we will come
together in conference to talk about a little further and iron out and
be able to get a work product to the President.
But as you know, today, March 26 of 2007, the number stands at 3,235
U.S. servicemen and women that have died in Iraq; some 13,415 of U.S.
troops have been injured and returned back to battle. You have to think
about it, injured and then returned back to battle; 10,000 U.S. troops
have been injured and have not been able to return back to battle.
Hearing those numbers and hearing how they continue to move up, Mr.
Speaker, even speaks further to the kind of oversight that this
Congress must have in this conflict in Iraq, this civil war in Iraq, I
must add, that we are officiating.
We know that the President had a press conference after we took our
action here on the floor. I want to commend the Members again who voted
in the affirmative to make sure that we were able to take action, the
first time the U.S. Congress has taken action with benchmarks, even
against profiteering with U.S. contractors that are the third largest,
you may call it coalition partner, or the second largest outside of
U.S. servicemen and women in Iraq. You would assume that there are
other countries in the world, since this is such a world issue that the
United States is involved in, you would assume that there would be a
number of countries before U.S. contractors, but U.S. contractors are
the second largest number of individuals that are there.
Mr. Speaker, when I talk about these numbers and when we talked about
the action last week, the President, then he sprung into action. He had
a press conference talking about how the Congress is now holding
dollars back from
[[Page 7686]]
our men and women in theater and asking us to please stop. Well, I am
glad that I lived long enough over the weekend to come back here to the
floor, Mr. Speaker, to not only share with the President, but those
that may think that by us standing up on behalf of veterans health
care, by us making sure that Walter Reed Hospital gets the necessary
dollars they need to be able to take on the influx of men and women
coming back from theater that are injured of the 10,772 that cannot and
will not go back to theater and the 13,415, when that number continues
to increase, that when they get their care in the field and then they
move on to Germany and they get even further care, and some of them
have to come back here to Washington, DC to even get physical therapy
and all the things that they need to get back to the theater, if that
is stopping the dollars from getting to the troops, then I think that
we need to go back to a civics lesson of what this is all about.
We are putting dollars in what the Republican majority did not put
in. Anything that the President asked for, the Republican majority
rubber-stamped it. As a matter of fact, the Republican majority in the
last Congress was so loyal to the President of the United States that
whatever he said, whatever he wanted, they did it. And guess what, Mr.
Speaker? I am here to report that that is one of the big reasons why we
have a Democratic majority right now in the U.S. House of
Representatives and in the Senate. Some 30-odd seats were lost living
under that philosophy. And all of the hours that we spent on this
floor, all of the hours that we spent in committee saying that if you
give us the opportunity to lead, we will lead. Democrats, Republicans,
Independents and some Americans who never voted before in their life
went out and voted last November.
Now, the President can have a press conference, that's fine, he is
the President of the United States. I can go out and have a press
conference. The bottom line is let's not have the people of the United
States of America feel that the U.S. House and the Senate are holding
money back from the troops. As a matter of fact, we have given more
than what the President called for as it relates to armor. We've given
the troops more as it relates to troop safety and force protection.
We've added three new brigades to the Marines. We've added 36,000 more
soldiers to the Army to make sure we are at the readiness level. Under
the Republican majority of the 109th and the 108th Congress, as this
war started and continued to escalate to the numbers of where it is
now, our readiness levels, and when I speak of readiness levels, Mr.
Speaker, I speak of the fact that if we had to go into another
conflict, we are not ready.
{time} 2145
There is not a National Guard unit right now that is ready to go to
battle. Now, what do we mean by readiness? Making sure that they have
the equipment, making sure that they have enough personnel to be able
to rise to the occasion, all the specialists that are needed, all the
striker brigades that are needed. We have 100 of them, but we are not
at the readiness level that we need to be, and we haven't been at this
low level that we are now since the Vietnam war. I am not giving out
any national secrets. Everyone knows that this is the case. So if we
know the obvious, why not take care of it?
We are doing more than what the President has asked for. The
President just has a problem. Do you know what the problem is? It is
the fact that the Congress has said: Guess what, Mr. President. I know
you have been saying a lot over the last 4 or 5 years of this war, now
within its fifth year, the third escalation of troops that you have
sent over to Iraq; and we pass a nonbinding resolution in the majority
and Republicans voted for that, too, saying that we disagree with that
philosophy. The American people are far beyond the President on this
issue. So we are here to represent the American people.
The second point, when you look at this issue of the binding
resolution, it says that if the Iraqi government does not meet the
benchmarks set by who, the President of the United States, George W.
Bush, then the redeployment of troops will start. The clock will start
at that point for a redeployment of a number of troops within 6 months.
What else took place? The President said that it is important that we
are not there forever. Well, still living under going in the old
direction, the President wants the prerogative to be able to say, well,
they are going to be there as long as they need to be there, and there
is not necessarily a plan, and you haven't given an opportunity for the
plan to work of the new escalation of troops.
Well, guess what? We saw plan one, and the violence did not go down.
We sat here and watched plan two, and the violence did not subside.
They weren't using Vice President Cheney's, the enemies are in the last
throes of their insurgency, later to find out that that is not the
truth.
So I guess we are just are supposed to continue to go on and on and
on.
So, Mr. Murphy, I guess when we start looking at the benchmarks, that
is the problem. Why doesn't the President say, that is my problem; I
have a problem with the fact that the U.S. Congress is saying they no
longer want to go with my original thoughts? There is nothing wrong
with that. He is an American. He can say it.
But the bottom line is every last one of us sitting in these seats
here in Congress and across the hall in the Senate, our obligation is
to the individuals that have sent us here. Our constituents that have
Federalized us here to make decisions on their behalf.
We are not generals. Some of us served in the military, some of us
did not serve in the military, some of us never wore a uniform in our
lives, but I can tell you this much. We have been sent here to watch
over the U.S. taxpayer dollars, have the well-being of our U.S. troops
that are allowing us to salute one flag, and to make sure that our
number one obligation is to be loyal to the American people, and not
one person.
So I speak very firmly and I stand very firmly on this point. Because
I sat here the last 4 years in the minority not having an opportunity
to be a part of the decisionmaking, not even being able to agenda a
bill in committee or subcommittee, not able to bring a bill up here on
the floor that the Republican majority did not allow me to. I mean,
under the rules, they didn't allow me to. To now say, well, the
President says that we are holding up dollars, emergency dollars for
the war in Iraq?
Let me just share a few other things, and then possibly we can go
into an exchange.
In the summer of 2005, there was a shortfall as it relates to
veterans' health care, $2.7 billion.
In March of 2006, the President's budget cut funding by $6 billion
over 5 years that was passed by a Republican-controlled Congress. And
the first time, Mr. Murphy, that we had an opportunity to do anything,
when I say the Democratic majority, the first action, and it was
because of the inaction by the Republican Congress that did not pass
the appropriations bills on time, that we passed a continuing
resolution to keep this government running, and what did we do?
Well, we went into that bill and we made sure some of the special
interest tax breaks and all of the things that the Republicans had in
place, being loyal to individuals that had great influence in this
House, and I am not talking about Members, I am talking about outside
forces. We took $3.6 billion of the U.S. taxpayer dollars to increase
the VA health care program and to make sure that their budget was in
place so that our veterans would have somewhere that they can get care
and their families.
That was our action. The President didn't ask for that. As a matter
of fact, the President didn't even want it. But we did it because it
was the right thing to do, and that was prior to the Walter Reed.
I keep saying that because that is so very, very important. People
think that politicians and some folks do things just because somebody
was looking or somebody said that you
[[Page 7687]]
should do it or you are under some political pressure. That was a
natural thing for the Democratic majority to do, and we did it.
And for the President to stand and say, well, you know, there is
things in there that should not be in there and things that I didn't
ask for. Well, guess what, we have to ask for it. I am even going to go
down memory lane again.
January of 2003, the same administration, President Bush cuts
veterans' health care for 164,000 veterans.
March of 2003, Republican budget cut $14 billion from veterans'
health care, passed by the Congress, with 199 Democrats voting against
it. That is House Concurrent Resolution 95, vote number 82.
March, 2004, Republican budget shortchanged veterans health care by
$1.5 billion. It was passed by the Congress, 201 Democrats voting
against it. That is House Concurrent Resolution 393, vote number 92.
March, 2005, President Bush's budget shortchanged veterans' health
care by more than $2 billion for 2005 and cut veterans' health care by
$14 billion over 5 years. That was passed with 201 Democrats voting
against it. That is House Concurrent Resolution, vote number 88.
I think it is very important that we outline that.
Just like I said here earlier when I talked about the 2005 shortfall,
after Democrats pressured the Bush administration and finally
acknowledged that the 2006 shortfall for veterans' health care totaled
$2.7 billion, Democrats fought all summer to make sure that those
dollars were placed back in the right direction as it relates to
veterans' health care.
Also in March, 2006, President Bush's budget cut veterans' funding by
$6 billion over 5 years, passed by the Republican-controlled Congress
and, like I said, at $3.6 billion.
Mr. Speaker, we come to the floor and we mean business. We are not
coming here to have a press conference and talk to some folks that may
not quite understand exactly what is going on day to day in Congress.
That is why we are here. We are here to make sure the American people
know exactly what is going on here.
The reason why we speak very passionately about, you may say, well,
it is Iraq, Iraq, Iraq, Iraq and, guess what, that other issue, Iraq.
The reason we speak very passionately about that is that we have seen
so much on this floor and so many words that Mr. Murphy talked about
earlier, Members going on passing out inaccurate information every now
and then, or the spirit of the information, whichever way you want to
frame it, and to see the hard-core reality of these issues are still
not addressed.
I had something here where all of the veteran groups, I must add
here, Mr. Speaker, ``This much-needed funding increase will allow the
Department of Veterans Affairs to better meet its needs for the men and
women returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as all veterans who
have served in the past.'' That is from the National Commander of
Disabled American Veterans. That press release was March 21, 2007.
``The American Legion and its 2.8 million members applaud the Budget
Committee for the budget resolution recommendation for $43.1 billion in
discretionary funding for veterans. Your recommendations are close with
the views that are estimated, that was estimated by the American Legion
earlier this year.'' That is by the legislative director and the lead
on the American Legion.
I think it is very, very important that Members understand that.
Veteran groups are 110 percent, 110 percent, Mr. Speaker, about what
this Democratic-controlled Congress is doing; and we are just getting
started. This is Monday. We are talking about the things that we need
to put in place to make sure that our men and women need to have what
they need to have when they are in theater and when they are out of
theater.
I challenge the President to think within his heart and within his
mind that he would turn a new leaf, and making sure that when we send
this emergency supplemental to his desk, if he vetoes it, it will be
his action that will be delaying the dollars to go to our men and women
in harm's way.
I have said once before last week, Mr. Speaker, I voted for two
emergency supplementals, a lot that I did not agree with, but the last
thing I wanted to do was to leave our men and women in harm's way
without the necessary funding that they need. So if I, someone that has
a different opinion than the President and the old Republican majority
as it relates to this war in Iraq, we are all Americans first and,
guess what, life is not perfect and everything is not going to come the
way you want it to come when you want it to come.
There are other people in this democracy that have something to say
about it, and I know there are Republicans in America that feel the way
the way that we feel. I know that there are Independents in America
that feel the way we feel, and I know that there are Democrats and
those that are looking to vote in coming elections to be a part of this
democracy.
So I come very proud of the work that has been done and the work that
will continue to be done here in this House.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Meek, just as a transition to Ms.
Wasserman Schultz, I would just say, elections matter; and there is
probably no better example of that in recent history than the election
in November. Things have just changed here. The air is different, the
priorities are different, the rate of action is different.
And, Mr. Meek, I get why we had to have an election in order to
change course in Iraq. I understand that this is a very difficult
subject that has divided people for a number of years. Over the past
several years, people, large numbers of people came to the conclusion
that we needed to change course from the President's policy, that we
needed to put a Congress here that is going to start standing up to
this guy and insisting that there are some other fights that matter in
this world, and that we need to invest back in Afghanistan, that we
need to make sure that our borders here are protected and that we
needed to start redeploying our forces.
So I get that we had to go to a national referendum in order to set a
new course. That is an important issue that has divided people.
Now, people have come down pretty firmly in the past 12 or 18 months
on the side of a new direction. That is why Friday, to me, was maybe
the most gratifying day in the short number that I have been here. But,
Mr. Meek, I don't get why we had to have an election to decide to
support veterans.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. If I may, and then I will yield and you can
share all the great information. And Ms. Wasserman Schultz happens to
be in between us today, so all we need is Mr. Ryan down here, and she
will have a real challenge. But I can tell you from past experience of
serving with her for 12 plus years now that she is very capable of
rising to the occasion here.
Let me just point out, just today, Mr. Murphy and Ms. Wasserman
Schultz, we took a vote. We took a vote saying that we would like for
the appointed U.S. District Attorneys to come and be confirmed before
Congress. Something that is very, very important, giving the chief
judge an opportunity to appoint a temporary U.S. District Attorney, for
that opportunity to take place because of what is happening now in the
Justice Department. And I think it is important. I saw Ms. Wasserman
Schultz earlier talking today about this very subject.
But, on the Republican side, you have some Republicans that are
saying it is just horrible of what is happening. Because if what we
think or believe what happened, these political appointees and then
they got taken out because they were either going after someone that
the administration did not want them to go after or they weren't going
after certain individuals as it relates to political motivation. And
under what we may call regular order in the 109th Congress or the 108th
Congress or beyond, the kind of grip that this administration had over
the House and the Senate, the chokehold that they had over the House
and Senate, this would have never been an
[[Page 7688]]
issue. It never would have been followed up on. There never would have
been a hearing.
Guess what? Now, Mr. Speaker, there are hearings in both House and
Senate, and now the Attorney General is getting caught in his own
words. One minute he had nothing to do with it, and he didn't know what
anyone was talking about. Now we understand that he led a meeting even
talking about this issue.
So when you look at it, and Mr. Murphy and Ms. Wasserman Schultz, 329
Members of the House. It goes to show you, with the right leadership in
place, we have a Democratic majority, Republicans will vote, some
Republicans will vote and move in the right direction. Only one Member
of the Republican leadership voted for this commonsense approach. There
are still Members on the Republican side that are in the leadership
that are still holding on to what used to be. The election took place
last November. You would think, well, maybe the American people are not
with this.
So I am just saying that this issue is continuing to evolve, and I
bring these examples up so that the Members can see that we have a lot
of work to do. It is not about partisanship. This is about leadership,
and we are providing the leadership here.
I know Ms. Wasserman Schultz who serves on the Judiciary Committee
can speak more eloquently on this issue. But this is one example
amongst many. You called out those bipartisan votes at the beginning of
the hour. We have to continue to embrace bipartisanship because that is
what the American people want. They don't want us to be Democrats and
Republicans. They want us to be Members of Congress watching out for
the better good.
{time} 2200
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Thank you, Mr. Meek and Mr. Murphy, it is
great to be here again.
I had an opportunity to engage in some dialogue with the caucus
chairman on the Republican side, the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Putnam). I fully expected to be engaged in a point-counterpoint
discussion on the U.S. Attorney General and the U.S. Attorney scandal,
and that he would be defensive, as many of his colleagues have been.
But knowing Mr. Putnam as we do, he was very frustrated. He expressed
deep concern. He was beyond comprehension how the administration could
have dealt with this problem in the way that they did.
I was asked how I felt about it as a member of the Judiciary
Committee. Quite honestly, under normal circumstances the President
does have the right to appoint and unappoint and ask for the
resignation of U.S. Attorneys that serve at his pleasure. Had it been a
matter of him just saying, yes, I asked for their resignation, we have
some other needs, we are moving in a different direction, whatever he
said, just be straight with the American people. Just be straight with
the Congress. If he had said, yes, I asked for their resignation, I can
do that, I am the President. Fine.
But, instead, it is fabrication, it is distortion, it is no, it was
not him, it was the guy behind the tree. It was his mother. Just own up
to what you did.
Now, if the problem is what you did, you asked for their resignation
because they were too good at their job and they were pursuing public
corruption cases against Republicans, and we have colleagues that
picked up the phone and put some pressure on these U.S. Attorneys whose
resignation ultimately was asked for, that is a horse of a different
color.
But this would have never exploded to the level it has if they had
just said, yes, we did. What I pointed out in my conversion with Mr.
Putnam, in past years, and I was happy to see he was frustrated and
concerned and there is bipartisan concern about the action that this
administration has taken repeatedly on the war in Iraq, on the U.S.
Attorney firings, and on the handling of the Valerie Plame issue, and
the list goes on and on.
Had there not been Democrats in charge of the Congress, this would
have been another thing that would have been swept aside. They would
have moved on or waited it out. They would have squeezed their eyes
tight shut and hoped that this, too, would pass.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. I know that some of this administration
are supposedly not great students of history; but if you read of recent
Presidencies, you might find out if you tell the truth right off the
bat, you get yourself in a lot less trouble than if you try to place
the blame.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I want to go back to my ``mom'' analogy that I
had last week. It is like how I deal with my kids. I told them, as all
little kids, they get nervous when they have done something wrong.
Sometimes they might not be completely truthful. And I have sat them
down time and again, and said, listen, honey, if you just tell me the
truth right away, it is going to be easier. I might be a little mad,
but I am going to be more upset if I find out you lied on top of a lie.
Young kids might not completely understand this, but grownups like the
President and the Attorney General can certainly understand the more
you stretch the truth, because we have to be careful about the words we
use here, the harder it is to remember the last one you told, the last
version of the truth you told.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Ms. Wasserman Schultz, there is going to
be a lot of stuff over the next couple months about Executive privilege
and who said what, and there may be a lot of terms that may not seem
like it matters to regular people.
The heart of the matter is the difference between America and some
Third World nations out there is we have a system of blind justice
which holds people accountable for their actions based on whether they
were right or wrong, whether they broke the law or didn't break the
law; not whether they have some powerful friend sitting in the halls
and corridors of power in Washington, DC or their State legislature.
That is what separates this country from a lot of other places in the
world where you can get hauled off to jail simply because you have
fallen in disfavor with someone who is in a high political position.
That is the essence of the genius of this country, that we have made
sure that our legal system operates separate from our political system.
There is going to be a lot of commotion about Executive privilege.
What it comes down to is what may have happened is that this
administration violated one of the basic principles of American
democracy: don't mix justice with politics.
And you are very right, maybe people wouldn't have found out about
this if we did have Democrats in the majority.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. We absolutely have to make sure that we
continue to exercise the system of checks and balances in our oversight
role here. If we don't, I am really fearful about what else. And we
have already seen the evidence of how far this administration will push
and how obsessed they are with the notion of a unitary Executive and
the concentration of power that they have tried to gather in the
Executive, through signing statements which are notations, whole
paragraphs and pages and pages of notations on legislation that we pass
here.
We will say ``X'' must happen. And in a signing statement, the
President will actually write a note that says why he doesn't have to
do ``X'' even though Congress passed a law and he signed it. He has
exercised more than any other President combined the so-called right
to, essentially if he doesn't think a provision in the law that we have
passed is constitutional, he has exercised his belief that he can
ignore it or not implement it. That is what the judiciary is for.
So between signing statements and the abuse of power with the PATRIOT
Act and National Security Letters and essentially not being entirely
straightforward, for lack of a better term, I am coming up with a lot
of adjectives and synonyms for the ``L'' word here, there is an
incredible effort being made that seems to require more energy than the
straight-up truth does.
That is why the oversight role is so important. If we are not here
asking
[[Page 7689]]
questions, then the administration will run rough shod over the
Constitution. They have proven that.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. The sense I am getting from my district now is that
this is all fine probably if everything is going okay for everyone
else. But the fact that things aren't going well, people are struggling
to pay for their health care and college tuition. They are living
paycheck to paycheck, bankruptcies are up, foreclosures, and kids are
getting killed because of an administration that has been less than
forthright with the facts. I think that is what is stirring among the
American people.
That is what happened in the election in November; and I think quite
frankly the key to moving the kind of agenda we want to move here is
going to be organize and tap that energy that is back home in a lot of
our districts. Unless we do that, we are going to struggle. But I think
we have the wind at our back. We have the American people at our back.
They like what we are doing. There are good responses from the bill we
passed on Friday.
{time} 2210
We have got to get out of Iraq, and this President does not have the
credibility to I think withstand the kind of pressure that is coming
from the American people. The American people want out. They are tired
of watching what is happening. Five more soldiers got killed, more kids
maimed, more kids injured, more kids at Walter Reed, more kids go into
a VA system that is less than adequate, and the American people are
looking for the kind of changes that you have talked about, Congressman
Meek has talked about.
The bottom line I think is this, and whether you are talking about
the war or anything else. For the war, it is like, well, there is only
two options here. We either go down the road the President has taken us
down and keep going or we have this alternative that we presented to
get us out in the next year, hopefully earlier. An alternative to not
going with our proposition is to continue to give the President a blank
check, continue to have kids get killed, continue to not have a plan
with absolutely no explanation as to what we are doing over there. No
one even knows anymore.
To go along with the President's budget means that as we look through
our notes here and the research we did, 1 million children who are
currently covered under the SCHIP program will get cut out of it. Our
plan, invest $50 billion to cover millions of children who are
currently uninsured. Which way do you want to go? I mean, this is not
brain surgery. The President wants to continue to give tax cuts to the
top 1 percent. We want to cover kids with health care, without raising
taxes.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Altmire). All Members are reminded to
refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Speaker, but this Congress
wants to add up to $50 billion to cover $50 million of new children on
the State Children's Health Insurance Program. We want to get the Pell
grant up to at least $4,600 and we reject the President's proposals for
cuts.
Now, imagine the leadership in the United States of America in 2007,
Mr. Speaker, 2007 where he is going to say we want to not fund Pell
Grants, we want to not fund children's health insurance and we want to
continue to spend $2 billion a week in Iraq.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I thank the gentleman. On Friday, what we said
was no more blank checks, no more war without a strategy and a plan to
get our men and women in uniform home, no more sending troops over into
combat, into harm's way without the armor they need, without the
preparation they need, without the rest they need. All of those items
were in that Iraq War supplemental.
The alternative, what the President preferred, was just give me the
money, just give me the money; do not ask me any questions. He was
opposed to his own benchmarks. The benchmarks that he laid out on
January 10 were in the bill, the ones that he said the Iraqi people
have to meet, that the Iraqi leadership has to meet, and we added some
that said, you know what, you have to make sure that you think about
protecting the men and women we are sending over there.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. We said that you said these are the benchmarks, and
guess what, we are going to hold you accountable for what you have
said, because up to this point, you have been saying whatever you want
and there has not been the kind of force of law which we passed out of
here on Friday.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Words are nice, but when you go, like each of
us have, to Walter Reed Army Medical Center and you look those troops
in the eye and you have a chance to spend some time with them, the
words ring really hollow unless you know you can back those words up
with some action, with some commitment, with some belief in the mission
and understand how devoted these men and women are to getting the job
done.
I mean, listen to some of the folks that are in that hospital, they
all, to a person, have told me when I have been there, they want to go
back. They want to get better, and they want to go back to join their
comrades, their buddies, and help finish the job, but we have to make
sure that we have their back.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Is that not interesting that the soldiers we talked
to, Mr. Speaker, at Walter Reed, back home, the kids that have gone,
come back, gone, come back, and they are going back again, the reason
you hear about why these kids want to go back and you think why would
you want to go back, they want to go back because their buddies are
still there. They feel like if they go back that they will be able to
save their lives.
The last couple of funerals I have been to with kids who were stop-
loss and were supposed to come home but ended up staying longer than
they probably should have and ended up not making it back, the reason
they wanted to go back in the first place was to protect their friends,
and that is the heroism, that is the valor, that is the nobility of the
cause. That is why these kids go back.
To talk about that the debate last week, and many of us did not get
an opportunity to speak for a variety of different reasons, but to
hear, Mr. Speaker, some people say that if we bring these kids home,
somehow that is going to make us less safe here in the United States,
is an appalling argument, that this administration and this Republican
Congress would rubber stamp this war to go over there, and that
National Intelligence Estimate has told us that this war has created
more terrorists, not less. It has created terrorists, Mr. Speaker, and
then now that we have thousands and thousands and thousands of more
people gunning for us here, these folks have the audacity to tell us,
Mr. Speaker, that somehow us bringing our kids home is going to make us
less safe.
Now, that, to me, is appalling and to continue that kind of
disjointed logic is unacceptable to me because we have kids in our
districts who are not back home. They are either in Iraq, and many of
them have gotten killed under the guise of the war, and to tell us that
by bringing our kids home and getting them out of a civil war is going
to make us less safe does not make any sense because all of the
intelligence in the whole world is saying this war in Iraq has
completed the final piece of the fanaticism of the Middle East.
We have given anyone who kind of wanted to join but did not really
want to, they are now joining. They are now a part of everything. They
are now a part of the terrorist groups. They are now a part of the
terrorist organizations. They now hate the United States more than they
ever have, and so I find the whole operation appalling.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. What we have gotten ourselves into, this
is a religious war.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Civil war.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. This is a religious war that we helped to
create in part. It did not exist until the bull sort of rushed into the
China shop, but I think we all find it appalling, some of us, this
simplistic terminology that gets rolled out here that we cannot leave
until victory has been
[[Page 7690]]
achieved. Explain to me what victory is because if we have to stay
there until we have completely eliminated a civil/religious conflict,
well, it was not raging for the decades before we got there and is one
that has almost no historical bounds. That is a difficult victory to
ask our brave men and women to achieve, to try to somehow remediate a
dispute between Shia and Sunni that cannot be resolved through the
military actions of our men and women.
Victory is much broader than that. Victory is about going after the
fight that really mattered in the first place which is in Afghanistan,
Mr. Speaker. Victory is about making sure that we secure our borders
here at home; that every container that comes into American ports gets
checked; that every airport has the proper screening technology to make
sure that the ports of entry who brought in the terrorists who harmed
this country have all the technology they need to make sure that it
never happens again.
{time} 2220
That's victory in the end. So it's frustrating as a new Member to
come down here and to listen to this new terminology get thrown out
there that doesn't have any basis in reality. That is part of what we
did on Friday as well, to start to broaden that definition of what
victory means and try to challenge the people to rise to that.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. On behalf of the American people, I think they are
trying to see what we are trying to do. We are trying to end this war,
stop the killing of our own kids, stop the maiming of our own soldiers,
get them out of a civil war, try to calm down what's happening, stop
the $8-plus billion a month that we are spending over there, and try to
take some of that money and invest that into our own students, our own
kids.
I was, just before I got here, having dinner with an old friend of
mine, who is a Republican. He said, we have spent $400 billion, soon to
be $500-and-some-billion dollars on this war. Can you just imagine, we
could have covered all of our citizens for health care, we could have
paid for everyone's college education, and, you know, gotten some stuff
done in this country.
Instead, we have $500 billion, we have well over 3,000 kids have
gotten killed, adults and soldiers, some 25,000 maimed or injured and
God knows how many innocent Iraqi civilians, many of them children.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. As we conclude, the President is so stubborn
and so ``my way or the highway,'' that his own definition of victory,
the benchmarks that we have put in this bill, he is threatening to
veto. That is what is mind-boggling, even when we insert his
milestones. Still, that is not acceptable.
If the gentleman would like to talk about our Web site.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Our e-mail is [email protected] if any
Members would like to e-mail us or visit us at www.speaker.gov/
30something, e-mail us, [email protected].
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. The Web site now, Mr. Ryan, is updated.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. All of the new statistics from our budget will be
on there, I am sure.
I think this is an appropriate time to make the announcement of our
key staffer for years and years and years here at the 30-something
Working Group, Tom Manatos has gotten engaged. He is going to be
married to a beautiful young Republican.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Who works at the White House.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Who works at the White House, and the engagement, I
guess, was blessed by the Greek Orthodox archbishop. How about that for
off to a good start?
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. The bipartisan spirit preached by the 30-
something working group put in practice.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Absorbed, even, by the 30-something
leadership.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Right up to the staff level.
Mr. Speaker, we yield back the balance of our time.
____________________
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to:
Mr. Kanjorski (at the request of Mr. Hoyer) for today and the balance
of the week on account of personal business.
Mr. Lampson (at the request of Mr. Hoyer) for today and the balance
of the week.
Ms. Millender-McDonald (at the request of Mr. Hoyer) for today and
March 27.
Mr. Udall of New Mexico (at the request of Mr. Hoyer) for today and
March 27.
Mr. Wamp (at the request of Mr. Boehner) for today on account of
attending his son's 20th birthday.
____________________
SPECIAL ORDERS GRANTED
By unanimous consent, permission to address the House, following the
legislative program and any special orders heretofore entered, was
granted to:
(The following Members (at the request of Mr. Tanner) to revise and
extend their remarks and include extraneous material:)
Mr. Conyers, for 5 minutes, today.
Ms. Woolsey, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. DeFazio, for 5 minutes, today.
Mrs. McCarthy of New York, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Allen, for 5 minutes, today.
(The following Members (at the request of Mr. Jones of North
Carolina) to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous
material:)
Mr. Poe, for 5 minutes, today and March 27, 28, and 29.
Mr. Garrett of New Jersey, for 5 minutes, March 27.
Ms. Granger, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Franks of Arizona, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Burton of Indiana, for 5 minutes, today and March 27, 28, and 29.
____________________
ADJOURNMENT
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now
adjourn.
The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 10 o'clock and 23 minutes
p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow,
Tuesday, March 27, 2007, at 10:30 a.m., for morning hour debate.
____________________
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC.
Under clause 8 of rule XII, executive communications were taken from
the Speaker's table and referred as follows:
960. A letter from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting
the Agency's final rule -- Approval and promulgation of State
Plan for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Florida:
Emissions Guidelines for Small Municipal Waste Combustion
Units [EPA-R04-OAR-2006 -0140-200605(a); FRL-8276-7] received
February 27, 2007, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
961. A letter from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting
the Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Amendments to
the Minor New Source Review Program [EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0915;
FRL-8276-3] received February 27, 2007, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
962. A letter from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting
the Agency's final rule -- Outer Continental Shelf Air
Regulations Consistency Update for Alaska [EPA-R10-OAR-2006-
0377; FRL-8249-2] received February 27, 2007, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
963. A letter from the Office of Managing Director, AMD-
PERM, Federal Communications Commission, transmitting the
Commission's final rule -- Amendment of Part 97 of the
Commission's Rules To Implement WRC-03 Regulations Applicable
to Requirements for Operator Licenses in the Amateur Radio
Service [WT Docket No. 05-235] Amendment of the Commisison's
Rules Governing the Amateur Radio Services [WT Docket No. 04-
140] received February 27, 2007, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
964. A letter from the Office of Managing Director, AMD-
PERM, Federal Communications Commission, transmitting the
Commission's final rule -- Rechannelization of
[[Page 7691]]
the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band for Fixed Microwave Services
under Part 101 of the Commission's Rules [WT Docket No. 04-
143] received February 27, 2007, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
965. A letter from the Office of Managing Director, AMD-
PERM, Federal Communications Commission, transmitting the
Commission's final rule -- Petition of Mid-Rivers Telephone
Cooperative, Inc. for Order Declaring It to be an Incumbent
Local Exchange Carrier in Terry, Montana Pursuant to Section
251(h)(2) [WC Docket No. 02-78] received February 27, 2007,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy
and Commerce.
966. A letter from the Office of Managing Director, AMD-
PERM, Federal Communications Commission, transmitting the
Commission's final rule -- Communications Assistance for Law
Enforcement Act and Broadband Access and Services [ET Docket
No. 04-295; RM-10865] received February 27, 2007, pursuant to
5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
967. A letter from the Office of Managing Director, AMD-
PERM, Federal Communications Commission, transmitting the
Commission's final rule -- Amendment of Section 73.202(b),
Table of Allotments, FM Broadcast Stations. (Hennessey,
Oklahoma) [MB Docket No. 05-85; RM-11164] received February
27, 2007, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce.
968. A letter from the Office of Managing Director, AMD-
PERM, Federal Communications Commission, transmitting the
Commission's final rule -- Amendment of Section 73.202(b), FM
Table of Allotments, FM Broadcast Stations (Opelika and
Waverly, Alabama) [MB Docket No. 05-79] Reclassification of
License of Station WSTR(FM), Smyrna, Georgia) received
February 27, 2007, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
969. A letter from the Office of Managing Director, AMD-
PERM, Federal Communications Commission, transmitting the
Commission's final rule -- Amendment of Section 73.202(b),
Table of Allotments, FM Broadcast Stations. (Hale Center,
Texas) [MB Docket No. 05-114; RM-1190] received February 27,
2007, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
970. A letter from the Office of Managing Director, AMD-
PERM, Federal Communications Commission, transmitting the
Commission's final rule -- Amendment of Section 73.202(b),
Table of Allotments, FM Broadcast Stations. (Columbus,
Indiana) [MB Docket No. 05-238; RM-11260] received February
27, 2007, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce.
971. A letter from the Acting SSA Regulations Officer,
Social Security Administration, transmitting the
Administration's final rule -- Optometrists as ``Acceptable
Medical Sources'' to Establish a Medically Determinable
Impairment.[Docket No. SSA-2006-0085] (RIN: 0960-AG05)
received February 27, 2007, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Ways and Means.
____________________
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of committees were delivered to
the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as
follows:
Mr. RANGEL: Committee on Ways and Means. H.R. 493. A bill
to prohibit discrimination on the basis of genetic
information with respect to health insurance and employment;
with an amendment (Rept. 110-28 Pt. 2). Ordered to be
printed.
Mr. OBERSTAR: Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure. H.R. 1019. A bill to designate the United
States customhouse building located at 31 Gonzalez Clemente
Avenue in Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, as the ``Rafael Martinez
Nadal United States Customhouse Building'' (Rept. 110-70).
Referred to the House Calendar.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure. H.R. 1138. A bill to designate the Federal
building and United States courthouse located at 306 East
Main Street in Elizabeth City, North Carolina, as the ``J.
Herbert W. Small Federal Building and United States
Courthouse'' (Rept. 110-71). Referred to the House Calendar.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure. H.R. 753. A bill to redesignate the Federal
building located at 167 North Main Street in Memphis,
Tennessee, as the ``Clifford Davis/Odell Horton Federal
Building''; with amendments (Rept. 110-72). Referred to the
House Calendar.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Committee on Rules. House
Resolution 269. Resolution providing for consideration of the
bill (H.R. 835) to reauthorize the programs of the Department
of Housing and Urban Development for housing assistance for
Native Hawaiians (Rept. 110-73). Referred to the House
Calendar.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Committee on Rules. House
Resolution 270. Resolution providing for consideration of the
bill (H.R. 1401) to improve the security of railroads, public
transportation, and over-the-road buses in the United States,
and for other purposes (Rept. 110-74). Referred to the House
Calendar.
____________________
TIME LIMITATION OF REFERRED BILL
Pursuant to clause 2 of rule XII the following action was taken by
the Speaker:
H.R. 493. Referral to the Committee on Energy and Commerce
extended for a period ending not later than March 29, 2007.
____________________
PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
Under clause 2 of rule XII, public bills and resolutions were
introduced and severally referred, as follows:
By Ms. BEAN (for herself, Mr. Frank of Massachusetts,
and Mr. Gillmor):
H.R. 1675. A bill to suspend the requirements of the
Department of Housing and Urban Development regarding
electronic filing of previous participation certificates and
regarding filing of such certificates with respect to certain
low-income housing investors; to the Committee on Financial
Services.
By Mr. BOREN (for himself, Mr. Frank of Massachusetts,
Mr. Renzi, and Mr. Kildee):
H.R. 1676. A bill to reauthorize the program of the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for loan
guarantees for Indian housing; to the Committee on Financial
Services.
By Mr. RANGEL (for himself and Mr. Lewis of Georgia):
H.R. 1677. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to enhance taxpayer protections and outreach; to the
Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. SMITH of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. Lantos,
Mr. Oberstar, Mr. Udall of Colorado, Mr. Michaud, Mr.
McGovern, Mr. Fortenberry, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Wolf, Ms.
McCollum of Minnesota, Mr. Berman, Mr. Emanuel, Mrs.
Maloney of New York, Mr. Rangel, Ms. Schakowsky, Mr.
DeFazio, Mr. Ackerman, Mr. McNulty, Ms. Watson, Mr.
Udall of New Mexico, Mr. Renzi, Mr. Grijalva, and Mr.
Payne):
H.R. 1678. A bill to amend the Torture Victims Relief Act
of 1998 to authorize appropriations to provide assistance for
domestic and foreign programs and centers for the treatment
of victims of torture, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN (for herself, Mr. Lincoln Diaz-
Balart of Florida, Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida,
Mr. Burton of Indiana, Mr. Mahoney of Florida, Mr.
Sires, Mr. Mack, Mr. Pence, Mr. Bilirakis, Mr.
Buchanan, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, Mr. Fortuno, Mr.
McCotter, and Mr. Hastings of Florida):
H.R. 1679. A bill to protect the environmental integrity of
coral reefs and other coastal marine resources from
exploration, development, and production activities for
petroleum resources located in a maritime exclusive economic
zone of the United States that is contiguous to a foreign
exclusive economic zone; to the Committee on the Judiciary,
and in addition to the Committees on Foreign Affairs,
Financial Services, and Oversight and Government Reform, for
a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in
each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi (for himself, Mr. King
of New York, Mr. Langevin, Mr. McCaul of Texas, Mr.
Etheridge, Mr. Dent, Ms. Loretta Sanchez of
California, and Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas):
H.R. 1680. A bill to authorize the Secretary of Homeland
Security to regulate the sale of ammonium nitrate to prevent
and deter the acquisition of ammonium nitrate by terrorists;
to the Committee on Homeland Security.
By Mr. LANTOS (for himself, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Mr.
Flake, Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas, Mr. Wexler, Mr.
Ackerman, Mr. Sires, and Mr. Scott of Georgia):
H.R. 1681. A bill to amend the Congressional Charter of The
American National Red Cross to modernize its governance
structure, to enhance the ability of the board of governors
of The American National Red Cross to support the critical
mission of The American National Red Cross in the 21st
century, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Foreign
Affairs.
By Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts (for himself, Mrs.
Biggert, Mr. Blumenauer, Ms. Waters, Mr. Taylor, Ms.
Matsui, Mr. Mahoney of Florida, Ms. Wasserman
Schultz, Mr. Baker, Mr. Gary G. Miller of California,
Mrs. Jo Ann Davis of Virginia, and Ms. Ginny Brown-
Waite of Florida):
[[Page 7692]]
H.R. 1682. A bill to restore the financial solvency of the
national flood insurance program, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Financial Services.
By Mr. HOEKSTRA (for himself, Mr. Stupak, Mr. Larsen of
Washington, Mr. Souder, Mr. Ehlers, Mr. Upton, Mr.
Boozman, Mr. McHugh, Mr. Gillmor, Mr. Chabot, Mr. Van
Hollen, Mr. McCotter, Ms. Kaptur, Mr. Ryan of Ohio,
Mr. Latham, Mr. Nunes, Mr. Radanovich, and Mr. Camp
of Michigan):
H.R. 1683. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to
provide for community projects that will reduce the number of
individuals who are uninsured with respect to health care,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
By Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi (for himself, Mr. King
of New York, Mr. Carney, Mr. Rogers of Alabama, Mr.
Etheridge, Mr. Langevin, Mr. Cuellar, Ms. Clarke, and
Ms. Loretta Sanchez of California):
H.R. 1684. A bill to authorize appropriations for the
Department of Homeland Security for fiscal year 2008, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Homeland Security.
By Mr. PRICE of Georgia:
H.R. 1685. A bill to protect information relating to
consumers, to require notice of security breaches, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Financial Services, and
in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government
Reform, and Energy and Commerce, for a period to be
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. ETHERIDGE (for himself, Mr. Rogers of Alabama,
and Mr. Thompson of Mississippi):
H.R. 1686. A bill to amend the Homeland Security Act to
require that uniforms, protective gear, badges, and
identification cards of personnel be manufactured in the
United States; to the Committee on Homeland Security.
By Mr. KIND (for himself, Mr. Regula, Ms. Hooley, Mr.
Rogers of Alabama, Mr. Spratt, Mr. McDermott, Mr.
Inslee, Mr. Boswell, Mr. Towns, Mr. Sessions, Mr.
Gordon, Mr. Ortiz, Mr. LaTourette, Mr. Higgins, Mr.
Walsh of New York, Mr. Coble, Mr. Shays, Mr. Weller,
Mr. Kuhl of New York, Ms. Watson, Mr. Grijalva, Ms.
Lee, Mr. Carnahan, Mr. Mollohan, Mr. Price of North
Carolina, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Petri, Mr. Doyle, Ms.
Schakowsky, Mr. Israel, Ms. Sutton, and Ms. Baldwin):
H.R. 1687. A bill to provide competitive grants for
training court reporters and closed captioners to meet
requirements for realtime writers under the
Telecommunications Act of 1996, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Education and Labor.
By Mr. SCOTT of Virginia:
H.R. 1688. A bill to amend the Social Security Act to
provide health insurance coverage for children and pregnant
women throughout the United States by combining the children
and pregnant woman health coverage under Medicaid and SCHIP
into a new All Healthy Children Program, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in
addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. KELLER:
H.R. 1689. A bill to provide support to combat illegal
downloading on college and university campuses; to the
Committee on Education and Labor.
By Mrs. LOWEY:
H.R. 1690. A bill to improve airport screening and
security; to the Committee on Homeland Security.
By Mrs. LOWEY (for herself, Mr. Shays, Mr. Crowley, Mr.
DeFazio, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Frank of Massachusetts,
Ms. Berkley, and Mr. McNulty):
H.R. 1691. A bill to end the use of conventional steel-
jawed leghold traps on animals in the United States; to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the
Committees on Ways and Means, Foreign Affairs, and the
Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. PALLONE:
H.R. 1692. A bill to fight criminal gangs; to the Committee
on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on
Education and Labor, and Financial Services, for a period to
be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. PAYNE (for himself, Mr. Cohen, Ms. Sutton, Mr.
Sires, Mrs. Lowey, Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas, Mr.
Johnson of Georgia, and Mr. Clay):
H.R. 1693. A bill to authorize National Mall Liberty Fund
D.C. to establish a memorial on Federal land in the District
of Columbia at Constitution Gardens previously approved to
honor free persons and slaves who fought for independence,
liberty, and justice for all during the American Revolution;
to the Committee on Natural Resources.
By Mr. REICHERT:
H.R. 1694. A bill to improve the financial assistance
provided to State, local, and tribal governments by expanding
the eligible use of funding under the Homeland Security Grant
Program to include costs related to staff and law enforcement
analysts engaged in information and intelligence sharing
activities; to the Committee on Homeland Security.
By Mr. REICHERT:
H.R. 1695. A bill to establish a National Commission on the
Prevention of Radicalization, to enhance information sharing,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary,
and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, for a
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each
case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. REYES:
H.R. 1696. A bill to amend the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and
Alabama and Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act
to allow the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo tribe to determine blood
quantum requirement for membership in that Tribe; to the
Committee on Natural Resources.
By Mr. ROGERS of Alabama (for himself, Mr. David Davis
of Tennessee, and Mr. Jindal):
H.R. 1697. A bill to establish a Rural Policing Institute
within the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center of the
Department of Homeland Security to develop and provide for
training programs for rural law enforcement agencies; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
By Ms. SCHAKOWSKY (for herself, Mrs. McCarthy of New
York, and Mr. Grijalva):
H.R. 1698. A bill to direct the Consumer Product Safety
Commission to promulgate a consumer product safety standard
for each durable infant or toddler product, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
By Ms. SCHAKOWSKY (for herself and Mr. Upton):
H.R. 1699. A bill to direct the Consumer Product Safety
Commission to require certain manufacturers to provide
consumer product registration forms to facilitate recalls of
durable infant and toddler products; to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. WEINER (for himself, Mr. Scott of Virginia, and
Mr. Keller):
H.R. 1700. A bill to amend the Omnibus Crime Control and
Safe Streets Act of 1968 to enhance the COPS ON THE BEAT
grant program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
By Mr. WELDON of Florida (for himself, Mr. Nunes, and
Mr. Shays):
H.R. 1701. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to provide an exemption from the harbor maintenance tax
for certain shipping between United States mainland ports; to
the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Ms. WOOLSEY (for herself, Ms. Lee, Mr. Kucinich, Ms.
Jackson-Lee of Texas, Ms. Kilpatrick, Ms. Schakowsky,
Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Serrano, Mr. Stark, Mr. Becerra,
Ms. Carson, Mrs. Christensen, Mr. Ellison, Mr.
Filner, Mr. Gutierrez, Mr. Hinchey, Mr. Honda, Ms.
Kaptur, Mr. McDermott, Mr. McGovern, Mr. Rush, Ms.
Solis, and Ms. Watson):
H.R. 1702. A bill to reallocate funds toward sensible
priorities such as improved children's education, increased
children's access to health care, expanded job training, and
increased energy efficiency and conservation through a
reduction of wasteful defense spending, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition
to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Education and
Labor, Homeland Security, Foreign Affairs, and Veterans'
Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. YOUNG of Alaska:
H.R. 1703. A bill to establish a coordinated avalanche
protection program, and for other purposes; to the Committee
on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committees on
Agriculture, and Oversight and Government Reform, for a
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each
case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. LANTOS (for himself, Mr. Fortenberry, Ms. Ros-
Lehtinen, Mr. Payne, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr.
Hastings of Florida, Mr. Royce, Mr. Jackson of
Illinois, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Moran of Virginia, Mr.
Doolittle, Ms. Watson, Mr. Fortuno, Mr. Rush, Mr.
Scott of Georgia, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Berman, Ms.
Jackson-Lee of Texas, Mr. Wexler, Mr. Engel, Mr.
Fattah, Ms. Corrine Brown of Florida, Mr. Jefferson,
Mr. Smith of Washington, Mr. Abercrombie, Mr. Udall
of Colorado, Ms. Woolsey, Mr. Burton of Indiana, Mr.
Sherman and Mr. Blaumenauer:)
[[Page 7693]]
H. Con. Res. 100. A concurrent resolution condemning the
recent violent actions of the Government of Zimbabwe against
peaceful opposition party activists and members of civil
society; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
By Ms. SHEA-PORTER (for herself, Mrs. Davis of
California, Ms. Lee, Mr. Rodriguez, Ms. Schwartz, Mr.
Towns, and Mrs. Jones of Ohio):
H. Res. 266. A resolution supporting the goals and ideals
of Professional Social Work Month and World Social Work Day;
to the Committee on Education and Labor.
By Mr. KIRK (for himself, Mr. Andrews, Mr. Scott of
Georgia, Mr. Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania, Mr. Sestak,
Mr. Klein of Florida, Mr. Crowley, Mr. Engel, Mr.
Wexler, Mr. Sires, Ms. Linda T. Sanchez of
California, Mr. Boozman, Mr. Chabot, Mr. Mack, Mr.
Burton of Indiana, Mr. McCotter, Mr. Hastings of
Florida, Mr. Boustany, Mr. Patrick Murphy of
Pennsylvania, Mr. Shimkus, Mr. Cantor, Mr. English of
Pennsylvania, Mr. Israel, Mr. Miller of Florida, Mr.
Carnahan, Ms. Bean, Mr. Barrow, Ms. Wasserman
Schultz, Mr. Melancon, Mr. LoBiondo, Mr. Conaway, Mr.
Lynch, Mr. Mahoney of Florida, Mr. McNerney, Mr.
Fossella, Mr. Kuhl of New York, Mr. Sessions, Mr.
Pence, Mr. Garrett of New Jersey, Mr. Lincoln Diaz-
Balart of Florida, Mr. Platts, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr.
Buchanan, Mr. Shuster, Mr. Porter, Mr. Knollenberg,
Mr. Feeney, Mr. Cannon, Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart of
Florida, Mr. Campbell of California, Mr. Goodlatte,
Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Culberson, Mr. Crenshaw, Mrs.
Tauscher, Mrs. Miller of Michigan, Mr. Renzi, Mr.
Young of Florida, Ms. Giffords, and Mr. Jordan):
H. Res. 267. A resolution calling for the immediate and
unconditional release of British marines and sailors held
captive by Iran, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Foreign Affairs.
By Mr. McINTYRE (for himself and Mr. Pitts):
H. Res. 268. A resolution supporting responsible
fatherhood, promoting marriage, and encouraging greater
involvement of fathers in the lives of their children,
especially on Father's Day; to the Committee on Education and
Labor.
By Mr. BURGESS:
H. Res. 271. A resolution recognizing the heroism and
sacrifice of Medal of Honor recipients, commending the
efforts of the Medal of Honor Host City Program in
Gainesville, Texas, to celebrate and honor the contributions
of Medal of Honor recipients, and encouraging the expansion
of the program; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Ms. LEE (for herself, Mr. Payne, Mr. Hastings of
Florida, Mr. McDermott, Mr. Rangel, Ms. Linda T.
Sanchez of California, Mr. Butterfield, Mr. Schiff,
Mr. Ellison, Mr. Fattah, Mr. Lewis of Georgia, Mr.
Grijalva, Mr. Serrano, Mr. Engel, Mr. Davis of
Illinois, and Ms. Kilpatrick):
H. Res. 272. A resolution commemorating the 200th
anniversary of the abolition of the transatlantic slave
trade; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
____________________
PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
Under clause 3 of rule XII,
Mr. STUPAK introduced a bill (H.R. 1704) for the relief of
Robert and Verda Shatusky; which was referred to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
____________________
ADDITIONAL SPONSORS
Under clause 7 of rule XII, sponsors were added to public bills and
resolutions as follows:
H.R. 20: Mr. Waxman.
H.R. 23: Mr. Space, Ms. Harman, Mr. Shays, Mr. Pascrell,
Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Miller of Florida, Mr. Walz of Minnesota,
Mr. Olver, Mr. Stark, Mr. Westmoreland, Mr. David Davis of
Tennessee, Mr. King of New York, Mr. Brown of South Carolina,
and Mr. Peterson of Minnesota.
H.R. 39: Ms. Shea-Porter.
H.R. 45: Mr. McGovern, Mr. Burgess, and Ms. Schakowsky.
H.R. 66: Mr. Scott of Georgia, Mr. Miller of North
Carolina, and Mr. Butterfield.
H.R. 74: Mr. Latham and Mr. Blumenauer.
H.R. 89: Mr. Reyes.
H.R. 146: Ms. Giffords.
H.R. 191: Mr. Doolittle.
H.R. 192: Mr. Doolittle.
H.R. 193: Mr. Bartlett of Maryland.
H.R. 234: Mr. Waxman, and Mr. McNerney.
H.R. 303: Mr. Wolf, Ms. Harman, Mr. Scott of Georgia, Mr.
David Davis of Tennessee, Mr. Courtney, Mrs. Emerson, and Mr.
Olver.
H.R. 315: Mr. Hastings of Washington.
H.R. 359: Mr. Sherman and Mr. Berman.
H.R. 368: Mr. Goode, Mr. Altmire, Mr. Renzi, Mr. Towns, Mr.
Roskam, Mr. Kennedy, Ms. Loretta Sanchez of California, Mr.
Michaud, Mr. Cleaver, Mr. Rothman, Mr. Bachus, and Mr.
Capuano.
H.R. 410: Mr. Towns.
H.R. 418: Mr. Porter.
H.R. 462: Mr. Bartlett of Maryland.
H.R. 463: Mr. Courtney.
H.R. 473: Mrs. McMorris Rodgers and Mr. Platts.
H.R. 477: Ms. McCollum of Minnesota, Mr. Jindal, and Mr.
Yarmuth.
H.R. 493: Mr. Davis of Alabama and Mr. Hill.
H.R. 550: Mr. Ehlers, Mr. Moore of Kansas, Mr. Wolf, Ms.
Eshoo, Mr. Doggett, Ms. Berkley, Mr. Larson of Connecticut,
Mr. Holt, Mr. Doolittle, Mrs. Wilson of New Mexico, and Mr.
Smith of New Jersey.
H.R. 552: Mr. Gilchrest, Mr. Holden, and Mr. Doyle.
H.R. 620: Mr. Sarbanes.
H.R. 649: Mr. Porter.
H.R. 657: Mr. Pastor and Mr. Miller of Florida.
H.R. 661: Mr. Pascrell and Mr. Larson of Connecticut.
H.R. 670: Mr. Wilson of South Carolina.
H.R. 684: Ms. Hirono.
H.R. 695: Mr. Holt, Mr. McCotter, Mr. Moore of Kansas, and
Mrs. Emerson.
H.R. 699: Mrs. Bachmann and Mr. LoBiondo.
H.R. 704: Mr. Miller of Florida.
H.R. 718: Mr. McIntyre, Mr. Braley of Iowa, Mr. Shuler, Mr.
Jones of North Carolina, Mr. Baird, Mr. Courtney, Mr.
Blumenauer, and Mr. Filner.
H.R. 727: Mr. Boustany.
H.R. 748: Mr. Oberstar, Mr. Hall of Texas, and Mr. Farr.
H.R. 758: Mrs. Capps.
H.R. 760: Mr. Lampson.
H.R. 808: Mr. Markey.
H.R. 816: Ms. Berkley.
H.R. 819: Mrs. Biggert and Mrs. Gillibrand.
H.R. 869: Ms. Zoe Lofgren of California.
H.R. 881: Mr. Goode.
H.R. 901: Mr. Boucher.
H.R. 913: Ms. Ros-Lehtinen.
H.R. 943: Mr. Abercrombie, Mr. Wexler, Mr. LoBiondo, Ms.
Kaptur, Mr. Holden, and Mr. Payne.
H.R. 971: Mr. Edwards, Mr. Jindal, Ms. Slaughter, and Mr.
Stupak.
H.R. 997: Mr. McKeon, Mr. Gilchrest, Mrs. Miller of
Michigan, Mr. McCrery, Mr. Bishop of Utah, Mr. Royce, Mr.
Davis of Kentucky, and Mr. Rogers of Kentucky.
H.R. 1038: Mr. Thornberry, Ms. Norton, Mr. Holden, and Mr.
Cohen.
H.R. 1042: Mr. Flake.
H.R. 1051: Ms. Schakowsky.
H.R. 1056: Mr. Bartlett of Maryland.
H.R. 1058: Mr. Bartlett of Maryland.
H.R. 1061: Mr. Baird and Ms. Baldwin.
H.R. 1063: Mr. Marshall and Mr. Alexander.
H.R. 1073: Mr. Price of North Carolina, Mr. Holt, Mrs.
Miller of Michigan, Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Murtha, Mr. McGovern,
and Ms. Linda T. Sanchez of California.
H.R. 1074: Mr. Hill and Ms. Linda T. Sanchez of California.
H.R. 1078: Mr. Moran of Virginia, Mr. Rothman, Mr. Wexler,
and Mr. Israel.
H.R. 1093: Mr. Boustany, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, Mr. Mica,
and Ms. Corrine Brown of Florida.
H.R. 1094: Mr. Alexander.
H.R. 1103: Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Serrano, Ms. Jackson-Lee of
Texas, and Mr. Kucinich.
H.R. 1108: Mr. Marshall and Mr. Crowley.
H.R. 1117: Mr. Cummings, Mr. Hodes, and Ms. Shea-Porter.
H.R. 1120: Mr. Walberg, Mr. Carney, Mr. Patrick Murphy of
Pennsylvania, Mr. Cole of Oklahoma, Mr. McCarthy of
California, Mr. Gingrey, Mr. Price of Georgia, and Mr. Terry.
H.R. 1121: Mr. Miller of Florida.
H.R. 1122: Mr. Miller of Florida.
H.R. 1139: Mr. Dreier and Mrs. Napolitano.
H.R. 1146: Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas.
H.R. 1157: Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mrs. Schmidt, Mr.
Kanjorski, Mr. Latham, and Mr. Rodriguez.
H.R. 1187: Ms. McCollum of Minnesota.
H.R. 1216: Mr. Moran of Kansas, Mrs. McCarthy of New York,
Mr. Israel, and Mr. Wexler.
H.R. 1222: Mr. Boswell, Mr. Marshall, and Mr. Nadler.
H.R. 1223: Mr. Boswell and Mr. Nadler.
H.R. 1225: Mr. Levin.
H.R. 1228: Mr. Nadler.
H.R. 1246: Mr. Price of North Carolina.
H.R. 1250: Mr. Pearce.
H.R. 1280: Mr. Filner and Mr. Larson of Connecticut.
H.R. 1281: Mrs. Napolitano and Mr. Levin.
H.R. 1289: Mr. Grijalva.
H.R. 1314: Mr. Wicker, Mr. Brown of South Carolina, Mr.
Bilirakis, Mr. King of Iowa, and Mr. Crenshaw.
H.R. 1324: Mr. Miller of Florida.
H.R. 1330: Ms. Giffords and Mrs. Emerson.
H.R. 1346: Mr. Waxman and Mr. Nadler.
H.R. 1347: Ms. Shea-Porter.
H.R. 1353: Mr. Israel and Mr. Wexler.
H.R. 1363: Mr. McDermott, Mr. Nadler, and Ms. Sutton.
H.R. 1380: Mr. McDermott.
H.R. 1391: Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas and Mr. Israel.
[[Page 7694]]
H.R. 1392: Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite of Florida.
H.R. 1413: Mrs. McCarthy of New York.
H.R. 1422: Mr. Rahall and Mr. Blumenauer.
H.R. 1434: Mr. Kagen, Ms. Moore of Wisconsin, Mr. Moran of
Virginia, Mr. Moore of Kansas, Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas, Ms.
Bordallo, and Mr. Wolf.
H.R. 1441: Mr. Berman, Mr. Baird, and Mr. Wexler.
H.R. 1448: Mr. Grijalva and Mr. Wexler.
H.R. 1469: Mr. Costello, Mr. Scott of Georgia, Ms. Hooley,
Mr. Wexler, Mr. Wu, and Mr. DeFazio.
H.R. 1474: Mr. Wolf, Mr. McIntyre, Mr. Bonner, Mr. Moore of
Kansas, and Mr. Marshall.
H.R. 1479: Mr. Nadler.
H.R. 1493: Mrs. Miller of Michigan.
H.R. 1498: Mr. Gordon.
H.R. 1506: Mr. Payne, Mr. McNulty, Mr. Taylor, Mr. Moran of
Virginia, Mr. Smith of Washington, Mr. Schiff, Ms. Baldwin,
Mr. Rothman, Mr. Hinchey, and Mr. Nadler.
H.R. 1524: Mr. Levin.
H.R. 1543: Mr. Holden, and Ms. Ros-Lehtinen.
H.R. 1551: Mr. Rangel, Mr. Rothman, Mr. Israel, and Mr.
McHugh.
H.R. 1554: Mr. Paul.
H.R. 1560: Mr. Wexler, Mr. Waxman, Mr. Filner, and Mr.
LoBiondo.
H.R. 1565: Mr. Frank of Massachusetts.
H.R. 1566: Mr. Serrano.
H.R. 1576: Mr. Schiff, Mrs. Miller of Michigan, Mr.
Dingell, and Mr. Platts.
H.R. 1586: Ms. Foxx, Mrs. Drake, Mr. Smith of Texas, Mr.
Shimkus, Mr. Gerlach, Mr. Garrett of New Jersey, Mr. Gary G.
Miller of California, Mr. Wamp, Mr. Radanovich, Mr. Turner,
Mr. Hensarling, Mr. Boozman, and Mr. Jordan.
H.R. 1588: Mr. McNulty.
H.R. 1595: Mr. George Miller of California, Mr. Lantos, Mr.
Scott of Virginia, Ms. Velazquez, Ms. Loretta Sanchez of
California, Mr. Rodriguez, Ms. Berkley, Mrs. Napolitano, Ms.
Schakowsky, Mr. Udall of Colorado, Mr. Wu, Mrs. Davis of
California, Mr. Miller of Florida, and Mr. Butterfield.
H.R. 1633: Mr. Cohen.
H.R. 1640: Mr. Blunt and Mr. Turner.
H.R. 1645: Mr. Honda and Ms. Velazquez.
H.R. 1660: Mr. Udall of Colorado and Mr. Perlmutter.
H.J. Res. 12: Mr. Jindal.
H.J. Res. 14: Mr. Smith of Washington.
H.J. Res. 37: Ms. Schakowsky.
H.J. Res. 39: Mr. McCotter, Mr. Farr, and Mr. Cohen.
H. Con. Res. 28: Mr. Lampson.
H. Con. Res. 37: Mr. Sessions.
H. Con. Res. 49: Mr. Pearce, Mr. Watt, Mr. Porter, and Mr.
Boren.
H. Con. Res. 60: Mr. Boyd of Florida.
H. Con. Res. 68: Mr. Arcuri, Mr. Pascrell, Mr. Lantos, Mrs.
Bono, Mr. Pallone, Mr. Ferguson, Mr. Capuano, Mr. Ryan of
Ohio, Mr. Serrano, Mr. King of New York, and Mr. Davis of
Illinois.
H. Con. Res. 75: Mr. Johnson of Georgia.
H. Con. Res. 85: Mr. Hastings of Florida.
H. Con. Res. 87: Mr. Gallegly, Mr. Klein of Florida, Mrs.
Lowey, Mr. Wolf, Mr. Shuler, and Mr. Wynn.
H. Con. Res. 92: Mr. Wexler.
H. Res. 20: Mr. Doggett.
H. Res. 37: Mr. Becerra.
H. Res. 55: Mrs. Napolitano and Mr. Fattah.
H. Res. 100: Mr. Oberstar.
H. Res. 119: Ms. Hirono, Mr. Inglis of South Carolina, and
Mr. Peterson of Minnesota.
H. Res. 121: Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Fattah, Mr. Engel, Mr.
English of Pennsylvania, Mr. Holden, Mr. Larson of
Connecticut, and Mr. Doyle.
H. Res. 154: Mr. Meeks of New York, Mr. Doyle, and Ms.
Jackson-Lee of Texas.
H. Res. 158: Mr. Tancredo and Mr. Crenshaw.
H. Res. 169: Mr. Ellsworth.
H. Res. 179: Mrs. Wilson of New Mexico, Ms. Norton, Mr.
Lincoln Davis of Tennessee, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Souder, Mr.
Payne, Mr. McIntyre, Mr. Stark, Mr. Emanuel, and Mr. Shuler.
H. Res. 196: Mr. Baird.
H. Res. 197: Mr. Stark.
H. Res. 221: Mr. Watt.
H. Res. 231: Mrs. Bachmann and Mr. Miller of Florida.
H. Res. 233: Mr. Lewis of Georgia.
H. Res. 235: Mr. Engel, Mrs. Tauscher, Mr. Israel, Mr.
Burton of Indiana, Mr. McNulty, Mr. Brown of South Carolina,
Mr. Berman, Mr. Weiner, Mr. Towns, Ms. Corrine Brown of
Florida, and Mr. Boyd of Florida.
H. Res. 243: Mr. Moran of Virginia.
H. Res. 250: Mrs. Bachmann, Mr. Hastert, Mr. Cannon, Mr.
Rogers of Michigan, Mr. Burton of Indiana, Mr. Smith of
Texas, Mr. Gingrey, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Sensenbrenner, and Mr.
Campbell of California.
H. Res. 259: Mr. Salazar, Mr. Saxton, Mr. Kuhl of New York,
Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Stupak, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Bishop of
Georgia, Mr. Shays, and Mr. Matheson.
H. Res. 264: Mr. Tom Davis of Virginia.
____________________
CONGRESSIONAL EARMARKS, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, OR LIMITED TARIFF
BENEFITS
Under clause 9 of rule XXI, lists or statements on congressional
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits were
submitted as follows:
The Honorable James L. Oberstar,
Compliance with Rule XI
Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, the Committee is required to include a
list of congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or
limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or
9(f) of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives. It is not clear if the definition of
``congressional earmark'' under clause 9(d) of rule XXI
applies to technical corrections to SAFETEA-LU projects
because these technical corrections do not provide new budget
authority for such projects.
However, in the interests of full disclosure and
transparency, the Committee has required Members of Congress
to comply with all requirements of clause 9(d), 9(e), or 9(f)
of rule XXI. The table included in House Report 110-62
provides a list of such provisions included in the bill. The
following table provides a list of such additional provisions
included in the bill, as amended, that the House of
Representatives considers today:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 1195 Section SAFETEA-LU Section Legislative provision Requested by
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 105(a)(232)................. Sec. 1702(2193).... In item number 2193 by Adam Schiff.
striking the project
description and by
inserting ``710 Freeway
Study to
comprehensively
evaluate the technical
feasibility of a tunnel
alternative to close
the 710 Freeway gap,
considering all
practicable routes, in
addition to any
potential route
previously considered,
and with no funds to be
used for preliminary
engineering or
environmental review
except to the extent
necessary to determine
feasibility''.
Sec. 105(a)(233)................. Sec. 1702(2445).... In item number 2445 by Timothy H. Bishop.
striking the project
description and by
inserting ``$600,000
for road and pedestrian
safety improvements on
Main Street in the
Village of Patchogue;
$900,000 for road and
pedestrian safety
improvements on Montauk
Highway, between NYS
Route 112 and Suffolk
County Road 101 in
Suffolk County''.
Sec. 105(a)(234)................. Sec. 1702(346)..... In item number 346 by Howard L. Berman.
striking the project
description and by
inserting ``Hansen Dam
Recreation Area access
improvements including
hillside stabilization
and parking lot
rehabilitation along
Osborne Street between
Glenoaks Boulevard and
Dronfield Avenue''.
Sec. 105(a)(235)................. Sec. 1702(449)..... In item number 449 by Tim Murphy.
striking the project
description and
inserting ``Route 30
and Mount Pleasant Road
Interchange Safety
Improvements,
Westmoreland County,
install light
installations at
intersection and
consolidate entrances
and exits to Route 30''.
Sec. 110(3)...................... Sec. 1934(c)(451).. By striking item number Luis G. Fortuno.
451.
Sec. 110(4)...................... Sec. 1934(c)(452).. In item number 452 by Luis G. Fortuno.
striking ``$2,000,000''
and inserting
``$3,000,000''..
Sec. 201(o)(4)(A)(xii)........... Sec. 3044(a)(57)... In item number 57 by Mike McIntyre.
striking the project
description and
inserting ``Wilmington,
NC, maintenance/
operations and
administration/transfer
facilities''.
Sec. 201(o)(6)................... Sec. 3043(b)(33)... San Gabriel Valley--Gold Adam Schiff and David Dreier.
Line Foothill Extension
Phase II.--In
evaluating the local
share of the San
Gabriel Valley--Gold
Line Foothill Extension
Phase II project
authorized by section
3043(b)(33) of such Act
(119 Stat. 1642) in the
new starts rating
process, the Secretary
of Transportation shall
give consideration to
project elements of the
San Gabriel Valley--
Gold Line Foothill
Extension Phase I
project advanced with
100 percent non-Federal
funds.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 7695]]
EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO AGNES E. GREEN
______
HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS
of new york
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. TOWNS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Agnes E.
Green. Agnes E. Green is the eldest of seven children born to David and
Agnes Cokley, and the mother of one son, Eric. She is currently the
Assistant Director of Public Affairs at Spring Creek Towers and the
Editor-in-Chief of its newspaper, The Spring Creek Sun.
Born and raised in Brooklyn's Bedford-Stuyvesant and now a resident
of Prospect Heights, Agnes is an activist who possesses a strong desire
to obtain the greatest good for her community.
While living in Crown Heights where her son was raised, she became
active in the parent associations and often served as president. Her
leadership was rewarded and she became a member on the Executive Board
of the citywide United Parents Association and later the Board
President.
As a parent leader, Agnes gained a reputation as an independent,
outspoken voice for all children's entitlement to a quality education
and parents' rights to participate in their education. Because of her
advocacy, she was asked by leaders of the CSD 17 Presidents' Council to
represent them in the race for a seat on Community School Board 17.
With the collective energy of parents and community support, she was
elected in 1983 and in every Board election thereafter, until the New
York City School Board was dissolved in 2004.
As a first term Board member, Agnes surprised many by becoming
President of the CSB 17 and held other officer and committee chair
positions throughout her 17 years as an elected school official.
She was appointed by Mayor Edward I. Koch to serve on the newly
created AIDS panel for school-aged children in August 1985. She was the
first parent representative to serve during one of the most contentious
periods in the City's public school history. The panel reviewed the
medical status and family history of children diagnosed HIV positive.
The end of the School Board did not diminish Agnes' commitment to
urging the improvement of public school education. She is a founding
member of Black New Yorkers for Educational Excellence, a citywide
progressive organization whose mission is to actively work for
education as a means of liberation.
Agnes, an honor student throughout public school, was also Bushwick
High School's first Black and first female to be elected President of
the Student Government Association. Her college education began at
Brooklyn College and formally ended at New York University where she
majored in Broadcast Journalism and minored in English literature.
After attending NYU, Agnes was hired by WCBS Newsradio 88 where she
worked for 19 years. She began as a News Desk Assistant and quickly
rose to Chief News Desk Assistant. Through her many years at WCBS Radio
she won numerous awards.
Agnes is currently the producer and host of Everyday People and
Everyday Voices aired monthly on Brooklyn Community Access Television.
Her passions include outdoor music concerts, jazz festivals, live
theatrical productions, taking photos, and collecting Black
memorabilia.
Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize this outstanding journalist
for all of her work.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to
Agnes E. Green.
____________________
PAYING TRIBUTE TO MAUREEN CLARK
______
HON. JON C. PORTER
of nevada
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. PORTER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and congratulate
Mrs. Maureen Clark for being awarded National Board Certification in
Career and Technical Education Communication Arts by the National Board
for Professional Teaching Standards.
Maureen is 1 of 2 educators at Foothill High School in Henderson,
Nevada to become nationally certified. National Board Certification is
a process that requires 1 to 3 years of preparation and testing.
Maureen completed an extensive portfolio of assignments, essays, and
videotapes as well as tests which assessed her knowledge of the
individual subjects she teaches. Once obtaining National Board
Certification, a teacher is given the highest honor of professional
teaching excellence. Only 116 of more than 20,000 teachers in the Clark
County School District, less than 1 percent, have earned this
distinction.
Mrs. Clark has a long and distinguished career as an educator. She
received her Bachelor's Degree in Art Education from the University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis and a Master's in Art Education from Northern
Arizona University. She is an 18-year veteran teacher, teaching the
last 7 years at Foothill High School. She currently teaches classes in
Computer Graphics, Website Science, and Computer Graphic and 3D
Animation. It is said that Mrs. Clark's classes are in high demand by
Foothill students and her teaching approaches are described as
innovative and exciting. After school, Mrs. Clark is the adviser for
SkillsUSA, a club and national organization that prepares students for
college by training them in technical, skilled, and service
occupations. Under her advisement, SkillsUSA has competed and earned
numerous state awards for its technology innovations. Maureen has made
a profound difference in our community and we are most fortunate to
have this leadership which positively impacts student achievement.
Madam Speaker, I am proud to honor Maureen Clark. Her efforts to
improve the educational experiences of the student at Foothill High
School are commendable. I congratulate her on her much deserved
recognition and I wish her continued success.
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO LILLIAN ROBERTS
______
HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS
of new york
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. TOWNS. Madam Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Ms. Lillian
Roberts. Lillian Roberts is currently the Executive Director of
District Council 37 of the AFSCME, AFL-CIO union. She represents
121,000 public workers in New York City, 50,000 of them retirees, 1,000
titles and 56 locals. She is also Vice President of the New York State
AFL-CIO, Vice President of the NYC Central Labor Council and Secretary
of the Municipal Labor Committee.
Lillian became a union activist as a Nurse's Aide working in a
Chicago hospital in the 1950s. She spearheaded the creation of five
locals and led an organizing drive at four Chicago hospitals.
Lillian came to New York City, built DC 37's hospital division and
became Associate Director of DC 37. She distinguished herself by her
skill as an organizer and her ability to connect with rank-and-file
members. She established the DC 37 Education fund, the largest union-
based adult education program in the country that offers union members
a four-year degree with the College of New Rochelle. This program has
become a model for unions nationwide.
During the late 1970s and 1980s, Lillian brought into the union
thousands of workers in federally funded jobs. She found that
experience to be a blueprint for creating unionized jobs for welfare
recipients. She also developed the DC 37 Municipal Employees Legal
Services program, which provides legal services to members and the DC
37 Personal Services Unit, which offers counseling to those with
personal problems.
In 1981, Lillian became the first African-American woman named New
York State Commissioner of Labor. During her 6-year tenure, she lead
the 7,500 employee body to increase the annual job placement level by 5
percent, obtained federal approval of a state plan for a Public
Employees Occupational Safety and Health Program, and computerized
unemployment insurance offices and the Job Service program.
Lillian was first elected DC 37 Executive Director in 2002 after
serving as consultant to
[[Page 7696]]
the union she helped build. She was re-elected to a 3-year term in
January of 2004. In January of 2007, Ms. Roberts was overwhelmingly re-
elected for her 3rd term.
Lillian currently leads the union where she had been a previous
Associate Director and consultant. In the 1960s and 1970s, she played a
major role in organizing new members into DC 37 and establishing an
array of benefits that became the envy of the Nation's labor movement.
With housing costs rising, Lillian approached Mayor Bloomberg with a
proposal to give DC 37 members and municipal workers an affordable way
to meet the City's requirement that they live in the 5 boroughs. The
result is the innovative DC 37 Affordable Housing Program. This program
allows DC 37 members and city workers preference for 5 percent of units
in city-sponsored lotteries for affordable homes and apartments, down
payment grants through the NYC Department of Housing Preservation and
Development, and homebuyer training and education through Neighborhood
Housing Services.
Lillian's leadership is rooted in the lessons she learned while
growing up on welfare on Chicago's South Side and fighting for better
working conditions as a Nurse's Aide. Growing up as 1 of 5 siblings in
conditions of poverty, she was instilled with a deep concern for the
needy and a passion for fighting social injustices.
Lillian has been a member of numerous boards including: Board of
Trustees of the College of New Rochelle; the State University of New
York, the National Equal Rights Committee and the National Committee
for Labor Israel.
Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize this labor activist. for all
of her accomplishments and her empathy for area workers.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to
Lillian Roberts.
____________________
PAYING TRIBUTE TO JOANN STRAND
______
HON. JON C. PORTER
of nevada
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. PORTER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and congratulate
Mrs. Joann Strand for being awarded National Board Certification in
Adolescence and Young Adulthood Secondary Language Arts by the National
Board for Professional Teaching Standards.
Joann is 1 of 2 educators at Foothill High School in Henderson,
Nevada to become nationally certified. National Board Certification is
a process that requires 1 to 3 years of preparation and testing. Mrs.
Strand completed an extensive portfolio of assignments, essays, and
videotapes as well as tests which assessed her knowledge of the
individual subjects she teaches. Once obtaining National Board
Certification, a teacher is given the highest honor of professional
teaching excellence. Only 116 of more than 20,000 teachers in the Clark
County School District, less than 1 percent, have earned this
distinction.
Mrs. Strand has a long and distinguished career as an educator
beginning with a Bachelor's Degree from Bemidji State University and a
Master's Degree in Secondary Language Arts from the University of
Nevada, Las Vegas. She has been an employee of the Clark County School
District for 19 years and has spent the past 8 years at Foothill High
School as a member of the English Department. Mrs. Strand is also a co-
creator with a fellow teacher of Young Entrepreneur Services, Inc.,
YES, Inc., is a unique company classroom which has been recognized
throughout the district for its unique approach to instructing
students. This class applies real world business work situations with
the necessities of an English class. Mrs. Strand is known by her
colleagues as a tireless worker who is both inspiring and relentless in
her pursuit of excellence. Joann has made a profound difference in our
community and we are most fortunate to have this leadership which
positively impacts student achievement.
Madam Speaker, I am proud to honor Joann Strand. Her efforts to
improve the educational experiences of the student at Foothill High
School are commendable. I congratulate her on her much deserved
recognition and I wish her continued success.
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO MS. AURORA BROWN
______
HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS
of new york
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. TOWNS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Brooklyn
resident Aurora Brown. Ms. Brown is a native New Yorker and a third
generation West Indian who sites education as the strength of her
lineage. The Amsted's (family name) were the first black school
teachers in Virginia. Ms. Brown taught scholastic and college
preparatory classes to youth for employment opportunities. Her students
have successfully gone on to colleges and universities such as
Morehouse, Spelman and Hampton through her mentoring.
As the Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder of S&B Cleaning
Services, Inc., Ms. Brown's mission to incorporate was derived from
previous experiences of managing several janitorial companies and being
employed by federal affiliates including 26 Federal Plaza, New York,
New York.
Ms. Brown received The Council City of New York Proclamation Award in
December of 2005 and the Partner in Education Award from the
Occupational Training Center of New York in June of 2004. Known for her
generosity and fairness when dealing with clients and employees, she
makes it her business to oversee personally the human resources
development of employing disadvantaged and handicapped individuals.
Ms. Brown's work ethic serves as encouragement for women to venture
out and become business owners. She states, ``through long hours,
trials, and tribulations, moments were grueling, but definitely worth
the effort.'' She also admits the company motto was her driving force
when faced with opposition and adversity. Tedious daily functions of
operating a business, she makes time to give to her community as a
facilitator of public functions, contributing donations, fundraising
for the welfare of child care. Ms. Brown, in conjunction with public
officials and local affiliates, has donated toys to the Young Minds
Daycare Center for the 2005 holiday season. Her personal choice for
donations in 2006 was Family Life Foster Care.
Ms. Brown has others to thank in establishing herself, such as
family, friends, and associates, but likes to acknowledge that her
Executive Vice-President Edwin Santiago is a key component in the
developmental operation of rapid growth of this organization; she also
takes pride in acknowledging that her employees are the backbone of S&B
Cleaning Services, Inc. There is much more you can expect to see that
Ms. Brown has yet to reveal. Just like her company motto ``There's not
much we don't do.''
Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize Ms. Aurora Brown for her
accomplishments in business.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to
Ms. Aurora Brown.
____________________
HONORING ANDREW WISE
______
HON. CORRINE BROWN
of florida
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor
Mr. Andrew Wise of the Neighborhood Housing & Development Corporation
in Gainesville, Florida.
On Tuesday, March 20, 2007, Andrew Wise was honored with the Dorothy
Richardson Awards for Resident Leadership from NeighborWorks America.
Mr. Wise combined his passion for Neighborhood Housing & Development
Corporation (NHDC) and his networking skills to recruit a remarkable
stream of community, business and educational leaders who have become
active in the NHDC organization. NHDC is a non-profit homeownership
center that has been in existence since 1982. The organization's goal
is to promote and provide decent and affordable housing for low-to-
moderate income residents of North Central Florida.
Mr. Wise has been an eloquent NHDC ambassador to the many church,
community and civic organizations to which he belongs. Within NHDC, his
board tenure and experience have made him the go-to person for new
board members--especially community residents--in understanding the
array of NHDC programs and their many and varied funding sources. He
has been invaluable in helping new members move past this steep
learning curve by getting them to focus on the mission of the
organization and how its board and staff are so instrumental in
transforming lives and uplifting the community.
Created in 1991, the Dorothy Richardson Awards for Resident
Leadership celebrate the outstanding contributions of dedicated
community leaders across the United States. Each year, the
NeighborWorks network honors residents who exemplify the qualities of
Dorothy Richardson, a Pittsburgh activist who helped advance the
community-based development
[[Page 7697]]
movement that informed the formation of the NeighborWorks network.
My congratulations and respect go out to Mr. Wise on his lifetime of
work and commitment to earn this award.
____________________
HONORING THE CAREER OF DENNIS GJERDINGEN
______
HON. RICHARD E. NEAL
of massachusetts
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, today I wish to recognize
and honor a dedicated and innovative educator, Mr. Dennis Gjerdingen,
upon his retirement after 26 years as principal of the Clarke School
for the Deaf in Northampton, Massachusetts.
Dennis became interested in childhood deafness when, in 1964, he
learned that his newborn son was deaf. He trained as a teacher of
social studies and English at Minnesota State University, received his
masters in Speech and Hearing at Washington University in St. Louis and
did post-masters work there in Educational Administration. He spent 14
years at Central Institute for the Deaf in St. Louis, as a classroom
teacher, researcher, associate professor, assistant to the director and
as headmaster, before coming to Clarke School for the Deaf in 1981. He
is the 6th president in Clarke's 140-year history.
Clarke School is an international leader in teaching listening,
speech, language and academic skills to deaf children and assisting
families and training professionals to work with them. During his
tenure, Mr. Gjerdingen has reorganized the Clarke School and its
structure to position Clarke for a rapidly changing future. He designed
and administered new Clarke programs, including the creation of the
Center for Oral Education on the Northampton campus that helps people
of all ages with hearing loss. In the last 10 years, Mr. Gjerdingen
spearheaded a strategic plan to expand Clarke to 5 campuses with 4 new
schools for young children in Boston, MA, Jacksonville, FL, New York
City, and Philadelphia, PA. Clarke School for the Deaf now impacts the
lives of more than 10,000 children and adults annually through its
educational programs, research, curriculum development and professional
training.
The author of more than 30 articles in professional journals, Mr.
Gjerdingen is widely recognized as an expert in the field. In 1987 he
was appointed by Congress to the Commission on the Education of the
Deaf that reported directly to Congress and the President. During this
appointment, he helped author a report from which major legislation was
adopted. He has also served as president of the International Alexander
Graham Bell Association.
It is my great privilege to honor Mr. Gjerdingen for his commitment
to providing greater educational opportunities for deaf children and
their families and professionals around the country.
____________________
PAYING TRIBUTE TO THE SCHWARTZ FAMILY
______
HON. JON C. PORTER
of nevada
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. PORTER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Schwartz family
for their philanthropic efforts in the Jewish Community of Las Vegas
and for their many contributions to provide the Las Vegas Valley with a
new community center and synagogue.
The Schwartz family, principals of Great American Capital, a real
estate development company found in Las Vegas, have been leaders in the
development, acquisition, operation and management of high quality
commercial and residential real estate projects in Nevada and Southern
California. As a result of their civic generosity, the construction of
the Beit Allon Chabad of Summerlin Community Center and Synagogue was
completed and opened in April of 2006. This facility has emerged as one
of the most magnificent synagogues in Las Vegas and includes the
finest, up-to-date facilities for education, socializing, and catering
affairs. For their humanitarian efforts and community service the
Schwartz family is being recognized as inaugural recipients of the
Chabad of Summerlin Founder's Award.
Madam Speaker, I am proud to honor the Schwartz family. Their
commitment to the Jewish Community is commendable and I congratulate
them on their much deserved recognition. I thank them for their
dedication and loyalty and wish them the best in their future
endeavors.
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO MELINDA JAMES-DELROSARIO, RN, BSN
______
HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS
of new york
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. TOWNS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Brooklyn,
New York resident Melinda DelRosario. Melinda DelRosario was born in
Panama City in the Republic of Panama. She attended the Instituto
Nacional in the Republic of Panama and became the youngest member of
the senior choir and usher ministry at Rio Abajo Methodist Church. Upon
migrating to the U.S. Ms. DelRosario attended Eramus High School in
Brooklyn, New York. In pursuit of a nursing career she earned a BSN
Degree at St. Joseph College in Brooklyn, New York graduating with Phi
Beta Kappa honors.
Upon graduation from St. Joseph College, she assumed various
administrative positions in home care and hospitals, among them; Kings
Brook Jewish Medical Center as an Administrative Supervisor/
Administrator on duty.
Currently, Melinda oversees the Nurse Connection Program with Village
Care of New York in conjunction with Roche Pharmaceutical Company. Ms.
DelRosario is an HIV Nurse and consultant. She also instructs doctors
and nurses in the administration of fuzeon therapy for HIV positive
patients. In addition, Melinda provides in home instruction to patients
and counseling to families.
Besides working as a healthcare provider, Melinda has been a prolific
community activist and commonly known for her spirit of cooperation and
punctuality. Twenty-five years ago, she became a member of ``The
Diggers.'' This is an organization led by Mr. Roman Foster who
researched historical facts on the building and construction of the
Panama Canal. This research resulted in the production of a documentary
which provided narratives and anecdotes with the contributions of West
Indians and the Caribbean works in Panama during the Canal's
construction.
Melinda James-DelRosario was also a member of the Madison Democratic
Club; the former Secretary of the Panamanian Nurses Association and the
Caribbean Nurses Association; Travel Coordinator with MIPOPA which is
an organization group headed by Dr. Carlos E. Russell which advocates
the rights of Panamanians to vote abroad. She is a member of Panama
Vote 2004, an organization led by Dr. George Priestly, which raised
funds to support the candidacy of President Martin Torrijos and
Probisida, an organization dedicated to providing assistance to HIV
positive patients.
Melinda is also a civic minded, community oriented individual who
embraces the concept of caring and sharing in issues affecting those
who have been disenfranchised.
Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize Melinda James-DelRosario for
her good works and accomplishments in our community.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to
Melinda James-DelRosario.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO THE FIRST ANNUAL CESAR CHAVEZ MARCH
______
HON. DALE E. KILDEE
of michigan
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. KILDEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 20th
anniversary of the naming of Chavez Drive and the first annual Cesar
Chavez March in my hometown of Flint, Michigan. A celebration and
fundraiser for the United Farm Workers members will be held on March
31st to coincide with what would have been the late Cesar Chavez's 80th
birthday.
Born on a family farm, March 31, 1927, Cesar Chavez witnessed
firsthand the suffering of migrant workers. When the family lost the
farm during the Great Depression, Cesar toiled in the fields following
crops across the Southwest. After serving in the US Navy during World
War II he returned to farm work and began his lifelong commitment to
justice for migrant workers.
During the 1960s Cesar Chavez, in reaction to the conditions he
witnessed in the fields, became a union activist. Adopting the
techniques of industrial unions like the UAW, Cesar fought against
agribusiness and unfair laws that forbade farm workers from organizing.
A nationwide boycott of table grapes and a 25-day hunger strike brought
the United
[[Page 7698]]
Farm Workers international attention. His leadership and personal
commitment forced agribusiness to sign the first union contract with
the United Farm Workers. He labored to improve the health and safety of
the workers. He fought successfully to end the use of harmful chemicals
like DDT and benefited not only the worker but the consumer as well.
When Cesar Chavez died in 1993, over 40,000 people attended his
funeral. In a show of respect for the man who had changed so many
lives, our nation posthumously awarded him the Presidential Medal of
Freedom.
Madam Speaker, Flint, Michigan was the first community in our nation
to honor this great humanitarian by naming a street after Cesar Chavez.
I ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring the memory of
Cesar Chavez and his legacy to the American people.
____________________
PAYING TRIBUTE TO FRANK J. FERTITTA AND LORENZO J. FERTITTA
______
HON. JON C. PORTER
of nevada
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. PORTER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor my good friends
Frank J. Fertitta, Chairman of the Board and C.E.O. of Station Casino
and Lorenzo J. Fertitta, Vice Chairman of the Board and President of
Station Casino as well as the entire Fertitta family.
Through the consistent efforts of Frank and Lorenzo Fertitta, Station
Casino was recently recognized by Fortune magazine as one of the top
100 companies to work for nationwide. The management of Station Casino,
which has received this recognition for 3 consecutive years, has
enacted several policies aimed at bettering the quality of life for its
team members. One such program, initiated by Frank and Lorenzo,
provides team members with assistance becoming homeowners. Another
program offers assistance to team members seeking to become U.S.
Citizens; this program offers assistance such as citizenship
application classes, study material for the citizenship examination,
and payroll advances for citizenship application. As a result of this
program, in 2006, 28 Station team members gained U.S. citizenship and
currently 260 more team members are attending citizenship classes.
In addition to implementing programs to enhance certain aspects of
their employees' lives, Frank and Lorenzo Fertitta have cultivated a
working environment founded upon ideals of camaraderie, respect and
fairness.
Madam Speaker, I am proud to honor my good friends Frank Fertitta,
Lorenzo Fertitta and the entire Fertitta family. Their dedication to
their employees is commendable and I wish them continued success in
their future endeavors.
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO JOYCE McDONALD
______
HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS
of new york
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. TOWNS. I rise today to pay tribute to Brooklyn resident Joyce
McDonald. Joyce McDonald was born to parents Willie and Florence
McDonald and raised in Brooklyn's Farragut Houses. Joyce is the third
eldest of seven children. She was reared in a household where
unconditional love was practiced and family values were instilled.
Joyce attended P.S. 287, Sands JHS 265 as well as Fashion Industry
High School. Her love and compassion for people led her to become a
volunteer at Cumberland Hospital as a Junior Nurse's Aide at 16-years-
old for the terminally ill. Joyce's teenaged years were not always so
hopeful.
During her teen years into adulthood, Joyce made many bad choices.
Thirty years afterward, she changed direction. Joyce has survived
various forms of mental and physical abuses which include rape,
attempted suicide, depression and a 25-year heroin addiction. In 1995,
Joyce tested positive for HIV and was later diagnosed with AIDS.
Despite her diagnosis, Joyce continued to share her life's story and
artistic talents with the world.
Without any formal art training, Joyce McDonald is currently a world
renowned artist. Her work has been exhibited in galleries, schools,
universities, shelters, nursing homes and hospitals. Her testimony and
art has been shared throughout the country via the media.
Joyce has received numerous awards, including: the 2002 Martin Luther
King, Jr. Service Award, the 2003 Church of the Open Door Woman of the
Year Award, the 2004 Isler's Award from the Women's Empowerment
Movement, and the 2004 Governor's Citation from Maryland. In 2005,
Joyce was one of nine Magnificent Women of Brooklyn honored by Senator
Velmanette Montgomery and received a citation from the New York
Assembly. She has also received the Dr. Martin Luther King Award from
Emmanuel Baptist Church.
Joyce McDonald's talents include being an artist, sculptress,
designer, writer, singer, poet and motivational speaker. These are
talents she attributes to her family, including her Dad who is now
deceased, her Mother, her two married daughters and their spouses and
her six grandchildren.
Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize the impressive achievements
of this extraordinary individual, who through her own pain found it
within herself to help others.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to
this wonderful person and her creative works.
____________________
PAYING TRIBUTE TO THE INY FAMILY
nevada
HON. JON C. PORTER
of nevada
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. PORTER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Iny Family for
their numerous contributions to the Jewish Community of Las Vegas and
for their many contributions to provide the Las Vegas Valley with a new
community center and synagogue.
The Iny Family, principals of Great American Capital, a real estate
development company found in Las Vegas, have been leaders in the
development, acquisition, operation and management of high quality
commercial and residential real estate projects in Nevada and Southern
California. As a result of their civic generosity, the construction of
the Beit Allon Chabad of Summerlin Community Center and Synagogue was
completed and opened in April of 2006. This facility has emerged as one
of the most magnificent synagogues in Las Vegas and includes the
finest, up-to-date facilities for education, socializing, and catering
affairs. For their humanitarian efforts and community service, the Iny
Family is being recognized as inaugural recipients of the Chabad of
Summerlin Founder's Award.
Madam Speaker, I am proud to honor the Iny Family. Their commitment
to the Jewish Community is commendable and I congratulate them on their
much deserved recognition. I thank them for their dedication and
loyalty and wish them the best in their future endeavors.
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO EUGENIA ``GENIE'' SWINSON
______
HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS
of new york
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. TOWNS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Ms. Eugenia
Elizabeth Swinson. Eugenia Swinson, or ``Genie,'' was born in Savannah,
GA, to Eugene and Carrie Swinson. She was raised on Long Island's South
Shore Bay in New York. Genie and her 9 siblings are products of the Bay
Shore Public School District. After graduation, all of them attended
college. Genie decided upon C.W. Post College with a major of vocal
music.
During her studies at Post, she toured Europe her freshman year with
the Chamber and Madrigal Ensembles. Upon returning from the tour, she
decided to move to California to launch a professional singing career.
This turned out be a wise decision because once there she had an
opportunity to work with Quincy Jones on the Brothers Johnson debut
album as well as tour with Boz Scaggs under the stage name of ``Pepper
Swinson.'' There would be many more bands that would come her way.
She returned to New York due to illness, however, after recuperating,
she moved to Israel to sing. After working in the Givatiem and Tel
Aviv, Israel, she once again returned to New York, this time with a new
skill. She had mastered the Hebrew language. Almost immediately after
arriving in the United States, Genie's health took a turn for the
worse. She began a battle with end stage renal disease, due to Systemic
Lupus Erythmatosis. This would mean 7 years of dialysis before a
successful kidney transplant at Beth Israel Hospital in Boston,
Massachusetts.
While in New York, Genie decided to return to C.W. Post College to
earn her undergraduate degree in modern languages with a
[[Page 7699]]
minor in music. She studied Spanish, Hebrew and Arabic. After the
transplant, Genie landed a job with the New York City Board of
Education as a teacher of Spanish. She received her masters degree in
multicultural education from the College of Mount Saint Vincent in
Bronx, New York. She is currently a teacher at a Theatre Arts School in
the Bronx and also gives private voice lessons in her home. Genie
actively continues her studies in languages. Italian and Portuguese are
her current passions. ``It's my favorite pastime.''
Not long after her transplant, she was approached by a representative
from the New York Organ Donor Network and became a volunteer
spokesperson for that organization. She appeared at several speaking
and singing engagements on behalf of the Network. At several events she
sang ``Another Chance to Give'' (La Vispera de Vida) in both English
and Spanish in an effort to bring awareness to the need for organ and
tissue donors.
It was her position as the official spokesperson for the Network that
led her to an opportunity to sing the national anthem before games at
both Yankee Stadium and Madison Square Garden for both professional
teams. Today, Genie remains a strong advocate of organ and tissue
transplantation.
Genie has modeled for Mode Magazine and continues to sing for Wilson
Pickett's back up band, The Midnight Movers. Accompanied by jazz
pianist Dr. Billy Taylor, she recently sang at a gala given by the Jazz
Foundation of America which honored its co-founder Ann Ruckert.
``I am a collector of people,'' said Genie. ``I have the same friends
today that I had in the second grade. Naturally, I've added on to that
distinctive group, but those friends are still an important part of my
life. I like to spend time, reading, studying languages and spoiling my
nieces, nephews and God's children. I'm honored to be a part of this
distinctive group,'' added Genie.
Madam Speaker, I would like to honor Genie for sharing her beautiful
talents with the rest of us. Through all of her adversity she continued
to grace us with her gift of song.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to
Eugenia ``Genie'' Swinson.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO 2007 JOHNSON COUNTY MOVERS AND SHAKERS AWARD WINNERS
______
HON. DENNIS MOORE
of kansas
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. MOORE of Kansas. Madam Speaker, I rise today to note an important
event in the Third Congressional District of Kansas. On April 10, 2007,
the Volunteer Center of Johnson County in Overland Park, KS, will honor
outstanding youth volunteers. Eighty young people have been nominated
by school personnel and nonprofit organizations for their dedication
and service to the community. Youth volunteerism continues to grow and
be a strong force in Johnson County. These 80 youth exemplify the true
meaning of volunteerism and giving back to their community, and it is
my honor to recognize each student volunteer and his/her school.
Alexander Abramovitz, Shawnee Mission North; Molly Allison-
Gallimore, Homeschool; Sydney Ayers, Barstow; Ava Azad, Blue
Valley; Lisa Barry, Olathe South; Lindsay Beardall, Shawnee
Mission South; Alexandria Bieber, Mill Valley; Abbey Blick,
Shawnee Mission East; Ashley Boots, Olathe Northwest; Sarah
Briggs, Trailridge Middle; Kristina Buchanan, Trailridge
Middle School; Kim Burnell, Olathe North; Amy Byarlay, Olathe
South; Sarah Campbell, Blue Valley North; Kelsey Charles,
Blue Valley West; Jenna Christensen, Shawnee Mission North;
Becca Doran, Shawnee Mission West; Katherine Ebling, Blue
Valley; and Marissa Erickson, Olathe South.
Evan Gage, Blue Valley Northwest; Jennifer Garren, Shawnee
Mission West; Kathryn Garrett, Shawnee Mission West; Kevin
Garrett, Shawnee Mission West; Michael Garrett, Westridge
Middle; Lindsey Gerber, Olathe North; Jean Gianakon, Shawnee
Mission North; Allison Golub, Blue Valley West; Kaley
Hagemann, Olathe East; Jessica Hebenstreit, Pembroke Hill;
Tess Hedrick, Shawnee Mission East; Logan Heley, Antioch
Middle School; Lauren Hiatt, Olathe North; Spencer Hill,
Shawnee Mission Northwest; Jing Jian, Olathe North; Janelle
Johnston, Shawnee Mission West; Michele Kerns, Blue Valley
West; Rachel Knapp, Westridge Middle; and Jessica Kruger,
Olathe North.
Hailey Lapin, Blue Valley Northwest; K. Clemence Lawson,
Olathe Northwest; Jake Ludemann, Shawnee Mission North; Sarah
Martin, Shawnee Mission West; Magdalena May, Olathe North;
Kaela McWherter, Blue Valley North; Courtney Miller, Blue
Valley West; Rebecca Miller, Olathe North; Jovana Mirabile,
St. Thomas Aquinas; Peri Montgomery, Shawnee Mission West;
Megan Moomau, Olathe North; Alyssa Morrison, Mill Valley High
School; Stephanie Nemer, Spring Hill High School; Evan
Neuman, Trailridge Middle; Alexandra Olsen, Prairie Trail
Junior High; Sam Parkinson; Sweta Patel, Olathe North;
Meredith Pavicic, St. Teresa's Academy; and Lauren Peterson,
Shawnee Mission Northwest.
Angela Podoll, Westridge Middle; Courtney Rathke, Olathe
North; Kaytlin Renfro, Shawnee Mission East; Bryce Reynolds,
Olathe Northwest; Kyle Reynolds, Olathe Northwest; Cassie
Rhodes, Spring Hill High School; Kaitlyn Rittgers, Olathe
Northwest; Alex Rorie, Mission Valley; Beth Russell, Olathe
Northwest; Michael Shoykhet, Olathe North; Devin Smith,
Olathe North; Elaina Smith, Prairie Trail Junior High; Haylee
Solcum, Trailridge Middle School; Peter Spitsnogle, Shawnee
Mission East; Jessica Stack, Olathe Northwest; Alexandria
Szalawiga, Olathe South High School; Nicole Tepper, Mill
Valley High School; Irene Wang, Olathe North; Danielle
Weathers, Mill Valley; Marin Willis, Spring Hill Middle;
Jessica Wilson, Spring Hill High School; Alexis Young,
Chisholm Trail Junior High; and Jenny Zhong, Blue Valley
Northwest.
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO DEBORAH BATTLE POINTER
______
HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS
of new york
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. TOWNS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Brooklyn
resident Deborah Battle Pointer. Deborah Battle Pointer is a true child
of the Diaspora with Carolinian, Jamaican and Black Foot Indian roots.
She was born and raised in Connecticut and received a Bachelor of
Science Degree in Psychology from SUNY Cortland and a Master's Degree
in Education from Cambridge College. The issues of access and equality
for all have been important cornerstones in her academic career. For
the past 30 years, she has worked in higher education, and served her
community as a volunteer while maintaining her involvement in the
creative arts.
Deborah was the first Associate Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid
at Cornell University, the first black woman to hold the position of
Director of Admissions at Columbia University's School of Engineering
and former Director of Financial Aid at both Columbia College and SUNY
Downstate Medical Center. While residing in Ithaca, New York, she was
elected to the Ithaca School Board where she served two terms.
Ms. Pointer is a co-founder and Co-Executive Producer of ``Russell
Simmons Presents Def Poetry,'' a television series shown on the Home
Box Office cable network. She was also an Executive Consultant to the
Broadway hit show, Def Poetry. The television series aired for the
first time in December of 2001 and continues to be a hit on HBO today.
Deborah and other Executive Producers of Def Poetry were recognized
with a Peabody Award for Excellence in Television for the HBO program
and received a Tony Award for the Broadway production in 2003.
In October of 2001, under the company name Bone Bristle Entertainment
LLC, Deborah and her business partners created a poetry anthology
published by Random House, ``Bum Rush the Page.'' The anthology
features works of 200 poets and has sold more than 15,000 copies. She
has recently published a children's picture book, ``I Am Hip-Hop''
through her non-profit organization Healium Inc. founded by Deborah
Pointer and Ronald Grant. Healium Inc. is dedicated to the efforts of
ending child abuse.
Deborah is currently a consultant to the Chairman of the Department
of Pediatrics at the Children's Hospital at Downstate where she is
involved in development and community outreach. She is also one of a
few African-American Christmas and Kwanzaa ornament designers and was
featured as an Editor's Choice in ``Decorative Gifts and Accessories''
magazine.
Ms. Pointer has authored several magazine articles on financing and
college education and has worked on a series of videotapes on financial
aid for students. The videotapes aired on Public Broadcasting Stations
in the New York tri-state area. For many years she was a consultant to
ESPN on selecting the High School Athlete of the Year. Deborah is
currently a member of the Brooklyn Borough President's Task Force on
BCAT, President of the Rutland Road Block Association and a member of
numerous other organizations.
Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize the impressive achievements
of Deborah Battle Pointer and her commitment to the children of
Brooklyn, New York. I also want to thank Ms. Pointer for sharing her
gifts with the rest of us.
[[Page 7700]]
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to
this wonderful and talented woman.
____________________
MOURNING THE LOSS OF DAVID BROWN
______
HON. JOE WILSON
of south carolina
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of
a true public servant of South Carolina's Second Congressional
District. David Brown, chief executive officer of Beaufort Memorial
Hospital of Beaufort, South Carolina, passed away Monday, March 19,
2007. Brown fell ill last month and was hospitalized at Johns Hopkins
University Hospital, where he passed.
Brown ably led the hospital during a time of tremendous growth. The
facility is now twice the size it was when Brown took over in 1996.
During his tenure as CEO, Brown developed a long-term affiliation with
Duke University Health System in heart and cancer care. Most recently,
he worked with Beaufort to bring additional workforce housing to the
area and led the hospital's expansion of services across the Broad
River.
Brown, son of Emerson M. Brown and the late Winifred Ryan Brown, was
born in 1951 in Germany, where his father was assigned as a U.S.
foreign service officer. Brown also lived in India, the Netherlands,
and Canada and attended high school in Switzerland and in Maine. He
earned a bachelor of arts degree in 1974 and a masters of business
administration with honors in 1976, both from Boston University.
Brown began his career in healthcare in 1976 as assistant executive
director of Prince George's County Foundation for Medical Care in
Landover, Md., and became executive director within a year.
In 1982 he joined the Greater Southeast Community Hospital in
Washington as vice president for professional services. Before leaving
the Washington area in 1996, Brown became president and CEO of the
Greater Southeast Community Hospital Foundation, which operated two
hospitals as well as long-term care facilities, home health agencies,
pharmacies and other health care-related businesses.
Brown is survived by his daughter, Caitlin Ryan Brown; son, Ryan
David Brown; father, Emerson Brown of Reed City, Mich.; sister,
Catherine W. Brown of Washington; and brother, Christopher G. Brown of
Columbus, Ohio.
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO CLAUDETTE AUDIGE
______
HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS
of new york
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. TOWNS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Brooklyn,
New York resident, Ms. Claudette Audige. Claudette Audige was born on
December 7, 1962, in Kingston, Jamaica. She has been a resident of New
York for more than 21 years. Ms. Audige is the wife of Andre Audige and
the mother of 3 beautiful children, Chase, Chad and Jodie.
Claudette Audige has been an experienced loan consultant for more
than 20 years. She is noted for her wisdom and compassion for
encouraging home ownership. She has inspired and helped many people to
save their homes as well as purchase a home.
Most of Mrs. Audige's extensive community involvement has been with
young people. She was a counselor at Good Samaritan Church, in the
Bronx, and St. Michaels, in Sheldon, New York. Her community activities
include participation in the McDonald's sing along concert series, a
drug awareness campaign, and the neighborhood gang violence awareness
program. The assistance she provides for children goes beyond the call
of duty since she works closely with the youth in her community.
She is sensitive to the needs of homeowners and it is out of that
compassion that led her to become a financial consultant. In addition,
the high rate of housing foreclosures among her friends and family was
another incentive for her to embark on this profession. Claudette gives
workshops to new homeowners and advises them of their financial status.
Due to her own past financial hardships, she has developed a flair for
assisting people to accumulate wealth through the power of prayer and
financial wisdom. Financial empowerment guides and motivates Mrs.
Audige to teach others to accumulate wealth and prosperity.
This extraordinary woman goes above and beyond the call of duty and
is commendable to the standards befitting the praised, virtuous woman
described in Proverbs.
Her motto is ``if I can help someone let not my living be in vain.''
Claudette Audige strives to educate the young and the old to possess
the knowledge of financial wisdom. She believes that everyone can own a
home with the proper education.
Madam Speaker. I would also like to recognize the impressive works of
Claudette Audige as well as her commitment to the Brooklyn community.
Madam Speaker. I urge my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to
this wonderful woman for all that she does for current and prospective
homeowners.
____________________
RECOGNITION OF THE HUNTINGTON VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER
______
HON. NICK J. RAHALL II
of west virginia
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the
Huntington Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) located in
Huntington, West Virginia. I am so proud to report that the Huntington
VAMC was named the ``Best Performing Facility'' for 2006.
This is a well deserved honor for the dedicated employees of the
Huntington VAMC who work so hard to ensure that our Nation's veterans
receive the quality they deserve. This honor is even greater
considering this is not the first time the Huntington VAMC has been
singled out for its high quality care. Just two years ago, this center
received similar recognition from the VA.
It is wonderful to know that the veterans who call West Virginia home
have such a topnotch medical facility to provide care. As we all
recognize, our veterans are our heroes and these heroes deserve only
the best care available.
It is important that we remember our veterans have given so much to
the future of our country and have asked for so little in return. Our
veterans, as our soldiers today, remain foremost in the thoughts and
prayers of all West Virginians.
I am honored that the Huntington VAMC is in my district. I hope that
this entire body will take a minute to congratulate the hard-working
men and women of the Huntington VAMC and to honor the sacrifices that
our brave service-members have made and continue to make.
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO AY'TASHA T. HANTON
______
HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS
of new york
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. TOWNS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Brooklyn
resident Ay'Tasha T. Hanton. Ms. Hanton is the proud daughter of Edna
M. Fulton, and Willie E. Hanton Sr., stepdaughter of Maudine Hanton,
who she affectionately calls ``Mom.'' Ay'Tasha was born in New York
City as the only daughter of seven children. Ay'Tasha's father expired
when she was 1\1/2\ years old. Without the relationship of her father,
she faced many challenges. With the loving support of her mother,
family and friends, she matured into a strong, independent woman.
A nine-year employee of the New York City Health and Hospitals
Corporation, Ay'Tasha has extensive knowledge in Finance
Administration, Policy and Procedures, Performance Improvement, Graphic
Design, Community Affairs and Healthcare Administration. In April of
1998, her career in health care began when she became the Coordinating
Manager of Chemical Dependency Outpatient Services and the Mental
Health Geriatric Program at Cumberland Diagnostic and Treatment Center
serving the Fort Greene Community. As an Assistant to the Sr. Associate
Director, Ay'Tasha worked diligently to aide the Chemical Dependency
patients who strived daily to maintain sobriety from their addictions.
She also worked attentively to aide the Geriatric population as they
faced the uneasiness of Mental Health.
In October of 2005, Ay'Tasha was reassigned as the NYS OASAS (Office
of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services) Administrator of Chemical
Dependency Inpatient and Outpatient Services at Woodhull Medical
Center, where she studied the communities' statistics.
Recognizing her statistical talents, Ay'Tasha was given additional
responsibilities by the Associate Executive Director of the Division of
[[Page 7701]]
Chemical Dependency for the North Brooklyn Health Network in the newly
established Performance Improvement Department, helping the Assistant
Director in strategizing ways to support the population suffering from
substance abuse addictions.
Her most recent opportunity towards climbing the corporate ladder
came in March of 2006 when she was assigned to assist the Associate
Director of Psychiatry in restructuring Woodhull's Psychiatric
Emergency Department. As the Administrative Manager of Psych ED,
Consultation and Liaison Services and the Chemical Dependency Inpatient
Detoxification Units, Ay'Tasha is also faced with the daily challenge
of aiding the Psychiatric patients as well as encouraging, mentoring
and challenging her staff to heightened levels, while advocating for
the Williamsburg and Bedford Stuyvesant communities.
Throughout her HHC career under the umbrella of the Department of
Psychiatry, Ay'Tasha has been a member of many committees such as
Cumberland's Open Access Team, Billing/Finance, Information Technology
and Community Affairs.
Ay'Tasha's walls are lined with many awards, certificates, and
presentations as a testament of her hard work. She has also received
extensive continuing education in Healthcare Professionalism such as
Managerial, Administrative Assistant, Graphic Design, and the list
continues. Ay'Tasha's most heartfelt accomplishment is her Associate of
Arts Degree in Biblical Studies from Bethel Bible Institute. Ay'Tasha
is presently seeking her Bachelors Degree in Health Administration.
Ay'Tasha understands the importance of children. She nurtures her
nieces, nephews, godchildren and a host of other youth. Not only is she
an inspiration to children, Ay'Tasha mentors young women in her
community. Ay'Tasha encompasses the true identity of a role model in
today's society.
Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize the impressive achievements
of Ay'Tasha T. Hanton for her commitment to her community.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to
this wonderful person and the great things she has done.
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO AIDA T. WILSON
______
HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS
of new york
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. TOWNS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Ms. Aida T.
Wilson. Aida T. Wilson was born in Panama City in the Republic of
Panama. She is the eldest of five children born to Olga and Charles
Tyrell. After completing high school at Santa Familia School for
Dressmaking in Panama City, she was immediately employed by Maloul
Brothers for five years in Colon, City of Panama.
Ms. Wilson migrated to the United States in 1956 and immediately
began to further her education by attending several adult education
programs while employed as a seamstress. She was later employed by one
of New York City's most prestigious department stores Lord and Taylor.
After serving in several positions she became their Merchandising
Auditor. She retired in 1994 after 37 years of service with the
company. Following one year of retirement, she was hired to work on a
part-time basis at Community Board 5 in East New York as a Community
Service Aide and has maintained this position for the past 11 years.
Ms. Wilson has been a communicant of St. Laurence Church RC for the
past 30 years. She has served on their Board of Trustees; as member and
past President of the Laurencian Guild (Rosary Society); Chairperson of
the Liturgy Committee; Treasurer of the Church AARP Chapter; and
presently a Lector at Sunday Masses and a member of the Parish Pastoral
Planning Committee. Mrs. Wilson is an active member and Past President
of the Brooklyn New Lots Lions Club and Part District Treasurer for the
Lions of District 20 K1 (Brooklyn and Queens). For her lionistic
activism, she has been recognized with many awards and citations
including the Distinguished Service Award for Community Service, Lion
of the Year, Knights of the Blind Award and the highest recognition by
an association, The Melvin Jones Fellowship.
Aida Wilson is married to Lloyd G. Wilson, (retired MTA Motorman).
This union brought forth a son Rodney, and a daughter Sharon who have
blessed them with six grandchildren: Tyrell and Cherrell Wilson, Jazine
Miller, Eryka, Elissa, and Jessica Hill. A step granddaughter Kristin
Reid Hill, son-in-law Eric Hill and daughter-in-law Angela A. Wilson.
Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize this pillar of our community
for all of her good works and kind gestures.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to
Aida T. Wilson.
____________________
INTRODUCTION OF THE INFANT AND TODDLER DURABLE PRODUCT SAFETY ACT AND
THE DANNY KEYSAR CHILD PRODUCT SAFETY NOTIFICATION ACT
______
HON. JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY
of illinois
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, today I am once again introducing two
bills that would help prevent needless deaths and injuries of young
children: the Infant and Toddler Durable Product Safety Act and the
Danny Keysar Child Product Safety Notification Act. These bills would
help us protect infant and toddlers from dangerous products, both
before they arrive on the shelves--and after they end up in homes.
The Infant and Toddler Durable Product Safety Act would require
infant and toddler products to receive a federal seal of approval
before they are sold. This bill is long overdue.
Currently, most consumers believe that, because a product is on a
shelf, it is safe. A Coalition for Consumer Rights' survey in Illinois
found that 75 percent of adults believe that the government oversees
pre-market testing for children's products; 79 percent believe that
manufacturers are required to test the safety of those products before
they are sold. For most products, neither is true.
In fact, there are no mandatory safety standards for the majority of
the children's products being sold today. The majority of the standards
that are in place are ``voluntarily'' set by the very industries
looking to make profits. They are also allowed to police themselves
about whether the standards are enforced.
Let me stress what that means: although there may be voluntary
standards in place, there are no requirements that all potential
hazards are addressed in those standards. For instance, the voluntary
standards for bassinets set by the industry did not have height
requirement for the sides or any test to make sure the baby couldn't
fall out. Only because of the tenacity of advocates like Kids in
Danger, was one finally set. There are also no consequences for the
manufacturer if the standards are not met, and no requirements for
products to be tested to see if the standards are met. This is true
even for baby carriers, cradles, play pens, and high chairs. For the
few products that do have mandatory federal standards, because there
are no testing requirements, the standards are meaningless.
Although the Consumer Products Safety Commission--the CPSC--requires
no testing and manufacturers mayor may not perform their own tests, do
not be mistaken, children's products are tested. They are tested in our
own homes, with our children and grandchildren as test dummies. The
cost of those tests can be a panicked child, amputated fingers,
fractured skulls, or a dead child.
Unfortunately, a trip to the emergency room or the morgue is often
the only way to know if a product is unsafe. This is unacceptable.
Parents and caregivers must have assurance that when they buy a
product, it will be safe. Therefore, the Infant and Toddler Durable
Product Safety Act would not only require the CPSC to issue mandatory
safety standards for infant and toddler products, it would require the
testing and certification of these products by an independent third
party before they are allowed to be sold to anyone.
To protect children should unsafe products make it into their homes--
as is currently happening--we also have to make sure that we can get
the hazards out as soon as possible. The Danny Keysar Child Product
Safety Notification Act would help us do that by requiring that all
children's durable products sold have recall registration cards
attached to them and that manufacturers directly contact those who fill
them out should there be a recall.
Although there is a shocking number of recalled products, our current
recall system is failing. Actual notice of a recall is dependent on
news outlets picking up the story and spreading the word. Notification
targeted to owners of the products is rare, and many parents remain
unaware of the dangers even when products are recalled. In fact, many
families still have the dangerous products listed in this report in
their homes because they have not happened to turn on the television at
the right time or read the right newspaper. We need to make sure that
notification is directed at the families that have bought these faulty
products so they don't have to rely on chance to hear the news.
My colleague, Rep. Fred Upton, and I named our bill that would help
solve this problem the Danny Keysar Child Product Safety
[[Page 7702]]
Notification Act because his story is a tragic example of the
inadequacy of our current recall practices.
Danny Keysar, the precious 17-month old son of Linda Ginzel and her
husband, Boaz Keysar, died when the Playskool Travel-Lite portable crib
he had been napping in at his babysitter's home collapsed. The rails of
the crib folded into a ``V''-shaped wedge when he stood up, trapping
his neck. He was strangled to death. It was May 12, 1998, five years
after the CPSC had ordered it off the shelves because it was so
dangerous.
Word of its hazard had not reached Danny's parents, the caregiver
with whom he was staying, or a state safety inspector who visited the
home just eight days before Danny's death. Had the Child Product Safety
Notification Act been in effect, there would have been a much greater
chance of saving Danny's life--and the 11 children who have since died
from the TravelLite.
We know that recall registration cards work. My bill is modeled after
the National Highway and Transportation Safety Administration's recall
system for car seats. Since NHTSA started requiring car seats to have
registration cards in 1993, the number of families registering
increased by at least tenfold. In fact, 53 percent of parents who
obtained cards mailed in the cards. Recall repair rates have gone up by
56 percent--all for a mere 43-cents per item. This bill will give
families a much greater chance to repair, return, or discard any
dangerous products that have made it into their children's nursery.
It is past due that we give parents the security they deserve and
children the safety they need. I urge my colleagues to support these
two bills.
____________________
INTRODUCTION OF HOUSE RESOLUTION 267 CONDEMNING THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF
IRAN FOR ITS SEIZURE OF BRITISH SAILORS AND MARINES
______
HON. MARK STEVEN KIRK
of illinois
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. KIRK. Madam Speaker, today I introduced House Resolution 267 with
my fellow Iran Working Group co-Chair Congressman Rob Andrews (D-NJ)
and Iran Working Group Vice-Chairs Dr. Charles Boustany (R-LA) and Ron
Klein (D-FL). This resolution condemns the Islamic Republic of Iran for
seizing 15 British sailors and marines in the Persian Gulf and calls
for their immediate release. These sailors and marines, based on the
HMS Cornwall, had finished a routine search of a civilian vessel in
Iraqi waters at the time of the kidnapping. The Iranian regime now says
it may charge the sailors and marines for illegally entering Iranian-
controlled waters.
The British soldiers were captured a day before the UN debated
additional sanctions for Iran's continued efforts to enrich uranium.
The sanctions were unanimously approved, and include a ban on arms
sales from Iran as well as freezing assets of 28 people and
organizations involved with the nation's nuclear programs.
Our resolution also asks the Security Council to explore new economic
sanctions against Iran, including a restriction on gasoline imports.
Despite its status as a top oil producing nation, Iran is highly
dependent on foreign gasoline due to severe mismanagement of its
domestic energy supply. An international restriction on foreign
gasoline is the most effective economic lever in our diplomatic toolbox
to prevent further Iranian hostility, deny Iran's ability to militarize
the Persian Gulf and enforce Iran's nonproliferation commitments.
The Iranian regime defied international law by seizing sailors in
waters outside of its jurisdiction. Our resolution sends a strong
message of condemnation from the House of Representatives.
I want to thank Reps. Andrews, Boustany and Klein for leading with me
on this resolution. I look forward to working with them and the more
than fifty original cosponsors on this important initiative.
____________________
INTRODUCTION OF THE BLUE WATER HIGHWAY ACT OF 2007
______
HON. DAVE WELDON
of florida
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Madam Speaker, today I introduced the Blue
Water Highway Act of 2007.
As Members of this body know, the ability to cost-effectively
transport goods to domestic markets is vital to our economy. It's
becoming increasingly clear, however, that economic and population
growth is far outpacing our ability to maintain and expand our existing
transportation infrastructure, posing serious, long-term challenges to
our current reliance upon land-based shipping.
In Florida and around the country, roadway congestion and driver
shortages are already making it difficult for trucking companies to
expand capacity. Freight shipping by rail is encountering serious
capacity problems in some regions, as well. And, recent estimates
indicate that overall freight traffic will continue to increase
exponentially in the coming years--up as much as 70 percent by 2020.
Madam Speaker, we are presented with a choice as we seek to address
this capacity crunch: We can try to engineer our way out of the current
situation at hundreds of billions of dollars in new federal
expenditures. Or, we can find alternate innovative modes of
transportation that will help absorb some of the traffic our growing
economy continues to create.
While we must continue to invest in our surface transportation
infrastructure, I believe that an alternative, environmentally sound
mode of transportation is at our fingertips that will lessen highway
congestion, save energy, and reduce air pollution.
Short sea shipping, or what I call the ``Blue Water Highway,''
involves shipping cargo by sea between U.S. ports. By establishing a
``highway'' along our coast where smaller cargo ships travel from port
to port along the Eastern Seaboard, Gulf Coast, Pacific Coastline, and
the Great Lakes, we have the opportunity to significantly reduce
highway congestion in an environmentally friendly and economically
sound manner. Additionally, sea-based shipping would mitigate against
wear and tear on our highways, potentially delaying the need for
expensive taxpayer-funded improvement projects and allowing such funds
instead to be used to free traffic congestion.
Though getting the Blue Water Highway up and running is no small
task, I believe that a modest tax policy change provided in my
legislation would significantly encourage the development of a short
sea shipping industry.
The Blue Water Highway Act of 2007 would amend the Internal Revenue
Code to exempt cargo shipped between U.S. mainland ports from the
harbor maintenance tax. This simple tax reform would remove the primary
prohibitive cost to short sea shipping, allowing designated cargo
vessels to travel from Port Canaveral in Florida, to Baltimore, and
then onto New York and Bridgeport, Conn. making other port calls along
the way without having to pay the cargo tax each time it enters a port.
Madam Speaker, amending the harbor maintenance tax is a reasonable
policy objective that would go a long way toward moving short sea
shipping from the backwater of the shipping industry.
____________________
HONORING THE BREESE CENTRAL LADY COUGARS BASKETBALL TEAM
______
HON. JOHN SHIMKUS
of illinois
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. SHIMKUS. Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor the Breese Central
Lady Cougars basketball team on their success in winning the
championship game of the 28th annual Class A state tournament at
Redbird Arena in Normal, Illinois.
Jessica Hemann, Courtney Strieker, Leann Voss, Britni Holtmann, K.C.
Root, Christy Rolfingsmeyer, Katie Robben, Kelsie Netemeyer, Katelin
Wiegmann, Tiffany Hilmes, Katie Scheer, Lauren Budde, and Cassandra
Deiters make up this victorious team of athletes, which are lead by
Head Coach Nathan Rueter and Assistant Coaches Angela Witte and Kelly
Hasheider.
The Number 11 State-Ranked Breese Central ladies received medals
after winning against Number 9 State-Ranked Rochester in a 47-41
victory.
I am very pleased to congratulate the Breese Central Lady Cougars on
their victory and wish them the best of luck for next season.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO DOLORES HUERTA
______
HON. JOE BACA
of california
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. BACA. Madam Speaker, I rise today to voice my strong support for
H. Res. 37. This
[[Page 7703]]
resolution honors Dolores Huerta for her commitment to protecting the
rights of women and children everywhere, and improving the lives of
farm workers.
I want to thank my colleague from California, Rep. Hilda Solis, for
sponsoring this resolution.
Since 1955, Dolores Huerta has been a preeminent figure in the civil
rights movement. She has dedicated her life to fighting for the rights
of workers, women, and children. Dolores has lived a life full of
compassion and love for her fellow man. Her actions helped to change
the way farm workers were treated and further established fair
treatment and respectable working conditions for them.
As a strong female leader, Dolores Huerta defied cultural and gender
stereotypes. She has been awarded the Eleanor D. Roosevelt Human Rights
Award and was inducted into the Women's Hall of Fame in 1993. Together
with Cesar Chavez, she founded the National Farm Workers Association,
now the United Farm Workers Organizing Committee.
Beyond her professional work, she is a proud mother of 11 children
and many grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
I urge my colleagues to send a message of support for the rights of
all workers and to honor the accomplishments of a true revolutionary,
Dolores Huerta, by supporting H. Res. 37.
____________________
RECOGNIZING LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO'S CENTER FOR PUBLIC SERVICE
______
HON. RAHM EMANUEL
of illinois
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize; Loyola
University Chicago for its enduring commitment to community service and
its creation of the Center for Public Service. I am pleased that the
Center will house the congressional papers of former Congressman Henry
J. Hyde and former Congressman Dan Rostenkowski.
Loyola's Center for Public Service will undertake the task of
encouraging citizens to dedicate their lives to civil service and
government. Through research and discourse, this non-partisan academic
unit will increase education on important policy issues.
Both Congressman Hyde and Congressman Rostenkowski attended Loyola,
so it seems fitting that their work will be preserved there.
Congressman Hyde recently retired from Congress after serving the
people of the Sixth district of Illinois for 15 terms. The former Dean
of the Illinois delegation served as Chairman of the Judiciary
Committee from 1995-2001 and was later Chairman of the International
Relations Committee.
Congressman Rostenkowski, or Mr. Chairman as he is still known,
served my district in the House and was a legislative force for 34
years. As the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, he played an
important role in tax and trade policy for thirteen years.
Madam Speaker, I congratulate Loyola University Chicago for its
creation of the Center for Public Service and its collection of the
congressional papers of former Congressmen Henry J. Hyde and Dan
Rostenkowski. I wish its faculty, staff and students the best of luck
as they pursue lives of public service.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO SAM MURPHEY FOR A LIFETIME OF DEDICATED SERVICE TO THE
NATION AND THE PEOPLE OF CENTRAL TEXAS
______
HON. CHET EDWARDS
of texas
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. EDWARDS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor a dedicated public
servant of the people of Central Texas, Sam Murphey. Sam is about to
embark on a well-deserved retirement after 22 years of service in the
U.S. Army and 16 years looking after the needs of the people of Central
Texas as my right-hand man and District Director.
Sam Murphey is a decorated soldier and veteran whose distinguished
service in the United States Army and his service to the constituents
of Central Texas is unparalleled in my experience. The positive impact
Sam has had is immeasurable and proof that one person can truly make a
difference in the lives of others. Sam is known by many names: husband,
father, grandfather, motivator, leader, and confidante. I join the many
others who are fortunate to call him ``friend''.
Sam graduated from the University of Texas in 1967 earning a
bachelors degree in business administration and a commission in the
Regular Army of the United States as a 2nd Lieutenant of Field
Artillery. Sam later earned his master of science degree in management
from the University of Central Texas in 1981 and he has completed an
additional 18 post-graduate hours of study in political science.
Following his graduation from the University of Texas, Sam began a
22-year career in the U.S. Army that took him to assignments in the
United States, Europe, Korea and Vietnam. He spent his combat tour in
Vietnam as a Field Artillery Forward Observer and Liaison Officer with
the 173rd Airborne Brigade. Other notable experiences during his
military career include a teaching assignment in the Gunnery Department
of the U.S. Army Field Artillery School, graduation from the Marine
Corps Command and Staff College, and an assignment at the U.S. Air
Force Academy as Air Officer Commanding of Cadet Squadron 29. He
retired from the Army at Fort Hood, Texas on October 1, 1989.
In March 1991, as a newly elected Congressman, I was wise enough to
hire Sam as my primary contact for the military and veterans
communities in what was then District 11. Sam excelled in that role and
became the District Director in January 1996. As a local veterans
leader, his counsel and advice have been indispensable over the years.
Among many other accomplishments, Sam played a key leadership role in
the successful fight to save the Waco VA hospital from closure and
helped make it into a national center of excellence. The massive
modernization of Fort Hood in the 1990s had Sam Murphey's fingerprints
all over it. Countless soldiers and their families have benefited from
Sam's hard work to make dramatic improvements in barracks, housing, and
training facilities at Fort Hood. Sam was also instrumental in opening
Gray Army Airfield to commercial aviation, providing land for the
Central Texas Veterans Cemetery and Tarleton State's upper level
institution in Killeen.
As a district director, it goes without saying that Sam is very
active in local community affairs, but he also spends much of his free
time to give back to the community. He continues to serve as Vice
Chairman of the Board of Directors of Heart O' Texas Federal Credit
Union. He is a past president of the University of Central Texas Alumni
Association, and has taught government and business classes at the
University of Central Texas and Central Texas College as a member of
their adjunct faculty. He is a past chairman of the Harker Heights
Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors and served 6 years as
Commissioner on the Harker Heights Planning and Zoning Commission. He
is a co-founder of the Harker Heights Economic Development Corporation
and is a past president of the Central Texas--Fort Hood Chapter of the
Association of the United States Army and of the Central Texas Chapter
of the Military Officers Association of America. He is a graduate of
Leadership Temple and Leadership Killeen and is a co-founder of the
Leadership Belton program. He was recently named Chairman of the Harker
Heights Chamber of Commerce Military Affairs Committee.
Sam and his wonderful wife Peggy, his much, much better half, are
retiring at the same time to enjoy their beautiful family together in
Harker Heights, Texas. Peggy is retiring after a career of service to
the soldiers and families at Fort Hood, a place that I had the
privilege to represent for 14 years and is very close to my heart. The
Good Lord has blessed Sam and Peggy with two children, Steven and
Kathleen and five grandchildren, Samantha and Steven Murphey, Hartley,
Elle and Sophia Corsi.
May the Good Lord continue to watch over them and as Sam is fond of
saying, ``bless their little hearts.''
Thank you, Sam for your personal friendship and for your service to
the people of Central Texas and the citizens of our Nation. We wish you
and your family all the best in the years ahead.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO GARY PLAYER
______
HON. LYNN A. WESTMORELAND
of georgia
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Madam Speaker, I rise today to carry on a tradition
started by the late Congressman Charlie Norwood, whose death this year
was a great loss to Georgia and the U.S. House of Representatives. Each
year on the eve of the Masters golf tournament in his hometown of
Augusta, GA., Congressman Norwood would honor a golfer of great acclaim
before his colleagues in the House.
[[Page 7704]]
This year, that tribute belongs to Gary Player, a world-renowned
golfer whose accomplishments extend far beyond the links. In April, Mr.
Player will tee up at the Augusta National for the Masters tournament
for the 50th consecutive year, a remarkable achievement of longevity in
any career. Few events in sports compare to the grace and beauty of the
Masters tournament, and for a half century, Mr. Player has played an
important role in one of the most cherished and most watched sporting
events in the world.
Gary Player's record is the envy of countless golfers. It includes
159 victories worldwide. He holds nine major championships including:
three Masters, three British Opens, two U.S. Opens and one PGA
Championship. In addition, he has won the World Match Play Championship
four times.
Outside the game of golf, Mr. Player has dedicated his life to
family--he is celebrating his 50th wedding anniversary this year--and
to serving the underprivileged.
In 1983, he established the Gary Player Foundation to address the
education crisis in South Africa. The Player family started the Blair
Atholl School--complete with a primary school of 400 students, a pre-
elementary school for 75, a community resource center and a sports
complex. The foundation ensures high-quality education, a nutritional
feeding scheme and basic medical care for each child.
Besides his foundation, Gary Player hosts the annual Nelson Mandela
Invitational Golf Tournament, one of the largest charity events in
South Africa. To recognize his many achievements, Gary Player was
awarded an Honorary Doctor of Laws from the Saint Andrews University in
1995.
Gary Player has lived an incredible life and he doesn't take those
blessings for granted. He has said, ``I have been so lucky with golf,
with my family, with my health, all I can be is thankful.'' Let us wish
him continued luck and thanks for his accomplishments on and off the
course. Mr. Player, good luck in Augusta.
____________________
ON THE INTRODUCTION OF THE DHS SAFE ACT TO ENHANCE THE SECURITY OF
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BADGES, IDENTIFICATION CARDS, UNIFORMS,
AND PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT
______
HON. BOB ETHERIDGE
of north carolina
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 26, 2007
Mr. ETHERIDGE. Madam Speaker, today I have introduced, together with
my colleagues from the Committee on Homeland Security, Chairman
Thompson of Mississippi and Mr. Rogers of Alabama, legislation that
will prevent terrorists or others with bad intent from posing as
Homeland Security officials or officers. This common sense bill will
require the Department of Homeland Security to make sure that sensitive
material--badges, identification cards, uniforms, and protective gear--
is made in the United States. As these items would be vulnerable to
theft in transit, it just makes sense to make sure they start and stay
in America.
When the Department of Homeland Security buys identification cards
overseas, there is no system in place to ensure that they are not
stolen and misappropriated by terrorists, who could then pass into
restricted areas with fraudulent credentials. In countries with less
robust ethical and management standards for business, manufacturers
might even be willing to sell uniforms or badges to the highest bidder.
The men and women who serve in positions that protect our security are
put at risk by a policy that does not secure these materials, and the
practice of purchasing them overseas without appropriate safeguards
must end.
It is certainly not uncommon for cargo to be hijacked or lost,
particularly in the staging areas at our Nation's ports of entry. The
potential theft of uniforms, badges, or ID cards by the truckload pose
a clear threat. These items are meant to serve as validation that those
charged with securing our country are who they say they are;
misappropriation is unacceptable.
This legislation will not slow down the Department at all with regard
to purchases; it merely ensures that sensitive materials are kept
securely inside the United States when appropriate. The bill contains a
waiver for small purchases and for material that will be used outside
of the United States. It gives the Department the flexibility to
procure materials outside of the United States if necessary and as long
as steps are taken to prevent misappropriation.
This legislation is focused and targeted at the area of greatest risk
in procurement. I urge my colleagues in the House of Representatives to
support it.
____________________
SENATE COMMITTEE MEETINGS
Title IV of Senate Resolution 4, agreed to by the Senate on February
4, 1977, calls for establishment of a system for a computerized
schedule of all meetings and hearings of Senate committees,
subcommittees, joint committees, and committees of conference. This
title requires all such committees to notify the Office of the Senate
Daily Digest--designated by the Rules Committee--of the time, place,
and purpose of the meetings, when scheduled, and any cancellations or
changes in the meetings as they occur.
As an additional procedure along with the computerization of this
information, the Office of the Senate Daily Digest will prepare this
information for printing in the Extensions of Remarks section of the
Congressional Record on Monday and Wednesday of each week.
Meetings scheduled for Tuesday, March 27, 2007 may be found in the
Daily Digest of today's Record.
MEETINGS SCHEDULED
MARCH 28
9:30 a.m.
Armed Services
Strategic Forces Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine the Strategic Forces Program
in review of the Defense Authorization Request for
fiscal year 2008 and the future years Defense Program,
with the possibility of a closed session in SR-222
following the open session.
SR-232A
Joint Economic Committee
To hold hearings to examine the current economic outlook.
SH-216
9:45 a.m.
Appropriations
Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related
Agencies Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine proposed budget estimates for
fiscal year 2008 for the Department of Labor.
SD-124
10 a.m.
Environment and Public Works
To hold hearings to examine reducing government building
operational costs through innovation and efficiency,
focusing on legislative solutions.
SD-406
Finance
To hold hearings to examine risks and reform, focusing on
the role of currency in the U.S.-China relationship.
SD-215
Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine the future of the Coast Guard
Dive Program.
SR-253
Rules and Administration
Business meeting to consider S. 223, to require Senate
candidates to file designations, statements, and
reports in electronic form.
SR-301
Appropriations
State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs
Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine the proposed budget estimates
for fiscal year 2008 for the United States Agency for
International Development and foreign assistance
programs.
SD-138
10:30 a.m.
Appropriations
Defense Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine the proposed budget estimates
for fiscal year 2008 for the United States Navy.
SD-192
Aging
To hold hearings to examine affordable drug coverage that
works for Wisconsin, focusing on preserving senior
care.
SD-562
11:45 a.m.
Foreign Relations
Business meeting to consider S. 193, to increase
cooperation on energy issues between the United States
Government and foreign governments and entities in
order to secure the strategic and economic interests of
the United States, S. 613, to enhance the overseas
stabilization and reconstruction capabilities of the
United States Government, H.R. 1003, to amend the
Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 to
reauthorize the United States Advisory Commission on
Public Diplomacy, S. Res. 30, expressing the sense of
the Senate regarding the need for the United States to
address global climate change through the negotiation
of fair and effective international commitments, S.
Res. 65, condemning the
[[Page 7705]]
murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist and human rights
advocate Hrant Dink and urging the people of Turkey to
honor his legacy of tolerance, S. Res. 76, calling on
the United States Government and the international
community to promptly develop, fund, and implement a
comprehensive regional strategy in Africa to protect
civilians, facilitate humanitarian operations, contain
and reduce violence, and contribute to conditions for
sustainable peace in eastern Chad, and Central African
Republic, and Darfur, Sudan, and the nominations of
Paul J. Bonicelli, of Virginia, to be an Assistant
Administrator of the United States Agency for
International Development, Curtis S. Chin, of New York,
to be United States Director of the Asian Development
Bank, with the rank of Ambassador, Eli Whitney
Debevoise II, of Maryland, to be United States
Executive Director of the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, Sam Fox, of Missouri,
to be Ambassador to Belgium, Zalmay Khalilzad, of
Maryland, to be the Representative of the United States
of America to the United Nations, with the rank and
status of Ambassador and the Representative of the
United States of America in the Security Council of the
United Nations, Margrethe Lundsager, of Virginia, to be
United States Executive Director of the International
Monetary Fund, Katherine Almquist, of Virginia, to be
an Assistant Administrator of the United States Agency
for International Development, Douglas Menarchik, of
Texas, to be an Assistant Administrator of the United
States Agency for International Development.
(Reappointment), and Ford M. Fraker, of Massachusetts,
to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
SD-419
2:30 p.m.
Appropriations
Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine proposed budget estimates for
fiscal year 2008 for United States Forest Service.
SD-124
Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Space, Aeronautics, and Related Agencies Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine transitioning to a next
generation Human Space Flight System.
SR-253
3 p.m.
Appropriations
Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine the proposed budget estimates
for fiscal year 2008 for the Department of the
Treasury.
SD-192
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
To hold hearings to examine No Child Left Behind
Reauthorization, focusing on effective strategies for
engaging parents and communities in schools.
SD-430
3:30 p.m.
Armed Services
Personnel Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine active component, reserve
component, and civilian personnel programs in review of
the Defense Authorization Request for fiscal year 2008
and the future years Defense Program.
SR-232A
MARCH 29
9:15 a.m.
Indian Affairs
To hold an oversight hearing to examine Indian trust fund
litigation.
SR-485
9:30 a.m.
Armed Services
To hold hearings to examine the Department of the Navy in
review of the Defense Authorization Request for fiscal
year 2008 and the future years Defense Program, with
the possibility of a closed session in SR-222 following
the open session.
SD-106
Foreign Relations
To hold hearings to examine an update on Iran; may be
followed by a business meeting to consider pending
calendar business.
SD-419
Small Business and Entrepreneurship
Business meeting to markup S. 163, to improve the
disaster loan program of the Small Business
Administration.
SR-428A
Veterans' Affairs
To hold joint hearings with the House Committee on
Veterans' Affairs to examine the legislative
presentation of AMVETS, American Ex-Prisoners of War,
Military Order of the Purple Heart, Gold Star Wives of
America, Fleet Reserve Association, the Retired
Enlisted Association, Military Officers Association of
America, and the National Association of State
Directors of Veterans Affairs.
SD-226
10 a.m.
Commerce, Science, and Transportation
To hold hearings to examine the nomination of David James
Gribbin IV, of Virginia, to be General Counsel of the
Department of Transportation.
SR-253
Environment and Public Works
Business meeting to consider S. 801, to designate a
United States courthouse located in Fresno, California,
as the ``Robert E. Coyle United States Courthouse'', S.
521, to designate the Federal building and United
States courthouse and customhouse located at 515 West
First Street in Duluth, Minnesota, as the ``Gerald W.
Heany Federal Building and United States Courthouse and
Customhouse'', the Public Buildings Cost Reduction Act,
the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, and the
nominations of Roger Romulus Martella, Jr., of
Virginia, to be Assistant Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, and Bradley Udall, of
Colorado, to be a Member of the Board of Trustees of
the Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence In
National Environmental Policy Foundation.
SD-406
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Federal Financial Management, Government Information,
Federal Services, and International Security
Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine eliminating and recovering
improper payments, focusing on the Office of Management
and Budget report entitled ``Improving the Accuracy and
Integrity of Improper Payments''.
SD-342
Finance
To hold hearings to examine clean energy from the margins
to the mainstream.
SD-215
Judiciary
To continue hearings to examine Department of Justice
hiring and firing of United States Attorneys, focusing
on preserving prosecutorial independence.
SH-216
2 p.m.
Judiciary
Business meeting to consider S. 236, to require reports
to Congress on Federal agency use of data mining, S.
376, to amend title 18, United States Code, to improve
the provisions relating to the carrying of concealed
weapons by law enforcement officers, S. 849, to promote
accessibility, accountability, and openness in
Government by strengthening section 552 of title 5,
United States Code (commonly referred to as the Freedom
of Information Act), S. 119, to prohibit profiteering
and fraud relating to military action, relief, and
reconstruction efforts, S. 621, to establish
commissions to review the facts and circumstances
surrounding injustices suffered by European Americans,
European Latin Americans, and Jewish refugees during
World War II, and S. Res. 108, designating the first
week of April 2007 as ``National Asbestos Awareness
Week'' and to discuss the possibility of the issuance
of certain subpoenas in connection with investigation
into replacement of United States Attorneys.
SD-226
2:30 p.m.
Intelligence
Closed business meeting and hearing regarding certain
intelligence matters.
SH-219
MARCH 30
10 a.m.
Appropriations
Legislative Branch Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine proposed budget estimates for
fiscal year 2008 for the Office of the Senate Sergeant
at Arms and Doorkeeper, and the United States Capitol
police.
SD-138
APRIL 10
10 a.m.
Commerce, Science, and Transportation
To hold an oversight hearing to examine the Federal Trade
Commission (FTC).
SR-253
APRIL 11
9:30 a.m.
Veterans' Affairs
To hold hearings to examine issues relative to Filipino
veterans.
SR-418
10 a.m.
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
To hold hearings to examine the availability and
affordability of property and casualty insurance in the
Gulf Coast and other coastal regions.
SD-538
Rules and Administration
To hold an oversight hearing to examine the Smithsonian
Institution.
SR-301
[[Page 7706]]
APRIL 17
10 a.m.
Judiciary
To hold an oversight hearing to examine the Department of
Justice.
SD-106
APRIL 25
2 p.m.
Veterans' Affairs
To hold an oversight hearing to examine the Department of
Veterans Affairs, focusing on mental health issues.
SR-418
APRIL 26
10 a.m.
Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Science, Technology, and Innovation Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine clean coal technology.
SR-253