[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 3695-3701]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         MIDDLE CLASS ECONOMICS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 2015, the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to 
speak. I hadn't intended to talk on Medicare, although I think that the 
ultimate reaction to what we just heard is that the Medicare guarantee 
that has been the bedrock, foundation, for seniors really will 
terminate if this budget proposal that we just heard discussed for so 
long continues because it will basically give seniors an option not to 
have Medicare. I don't think we want to do that. This has been an 
extremely important program for more than 40 years now, and I want to 
look really, really hard at the proposal that is being put forth by my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
  What I came to talk about today is something that the President 
actually spoke to us about here in the Chamber in January, and it was 
middle class economics--middle class economics. How is it that we can 
grow the middle class which has been stagnant in its economic growth 
for the last almost 25 years now, not seen a pay increase, husband and 
wife or a single parent struggling to make ends meet here in America? 
The President came here and he brought to us this middle class 
economics.
  Why is it important? Well, basically, if the middle class is healthy, 
if the middle class paycheck is growing, the economy grows. It is an 
economy that is based upon the consumer, and the consumer really is the 
middle class. So it becomes absolutely important that we look at how we 
are going to grow the middle class in America.
  There are many different ways to do that. Obviously, we need to 
strengthen the wages that the middle class have. We have seen very 
little wage growth in the last two decades. We need to really make sure 
that the men and women that are out there working day in and day out 
have the increase in their paycheck. We have seen little tiny bumps now 
as we look across the Nation, and as more and more people become 
employed and the labor market becomes somewhat tighter, we would hope 
to see this. But an important element of this paycheck is the minimum 
wage. So we advocate for $10.10 minimum wage all across this Nation. We 
hope to get it.
  But what we really want to spend time on today is the infrastructure 
and how to really see the infrastructure--the foundation for economic 
growth--really be put in place in America. We now have until mid-May, 
May 15, to put in place a new version of the highway bill. Can we do 
it? We have to do it. If we don't put in place and extend the Surface 
Transportation Act, we are going to see contractors all across America 
shut down their work, new contracts for highways and bridges not go 
into effect but, rather, be delayed. So Congress has an enormous task 
at its hand, and that is to reauthorize the Surface Transportation Act.
  The current one? We kicked it down the road last fall. Well, the stop 
sign is right in front of us, so we need to get with it. We are going 
to talk about some of the elements in that. We know that if we put in a 
robust, full Surface Transportation Act, we are going to see the 
American middle class go back to work.
  Let me just show you some of the elements that are in that Surface 
Transportation Act. Here they are. Last year, the President proposed 
the GROW AMERICA Act. I am going to call this the GROW AMERICA Act II. 
So we are looking now at how we can do that. The President came out 
with a full, 6-year program, a very robust increase in the amount of 
money available for surface transportation--fully paid for without 
increasing the excise tax on gasoline and diesel. No, you are not going 
to see an increase in the pump because of this program. Now, the oil 
companies may stick you, but not the government.
  And so the President's plan, which we call the GROW AMERICA Act 2, 
has all of these elements in it: rail, a full

[[Page 3696]]

rail program that is a freight program; how you connect the rail 
system, the highway system, and the port system; buses; light rail and 
the intercity transportation systems that are so important for our 
urbanization. We are seeing a major need for these buses, for the light 
rail, the metro systems across the Nation. Ports: 90 percent of the 
commerce comes through our ports, and so the ports--Los Angeles, Long 
Beach, in California, Oakland, San Francisco, and Sacramento in my 
district--are critically important. So there are all of these elements.
  We know we need to repair the bridges. We have a nice picture of the 
Golden Gate Bridge here. We probably should put the new Bay Bridge, or 
maybe we could actually put up this bridge. This actually happened 
about 3 years ago. This is Interstate 5 from the Canadian border to the 
Mexican border down the west coast, Interstate 5. Well, for about a 
month and a half you weren't going to get very far on Interstate 5 
because this bridge is right near the Canadian border, and it 
collapsed. So bridges across the United States are in desperate need of 
rebuilding. Many of them are decades old, some more than 100 years old; 
and, finally, highways.
  So this is the GROW AMERICA Act Surface Transportation Program that 
the President has proposed, about $160-some billion over a 6-year 
period of time. It is a large program. It provides a lot of money for 
all of the things we need to do: freight, intercity travel, buses, 
light rail, metro systems, ports, bridges, and highways. It is all 
there. There is a separate bill dealing with our airports. This is our 
program. This is what we need to do. When we do this, we are going to 
put America back to work.
  Now, one of my colleagues from California, the former speaker of the 
California Assembly, is here to talk about an element in this program. 
I welcome Karen Bass to this 1-hour discussion.
  Ms. Bass, if you would like to tell us what is going on in 
California.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Bass).
  Ms. BASS. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, last year, Congress took an important first step. The 
CR/Omnibus allowed transit agencies to pursue local hiring. It didn't 
require them to adopt local hire policies, but it put hiring decisions 
in the hands of local government officials. I think my good friend and 
colleague from California is making the point that transportation is 
the backbone of this country, and certainly we have been the world's 
leader in infrastructure, in projects like has been described by my 
colleague, but we need to do more of that.
  Every now and then, Congress does something in a bipartisan manner, 
and because of this action, the Department of Transportation 
established pilot programs that will permit L.A. Metro to prioritize 
local hiring on over $2 billion in transit and highway projects. Not 
just L.A. Metro, but around the country, local hire is now a policy. 
This investment will translate into tens of thousands of well-paying 
jobs for Angelenos putting these tax dollars back into the communities 
that paid for the projects.

                              {time}  1730

  Los Angeles is in the midst of a multibillion dollar investment in 
transit projects that will reduce congestion on our streets and reduce 
air pollution. Two major projects, I am fortunate to say, are in my 
district.
  One is the Crenshaw line, which is an 8\1/2\ mile light rail line 
between the Expo line on Exposition Boulevard and the green line. It 
will serve the Crenshaw District, Inglewood, Westchester, Los Angeles 
International Airport, and surrounding communities.
  Another project is the purple line that will provide a high-capacity, 
high-speed, dependable alternative for those traveling between 
communities, such as Miracle Mile, Beverly Hills, Century City, and 
Westwood. Angelenos have repeatedly voted to raise local taxes to help 
build these local transportation projects, but LA metro had not been 
allowed to prioritize hiring local workers.
  In LA, it is crucial that we adopt local hiring policies. Los Angeles 
unemployment remains higher than the national average, and people 
living in south Los Angeles, who are directly impacted by the transit 
projects I mention, are facing some of the highest unemployment rates 
in the State.
  Their tax dollars are paying a vast majority of these projects. Their 
businesses and homes are being the most impacted by the construction, 
but they don't benefit from the thousands of jobs that these transit 
projects will create.
  While I was back in my district last week, I heard numerous 
commercials on how Crenshaw Boulevard, a major thoroughfare through 
south Los Angeles, will be closed for several days because of the light 
rail construction. This closure is directly impacting businesses trying 
every day to provide goods and services to the people who live there, 
as well as the residents who call south Los Angeles home.
  This closure is difficult, but ensuring that these transit dollars 
will bring well-paying jobs is one way to alleviate the temporary pain 
from construction. We have done the right thing and allowed transit 
agencies to have control over local hiring practices. This will bring 
high-quality jobs to the areas most impacted by the disruption of 
transit construction.
  Democrats and Republicans can often disagree, but on this area, we 
are on the same page. More local control to transit agencies will mean 
they can build light rail and subway projects that will last for 
generations while ensuring that people who need jobs today will be the 
first in line for the jobs these projects create today.
  This is an example of bipartisanship. My colleagues that are here 
today talking about the Grow America Act, this is a first step; it is 
positive, but we obviously need to do so much more. The example of the 
projects that you have given is where we need to go next.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Thank you very much, Ms. Bass. I really appreciate 
your support. You have been a leader in California for many years, 
despite your youth. We look forward to this.
  I am very familiar with the extensions that you are talking about in 
southern California. As Lieutenant Governor, we were working on many of 
those projects, and I really like that local hire. That is so 
critically important.
  We have this issue not just on big transit programs like yours, but 
we also have it on our military bases, two of which I represent. All 
too often, people are imported from other States to do work in our 
local communities, and I am going: No, no, no, hire local, hire local, 
buy local.
  Let me put one more thing up here, and then I am going to yield to my 
friend from New York because this is really his turf. Make It In 
America, Buy America. So when you are going to build these projects, 
let's do it with American-made products.
  I think this one, Ms. Bass, this is, I don't know, a problem that 
occurred in San Francisco. When they decided to rebuild the San 
Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, they decided to use Chinese steel.
  Some 6,000 jobs went off to China. The steel came back. It turns out 
that the steel had all kinds of problems: welding problems, structural 
problems. They are still dealing with this. This is really the ``San 
Francisco Made in China Bay Bridge''
  On the other hand, my good friend here from New York, Paul Tonko, the 
Tappan Zee Bridge, across the Hudson River, both of them about $6 
billion to $7 billion. This bridge made in America, with American 
workers, and American steel--and it is coming in on budget--not Chinese 
steel.
  I don't know, Ms. Bass, but when you talk about making it local, hire 
local, we ought to have Buy America, Make It In America, and then we 
can really see the jobs, not just the local jobs in the construction, 
but all of the other parts that go with it.
  Where is that train being made? It could be made in Sacramento by 
Siemens with American workers, made in America, our tax dollars hiring 
local workers and American-made products. It can be exciting. We can 
really build

[[Page 3697]]

this economy. We can grow America, and we can rebuild the American 
middle class in the process.
  Mr. Tonko, congratulations on your Tappan Zee Bridge made in America 
with, as Ms. Bass would say, locally hired workers.
  Mr. TONKO. We are proud of any Make It In America provisions.
  Let me thank you, first and foremost, for bringing together 
Representatives like Congresswoman Bass and you always at the helm to 
lead us into discussions at the soundness of investment, in 
infrastructure, that is required for a modern-day society, for commerce 
to function, for economic recovery sake. We need to include 
infrastructure as a bit of the formula that takes us to the maximum 
outcome for producing jobs.
  I think any of us comprehends how investment and infrastructure 
equates to job creation. It is an easy exercise to relate to the 
skilled set of labor that is required to build these bits of 
infrastructure, but it is in the millions that we can strike in terms 
of added jobs and certainly a bolstering of our regional economies and 
certainly our national economy.
  This one is a no-brainer. It makes sense across the board to invest 
in what is crumbling infrastructure, improving those deficit-rated 
bridges, deficient bridges, and to be able to provide for the sort of 
vision that we as a nation require, this Nation requires, in order to 
move forward on a path of soundness.
  The siloing that needs to take place--or can take place, perhaps 
better said--is a frightening thing. We need to look at this 
infrastructure improvement through that silo, through certainly the 
opportunities for economic recovery, the environmental policies, the 
energy policies.
  If we can move forward with these investments, encourage American-
made manufactured goods and products for these projects, and then also 
see the soundness of putting together multimodal concepts where we 
bring together, through a sense of planning, all of the modes of 
transportation so that they are put into a hub concept where we are 
putting together the best energy outcome and that constantly working in 
that silo mentality that doesn't produce the results that will be most 
beneficial to all of us and for generations that will follow.
  I think that we need to understand that we improve our bridges, we 
structure new where it is required; we don't continue to build to 
capacity without the element of rail opportunity that can remove some 
of those cars from the highway.
  Energy efficiency is a common factor with rail transportation. It is 
the most energy-efficient mode of travel. If we can invest in rail and 
then incorporate that with soundness of transportation and 
infrastructure so that we are not building where it is not essential, 
where it can be avoided by multimodal concepts, we will then have the 
best product.
  All of this is focused on the needs of a modern-day society. When we 
have seen the crumbling of infrastructure, where we have put on the 
back burner maintenance and repair and improvements, it begins to catch 
up with the budgetary thinking here, and we develop crises that require 
huge outlays of money.
  It is important for us to move now as urgent as we can, as quickly as 
we can, to invest in our infrastructure, in our roads, and our bridges.
  I have looked at the needs within my district. They are there; they 
are very heavy. The impact on consumers with faulty roads, with less 
than acceptable infrastructure, is costly to the individual motorists.
  That is in terms of repair and maintenance of your vehicle; it is in 
terms of idle time where there are traffic jams related to, again, a 
need for infrastructure that is soundly developed through a sense of 
planning where we look at all modes of transportation.
  We have seen other nations begin to leapfrog past where we are at. We 
have instructed developing nations on how best to build their 
infrastructure, not just transportation roads and bridges and the 
traditional transportation infrastructure, but with utilities, with 
communications wiring, with all sorts of opportunities in water and 
sewer.
  We can advise, but we need to take our own advice as a nation and 
begin the investment in what is soundly a strengthener of commerce, 
public safety, and quality of life issue for all of us, individuals and 
families in this country.
  This is a golden opportunity. This is a way to put people to work. It 
is a way to purchase American-made goods that are, again, producing 
jobs in their manufacturing centers. It is a way to embrace sound 
planning. It is a way to be a better steward of the environment. It is 
a way to be energy smart in the outcome.
  All of this can be taken care of if we do this incorporated sense of 
thinking, a collaborative model that doesn't silo us to the tomorrows 
of our society, but builds on a pathway to soundest investment, to most 
efficient and effective use of taxpayer dollars.
  People want safe roads. They want safe bridges. They want the modern 
convenience of utility infrastructure and communication infrastructure. 
They want the soundness of thinking that a company's water, drinking 
water, and water and sewer infrastructure are sound.
  Representative Garamendi, you are on the west coast. I am the country 
span away on the east coast.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. 2,800 miles.
  Mr. TONKO. We are sitting on very aged infrastructure, and it is 
important for us to recognize that fact. There is a life expectancy 
that, when met, begins a huge crumbling of the infrastructure.
  We need to acknowledge that fact. We need to acknowledge the fact 
that the soundness of workers skilled, trained, prepared, ready to do 
this work can be put into meaningful work opportunities, and we can 
get, again, the pathway to soundness of commerce and quality of life 
addressed in a very reasonable fashion.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Tonko, thank you so very much. You are always 
passionate about growing the American economy, making the jobs. Often, 
you talk about research and the important role of research and, today, 
the important role of infrastructure of all kinds.
  Earlier, as I was going through some numbers about the GROW AMERICA 
Act II--this is this year's version of the President's infrastructure 
bill--I misstated. I said it was about a $167 billion program. 
Actually, it is a $478 billion program over 6 years.
  It happens to be $176 billion more than we are currently spending at 
the same rate, so it is really a terrific boost in the infrastructure. 
It does cover all of these things: rails, buses, ports, bridges, 
highways.
  That is not all that we need to do. The American Society of Civil 
Engineers laid it out. If you look at our airports, they are getting a 
D; bridges, a C-plus--you go down through the list--drinking water, a 
D; energy, a D--just all through the list, all of the infrastructure--
sanitation systems, D; water systems, D.
  Many of our communities, New York City and others in your area, are 
communities that are two centuries old, and some of the infrastructure 
is also two centuries old. We have this enormous need to rebuild our 
economy. If we do so, we are going to create a lot of jobs.
  One of my favorite publications that came across my desk recently is 
this one: ``Infrastructure Investment Creates American Jobs,'' Duke 
University. This isn't something put out by the Democratic Party; it is 
put out by Duke University.
  They say for every billion dollars that we invest, we not only get 
the infrastructure--the roads, the ports, the airports--but we also get 
21,671 jobs. The economic impact is not just $1 billion or $1; it is 
actually $3.54.
  You are getting this boost in the economy. You are getting that 
thrust growing the American economy and, as the President said, 
``growing the middle class'' because these are middle class jobs.
  I am sure you see this in your area.
  Mr. TONKO. Absolutely.

[[Page 3698]]

  Again, the aged infrastructure is one factor; the new development, 
innovation, cutting-edge, high-tech opportunities that are not 
embraced, not incorporated into the infrastructure that we currently 
require--these are two major driving factors as to why we should be 
aggressive in our pursuit of infrastructure resources.

                              {time}  1745

  There are those, ourselves included, who embrace an infrastructure 
bank bill, making certain that we can get more for the dollar, that we 
can leverage and stretch the commitments that we make to reach more 
projects.
  You talked about water infrastructure. I am seated on the Energy and 
Commerce Committee and am ranker on the Environment and the Economy 
Subcommittee, so it is an appropriate place to review and to further 
inspect the state of our drinking water infrastructure.
  In the last district work period just completed, I began with my crew 
at home the initial steps, with tours, of reviewing the water 
infrastructure that serves the communities that I represent. In 
Schenectady, New York, which is a town of about 60,000 individuals, we 
have some 240 miles of pipe in one community. That pipe may be as old 
as 100-plus years. The main feeds are 36-inch and 24-inch pipes.
  When you look at all of this infrastructure, knowing that the 
replacement factor is going to come, isn't it a better thing to plan 
how we are going to share those resources with communities?
  This is understanding that when we have a water main break--and we 
witnessed many of those during the very harsh winter that the Northeast 
of the country faced this year, and a number of the frost heaves are 
now busting this infrastructure. When we have some of these major 
breaks and when you see the water flowing from that location, it is not 
just water that is flowing by; it is dollars and it is electrons, 
because it took immense amounts of electricity, energy supplies, to 
treat that water. It took tons of taxpayer dollars to make certain that 
it is acceptable in its form for consumption, drinking water, and, of 
course, it is the water wasted.
  So we need to see this as a way to save water, to save dollars, to 
save energy, and why not incorporate into this discussion all of those 
elements that speak to drinking water needs in this country?
  You have seen too many opportunities or impacts on communities where 
they have had this ``boil water'' provision for days, if not weeks. You 
see it around the country. People are getting impacted, again, with 
this infrastructure that is so old, and it is in need of repair. We are 
sitting on not only pipes in the ground but well systems, the 
infrastructure, the computers, the workforce that is required.
  Are we training the appropriate workforce to pick up in these areas 
who have high levels of certification? The know-how is immense, and the 
responsibility is awesome. There is the human infrastructure. There is 
the training. There is the planning that is required and, certainly, 
the outstanding need for the soundness of all of the system that brings 
you from that aquifer, that water source, into the business place or 
the home place.
  This is something that we are going to further explore because we 
know there is an inordinate need, and we want to put together a sound 
plan that is thoughtful and reaches to the expected--the projected--
needs and offers the assistance to local governments, which is so 
essential.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Tonko, you are talking about water. In just 
looking through the report card from the American Society of Civil 
Engineers, they have down here ``water systems,'' with drinking water, 
D; energy, D-plus; sanitation is another D; and wastewater, D.
  Just across the Nation, in terms of a modern water infrastructure, 
both drinking water--potable water--as well as the sanitation systems, 
we rank them a D. In other words, we are polluting. We have 
contaminated water to drink, and we have contaminated water going out 
the other end of the sewer plant.
  Let me just take a second to talk to you about a place where there is 
not enough water--California. We are in the fourth year of a major 
drought in California, Mr. Tonko, and you are talking about all of 
those water problems you have in New York. Perhaps you could put it on 
one of those tank cars and send it out to California, because we are in 
desperate need of water in California. Fortunately, last November, the 
people of California took note of this problem, and they passed a $7.5 
billion bond to build the water systems of California.
  There are many parts to this--rebuilding the community water systems 
for small communities like you described. We have problems in 
California because communities are out of water. They don't have any 
water at all. That is part of it. There is another part in dealing with 
conservation so that we would conserve our water. There is another 
piece of it that deals with recycling. In fact, the fifth-biggest river 
on the west coast of the Western Hemisphere--from Alaska all the way to 
Chile--is the sanitation plants in southern California.
  You take, for example, water coming from northern California--500 
miles, 5,000 feet in the air. You take it into southern California. You 
bring it in from the Colorado River--200 miles, 2,000 feet. You bring 
it into southern California. You clean it. You use it once. Then you 
clean the water to a higher standard than the day it arrives in 
southern California, and you dump it in the ocean. Hello. Anybody 
thinking? So the people of California said, Let's recycle, so recycling 
programs are going to be part of California's future.
  We need to build reservoirs. We need to take care of the underground 
aquifers, which are rapidly being depleted. Unlike in New York, we are 
depleting them in California, not only in California, but in Nevada, 
Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Georgia, Florida, and Oregon. All of these 
States are seeing a depletion in their aquifers. In California, we need 
to get with this.
  In doing so, what I would like to see us do here in Washington is to 
take our Federal water programs, which are several. We have a recycling 
program and a conservation program--title VI is the Central Valley 
Improvement Act--available to the entire Nation. We have the EPA with 
its water programs, the Department of Agriculture, obviously the Bureau 
of Reclamation, and the Corps of Engineers.
  For those programs that are California's, we ought to put them right 
underneath that water bond and augment, supplement, and drive forward 
that water bond that the people of California already voted for. We 
have our task in major infrastructure, in putting people to work, and 
in guaranteeing the future for California water supplies.
  Mr. TONKO. I couldn't agree more. I think what we can do to 
supplement efforts in individual States is so critical right now 
because the need is so in demand.
  When I talk about this, I hear from your counterparts in California 
about the huge loss of water they had with some of the water main 
breaks. Again, it is the water; it is the dollars; it is the electrons 
that are flowing right by us. I have heard from Representatives from 
Texas, from those in Maryland, from those in the Northeast--New England 
and the Northeast--all saying it is about time. We need to do something 
here. My gosh. We have wooden pipes serving some communities. It is out 
of sight, out of mind. It is beneath that surface, and we are just 
believing that the water supply will be there and that the pipes will 
last forever. We know that the acidic quality of soils will wear the 
pipes from the outside and that the velocity will wear the pipes from 
the inside. They will not last forever.
  It is important for us to make certain that we communicate well, 
establish that dialogue with the water maintenance crews at all levels 
in our home States and have them instruct us as the first line of that 
service delivery system and say, Hey, this is the situation. These are 
the conditions. These

[[Page 3699]]

are the needs. And let us go forward with this infrastructure 
discussion that fully incorporates all of the elements of 
infrastructure--from the safety of our roads and bridges to the 
advanced investment in ports and rail, to communications to utilities. 
We have monopoly designed settings now wheeling electrons from region 
to region, State to State, nation to nation, nations to the U.S. All of 
this needs to be broadened in terms of the dialogue that we share and 
develop.
  We need to understand that we are at a cutting edge where, in this 
century now, we need to upgrade because of new opportunities or upgrade 
because of aged infrastructure. It begins with the soundness of 
planning, and it is why I enjoy these discussions with you where we can 
ignite, so to speak, that thinking at home and, certainly, amongst our 
colleagues here in the House and down the hall in the Senate to make 
certain that we are just avidly supportive of going forward with a 
progressive order of policies that will speak to these infrastructure 
needs and where we allocate the resources that are going to respond 
effectively to the given situation at hand.
  It is within our grasp. The bottom line is it produces jobs--millions 
of jobs--all while addressing safety and quality of life and commerce 
opportunity.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Tonko, thank you so very much. You keep bringing 
these issues so clearly to all of us.
  There are some among the 435 Members of this House who believe that 
the Federal Government should not have a role in these kinds of 
projects, and I think they are doing two things as they advocate that 
the Federal Government ought to get out of this business.
  First of all, they are ignoring the Constitution, which specifically 
says Congress is supposed to take care of postal roads. They are also 
ignoring the Founding Fathers. Washington asked his Treasury Secretary, 
Hamilton, to develop a program on advancing the American economy, and 
he came back with a program to build ports, postal roads, and canals. 
So this has been a long history of America from the beginning--that the 
Federal Government has a role in all of these.
  This morning, we had a hearing in the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee about the highway bill, about the surface 
transportation bill. We note that the President put forward what I call 
the GROW AMERICA Act II--this is this year's version of last year's 
bill--that is for $478 billion, a 6-year program, $176 billion more 
than proposed last year, and fully paid for.
  I notice that the ranking member of the Highways and Transit 
Subcommittee of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has 
joined us. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton of Washington, D.C., is with 
us now. This is her turf as ranking member of that committee.
  Thank you so very much for joining us, Ms. Norton. Share with us your 
thoughts on how we can grow America--grow the middle class, increase 
the paychecks for Americans, and build our infrastructure.
  Ms. NORTON. I thank both of my good friends.
  I certainly thank you, my good friend from California, Mr. Garamendi, 
for the consistency with which you have taken on these Special Orders. 
You don't need my support, but I thought I would come down and offer my 
support, not only because of how comprehensive have been your comments 
to remind the American people of how important our bill is, the surface 
transportation bill; but I would like to just take a few minutes to 
relate to what I have heard both of you say. Indeed, I have heard you 
mention jobs and the economy in one form or fashion, but I want to take 
this moment to indicate the link between jobs and the surface 
transportation bill. What makes me want to do this is the Gallup Poll.
  We have always known that the surface transportation bill and, 
indeed, that infrastructure has been an engine of the economy, and one 
reason is that it throws off jobs. It starts, of course, in 
construction, but then, more than any other sector, it stimulates jobs 
all the way up, jobs that support all the way up. That is what the GROW 
AMERICA Act will do. Of course, if you want to do that, you need stable 
funding. When I looked at what the American people want, I saw 
immediately the link between that and this Special Order hour today. If 
you look at the most important problems in American life, it is amazing 
what they are. The Gallup Poll asked, What is the most important issue 
for the American people?

                              {time}  1800

  There were eight issues. Of those eight issues, seven out of eight 
have to do with the economy.
  Number one was economic problems, divided into the economy and 
unemployment and jobs. Federal deficit and Federal debt were there, but 
everything else was about jobs and the economy.
  There are gaps between the rich and the poor, lack of money--that is 
how the American people put--wage issues, and the high cost of living. 
There you have it. What is the best way to do what Americans want.
  I agree with my good friend from California, we had a good hearing 
this morning, but I wonder if both of you weren't surprised that there 
was not more talk in this very bipartisan hearing that we had about 
jobs and the relationship to the surface transportation bill. I think 
there is a reason for that. That is that we can't yet pass the first 
hurdle: How are we going to pay for it? It costs money.
  Your chart there--rail, buses, ports, bridges, highways--are not 
free. We are so hung up on trying to do the impossible, fund all of 
those without money, that we can't get to what the money will do. We 
are approaching the absolute deadline, May 31. The construction season 
is already here. It is 65 degrees in Washington, D.C., today.
  I wonder, Congress knows that that very first bill, that Eisenhower 
bill in 1956, had a 13-year authorization because the Republicans in 
the 1950s were attuned to how long it takes to do exactly the kinds of 
things, Mr. Garamendi, that your chart points to, and you need an 
authorization more than a few months or even a few years to get that 
done--a 13-year authorization. No wonder that those post-World War II 
years were the very best years for the American economy.
  The States simply cannot make capital improvements. That is what your 
chart speaks to. Every last one of those is a capital improvement. You 
can't do it without capital funds that come in bulk. The States, of 
course, have thrown up their hands. How many of them have just said, 
``We have got to do it if Congress won't do anything; we just can't go 
on like this''? Of course, they are forgoing the projects they most 
need because no State has that kind of funds. Eleven States don't even 
have the option of putting up their own funds, they depend so heavily 
on Federal funds.
  But to show the link that I came to the floor to make to jobs, the 
occupations with the largest growth today would make the American 
people cry. Number one is personal care aides. Heaven knows we need 
them. We are having a big rally here in the District tomorrow because 
of the low pay of these workers. But at the bottom is construction 
laborers. The personal care aides make median $19,000, almost $20,000. 
The construction laborers make almost $30,000. That is a difference 
between a higher-wage job and those are the kind of jobs you are 
talking about, Mr. Garamendi--and a low-wage job. We are making only 
low-wage jobs because we are not, in fact, funding bills that would not 
only deal with rail, buses, ports, bridges, and highways, but the other 
parts of our transportation and infrastructure that my good friend has 
also mentioned.
  Of the fastest growing occupations, the top 10, only two have to do 
with what would grow America--insulation workers and brick and stone 
masons. Those are only two of the top 10.
  In my own district, the District of Columbia, I would hate to ask you 
to guess what is the occupation with the largest job growth--security 
guards. We need security guards and we welcome security guards, but I 
want my

[[Page 3700]]

two friends at the podiums to know that not one job, not one truly 
high-paid job, except registered nurses and lawyers--God forgive us--is 
on this list.
  So I come to the floor to thank both of my good friends for the 
conversation you have been having, to join it, and to link it to what 
worries the American people. They can think about nothing these days. 
They don't even think about ISIL. They hardly even thought about the 
Department of Homeland Security bill that we just passed here only last 
week. They can't think about anything except that as we say, rightly, 
there is a growth in jobs, and yet their wages stagnate because the 
growth is not where the wages would grow.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Ms. Norton, you hit right on with your closing 
sentence. It is about the middle class; it is about middle class jobs; 
it is about growing the economy and laying the foundation for present 
and future economic growth. We could do that. The President's plan last 
year, which he called the GROW AMERICA Act--and I am saying this year 
we call it the GROW AMERICA Act II--is $478 billion. That is a lot of 
money, and we put that into the surface transportation.
  I was thinking about as you were talking about the surface 
transportation, Mr. Tonko, over there, and about the new Amtrak bill 
that just passed out of our committee. It will be on the floor pretty 
soon. It calls for a lot of investment for Amtrak on the Northeast 
corridor so that you can go from Washington, D.C., to your home up on 
the Hudson River. I think there is a rail line that goes up there.
  Mr. TONKO. There certainly is.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. They call for a big investment there. One of the 
things we think ought to be in this bill--in fact, it is in the bill--
is a very strong Buy America provision. This is a locomotive, electric 
locomotive for the Amtrak line here on the Northeast corridor from 
Washington, D.C., to Boston, and this locomotive is 100 percent 
American made. It is made in Sacramento, California, of all places, by 
a German company, Siemens, who looked at the American Recovery Act, and 
there was $700 million in there to build these locomotives, and they 
said 100 percent American made. And Siemens looked at that and goes: 
$700 million, make it in America, we can do that, and they are doing 
it. These are now being deployed on the east coast line.
  But the next phase is a high-speed line between Washington and 
Boston, and that high-speed line calls for a new kind of train, high-
speed train, and out of our committee we said that it is going to be 
built in America.
  Now, Mr. Tonko, here is where I turn this over to you. It turns out 
that one of the foreign companies, Alstom, which is a French company, 
has a manufacturing plant in upstate New York, maybe near your 
district. If so, you are going to have those middle class manufacturing 
jobs when this bill passes with a 100 percent Buy America provision.
  Mr. TONKO. Well, interestingly, when I was on a recent trip south of 
D.C., into the southeast of the U.S., I got to tour a brand-new car 
that is a luggage car, storage car, includes racks for bikes, all sorts 
of storage done on that car itself, and proudly they wanted to share 
with me it is made in Elmira, New York, in upstate New York, state-of-
the-art design, brand new vehicle, just put on, I believe, that week 
that I was on the train. So, you are right, this translates into jobs 
of all orders, from manufacturing of these cars, these train cars, to 
innovation and research that is required, for instance, in our electric 
utility infrastructure.
  But, you know, I think Delegate Holmes Norton struck something that 
should speak to our senses, and that is history dictating to us when we 
were at our best. When we had this dip in our economy, when we were in 
post-Depression, when we needed to recover, we invested in jobs; we 
invested in infrastructure. My gosh, you look at the buildings that 
came through those late 1920s and 1930s that are still standing, not 
only solid as a rock, but tremendously designed and great bits of 
architecture that speak to a great bit of cityscape in our communities 
that really added to the look of the community.
  And we can take it back even before that in the history of our time 
when, as we have talked on this floor before, the Erie Canal, barge 
canal, was constructed. It was done at a time when Governor DeWitt 
Clinton had this goal--and the economy was in tough shape, too--and so 
he drove this idea through tough times when people said we can't afford 
it. And elements in history, chapters in history repeatedly remind us, 
you know, we are replete with these anecdotal bits of evidence that 
tell us, when things were really tough, when the economy was really, 
really weak, we went and pulled ourselves out of those pits, those 
financial downfalls, and did it through investment in infrastructure.
  Here we not only have an opportunity to pull us up and have a 
stronger economic response, but it is also enabling us to utilize the 
intellectual capacity of this great country that grows innovation, 
grows ideas, new concepts, research on lighter weight materials that 
can make our renewable energy supplies all the greater, where the bang 
for the buck is all the stronger.
  So there are elements galore that speak to an effective bit of 
planning that can take us through these tough economic times, respond 
to this crumbling nature of infrastructure or the need to build the new 
state-of-the-art elements into our Nation, be it communication, 
utility, transportation-wise or water and sewer-wise. There are golden 
opportunities to add to the workforce and then utilize the best 
opportunities out there, technologically, that have been developed 
through the soundness of American know-how, American ingenuity. So this 
gives birth. This gives--it coaxes from us the strength that we have as 
a nation to rely on that creative pioneer spirit that builds America in 
the truest form and fashion.
  So coaxing that kind of activity, America needs to be coaxed by that, 
pushed to embrace the pioneer spirit. Go forward with these 
opportunities to make us a strong, strong voice that will resonate with 
all communities across this country because they know that need for 
infrastructure is strong. It is really beckoning our leadership to go 
forward and commit to the soundness of that infrastructure investment, 
and we see it in so many aspects of the work done here.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. We know that one of the key opportunities that 
presents itself to Congress in the next 3 months is the surface 
transportation bill. We know that we have to have it out of here, renew 
it by the end of May. We know that if we do that, the construction 
season--while being a little bit rocky because we are late in getting 
this done--will be able to move forward through the summer and then on 
into the fall.
  One of the tasks that our Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton has is to 
push that out, and if in that piece of legislation we maintain the Buy 
America provisions, it is not just the construction jobs, it is going 
to be the manufacturing jobs, and men and women that will build the 
light rail, that will build the buses, that will build the Metro 
systems, will put together the pieces of the port, the bridges, 
wherever they may be, and of course the highways.
  Ms. Norton, you have got a task out ahead of you. I know you are up 
to it. If you would like to share some additional thoughts, we would be 
delighted to hear from you.
  Ms. NORTON. Well, my additional thoughts are really stimulated by the 
comments that both of you have made. You spoke about manufacturing. One 
of the reasons, one of the first things that occurred that got out of 
this recession was that manufacturing began to come back in America; 
and now, of course, corporations are finding good reasons to 
manufacture in America, and particularly at this time.
  Mr. Tonko, in essence, you were talking about stimulating the 
economy, and the best way to do it is to build something. You mentioned 
the buildings in Washington. If you look at the cornerstone of 
virtually all the public buildings downtown, the buildings that

[[Page 3701]]

people come to see, the Federal buildings, they all have a 1930s 
cornerstone, because that is when we stimulated ourselves out of the 
Depression.
  Mr. Garamendi mentioned Amtrak. Well, this is the hub of Amtrak, my 
own district. I must tell you, when I think about high-speed rail, 
speaking of Amtrak--and we haven't put the first high-speed rail on 
line, not the first, which puts us behind not only all of our allies, 
but even some developing countries.

                              {time}  1815

  It makes me almost ashamed to be on this committee, we are so behind. 
If we really wanted to get the economy going, we would give ourselves a 
deadline for high-speed rail. We would understand that if you want to 
move your economy quickly, you do not do something like cut taxes. You 
build things. You build America.
  I don't know how much time you have left, but I just want to thank 
you for the leadership, Mr. Garamendi, that you have taken and to say 
to you that I am with you as we continue to remind this Congress that 
this should be one of its foremost tasks this year: our surface 
transportation bill.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Your leadership on the Subcommittee on Highways and 
Transit is exceedingly important. All of us look forward to your 
success and the success of all of us in building America's 
infrastructure.
  We have about a little less than 5 minutes left. If you would like to 
take a few minutes, then I can, and we will call it an evening in which 
we have come, once again, to talk about building America, rebuilding 
the American middle class.
  Mr. TONKO. Thank you. Certainly, it is an honor to join with you and 
our colleagues this evening, as so many have come to the floor to speak 
to the soundness of infrastructure.
  We have talked about the present moment. We have talked about being 
inspired by the past, but let's look to the future. Not only do we owe 
it to the present moment to embark upon some of the newest options, 
alternatives, and innovative concepts, but what about the impact on 
future generations?
  If we don't do what is required of us in this present moment, we are 
saying that we are willing to survive on that fat of the land, that we 
take all of that thoughtfulness and all of the sense of progress and 
the pioneer attitude of generations before us who said: We are going to 
leave a sound bit of infrastructure, and we are going to know that we 
did the most we could in our moment so that generations to follow will 
be able to live--and live strongly--and be able to prosper from that 
and perhaps further stretch the thinking of America.
  Well, we haven't done that. We have taken that opportunity and 
utilized it in a way that serves our present-moment needs. The neglect 
here, I think the sinfulness of this outcome, the moral compass that 
should guide us is that you leave a better world for those to come.
  The payment mechanism isn't going to get cheaper. We know that. The 
need is inordinately high. The sense of vision that we need to share as 
leaders of a nation that is so great as the U.S. needs to provide for a 
soundness of planning and cutting-edge opportunities and an 
infrastructure that is strong and vibrant that allows for job creation, 
for commerce and its needs, for public safety, for individuals and 
families across this country.
  Representative Garamendi, this has been a very sound way to share 
with people across the country what the thinking is of the Democrats in 
the House. The Democrats believe in the soundness of infrastructure. 
They believe in investing in jobs. They believe in investing in a 
better tomorrow, investing where you rightly anticipate lucrative 
dividends--lucrative dividends.
  It is not spending foolishly. It is investing soundly in a way that 
speaks to documented need and then encourages and inspires us to speak 
in bold terms that will take us to cutting-edge opportunities that we 
will leverage in the present moment so that generations to follow will 
say: They got it, they tackled the problem, they responded to the 
challenge, they were bold in their attempt.
  Let's leave that as our message. Let's leave that as our legacy.
  I thank you for the opportunity here this evening.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Tonko, thank you so very much for joining us 
tonight and your leadership on this whole range of issues.
  It is about tomorrow. Tomorrow will be solid for America if we build 
a solid foundation, and that foundation is the infrastructure. It is 
the research facilities, the sanitation, the water facilities, the 
highway and rail facilities.
  The President has made a proposal. It is up to us to respond to that. 
Six years, fully paid for, no increase in the gasoline and diesel tax, 
it is all there. All we need to do is grab it and grab the future in 
the process. I am happy for the opportunity to share this evening on 
building tomorrow's future.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________