To grant the consent of Congress to an amendment to the compact between the States of Missouri and Illinois providing that bonds issued by the Bi-State Development Agency may mature in not to exceed 40 years.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 22) to grant the consent of Congress to an amendment to the compact between the States of Missouri and Illinois providing that bonds issued by the Bi-State Development Agency may mature in not to exceed 40 years, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on S.J. Res. 22, as amended, currently under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The Founding Fathers did not believe that the Federal Government should try to solve every problem in the country. Instead, they believed that local problems should have local solutions. This system of federalism became the bedrock of the Constitution.

One particular aspect of our federalist system is found in the Compact Clause of the Constitution. The clause recognizes agreements or contracts that States make among themselves, with congressional approval when necessary. Today, there are approximately 200 active interstate compacts addressing a variety of issues that range from environmental and energy policy to natural resources to traffic and transportation. Rather than wait for a one-size-fits-all program from Washington, D.C., the Constitution allows States to solve these kinds of problems for themselves.

In 1949, Missouri and Illinois formed a compact to create the Bi- State Development Agency. The agency's mission is to facilitate and coordinate economic and infrastructure development in the St. Louis metropolitan area. Among other projects, the agency runs the public transportation system in St. Louis. The agency does not have taxing authority, but it may issue bonds. For example, in the 1960s, the agency sold bonds to finance construction of the tram to the top of the Gateway Arch, which it operates today. The compact allows the agency to sell 30-year bonds. Last year, most States adopted legislation to amend the compact and allow the agency to issue 40-year bonds.

In addition to other capital improvements, the agency could use revenue from these 40-year bonds to support the CityArchRiver 2015 initiative. The purpose of the CityArchRiver 2015 is to better connect downtown St. Louis with the Gateway Arch and the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial national park. The project also involves building elevated walkways across the river to Illinois.

Senate Joint Resolution 22 gives congressional approval to this amendment, the Missouri-Illinois Interstate Compact. The Judiciary Committee marked up its companion, House Joint Resolution 70, on September 21. The suspension version of Senate Joint Resolution 22 contains one amendment, to correct a minor drafting error regarding the effective date. With this amendment, Senate Joint Resolution 22 will be effective upon the date of enactment.

In conclusion, I'm pleased to see this feature of our federalist system at work. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution and look forward to its swift passage.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

I have no requests for time, and I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentleman.

If our time would be better spent on those things, we would be glad to withdraw the suspension on your suggestion and just drop it right now. We will be glad to do that. I will make that offer.

As a closing comment, I have come to know the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay), my friend across the aisle, and hold him in very high regard. I appreciate very much his comments earlier about what this compact means to Illinois and to Missouri. I know Mr. Clay has been a leading proponent of this happening, and I really very much appreciate his comments. This will not provide jobs across the country, but it solves a problem. It will ease things for those two States so that jobs should be easier.

And I was totally serious when I offered my colleague who was saying that we were wasting our time on this--I know Mr. Clay and many others have spent a great deal of time on this, and I didn't think the Democrats that were pushing this bill so hard were wasting our time. I think it's a very legitimate use of our time.

Some people like to confuse the term ``interstate,'' as used in the Constitution; and they want the term ``interstate'' to be expanded, as it has sometimes, to apply to nothing but activity wholly within one State. The Supreme Court has even given some regard to those kinds of arguments, but this is not one of those cases. This is a matter that's been taken up and passed by the Senate, and we should pass it today. It takes up a matter clearly between two States that makes it interstate.

And then it is not the State of Illinois or Missouri coming and begging for the Federal Government to take over a State responsibility. It is two States with different opinions, different concerns, but wanting things to work together for good, coming to a solution; and then the Federal Government, since it is interstate, must recognize that compact. I think it is an appropriate thing to do. I don't think the Democrats who are pushing this bill were wasting our time. I think it's an appropriate use of Federal time.

With that, I would urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I want to applaud the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert), the ranking member, and my colleague from Missouri, and to echo the comments of Mr. Conyers on his father, but also the stellar work that he is doing. As a member of the delegation, we can always count on Missouri to test the Constitution and to ask the United States to do what is right.

I am rising to support this compact. Frankly, I want to really embrace it because it is maybe one aspect of legislation, Madam Speaker, that we are actually bipartisan and supporting it without hesitation.

I, frankly, believe that the Federal Government should not overreach as it relates to compacts that have been between States. But I do think that regulation is key and crucial to give States extra leverage.

So let me congratulate Mr. Clay. And I look forward to supporting this legislation.

I will add, as well, that when I think of bonds, I think of opportunities for building, using resources to restore. And by the very nature of that, Madam Speaker, we're talking about creating jobs.

So I add another applause to this particular legislation coming out of the Judiciary Committee because, for once, among many bills that we have been debating from the Judiciary Committee, this bill might enhance opportunities for jobs. I think of bonds. I think of jobs. I think of utilization of funds from bonds as they mature. And this is a good thing.

I'm sad to say that in the course of the time that we've spent, maybe over the last 3 weeks, when we could have actually engaged in reasonable debate on how we raise the payroll tax, how do we extend the payroll tax cut, and how do we extend the unemployment benefits, we have not been able to do that.

So let me just share my assessment of the folk who are needing unemployment benefits. Personal savings have gone. Family savings have gone. They've exhausted the 401(k)s and they have tapped every other fungible amount of dollars that they might have, maybe even to the kiddie's saving account that started with 25 cents, leaving many individuals in this harmonious, humble holiday time, desperate, desperate for a job, desperate for assistance, desperate for being able to pay their mortgage, desperate for paying their rent.

Madam Speaker, maybe we should also say, desperate in getting one more allotment of food stamps. Maybe we're not aware that there are 46 million families on food stamps, and most of them wait all the way to the exhaustion of those food stamps; find themselves, before the next opportunity for food stamps, literally drinking water, making tea, and eating crackers. There was an expose on this just recently on one of our cable stations, families waiting until 12 midnight to watch and see if their account has in it the amount of money they needed to enter a grocery store to feed their children.

I don't believe that we can leave this sacred and august institution without, one, providing relief on extending the payroll tax cut, giving $1,000 and $1,500 to the American working class. And clearly, I don't believe that we can leave without providing for unemployment. Every dollar invested in unemployment insurance yields $1.52 in economic growth, and at least 200,000 jobs will be lost if Republicans block extension of the unemployment insurance.

In fact, frankly, I know that Scrooge would not find a place of comfort in this House.

We have always risen to the occasion of helping the most desperate. Whether it has been under Franklin Delano Roosevelt in World War II, where he had to put the apple sellers back to work, or whether it was when our President had to stop the bleeding with the $800 billion stimulus, we have always risen to be able to find a way to move our economy. And if we would tell the truth, we would see that our economy is percolating along.

So in the tribute of President Obama, who speaks today in Kansas in the same place that President Teddy Roosevelt spoke about opportunity for Americans, I'm asking for the Members of Congress to come to the floor and give opportunity for Americans.

I will close by saying to my friends, there are many good friends who are running for President. Many of us have worked with them. And anytime an American wants to offer themselves to serve this country, I have no angst with them, no matter how much I disagree with their policy. But let me be very clear, as a child that grew up poor, lived with neighbors who were poor--not in our minds, but certainly by our economics--I want to make the record very clear: poor children have role models because poor families get up every day and go to work. And the solution to poor children being the best that they can be is not a Donald Trump apprenticeship, and it sure isn't to get rid of the working janitors who are supporting their families and put the poor children to work.

I hope that we can do better than that, Madam Speaker, and get back to work and make sure we extend the payroll tax for working families. And let's extend the unemployment insurance for the 99ers.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the chairman and ranking member of the full committee and the chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee for their leadership and for moving this critical resolution.

I'm proud to have introduced the House version of this joint resolution, and it accomplishes two very good things: S.J. Res. 22 approves an important amendment to a compact between two States.

As was mentioned before, in 1949, Missouri and Illinois entered into an agreement to foster ``regional economic development through excellence in transportation.'' The compact created the Bi-State Development Agency. Congress approved it, and has approved several amendments over the last 6 decades.

The agency, now known as ``Metro,'' operates the St. Louis Metropolitan region's public transportation system. It has more than 2,400 employees and carries over 55 million passengers each year.

This resolution approves a small but crucial change to the Bi-State Compact. Both State legislatures have passed it, and both Governors have signed it. This is a necessary and good amendment, and there is no negative impact to the Nation or to States. As such, Congress should approve it.

This resolution also enables the Congress to fulfill one of its constitutional duties. And I agree with my good friend, Mr. Gohmert, that Congress should not overstep its authority. While we do not always agree on the limits of that power, we agree on this resolution and on the constitutional authority for it.

Article I, section 10, clause 3 of the Constitution says that ``No State shall, without the consent of Congress . . . enter into an agreement or compact with another State.''

The Framers of the Constitution required that Congress would have to approve these agreements to protect the interests and rights of the other States. This also protects the rights of the citizens within the States that are party to the compact by providing Federal oversight.

This clause was a compromise. There were those who wanted to give the Federal Government greater power over the States, including the authority to

regulate to negate State laws. Others felt very strongly that this would be overly nationalist and broad.

The Constitutional Convention, rather than giving the Federal Government complete control over everything, or nothing, compromised. They compromised for the good of the Nation. They granted the Federal Government blanket authority over some areas. They also limited the Federal Government's authority in others. And they required congressional approval for agreements between the States.

This compromise, one of many that formed our great country, demonstrates that two opposing sides, who each feel passionately about their point of view, can come together and compromise for the good of the Nation. They each put aside their well-intentioned and strongly held belief that they were completely correct, and that the other side was completely wrong, and found a way to work out the differences. Each gave up something they held dear in order to achieve a higher good: That was the creation of a strong Nation, a Nation that would endure.

Madam Speaker, there is a lesson here, a 224-year old lesson for us who serve in Congress today.

Once again, I thank the chairman and ranking member.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Members of the House, under the Constitution, article I, section 10, clause 3, these kinds of interstate compacts must be ratified by the House of Representatives. Senate Joint Resolution 22 gives congressional approval to an agreement between Missouri and Illinois to amend the interstate compact establishing the Bi-State Development Agency.

My colleague on the Judiciary, Judge Gohmert, has expertly described what it is that brings us here, but I would merely add that the congressionally approved interstate compact establishing the Bi-State Development Agency in 1950 serves as the primary provider of the public transportation for the St. Louis metropolitan area. It also develops, maintains, owns, and operates bridges, airports, wharves, docks, grain elevators, industrial parks, parking facilities, refuse and waste handling facilities, as well as fuel, energy, air, water, rail, or commodity storage areas. Also, there is a 40-year maximum maturity period for bonds and other financial instruments which will allow the agency to finance projects for longer periods of time.

I congratulate my colleague from St. Louis, William Lacy Clay, a distinguished Member from Missouri whose father was in on the first interstate compact, and now we're proud that he and other of his colleagues from both Missouri and Illinois are supporting this Senate Joint Resolution 22. I urge its favorable consideration.

I would like to yield the distinguished gentleman as much time as he may consume.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield as much time as she may consume to the distinguished gentlelady from Houston, Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), a senior member of the committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Tonko).

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the Representative from Michigan for the opportunity to speak to this measure and to really express concern about the inordinate time that we are spending on measures that allow us to harm the air that we breathe and the water that we drink.

The American people are asking us to set priorities here that focus on job creation. They're demanding that this body focus on jobs and helping rebuild our economy. Instead, we seek to be spending hours debating regulatory and bureaucratic measures that are flawed and would dramatically undermine the ability of our government to protect the air that we breathe and the water that we drink. Instead, I would suggest that our time be better spent focusing on putting more money in the pockets of American workers, empowering our middle class.

I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Madam Speaker, might I suggest that during this holiday season, as the American public struggles to pay bills that range from gas bills to groceries that are required for their mortgages, again, the focus should be on job creation. And the payroll tax holiday is nearing its expiration. This body should act to extend that tax cut for hardworking middle class American

families. A failure to do so would result in job losses, a reduction in economic activity, and higher taxes for many families when they can least afford it.

So my suggestion here is to stop wasting time on less important priorities and start focusing on creating jobs and standing up for our middle class, enabling them to strengthen their purchasing power and to enable our economic recovery to be as vital and strong as possible.