Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I was unable to be present for several votes taken on the House floor yesterday afternoon, Thursday, October 22, 2009, due to illness. As a result, I missed rollcall votes No. 801 through No. 811. Had I been present: on rollcall vote No. 801 I would have voted ``no''; on rollcall vote No. 802 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 803 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 804 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 805 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 806 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 807 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 808 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 809 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 810 I would have voted ``aye''; and on rollcall vote No. 811 I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be present for several votes taken on the House floor today, Friday, October 23, 2009, due to illness. As a result, I missed rollcall votes Nos. 812 and 813.

Had I been present: On rollcall vote No. 812 I would have voted ``aye'' and on rollcall vote No. 813 I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my amendment, a measure that expands the type of technologies that the Department of Energy should consider when planning for future solar.

The Central Valley in California is home to many solar technology companies and to the University of California at Merced, a leader in solar research. However, my constituents tell me that they are unable to take advantage of several of the Department of Energy grant application processes because the Department has a very narrow view of the future of solar.

As someone with solar panels on my home in my hometown of Atwater, I understand the tremendous benefit that solar power will have on our country and economy, and I want to ensure that our current planning is done correctly. Instead of limiting the potential of solar power, we should be expanding that potential and letting the full imagination of American ingenuity take charge.

My amendment is very simple: it expands the type of technologies that the Department of Energy should consider when planning solar technology road maps, and it directs the Department to focus resources on different types of solar technology.

Specifically, my amendment expands the definition of solar technology to include solar thermal power technology and not just electronic photovoltaic technology. This would facilitate the funding of solar projects and replace all types of polluting technologies, including diesel.

Secondly, my amendment directs the Department of Energy's demonstration program to include solar thermal projects that operate using solar power only. Some solar plants are built with gas-fired plants next door to them to generate power when the sun is not available. If we as a country are going to wean ourselves away from dirty energy, then we must develop technologies that eliminate the use of pollutants completely and stop settling for hybrids. I know we can do better than this. And this amendment instructs the Department of Energy to look harder and wider at these technologies.

I urge the passage of my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague and my friend, the gentleman from Texas, for his support of this amendment.

I would like to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to this rule.

We have heard a lot of debate this year about California's water crisis.

We are suffering from our third year of drought, and the situation has been compounded with a ``regulatory drought'' that has restricted our ability to deliver water even when it is available. Over 40,000 people are out of work, over 500,000 acres of some of the world's most productive farmland have been fallowed, farmworkers are now standing in food lines, people are losing their homes, and more importantly people are losing their hope, all because of a lack of water.

The Federal Government is in part responsible for the regulatory drought, and it is time for the Federal Government to take action to address this crisis.

I support this underlying bill, Mr. Speaker. But quite frankly, I am completely fed up with the lack of a response to our water crisis in the San Joaquin Valley.

My definition of ``crisis'' is a disaster that requires an immediate response. The fact is, there still is no immediate response--in fact there is hardly even any response. And it's high time that the Federal Government admits that not enough is being done to address the valley's water needs.

In fact, I have with me a list of 26 projects that the Federal Government can work with us on to relieve the pressure that the lack of water has created on the valley.

My friends and colleagues from the San Joaquin Valley, Mr. Radanovich and Mr. Nunes, offered amendments in Rules Committee last night but they were not made in order.

My folks need relief. They are suffering and can't wait any longer. And farmers in the valley have planting decisions to make in the near future. They simply can't go through another farm season not knowing if they will have any water.

Mr. Radanovich and Mr. Nunes deserve to have their amendments on the floor today. Their amendments would have ended this regulatory drought once and for all and provided much-needed relief to our farmers.

Because San Joaquin Valley farmers are prevented from getting the water they so desperately need, I urge all of my colleagues to oppose this rule.

Actions and Projects To Address California's Water Supply Crisis

Reconsultation of FWS and NOAA Biological Opinions.

Undertake a National Academy of Sciences 6-month review of

all the factors in the decline of the Delta.

2-Gate Fish Protection Demonstration Project--coordination

and funding.

Delta Mendota Canal and California Aqueduct Intertie--

coordination and funding.

Completion of a long-term, multi-year water transfer

program.

Develop a program to coordinate schedules on North to South

transfers.

Support permanent reform of intra county East-West

transfers within the CVP.

Patterson Irrigation District Pumping Plant and Fish

Screen.

Patterson Irrigation District Pipeline Project.

Diversify Level 2/Level IV Refuge Program.

Announce 2011 rescheduled water decision in the Spring,

2010.

Additional federal support for the Westside Water Use

Efficiency and Conservation program.

Support the removal of restrictions under the Emergency

Drought Relief Act which restrict funds to temporary

projects.

Mendota Dam Replacement.

San Luis Drain Rehabilitation.

Allow the use of Whiskeytown Reservoir to be used to meet

the water supply needs of the most impacted areas.

Work in collaboration with the state on the development of

a long term Joint Point of Diversion program.

Friant-Kern and Madera Canals Capacity Correction.

Friant-Kern Canal Reverse Flow.

Pipeline Replacements in the San Luis Unit.

Westlands Water District Reclamation Project for drainage

impacted areas and reclamation of poor groundwater.

West Stanislaus Irrigation District fish screen and

pipeline.

Stockton East Water District intake structure and fish

screen.

Merced Irrigation District New Exchequer Dam Spillway

Modification Project.

Semitropic-Rosamond Water Bank Authority Antelope Valley

Water Bank Initial Recharge and Recovery Facility Improvement

Project.

Semitropic Water Storage District Pond-Poso Spreading and

Recovery Facility.

Madam Speaker, today with Congressman Costa, I introduced the ``Water Transfer Facilitation Act of 2009.'' the measure should reduce unnecessary delays in water transfers at a time when Central Valley farmers have been hard hit by a three-year drought. It would allow new water transfers of roughly 250,000 to 300,000 acre-feet of water per year. The bill would grant authority to the Bureau of Reclamation to approve voluntary water transfers between sellers and buyers in the San Joaquin Valley. The measure also would streamline environmental reviews for Central Valley water transfers by ensuring that they occur on a programmatic basis, instead of the current project-by-project basis.

Transferring water between and within counties for water districts is a critical tool during periods of drought. While the best solution would be to fully operate the federal and state pumps, this change in the law provides us some relief. This legislation makes permanent the ability to transfer water to our Valley's farms when it is most needed, therefore, allowing our farmers a lifeline to continue to grow crops and help our local economy. More will need to be done to protect the Valley's water, and I will continue that fight.

The bill is supported by a great number of water users across the Central Valley, including the following: Friant Water Users Authority, San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Authority, Delta-Mendota Canal Authority, Westlands Water District, Metropolitan Water District, Glen Colusa Irrigation District, Northern California Water Association, Banta-Carbona Irrigation District, Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority, Association of California Water Agencies, Placer County Water Agency, Conaway Preservation Group, and the Reclamation District 2035.

I have submitted several of these support letters here for the record, and I understand that Mr. Costa will submit additional letters as well.

Association of California

Water Agencies,

October 6, 2009.

Re ACWA support for Water Transfer Legislation.

Representative Cardoza,

Longworth House Office Building,

Washington, DC.

Representative Costa,

Longworth House Office Building,

Washington, DC.

Dear Representatives Cardoza and Costa: Thank you for

introducing water transfer legislation for the Central Valley

Project (CVP) which ACWA is pleased to support. As

California's water supply challenges multiply, this

legislation can provide greater flexibility for management of

CVP water supplies. As you know, ACWA's 450 public agency

members are collectively responsible for 90 percent of the

water delivered in California for residential and

agricultural uses.

California's water supply situation is dire and worsening.

Three years of below average precipitation along with heavy

regulatory restrictions through the ESA and Biological

Opinions, have seriously diminished California's water

supplies. Under these conditions, it is essential that short

term actions, such as provided by your legislation to

flexibly enable water supplies to move across the San Joaquin

Valley, be pursued.

Again, thank you for introducing water transfer

legislation. ACWA looks forward to working with you to secure

its passage in an expedited manner.

Sincerely,

Timothy Quinn,

Executive Director.

Northern California

Water Association,

Sacramento, CA, October 2, 2009.

Re Support for Water Transfer Legislation.

Hon. Jim Costa,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Congressman Costa: On behalf of the Northern

California Water Association (NCWA), we thank you for

introducing legislation authorizing and establishing a

permanent long-term program to promote and manage water

transfers in the Central Valley of California. We support

your efforts and this legislation as a means of providing

greater flexibility in the management of Central Valley

Project (CVP) and other water supplies to help meet unmet

needs critical to the future of the State of California.

As you are aware, the devastating impacts of diminished

water deliveries to the CVP as a result of three years of

below average precipitation have been made even greater by

the various regulatory restrictions, including the

requirements established by the recent federal biological

opinions for endangered fish under the ESA. Your legislation

will provide immediate, much needed relief in the form of a

flexible and useful tool that will allow water to be

transferred from willing parties to those in need within the

Madam Speaker, due to overwhelming response from water users in the Central Valley, I am compelled today to introduce additional letters of support for the Water Transfer Facilitation Act of 2009. The bill would grant authority to the Bureau of Reclamation to approve voluntary water transfers between sellers and buyers in the San Joaquin Valley and streamline environmental reviews for Central Valley water transfers.

The bill is supported by a great number of water users across the Central Valley, including the following: Friant Water Users Authority; San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Authority; Delta-Mendota Canal Authority; Westlands Water District; Metropolitan Water District; Glen Colusa Irrigation District; Northern California Water Association; Banta-Carbona Irrigation District; Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority; Association of California Water Agencies; Placer County Water Agency; Conaway Preservation Group; and Reclamation District 2035.

Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the FY 2010 Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. I would like to point out two provisions of the report that help to address the water supply crisis in California's San Joaquin Valley.

California is experiencing its third consecutive year of dry conditions. Our State's water supply outlook is further exacerbated by the ``regulatory drought'' that has resulted from agency regulatory actions. The Endangered Species Act in particular has proven to be a regulatory hammer, preventing water conveyance, transfers, and storage, even when water supplies have been plentiful. The Departments of the Interior and Commerce developed new Biological Opinions to protect Delta smelt and salmonid species, respectively. These decisions have resulted in significant restrictions on pumping water out of the Delta. These cuts were in addition to the many previous cuts that had already been imposed, including the Bay Delta Accord, the Central Valley Project Improvement Act and other actions.

The combination of the drought and the regulatory drought has resulted in dangerously low reservoirs and a 10 percent water allocation to farmers on California's westside. Over 400,000 acres of some of the world's most productive farmland have been fallowed, resulting in devastating job losses and high unemployment--as much as 40 percent in some cities on the westside.

It is crucial that the State of California and the Federal Government build new storage facilities and that we develop a better conveyance and water management system. In the meantime, it is important for the Departments to development programs that allow for flexibility as a means of achieving greater water supply. There are two provisions that Mr. Costa and I added to the House Energy and Water Appropriations bill that do just that.

First, the $40 million in CALFED funding provides the Bureau of Reclamation with the flexibility to use these funds to help fund crucial projects, such as the Two Gates Project and the Intertie Project, which will help relieve some of the pressure on the water supply in the San Joaquin Valley of California. More funding is needed for these two projects as well as others, and this report provides a good start on a downpayment toward these projects and others that will help the Bureau, the State Department of Water Resources and our water district to move and transfer water in California to the people and farms that need it the most.

Second, I support the clarification of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act of 1992, which clarifies that additional restrictions under the CVPIA on water transfers within certain areas of the Central Valley Project South of Delta are not required. Several years ago, the Bureau of Reclamation changed its interpretation of this statute, and began applying additional and cumbersome requirements to water transfers within the CVP unless they were within the same county. These restrictions on water transfers have prevented the transfer of water from one area to another and have created an impediment to efficient and practical water use. This amendment would clarify that water transfers between Friant and South of Delta agricultural service contractors can occur beyond county boundaries so that water districts within one county can transfer to districts outside the county.

Unfortunately, the House version of the Energy and Water Bill which provided for permanent clarification in the law was not included in this report. Instead, this language clarifying the water transfer provision is limited to a 2-year period. Senator Feinstein, Mr. Costa and I will be introducing a bill to make this transfer amendment permanent, and we look forward to bringing something to the floor in a short period of time.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 760 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 760.

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

House Resolution 760 provides for the consideration of House Resolution 324, the Santa Cruz Valley National Heritage Area Act. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill, except for clause 9 and clause 10 of rule XXI. Mr. Speaker, the rule also provides for the adoption of an amendment printed in the Rules Committee report to clarify that the bill does not in any way modify, alter or amend any border enforcement authority. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Mr. Speaker, the bill before us today, H.R. 324, designates the Santa Cruz Valley region of southern Arizona as a National Heritage Area. The Santa Cruz Valley is one of America's longest inhabited regions, with traces of human occupation extending back more than 12,000 years. The region was at the center of centuries of Native American cultural history. It also served as a corridor of Spanish exploration, colonization, missionary activity, as well as a frontier of Mexican and early American mining, ranching and agriculture.

The heritage area includes two national parks, two national historic trails, four State parks, six county parks, four major lakes, two designated scenic highways, and hundreds of miles of back-country trails and urban bikeways. It also includes 32 museums, 28 districts, 102 individual buildings listed on the National Register of Historic Places, as well as dozens of prehistoric and historic archaeological sites. A July 2005 study by the Center for Desert Archaeology, on which the bill is based, examined the many resources in the region. The National Park Service reviewed the study and found that the area meets the 10 criteria for proposed heritage areas.

Designating the Santa Cruz Valley as a heritage area allows the Park Service to support the State and local conservation efforts through Federal recognition, seed money and technical assistance. This simply means that local groups will have the resources they need to educate the public about the historic, cultural and natural value of the area.

I would like to commend my good friends, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) and the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Giffords), for bringing this legislation to the floor today so that we can ensure that America's history and natural wonderment is protected for future generations.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say in response and in my close that this bill, in fact, does not regulate zoning, as the gentlelady indicated. It does not have any effect on private property rights. In fact, I'm told that the entire State of Tennessee is part of a heritage area, and we would not think of the entire State of Tennessee as being affected with private property rights effects.

I would submit to you that we would know, just from that designation alone, that it is similar to this one that we are passing today, that the citizens of Tennessee are not affected in their private property rights with that heritage area designation. This bill is subject to appropriation, a $15 million maximum over 15 years, that would have to be voted on by the Appropriations Committee, then subject to appropriation in both the House and the Senate, subject to signature by the President.

Mr. Speaker, National Heritage Area designations have no regulatory consequences whatsoever. This bill specifically says that nothing in it diminishes the authority of the State to regulate fishing, hunting and the management of fish and wildlife. It includes extensive protections for private property owners and prohibits the use of Federal funds received under the act for land acquisition. It would in no way have any impact on border protection and any other law enforcement effort. Additionally, the language was self-executed in the rule which specifically states that nothing in the bill modifies, alters or amends any other border enforcement authority.

The gentlelady indicated that the bill failed. The bill failed under a two-thirds requirement. In fact, it got well over 240 votes to 140 votes in the negative. The bill got 100 votes more than a majority. I think this bill has tremendous support on this floor. In fact, it has tremendous support in the State of Arizona. It's a good measure, and I believe it will pass overwhelmingly when it comes back under a rule in this House.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that we support this bill. As I said earlier, this bill is not only important to our Nation's history, it is also important that America's most treasured resources are protected for future generations. It deserves the strong support of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and on the previous question.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

California community colleges recently announced that their enrollment for the 2008-2009 academic year increased at the system's 110 colleges in California by more than 135,000 students. Extremely high unemployment rates and restrictive admissions at the State's 4- year college systems have led to record numbers of students seeking degrees and certificates. This trend in increasing enrollments is being mirrored across our Nation during these tough economic times. While increased enrollments in higher education programs is to be applauded, there is also some concern about our State's ability to manage the impact of enrolling so many new students.

California's community colleges are dealing with nearly $1 billion in cuts as a result of the State's budget crisis this year. The shortfall in funding is placing stress on a system that is already stretched to capacity. H.R. 3221 will provide critical funding opportunities for those very community colleges to better serve their students, filling a funding gap most States are currently unable to meet.

Providing access to affordable higher education, especially at the community college level, is going to be essential to the recovery of congressional districts like mine that have extremely high unemployment rates. As I have said many times, this economic crisis has hit my district particularly hard. In July, the Bureau of Labor Statistics ranked the metropolitan area of Merced, California, with the fourth highest unemployment rate in the Nation at 17.6 percent. Two other metropolitan areas in my district, Modesto and Stockton, had unemployment rates of 16.3 and 16.0 respectively. All three areas are well over the national average unemployment rate of 9.7.

My amendment to H.R. 3221 simply provides community colleges serving in areas with high unemployment rates, higher than the national average like my district, have priority consideration when applying for this grant money. Investing in our community college system, especially the ones in high unemployment areas above the national average, is a critical part of any economic recovery plan; and it will allow our Nation to emerge from this downturn empowered with both the education and workforce skills needed to succeed in the 21st century.

I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this commonsense amendment.

I yield to the chairman.

Resuming, Mr. Chair, I would thank the chairman for his work on this bill. It's a fine piece of legislation, and I thank him for supporting my amendment.

Mr. Chairman, as Merced College, Modesto Junior College, and San Joaquin Delta College work hard to retain our workforce and educate the next generation of Americans, they're building a new foundation for hope and prosperity across the country. Investing in these schools and other institutions in these areas suffering from high unemployment rates is critical to the future success of our country. Again, I urge the adoption of my amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I rise today to recognize the passing of a great public servant, Sergeant Steve May of the Modesto Police Department who died from medical complications sustained from a 2002 accident that occurred while on duty. As a 23 year veteran of the Department, Sergeant May gave the ultimate sacrifice to our community.

Sergeant May was hired by the Modesto Police Department on February 6, 1979 and promoted to Corporal on January 28, 1992. He was then promoted to Sergeant on September 20, 1994. Sergeant May was a respected member of the Department who was a consummate professional who served his community with distinction. The accident that took Sergeant May from his family and our community occurred on July 29, 2002. Stanislaus County Sheriffs Deputies saw a black pickup that they believed to be suspicious, and after the vehicle attempted to evade officers, it rammed the deputies' patrol car and sped off. Sergeant May was on patrol and spotted the suspect's vehicle in downtown Modesto. He followed the vehicle and pursued it vigorously as the vehicle reached high rates of speed. The suspect ran two stop signs and was evading police. While running a stop sign, Sergeant May's patrol car was struck and pushed into a tree as the suspect's vehicle hit a house. Sergeant May was trapped inside his car and freed by firefighters. Suffering severe injuries, he was rushed to the hospital for treatment.

Sergeant May's family and our community are deeply saddened by this loss. He leaves behind his wife Diana and their two children--Corinne and Michael. I offer my prayers and condolences as they grieve.

Sergeant May was clearly a remarkable individual, public servant and law enforcement officer who remained dedicated to public safety and service throughout his impressive career. Through his dedicated work, he touched the lives of many and helped change the face of our community. Madam Speaker, it is with respect and gratitude that I ask my colleagues to join me in this posthumous recognition of Police Sergeant Steve May for his dedicated service.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the rule and the underlying bill.

Since being elected to Congress, I have been a member of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition, fighting to rein in reckless federal spending and put an end to our spiraling deficit.

I believe we must get back on the road to fiscal responsibility before we pass the nation's keys--and our debt--onto our children and grandchildren.

You can spin this debate any way you want to, but these are the facts.

President Bush inherited a $5.6 trillion surplus from President Clinton. This was squandered leaving a record deficit of $1.8 trillion for 2009 alone.

In just 8 years under President George W. Bush, our Nation's debt-- now more than $11.6 trillion--nearly doubled meaning more debt was accumulated over the past 8 years than under all of the Presidents from George Washington to Ronald Reagan combined.

We are in tough economic times and these extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures.

But plain and simple, we cannot afford to continue writing blank checks and borrowing money from countries such as China to pay our bills.

The PAYGO legislation before the House today reinstates one of the fiscal discipline tools that worked so well throughout the 1990s, and that led to the first budget surpluses since 1969.

I would point out that it was the first President Bush, working with a Democratic Congress, that instituted the first PAYGO rules.

The Clinton Administration and Democrats in Congress continued to work with Republicans on a bipartisan basis and turned decades of exploding budget deficits into 4 straight years of budget surpluses with record economic growth through the continued use of PAYGO.

Under President Clinton, for the first time in 30 years, America actually began to pay down its debt to foreign nations.

It was only when President George W. Bush and the Republican Congress abandoned any sense of fiscal discipline and allowed the proven PAYGO rules to expire in 2002, that government spending spun out of control and we rang up the largest deficits in our Nation's history.

My point is that when both the Administration and the Congress are willing to cooperate and adhere to fiscal discipline, PAYGO works.

Our side knows it. The other side of the aisle knows it. There is absolutely no denying PAYGO has worked in the past, and with a new Administration with a strong commitment to reversing the reckless fiscal policies of the past 8 years, we have that willingness to cooperate again today.

Blue Dogs know that we should not be in this situation today.

And as we all know, despite the Blue Dogs' best efforts--and the efforts of many other members on both sides of the aisle--cutting spending and making tough choices is never easy.

But enough is enough. It's time to stop blaming. It's time to stop pointing fingers. It's time we return to the fiscal accountability measures that I and my fellow Blue Dog colleagues have long advocated. And it's high time we start doing the right thing and start paying for what this country buys.

I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this common sense legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk made in order under the rule.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the amendment, an amendment that makes technical changes to allow water transfers in the Central Valley of California. This amendment takes a significant step towards addressing the impacts of the water supply crisis in the San Joaquin Valley.

This is a companion amendment to the one that Mr. Costa and I just introduced. Mr. Costa is my coauthor of this amendment. And together, these two amendments, in fact, do work to help us deal with the incredibly significant crisis that we have in the Central Valley. People are suffering greatly.

Currently, the Bureau of Reclamation restricts certain water transfers to intracounty transfers. The inability to transfer water beyond county lines has created incredible impediments to efficient and practical water use in our State. This amendment will allow those transfers to occur beyond these county lines so that water users who have enough supply in one county will be able to use it in another county to help their fellow farmers.

As Mr. Costa indicated, the amendments also direct the Secretary to implement recovery plans for the giant garter snake, an endangered species. The recovery plan will remove the bureaucratic red tape that prevents water projects from moving forward, while also protecting this important species.

We could not be here today working on these problems if it wasn't for the work of the chairman, Mr. Pastor, for Mr. Obey, for the cooperation that the entire Valley delegation has shown on this issue. Mr. Costa has indicated that because of the efforts that we have employed, we have provided our farmers with 500,000 acre-feet that they wouldn't have had otherwise under the current rules.

I want to specifically also indicate my sincere appreciation to Majority Leader Hoyer, who has been steadfast in his support of Mr. Costa and me trying to move this effort forward.

At this time, Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Salazar), who has also been a diligent supporter of our efforts and has been concerned, has actually visited our district, and I greatly appreciate his help and support.

Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 15 seconds to the chairman of the committee.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the chairman. As I said before, without his help, we could not have made these amendments in order and brought them to the floor. I think these amendments offer significant opportunities to the Central Valley. They are not a panacea. They are not going to cure every problem. We have more work to do.

But, in closing, I want to thank Secretary Salazar for taking time out, coming and visiting our valley, understanding the problem. We have a lot of work to do with the Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Reclamation, but with continued work and cooperation, I think we will make significant progress on the significant challenges that we face in the Central Valley.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I would ask for an ``aye'' vote of my colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 617 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida, my good friend, Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart. All time yielded for consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 617.

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

House Resolution 617 provides for consideration of H.R. 3081, the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs appropriations bill for the fiscal year 2010, under a structured rule.

The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations.

The rule waives all points of order against the bill and its consideration except those arising under clause 9 or clause 10 of rule XXI. The rule also waives points of order against provisions in the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI.

The bill makes in order the amendment printed in part A of the committee report and the amendments printed in part B of the committee report accompanying this resolution. Each amendment is debatable for 10 minutes. Finally, the rule also provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Mr. Speaker, the legislation that we will consider today, H.R. 3081, funds the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and related programs for fiscal year 2010.

This bipartisan bill reflects four key priorities: it protects our national security and combats terrorism; provides critical resources to meet global health and development challenges; ensures adequate oversight and accountability of our foreign assistance; and most importantly reforms and rebuilds America's diplomatic and development capacity.

In total, the bill provides $48.8 billion for fiscal year 2010. This is $3.2 billion less than the President's request, and $1.2 billion below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level including supplemental funding, a reasonable level of funding during these unprecedented fiscal times.

To protect national security and combat terrorism, the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill provides $2.2 billion to Israel, provides $2.7 billion in assistance for Afghanistan and $1.5 billion for Pakistan, and it provides $1.8 billion total in economic and security assistance for Egypt and Jordan, two of our key allies in the Middle East.

It also requires a report on the status and progress of diplomatic efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and it continues a reporting requirement on bilateral and multilateral sanctions against Iran. Further, it prevents the Export-Import Bank from providing financing to any energy producers or refiners that contribute to Iran's refined petroleum resources.

The bill also continues to take aim at the war on drugs by setting aside $319 million for Mexico and Central America for counternarcotics and law enforcement programs. It also includes $520 million for Colombia to fight narcotics and criminal gangs and to promote alternatives to drug production.

The State-Foreign Operations bill makes great strides in increasing global health by providing funding increases for international HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention, tuberculosis and malaria prevention, safe water and hygiene, and child and maternal health programs. These global health investments are critical, not just in saving lives overseas, but in protecting the health of countless Americans from disease.

The State-Foreign Operations bill also ensures that the United States continues to meet our moral and humanitarian obligations abroad. The bill provides funding for countries facing long-term development challenges, improving foreign agriculture and food security programs and helping countries struggling with food shortages, supporting basic education needs, helping displaced people around the world with food, water, shelter and other basic needs, and providing lifesaving assistance during worldwide natural disasters.

It also provides $450 million for the Peace Corps. This is $77 million above the President's request, which accelerates the President's commitment to expanding the Peace Corps, one of the most valuable programs our government can fund.

The lack of capacity in our civilian agencies has resulted in an increased reliance on American troops to carry out diplomatic missions. Besides placing an additional workload on our already overburdened troops and taking their focus away from their critical core missions, it is not in the best interests of our Nation to place diplomatic missions with our military.

Secretary Clinton, Secretary Gates, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have all stressed the need to increase the capacity of the State Department and USAID. As such, the bill provides resources to hire 1,000 new State Department personnel and 300 new USAID personnel so our country can take the necessary steps to begin rebuilding and restoring our diplomatic capabilities that we shortchanged and underappreciated for far too long.

Finally, the bill also improves and continues the Democrats' commitment to oversight and accountability. It provides nearly $150 million for activities of the Inspector General of the Department of State and USAID, as well as for the Special Inspectors General for both Iraq and Afghanistan reconstruction. In addition, this bill reverses years of accounting gimmickry through supplemental appropriations. Instead, it provides upfront, honest and transparent accounting of the true costs of meeting our critical foreign policy and national security initiatives.

Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill. In these tough economic times, it is also a fair bill. And, most importantly, this is a bipartisan bill that goes a long way towards restoring the strength and capabilities of the United States both here and abroad.

I commend the chairwoman, Mrs. Lowey, for her admirable efforts in ensuring our needs are met, both here and abroad, and to ensure that the national security and foreign policy commitments of the United States remain strong for many days to come.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the chairwoman of the committee, Mrs. Lowey.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

The gentleman is very sincere, and I appreciate his friendship and his words. I would just make one correction, and that is when he speaks of a 40 percent increase in this bill, what we are doing in this bill is increasing the transparency from a situation where all the dollars that we're spending here were in the past few years put into supplemental bills and pretended like they didn't really count. We're taking that supplemental spending and putting it in a transparent process that we can all appreciate.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith).

(Mr. SMITH of Washington asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Perriello).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne).

(Mr. PAYNE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Jackson).

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague from Florida for his words.

I concede that it is quite unfortunate that we stand here today, where we stand today, with regard to what has transpired over the past few weeks. It is not the way we want things to operate in the people's house, it's not the way my friends on the other side want to operate either.

A trust and agreement have been breached. Republicans have chosen not to be able to come to an agreement from our very first appropriation bill. There was a marker laid down with dilatory tactics which could have prevented us from tending to the people's business. While Democrats have continued choosing to try and legislate

and move forward and do what the voters and those who elected us to do, we have seen that there has been continuing obstructionist tactics.

The State-Foreign Ops appropriations bill gets to the heart of our national security interests, and it is one of the most important appropriations bills we consider each year. This bill has no place for obstructionism and partisan politics. That has to stop at the water's edge. We simply cannot risk the people's business coming to a screeching halt on such a critical national security measure.

Mr. Speaker, for the good of this institution, we must put aside our political differences and find the common ground. But until that time, we must also do what's necessary to continue doing the people's business and ensure that nothing stands in the way of providing for the safety and security of this great Nation.

Mr. Speaker, simply put, the State-Foreign Ops Appropriations bill funds the United States' diplomatic and development priorities. It is a cornerstone of our national security. It is critical that we send a strong, united message to the world about the United States' foreign policy commitments, about our priorities, about supporting this bill with overwhelming bipartisan support today.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this rule and on the previous question.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida is as follows:

Amendment to H. Res. 617 Offered by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida

Strike the resolved clause and all that follows and insert

the following:

Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this

resolution the Speaker shall, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 3081) making appropriations for the Department

of State, foreign operations, and related programs for the

fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other

purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed

with. All points of order against consideration of the bill

are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule

XXI. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall

not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the

chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on

Appropriations. After general debate the bill shall be

considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. Points

of order against provisions in the bill for failure to comply

with clause 2 of rule XXI are waived. During consideration of

the bill for amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the

Whole may accord priority in recognition on the basis of

whether the Member offering an amendment has caused it to be

printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated

for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. Amendments so

printed shall be considered as read. When the committee rises

and reports the bill hack to the House with a recommendation

that the bill do pass, the previous question shall he

considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to

final passage without intervening motion except one motion to

recommit with or without instructions.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the appeal of the ruling of the Chair be laid on the table.

Mr. Chair, I was unable to be present for several votes taken on the House floor earlier today as one of my children required immediate medical attention. As a result, I missed rollcall votes 480, 481, 482, and 483.

Had I been present, on rollcall vote 480 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote 481 I would have voted ``aye'', on rollcall vote 482 I would have voted ``aye''; and on rollcall vote 483 I would have voted ``aye.''