Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the courtesy of my friend, the gentleman from North Carolina, in permitting me to speak on this.

This piece of legislation is, sadly, a product of our time with a breakdown with our friends on the other side of the Capitol seemingly unable to proceed with regular order. We saw, sadly, this last week one person bring the transportation funding in this country to a halt, hold up unemployment benefits affecting literally hundreds of thousands of Americans in the most negative way, and that is passing for regular order over there. This bill is an opportunity for us to break that impasse.

It is significant in three ways: first of all, there were five Republicans who were willing to join with the majority to be able to move things forward. In some sense I think we ought to try and reward that sense of at least breaking the tyranny of the 60-vote majority requirement.

Second, the real job generator in this legislation is to be found in extending the transportation funding through the end of the year. Madam Speaker, the most effective job-generating legislation that we could put forward at a time of 40 percent unemployment in many metropolitan areas in the construction trade is to put Americans to work rebuilding and renewing America.

This legislation provides $77 billion towards that objective, fully funding the first 6 months of this year and extending it through the full 15-month cycle through the end of this calendar year. This will give certainty to the men and women who are dealing with our transportation systems, roads, bridges, transit, the whole range. It will save hundreds of thousands of jobs. It will incite economic activity. And maybe, just maybe, it will be a signal that we bring together a larger vision of rebuilding and renewing America and putting our fellow citizens back to work.

Would the gentleman yield?

What I said, and I want to be clear if I misrepresented it, is that the $77 billion in transportation funding will protect or create hundreds of thousands of jobs. That's what I said.

Will the gentleman yield?

The bill includes $77 billion of transportation funding. That was my reference. I think the experts agree that it would be hundreds of thousands of jobs, if not 1 million, saved or created with that transportation funding.

I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy.

Madam Speaker, today I am proud to introduce the Active Community Transportation Act, legislation that will provide concentrated, long term funding for communities to implement active transportation systems. Communities across the country are realizing the importance of encouraging active lifestyles, for the health of their citizens, the environment, and the economic strength of the community itself. As only 68 percent of Americans are licensed drivers, we should provide transportation options for those who don't have access to a car, generally the elderly and the young. Since half of the trips taken in the United States today are within a 20-minute bicycle ride, and a quarter of all trips are within a 20-minute walk, there are plenty of opportunities to incorporate walking and biking into Americans' daily lives.

Americans will walk and bike if these modes are made safe and convenient. However, our nation has failed to invest adequately in pedestrian and bicycle networks to make active transportation a viable choice for routine travel. Too often we take for granted the value of being able to bike and walk to work. It is time for the federal government to support infrastructure investments to make walking and biking safe and convenient for all Americans. Investing federal dollars to create walkable and bikeable communities is also a cost-effective way to create jobs and transportation choices. In my hometown of Portland, Oregon, our investment of $60 million created 274 miles of bike lanes, more than doubled the amount of people who commute by bike and provided between 850 and 1,150 jobs. This is just one of many stories I have heard about the impact that active transportation infrastructure has on people's health, their daily lives, and their pocketbooks.

The Active Community Transportation Act will help communities to implement comprehensive, strategic active transportation systems to make walking and bicycling safe, accessible and convenient for Americans, thereby increasing activity levels, lowering emissions and creating healthier, more vibrant communities.

Madam Speaker, I strongly support H. Res. 1097, Supporting the goals and ideals of National Engineers Week. Throughout my career at the local, State and Federal level, I have worked with engineers in Oregon and around the country on some of the world's biggest challenges. From addressing climate change to creating livable communities to helping deliver clean water to poor people around the world, engineers are often the first to roll up their sleeves and build solutions.

Over the past 10 years, I have seen a revolution within the engineering community, as both companies and individuals have been playing increasingly innovative roles. Organizations such as the American Council of Engineering Companies and the American Society of Civil Engineers have done a tremendous job of educating Members of Congress and the public about the infrastructure challenges this Nation faces as well as presenting commonsense solutions. I hope they will continue to work to leverage their colleagues and their communities to make even more progress on these fronts.

Engineers are leading the charge to renew and rebuild America in an economically and environmentally sustainable way, and I am pleased that we can honor them with this resolution highlighting National Engineers Week.

Mr. Speaker, in 2001, I voted against the USA PATRIOT Act because it granted law enforcement powers too broad, too removed from oversight, and at the expense of Americans' civil rights. I am disappointed that H.R. 3961 simply extends three of these provisions without any additional protections or oversight.

This is a missed opportunity to rebalance the need to pursue violent extremists with the need to respect our own citizens. Continuing to allow the government to obtain ``any tangible thing'' relevant to a terrorism investigation, including library records, is a disturbingly low bar. We can do better.

Committees in the House and Senate have offered drafts to improve the PATRIOT Act, and I strongly suggest that we move forward immediately to amend this law.

Madam Speaker, today I am pleased to introduce the Columbia River Restoration Act. The Columbia River is the largest river in the Pacific Northwest, supplying fishermen with jobs, serving as a recreational resource, and providing power to the Northwest. The river and its tributaries provide significant ecological and economic benefits to the Pacific Northwest and the entire country. Approximately 8 million people, including my constituents, inhabit the basin and depend on its resources for their health and survival. The 14 hydropower dams in the Columbia Basin provide over 75% of the power for the Northwest. Half of the 7.3 million acres of income producing farm and ranch land in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington are irrigated with the Columbia River; sales from these exceed $10 billion annually. Traditionally, the Columbia and its tributaries have been the largest salmon producing river system in the world, with annual returns peaking at up to 30 million fish. Recognizing the river's importance, the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, designated the Columbia River as an Estuary of National Significance in 1995 and a Large Aquatic Ecosystem in 2006.

Sadly, after years of treating this great river like a machine, we know that the Columbia River is plagued by habitat loss and degraded with dangerous PCBs and other chemical pollutants that are detrimental to fish and wildlife, including thirteen species of salmon and steelhead listed under the Endangered Species Act as threatened or endangered. Legacy contaminants such as DDT that were banned in the 1970s are still detected in juvenile Chinook salmon. According to EPA and tribal surveys, these contaminated fish are consumed in large quantities by tribal populations, putting them at risk. Other pesticides and contaminants, such as hormone disrupters from pharmaceutical and personal care products, have been found in the river and salmon and may impair salmon growth, health, and reproduction. These contaminants threaten not only the health of fish and wildlife, but the humans who depend on them.

I am proud that stakeholders in the Columbia Basin have come together in a partnership including states, tribal governments, public and private entities, and key federal partners to look with a hundred-year vision toward the future of the river, and to clean it up and make it a sustainable resource for generations. The Lower Columbia River Partnership (LCREP), for example, works to protect the estuary's ecosystem and its species, reduce pollution, and provide information about the river to the public. The partnership has restored 2,600 acres of habitat, opened 41.7 miles of stream habitat, completed toxic and conventional pollutant water quality monitoring, and engaged in innovative public involvement and restoration efforts in the region. LCREP has worked with the EPA to complete a Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan to guide recovery efforts in the lower basin. EPA has also worked with stakeholders to develop a Toxics Reduction Action Plan to reduce toxics throughout the Basin. While there have been numerous studies and projects for toxics reduction and habitat restoration on the river, it is time for a broader, more comprehensive, and better funded effort.

The bill I am introducing today would authorize the EPA to work with LCREP, the States of Oregon, Washington, and Idaho, Columbia Basin tribal governments, local governments, citizen groups, industry, and other Federal agencies to develop and implement a collaborative and comprehensive strategy to increase monitoring and reduce pollution in the basin. Through a new Columbia River Program Team located in EPA's Region 10 Oregon Operations Office, EPA will assist and support the implementation of the Toxics Action and Comprehensive Plans to reduce toxics, coordinate the major functions of the Federal government related to the plans, track progress toward meeting the goals and objectives of the plans, and share this information with the public. The legislation authorizes $40 million a year for this effort.

Restoration projects, toxic monitoring and other activities associated with the restoration effort will create between 700 and 900 jobs a year in the region for biologists, construction workers, and others. It will also enable the river to continue supporting jobs in the farming, hydropower, recreation and transportation industries.

I am pleased to be joined by some of my colleagues in Oregon and Washington in introducing this legislation. I look forward to working with stakeholders in the Pacific Northwest to move it quickly.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Portland Development Commission and the City of Portland, Oregon.

The Portland Development Commission, the city's urban renewal and economic development agency, has been able to exceed their established diversity goals in construction contracting for each of the last two years.

The PDC results are promising. In tough economic times and in a city with a small minority population PDC has exceeded goals for utilization of minority, women-owned and emerging small businesses by at least 15 percent annually, committing more than 35 percent of the dollars committed to state-certified firms.

Three years ago the PDC executive leadership and Board took bold steps by revising the decade-old policies governing business and workforce equity and adopting significant policy changes, which included: The adoption of the PDC Construction Wage Policy; revision of the PDC Business and Workforce Equity Policies; convening a community- based Workforce Diversity Advisory Committee, whose work resulted in PDC's new workforce diversity goals for all PDC construction projects and upcoming new contractor requirements; closer working relationships with the National Association of Minority Contractors-Oregon, the minority chambers of commerce and the Metropolitan Contracting Improvement Partnership, which focuses on building contractor capacity; a renewed partnership with organized labor that changed the state prevailing wage statutes on public-private partnerships; support for pre-apprenticeship programs such as Oregon Tradeswomen, Inc., the Evening Trades Apprenticeship Program, WorkSystems Inc., Irvington Covenant, Portland Youthbuilders and Construction Apprenticeship and Workforce Solutions; and providing technical assistance at no cost to all minority, women-owned and emerging small businesses bidding on or receiving PDC constructs.

Additionally, I'm pleased to report that the PDC has achieved these results in part due to close collaboration with organized labor. These jobs are family wage jobs that provide health insurance benefits.

The PDC is committed to making further progress. They've established a Workforce Diversity Strategy Committee that will function

as an oversight group and constantly evaluate results and set aggressive goals for diversity in PDC construction projects.

They've worked with minority business associations to put in place technical assistance agreements to focus on building capacity among historically underutilized businesses. PDC will implement a prompt payment requirement making sure that small contractors get paid quickly for their work, and just last month, PDC implemented a Small Contractor Loan Insurance program that gives small contractors access to working capital through a revolving loan. This will be a huge help to small firms that are struggling to attain credit with banks.

I commend PDC for what they've done, and what they have planned to make sure that public construction projects benefit the entire community and not just a select few.

Madam Speaker, the impacts of a changing climate are far-reaching, representing a threat not only to our natural ecosystems but to our national security as well. To help avoid the worst effects of carbon pollution, consumers must have a dependable supply of energy that is clean, renewable, and American. The right combination of tax incentives, regulatory changes, and investment in research and development for cleaner energy can expand the renewable energy market, put renewable energy on an equal footing with traditional fossil fuels, and create good domestic jobs in the clean energy industry.

During the economic crisis, renewable energy investors were unable to take advantage of tax credits offered by the federal government to spur renewable energy investment and production. For example, many industry analysts anticipated that in 2009 wind power development would drop by as much as 50% from 2008 levels, with equivalent job losses.

To avoid this outcome, the federal government shifted its tax credit contribution to these projects into cash grants for qualifying projects. This program was extremely successful: in 2009, as a result of these policies, the U.S. wind industry broke all previous records by installing nearly 10,000 megawatts of new generating capacity in 2009. Other renewable energy providers reported similar gains.

This grant program expires on December 31, 2010. The legislation that l am introducing today, the Renewable Energy Expansion Act, will ensure that these benefits are not lost and will ensure that consumers continue to gain better access to sources of clean, renewable energy.

The Renewable Energy Expansion Act allows taxpayers to elect to receive a tax credit that functions as a direct payment for investing in or producing renewable energy. The amount of the payment is tailored to equal the subsidy provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act's energy grant program. The legislation provides taxpayers the option to receive this new credit or to use the ARRA- created grant program, depending on which program best matches their needs. The legislation also ensures the smooth continuation of our underlying commitment to clean, renewable energy by carrying forward existing guidance and making technical changes to improve the underlying program. Finally, the legislation extends the credit until January 1, 2013.

The legislation makes several technical improvements to the underlying grant program. First, it eliminates an unintended consequence of the normalization rules that limited the ability of regulated utilities to develop renewable power facilities, even if the project otherwise met the prudency tests required by their public utilities commissions. I look forward to seeing added renewable power capacity in my state as a result.

Second, the legislation also improves the investment climate for renewable projects by streamlining access to these investments by

investment funds with tax-exempt investors. The proportional disallowance rules that are part of the legislation provide an important balance between protecting federal investments while opening up increased sources of development capital for renewable power developers. In that same vein, this legislation adopts changes that will increase the ability for real estate investment trusts to access these investments and I look forward to an expanding pool of investment capital for these projects in the future.

Finally, it is important to emphasize that the regulatory guidance that has been developed under the American Revitalization and Recovery Act's section 1603 grant program will be adopted by this legislation. It is important for the renewable energy industry--and for the investment community that supports it--to have certainty in the nature of the federal commitment. Having built a smoothly functioning guidance structure under the 1603 program, it provides no benefit to unsettle that understanding. It is my expectation that within 60 days of the enactment of this legislation the Treasury Department will issue guidance integrating the existing guidance into this new framework.

This legislation will help transition America to a clean energy economy. I look forward to working with my colleagues to realize that goal.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the courtesy of the Chair of the Ways and Means Committee in permitting me to speak on this and the rapid action that the committee has taken.

As we are overcome with grief and sympathy for the Haitian tragedy, I am reminded of the devastation I saw in Indonesia in the aftermath of the 2004 tsunami, where over 160,000 people were killed. That disaster inspired cooperation that was truly incredible even in the troubled island of Aceh that had been torn by war for years. That rebuilding effort sparked a terrific renaissance there.

This must signal a new day for the troubled but promising country of Haiti. Obviously, our immediate priority must be saving lives with food, water, shelter, medical supplies. I am pleased that groups in my community, like the acclaimed Mercy Corps, and the Northwest Medical Team, have leaped into action with resources from the Pacific Northwest to make a difference under these dire circumstances.

But we must recognize that decades of crushing poverty in Haiti have left ordinary people far too vulnerable to disaster. We have an obligation as a country, as we work with comprehensive aid efforts in the months and years ahead after the cameras are gone, to help the Haitians rebuild that nation. You know, there are problems with the nation of Haiti. But the world has not always, indeed has seldom been a good neighbor to that troubled country.

I am pleased that this legislation will make it easier for Americans, who face tough times themselves, to help give gifts of life and hope to our neighbors in that devastated island. The bill allows those who have donated to Haiti a chance to claim the donation in the tax return that they are preparing this spring rather than waiting a full year to claim the deduction. It is a simple gesture, but it will encourage giving in this challenging economy and helping do what is right for Haiti.

We commemorate extraordinary people and events on the floor of this House. Madam Speaker, there's no more extraordinary person that I have known than Dr. Dennis West. To everybody he was just ``Denny.'' No pretension, low-key, insightful.

Dennis West had a remarkable career. Over the last 40 years, the city of Portland has gained a reputation as a unique community: well- planned, thoughtfully governed, providing cutting-edge initiatives, and creating a model of livability. Our community has been characterized by citizen involvement and getting the most out of scarce resources. There have been many heroes, elected officials, civic leaders, and philanthropists who've helped create this unique and renowned city. No one has done more as a public servant than Dennis West.

He started his public service as an intern in the office of one of my predecessors, Congresswoman Edith Green. I first met Denny 40 years ago when he was a professor at Portland State University's School of Urban Studies, which he helped found and guide. Over the course of these four decades, Portland State, now Oregon's largest university, has emerged as one of the centers of urban scholarship and practical application, a laboratory of livability, a Mecca for planning and sustainability, and a critical driver of vitality for Portland.

Denny then played a critical role as chief of staff to Lloyd Anderson, Portland's Commissioner of Public Works, in an era where the city of Portland was taking bold action with the development of its downtown plan, its transit system, and the creation of a 38-acre waterfront park instead of a riverfront freeway. Denny helped play a role for his engineer boss, developing the vision and becoming an effective and respected political leader.

Then Denny was recruited by Multnomah County's new chairman, Don Clark, to establish the financial and budgetary systems to help modify personnel procedures and give coherence to what had been an old-style, typical county operation. During this time the county did not just modernize its administration and finance. It was involved in innovative justice, health, environmental, and transportation initiatives. Dennis West was the intellectual force helping guide and implement that vision.

Then Denny was a deputy director of the Port of Portland, a quiet agency with a powerful reach to deal with critical freight and transportation movements, the airport, the docks, and economic development. Again, he played a critical role in the development of the port capacity and the professionalism of its staff as a key element in the evolution of our metropolitan area.

The Oregon Health Science University has played a critical role in the last 25 years in research breakthroughs, medical innovation, economic development, and the delivery of high-quality health care. Denny West was a key administrator for research and economic development, helping create the academic, economic, and health care powerhouse that is one of our State's most important institutions and our city's largest employer.

Denny concluded his career serving 10 years as the director of the Portland Housing Authority, one of the Nation's premier public housing agencies, dealing with the problems of homelessness, special needs, low-income housing, and community revitalization. Under his leadership, Portland won national recognition awards for its innovation, cost- effective delivery, and perhaps the capstone of his career was the acclaimed Columbia Village, a spectacularly successful HOPE VI housing project making a deteriorated World War II-vintage housing project into a point of pride.

Denny West was an extraordinarily gifted administrator. In agency after agency so important to our community, he played a critical role, often as the go-to guy, the person who perhaps didn't have the title but made things work. With the Housing Authority of Portland, he was also the guy in charge, and the results are a testament to his extraordinary vision, administrative skill, sensitivity, and compassion.

Over these last 40 years the half-dozen agencies provided the infrastructure, the drive, the national recognition, all of which blended to make Portland a unique community. While Dennis West's name might not be well known, his fingerprints were on the critical developments in all of these organizations. Denny's career and achievements were made while being an extraordinary human being, a friend, and determined civic advocate. Even though his later years were marked by debilitating illness, he never lost his spark and drive. He willed himself to do things that younger, healthier people could not even imagine.

All sympathy goes out to Denny's wife, Sue, his life partner, who played such an extraordinary role, especially in his difficult later years, and to his circle of friends who provided unbelievable support, who revere his contributions and his memory. We all join in celebrating the life of this extraordinary man, Denny West.

Madam Speaker, as we enter the final days of 2009, I'm pleased to join my colleagues in Congress to pass a series of bills that will protect jobs, spur employment, and strengthen the ability of families to make it through economic hardship. Among these measures is H.R. 3326, the ``Fiscal Year 2010 Department of Defense Appropriations Act.'' Although I remain extremely frustrated by large portions of this bill that spend too much on the wrong things, I voted for it to provide resources for our troops, including hundreds of Oregonians stationed abroad, and for Oregon's economy.

The bill includes a number of hard-fought provisions that will make a difference for Oregon's economy. Universities like Portland State, Oregon, and Oregon State, local companies like Precision Castparts and our regional manufacturing initiative, the Manufacturing 21 Coalition, will see needed investment in programs to treat traumatic brain injury and develop a skilled workforce. These are the right investments-- targeted and timely. Spending billions of dollars on items that the Pentagon doesn't need and the President didn't want takes resources away from addressing the deficit, or from critical investments like our own people.

This bill is also a vehicle for making sure that millions of people can bridge this economic downturn. This legislation ensures that ordinary Americans do not lose unemployment benefits, that the unemployed have access to health care, that doctors in Oregon and around the country are not subjected to the egregious Medicare reimbursement cuts. These efforts demand support.

I look forward to swift enactment of these much-needed provisions. Grinding the legislative process to a halt only short-changes honest Americans. It is my sincere wish that in the New Year we renew a spirit of cooperation in the Senate and across the aisle.

Madam Speaker, I voted for legislation increasing the debt ceiling that will get us two months into the next year. We are dealing with the sad consequence of Americans living beyond their means for the last eight years. Even though I have argued and voted against these expansions, such as an unfunded and ill-advised war, an unfunded expansion of Medicare, and tax cuts that were not sustainable, I nonetheless feel an obligation to increase the debt ceiling so that the federal government can continue to operate.

This vote allows the government to continue to pay Social Security benefits, Medicaid and Medicare support, and the salaries of those serving in our uniformed services.

At a time of continued challenge for the economy, we have higher demands for countercyclical programs like food stamps, unemployment benefits and support for state and local infrastructure projects. Unemployment and the economy would be much worse had we not made the recovery investment early this year, but even that has not been sufficient for the economy to fully rebound. It would be the height of irresponsibility for Congress to shut down the government, especially while we face these incredible challenges.

In the long run, Congress will have to address comprehensively the level of government service, the nature of our revenue system, and how we extract more value from federal investments. It is in this context that we can constructively address our economic challenges, including our investments in job creation and reducing the federal deficit. This has been my top priority in this Congress as in previous sessions and should be at the top of the congressional agenda as we move forward. In the meantime, raising the debt ceiling is a critical factor to keep the economy recovering and the government functioning.

Mr. Speaker, this morning, listeners to NPR Marketplace heard the insurance industry dealing with the problems of global warming. Extreme weather events, actually, is why they were concerned. That term global warming actually means drought, flood, heat waves, intense storms, breaking seasonal patterns. In my region of the Pacific northwest, it means long, slow trends, like the increase in spring temperatures over the last 70 years, that lead to a significant decline in the snow pack that we rely upon for drinking water and hydropower.

As our congressional delegation heads to Copenhagen this week to join with parliamentarians from around the world, we will be able to be involved with a critical discussion on how we are going to meet those challenges. Our delegation is going to be somewhat unique because, while other groups of parliamentarians in other countries are of different parties and disagree on the best solution to deal with climate change and extreme weather events, ours, with the possible exception of Saudi Arabia, will be the only one where there are some people who actually question the science and the need for action.

This is unfortunate, because the facts are clear. Even regarding the recent dust up over stolen e-mails of some of the climate scientists, it doesn't change the scientific consensus that we are involved in a period of significant global warming and that human activity is the cause. Despite some dispute over whether this year is the fourth, fifth or sixth warmest in history, there is no question but that the current decade will be the hottest since we began recording temperatures.

Even with the consensus on science, there still is a great deal of real controversy in Copenhagen about how we are going to move forward.

I think it's very important for us to highlight the encouraging dynamic that is taking shape, because there is a consensus for taking action. The question is in implementation both of speed and scale.

There is good news that the United States is no longer missing in action. As the world's largest economy, the second largest emitter this year and still the leader in the history of the world in total emissions, it's important that the United States finally joins with the rest of the developed world to deal with this question. It is encouraging that the Obama administration and the new Congress has been acting from the very beginning of this session of Congress with an $80 billion investment in clean energy.

After years of delay, the Obama administration acted on what we passed in the last Congress to increase the long overdue improvement in automobile fuel efficiency. The EPA has finally announced that it is going to follow the law dealing with carbon pollution, as the Bush administration was directed by the Supreme Court but refused to do.

We have had the historic passage of the Waxman-Markey legislation, for the first time in history putting Congress on record supporting comprehension climate legislation. The administration will use the House bill as the basis for targeted reductions in greenhouse gases. We have emerging in the Senate a bipartisan framework with Senator Kerry, Senator Lieberman and Senator Graham providing the leadership in that area.

It's exciting to see the pieces come together, Mr. Speaker. It is frustrating to see it slow, and time is of the essence, but finally it's clear that action is in everybody's interest. The United States can no longer afford to waste more energy than anybody in the world. It's exciting to see the European Union, China and India all acting, at least in their own way, moving in this direction. The dominos are falling for new, clean, energy economies, managing forests to protect the planet and new sustainable agriculture.

All this will happen. The question is when. I am encouraged that in Copenhagen there is a process that the United States can help move us forward.

Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to support HR. 1147, the ``Local Community Radio Act,'' a bipartisan measure to revitalize the local, public interest radio programming that is so important to communities nationwide.

The broadcast spectrum, after all, belongs first and foremost to the American people. I continue to believe that public access to these resources and quality, local programming should be readily available to all. In the 106th Congress, we established the bipartisan Public Broadcasting Caucus to highlight the unique and invaluable contributions of public radio and television stations and programs. Public Broadcasters provide valuable commercial-free educational, informational, and cultural programming for communities all across the country, as well as emergency alerts.

Complementing these efforts are our country's local, low-power FM radio stations. These stations, whose signals only operate in a three- to-five mile radius, serve as vibrant community resources. These small operators include all manner of local politicians, clergy, civil rights, and community leaders. In times of crisis, like public radio stations, they may also provide essential emergency services. I am pleased Congress is acting to strengthen the ability of these stations to operate responsibly.

This bill is the result of years of negotiations between commercial broadcasters, public broadcasters, and Congress. I appreciate the efforts of all, including National Public Radio (NPR) and the National Association of Broadcasters, NAB, to work together to craft this product. The result is a bill that balances the needs of incumbent stations to protect their signals with an opening up of the airwaves to smaller, more diverse operators.

I look forward to moving this compromise forward, and to strengthened programming in our communities.

I thank the gentleman from Ohio for permitting me to speak on this.

I have great respect for the Chair and ranking member, and I deeply share their concern about a nuclear-armed Iran. It is something that I think we are all deeply opposed to, we're deeply concerned about, in terms of the potential instability in that delicate region and frankly around the world. But I have a deep concern that the approach that is being offered here is not calculated to reach that objective.

First and foremost, there is correspondence, a letter from the Deputy Secretary of State, Mr. Steinberg, talking about the problems of sanctions legislation on the Senate side, that talks about how we are entering a critical period of intense diplomacy to impose significant international pressure on Iran.

It is not at all clear, Mr. Speaker, that moving forward right now with new sanctions on companies of other countries that are involved with the petroleum activities is actually going to be helpful at a time when the administration is ramping up its international efforts to deal with Iran; I think efforts that we all support and feel need to be as productive as possible.

I think there is also a very real question about whether the focus of this legislation is going to have its intended

use, because there is nobody in the Iranian Government, in the Revolutionary Guard, in the inner circle of either the President or the Supreme Ruler that's not going to get their gasoline. The extent to which it is successful, and that remains questionable, it's going to be impactful on the people of Iran, common people who in the main are amongst the few Middle Eastern countries where they still have a favorable view of the United States. Sanctioning those people, not the leadership is not helpful.

I found it interesting on the front page of today's Washington Post, they discuss the evidence of Iran's nuclear-armed being expedited, despite sanctions. In fact, there is evidence in this article that it is the sanctions themselves that have spurred the indigenous development of that capacity in Iran. One of them said, ``thank God for the sanctions'' against us.

We need to be very careful about the application of sanctions and how they're going to be worked. I think we have a shortsighted view for dual use technology and dealing with export controls that have actually developed other countries' capacity, including those that aren't friendly to us, along with all companies from other competitor nations around the world. I think we need to be very careful here.

Last but by no means least, Mr. Speaker, I am concerned that the United States is really the only major country in the world that doesn't have a thoughtful sanctions policy--when to impose them, how to impose them, and, most important, when to take them off. I would respectfully suggest that this is not the right time. This is an instrument that's not likely to be successful, and it may complicate our efforts against Iran. While I agree with the gentleman's objective, I don't agree with the legislation and urge its rejection.

The Deputy Secretary of State,

Washington, DC, December 11, 2009.

Hon. John F. Kerry,

Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate.

Dear Mr. Chairman: I wanted to follow up on our

conversations regarding Iran, and possible sanctions

legislation to be taken up by the Senate (S. 2799). We share

Congress's concerns on Iran and its nuclear program, and the

need to take decisive action. One of the top national

security priorities for the Obama Administration is to deny

Iran a nuclear weapons capability. As we discussed, we are

pursuing this objective through a dual track strategy of

engagement and pressure; and we are engaged in intensive

multilateral efforts to develop pressure track measures now.

It is in the spirit of these shared objectives that I write

to express my concern about the timing and content of this

legislation.

As I testified before the Congress in October, it is our

hope that any legislative initiative would preserve and

maximize the President's flexibility, secure greater

cooperation from our partners in taking effective action, and

ultimately facilitate a change in Iranian policies. However,

we are entering a critical period of intense diplomacy to

impose significant international pressure on Iran. This

requires that we keep the focus on Iran. At this juncture, I

am concerned that this legislation, in its current form,

might weaken rather than strengthen international unity and

support for our efforts. In addition to the timing, we have

serious substantive concerns, including the lack of

flexibility, inefficient monetary thresholds and penalty

levels, and blacklisting that could cause unintended foreign

policy consequences.

I have asked Department staff to prepare for and discuss

with your staff revisions that could address these concerns

on timing and content. I am hopeful that we can work together

to achieve our common goals.

I hope that consideration of this bill could be delayed to

the new year so as not to undermine the Administration's

diplomacy at this critical juncture. I look forward to

working together to achieve our common goals, and I will stay

in close contact with you as our diplomatic efforts proceed.

Sincerely,

James B. Steinberg.

Madam Speaker, this morning's New York Times had a column by John Harwood, entitled: Obama's Potential Quandary--Creating Jobs or Reducing the Deficit, which analyzed what is potentially a dilemma, but it doesn't have to be that way.NOTICE

If the 111th Congress, 1st Session, adjourns sine die on or before December 23, 2009, a final issue of the Congressional Record for the 111th Congress, 1st Session, will be published on Thursday, December 31, 2009, to permit Members to insert statements. All material for insertion must be signed by the Member and delivered to the respective offices of the Official Reporters of Debates (Room HT-59 or S-123 of the Capitol), Monday through Friday, between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. through Wednesday, December 30. The final issue will be dated Thursday, December 31, 2009, and will be delivered on Monday, January 4, 2010. None of the material printed in the final issue of the Congressional Record may contain subject matter, or relate to any event, that occurred after the sine die date. Senators' statements should also be formatted according to the instructions at http://webster/secretary/cong_record.pdf, and submitted electronically, either on a disk to accompany the signed statement, or by e-mail to the Official Reporters of Debates at ``[email protected]''. Members of the House of Representatives' statements may also be submitted electronically by e-mail, to accompany the signed statement, and formatted according to the instructions for the Extensions of Remarks template at http://clerk.house.gov/forms. The Official Reporters will transmit to GPO the template formatted electronic file only after receipt of, and authentication with, the hard copy, and signed manuscript. Deliver statements to the Official Reporters in Room HT-59. Members of Congress desiring to purchase reprints of material submitted for inclusion in the Congressional Record may do so by contacting the Office of Congressional Publishing Services, at the Government Printing Office, on 512-0224, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. daily. By order of the Joint Committee on Printing. CHARLES E. SCHUMER, Chairman.

The rebuilding and renewing of America should be one issue that actually brings us together, where there are solutions that are clear and complementary in terms of creating jobs, protecting the environment and reducing the budget deficit.

We have serious needs all across America for water and transportation investments in every single community. There are estimates that up to 20 million Americans every year are sick needlessly from waterborne illness because of failures in water systems. There are millions of hours and billions of dollars that are wasted as Americans and American businesses are stuck in traffic. There are tens of thousands of unsafe bridges. There are transit systems in desperate need of repair and revitalization.

What America needs, first and foremost, is a vision of investing in renewing and rebuilding America in this century. The plans for infrastructure for this century are available. As someone who has labored in this field for years, working around the country, I know that the vision is ready to be incorporated into the reauthorization of the Surface Transportation Act or in new water trust fund legislation, and it can be done not in years or in months but in a matter of weeks. This work is ready.

Next, we must commit to extracting more value out of existing and future investments. Luckily, here, too, reform is in the works. I have been deeply impressed with the work of Secretary Ray LaHood of Transportation, of Housing Secretary Shaun Donovan and of EPA administrator Lisa Jackson, where the Federal Government is in the process of creating a new partnership with our communities, businesses and families in terms of how the Federal Government does business and invests that money.

But even with bold vision and with more value being extracted, we actually are going to need to invest more money. The Chinese, for instance, are investing about nine times as much as the United States in their infrastructure needs. We are losing the race for global competitiveness while we see conditions deteriorating at home. The Society of Civil Engineers has graded American infrastructure at a D, and suggests that it requires at least $2.2 trillion in the next 5 years to bring things up to standard.

If we act now, there are, in fact, areas of broad support for more investment--from business, local government and the American people--if this increased money goes to rebuild and renew our country.

There is a danger that our current direction will not be as effective as it could be. I am heartened that there appears to be a consensus that we will be spending, perhaps, $50 billion or more in new infrastructure investment, but if this money is simply going to flow through existing channels with an imperative that it be spent as quickly as possible, it is not going to have as much long-term impact as it would if we were to do it right.

Doing it right means a reauthorization of the 6-year Transportation bill with a national purpose and reform specified. It means the creation of a water trust fund to give money where it is needed. It is the reenactment of the Superfund tax so that polluters actually pay to clean up dangerous areas that are found in every single State. It would create tens of thousands of jobs while it would reduce environmental threats.

There are many contentious, complex and partisan issues that, understandably, divide Congress and the American people, but renewing and rebuilding America is not one of them. Done right, it will be deficit-neutral with a bold vision to revitalize the economy while strengthening our communities and protecting the planet. I hope we all start the new year with a commitment to invest in livable communities where our families are safer, healthier and more economically secure.