Floor Statements

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, it is, indeed, a privilege to submit to the House for its consideration H.R. 3183, the Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2010. The Appropriations Committee approved this bill unanimously by a voice vote on July 8. This is a good bill that merits the support of the entire House.

I thank all of the members of the Energy and Water Development Subcommittee for their help in bringing this bill to the floor today. This has been a challenging year with our extremely compressed schedule, and I appreciate our Members' attention and participation in this accelerated process.

I particularly want to thank the ranking member--my dear friend, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen)--for his extraordinary cooperation, insight and friendship.

Mr. Chairman, this is a bipartisan bill that represents the fair and balanced treatment of competing priorities. This is the way our constituents expect their Representatives to work together, and I am proud of this bipartisan process.

I also would like to thank the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Mr. Obey, and the ranking member, Mr. Lewis, for their support.

I was given this assignment 3 weeks ago, and without the great work of the subcommittee staff, we would not be here today. So, today, this afternoon, I want to thank the staff of the subcommittee: the Clerk, Taunja Berquam; Robert Sherman; Joseph Levin; James Windle; Casey Pearce; Rob Blair; and Kevin Jones. They worked many hours and through the weekends to get this bill today on the floor.

I would also like to thank Richard Patrick, from my office, and Ms. Nancy Fox and Ms. Katie Hazlett of Mr. Frelinghuysen's office.

I want to acknowledge our agency detailee, Lauren Minto from the Corps of Engineers, for her assistance, talent and knowledge in putting this bill and report together.

These people have formed a great team, and without their work, we would not be here today. I have to thank them again because their support has been invaluable.

Mr. Chairman, this bill provides funding to address critical issues that affect our Nation's security and prosperity--from Addressing high gas prices, our energy crisis and climate change to advancing science and innovation, to preventing nuclear proliferation, to encouraging effective project management, and to investing in our Nation's flood control and water infrastructure projects.

The total funding for energy and water development in fiscal year 2010 is $33.3 billion. This funding amount is a decrease of $1.1 billion from the budget request, and it is roughly equal to the current fiscal year. While the bill is below the budget request, the primary reason for this difference is a Congressional Budget Office score of $1.5 billion for the Department of Energy's budget request for the Innovative Loan Guarantee Program. The bill provides $406 million above the budget request in program scope.

This bill made a concerted effort to cut lower priority programs and to apply the cuts to higher priority efforts. These spending cuts include 18 activities, totaling $2.5 billion below the President's request.

Given the wide-ranging scope of issues in this legislation that are critical to our Nation's well-being, I set forth the following priorities to ensure that our tax dollars will be spent wisely and effectively. These priorities include:

addressing high gas prices, reducing our dependence on foreign oil, and confronting the energy crisis through increased investment in alternative, domestic transportation fuels and new vehicle technologies;

addressing climate change with sound investments in carbon sequestration, low-emission energy technologies, and science research;

modernizing the energy sector through the research and development

of renewable energy sources, efficient energy technologies, and novel electric grid technologies;

confronting the terrorist nuclear threat by increasing the protection of nuclear materials and accelerating the deployment of systems to detect such materials at border crossing points and ports;

improving the security of our weapons by upgrading the protection of our facilities as well as improving the training and equipment of the Protective Force;

insisting that the President submit to Congress a nuclear weapons strategy and a nuclear complex transformation plan before Congress will consider funding a new nuclear warhead;

investing in dam safety, flood protection, hydropower modernization and infrastructure that is essential to waterborne commerce on our coasts, rivers and inland lakes, which is essential to the safety of our citizens and our economy; and

saving taxpayer dollars by improving management of agency programs, especially at the Department of Energy.

This bill provides adequate funds to meet the priority needs of the House. It funds the most worthwhile projects and programs near requested levels, and it reduces some programs that are less valuable or less urgent. I urge my colleagues of the House to support it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

As we talked earlier this morning, we said that we understand the importance of Hanford as well as all the other sites, and I told you of the possibility that some of us would need to go see the site and look at it firsthand. So you well know that I recognize the importance of cleaning up Hanford and also all of the EM sites. I will work with you on this issue and review the needs of Hanford's Richland Operations office, including the River Corridor Closure project, as we make our way through conference and write a final bill.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to another gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee).

I can assure the gentleman from Washington that the committee is aware of this sustainable domestic energy source and its potential. We will continue to work with the gentleman from Washington through conference to highlight renewable marine and hydrokinetic energy development as a priority for the agency.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia, my good friend, Bobby Scott.

I thank the gentleman for bringing this important issue to us.

You have made a case that the administration request for $22 million for the continuous electron beam accelerator facility is merited.

You have my personal commitment to work with you and Mr. Wittman going forward to see that this project receives the funding it needs and deserves.

First of all, I thank the gentleman for yielding time and congratulate him on his amendments.

To you and Mrs. Schmidt, I appreciate the comments made by all my colleagues. I will be happy to work with everyone to ensure the program is run efficiently and effectively. The management and effectiveness of this program is a priority of the subcommittee. We must ensure that it is fair to all applicants. And, yes, I will work with my colleagues.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel).

First of all, thank you for the compliment, and I will tell you that I have Eliot Engel and Brad Sherman, as well as you, Madam Chairman and Mr. Israel, who have brought this matter to my attention, and I want to thank you for raising it on the floor.

I, too, am a supporter of the U.S.-Israel Energy Cooperation. This bill, as you have told us, doubles the account which funds such programs, and I look forward to working to ensure that the U.S.-Israel Energy Cooperation continues to receive strong support in order to accelerate the development of alternative energy programs.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith) for the purpose of a colloquy.

I would like to thank the gentleman from Washington for drawing the subcommittee's attention to this very serious issue. He has been a dedicated advocate for the people of the Ninth District of Washington and the surrounding areas. We will work with the gentleman to ensure that the Seattle district of the Corps is responsive to the needs of the cities and people along the lower Green and Puyallup Rivers and that adequate resources are available to repair the Howard Hanson Dam. So we look forward to working with you.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Altmire) for the purpose of a colloquy.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I agree, and the committee was pleased to recommend that the Nuclear Power 2010 program receives $71 million in this legislation, an increase of $51 million above the President's request.

I want to thank the gentleman for pointing out the vital role this program plays in his district. I am glad that NP2010 funding is included in the bill for all participants who are moving forward with licensing and building to bring the next generation of nuclear plants to the market.

Mr. Chairman, I would yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan).

First of all, I want to thank you for raising this important issue, and you have my personal commitment to work with you as we go forward to find a solution that best serves the national security.

We're well aware of the capabilities and the value of Los Alamos National Laboratories.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado, my good friend, Mr. Polis.

First of all, you are both correct in that when the Secretary appeared before the subcommittee, this is and was presented as a work in progress. And knowing that we are going to proceed forward with the administration and with the Secretary, we thought that it was in the best interest to fund one hub. And as the Secretary and the administration goes forward in developing these hubs, we look forward to working with you, Mr. Polis.

I yield another minute to Mr. Polis.

So we look forward to working with you and Mr. Carnahan because it's an idea that obviously will expand, will grow, and we

want to make sure that the committee, the subcommittee has the opportunity to work with the Secretary to see its development. So we look forward to working with you.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New York, a member of the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee, Mr. Israel.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson).

We don't have any other speakers. So I reserve my time.

Mr. Chairman, as you heard, this is a bipartisan bill. We've tried to balance the different priorities and needs of this country.

Again, I want to thank my ranking member for his cooperation, his support, and his insight in preparing this bill. It is a good bill, and we would not have been able to do it without the staff that was involved in bringing this bill to us.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.

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

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

This amendment provides funding for several important programs within the bill. On behalf of Messrs. Arcuri, Michaud, Hodes, Welch and Ms. Pingree, $2.5 million for the Northern Border Regional Commission to address economic challenges in border counties from Maine to New York.

On behalf of Mr. Klein of Florida, $1.8 million for the Corps of Engineers to help address the chronic backlog of regulatory permit applications.

And on behalf of Mr. Israel, Mr. Larson of Connecticut, Mr. Dent, Mr. Massa, Mr. Inglis, $45 million for energy efficiency, renewable energy.

On behalf of Mr. Cuellar of Texas, the amendment prohibits funds in this bill from being used to purchase lightbulbs unless they the energy star or Federal energy management program designation.

Also, this manager's amendment has an amendment for Mr. Kissell which does not create any new programs or it follows the current language, and the amendment prohibits funds in the bill from being used to purchase passenger vehicles unless they're purchased from Ford, GM or Chrysler.

The amendment decreases funding for Corps of Engineers' programs and expenses by $10.8 million; the Department of Energy departmental administration by $30 million; the office of electricity by $15 million; and other defense activities by $.25 million.

I reserve my time, Mr. Chairman.

First of all, I apologize to the ranking member in

that it was my understanding that the manager's amendment had been shown to him and had sought his approval, but if they had not, my deepest apologies because I think it's important that this bill, along with the manager's amendment, continue to be bipartisan.

I yield 30 seconds to Mr. Massa.

Mr. Chairman, this is a good amendment and I would ask the House Members to support it. I yield back the balance of my time.

I just want to inform the gentleman that we support his amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, even though I do support the amendment.

As I told you, I support this amendment since it simply adds money to the Corps construction account. However, I wish to point out that additional funds for Chickamauga Lock cannot be made available until the solvency of the Inland Waterway Trust Fund is addressed.

The project requires 50 percent of its funding from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund, and that trust fund isn't solvent. Before any new multiyear obligations are initiated, the revenue stream or alternative funding solutions for these projects must be addressed.

We have been working with the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for a comprehensive solution to the issue for some time. I have sympathy for the project. I think I know more about this project because of Mr. Davis and Mr. Wamp. I congratulate both of them for bringing the amendment.

Again, the issue at hand is a lot larger than the $180 million project. I support the project.

I will yield to my ranking member.

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

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, even though I am not opposed to the amendment.

I'm very happy to tell the author of the amendment that this will be a bipartisan amendment, since we are accepting his amendment.

We understand how important hydropower is, and we need improvements at existing facilities so we can provide the reliable, efficient domestic emissions-free source of renewable energy. Investment in modern turbines has been a benefit of improving existing water quality and fish passage issues, in addition to increasing generation efficiency and capability.

As energy security and issues of global climate change are becoming increasingly important to the decisionmaking regarding infrastructure investment, improving existing hydropower facilities, we must add some priority.

I urge the Bureau of Reclamation to work with local groups and public power entities as it looks to use its water resources most efficiently. I also urge the Bureau of Reclamation to continue to focus on its core water and related resource projects and not sacrifice that valuable work while engaging in this effort. I support the amendment.

I will yield time to the ranking member, Mr. Frelinghuysen.

We support the amendment, and yield back the balance of our time.

I would just like to inform the gentleman that we are supportive of his amendment.

I just want to indicate to my friend, Dennis Cardoza, that we will be supportive of his amendment.

First of all, I would like to thank the gentleman for yielding, and I would also like to thank him for bringing this amendment.

This amendment funds research and development for one of the small handful of technologies that may reduce the Nation's dependence on foreign oil. This increase in funding is consistent with the committee's efforts in this bill to address rising gasoline prices.

So I tell my dear friend from Oklahoma that we rise in support of his amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition, though I am not in opposition and staying with the flow.

First of all, to the manager's amendment and the issue about the purchasing of cars, I have been told that the current GSA policy that has jurisdiction in the purchasing of cars over the agencies in which this committee has jurisdiction thereof, that we have just restated that policy. It was not intended to be an earmark. It was not intended to do anything different. It is not authorizing on an appropriation bill. It's a restatement of GSA policy. If there is a reason to be against it, it would be because it was redundant. But we did not create any new legislation. We are just restating GSA policy as it concerns purchase of cars under the agencies.

I rise in support of this amendment from the gentlelady from Michigan. In this bill the committee supports strong

investment in renewable energy technologies, such as solar, wind and geothermal power. Water power is an important piece of this renewable portfolio. Refining conventional hydropower technologies can increase the efficiency of our Nation's hydropower dams and cost effectively increase clean power generation without the need for new dams. Research and development of technologies that use waves, tides and streams for power can deliver a new source of virtually untapped renewable energy. So we continue to be with the flow and support the young lady's amendment.

I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, may I inquire how much time I have.

Mr. Chairman, first of all, I'd like to thank the gentleman from New Mexico for yielding to me and to inform him that we will support the amendment as offered. However, I have some concerns about increasing the percentage of laboratory directed research at this time. I hope that this increase in lab directed research and development will, in this tight budget environment, produce a net increase in the national security output of the laboratories. I look forward to working with you to ensure this increase is tightly mission- oriented and will be compatible with meeting other challenges of the laboratories. With that, I will inform you that we are supporting this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition, even though I'm not opposed to the amendment.

I support Mr. Cao's amendment because the provision the gentleman is amending requires the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to provide a report on improving its licensing procedure by reducing the time for submission of the report to Congress from 90 days to 60 days. This should improve the NRC's responsiveness to Congress and provide more timely information to the Congress on measures that can be taken to improve the regulatory process.

I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

We are in support of the amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I rise in opposition to the amendment of the gentlelady from Tennessee.

The amendment proposes a 5 percent reduction to every account in this bill. If you exclude the recovery money, as I mentioned in my opening statement, this bill that is before you is $1 billion below the President's request and is slightly above last year's 2009 funding.

This Energy and Water appropriations bill is a key part of ongoing efforts to meet the infrastructure needs of the country; and after years of neglect, addressing the inadequacies of our national energy policies, we are trying to do it with this bill.

The Energy and Water bill is only slightly above last year's enacted level and is $1.1 billion below the budget request, as I mentioned. Balancing priorities with this allocation require a concerted bipartisan effort. We ended up with a bill that meets the priorities and supports fiscal responsibility.

A reduction of 5 percent would cut $1.7 billion from the bill and undercut a number of priorities at a time when we can ill afford to reduce them further.

I do not support the amendment and urge Members to vote ``no.''

I will yield to the ranking member.

I would request that Members vote against this amendment, and I yield back my time.

I thank the gentleman for yielding and to inform him and our Members that the committee supports the construction of this museum and is against the amendment, so we are urging Members to vote ``no'' on the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I object to the modification.

This amendment was taken up by the Rules Committee, and I don't have the authority to change or to modify it. So, rather than get into the debate, I thought it was in proper form to object.

Mr. Chairman, I will inform our colleagues that the committee is opposed to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I object.

I thank the gentleman for yielding. I will just inform Mr. Rothman that we are against the amendment and support the gentleman's earmark.

Mr. Chairman, I object.

Mr. Chairman, I object.

I claim the time in opposition.

Before I get into the substance of Fort Mason Center, what I would like to announce is there was concern expressed regarding the manager's amendment, especially as it related to the vehicle purchase as outlined in that manager's amendment. I am committing to work with all Members to address that their concerns will be addressed in conference.

The gentleman from Arizona is right: we have a congressionally directed mark in this bill that will assist the Fort Mason Center to continue its best practices in its development. He is correct: since this base was basically closed down, this area has been developing to assist the people of San Francisco and the surrounding areas as a center for culture, education and recreation. It is located on the northwest side of San Francisco and includes a number of buildings and piers, and it leases space to 24 nonprofit organizations.

The gentleman from Arizona is correct: this is an earmark that continues the development of the center. The attempt of this earmark is to specifically incorporate sustainable design and construction strategies consistent with LEED silver certification in the likelihood it will be better than that certification.

The continued development of the center will now include more and extensive use of solar and wind energy and will serve as a model for sustainable practices within a historically sensitive context.

And so with that, I would request a ``no'' to the amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

This earmark, its sponsor is the Congresswoman from San Francisco.

Well, I would tell my dear friend from Arizona, and he is a dear friend, that this year we, our colleagues, at least those from Arizona, that requested congressional direct earmarks in this bill are part of that 24 percent and are very happy to belong to it. So, we will continue to work with Mr. Flake and other Members of Congress.

I yield back my time.

Mr. Chairman, for the fifth time I will object.

I rise just to inform the gentlelady that the committee is opposed to the amendment and supports her congressional- directed earmark.

I rise in opposition to the amendment and claim the time in opposition.

Actually, this pier is somewhere. It's in San Francisco. Pier 36.

I bring to the gentleman that this removal--in the 2007 WRDA bill, the funds were authorized so that the Corps would begin removing the deteriorated Pier 36, which is located in the San Francisco waterfront.

This pier was built in 1908-1909, and it was built of reinforced concrete for the use as a freight ferry facility. The pier was originally 721 feet long and 201 feet wide. The outer wood portions of the pier, after 70 years of being in the elements, have deteriorated.

Recently, further deterioration has caused the pier to be closed and it has been secured with fencing to prevent entry. The deteriorating sections of decking and wooden support pieces continue to rot, break, and float into the bay, which represents a potential hazard to navigation in the adjacent Federal Channel.

In addition, Pier 36 was constructed using creosote-soaked pilings, which contain a class of chemical compounds known to affect the viability of fish spawning. Use of creosote-treated wood is now prohibited in new construction in the San Francisco Bay.

So, the removal of Pier 36, which was authorized in the WRDA bill 2007, is needed to ensure that the continued deterioration, the piles that would fall into the water, would not cause a threat to navigation and the chemicals that they were treated with would be eliminated as an environmental hazard.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, the committee finds merit in this authorized Pier 36 removal and we ask our colleagues to object to and refuse the amendment as offered.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

First of all, I want to state for the record that I have never met personally with the company listed as the recipient for this earmark. It has spurred my interest, the technology and the use of technology, that I brought this request to the subcommittee. And while this is a for-profit company which is listed as a recipient, under the new rules instituted in this Congress this year, this company or any company will have to compete for the contract, and I know of at least three U.S. companies with products suitable for such competition and a great number of foreign companies that could compete.

This request has been vetted by the Department of Homeland Security and the Border Patrol. The Border Patrol's special response teams and technical teams have stated requirements for this technology which allows them to recharge their power-intensive equipment while deployed in the field on extended missions. These teams man-pack over 100 pounds of equipment into the field on their missions, so every pound saved is significant.

This technology, which is basically photovoltaic film, lightweight, portable, allows them to leave behind at the camp previously used car battery-type systems in favor of this lightweight, portable, photovoltaic film. And this allows the person using it to be able to extend the mission for a longer period of time and to be able to recharge their battery so that they can use their communication system, can use sensors, and will allow the Border Patrol to be more effective in its law enforcement efforts. This type of technology is currently used by the military, especially the Marine Corps.

So the intent for this earmark is not to reward a company because they met with me or because they contributed, which they did not, but to bring forth to the attention of the Border Patrol that this equipment is available for competition for the companies that qualify according to their purchase order so that we can make the Border Patrol, as they extend into the desert, to be more effective and be able to continue the law enforcement. That is the only reason for this earmark, and I oppose the amendment.

Would the gentleman yield?

I would have no objection if you removed the name.

I object. At the urging of your colleagues, they asked me to object, so I will object.

Madam Speaker, I would like to take a few minutes to praise and reflect upon the career of an outstanding CEO and an even better friend, Bill Post. I first met Bill in the early 1970s when he was financial officer for the Arizona Public Service, also referred to as APS, and I was a Maricopa County Supervisor. He impressed me as a smart, young executive.

Bill Post is the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Arizona Public Service--my home state's largest electric company. Bill recently announced his retirement from APS and its parent company, Pinnacle West Capital Corporation, after 37 distinguished years with the companies.

Starting his career as a Draftsman after finishing college at Arizona State University, Bill quickly climbed the ranks at APS. He became an officer in 1982, then ascended to President and CEO of APS and President of Pinnacle West in 1997. He earned the title of Chairman of the Board for both companies in 2001.

Of course what he accomplished and the relationships he built were always far more important to Bill than any title. He guided APS through a period of incredible growth for our state. In the last decade alone, APS added more than 300,000 customers, yet the company has been a model of efficiency. Despite its rapid growth, APS continued to meet Arizona's expanding energy needs while also improving customer satisfaction, setting new standards of electric reliability and keeping employee numbers essentially flat.

Revered for his business acumen, Bill is also ubiquitous in the community--continually lending his guidance, energy and financial resources to non-profit organizations such as Greater Phoenix Leadership, Valley of the Sun United Way, the Arizona Business Coalition, and the Children's Action Alliance. His dedication to our community and state led me to often refer to Bill as the ``Big Dog in Town.'' Bill's own generosity has always set the tone for his company-- APS and its employees are known across Arizona as leaders in the communities they serve.

Bill Post embodies the character and uniqueness of my home state. A lifelong Arizonan, Bill is as at home driving his Jeep through dusty desert trails as he is guiding strategy in a corporate boardroom. In his retirement from APS, I know he will probably be providing leadership to the people of Arizona.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to ask my colleagues to join me in commemorating the 125th anniversary of the National Crittenton Foundation and the Crittenton Family of Agencies. I do so because this network of organizations deserves recognition for the profound role they have played in allowing girls and young women to realize their full potential.

In particular, I would like to draw attention to the Florence Crittenton Services of Arizona in Phoenix. For more than a century, this organization has provided valuable services, education and community-based programs to help Arizona children and teens overcome the issues of abuse, neglect, teen pregnancy and mental health problems. Through its comprehensive network of services and support systems, this organization provides a refuge where vulnerable youth, ages 12 to 21, prosper from the assistance of a caring community and discover the possibility of a bright new future in spite of their challenging past experiences.

As society has experienced dramatic changes in the last 100 years, the Phoenix home has changed too, but its goal of giving every girl it serves safety, hope, and opportunity has remained constant. I commend the Florence Crittenton board members, staff and volunteers for their compassion and dedication to excellence, ensuring that their services continue to grow to meet the needs of the girls it serves, and for becoming one of the state's leading experts in gender-specific services.

It is with great pride that I congratulate the Florence Crittendon Services of Arizona and its nationwide community of Crittendon sister organizations on their successful efforts to empower at-risk girls to rise above the negative circumstances they have been exposed to and become productive and self-sufficient citizens who understand the value of always treating themselves and others with respect.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to one of America's finest, Clarence W. Dupnik, Sheriff of Pima County, Arizona, who, this year, celebrates 50 years of law enforcement service to his community in Tucson, Arizona. Sheriff Dupnik began his career in February, 1958, as a Patrol Officer with the City of Tucson Police Department. While there, he held various positions, rising to Major in charge of Field Operations when he retired in January, 1977. From there, he was appointed Chief Deputy Sheriff of the Pima County Sheriffs Department, and was appointed Pima County Sheriff on February 19, 1980. Since that time, Sheriff Dupnik has been elected to 7 consecutive terms of office as Pima County Sheriff, a position in which he remains today. Of his 50 years of law enforcement service, Clarence Dupnik has served 31 years as Sheriff of Pima County, the 2nd largest populated county in the States of Arizona, and the 7th largest county in the nation--a remarkable achievement!

During his law enforcement career, Sheriff Dupnik has, among other things:

Led the reduction of the per capital crime rate in Pima County to levels equal to the City of Scottsdale and one-half the crime rate within the City of Tucson.

Created the Metropolitan Area Narcotics Trafficking Interdiction Squads (MANTIS).

Founded the Command Group of the Arizona Alliance Planning Committee, a joint federal, state, and local law enforcement task force to interdict and prevent the smuggling of illegal narcotics into Arizona from Mexico.

Collaborated with the FBI to participate in the Joint Terrorism Task Force, and was appointed to serve on the Executive Committee of the

Madam Speaker, I rise before you today to recognize the success of a man from my home state of Arizona--Joseph P. Anderson--who is retiring after devoting his professional life to helping our state's less fortunate and most vulnerable people.

Joe is a third-generation Arizonan raised in Prescott. His father, Novian Anderson, was an Army major and then an Arizona Department of Economic Security employee. His mother, Martha Anderson, was a school teacher. He credits these two hard working individuals with instilling in him a strong work ethic and sense of community. Those solid roots, which included a strong religious upbringing, gave him a base for everything he needed to know about life--work hard, live by the Golden Rule, be loyal to your friends, and never forget to give back to the community that nurtured you.

After graduating from Arizona State University, Joe embarked on a 17- year career with the Arizona State Government. While working for the Arizona Department of Administration, Joe's superb organizational and analytical skills were recognized by Governor Bruce Babbitt, who had the wisdom to couple them with the talents of Dr. Donald F. Schaller in a bold move to address the state's failing Medicaid system. Together, they rebuilt Arizona's pioneering health plan for the poor and created a successful new prototype of managed care that cut costs while providing high quality health care. It proved to be so effective, it has been emulated in whole or in part by most other states.

In 1986, Joe and ``Doc'' formed a partnership with P.J. Davis and started the consulting firm of Schaller Anderson. Working as a team, they established an acclaimed long-term care program and developed managed health plans for low income persons in seven states, while also working on Medicaid programs in two other states. Schaller Anderson became such a success that it was purchased by Aetna to serve as its Medicaid arm with Joe remaining as chairman of the Schaller Anderson Board.

Staying loyal to his parents' values, Joe always made time for worthy causes. Never one to scrimp on donating time, energy and money, he also encouraged his employees to contribute to charitable causes as well. His efforts were instrumental to the good work done by such groups as the Central Arizona Shelter Services, the Cesar Chavez School, a City of Phoenix smoke alarm distribution program that aided low-income households, and the Monsignor Edward J. Ryle Fund. Not surprisingly, these tireless efforts resulted in his being awarded with a number of prestigious commendations citing his service and leadership.

Clearly, Joe's indomitable belief in the importance of giving and participating has served both him and the State of Arizona very well. So, even in retirement, we expect Joe will continue to be guided by the strong sense of responsibility he gained from his parents and we look forward to his remaining active in making Arizona a better place to live for those in need.

Madam Speaker, reserving the right to object, would the leader yield for two questions?

As I understand the situation, we are going to secure the Chamber, and in securing the Chamber, I think it means that from the Cloakroom, the people who work the Cloakroom who usually tell us when the Chamber will be cleared, how are they going to communicate that we can come back in for the secret session?

The second question I have is do you expect to have further votes tonight, for those of us who will not attend this secret session and we won't know when it's finished?

I withdraw my reservation of objection, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. J. Eugene Grigsby, a talented and multi-faceted artist who has been instrumental in highlighting the importance of combining art with culture and history as a means of expression. As such, he is considered by many as ``one of America's leading artistic minds and recognized internationally as an artistic voice for the African American community.'' It was in keeping with this distinction that he was recently honored by the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation at its Celebration of Leadership for the Visual and Performing Arts.

From his early days as a young art teacher in 1946 at Phoenix's segregated Carver High School, Dr. Grigsby has concentrated on conveying to his students the importance of incorporating their personal being and heritage in their works--a message he continued to demonstrate as he rose to become Professor Emeritus of Art at Arizona State University. As an internationally respected artist himself, who has mastered a number of mediums including oils, acrylics and lithographs, his works are noted for their ability to capture the spirit and dignity of his African and African-American subjects in scenes depicting their daily life.

A pioneer in today's promotion of multi-cultural art, Dr. Grigsby led the way to contemporary art instruction that goes beyond work in the studio by including the study of history and how man has chosen to express himself in differing environments. It is within this context that his celebrated book, Art and Ethnics: Background for Teaching Youth in a Pluralistic Society, has provided educators with valuable insights into art education and will continue to impact the study of art well into the future.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to commend, honor and thank Dr. Grigsby, one of the great American artists, for his continued service and contributions to the world of art and academic communities.

I thank my chairman, John Olver, for recognizing me.

First of all, I want to congratulate Chairman Olver and Ranking Member Knollenberg for the fine work they have done on this bill. It is quite an accomplishment. If you look at last year, we were not able to conference the bill and here we are talking about a bill that has been conferenced with the Senate. Both the chairman and the ranking member have talked about some of the programs that have been given additional funding, but I would like to talk about a few that this bill starts a new initiative.

One is a program that the railroad administrator spoke to us about at one of our hearings, and that is the ability of the Federal Railroad Administration being able to provide grants to have intercity connection by rail. And in Arizona, it is a program that we are looking forward to see implemented. As you may know, Arizona is growing very quickly, and the two metro areas, the Phoenix metro area and the Tucson metro area, in a very short time are going to be growing into each other, and there is a great need to connect them because the freeway that connects them today is no longer efficient.

So by applying for these grants, hopefully we will be able to connect 90 percent of the Arizona population with a rail.

With the possibility of that connection, then there is a possibility that Arizona may be connected with Amtrak. So it is an initiative that this conference bill brings forward that those of us in Arizona are very happy to see implemented, especially in this city-to-city rail connection.

For those of us who were local elected officials, I am very happy to report that CDBG is in this bill and will receive additional money, so local officials can use these monies to develop the social infrastructure that is needed in many of our locations that do not have the economic development activity that other parts of the city has.

The other initiative I want to talk about is one that you will begin to see cooperation with the Federal Transit Authority and HUD. As the transit lines are being developed, there are initiatives in this bill that will encourage the development of affordable housing and development of small businesses along the transit line. This is something that, again, those of us who have transit lines that are being developed, that with these initiatives we can develop affordable housing, because many of the people who will be on the transit lines are people that will be going to work and in many cases need to have the affordable housing that the transit line will bring it.

I congratulate both the chairman and the ranking member for this fine bill, and I ask for its passage.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to applaud and congratulate my good friend, Chairman Rahall for his efforts to bring this legislation to the House floor. He has worked over many years to reform the mining law and because of his persistence, we have a better chance of finally securing reform than we ever have. Reform is long overdue.

I am supporting this legislation, but I wish to continue to work with the chairman and follow the actions of the Senate to make sure final legislation does not inadvertently create a system that makes our domestic industry unable to compete in the world marketplace. Mining has a long and colorful history in the State of Arizona and it provides great benefit to the State's economy. I believe we can have reform and also preserve a healthy industry.

I know the chairman shares that objective, and again I applaud him and his staff for making this issue a priority.

Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 986, I was at a meeting away from my office and unable to return on time. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Madam Speaker, on rollcall Nos. 961, 962, and 963, I missed voting due to an airline delay.

Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on all three.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about a proposal that would be impacted by the repeal of the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, program to collect unpaid taxes. The Disability Preference Program for Tax Collection Contracts is an initiative championed by the Senator from Nebraska, Ben Nelson. It would give an incentive to private third- party collection companies to hire people with severe disabilities and give them high-paying jobs.

The Disability Preference Program is worth supporting even under the assumption that the IRS contracting law should later be repealed. A closer look at the Disability Preference Program and the repeal of current IRS contracting law clearly shows that the two are not mutually exclusive. Until such time as a repeal is passed, workers with disabilities (including service disabled veterans) employed by contractors are gaining valuable vocational training and work experience on-the-job.

Disabled veterans and other disabled workers would most likely ``retain employment'' with the contractor through reassignment to another project within the company if the IRS contract were to expire or be terminated. Private sector collection contractors strive to lower attrition and training costs by reassigning exiting staff as projects are gained and lost.

In addition, employees assigned to the IRS contract work at the private collection contractor must pass the same level of scrutiny and background checks as IRS employees, and undergo IRS-approved project training and testing. Therefore, contractor employees will be the ``best available applicants for job opportunities with the IRS'' when the IRS hires internal collectors to do the work before or after repeal.

Under the Disability Preference Program, disabled workers would receive valuable training, certification, and job experience to seek gainful employment at private sector or government offices performing telephone collection work, and therefore would be much ``better qualified and prepared to continue a career'' in the collection industry than they otherwise would have been if the program was not available.

Although even for a temporary time period, use of this employment initiative will provide a much needed demonstration to government contracting entities that similar contracting requirements should be used to provide good job opportunities for disabled veterans and other persons with disabilities.

I strongly support enactment of the Disability Preference Program for Tax Collection Contracts.

Madam Speaker. It is with great pleasure that I rise today to congratulate the Phoenix Mercury on becoming the 2007 winner of the Women's National Basketball Association Championship on September 16, 2007, in the final game of a five-game series that Phoenix won by an impressive 108-92 score.

This is the first championship for the Phoenix Mercury, and the first title won by a road team in the league's history. The event also places the Mercury Coach, Paul Westhead, in the unique position of being the first coach to ever lead a team to a championship in both the National Basketball Association and the WNBA courts.

The WNBA started 11 years ago. Since that time, its fan base has continued to grow each year as more and more sports enthusiasts have become appreciative of the athletic talents of women. This year's victory game, in which the Mercury posted a 73.3 shooting percentage in the first quarter, clearly shows that women have rightfully earned a spot in the limelight of this sport.

The magic events of the September 16th game created an impressive run of records that are truly deserving of recognition. Therefore, I am very proud of to have sponsored this resolution honoring the Phoenix Mercury, a superb team that has combined hard-work, sportsmanship, raw talent, and a will to win into a modern day success story--a success that was aided by great coaching and a strong front office organization led by owner Robert Sarver. I am most certainly wishing them all the best as they continue to bring outstanding basketball in the future to fans worldwide.

As Coach Westhead recently quoted when referencing this victory and which serves as a thoughtful reminder to all walks of life, ``Isn't it amazing how much can be accomplished when no one cares who gets the credit?''

Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 935, I was detained at my office. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''