Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, a lot of us think we represent the people. With unemployment now over 10 percent, the second biggest issue if you don't have a job is that you don't have health care. We have a lot of problems in our country, unemployment and health care, and hopefully Congress will take that.

We made a step early in the year with a stimulus bill to try and create jobs. It hasn't done what we wanted. We need to do something, but we also need to deal with health care.

Let me take the last part of my time to say our country lost 12 brave soldiers yesterday at Fort Hood, Texas. They were prepared to be deployed to defend our country. I think that is what this House ought to be thinking about today, those families and those soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of national health reform to help relieve the economic burden of rising health costs on small businesses.

Nationwide, 25 percent of the uninsured, 11 million people, are employees

of firms with less than 25 workers. Because they lack bargaining leverage, some small businesses pay 18 percent more than larger businesses with the same health insurance.

If H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care Act for America, is enacted, small businesses will be able to find affordable health insurance coverage in the health insurance exchange.

Under the legislation, businesses with up to 100 employees will be able to join the health insurance exchange, benefiting from group rates and a greater choice of insurers. There are 16,600 small businesses in the district I represent that will be able to join that health insurance exchange.

H.R. 3962 will allow small businesses with 25 employees or less and average wages of less than $40,000 to qualify for tax credits up to 50 percent of the cost of providing health insurance. There are 14,600 small businesses in our Texas district that will qualify for these credits. That's why it's important we pass health care.

I thank my colleague.

First of all, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2868. I represent the largest petrochemical complex in the country. These chemical facilities contribute much to our economy and way of life and the employ thousands of workers in high-paying, quality jobs.

These chemical facilities have invested $8 billion in security improvements since 2001 and are fully complying with DHS' Chemical Facilities Antiterrorism Standards, or CFATS, that has not been fully implemented. These dedicated chemical employees, as well as the communities around them, deserve the best security standards possible to prevent another unthinkable act of terrorism on U.S. soil.

When this bill was originally introduced, I had some concerns about it. Working with both Chairman Waxman and Subcommittee Chairman Eddie Markey along with industry and labor officials, we made a number of changes in here and I would like to summarize some of them.

We worked with the Chair to include new language to clarify that the Coast Guard would be the main entity enforcing the requirements similar to the maritime security facilities; provide an explicit consultative role for the Coast Guard if the DHS Secretary considers IST for a maritime security facility; ensure maritime security facilities would not perform additional background security requirements other than under CFATS; and identify the TWIC credential that is being used to satisfy CFATS would also satisfy this bill. That's what's so important.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 2868, the Chemical and Water Security Act, a bill to protect chemical facilities and drinking water and wastewater systems across the country.

The Houston Ship Channel I represent is home to the largest petrochemical complex in the country. These chemical facilities contribute much to our economy and way of life and employ thousands of workers in high-paying, quality jobs.

Chemical facilities have already invested nearly $8 billion in security improvements since 2001 and are fully complying with DHS' Chemical Facilities Antiterrorism Standards, or CFATS, which are not yet fully implemented.

These dedicated chemical employees, as well as the communities that surround these facilities, deserve the best security standards possible to prevent another unthinkable act of terrorism on U.S. soil.

As introduced, I had several concerns with H.R. 2868 that were mostly addressed in the final bill by working with Chairman Henry Waxman, Subcommittee Chairman Ed Markey, and industry and labor representatives.

First, granting the DHS Secretary authority to mandate a facility to perform a ``method to reduce a consequence of a terrorist attack''--or IST--raises questions as to whether, or how, to involve government agencies like DHS that have few, if any, process safety experts, chemical engineers and other qualified staff.

We worked to include a fair and transparent technical appeals process in H.R. 2868 that requires DHS to examine such decisions with facility representatives as well as with experts knowledgeable in the fields of process safety, engineering, and chemistry.

In addition, the scope of affected facilities nationwide potentially subject to IST requirements was substantially reduced by focusing exclusively on chemical facilities in populated areas subject to a release threat, and DHS may not mandate IST if it were not feasible or if the facility would no longer be able to continue operations at its location.

Second, H.R. 2868 as introduced created unnecessary duplication with existing regulations for chemical facilities already regulated under the Maritime Transportation Security Act, or MTSA.

We worked with the Chairmen to include new language to clarify that the Coast Guard will be the main entity enforcing the requirements of this act for MTSA facilities; provide an explicit consultative role for the Coast Guard if the DHS Secretary considers mandating IST on a MTSA facility; ensure MTSA facilities would not have to perform additional background security requirements under CFATS; and identify the TWIC credential as being able to satisfy the CFATS requirements in the bill.

Third, workers were not afforded a robust redress process in the case of any adverse decisions made due to the personnel surety requirements in the legislation.

We worked to include a ``Reconsideration Process'' by which workers could petition DHS to make a determination as to whether the worker poses an actual terrorist security risk, as well as included annual reports to Congress assessing much needed background check and redress process data.

Fourth, the civil suit provisions could have unnecessarily disclosed sensitive security information for facilities.

Revised language was included to permit affected citizens the ability to compel agency action on CFATS and provide an avenue for citizens to report facilities in potential violation of the bill's requirements while safeguarding sensitive information. No private right of action is permitted against private companies.

Finally, the original bill failed to streamline the regulation of both drinking water and wastewater facilities and lacked an appeals process for water systems subjected to IST decisions.

H.R. 2868 now places EPA in charge of regulating both drinking water and wastewater facilities and includes an appeals process for water systems to ensure a fair and open hearing on any IST decisions made by the State or EPA.

H.R. 2868 is far from perfect, but it includes substantial compromises to permanently extend chemical and water security regulations while reducing duplicative regulatory standards, increasing worker protections, and providing important safeguards to chemical facilities and water systems.

I want to again thank Chairman Waxman and Subcommittee Chairman Markey for working with me and other Members to improve this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of national comprehensive health care reform for all Americans.

Since its creation under the direction of President Lyndon Johnson, Medicare has proved to be one of the great success stories of the Federal Government. We want to improve the solvency of the program to ensure our seniors today continue to enjoy the program and that our children will be able to collect Medicare benefits in the future.

H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, does not endanger traditional Medicare, but it does immediately improve the program. Currently, there are 56,000 Medicare beneficiaries in the 29th Congressional District in Texas that I represent. H.R. 3962 improves their Medicare benefits by providing free preventative and wellness care, improving primary and coordinated care, improving nursing home quality, and strengthening the Medicare Trust Fund.

Each year, 4,400 seniors in our district hit the doughnut hole and are forced to pay for drug costs despite having part D coverage. This legislation will provide these seniors with immediate relief, covering the first $500 of doughnut hole costs next year, cutting brand-name drug costs in the doughnut hole by 50 percent, and completely eliminating the doughnut hole by 2019.

Mr. Speaker, that's why we need H.R. 3962, to improve health care for our seniors and all Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of national health care reform. The 29th

District in Texas, which I represent, has one of the highest numbers of uninsured individuals in our country, where nearly 40 percent of the residents are uninsured.

Last week, the melded House version of the health care bill was reintroduced as H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act. H.R. 3962 creates a national health care exchange in which individuals and small businesses can purchase health insurance plans for themselves and employees. Our goal is to build on the system of employer-based health care coverage that 60 percent of Americans currently enjoy and allow those who have employer-based insurance to keep that coverage.

If enacted, H.R. 3962 will provide insurance coverage to 230,000 currently uninsured residents in our district and improve the employer- based coverage for 217,000 residents. Under this legislation, 177,000 households would qualify for affordability credits to purchase health insurance.

In our district, 16,600 small businesses would be able to obtain health insurance for their employees, and 14,600 small businesses will qualify for tax credits to help them offset the cost of obtaining health care. That's why we need national health care reform.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 729, which expresses the sense of Congress that a day be designated to honor America's firefighters who have made enormous sacrifices through loss of life and limb in their service to protect our communities.

There are over 1 million firefighters in the U.S., and each time they respond to an emergency, they risk their own personal safety to help others. Each year, roughly 100 firefighters die in the line of duty.

The City of Houston has one of the largest fire departments in the country with almost 4,000 firefighters and about 100 fire stations. Since the modern-day Houston Fire Department was formed, over 60 firefighters have lost their lives in the line of duty. Two of these died this year alone.

It is therefore imperative that we take this moment to show our appreciation for the services they provide and the sacrifices that so many have made.

As a cosponsor of this resolution, I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 729, which calls for the President to formally commemorate these brave men and women by designating a National Firefighters Memorial Day.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 783, which recognizes Hispanic Heritage Month and celebrates the vast contributions of Hispanic-Americans to the strength and culture of the United States.

In 1968, President Lyndon Johnson introduced Hispanic Heritage Week, which was later expanded to Hispanic Heritage Month in 1988 by President Ronald Reagan. This year, Americans commemorated the history of Hispanic-Americans and their numerous contributions to our country from September 15, 2009, to October 15, 2009.

The estimated Hispanic population of the United States as of July 1, 2008, was 46.9 million. Hispanic-Americans constitute 15 percent of the Nation's total population, comprise 62.2 percent of my district in Houston, Texas, and are the fastest-growing minority group in the United States. Their contributions to our society are evident in many areas including the arts, architecture, literature, military, and our government.

In congratulate all Hispanic-Americans on their rich history and culture, and recognize Hispanic Heritage Month as an important time to commemorate the great achievements and contributions of Hispanic- Americans to the United States.

As a cosponsor of this important resolution, I urge my colleagues to support its passage.

Madam Speaker, after World War II when our parents and, in some cases, our grandparents returned from victory, our country stayed to rebuild the countries of our former enemies and our friends. Each of these countries, with our help, established a national health care plan for their people. Our country did not since huge numbers of Americans at that time received health care through their employers. That is not true today.

My Texas district has the highest number of uninsured adults under 65 in the country. We need a national health care plan for all Americans. If you have Medicare or employer-based insurance, that's great.

Next week, let's do what we did after World War II for our enemies and our friends. Let's provide national health care for all Americans.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the conference report on H.R. 2996, the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for FY2010.

This legislation provides a 17 percent increase over FY09 levels for critical programs that protect our public health and environment.

Among other provisions, the legislation provides $605 million for the Superfund program which will assist sites across the country clean up hazardous substances, including potentially the San Jacinto River Waste Pits site.

It also provides $3 million to fund four new centers of excellence to study toxin and chemical impacts on children.

Madam Speaker, I would also like to highlight two important projects I requested funding for in this bill, but unfortunately, did not receive mention in the final conference report.

The first is the Mickey Leland National Urban Air Toxics Research Center to continue air quality public health research on air toxics in urban areas as directed by the. U.S. Congress. The Center is a 501(c)(3) institution authorized by Congress in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.

The individual FY2010 Interior and Environment Appropriations bills approved by both the House and Senate included language recognizing the significant contributions made by the Center in the understanding of the human health effects due to exposure to air toxics. Further, the House legislation encouraged EPA to consider allocating funding for the Center in EPA's budget. The EPA has gone through a deliberative process during the past four months to review the qualifications and research contributions to-date made by the Center and as a result, has recommended that funding for the Center be included in the agency's FY2011 budget. Funding air toxics research through the Center is consistent with the congressional intent and supports the Administration's stated objective of expanding research and efforts to address the human health effects of air toxics.

I am concerned the final conference report did not reaffirm the importance of the Center's work to our country. Americans want to know whether they are at risk from pollutants in the air that they breathe. People who live near sources of air toxics such as major roadways, industrial facilities, or small businesses, are often especially concerned about their risk.

The Center is conducting The Houston Exposure to Air Toxics Study, HEATS, which is an ongoing project designed to study the relationship between personal exposures--the air

people breathe as they go about their daily activities--and fixed site monitored concentrations of air toxics by measuring personal, residential indoor, and outdoor concentrations.

Federal support for the Center is critical to ensure this research continues and I hope to continue working with the chairman, EPA, and OMB to get funding for this research in the budget as Congress intended when it created the Center.

We also sought funding funding for a 6-year Capital Improvement Project that will rehabilitate and upgrade the city of Baytown, Texas's wastewater and water infrastructure to comply with federal and state regulations, maintain its condition and reliability and save costs. The city has implemented an asset management program to assess equipment condition, optimize work practices and ensure funding remains in place to sustain infrastructure improvements over time.

The funding we requested under the State and Tribal Assistance Grant would help rehabilitate portions of the Central District Wastewater Treatment Plant to include elevation of redesign of critical components to reduce the storm surge impacts suffered during Hurricane Ike. These include the influent lift station, blower building, administration/ laboratory building, and grit removal process. The internal piping needs to be replaced to improve energy and operating efficiency, along with the chlorine contact basin and plant pumping/transfer systems. Installation of post-storm emergency power systems are also a part of this effort.

This is an important project to help Baytown recover from damage caused by Hurricane Ike, and overall to upgrade their wastewater system, and I look forward to working the Chair as we move forward to find assistance for this project.

I also want to express some reservation and guidance to EPA as it works to carry out a study in the bill ``on the relationship between hydraulic fracturing and drinking water, using a credible approach that relies on the best available science, as well as independent sources of information.''

I understand the concerns and desire to adequately protect the environment when developing our domestic resources. Hydraulic fracturing is a well-tested technology that has been used to develop energy for over 60 years.

First used in 1947, hydraulic fracturing has become a standard practice for improving the process of natural energy extraction. The practice involves the pumping of fluid into wells at high pressure to create fractures in rock formations that allow for complete production of oil. Hydraulic fracturing is responsible for about 30 percent of our domestic recoverable oil and natural gas. About 90 percent of currently operating wells use this technology. Hydraulic fracturing, as used to produce natural gas from shale formations, has created new opportunities for clean energy and employment without causing environmental damage.

Recent studies on fracturing conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency in 2004 found no confirmed evidence of contamination of drinking water. The study concluded that the injection of hydraulic fracturing fluids poses ``little or no threat'' to humans or the environment, EPA. The EPA did not find a single incident of the contamination of drinking water wells by hydraulic fracturing fluid injection.

Just like EPA's prior study, the new study in H.R. 2996 should be conducted using a systematic, scientific approach that assures transparency, validity and accuracy. The study should be based on accepted quality assurance guidelines in order to ensure that the information on which the study is based is of sufficient quality to support the study's conclusions. It should be properly peer-reviewed by qualified experts in accordance with standard practices, and should also draw on the expertise of those both inside and outside the Federal Government who can contribute relevant information to a high quality study. These contributors should include the Department of Energy and the U.S. Geological Survey as well as the state regulators who have many years of experience with hydraulic fracturing. This study should eventually be made available for review and comment by interested members of the public prior to being finalized.

At the same time, since we have already studied hydraulic fracturing, it would be prudent for any proposed study to fully take into account other studies that have already been undertaken by Federal or State governmental agencies, councils, commissions or advisory committees. For example, given the significant effort associated with the Agency's prior 2004 study, it would certainly be prudent to fully consider this study in undertaking any further examination of hydraulic fracturing.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the study should be based on well-recognized principles of risk assessment to determine whether there is any realistic risk that individuals may be exposed to substances used in the hydraulic fracturing process at levels that could possibly be considered harmful.

Madam Speaker, I believe that a targeted study of hydraulic fracturing is the most efficient way to use our resources to accomplish the goals of this study. We need to continue to develop our domestic energy resources, including clean-burning natural gas. A focused approach to the study will allow us to address concerns about hydraulic fracturing while facilitating the continued use of this critical technology.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of national comprehensive health care reform for all Americans. Our district has the highest number of uninsured adults in the Nation.

Since 1965, Medicare has proven to be one of the great success stories of the Federal Government. It is the second most popular government-run program behind Social Security. That's why I strongly support national health care reform that includes the national public option similar to Medicare.

Some of our Republican colleagues have been quick to say that H.R. 3200, America's Affordable Health Care Choices Act, endangers traditional Medicare and eliminates the Medicare Advantage program. These assertions are not true. The fact is that H.R. 3200 does not use funds from the Medicare trust fund to pay for reform. Instead, it eliminates waste and fraud within the Medicare program and abolishes the infamous doughnut hole that was created under a Republican Congress in 2003 on the prescription drug plan and strengthens the financial health of Medicare.

In 2003, a Republican Congress created the Medicare Advantage program, and insurance companies have been benefiting ever since.

Mr. Speaker, I have to admit that I've never heard someone quote Herbert Hoover as being so bad and President Obama as being so good. We have to remember that Herbert Hoover was actually a Republican.

Mr. Speaker, am I supposed to have the floor or do the Republicans have it part time?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in strong support of a national health care plan that provides comprehensive health care for every American.

Three House committees had many public hearings and public votes on the bill, H.R. 3200. Democrats are using the same public rules that the Republicans used when they were in charge. They just don't like them because they don't have the majority now.

We have so many people uninsured in our country. My own district has the highest uninsured in the country of people who have private insurance--35 percent of our district has private health care, and over 40 percent is uninsured because they can't afford it or their employers don't provide it.

We've given private insurance companies plenty of time to cover the 39 million U.S. citizens who don't have health care, but they can't do it because they can't make a profit on someone like that. So that's why we need a public option. H.R. 3200 will help that. We will have health care for everyone.

Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of this bill and urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it.

The 29th District of Texas that I represent encompasses the Port of Houston--the largest port in the country per foreign tonnage. It drives economic activity in the region, and is home to one of the largest petro-chemical complexes in the world.

Because of this, security on the waterway is critical, and the Coast Guard has been exceptional in providing that security.

Last month a 458-foot motor vessel Chemical Supplier collided with a barge near Brady's Island, close to the Interstate 610 bridge. The Unified Command, led by the Coast Guard responded mitigating the oil spill, preventing further damage and minimizing disruption, and traffic was moving on the waterway again within three days.

Again, yesterday, a tanker ship collided with a supply vessel offshore Texas, about 40 miles southeast of Galveston, spilling 18,000 gallons of fuel oil into the Gulf of Mexico. The Coast Guard responded, contained the spill, and began cleanup later in the day with a DC-3 airplane dropping dispersants on the spill.

This bill is a strong bill, that provides the Coast Guard with the resources they need to meet the security and environmental demands they are tasked with.

The measure authorizes programs of the Coast Guard in FY 2010, and makes a number of changes dealing with acquisition systems, including the troubled Deepwater program to replace aging equipment, as well as changes to the leadership structure and career development. It requires the Coast Guard to set new regulations on marine and fishing safety, establishes marine safety as a Coast Guard function, and guarantees mariners the right of self-defense if under attack. The measure also increases penalties for knowingly bringing illegal aliens into the United States, and creates new penalties for ships under U.S. jurisdiction that do not comply.

As amended this bill will clarify existing law to ensure that the U.S. Coast Guard can continue to delegate the review and inspection of offshore facilities to the American Bureau of Shipping. Since the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, the United States Government has partnered with the Bureau to enhance safety and protect the environment. This partnership has been inadvertently jeopardized by a recent unrelated court case. Passage of the bill will continue today's high levels of offshore safety, ensure offshore projects are not delayed, and protect the jobs of hard working Americans.

Madam Chair, I again thank the Committee for their work on this bill and strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 1793, the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act of 2009.

Since its establishment in 1990, the Ryan White CARE Act has delivered vital funding to States and urban areas with large numbers of individual living with the AIDS virus.

In Texas, the number of individuals living with HIV and AIDS increased in the last 10 years. Texas has one of the largest HIV and AIDS populations in the country and we rely heavily on Ryan White dollars to provide quality life-prolonging care to Texans living with HIV and AIDS.

We currently have two Eligible Metropolitan Areas and 3 Transitional Grant Areas under Ryan White CARE Act in our State.

Houston is currently the eighth largest Eligible Metropolitan Area in the Nation, with 10,000 individuals living with AIDS and Ryan White funding helped to provide critical health care and support services to more than 18,000 individuals in Houston in 2006.

In my community in Harris County, our Hospital District utilizes more than $26 million each year to coordinate essential health care and support services for more than 21,000 individuals in our community living with HIV and AIDS.

The importance of this program cannot be overestimated; without CARE Act funds, many Americans living with HIV and AIDS would have no other source for treatment.

The Senate passed their version of the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act of 2009 on Monday and I am pleased we were able to work out a bipartisan and bicameral resolution which is reflected in this bill.

Without this vital legislation, millions of individuals would lose their HIV and AIDS treatment and support services. I am pleased we worked swiftly to send this to the President.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 138, which honors the George Bush Intercontinental Airport for its 40 years of outstanding service to the residents of Houston, TX, and to travelers from around the world.

Since it first opened in 1969, Bush Intercontinental Airport has transported over 700,000,000 passengers to more than 170 U.S. and international destinations, making it one of the largest airports in the world. This, in turn, has generated tremendous economic benefits for the greater Houston area. Travelers to the region account for more than $20 billion in annual sales. The airport also employs over 30,000 Houston-area residents and has created over 120,000 additional jobs in local industries. Many of these employees live in our district.

Bush Intercontinental Airport has likewise served as a hub for cargo shipments to the U.S. and Latin America. For four years in a row, the airport has received Air Cargo World's ``Air Cargo Excellence Award'' for its facilities. It now handles more than 300,000 tons of freight annually, and this figure continues to grow. In November, the airport plans to open a new import facility for perishable freight, which will expand business in temperature and time-sensitive products.

Together with the Port of Houston, Bush Intercontinental Airport has helped to make Houston a truly international city and one of the leading ports of entry and export in the country. It serves as a model of success in international travel and shipping, and this level of accomplishment should be acknowledged.

I urge my colleagues to support House Concurrent Resolution 138 recognizing the 40th anniversary of George Bush Intercontinental Airport.

Madam Speaker, I submit the following article.

[From the Washington Post, Sept. 28, 2009]

The FCC's Heavy Hand

In a speech at the Brookings Institution last week, Federal

Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski

promised that his agency's plan for regulating Internet

service providers (ISPs) will be ``fair, transparent, fact-

based and data-driven.''

That's nice. But Mr. Genachowski failed to convincingly

answer the most important question of all: Is this

intervention necessary?

Mr. Genachowski claims to have seen ``breaks and cracks''

in the Internet that threaten to change the ``fundamental

architecture of openness.'' He and other proponents of

federal involvement cite a handful of cases they say prove

that, left to their own devices, ISPs such as Comcast Corp.

and AT&T will choke the free flow of information and

technology. One example alluded to by the chairman: Comcast's

blocking an application by BitTorrent that would allow peer-

to-peer video sharing. Yet that conflict was ultimately

resolved by the two companies--without FCC intervention--

after Comcast's alleged bad behavior was exposed by a

blogger.

Mr. Genachowski offered two proposals to combat alleged ISP

misconduct. One should be embraced, the other shelved.

Mr. Genachowski is right to insist that ISPs be candid with

the agency and the public about network management practices.

Such disclosures are necessary, Mr. Genachowski asserted

correctly, to ``give consumers the confidence of knowing that

they're getting the service they've paid for'' and ``enable

innovators to make their offerings work effectively over the

Internet.'' Transparency should go a long way toward allaying

the concerns of those who fear ISP manipulation of markets.

It also puts in doubt the need for Mr. Genachowski's second,

dubious offering.

Aptly dubbed an ``immodest proposal'' by the Free State

Foundation's Randolph J. May, the FCC would prohibit ISPs

from ``discriminating against'' different applications. Mr.

Genachowski explains it this way: ISPs ``cannot block or

degrade lawful traffic over their networks, or pick winners

by favoring some content or applications over others in the

connection to subscribers' homes.'' In short, ISPs, which

have poured billions of dollars into building infrastructure,

would have little control--if any--over the kinds of

information and technology flowing through their pipes.

In a slight concession, Mr. Genachowski said that the

commission would consider whether to allow ISPs to offer

``managed services in limited circumstances''; this approach

could allow ISPs to create a two-track delivery system--one

for routine traffic, the other for applications that use

exorbitant amounts of bandwidth. But unneeded regulation

could still interfere with their ability to manage bandwidth-

hogging applications that can hamper service, especially

during peak times.

Mr. Genachowski claims that the FCC ``will do as much as we

need to do, and no more, to ensure that the Internet remains

an unfettered platform for competition, creativity and

entrepreneurial activity.'' He will advance this goal by

insisting on transparency; he will jeopardize it--and stifle

further investments by ISPs--with attempts to micromanage

what has been a vibrant and well-functioning marketplace.