Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Dr. Jack Vorona of Falls Church, Virginia for his induction into the Defense Intelligence Agency's Torch Bearers Hall. DIA established Torch Bearers Hall this year to coincide with its 50th anniversary and to recognize former employees who have made exceptional contributions to its mission. Dr. Vorona's invaluable leadership in developing scientific and technical intelligence programs during the height of the Cold War helped keep Americans safe and secured him a spot among the eight inaugural recipients of this honor.

During his 25-year career at DIA, Dr. Vorona developed many programs aimed at identifying foreign defense technologies that could threaten the U.S. and its allies, including nuclear technologies. As Deputy Director for Scientific and Technical Intelligence, he oversaw funding to address the most significant threats posed by massive Soviet investments in science, technology, and weapons programs. His work was vital in helping to ensure that the U.S. was never technologically surprised.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Dr. Vorona's remarkable achievements and in thanking him for his dedicated service to the nation.

Madam Speaker, ask Americans their priority, and they'll tell you it's jobs. There are 14 million Americans out of work. There are 9.3 million more Americans working part-time because they can't find full-time employment. There are millions more Americans whose incomes have stagnated because of the persistent unemployment which has dragged down economic growth. In fact, median household income has fallen 9.8 percent since the recession first began in 2007. More troubling, although the overall economy has been growing again, household incomes continue to fall. Since December 2007, American households have lost more than $5,400 per average household.

There are several factors leading to this decline. One of the most significant is that in order to find work, many millions of unemployed Americans are forced to accept lower pay. With millions of Americans still desperately searching for jobs, businesses can afford to offer lower wages. With millions of American families slipping below the poverty line and wondering where the next mortgage payment or meal will come from, prospective workers can't afford not to take the pay cut.

It's clear we must pass the American Jobs Act. This is a plan that reduces business taxes to encourage private sector hiring and increases infrastructure investment to repair and rebuild America, creating jobs. And it cuts taxes for every working American. While the lingering effects of the worst recession in 80 years continue to drive down Americans' income, we can increase their take-home pay with the Americans Jobs Act, putting more money back in the pockets of average American families. Increasing American paychecks and creating jobs-- that ought to be our priority.

But Republicans in Congress have a different priority: cutting. Last Congress, Republicans' big marketing blitz wasn't about creating jobs, it was about cutting. Last Congress, Democrats passed business tax cuts to spur job creation, approving infrastructure improvements to create construction jobs and backstopping faltering State and local education funding to save teaching jobs. And we saw results. The Great Recession resulted in 8 million jobs lost. But thanks to our efforts, like the Recovery Act and the HIRE Act, we created 2.6 million jobs. A good start, but not enough.

But what were the Republicans doing last year? They were trumpeting their YouCut program. Perhaps if Democrats had named our efforts YouHire program, Republicans might have taken more notice.

Unfortunately, through fighting and threatening, delaying and denigrating, Republicans have made clear that cutting remains their top priority. Their first bill introduced this year, H.R. 1, wasn't about jobs; it was all about cuts. In fact, economists predicted it would cost 200,000 jobs.

Surely their second bill was about jobs? No. H.R. 2 tried to repeal important health reforms so that people with preexisting conditions wouldn't be protected; so that parents wouldn't be able to keep their kids on insurance, especially during tough times, through the age of 26; so that the doughnut hole for our seniors could be closed and they could get a 50 percent brand name drug discount this year.

But if Republican voodoo really worked, why isn't our economy better? Why are American incomes still dropping? This entire year in place of actual job creation legislation, Republicans have focused instead on ever-increasing cuts. And since the beginning of the year, the economy has faltered. Their single-minded focus on attacking private sector employees has paid off; we've lost 535,000 public jobs all across America. It's time to invest in America again. Let's support the American jobs bill.

Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chairman, during the past 10 months, the Republican leadership has already tried to pass more than 125 anti- environmental bills, amendments, and riders. We debated yet another anti-EPA bill just the other day, and the majority rejected every single amendment that would have protected public health.

I introduced a simple amendment that would have ensured no deaths or increased incidence of illness would occur as a result of the cement factory bill we debated last week. It would seem to be a modest proposition that bills passed by Congress should not lead directly to premature death or hospitalization, yet that's exactly what these anti- clean air bills do. Republicans claim that all these anti-EPA bills will create jobs, but sadly those new jobs would only be created in hospitals.

The latest Republican attack on the Clean Air Act is H.R. 2250 before us today, which would block public health standards for industrial boilers. The EPA is issuing these standards in accordance with the Clean Air Act, which was passed in 1970 and signed into law by a Republican President. Since 1970, the Clean Air Act has dramatically reduced air pollution, despite population growth, while America's economy has doubled in size.

The evidence is clear: We do not have to make the false choice between a healthy economy and a healthy environment. Yet that is precisely the false choice presented us in H.R. 2250. My colleagues claim we must allow more mercury pollution, more particulate pollution, more soot into our air in order to spur economic recovery. How easily some seem to forget that this recession started under the most anti- environmental administration in history, that of George W. Bush. So if attacking the environment really did spur economic growth, then we wouldn't have had the economic collapse of 2008.

The consequences of acting on the false premise presented by my Republican colleagues would be catastrophic for Americans' health. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, by following the law and implementing health standards for industrial boilers, EPA will prevent 2,500 to 6,500 premature deaths every single year. By allowing the EPA to continue implementing the Clean Air Act, we will prevent some 4,000 heart attacks, 4,300 emergency room visits, and 2.2 million lost work days every single year. By preventing all of these premature deaths and pollution-caused illnesses, merely implementing the Clean Air Act rules for industrial boilers will save, taking costs into account, between $20 billion and $52 billion annually.

My simple amendment would allow H.R. 2250 to go into effect if it didn't cause these illnesses and deaths. If in fact we can loosen regulations without any negative health consequences and without adding to health care costs that are already too high for most families, then by all means let's do it. By passing this amendment, my Republican colleagues can reaffirm their support for deregulation, provided that it doesn't injure or kill our constituents.

My amendment says, ``The administrator shall not delay actions to reduce emissions from waste incinerators or industrial boilers if such emissions are causing respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses and deaths.''

This ensures that, if H.R. 2250 passes, we won't be increasing the rate of respiratory disease or accepting more children to hospitals with asthma attacks. Since members of the majority claim to be equally concerned about the health of our constituents, I wanted to offer them the opportunity to affirm their interest in statute and pass this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chairman, this congressional session is not even a year old and the Republican leadership has already tried to pass more than 125 anti-environmental bills, amendments, and riders.

They started by attacking public health standards to reduce carbon dioxide pollution on the premise that we should trust oil-funded soothsayers over climatologists and reject the overwhelming scientific consensus that global warming is already occurring and threatens our environment and public health.

When the Republicans attacked greenhouse gas standards, they claimed that they, nonetheless, supported Clean Air Act standards to reduce toxic pollutants like mercury. After all, it was a Republican President who signed this legislation creating the Environmental Protection Agency more than 40 years ago.

A Republican President signed the Clean Air Act of 1970, which established the process that the EPA is using today to reduce toxic pollution, including mercury and dioxin. A Republican President signed the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990 establishing--steel yourself--a cap-and-trade program to reduce sulfur dioxide pollution. That Clean Air Act bill of 1990 also accelerated reductions of other toxic pollutants because Congress believed that

the EPA was not moving quickly enough to reduce toxic pollution.

All of these major clean air bills were passed by Democratic Congresses with Republican Presidents. While it may seem unbelievable in today's political climate, there was a time in the not-so-distant past when environmental protection had bipartisan support. As a result of the bipartisan effort to protect the environment, our economy grew while air pollution levels fell and public health improved.

Air quality here in Washington, D.C., in Los Angeles, and other major cities is healthier today than it was in 1970 thanks to the Clean Air Act. Our automobiles no longer emit unlimited quantities of asthma and lung cancer-causing pollution, or lead. Our power plants now have scrubbers to reduce the sulfur dioxide pollution that caused acid rain and poisoned rivers and streams throughout the United States before 1990. Mercury pollution has fallen 80 percent thanks to that act. Thanks to these improvements in air quality, the Clean Air Act saves approximately 160,000 lives a year by preventing deaths otherwise caused by pollution.

When this new Republican Congress attacked greenhouse gas regulations, they claimed that they would not reverse the improvements that the Clean Air Act has made in reducing toxic pollution. Of course, their attempt to block greenhouse gas pollution standards was only the opening salvo. This Republican House has passed dozens of bills and amendments effectively repealing the Clean Air Act by blocking regulation of soot, smog, and dioxin. Their assault on the Clean Air Act is so comprehensive that they have passed regulation to deregulate multiple kinds of soot. Today, we'll vote on a bill to deregulate mercury and other toxic pollution from cement factories.

This bill would not only deregulate mercury pollution from cement factories, it would also block the EPA public health standards for other deadly pollutants such as the particulate pollution that scars lung tissue and causes cancer and emphysema. Blocking public health standards for cement kilns will increase net costs for American taxpayers by $6.3 billion to $17.6 billion every year by increasing the incidence of heart attacks, lung cancer, asthma attacks, and developmental disabilities in children.

They claim that these antipublic health bills would create jobs. The fact is that while the Clean Air Act has reduced dangerous air pollution for the last 40 years, saving 160,000 lives last year alone, America's economy doubled in size. It didn't shrink, the sky didn't fall, and the worst predictions of our friends on the other side, not one of them came true.

I have introduced two amendments to H.R. 2681. I'm only going to move this one, Madam Chairman. This will clarify that the provisions in this bill will not go into effect if it causes respiratory illness, cardiac disease, other diseases, or death. This amendment would apply throughout the country, ensuring that rural, suburban, and urban Americans would be protected equally from reckless provisions in the underlying bill.

My amendment says, ``The administrator shall not delay actions to reduce emissions from any cement kiln if such emission is causing respiratory and cardiovascular illness and death, including cases of heart attacks, asthma attacks, and bronchitis.'' This ensures that if H.R. 2681 passes, God help us, we will not be increasing the rate of respiratory disease or sending more children to the hospital with asthma attacks. Since members of the majority claim to be equally concerned about the health of our constituents, I wanted to give them an opportunity to prove it.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

My colleague, whom I respect, said that we're losing jobs because of this onerous regulation. I'm just wondering if my colleague has any data on how many jobs were lost in the last 40 years due to the Clean Air Act--net.

Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, how many different jobs could be created if America just had more snakes? venom specialists? animal control? mongoose peddler? I only ask because, in the face of stagnating job growth, Republican leadership in the House Oversight Subcommittee actually recommended relaxing restrictions on exotic snake sales to create jobs. Apparently, in the face of ongoing unemployment, the one job Republicans feel confident they can create is snake oil salesman.

In contrast, President Obama's jobs proposal takes a page out of a former Republican playbook, most notably that of Dwight D. Eisenhower, supporting policies that put Americans back to work. It includes infrastructure investments to build and repair schools, roadways, bridges, creating construction jobs. The President's proposal cuts business taxes to incentivize hiring in the private sector, and it cuts payroll taxes for every current worker to spur economic demand. These bipartisan policies have been successful in the past.

The American people need real jobs, Mr. Speaker, not snake charmers, and I ask that my colleagues support real proposals like the American Jobs Act.

Offered By: Mr. Connolly of Virginia

Amendment No. 17: At the end of the bill, add the following

section:

Offered By: Mr. Connolly of Virginia

Amendment No. 18: At the end of the bill, add the following

section:

Offered By: Mr. Connolly of Virginia

Amendment No. 18: At the end of the bill, add the following

section:

Offered By: Mr. Connolly of Virginia

Amendment No. 19: At the end of the bill, add the following

section:

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

Mr. Chairman, Deutsche Bank, the biggest bank in Europe, recently issued a report on global clean energy investment opportunities in which it stated, ``Countries with more TLC, transparency, longevity, and certainty, in their climate policy frameworks will attract more investment and build new clean industries, technologies, and jobs faster than their policy-lagging counterparts.''

The TRAIN Act is one more step in the wrong direction by the same Republican House which has held over 110 anti-environmental votes. This unprecedented assault on the environment has devastating consequences for our economy. As the Deutsche Bank report said, ``Germany and China have emerged as global leaders in low carbon technologies and investment. The net effect is that while Congress stumbles, the U.S. stands to fall behind.''

This investor report, from Europe's largest bank, identified several policy failures that are impeding job growth here at home. First, Congress has not established a carbon reduction target, or required polluters to pay for the cost of greenhouse gas pollution. Congress does not have a national renewable standard or even an energy efficient standard. The Deutsche Bank report notes that the lack of these regulations and incentives has actually forced investors to make investments elsewhere, including in China and other countries, rather than here at home in America. As a result, we have lost solar and other advanced technology market share to our competitors.

My simple amendment to the TRAIN Act establishes a simple process to identify ``policies that should be adopted and implemented by the United States to provide domestic job growth, and to ensure that our Nation is internationally competitive in the $5 trillion global energy industry for clean energy technology, development, and manufacturing.'' Business leaders have urged Congress to adopt both a regulatory framework and a system of incentives to spur clean energy job creation. In addition to the regulation the Deutsche Bank identified as supporting investment, American entrepreneurs have called on Congress to expand public financing for clean energy.

This month members of the American Energy Innovation Council visited Capitol Hill to express their strong support for just that concept. This group included venture capitalist John Doerr, former Lockheed Martin CEO Norm Augustine, and Bill Gates of Microsoft. The American Energy Innovation Council recently issued a report which stated, ``As business leaders, we feel that America's current energy system is deficient in ways that cause serious harm to our economy, our national security, and our environment.

To correct these deficiencies, we must make a serious commitment to modernizing our energy system with cleaner and more efficient technologies.''

This Republican House is an anchor that's dragging down the American economy. It's continued obsession with austerity and opposition to any economic recovery programs, including clean energy, mean that America falls behind while China surges ahead. We cannot afford to let China and Germany dominate industries such as clean technology.

My simple amendment will establish a process to start restoring American leadership in this important sector for economic growth. Rather than repealing commonsense public health standards, we ought to be focused on measures like my amendment, which support high-tech job growth.

I ask my colleagues to vote for this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield for a question?

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I would inquire as to what would be the comparable number for oil and gas and coal in the United States. You talk about the growth trend; but in absolute numbers, is it not true that actually the fossil fuels industry gets $70 billion a year?

I would inquire of the Chair how much time is left on this side.

To conclude on this matter, I have enormous respect for my colleague on the other side; but to oppose a simple study to require that we look at the benefits of clean energy technology, I find that very troubling. That resistance, sadly, is going to impede American growth and competitiveness and is actually going to cost us jobs.

There is no question that in the coal industry, in particular, we've kind of reached a plateau. In fact, in Kentucky, we've lost a lot of jobs relative to, say, 30 years ago; whereas, as my colleague from Massachusetts pointed out last night, in wind energy, just in the last 4 years, we're up to 80,000 jobs. It's a fast-growing, lucrative part of our economy. It's clean, and it actually concretely helps create jobs.

That's a worthwhile thing to study if not to invest in, and I regret the fact that the manager on the other side finds even a study something to be resisted.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

I thank my good friend and the distinguished ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Chairman, this bill is extraordinary even for the most anti- environmental House of Representatives in American history. The Republican leadership has attempted already to pass over 110 anti- environmental bills, amendments, and riders. But the TRAIN Act would be one of the most destructive for America's environment and our public health.

It appears that the Republican leadership took every anti- environmental bill, rider, amendment, and nighttime fantasy of the Koch brothers and wrapped it into a single legislative package called the TRAIN Act.

This bill would block clean air, public health standards for mercury, dioxin, smog, soot, and other toxic pollutants. We're supposed to believe no, no, no, all we're doing is just delaying and studying. Twenty-one years is a long time to study. And if you have a loved one whose health is at stake, that delay can be life threatening.

By increasing the incidence of emphysema, lung cancer, asthma, and cardiac diseases, this bill will kill 25,000 Americans every year-- nearly as many as are killed in highway accidents.

Just one standard this bill would repeal, the Cross-State Air Pollution

Rule, would have significant ramifications for my district and for the National Capital Region from which I come. The wind transport of power plant and other harmful emissions from polluters to the west in our community is one of the reasons the Capital Region is listed as a non- attainment area for air quality. But we have to clean it up.

The preponderance of harmful ground level ozone threatens seniors, asthmatics, and those with respiratory conditions--not to mention the fact that it threatens our eligibility for long-term transportation funding.

Monitoring and responsibly regulating cross-State air pollution here and in other regions would save, not cost, save $280 billion a year in health care costs. But not if the Republicans pass this bill.

But of course they don't want you to look at the other side of the ledger. There are benefits to be had by implementing the EPA standards rather than delaying them, $280 billion worth, but they don't want you to know that. They don't want to talk about that.

I was proud to work with a number of my colleagues to lead a group letter signed by 60 Members of this body reaffirming our support for the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule. This public health standard is critical for economic and human health in our region. That rule is just one example among many successful public health standards established under the Clean Air Act.

Since its inception in 1970, the Clean Air Act has produced economic benefits that far outweigh the cost of compliance by as much as 8 to 1. The Small Business Majority credits the Clean Air Act with widespread economic benefits, both across urban and rural communities, improving public and worker health, and creating jobs, millions of them.

Each year, the Clean Air Act prevents 22,000 hospital visits which would otherwise be caused by pollution-induced respiratory diseases, 67,000 chronic asthma and bronchitis attacks, and saves over $110 billion in health care costs. The TRAIN Act would block nearly every major public health standard being implemented by the Clean Air Act.

I heard my colleague and friend, Mr. Griffith from Virginia, talk about a letter he read in a local newspaper in Charles County, Virginia. This couple purportedly couldn't understand why bureaucrats who were sitting on their rear ends somehow come up with these fantastical regulations that are just burdensome and serve no purpose.

Perhaps if that couple had sat with a child in a hospital room, fighting for his or her breath, they'd understand why we need these regulations and why those professionals at EPA are doing their job to protect public health. Perhaps if they had seen a loved one or a spouse hooked up to tubes, fighting for her life because she's severely asthmatic, they'd understand why we need these standards. Perhaps if they understood a friend had COPD and has to walk around now all the time with oxygen in a mask to function and be mobile, they'd better understand the life-and-death struggle of people who live in areas affected by dirty, polluted air and would better respect why the EPA is protecting our health--even if that couple in Charles County doesn't understand.

I urge opposition to this bill.

Mr. Speaker, here they go again--House Republicans are driving America once more to the brink. They took us to the edge of a shutdown in April. They shoved us to the precipice of America's first ever default in August. And now after their similar attempt failed yesterday, House Republicans are again playing politics with the American economy, and American families.

Hurricane Irene leveled homes end businesses in the Northeast. An earthquake destroyed businesses in Mineral, Virginia. In my district, Tropical Storm Lee left hundreds of families homeless and damaged dozens of small businesses. And yet in this Continuing Resolution, House Republicans state they will only help those in extremis if we gut the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing program--a successful program that spurs Amerian innovation and creates American jobs.

In fact, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce urged the retention of this important program stating it ``promotes manufacturing in the U.S. and is an important component.''

Americans don't need brinkmanship; they need predictability and security. This Continuing Resolution gives them neither. I would urge my colleagues to reject it in favor of one that protects Americans.

I thank my good friend from Michigan for yielding.

Let me take this opportunity to thank the 174 Republican Members of this House who voted with us in a bipartisan fashion just last month to avert the first Federal default in the Nation's history. It may not have been an easy vote for some, but it was the right thing to do to prevent a catastrophe that would have certainly shaken further our fragile economic recovery. Today's vote is no different.

I urge my colleagues to not give in to the political gamesmanship that Standard & Poor's cited as the very reason for its bleak downgrading of the United States' credit rating. We must reaffirm our commitment that America will meet its obligations, and we don't want to find ourselves politically explaining how we voted for it before we voted against it.

Make no mistake that voting in favor of this resolution will, in fact, lead to the very default we voted to avoid with the Budget Control Act. You cannot now be for default after having just voted against it. We must reject this resolution and move on to the real challenge of working with a bipartisan supercommittee to restore fiscal responsibility, revive our economy and, most importantly, re-instill confidence in the American citizen and the American business community.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for their efforts to pass this clean extension of both our surface and air transportation programs.

Working in a bipartisan fashion, we can avoid the previous clashes and political theatrics that forced 4,000 FAA employees and more than 70,000 construction workers off the job for two weeks without pay.

Our nation's transportation infrastructure is the backbone of our economy, and we must ensure our ability to move people and goods if we are to grow the economy and create jobs.

I know the Chairman and Ranking Member share my disappointment that we are not yet providing back pay for those FAA employees who were furloughed. As you know, I am a cosponsor of Congressman LoBiondo's bipartisan legislation to make those employees whole. They were innocent victims of our inaction, and we should restore those lost wages immediately.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Hal Strickland for receiving the National Voluntary Service Award from the National Recreation and Park Association.

This prestigious award is given to volunteers who work to improve recreation, parks and conservation programs in our communities. With more than three decades of volunteer service with local youth and parks organizations, Mr. Strickland has left a profound and lasting imprint on my community of Fairfax County, Va.

In addition to his career as a civil engineer for the U.S. Forest Service, Mr. Strickland served 14 years on the Fairfax County Athletic Council, including two as chairman. He founded the Chantilly Youth Association, and spent 25 years as president of the community sports league. He served as president of the Greenbriar Civic Association, and for the past 20 years, he has served on the Fairfax County Park Authority Board, where he has served as chairman six times.

He has said that he is most proud of his work on Fairfax County's successful synthetic turf field program. I was proud to partner with Mr. Strickland to launch that effort during my tenure as Chairman of the Fairfax Board of Supervisors. It played a vital component of our anti-gang initiative by providing young people with more year-round outdoor activities. This community collaboration also has expanded field opportunities for Fairfax's many sports leagues. The program now has more than two dozen synthetic fields across the county.

He is also known for his work of preserving green spaces in Centreville and Chantilly, despite the areas' rapid growth. This green space resembles the historic beginnings of the area, when it was a collection of gentlemen horse farms. He has truly influenced the quality of life in Fairfax through his accomplishments.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in commending Hal Strickland for receiving the National Voluntary Service Award and thanking him for his years of service in our community. Through his dedicated service, we are preserving our history through green spaces and making recreational activities more accessible to all for generations to come.