Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 200th anniversary of the designation of the town of Greenfield, Massachusetts as the county seat of Franklin County. The town of Greenfield was incorporated in 1753 and named for the nearby Green River. Hampshire County was divided to create Franklin County in 1811, and Greenfield was designated as the seat of government for Franklin County. After 200 years of development and innovation, Greenfield and Franklin County continue to thrive on the exceptional enthusiasm of their citizenry.

Greenfield has long been associated with commercial development and economic diversification. The strategic location at the confluence of the Deerfield and Connecticut Rivers provided advantages to manufacturers in the 18th century. Throughout the 19th century, major transportation routes linking Springfield, Massachusetts to New Hampshire and also Boston to New York began to pass through Greenfield. The town eventually grew to accommodate the influx of manufacturers which lasted until the conclusion of World War I in 1918.

The ingenuity and resolve of Greenfield citizens ensured that the Great Depression did not cripple its agricultural and industrial workers, as happened elsewhere in America. The U.S. engagement in World War II then worked to stoke new business opportunities in Greenfield, and these economic openings allowed the town and its residents to quickly rebuild from the Depression and spring forward and economically develop further. In 2003, Greenfield grew to the point of adopting a mayoral form of government--thus, officially becoming a city in Massachusetts--in order to continue and improve upon on its tradition of providing superior recreational, educational and business opportunities for its residents.

On the occasion of the 200th anniversary of the designation of the town of Greenfield, Massachusetts as the county seat of Franklin County, I congratulate its citizens and praise their dedication and perseverance throughout the town and city's history. I look forward with enthusiastic support as we work together for a prosperous future.

Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Madam Chairman, title V of the Energy and Water bill that is before us today robs Peter to pay Paul.

Title V takes funds which were appropriated 2\1/2\ years ago for transportation purposes and moves part of those funds to the Corps of Engineers in today's Energy and Water appropriations bill. Title V specifically rescinds all awarded but unobligated high-speed rail dollars from the Recovery and Reinvestment Act and moves those dollars to respond to the unprecedented flooding this spring in many States for work to be done as it is designed and executed by the Corps of Engineers.

Effectively this is a backhanded increase in allocation to the Energy and Water Subcommittee for this bill at the expense of transportation purposes.

I don't contend or even suggest that the Energy and Water bill is well-funded. In fact, the allocations for the Energy and Water Subcommittee and for the Transportation and HUD Subcommittee, of which I am the ranking member, are both totally inadequate. But I do object to killing projects in transportation that will create construction jobs in the severely depressed construction industry and provide a valuable transportation alternative in heavily congested corridors among our largest metropolitan areas all over the country. And I do absolutely support making the repairs to flood control systems as quickly as they can be designed and built. That's an obligation.

In my 20 years, 10\1/2\ years under Democratic Presidents, 9\1/2\ years under Republican Presidents and under the control in the Congress of either party--because it switched back and forth in those 20 years-- we have dealt with natural disasters on a bipartisan basis, on an emergency basis, every single year. Most famously, that includes, in September '05, the Katrina disaster which resulted in $15 billion for recovery of New Orleans and the gulf coast on an emergency and on a totally bipartisan basis. But this section takes from projects planned, applied for and awarded but not yet obligated and kills those projects.

Roughly $6 billion of the $8 billion appropriated for intercity passenger rail and high-speed rail projects in the Recovery Act are already obligated, and half of those are already in construction. The Recovery Act itself allowed until the 30th of September of 2012, the end of the '12 fiscal year, to obligate those dollars. Of the roughly $2 billion unobligated, 80 percent of those dollars arises from the single decision just 3 months ago of the Governor of Florida to refuse the $1.6 billion previously applied for and awarded for a project to build true high-speed rail on a dedicated corridor between Orlando and Tampa.

Now, Orlando lies roughly equidistant from Jacksonville, Tampa and Miami. Those four, Jacksonville, Tampa, Miami and Orlando, are four of America's 40 largest metropolitan areas. All have over 1\1/2\ million people, all are growing by between 15 and 30 percent, and they are among our fastest growing metropolitan areas. They represent a prime example of the opportunity that high-speed rail offers in carefully selected high-population corridors around the country to reduce congestion and expedite travel.

When that money was refused by Florida, the Federal Rail Administration re-awarded the $1.6 billion to projects in other States, including, as examples, in the Northeast Corridor, which carries half of all intercity rail passengers in America every day, nearly $800 million for work in that Northeast Corridor, and that work would bring the speed up to 160 miles per hour in parts of New Jersey, and the work would be done in New York and New Jersey. So that is $800 million.

I ask unanimous consent to be given 1 additional minute.

Secondly, in the high-speed corridors that are based on Chicago as their hub, to go to Detroit, to go to St. Louis, to go to Indianapolis, to go to Milwaukee, for equipment that will allow those high-speed corridors to function better.

Thirdly, in projects on the west coast as well. All of those projects are jeopardized by this provision in this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 250th anniversary of the founding of the town of Great Barrington, Massachusetts, including the village of Housatonic. The town was incorporated by the colonial Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Sir Francis Bernard, on June 30, 1761. Nestled in the Berkshire Hills, Great Barrington features natural resources such as Monument Mountain, Lake Mansfield, and the scenic Housatonic River. It is the town that saw the first open resistance to British rule in 1774, Henry Knox's cannon caravan passing through to Fort Ticonderoga in 1776, and provided a distinguished roster of military personnel to every major conflict in which America has participated.

Great Barrington has also been the home of poet and journalist William Cullen Bryant, inventor William Stanley--who first lit the streets of Great Barrington--and inventor Marcus Rogers. Elizabeth Freeman, who successfully sued for her freedom from slavery in 1781, Laura Ingersoll Secord, the Canadian heroine of the War of 1812, Anson Jones, the last president of the Republic of Texas and James Weldon Johnson, the co-writer of the Negro National Anthem all resided in Great Barrington. W.E.B. Dubois, distinguished writer, editor, sociologist and activist, graduated from Searles High School in Great Barrington as valedictorian before embarking upon a lifetime of achievement that included the founding of the Niagara Movement, the precursor to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored Persons. The citizens of Great Barrington stand as an example of what hard work and resolve can accomplish.

The town of Great Barrington is also the center of many historical, commercial and cultural resources, including the Mason Library in Great Barrington and Ramsdell Library in Housatonic, the Mahaiwe Performing Arts Center, the Captain Truman Wheeler House, the Dwight-Henderson House, and the famed Newsboy Statue. With its scenic natural resources, Great Barrington has become the summer vacation destination of thousands and continues to be a vibrant and charming community.

On the occasion of the 250th anniversary of the town of Great Barrington, Massachusetts, I congratulate its citizens and praise their dedication and perseverance throughout the town's history. I look forward with enthusiastic support as we continue to work together for a prosperous future.

Mr. Speaker, on June 30, 1761, the incorporation of the town of Shutesbury, Massachusetts, was approved by the colonial Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Sir Francis Bernard. Named for former colonial Governor Samuel Shute, the town is an exemplification of the natural beauty of Massachusetts' rolling hills. After 250 years, Shutesbury remains a town largely untouched by the imperfections of modernity.

The town traces its history to 1735, when an east-west inland road was built to encourage commerce from Lancaster to Sunderland. Over the next century, residents constructed a meetinghouse and assembled a small town. The incorporation of Shutesbury in 1761 allowed residents to expand their community to include a church and public library. The town has grown to now include over 1,700 people while maintaining the charm and civility that Shutesbury has continually represented.

Shutesbury continues to thrive in western Massachusetts as a rural community amidst burgeoning cities. The promise of this town is rooted in its commitment to protecting natural resources and recognizing the capacity of forests, streams and rural communities for future generations to enjoy.

On the occasion of the 250th anniversary of the town of Shutesbury, Massachusetts, I congratulate its citizens and praise their dedication and perseverence throughout the town's history. I look forward with enthusiastic support as we continue together to work toward a prosperous future.

Mr. Speaker, on June 30, 1761, the town of Belcher's Town, Massachusetts, was incorporated by the colonial Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Sir Francis Bernard. The town is named for Jonathan Belcher, colonial Governor of the Province of Massachusetts Bay from 1730 until 1741. After 250 years of development and innovation, Belchertown continues to promote civility and cooperation amongst its citizens.

Overlooking the Connecticut and Quaboag Valleys, Belchertown has long been a town connected to the thoroughfares passing through the area. Many of the original buildings were taverns to accommodate travelers; however, the first railroad in 1850 allowed greater diversity in the town's commercial endeavors. In the past century, Belchertown has continued to prosper while maintaining the community-oriented charm familiar to most of western Massachusetts.

The commitment to volunteerism and community service is traced throughout Belchertown's history. Its citizens stand as an example of what hard work and resolve can accomplish, as evidenced by the formidable carriage industry in the early 1800s, the town's first library in 1887, the development of Quabbin Reservoir in 1927, and the brave service of numerous citizens in every U.S. war except the War of 1812.

On the occasion of the 250th anniversary of the town of Belchertown, Massachusetts, I congratulate its citizens and praise their dedication and perseverance throughout the town's history. I look forward with enthusiastic support as we continue to work together for a prosperous future.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to pay tribute to Paul M. Dowd for his longtime service to the City of Pittsfield, Massachusetts, and whose name will hereinafter be associated with the historic baseball field at Wahconah Park in Pittsfield.

Mr. Dowd first came to Pittsfield in 1966 as a pitcher for the Pittsfield Red Sox--having been signed by that organization in 1964-- from his home state of Michigan, where he also attended Ferris State College. He has been a full-time resident of Pittsfield for the past 35 years. During that time, he has generously dedicated his time to the community.

Thirty years ago, Mr. Dowd founded the Berkshire County Chapter of the Jimmy Fund and remains active as its president. He was elected to the Pittsfield City Council for six years, served in the United States Marine Reserves, coached Little League baseball, and is a member of the Knights of Columbus, Elks Lodge, and American Legion. Mr. Dowd is well known in the community for his selfless and thoughtful commitment to improving the quality of life for children afflicted with cancer.

In recognition of his magnanimous service to the community and its children, the Pittsfield City Council and the Pittsfield Park Commission voted unanimously to name the baseball field at Wahconah Park as the Paul M. Dowd Field. Because of his outstanding commitment to the welfare of Pittsfield's citizenry, Mr. Dowd is most deserving of this high honor.

Mr. Speaker, on April 26, 1761, at the urging of Colonel William Williams, the official incorporation and names of Pittsfield and Berkshire County, Massachusetts were approved by the colonial governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Sir Francis Bernard. The name Berkshire reflected a connection with the English Berkshire, while the naming of Pittsfield reflects an admiration for William Pitt, Earl of Chatham. Pitt, dubbed the ``Great Commoner,'' was a supporter of the colonies in America.

For 250 years the people of Pittsfield have been innovative, resourceful and resilient. The first agricultural fair was held in Pittsfield, and the first written reference to our national pastime of baseball is found in a 1791 city ordinance. William Stanley set up the transformer business in Pittsfield that eventually became the General Electric corporation.

Today, Pittsfield is once again a city on the rise. Fueled by the creative economic sector, Pittsfield is thriving by embracing diversity, art and culture.

I congratulate the citizens of Pittsfield on this occasion of their city's remarkable 250th anniversary, and I wish them the best as we embark together on a bright future.

Madam Chairman, this is a thoughtless and destructive amendment. I strongly oppose the underlying bill and believe it profoundly limits the transportation options for Americans and will damage our economy through hundreds of thousands of lost jobs. But I do respect that Chairman Latham provided oversight and made tough decisions on priorities.

Unfortunately, the Jordan amendment, after all these days of individually considered amendments, does none of that. It reduces every account by 5.5 percent without any understanding or probably even concern for

the impact. For example, it ensures a part-time air traffic control system by cutting more than half a billion from the operating expenses of the FAA. Does the gentleman really intend to close down the Columbus, Cincinnati and Cleveland airports 1 day each month?

This amendment would result in the funding shortfall of nearly a billion dollars in the tenant-based section 8 program, resulting in the eviction of 120,000 people.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate and thank the gentleman from New York for the statement that he has just made because I think it represents the most rational thing that we could do with the transportation section of this legislation. But given the hour and understanding that we are not operating under rational rules on this issue, I will say only that, that I do congratulate and commend you for the statement that you have made, in which I virtually totally concur. I might find a word or two to disagree with in the usage there, but I concur with it.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Point of Order

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, the underlying bill that we have before us profoundly limits the transportation options that are available for the American people and imposes deep cuts upon the very programs with the greatest potential for creating jobs and providing the necessary foundation on which a strong economic recovery depends.

The underlying bill terminates, completely defunds the High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail program that was authorized under the PRIIA rail safety bill in the fall of 2008 and signed by then President Bush. That's 28 months ago. It rescinds those items that were in the Recovery Act. In the legislation that was passed in February of 2009, the Recovery Act, it rescinds all of the unobligated funds from that Recovery Act, and it rescinds in the high-speed rail program the $2.5 billion of grants that were awarded in September of last year that were passed in the December '09 2010 appropriations bill. Those grants were awarded but have not yet been obligated.

It also happens to shut down all of the new funding for light rail and commuter rail and bus rapid transit, only providing money for those projects already in place that have received full funding grant agreements. They have contracts of that sort. There is funding in the underlying legislation to do that in the area of the Federal Transit Administration. It also cancels all of the so-called TIGER grants which were part of the fiscal year 2010 legislation, some $600 million, over 76 projects in 40 different States which were awarded money from among 1,000 projects that asked for $20 billion, showing the enormous need that was perceived on the part of the country. All of that in the TIGER grants in the 2010 budget are matched by local funds. It's not all Federal funds, as were the ARRA moneys. But it has to be matched at the local level. It's not cookie cutter. It is not ordered by Beltway bureaucrats or anything like that. It's projects that grew out of the planning and the intent on the part of the States or the cities or the regional transit agencies to get good projects done.

All of these, all of these are job-killing cuts, terminations, and rescission, every one that I have mentioned that is done in the underlying legislation. All of these are part of the $7 billion reduction in transportation construction for transportation and infrastructure that have been removed--terminated, rescission, cuts-- that have been removed from our construction industry, which is suffering from 30 to 40 percent unemployment. They represent at least 280,000 jobs, 280,000 man years of work for that construction industry suffering from 30 to 40 percent unemployment. And this is at a time when bids are coming in at 20 percent below the engineering estimates for what they would cost. Exactly the time that we should be doing those construction projects, putting those construction projects out to bid.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Now I have finally gotten to the amendment of the gentleman from Texas. The underlying bill before us actually provides $850 million which covers both the debt service for the bonded debt of Amtrak and covers capital improvements.

Now, we also have Amtrak, which was authorized for funding in the legislation, the rail safety legislation as signed by President Bush in September or October of 2008. For the fiscal year 2011, the authorization for debt service and for capital grants, that authorization is over $1.3 billion. So the amount that is in this bill, which happens to be at $850 million, is $450 million plus, below the authorized amount for those items, and actually comes right on the enacted number for Amtrak for the same purposes, the debt service and the capital grants for new improvements and for improvements to whatever it is that is needed for state of good repair and such in Amtrak, mostly which is spent on the Northeast Corridor, which is where Amtrak owns all the trackage. Most of that capital money is used in that kind of a way.

That money already leads to 1,500 jobs, which will be terminated at Amtrak at the $850 million level, and the gentleman's proposal is to cut another $446 million below that. That happens to leave us in a situation where there is almost no money left for Amtrak to operate, to do any capital program for the rest of the year, because they are committed to $270 million plus of debt service.

Therefore, if the gentleman's amendment were adopted, it would take $446 million out, leaving only $403 million left in the program. 270 is needed for the debt service, and 127 or $128 million has already--it changes as the days go on--has already been expended on state of good repair, service and improvements in this fiscal year as allowed under the CR that we've worked under for now almost 5 months, so that there would be virtually no money, less than $5 million left for doing any of the kind of improvements, maintenance, the track work, if there are bridges that need to be done or anything of that sort.

So it virtually ends up with leaving them nothing to do for the kind of emergencies and anything that would be otherwise planned for the rest of the year. Now that, in fact, means then that Amtrak will in fact terminate another 1,000 jobs.

I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Reclaiming--it wasn't my time. I think we should have been trading it through Mr. Nadler.

But the money is assigned to be used either for the payment for the service, the contract for the service itself, or the need for some subsidy on the service, which is a very small one, on the operation for the Northeast Corridor, if any at all. And the rest of it is assigned clearly for debt service and for the capital program which necessarily goes on, because if you don't do it and keep up with repairs when they are needed, then you end up with ever-growing repairs that put you out of business.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

I want to commend again and congratulate the gentleman from Colorado for offering this amendment, and I want to support this

amendment, though I realize the realities of the situation that we are in.

In the recovery bill--and we could have a long discussion about the word ``failure'' of the recovery bill but we won't go into that at this time of night--the so-called projects that were ready to go into construction right away, those were designated with a termination date. The work had to be done by the end of 2010. And those monies that were for shovel-ready projects have already been expended completely in the process.

For the longer term investments, of which the high-speed rail program and the TIGER grant program were part, those were always intended to go farther. Never was it suggested that they could be done and the work done that would produce the jobs necessary in less than at least 2011 and 2012 as well. So what has been proposed for the TIGER grant here, and all of the TIGER grants, puts them in quite a different category.

The gentleman's amendment highlights an example of how the majority's rhetoric and political posturing on the continuing resolution come at the expense of good policy.

If you had presented this project that the gentleman from Colorado has put forward to a Member on the other side of the aisle, they would agree that the use of a $10 million grant to leverage over $200 million in non-Federal funds is a perfect example of the potential for public- private partnerships. But the moment you mention the project genesis within the President's Recovery Act, their tune turns to righteous condemnation.

More broadly, there are other projects across the country that would be impacted by the rescission's political intent. In particular, efforts to address congestion that is choking our transportation network through the creation of a 21st-century high-speed rail system would be halted in many regions. For example, $110 million to improve connections to Amtrak's Northeast Corridor within the Nation's most densely populated region is also caught up in the same problem that the gentleman from Colorado is talking about. So it would be an entirely rational thing to allow the ARRA funds to be implemented until September 30, 2011, as has been suggested.

I support the gentleman's amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman for yielding time.

Mr. Chairman, this continuing resolution clearly endangers the fragile recovery of America's economy. While I have the greatest respect for Chairman Latham, he has been saddled with an irrational task of cutting $15.5 billion, a 23 percent cut, from the ``Transportation and Housing'' title of the resolution. I cannot fathom how the new majority, which proclaims to be all about

jobs, could as their first piece of business impose deep cuts upon the very programs that have the greatest potential for creating jobs and that provide the necessary foundation for a strong economic recovery.

Specifically, the continuing resolution cuts funding for the Community Development Block Grants program by more than 60 percent to by far the lowest level since the program was created in 1975 under a Republican President, President Gerald Ford. As a result, over 1,200 cities and towns across all 50 States will be forced to shelve local economic development projects in every one of our districts, and the associated 45,000 jobs will be lost.

In addition, the bill proposes to cut over $7 billion in transportation and infrastructure investments. This includes reductions that force Amtrak to lay off roughly 1,500 employees and will halt work on 76 TIGER grants already announced in 40 States and cancel the associated 25,000 construction jobs.

Finally, as we consider the ongoing housing needs of our most vulnerable citizens, this bill reduces by $760 million, a 75 percent cut, programs serving elderly and disabled persons, handcuffing our ability to keep up with the support required to meet the needs of our expanding and aging senior population.

In addition, the $75 million cut to our Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing, VASH, program is frankly appalling. Just last week, HUD released a report indicating that more than 76,000 veterans are homeless on any given night and that vets are 50 percent more likely to be homeless. Yet the majority's bill turns its back on our homeless vets, leaving them literally out in the cold.

Mr. Chairman, while I'm glad this bill does not meet the Republican majority's pledge to cut $100 billion in non-security spending, it will still have a dramatic negative impact on American families, while making no more than a ripple in the ocean of additional national debt caused by the massive tax cuts adopted during the Bush administration, at the very time that America has engaged in two trillion-dollar wars in the Islamic world.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate the American Bus Association, the trade association for the private over-the-road bus and motorcoach industry, on its 85th anniversary in this year of 2011. The ABA represents 800 bus operating companies (along with 3200 other travel, tour and motorcoach manufacturing companies). The members of the ABA provide all manner of transportation services to millions of Americans. Specifically, ABA members provide scheduled service, commuter operations, charter and tour services and airport shuttle services to all parts of the country. A gauge of how well and thoroughly ABA members do their jobs is found in the amazing statistic that the industry provides 760 million passenger trips each year.

A few other facts about this industry are in order. The private bus industry is the clear choice for environmental travel. A recent study by the Union of Concerned Scientists documents that for an individual or family traveling anywhere from 100 to 1000 miles motorcoach travel is the cleanest form of transportation available. Moreover, each motorcoach can take 55 cars off of our nation's highways, a testament to the industry's ability to aid us in overcoming the congestion on the nation's highways. In fact, as a recent Forbes Magazine article detailed, the motorcoach industry's environmental record translates into saving Americans a total of forty-four million gallons of fuel each year.

Less recognized is the industry's record in fostering tourism and travel in the nation. Each motorcoach may in effect leave some $13,000 behind in communities visited by those passengers in just a 24-hour period. The ABA has documented on its website the number of jobs motorcoach travel and tourism supports, both directly and indirectly, and the amount of money that motorcoach leaves in every Congressional district. The ABA Research Foundation has documented that motorcoach tourism is a vital part of the U.S. economy, employing over one million Americans and creating over $112 billion in economic activity.

The ABA began its service to the nation as the bus division of the American Automobile Association in 1926. At that time buses were the main transportation choice for the overwhelming majority of Americans, providing service to all parts of the nation, urban and rural. Buses took Americans to work, school, jobs, and hospitals; they allowed us to meet our families, see friends, and make a living.

Today, that role as the chief private transportation mode is being reprised by the industry. The industry has begun new point to point routes, serving city pairs as never before. We have seen bus services allowing Americans to see families, travel for business and pleasure and see their nation as never before. A study cited in a recent U.S.A. Today article documented that motorcoach transportation is the fastest growing mode of transportation in the nation for the last three years in a row, growing by six percent this last year alone. I want to congratulate the American Bus Association on its anniversary and wish it continued success.

Madam Speaker, on Saturday, Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, along with members of her congressional staff and constituents, were senselessly shot while attending a ``Congress on Your Corner'' event in Tucson. Those killed by the gunman--U.S. District Judge John Roll, Gabe Zimmerman, Christina Green, Dorothy Morris, Phyllis Scheck and Dorwin Stoddard--were citizens participating in the democratic process, meeting and speaking with their Member of Congress.

Like everyone else, I was shocked by the news. This kind of deadly violence shakes a community and a nation to its core. The rapid, life- saving action of Tucson's emergency responders and medical professionals and the acts of courage displayed by those at the event do, however, serve to remind us that the kindness of the human spirit can fight back in even the darkest of moments. My thoughts and prayers are with all those in Tucson, in particular the families of those who were injured or killed, and especially with my friend and outstanding colleague in the House, Gabrielle Giffords.

In the four years I have served with Congresswoman Giffords, she has been a stalwart supporter of her district, her State and America's interests at home and abroad. It is impossible not to admire her commitment to the job of Representative and the passion with which she pursues her interests and policy agenda. I am proud to serve on the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition, where Gabby is an influential advocate for renewable energy. She is a positive, moderate, thoughtful voice in our Caucus, and it is my greatest hope that she will recover from this terrible tragedy and return as soon as possible to her job. We certainly need her and miss her.

I don't believe that I have ever seen her without a smile on her face, which is quite a feat for someone working on Capitol Hill. She is a wonderful, upbeat and remarkable person.

It is imperative that we begin to learn everything we can from what happened in Tucson. If we do not take what measures we can to prevent such violence from occurring in the future, we not only do a disservice to those who were harmed and killed on Saturday, but we betray our commitment to the participatory principles on which our democracy, which must serve as a political and social example to other nations, was founded. We should re-examine how we treat and care for those suffering mentally in our country. We must thoroughly discuss how individuals become eligible to purchase automatic weapons. And we must learn to communicate about our differences in ways that are more thoughtful and civil and that better promote aspiration to those qualities in all who hear or read our words.

I continue to hope and pray for a full recovery for Congresswoman Giffords and the other injured victims and for a healing within for all those hurt internally by Saturday's events. Our Nation must continue to grow and become stronger in the face of this tragedy.

Madam Speaker, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development will bid farewell next week to Patrick Hatch, who

has served as the Subcommittee's Congressional Fellow over the past year. Mr. Hatch will return to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, where he will continue to perform budget and oversight work, taking with him the extraordinary talents and insight he shared with the Subcommittee.

The Transportation Subcommittee was very fortunate to have Patrick as a part of the Subcommittee team this year. He did an outstanding job serving as a valuable member of our housing policy team, researching a variety of housing and transportation issues, preparing hearing and briefing materials, and managing the thousands of project requests that were submitted to the Subcommittee during the fiscal year 2011 appropriations process. In addition, Patrick had lead staff responsibility for oversight of the budgets of the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Inspector General, Access Board, and Federal Maritime Commission.

Patrick's attention to detail, strong work ethic and excellent sense of humor set a high standard for the Subcommittee. His tremendous commitment to public service was evident in how he continually went above and beyond the call of duty by taking on additional assignments and working long hours to assist his Subcommittee colleagues and ensure a high quality piece of legislation. In every task, Patrick brought a sense of professionalism and passion to his work, and was a pleasure to work with, no matter how late the hour. Everyone who interacted with him during his service to the Subcommittee was greeted with a smile and a kind word, which is extraordinary, considering the difficult tasks and situations he dealt with each day.

I am profoundly grateful for Patrick's service to the Subcommittee over the past 12 months and I am confident that he will go on to achieve great things at the Department of Housing and Urban Development. I, along with my Subcommittee staff, wish Patrick all the best in his future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, this coming spring, tens of thousands of young people will graduate from high school, many of them at the very top of their class, only to discover that they have no hope of pursuing their goals because they were brought here illegally.

The DREAM Act will allow these young people the opportunity to pursue a pathway to citizenship while contributing to our country through higher education or military service, young people like Marissa, an honors student from my district.

Marissa was brought here as a young child from Uruguay and grew up considering herself as American as her classmates. Her English is as good as yours and mine. She excelled in school. Her dream was going to college and becoming a physician, but that dream was crushed when her parents sat her down and told her that her family is in the United States illegally.

America deserves to have the best and brightest young people like Marissa studying in our universities and defending our Nation. And these students deserve the chance to earn citizenship in the country that is the only homeland they know. It is the moral thing to do, and it's the fair thing to do.

I urge my colleagues to support the DREAM Act.

Madam Speaker, I rise to commend the outstanding public service of Jake Sullivan and the recognition bestowed on him with the Henry L. Shattuck Award for Public Service.

Commitment to public service has been the primary concern of Jake since he served the First District of Massachusetts in the 105th Congress. As my district scheduler, Jake accomplished his job with great skill and diplomacy. His amiable nature and the enjoyment he took in working as a team player served him well throughout his tenure.

Many of my constituents have continued to approach me and report how much they appreciated working with Jake. Treating everyone with respect, understanding, and kindness, he learned early on how to become an admirable public servant.

Jake has continued his unparalleled trend of resolute and superior public service with the city of Boston. As Senior Federal Relations Advisor to Mayor Thomas M. Menino, Jake is responsible for strategic collaboration between the city of Boston and the Federal Government. In this capacity, Jake works tirelessly to

support the interests of the city of Boston in the face of ever- intensifying and demanding constraints.

Jake has worked closely with my office and me throughout his tenure with Mayor Menino on behalf of the city of Boston. His determination to discover the best possible results for the citizens of Boston and intuitive perception of the complexities of an issue perpetually impresses me.

I am encouraged to report that Jake has remained grounded in his pursuit of public service throughout his professional career. Jake's compassion for his colleagues and dedication to public service is equally, if not more, evident as it was when he was a member of my staff over 12 years ago.

Jake Sullivan has made significant contributions to the city of Boston and State of Massachusetts since he began his public service with the First District. I strongly commend his continued commitment to public service and look forward with anticipation to his future achievements.