Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the 4,000 workers of the Federal Aviation Administration who were furloughed on July 22nd. For this reason, I urge the immediate passage of H.R. 2644, the Aviation Jobs and Safety Act of 2011, which will provide a clean extension and end this nonsense.

Republicans claim to focus on jobs, but time and time again, we see them cut, delay, and disable every program that comes their way. The partial shutdown of the Federal Aviation Administration has become the primary tactic of the Republican Party, which would rather send people home than send them to work.

The failure to pass a clean FAA extension is the latest example of this tactic. Since 2007, Congress has passed 20 short term extensions without controversial provisions. Breaking that precedent, House Republican leadership decided to attach policy riders to weaken unions and kill jobs, knowing full well it would never be approved by the Senate.

Mr. Speaker, the 4,000 furloughed FAA employees are non-partisan career civil servants who in many cases have spent more than two decades working to provide the public with safe, modern and efficient air travel in this country.

The Republican-led FAA shutdown has caused the FAA to issue 217 stop- work orders on $11 billion worth of air traffic control and safety- related contracts, and that number will continue to grow.

Because of this, nearly 86,000 construction jobs are now in jeopardy around the country. That's 90,000 people waiting to work, needing to pay their mortgages and feed their families.

Contracts are waiting to be honored and work is waiting to be done, but the Republicans are held up on issues such as subsidies to rural airports, which cost about $200 million a year.

Mr. Speaker, in just 10 days, the FAA shutdown has already cost the American taxpayer $300 million. Every day the Republican leadership holds out costs this country $30 million in lost airport fees.

Also troubling is how the airlines have reacted to the FAA shutdown. Instead of passing cost savings on to air travelers, almost every one of the airlines raised their ticket prices and pocketed the money. The situation was there and they took advantage of it.

My Republican colleagues are fond of saying that cutting taxes and dismantling government bureaucracies will streamline business and result in greater value to the consumer, but I fail to see the airlines acting on that principle.

On July 26th I joined my Democratic colleagues in the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in introducing H.R. 2644, which will end this job-killing standoff immediately. I call on my Republican colleagues to pass a clean extension so we can return to the business of negotiating a long-term authorization bill.

Mr. Speaker, it is incredibly unfair to hold thousands of American jobs hostage while we battle over promises we have already made and signed into law. This is exactly the same tactic that we saw Republicans employ with their threatened shutdown of the federal government in March and their senseless debate over the debt-ceiling which threatened the entire economy.

I remain committed to passing an authorization bill that adequately funds critical components of our transportation infrastructure, such as the implementation of the Next Generation Air Traffic Control system, and I am concerned that reckless cuts necessitate the firing of many safety personnel and put the flying public at risk. Right now the workers who should be moving these projects forward are sitting at home worried about the money they are not able to earn.

Mr. Speaker, we must pass H.R. 2644 immediately. Every day we wait costs our country money. This pointless shutdown erodes confidence of the hundreds of small businesses who contract for the federal government, and puts nearly 90,000 jobs in needless jeopardy.

I urge my colleagues to for a clean funding extension of the FAA before we leave Washington for the district work period. Thousands of jobs and livelihoods hang in the balance.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Golden West Humanitarian Foundation.

Since 1998, the Golden West Humanitarian Foundation has been proactive in combating shortfalls in heavily mine-impacted countries. With innovation, forethought, partnership, appropriateness and affordability as its key strategies for intervention, the Foundation's mandate is to safeguard the lives of men, women and children across the globe where landmine and unexploded ordnance contamination is a major threat. That commitment and investment is most certainly deserving of recognition. Their tireless work brings countries closer to peace and prosperity and serves as inspiration to others to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, in December I traveled to Cambodia and saw first-hand the great work that Golden West Humanitarian Foundation does in that country. Golden West has been actively removing landmines and other unexploded munitions in Cambodia caused by three decades of war. Estimates are that up to six million landmines still remain in Cambodia. Landmines claim more than 200 lives annually and have caused more than 40,000 people to live as amputees. This means that one out of every 230 people living in Cambodia is an amputee.

Mr. Speaker, the 37th Congressional District of California, has the largest population of Cambodians living in the United States. What happens in Cambodia affects my constituents in California. Every time someone in Cambodia is maimed or killed by a landmine, it is likely that person has family members or friends that live in my district.

Mr. Speaker, the Foundation is hard at work doing the important work of removing landmines in Cambodia and elsewhere around the world. Golden West Humanitarian Foundation has implemented several other successful programs. They offer support to Cambodians who, while at work or play, face the risk of death or maiming by these remnants of conflict.

One of Golden West Humanitarian Foundations' most effective programs is its Explosive Harvesting Program (EHP). This program recycles explosives extracted from existing weapons stockpiles to create disposal charges for humanitarian demining. Since its inception, EHP has provided the bulk of all demining explosives used in Cambodia. The Explosive Harvesting Program has deactivated over 200,000 landmines and has removed more than 24 tons of explosives from potential black market sales.

Another effective way the Foundation is preventing unnecessary deaths in Cambodia is through Research and Development. Research into explosive and non-explosive demining tools, as well as landmine and unexploded detection technologies, is where investments have produced impressive returns on investment. The Foundation has provided cutting edge solutions for problems encountered in humanitarian demining. The technical achievements of their research have been utilized by numerous organizations worldwide.

The Foundation further aids in protecting the most vulnerable group impacted by landmines and unexploded ordnance--children. Children are at a high risk of either dying or becoming physically or psychologically injured from land mines and other detonators in Cambodia. According to reports, there are two active mines in Cambodia for every child. Curious and trusting by nature, children are easily attracted by the explosives' texture and shine and too often find themselves exposed to the risk of harm.

Through their Children's Education Program, the Foundation has put ideas into action and created effective ways of preventing the unnecessary and heart rending death or harm to innocent children. One innovation in particular is the videogame Undercover UXO (shorthand for unexploded ordinance). It is an interactive, aged appropriate tool targeted that helps bring awareness to the children of the dangers land mines and other unexploded ordnance.

Golden West Humanitarian Foundation's work is critical to saving lives in Cambodia and around the world. The Foundation has more than a decade of experience making the world a safer place. I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring the Golden West Humanitarian Foundation and thanking them for the work that they do.

Mr. Speaker, I am compelled to rise in strong opposition to H.R. 2417, the ``Better Use of Light Bulbs Act.'' I oppose the ``Bulb Act'' because it is costly to taxpayers, harmful to the environment and an impediment to technological innovation. In short, H.R. 2417, the ``Bulb'' act should be rejected. It is unnecessary and, to put it simply, not a bright idea.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation is a thinly veiled attempt to reverse the advances made by the ``Energy Independence and Security Act,'' passed by the Democratic controlled 111th Congress. In fact, the original 2007 light bulb efficiency language was co-sponsored by Rep. Upton, R-Mich., and then-House Speaker Dennis Hastert, Ill. Of the 95 Republicans who originally voted for the new energy standards in 2007, 55 of them remain in office, including the current chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee and several members of the Republican leadership. House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton and Republican leaders Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Peter Roskam and Pete Sessions. It was a good idea then and is a good idea now. I was proud to vote for that bill and oppose this effort to undo it.

Mr. Speaker, the ``Energy and Independence Act'' did not ban incandescent bulbs; it spurred innovation and economic growth. This growth is put at risk by H.R. 2417. In my home state of California, light bulb standards have spurred innovation and economic growth. It does this not by banning incandescent bulbs, but rather investing in innovative technologies such as advanced incandescent, compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) and light-emitting diodes (LEDS). These policies translate into significant cost savings for American households; H.R. 2417 does not.

Second, the energy efficiency standards threatened by H.R. 2417 translate into huge cost savings for Americans. The standards would save American families, businesses and the country more than $12.5 billion annually, reducing Americans' energy costs by an average of 7 percent or about $85 per household each year. In California, standards have already resulted in tens of billions of dollars in utility bill savings for its citizens.

Studies have documented that energy efficient bulbs would save the average California household $125 a year, while the reliance on inefficient bulbs would cost consumers $35.6 million in unnecessary and unreasonably higher electricity bills.

Mr. Speaker, this bill is harmful to the environment. The efficiency standards that H.R. 2417 would repeal have been shown to reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions. Thus, it is not surprising that H.R. 2417 is strongly opposed by environmental groups like Environment America, the Environmental Defense Fund, and the Natural Resources Defense Fund. They understand the detrimental, long-term effects that a repeal of H.R. 2417 would have on our environment, and what that means for the quality of life of our children and families nationwide.

Efficient light bulbs decrease the level of harmful air pollution by 100 million tons of carbon pollution per year. That is the equivalent to the emissions of 17 million cars. H.R. 2417 would dismantle what have proven to be successful efforts at reducing harmful emissions associated with much-needed energy production and job creation.

Finally, and most importantly, H.R. 2417 will impede new job creation in America. The new standards that H.R. 2417 would repeal are already prompting manufacturers to build new U.S. plants. Nationally, more than 2,000 jobs have already been created at new factories across the country, including Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina, Florida and my home state, California. We need to adopt policies that will create jobs, not jeopardize them as H.R. 2417 does.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2417 is a dim idea that should not see the light of day. Because I am focused on spurring innovation, conserving energy, protecting the environment and creating jobs, I strongly oppose H.R. 2417, and urge my colleagues to do likewise.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to speak on the Richardson amendment.

This amendment adds an additional $5 million to the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act--also known as DERA grants--by cutting $10 million from the EPA Buildings and Facilities account. The Richardson amendment is about creating jobs, saving lives, and improving our Nation's air quality.

Mr. Chairman, in the last Congress I introduced legislation that extended DERA for 5 years. The DERA legislation received large bipartisan support and was later signed into law by President Obama. DERA is supported by a coalition of over 500 leading transportation, environmental, and health organizations.

I represent a region that's home to the largest port complex in the Nation and consists of some of the busiest freeways and railways in our country. However, the area also suffers from poor air quality, which has led to much higher rates of asthma and cancer than any other area in the Nation. DERA improves our air quality by reducing the CO2 emissions by up to 35,600 tons per year. It has been estimated that nearly 2,000 lives will be saved over the next 5 years through DERA by increased air quality.

Unfortunately, the bill before us today reduces the funding for DERA grants by $19.9 million, which is well below the fiscal year 2011 levels. The EPA estimates that the DERA program averages more than $13 in health and economic benefits for every $1 we authorize in funding. The EPA also estimates that DERA saves more than 3.2 million gallons of fuel annually, which means that truckers and other diesel operators will spend $8 million less on fuel. Mr. Chairman, that's less dependency on foreign oil.

In these tight economic times, it makes sense that we invest in programs that work and are cost effective. The CBO score on the Richardson amendment showed that it will decrease the budget authority by $5 million without creating any new budget outlays. Simply put, the Richardson amendment saves money.

Since DERA funding began in 2007, more than 3,000 projects nationwide have benefited from this program. In fact, there have been nine projects in the Los Angeles County area, where I reside, alone.

Mr. Chairman, DERA projects have created jobs and improved air quality in my district and across the country. The Richardson amendment saves lives, saves money, and creates jobs, which is certainly what we need and we should be talking about more in these dark hours.

I urge my colleagues to support the Richardson amendment.

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

Will the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentleman from California, which we both serve, and it's my understanding that the account that the funds we're requesting that it would be taken from do, with what we're taking, still meet its outlay that's required, so I don't believe that this would be a hurt to that account.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition.

I rise in strong opposition to the amendment that's brought forward to us today. If you look at the history, actually, of the DERA program, it's one of the rare programs in this House that has enjoyed bipartisan support from day one. When you consider the inception of the program and the continued amendments that have been passed on this floor, it has garnered support. And let's talk about why.

There is evidence to show that for every $1 of investment that's made into this particular program, $13 is received back, $13 in economic benefits, in terms of jobs and in terms of health savings. Why?

DERA is the diesel emission program. I would say, is there anyone here who honestly believes that the American public that is driving on the highways every single day and sees the spewing of smog and soot coming out of trucks thinks that we no longer need this program?

There are thousands and thousands of trucks on our highways, and if this program weren't needed, I would suggest, then why are we receiving thousands and thousands of applications every single day? When the trucks have been

replaced and we have reduced the emissions, then there will be the time to reevaluate this program. But that time is not now. We are finally making progress.

And let's talk about the benefits of the diesel emission program. Yes, one, it helps us to reduce the old trucks that are on the highways. But what does it also do?

By having diesel emission, it allows us to also save in terms of fuel that's being used. And we all know our dependency currently on foreign oil, so when we consider the ability to be able to reduce the amount of oil that we have to purchase, that individuals are purchasing, that truckers are purchasing, it reduces that cost of our dependence on oil. It reduces the cost of what the end users receive when they're getting the various products.

Now, let's talk about safety. When we look at the old trucks, if we can incentivize truckers to be able to upgrade their equipment, which would include filters, protection with diesel emissions, oftentimes there are other benefits that they're gaining with those vehicles, and so we're also saving lives.

I would say any suggestion of this amendment is shortsighted and ill- advised. This is a good working program, and the maker of the amendment agrees to that, and it garners bipartisan support.

I would suggest to you, Mr. Chairman, and strongly urge that my colleagues would all join us in opposition to this amendment. Let's keep this program that is working in this country, and let's address the desperate diesel emission that's impacting asthma and many health issues in our country.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to speak on Richardson amendment No. 2.

This amendment would direct $5 million for clean air grants, which were cut by nearly 15 percent in the current legislation.

Air pollution is a national problem. According to the EPA, approximately 127 million people live in counties that exceed at least one of the health-based national ambient air quality standards in 2008. New health-based standards for ozone will likely increase this number.

Mr. Chairman, I represent a region that's home to the largest port complex in the Nation and consists of some

of the busiest freeways and railways in the country. However, the area also suffers from poor air quality, which has led to much higher rates of asthma and cancer than the current national average.

Exposure to dirty air causes tens of thousands of premature deaths each year and results in serious health problems, such as the aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, difficulty breathing, increased susceptibility to respiratory infections, adverse effects on learning, memory, IQ, and behavior, as well as cancer.

Improvements in air quality lead to greater productivity, fewer sick days, and less money spent on health care to address air pollution- related problems. State and local air pollution control agencies have the primary responsibility to implement our Nation's clean air programs that are required by the Clean Air Act. However, due to this current recession, State and local governments are increasingly strapped for resources and are finding it ever more difficult to carry the Federal Government's share of funding this responsibility.

Because of the continuing adverse impacts of this recession on State and localities, air agencies will continue to make more painful decisions, such as reducing or cutting air programs that protect our public health. So in other words, we took 10 steps forward and now we're taking 20 back.

Mr. Chairman, I have seen firsthand that clean air grants are effective, when you consider, in an area of mine that's home to 16.8 million people and is one of the smoggiest areas in the Nation, the South Coast Air Quality Management District is one of the air pollution control agencies for Orange County and Los Angeles urban areas, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties as well. Clean air agencies also assist companies in being able to help them to comply with Clean Air Act regulations. This assistance has allowed many businesses to expand and to create jobs.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support clean air, support public health, and support American jobs. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was honored to be one of the featured speakers at an important session of the 102nd Annual Convention of the NAACP, which is being held in Los Angeles, California. My participation in this important event necessitated my remaining in my congressional district on Monday, July 25, 2011. Consequently, I was unable to return in time for rollcall votes Nos. 630, through 636.

Had I been present, I would have voted as follows:

1. On rollcall No. 630, I would have voted ``no'' (July 25)--(H. Res. 363, Providing for consideration of H.R. 2584, making appropriations for the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2012, and for other purposes).

2. On rollcall No. 631, I would have voted ``aye'' (July 25)--(On Approving the Journal).

3. On rollcall No. 632, I would have voted ``aye'' (July 25)--(Moran Amendment to H.R. 2584, Interior and Environment Appropriations Act for

Offered By: Ms. Richardson

Amendment No. 23: Page 66, line 10, after the dollar

amount, insert ``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.

Page 68, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $5,000,000)''.

Page 68, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $5,000,000)''.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 1315, the ``Consumer Protection Safety and Soundness Improvement Act'' because it is an undisguised attempt to undermine the critical reforms we worked to put in place following the economic disaster which cost this country 8 million jobs and $17 trillion in Americans' net worth and retirement savings.

I cannot support legislation that would take us back to a time when the people charged with regulating the financial industry were so intertwined with its interests that they purposefully looked the other way while unscrupulous firms conjured up dangerous and self-defeating schemes that brought our nation to the brink of economic disaster.

My friends on the other side of the aisle, aided by the army of banking industry lobbyists, all seem to have forgotten everything that happened in the past three years, so let us review the record.

Years without accountability for Wall Street and the Big Banks under President Bush and Congressional Republicans led to what most economists consider to be the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

The official explanation was that the crisis was not a natural disaster, but the result of high risk, complex financial products; undisclosed conflicts of interest; and the failure of regulators, the credit rating agencies, and the market itself to rein in the excesses of Wall Street.

Major financial institutions began to fall like dominoes, and we had to step in and bail them out. I voted for the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act because it ended any possibility of another taxpayer bailout and put in place measures to ensure that such insanity should never again threaten the livelihoods of innocent Americans.

H.R. 1315 is designed to slow down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), replacing its single leader with a 5 member commission, which is likely to lead to internal gridlock.

Simply put, this legislation is an attack on the landmark Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act passed by the Democratic-controlled 111th Congress and an attempt to return to the bad old days of the Wild West of Wall Street.

Weaken, delay, and erode--these are the tactics being employed through this legislation by those who choose to side with some reckless Wall Street bankers over millions of American families.

Mr. Chair, the financial crisis of 2008-2009, which we have come to call the ``Great Recession,'' saw millions of Americans pay the price of abuses committed by big banks, credit card companies, and other financial institutions on Wall Street.

They paid with their homes, their savings, their pensions and their jobs.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was established under the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act which President Obama signed into law last year. Since then, opponents, backed by an army of banking lobbyists, have tried to restrict and cripple parts of the law that will do the most good for American consumers, the CFPB being the prime target.

H.R. 1315 replaces the Director of the CFPB with a 5 person commission, which will make it easier for other banking regulators, who failed to protect consumers in the past, to overturn its rules and delay its core functions until its leadership is confirmed by the Senate.

Mr. Chair, despite the claims made by supporters of H.R. 1315, the CFPB is far from being some all-powerful government bureaucracy subject to the whims of a single person, as new rules and initiatives it generates can at any time be overturned by a two-thirds vote from the Financial Stability Oversight Council. This ensures that the Director of the CFPB is held to account to the overall safety and stability of U.S. financial institutions.

The CFPB is intended to oversee the $3 trillion consumer finance industry and prevent unfair and deceptive lending practices such as those that caused the economic crisis we find ourselves in today.

H.R. 1315 would delay the transfer date for the CFPB until there is a Director confirmed by the Senate--a distant prospect since Republican Senators have vowed to filibuster any person nominated by President Obama. Thus, this provision in the bill would leave the CFPB with no meaningful consumer protection authority when it officially opens its doors.

The same federal banking regulators who failed us the first time will remain in charge, leaving consumers unprotected from the abuses that brought our country to the brink of collapse and led to the loss of more than 8 million American jobs.

Mr. Chair, since its creation last year, the CFPB has made considerable progress which hints at its full potential as a valuable and necessary component of our regulatory framework.

The CFPB has established a new consumer complaint process and consolidated the authority of seven other agencies in policing abuses in consumer financial products such as mortgages and credit cards, pushing their providers to simplify their forms so consumers fully understand the costs and fees associated with their products.

The CFPB also provides special guidance to members of the armed forces and has taken steps to police unfair practices employed by certain payday lenders and debt collectors.

H.R. 1315 throws a wrench into these accomplishments with the ultimate goal of destroying the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and turning back the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act.

Mr. Chair, I believe that strong consumer protections are essential to stabilizing the economy, promoting competition and transparency, and bringing confidence back to the financial marketplace.

For these reasons and for the protection of my constituents' livelihoods, I will vote against this legislation and I encourage my colleagues to do likewise.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 2560, the so-called ``Cut, Cap, and Balance the Federal Budget Act.''

This bill should properly be called the ``Cut, Cap, and End Medicare and Destroy Social Security Act,'' or quite plainly the ``Cut, Cap, and Plunge the United States into Default Act.''

Mr. Speaker, this is exactly what will happen if this legislation is passed. My colleagues across the aisle would have us believe that the proposed legislation is the answer to all the debt crisis but any attempt to balance the budget on the backs of seniors, veterans and America's working families isn't an answer; it's a cruel joke, but one with real consequences.

The American people did not send us here to play games. Instead, they want us to work together to adopt fiscally sound pro-growth policies that puts our financial house in order and will give a rocket boost to our economy so that it creates millions of good-paying jobs for all of our people.

We can do this. We did it in the 1990s when under the leadership of President Clinton we balanced the budget four consecutive years, paid down the national debt, created 23 million new jobs, and left $5 trillion in projected surpluses.

It is not a serious proposal to legislate a spending cap of 18 percent of GDP, a level that has not occurred since 1966, before the escalation of the Vietnam War.

But this isn't 1966. It's 45 years later, and in 2011 we face greater challenges. Our population has increased by 57 percent, we are living nearly 10 years longer on average, and the percentage of citizens age 65 and up has climbed to 13 percent.

In my district 63,000 men and women receive Medicare annually and 40,000 receive Social Security, and tens of thousands more will soon reach eligibility age. How can I look them in the eye and tell them that the benefits they are entitled to, that they have worked so hard for over the years, are not coming?

More Americans than ever rely on Medicare and Social Security to pay for the ever increasing costs of health care and provide for themselves in retirement. In my district, Social Security constitutes 90% or more of the income received by 34 percent of beneficiaries (21 percent of married couples and 43 percent of non-married beneficiaries).

Passing H.R. 2560 will result in draconian cuts to these vital benefits. Doing so would leave our most vulnerable citizens exposed and unprotected. I cannot and will not support a proposal that will inflict such grave hardship on the most vulnerable of our citizens while asking nothing of those who benefited most from the reckless economic policies of the previous administration.

Mr. Speaker, the times are serious but this legislation is not. In two weeks the debt limit will be reached so time is of the essence. This legislation, however, is a waste of time and has no chance of ever becoming law. We should reject this proposal and take up a serious proposal to resolve the debt crisis and maintain our country's A+ credit rating.

It is difficult to take seriously a proposal that conditions, as this bill does, paying the nation's bills upon the approval by the House and Senate, and submission to the states for ratification, of a radical balanced budget amendment that enshrines the notorious Ryan Budget in the Constitution and makes the discredited theory of trickle-down economics the law of the land. That is a prescription for economic disaster.

Passage of this gimmick proposal will virtually ensure that America will default on its financial obligations for the first time in history, with catastrophic consequences for our nation and the global economy.

Seniors will not receive their Social Security checks; funding to train, equip, deploy, and pay military and law enforcement personnel will be withheld; interest rates will rise; the value of pensions and retirement portfolios will fall; and jobs will be lost.

Mr. Speaker, this bill is nothing more than political theater; at best a cheap gimmick to appease the Tea Party base of the majority party in the House. But it's not the right thing for our country.

What we need right now is for responsible leaders to act responsibly. As legislators, our constituents are looking to us to get serious about the serious work we need to do to protect the economy, our people, and the nation's unrivaled record of creditworthiness. They deserve no less.

For all these reasons, I stand in strong and unyielding opposition to H.R. 2560 and urge my colleagues to join me in rejecting this radical and dangerous proposal.

Mr. Speaker, it is no exaggeration to say that the past few years have been among the challenging in our nation's history. The collapse of the housing market, the turmoil on Wall Street and the ensuing financial crisis, the severe economic downturn resulting in the loss of millions of middle-class jobs, and the ever present threat of terrorist attacks on our homeland are enough to make many question whether the American Dream is still attainable and to conclude that our best days are behind us.

I do not share this view. The future of our country is bright and I firmly believe that our best days lie ahead. One of the reasons I am so optimistic that 21st century will be known as the second ``American Century'' is the extraordinary quality, talent, commitment, and energy of the young people who will in time assume the responsibility of leadership.

Members of Congress know well, perhaps better than most, how blessed our nation is to have in reserve such exceptional young men and women who will go on to become leaders in their local communities, states, and the nation in the areas of business, education, government, philanthropy, the arts and culture, and the military.

We know this because we see them and benefit from their contributions every day. Many of them work for us in our offices as junior staff members, congressional fellows, or interns and they do amazing work for and on behalf of the constituents we are privileged to represent.

I rise today to pay tribute to the wonderful young men and women who have done this work in my office for my constituents.

Today, I bid farewell to an extraordinary young man, Thorne Maginnis, who joined my team in January of last year and who will be moving on to attend law school this fall at the University of Virginia. From his first day on my staff Thorne's talents as writer, analyst, and researcher were apparent for all to observe. These gifts, combined with his winning personality and cooperative spirit made him an invaluable staffer and a valued friend to his colleagues, who all will miss his good cheer but wish him well in his future endeavors, which I am confident will include continued service in furtherance of the public interest.

Mr. Speaker, I believe there is no higher calling than the call to serve a cause larger than ourselves. That is why I ran for public office. When I was six years old I dreamed of becoming a public servant when I grew up so I could help others. As the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King once said:

Everybody can be great because anybody can serve. . . . You

only need a heart full of grace. A soul generated by love.

By this measure, there are several other great young men and women who served as volunteers this year in my offices. They may toil in obscurity but their contributions to the constituents we serve are deeply appreciated and I wish to acknowledge them. They are: Devin Benavidez, Elliott Blufer, Laura Sisemore, Chris Robinson, Carlos Jurado, Jerry Boies, Sunjay Bhatia, Jazmine Florence, and Renata Harris. In past years, my office has benefitted from the contributions of other volunteers, including Helen Lei, Navy San, Chris Prado, Jimmie Luthuli, Erika Wright, Peter Ward, Alyce Boatwright, Tom DeMaio, and Brittni Hamilton.

Mr. Speaker, the infusion of energy, intelligence, and idealism young people bring to their internships in my office and those of my colleagues helps keep our democracy vibrant. The insights, skills, and knowledge of the governmental process they gain from their experiences will last a lifetime and prove invaluable to them as they go about making their mark in this world.

This is why I am so optimistic about our country's prospects for the future. As Margaret Mead said:

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed

citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing

that ever has.

I am grateful that such thoughtful committed young men and women can be found working in my office, those of my colleagues, and in every community in America. Their good works will keep America great and as they age, they will ensure she stays forever young.

Mr. Speaker, it is my sad duty to rise today to inform the House of the death of Mrs. Ramona Hahn. The wife of legendary Los Angeles County supervisor Kenneth Hahn, Ramona was the proud matriarch of a family whose members have devoted their lives to public service. Ramona Hahn passed away on Monday morning at the age of 86--a mere day before her daughter Janice was elected to join us in this body, representing California's 36th Congressional District. My deepest condolences go out to our new colleague, Congresswoman Janice Hahn, and the entire Hahn family, as they mourn the loss of a devoted wife and loving mother. Ramona was a great lady; she was my friend.

Born to American missionaries in Tokyo, Japan, Ramona Hahn was a service-minded individual who committed her life to God and family. Ramona has been described by her children as the ``driving force'' behind their family of public servants. She worked hand in hand with her husband as he fought to improve the lives of his constituents. She provided strength and support as he took bold stands for civil rights, including the decision to greet Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. at LAX when he visited Los Angeles in 1961. He was the only elected official from California to do so. This act of political courage has never been forgotten, but is in keeping with the character and commitment that has been the hallmark of the Hahn family for more than a half century.

Ramona's community involvement and selfless attitude was a powerful example for her two children. Her son James Hahn has served as Los Angeles City Controller, Los Angeles City Attorney, and Mayor of Los Angeles, and is currently a judge on the Los Angeles County Superior Court. Her daughter Janice Hahn has served in the Los Angeles City Council and on the Los Angeles Charter Reform Commission, which modernized Los Angeles city government, making it more responsive to the city's diversity and challenges. In the coming days, she will be sworn in on the House floor.

I know that the entire Hahn family wishes that Ramona could have lived to see her daughter sworn in as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives. For Janice, the loss of her mother must make this monumental achievement bittersweet. However, I hope that Janice and her family can take comfort in the knowledge that their mother's loving spirit lives on through the lives that she touched and the good works that Janice will do in this body.

I ask all Members to join me in a moment of silence in honor of the memory of the late Ramona Hahn.

Madam Chairwoman, I move to strike the last word.

I rise in strong opposition to the fiscal year 2012 Energy and Water Appropriations bill, which includes an amendment that would rescind the remaining unobligated high-speed rail funding that was originally approved in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

In listening to my colleague who just spoke, I don't think anyone here on this floor disagrees that we support the farmers, we support the people who have been impacted by flooding. But the question is whether these particular funds are the appropriate funds that should be dedicated to address that particular issue.

I would venture to say that while I believe it's important that the Army Corps of Engineers has access to funding necessary to prepare for future disasters, I would say that because I am the ranking member of Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications. But when you consider our long overdue efforts to be able to develop a high-speed rail network that would create jobs and bring rail infrastructure into the 21st century for the United States, that also is a priority as well.

I am proud to be vice chair of the bicameral High-Speed Rail and Intercity Passenger Rail Caucus, and I am glad that we are working to increase the visibility on this issue. I have long fought for bringing transportation systems into the 21st century. After all, that's important to Americans' lives as well. Because if we're not able to traverse from one side of the country to the other, if we're not able to do it in an efficient manner, eventually we will also find ourselves without more jobs and without being able to have appropriate living conditions.

Consider that high-speed rail pays for itself, significantly reducing $700 billion a year of oil purchased that could be dealt with regarding our trade deficit. High-speed rail pays for and saves lives. We are talking about lives. What about the 43,000 Americans who die each year in car accidents? What happens when we talk about that high-speed rail pays for its efficiency and mobility by being able to move people and goods without delay and waste? And also when you consider that high- speed rail pays by improving air quality, which also helps and saves lives.

Thirteen countries around the world are investing hundreds of billions of dollars into their systems. And for years the United States has failed to keep up. Finally, we have an administration that is actually focused on this issue and has made a commitment to this funding. However, when you consider that in the United States we only have one high-speed rail corridor, that's the Acela Express, operated between Boston and Washington, D.C., and even in our one corridor the trains only reach 150 miles per hour, far below what we would really call a true world class high-speed rail.

So when we consider being in the High-Speed Rail Caucus and what our efforts are today, thankfully we are looking at a situation where we do have funding that's been allocated. So when we say it's unallocated funds, let's talk about that. Actually, what's happened is the administration has done an excellent job in considering areas that have said they are not ready to do high-speed rail at this time. So rather than our wasting money as we did in the past, years in the past, of building bridges to nowhere, what we've said is, if a particular area is not ready, let's put the money back where it can now be reallocated.

So it's not that the funds are totally unobligated. We are now in the process of putting them in the areas that are ready to build high-speed rail now. We must be forward thinking and proactive to position our country to compete in the global economy. That's about American lives as well. Nowhere is it more important than in the area of high-speed rail to take that broad step.

It will cost about $40 billion to bring high-speed rail to areas like mine in California. But with it comes really a revolution in travel in a way that we have not touched before.

Madam Chairwoman, I cannot support this bill in its current form in light of the amendment that's been brought forward, and I urge my colleagues to vote against these draconian cuts. We had an opportunity to do more funding for Army Corps, and on this very floor many of my colleagues chose not to do so.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Offered By: Ms. Richardson

Amendment No. 5: Strike section 901.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Leonard Earl Roberts, Sr., a public servant and community leader, whose impact has been felt not only in Southern California but throughout the country. On July 5, 2011, Mr. Roberts passed away, leaving a legacy of service and patriotism. He will be dearly missed by all who knew him, but his example lives on in all of the lives that he touched.

Leonard Earl Roberts, Sr. was born in 1925--at the height of the Harlem Renaissance--to Mary Queen Dorsey in Vidalia, Louisiana.

Leonard, Sr. was no stranger to meeting and overcoming adversity. In his desire to serve his country, he joined the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) at the young age of sixteen, where he participated in the efforts to rebuild our Nation's infrastructure during the economic recovery efforts from the Great Depression. Later that year, Leonard, Sr. stepped forward to defend our country following the events of Pearl Harbor, despite being under age, and quickly advanced to the rank of staff sergeant. Leonard, Sr. was in the first wave to land on Omaha Beach during the Normandy invasion on June 6, 1944, as part of Operation Overlord, now known to most of the world as D-Day. He successfully led his platoon in many battles until his honorable discharge on December 7, 1945 at the close of the war. His entire outfit received the Bronze Indian Arrowhead for Assault Trooper, the Cor-De-Guerre--France's highest military honor--and several other medals and honors.

Upon his return home after military service, he sought out and married his childhood sweetheart, Dessie. Leonard, Sr. and Dessie moved to Boston, Massachusetts, taking advantage of the GI Bill and attending the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he received an Engineering degree. In the following years, Leonard and Dessie welcomed three children to the family--Donna, Janet, and Leonard, Jr.

Leonard, Sr. soon moved his family to Los Angeles, California--where children Jacqueline and Keith were born--to begin his lifelong career in the Aerospace industry which was his civilian way of continuing his service to our country. He designed a four axis machine for specialized production of precision oversized aircraft parts which revolutionized the industry. In 1972, Leonard, Sr. established Roberts Aerospace Manufacturing Engineering Corporation (RAMEC), and continued to receive coveted government contracts, as a result of his expertise in precision manufacturing for nearly four decades until the time of his passing. Equally of note, Mr. Roberts was well known in the industry as a man of integrity.

Leonard, Sr. valued God, Country and, above all else, family, which is demonstrated by his marriage to Dessie for sixty-five years and his commitment to his children. His love will live forever in the hearts of his Grandchildren Allen Talbert, Kellie Clay (deceased), Chanel Troy- Thompson, Danielle Benoit-Williams, Natalie Roberts, Raquel Roberts- Richards and Bridgette Craddock and Grandchildren Tealor Chanel Mason, Jeraud, Jeremiah Jr. and Jehman Williams, Carl Quincy Clay, II, Lauren, Sydney and Brandon Talbert, Rameses Earl Roberts Richards, and Marcus Sebastian Mason.

Leonard, Sr. will be lovingly remembered by his sister Dottie and his nieces Cheri, Donna and Shanel, along with a host of other relatives and friends.

He recently imparted the profound statement to his loved ones, a motto which he lived by, ``Everything is manageable in a family.'' Leonard, Sr. lived his life by anticipating the outcome of an effort before beginning the task. It mattered not how straight the gate or how charged with punishment the scroll, Leonard Sr. was the master of his fate, he was the captain of his soul.

My thoughts and prayers are with the Leonard E. Roberts family. His passing is an enormous loss for my district, Southern California, and the Nation as a whole.

Madam Speaker, I rise today as a proud co-sponsor and strong supporter of H. Res. 268, which reaffirms our national commitment to a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

Madam Speaker, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has persisted for generations. It has claimed thousands of lives and has contributed to instability in the world's most volatile region. Few things would do more to advance the cause of world peace than the achievement of the two-state solution which recognizes Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state with secure borders and the right of the Palestinians to govern themselves in an autonomous state with the resources and factor endowments to enable the Palestinian people to live in dignity.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a strong and vocal advocate for direct negotiations, has already accepted a two-state solution, only to be continually rebuffed by the Palestinians at every turn.

Madam Speaker, attempts by Palestinian leadership to circumvent direct negotiations with Israel and instead seek direct recognition from the United Nations and foreign governments is counter-productive and undermines the work that has been done over the last several decades to come to a peaceful and mutually beneficial resolution.

The unilateral declaration of statehood by the Palestinian Authority shows a disregard for and violation of the underlying principles of Middle East peace agreements, including the Oslo Accords, the Road Map, and most recently the Annapolis Conference.

Madam Speaker, a two-state solution is the only feasible resolution to this long-standing conflict. Therefore I strongly applaud the Administration for opposing international recognition of a Palestinian state that is not reached in direct negotiation with Israel.

I urge the President to direct the United States Ambassador to the U.N. to exercise our veto with respect to any resolution of the United Nations Security Council to the contrary and call upon Palestinian leaders to return to the negotiation table in a good faith effort to reach a mutually acceptable agreement to bring about the two-state solution, which is one and sure path to the just and lasting peace we all seek.

For these reasons, I strongly support H. Res. 268 and urge my colleagues to join me.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 515, the Belarus Democracy Reauthorization Act of 2011, which will support human rights in Belarus by encouraging the free expression of ideas among pro-democracy activists.

I would like to commend Mr. Smith, the gentleman from New Jersey, for sponsoring this legislation and the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen and Mr. Berman, for their efforts in bringing this legislation to the floor.

Madam Speaker, Belarusians have the same right to self-government and free speech as their neighbors and through the reauthorization of assistance to their civil society, H.R. 515 will help them regain rights which have been repressed by the ruling regime.

Since he was elected as his country's first president in 1994, Aleksandr Lukashenko has steadily consolidated his power, reversing promising reforms put in place following the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The CIA World Factbook describes Belarus as ``a republic in name, although in fact a dictatorship.'' Former Secretary of State Condolezza Rice called it ``the last true remaining dictatorship in the heart of Europe.''

Belarus has been criticized for its dismal human rights record by the U.N. Security Council, the U.S. State Department, the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, the Council of Europe, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the European Council, the European Parliament, the European Commission, and the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.

As a result of its human rights violations and a steady record of state-sponsored political repression, Belarus is subject to numerous sanctions from both the United States and the European Union. In 2004, Congress unanimously passed the Belarus Democracy Act, which authorizes assistance for political parties, non-governmental organizations, and independent media toward democratic and humanitarian reforms.

This legislation affirms that it remains in the interest of our country that Belarus returns to its rightful place among its fellow European democracies. Unfortunately, recent events validate its current designation as a rogue state. The White House released the following statement regarding its last Presidential election which saw widespread violence and voting irregularities:

The flawed December 2010 Presidential election in Belarus

and its aftermath--the harsh violence against peaceful

demonstrators; the continuing detention, prosecution, and

imprisonment of opposition Presidential candidates and

others; and the continuing repression of independent media

and civil society activists--all show that the Government of

Belams has taken steps backward in the development of

democratic governance and respect for human rights.

Madam Speaker, the focus of H.R. 515 is on the Government of Belarus, not its people.

Many of my constituents and their families came to this country fleeing repression from totalitarian regimes. Hearing their stories, I am constantly reminded that a government which respects human rights, free speech, independent courts, and transparent elections is essential to personal liberty. As we pursue sanctions against the government of Belarus, we must provide support to the pro-democracy movement.

With H.R. 515, we will send a message that governing through fear, censorship, and the threat of violence has no place in a legitimate republic. As we mark the 235th birthday of the United States and the rights we enjoy, let us encourage those who wish to apply our principles to their own governments.

With this legislation, we support the political activists, the independent journalists, and the civil society leaders who risk so much for the good of Belarus.

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 515.