Floor Statements

Offered By: Mrs. Capps

Amendment No. 16: After section 1, insert the following

section (and redesignate the subsequent sections, and conform

the internal cross-references, accordingly):

Offered By: Mrs. Capps

Amendment No. 17: After section 1, insert the following

section (and redesignate the subsequent sections, and conform

internal cross-references, accordingly):

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

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

You know, it's clear that the goal of the TRAIN Act is not simply to study EPA standards. The goal of the majority is to block the efforts of EPA to cut mercury and other toxic pollution from dirty power plants. That's dangerous and it's misguided.

The research is clear, unless EPA enforces these standards, there will be more premature deaths, more heart and asthma attacks, more hospital and emergency room visits.

Up until recently, I thought I was safe from this pollution. I don't live next door to a power plant; I live near the coast of the Pacific Ocean. But I learned that you don't need to live near a dirty power plant to be exposed to its harmful effects. I received test results this summer showing that I have an unsafe level of mercury in my body. And I'm not alone. Tens of millions of American women of child-bearing age, and their children, are at risk from mercury and other toxins that are released into our air each and every year. Every year, hundreds of thousands of babies are exposed to mercury.

Mercury exposure can cause learning disabilities, developmental delays, and other developmental problems. We owe it to our children to clean up toxic mercury pollution, and that's why I'm offering this amendment.

The amendment would simply require that this committee designate the analysis of the true costs of including health effects in blocking EPA's lifesaving clean air safeguards. These costs are clear to mothers and grandmothers across the Nation--brain damage, developmental problems, infant deaths. Support my amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I would say to the gentleman, power plants are the biggest industrial source of mercury pollution in the United States, and I believe that the remarks of the chairman of the Energy Committee underscore the very reason that we should have the studies of the health effects included in the study that is requested by the TRAIN Act.

I am pleased to yield 1 minute to my colleague from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), a champion of livable cities, to speak on this topic.

May I ask how much time is left?

I am happy to yield my 1 minute to my colleague from Florida, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a mother of three young children.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

I thank my colleague for yielding time.

Mr. Chairman, I express my strong opposition to this bill that will dismantle public health standards and safeguards and increase air pollution.

The TRAIN Act may have started as a ``study,'' but it has transformed into a fundamentally different beast. It will neither create jobs nor stimulate the economy. Instead, the TRAIN Act indefinitely blocks the EPA's Cross-State Air Pollution Rule and Mercury and Air Toxics Standards. These are designed to protect our children and our families from dangerous pollutants.

We know that blocking these standards will lead to tens of thousands of premature deaths every single year. It

will lead to more heart attacks, more respiratory illnesses, more children in the hospital hooked up to respirators. The TRAIN Act means more exposure to toxic mercury as well, a brain poison that causes developmental disorders, especially in small children and the unborn.

But, Mr. Chairman, the TRAIN Act will also hurt the economy. It will make it harder for families to make ends meet. It will force Americans to miss millions of days of work each year in order to care for sick family members or themselves.

It will waste billions of taxpayer dollars treating preventable illnesses and disease caused by pollution, which could have been prevented. And it will saddle families and businesses with out-of- pocket medical costs and higher insurance premiums.

That's what the TRAIN Act is really about, blocking the EPA from ridding our air of pollutants that cause asthma attacks, respiratory illnesses among children, heart disease, and premature deaths. And the other side of the aisle wants to make it worse than it already is.

Later today, Mr. Whitfield will offer an amendment that imposes even longer mandatory delays on EPA's two lifesaving clean air standards, and it would rewrite the Clean Air Act to reverse the way toxic air pollution standards are set. Instead of basing standards on the cleanest plants, the standards would be based on what the oldest and dirtiest plants are doing. Today Administrator Jackson testified that this change alone would make it impossible to ever issue a cross-State pollution standard.

Another amendment, led by Mr. Latta, would invert the Clean Air Act's 40-year-old requirement that EPA set its clean air standards on health science and medicine alone. His amendment would eliminate that right, which Americans depend upon.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on these dangerous amendments because Americans don't want millions of tons of toxic pollution dumped into their lungs. They want jobs, and they aren't fooled that they need to pay for those jobs with more pollution. They want a stronger economy, not increased health care costs and suffering. And, most importantly, they want their children to breathe clean and safe air.

I urge my colleagues vote ``no'' on this bill.

Madam Speaker, as I traveled throughout my district these last few weeks, one issue dominated all conversations--jobs.

As my colleagues on the other side created the default crisis this summer, the American people threw up their hands in disgust and dismay, and I don't blame them. Our constituents know the number one issue facing this country is jobs, and they know this Congress must take concrete actions to grow our economy, and it must take them now.

The good news is we have a plan. The American Jobs Act is a commonsense, bipartisan plan to put Americans back to work and strengthen our economy. It keeps teachers in the classrooms and cops and firefighters on our streets. It rebuilds our crumbling roads and bridges, modernizes our schools, and rehabilitates our neighborhoods. It cuts taxes for small businesses, workers and their families.

The time for political games--which are costing jobs and creating economic uncertainty--has passed. I urge the House leadership, help us pass the American Jobs Act, and let's pass it now.

Mr. Speaker, Sunday marks the 10th anniversary of one of our Nation's most tragic days. This weekend, we remember and honor those we lost and those they left behind. In the days and months following these attacks, our Nation was in mourning, but there was also hope as we came together to build a stronger country. This anniversary, let us reawaken that spirit.

Ten years ago, we stood on the Capitol steps, Republicans and Democrats alike, in a show of national unity and resolve. The spirit of that moment was only a tiny symbolic action dwarfed by the enormous outpouring of kindness and volunteerism across this Nation, but it is one we clearly need to see again. Let us once again channel the strength we found in the aftermath of 9/11 and begin a new chapter in rebuilding America.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor and celebrate a dedicated public servant and my longtime staffer and friend, Barbara Haile.

Barbara Haile would make a good book. Each chapter could start with, ``When I had dinner with . . .'' Unfortunately, many of those passages would be left out because she could recognize their faces but not always their names. Some dinner stories would start with professional athletes, such as Baseball Hall of Famers Willie Mays and Willie McCovey or they would end with after dinner taxi rides with people like Norman Mailer arguing with one of his many wives. If you drop a name of an iconic American in the last half century, it's a good bet Barbara knew them or at least had dinner with them.

Her life story took her from Jamaica to the United Nations in New York, to Saudi Arabia to San Francisco during the late 60s, eventually landing in San Luis Obispo with her husband Allen Haile and two children, Jonathan and Courtney.

And speaking of books, Barbara can recite the Good Book from memory and may break out singing an old-time hymnal, though she would never describe herself as a religious woman, just the product of a traditional Jamaican upbringing. Whether the results of her traditional Jamaican work ethic or her life experiences she could also write a how- to on helping those in need.

The consummate caseworker, Barbara's name is known throughout federal government agencies. If you work in one of my offices and have the occasion to speak with a Federal social service agency you will eventually be asked, ``Oh, Representative Capps's office. Do you work with Barbara Haile?'' It is not because she had dinner with these folks but because she is a caseworker extraordinaire who found ways to help people who had given up hope.

Barbara Haile was the last hope for many people facing walls of bureaucracy and red tape or those without options until she authored one of her countless letters. Her tenacity for helping those in need likely led to officials trying to find a way to help because they knew she would not go away. While her countless stories of finding homeless veterans a place to live, getting seniors needed healthcare or assisting immigrants to become American citizens are confidential, the volume of files on her cases would make Superman, possibly a dinner guest, cringe at moving her cabinets to make room for more.

Barbara will be sorely missed not only by me but by the entire community of the Central Coast of California. Not only has her hard work helped countless constituents but she is a true example of a dedicated public servant. Her service and diligence to both me and my late husband Walter--and, most importantly, to the constituents we serve--will not be forgotten. I am honored to have worked with her, and proud to call her my friend.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to my good friend, Henry L. ``Hank'' Lacayo, an exceptional individual who has dedicated his life to public service, community leadership and social activism. On August 20, 2011, the Henry L. ``Hank'' Lacayo Tribute Committee will be celebrating Hank's 80th birthday, and honoring him for his endless contributions to the county of Ventura, the State of California and our Nation.

Hank is currently serving a fifth term as State President of the Congress of California Seniors, a statewide senior advocacy organization. But Hank has been an active and engaged community leader for more than half a century. He first began his labor career in 1953, and was soon elected to become the President of UAW Local 887, representing over 32,000 workers at North America Aviation/Rockwell International in Los Angeles.

During his presidency Hank served as an instrumental figure in several events that forever changed our nation. Hank's activism during the civil rights movement was one of them. In August of 1963, Hank led a delegation from the L.A. area to join Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. at the Washington DC. civil rights march. Hank also showed his support of Cesar Chavez by serving as a key individual in encouraging the UAW to financially aid farm workers.

Although Hank's trajectory has been focused within the work of labor unions, he has also been heavily involved within the Latino Community. Raised in Chihuahua, Mexico, Hank has stayed close to his roots and culture. He joined the late Willie Velazquez and Dr. Juan Andrade to help found the U.S. Hispanic Leadership Institute, and he served as its first President and Chairman of the Board. Hank also currently serves as the Chair of the Vision Committee and co-founder of Destino: The Hispanic Legacy Fund of the Ventura County Community Foundation.

Hank has been recognized on numerous occasions and has received various prestigious honors and recognitions. These include the Tri- Counties Labor Leader of the Year, The Pat Brown Institute Life-Time Public Service Award, California Lutheran University Exemplar Medallion and, among many others, the U.S. Hispanic Leadership Institute National Hispanic Hero Award.

Hank has been able to expand his life legacy to many broad aspects of community leadership and public service. It is my distinct pleasure to ask my colleagues to join with me in wishing Henry L. ``Hank'' Lacayo a happy 80th birthday and in saluting him for his years of public service and community leadership.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor 21-year-old United States Marine Lance Corporal Cody James Elliott of Pismo Beach, California. On June 12, 2011, while out on patrol, LCPL Elliott ran to help his Brother in Arms, Josh McDaniels, who had been injured in an IED explosion. While en route to his fallen comrade--without regard for his own safety--LCPL Elliott was severely wounded by another IED explosion. Every day, magnificent men such as Cody shine on the battlefields of honor, bringing their light of heroism and selflessness to the darkness of war--making us all proud to be Americans. In the blast, LCPL Cody lost his left leg, broke his tibia in his right leg, and lost one of his fingers. In just a few short weeks, he has come a long way in dealing with his wounds and is moving full speed towards recovery. With the help of his family, he continues to recover and show us what it means to bravely serve our country. I ask that this poem penned in his honor by Albert Caswell be placed in the Congressional Record.

Run To Me

(By Albert Caswell)

Run . . .

Run to me . . .

On battlefields of honor bright . . .

There are but all of those who so carry the fight!

All with their most magnificent light! To win that day, to

that night!

Who so shine, all in their most sacrificial light . . .

Who for all of their Brothers In Arms, are but so ready to

die!

All in the blood that binds them, this most sacrificial tie!

Which brings such tears to the Angel's eyes!

As it was on the day in June, when Cody you so ran . . . as

your heart so swooned!

As your Brother Josh lay dying, as you ran to him . . . not

asking why then!

All in your most magnificent shades of green, oh yea you

United States Marine!

As when that bomb went off, as you lie there in all its cost

. . .

All in what you had given, all in what you had lost!

As the tears rolled down your face, all in what this war had

brought!

As up ahead but lie a new front . . .

Only twenty-one years old, and barely hanging on . . .

As it was then there you so saw you had a choice!

As you told yourself, get up Marine . . . while listening to

your most inner voice!

As from deep down within, but came such a force!

As now Cody, your new life would so begin . . .

With that first step, all in that pain and heartache which

lie so up ahead . . .

As somehow, you lifted up your fine head and so said!

I did not die, I am not dead! As you so chose to feel that

wind upon your face . . .

All for your Fallen Brothers, all in your heart they now so

hold such a special place!

For you've got a life to live, as now you picked up the pace!

A life to lead, as it's now Cody you've so chosen to move at

light speed!

For you are a United States Marine, all in what your recovery

has so seen . . .

You see, people like you Cody . . . so give to us all what we

so need!

Because, You So Teach Us! And You So Beseech Us!

As so deep down inside, You So Reach Us!

With all of your most courageous faith, You So Speak To Us

Out On Our Ways!

For you will run, and you will breathe . . . and oh yea Cody

you will so succeed!

And if I ever, I so have a son . . . I pray that he may be as

courageous as you

my son . . .

Whose heart to me so runs! Because, Cody in heaven you need

not arms or legs, and that's where you are going one

day . . .

And, you will hear our Lord so say, ``Cody, Run To Me!''

All for what you gave, Run To Me!

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the Republican Default Act.

I oppose this bill because it does nothing but guarantee another default crisis in six months. It's nothing more than another partisan gimmick that will quickly be voted down in the Senate.

The majority says it wants a plan to address our nation's deficit, and the President has worked with them to achieve this goal. He has negotiated in good faith and put everything on the table, demanding only that the plan be balanced and responsible. And how did the majority respond? They refused to compromise and walked out of negotiations . . . twice.

Clearly, the majority is more focused on pushing their ideological agenda to end Medicare and preserve tax breaks for Big Oil and Wall Street than forging a good faith compromise to avoid default.

Mr. Speaker, compromising is what the American people send us here to do. As the President said, they voted for a divided government, not a dysfunctional one. It's time to stop the gimmicks and ensure our country does not default on its obligations.

Default would destroy close to 700,000 jobs, spike interest rates on credit cards and mortgages, and cause untold damage to our struggling economy.

Ronald Reagan took the necessary steps to avoid default 17 times. George W. Bush did it 7 times. No games. No gimmicks. Just a clean vote to avoid default and maintain the full faith and credit of the United States.

I urge my colleagues to come back to the table and forge the balanced and responsible compromise the American people deserve.

Mr. Chair, I want to speak in favor of Mr. Bass' amendment to restore funds to the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

More than 40 years ago, Congress made a commitment to the American public--a commitment to use a small portion of revenues from offshore drilling toward natural resource conservation and outdoor recreation programs--a commitment to partially offset the depletion of limited natural resources that belong to us all.

Diverting these funds goes against the promise that Congress made to the American public back in 1965 and the American public doesn't support it.

A new bipartisan poll released today by the LWCF Coalition shows that 85 percent of Americans support full funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

The nation's primary tool to conserve land for parks, wildlife refuges, forests, rivers, trails, historic and cultural sites.

Cuts to the LWCF undermine the economic asset that our Federal, State, and local public lands represent in this country.

And rob the American public of the opportunity to enjoy and recreate in these special places.

According to the Outdoor Industry Foundation, outdoor recreation activities, including hunting, fishing, camping, and other activities contribute a total of $730 billion annually to the economy.

Supporting 1 of every 20 jobs in the U.S. and stimulating 8 percent of all consumer spending.

Support jobs, support our natural treasures, and keep our commitment to the American public.

Vote ``yes'' on the Bass Amendment to restore funds to the LWCF.

Mr. Speaker, in the over 200 days since the majority has controlled this House, they have yet to bring a bill to the floor that would create jobs or help working families, not one. Not one bill to create jobs and build a stronger economy for the future. Not one bill to invest in education, innovation, or infrastructure. Instead, we have a partisan agenda to unfairly burden the middle class with deep cuts while preserving tax cuts for the wealthy and loopholes for Big Oil and corporations that ship jobs overseas. And to make things worse, the majority is threatening to force an unprecedented default on our Nation's debt.

A default would destroy close to 700,000 jobs, spike interest rates on credit cards and mortgages, and cause untold damage to our struggling economy. This is not what the markets are looking for, and it's certainly not what the American people want. They want us to help create jobs and reduce the deficit. They want us to compromise on a fair and balanced approach that doesn't just kick the can down the road. The American people are asking us today to put aside our differences for the good of this country. I support this responsible approach and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Chair, I want to speak in favor of Mr. Moran's amendment to strike an irresponsible provision in the underlying spending bill.

Sec. 124 puts our wild lands in harm's way by prohibiting funds from being used to implement, administer, or enforce Secretarial Order 3310, or the ``wild lands'' policy.

This policy is a reasonable, well-grounded approach that will facilitate public participation and will restore balance to our public lands management policies.

Most importantly, it will protect cherished natural icons from development.

I commend the Secretary on his Order to resume the Interior Department's compliance with Wilderness Act and other existing laws that guarantee wilderness preservation.

The Secretarial Order overturns a flawed decision made by former Interior Secretary Norton during the Bush Administration to halt all assessment or new protection of public land with wilderness characteristics.

In effect, the Bush Administration stopped complying with the statutory requirements of the Wilderness Act and other laws.

The Salazar Order reverses that decision.

As a Member of Congress who understands the value of preserving wild places I fully support Salazar's decision to restore balance to public land management and any other measures taken to ensure the protection of ecologically important spaces.

Clearly, some of my colleagues do not agree with me.

Once again, the majority is trying to block BLM's and Congress' ability to manage public lands for the people.

They are breaking with years of bipartisan tradition of protecting these important spaces.

But we've witnessed these same tactics before with H.R. 1 earlier this year.

Blocking funds for the ``wild lands policy'' will have the immediate effect of despoiling thousands of acres of wild lands.

Destroying what could have been a legacy for future generations.

It allows the American people, through their elected representatives, to decide which lands should be permanently preserved as wilderness.

It is supported by the millions of Americans who are committed to the preservation of our wilderness heritage.

Without the policy, many of our nation's pristine wild and public lands remain at risk.

Don't take nature away from the American people.

Vote ``yes'' on Mr. Moran's amendment to strike this irresponsible provision from the Interior spending bill.

I thank my colleague for yielding.

Madam Chair, I rise to speak against this hazardous piece of legislation.

H.R. 1938 directs the President to allow Canadian oil companies to build a dangerous pipeline through American lands and waters. And H.R. 1938 would expedite the pipeline's permitting process despite a long list of unaddressed concerns from numerous communities. The environmental impacts of this pipeline--which would extend over 1,600 miles through six States--have not been thoroughly considered. And we know that this project has the potential to significantly impact the environment.

We have already seen what damage can be done. There have been 12 spills along TransCanada's Keystone pipeline in its first 12 months of operation. And the Keystone XL pipeline will deliver some of the most destructive oil on the planet. Tar sands oil contain higher

concentrations of toxic chemicals, like sulfur, nickel, nitrogen, and lead, than conventional oil. And a barrel of tar sands oil emits up to three times more climate-disrupting gases than conventional oil.

Building this pipeline would be the greenhouse equivalent of adding roughly 6.5 million passenger vehicles to a highway or constructing 12 new coal-fired power plants. Major concerns arise about the negative impacts of the pipeline on public health and the environment.

At a time when we must find ways to end our dependence on fossil fuels, it is simply not in the national interest to deepen our reliance on one of the most dirtiest forms of oil on the planet. I believe that conducting the appropriate analysis under NEPA, which cannot be done properly if it's rushed, will make this abundantly clear.

We need to be moving forward by supporting clean, renewable energy in this country. And while the President is calling for a reduction in oil imports, this bill calls for an increase.

For all these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 1938.

I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, the legislation we are considering today undermines the ability of the Federal

Government to continue protecting our Nation's air, land, and waters.

I intended to offer an amendment, along with my colleague from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and my colleague from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), to fully fund the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, fully fund the national agency in charge of regulating offshore oil and gas drilling. Unfortunately, due to changes by the Republican leadership to the House budget process, we weren't allowed to offer this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, it's been over a year since the Nation's worst offshore oil spill. And I think our constituents would be surprised to learn that rather than taking action to prevent another deadly spill, this House continues to talk about expanding offshore drilling while sidestepping environmental laws to do so. They would also be surprised to learn that the underlying bill blocks the bureau's ability to collect inspection fees, and, as a result, the agency would see a $35 million cut in their budget.

Mr. Chairman, in his fiscal year 2012 budget request, President Obama asked for a significant increase for the bureau over his 2010 budget. He asked for this new money to hire additional inspectors, to enhance environmental reviews, and to enforce strengthened regulations. If we recall a year ago and the events following the spill, we will understand why this is the case.

While this request was a significant increase over prior years, the administration proposed to offset nearly half of the request by increasing the inspection fees on offshore rigs. This was a key recommendation of the President's bipartisan, independent national oil spill commission.

In their final report, the commissioners recommended the industry fees should be increased to, and I quote from their report, ``provide adequate leasing capabilities and regulatory oversight for the increasingly complex energy-related activities being undertaken on the