Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 464 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz- Balart). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials into the Record.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 464 provides for a structured rule for consideration of H.R. 915, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009.

I would like to acknowledge Chairman Oberstar and Ranking Member Mica of the full Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and Chairman Costello and Ranking Member Petri of the Aviation Subcommittee and thank them for their bipartisan work on H.R. 915. As a member of the full committee, I take great pride in being a part of the cooperative atmosphere, and I believe that it yields positive results, both for Congress and the American people.

Mr. Speaker, we are here today to consider H.R. 915, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009. In many ways, it is unfortunate that we must consider this bill because the reauthorization of the FAA and its programs expired over 3 years ago. The House passed a reauthorization bill in September of 2007 that was very similar to the measure we will consider today. Unfortunately, the Senate was unable to move the FAA reauthorization last Congress, and so we are forced to take the lead once more, affording the Senate even more time to act than we did in the previous Congress.

The American public cannot afford to wait any longer for this legislation. The bill makes essential increases in aviation funding and safety improvements that are long overdue. In the past few months, we have seen, in New York State alone, my home, two crashes involving regional jets, and the investigations into those crashes have revealed that greater safety oversight is needed.

H.R. 915 includes a number of provisions that will make air travel safer for the American public, such as a requirement that the FAA increase the number of aviation safety inspectors and increase funding for programs that reduce runway incursions. The bill requires the FAA to inspect foreign repair stations at least twice a year and perform drug and alcohol testing on those individuals working on U.S. aircraft, to ensure that aircraft maintenance is performed in a safe and responsible manner. The bill also directs the FAA to begin an administrative rulemaking process to revise existing aircraft rescue and fire fighting standards that have not been updated in 21 years.

Many of those safety improvements come with increased costs. I have personally heard from a number of smaller airports in my district that are concerned that the cost of complying with the new fire fighting standards will pose a severe economic hardship on them, possibly causing a reduction in air service. I would like to thank Chairman Oberstar and Chairman Costello for addressing my concerns on this matter during yesterday's Rules Committee hearing.

The provisions related to the aircraft rescue and fire fighting rulemaking specifically require that the Secretary of Transportation conduct an assessment of potential impacts associated with the revisions; that is to say, that they will review the rulemaking and make a determination on how smaller airports, if there is a question with their ability to comply, how they can comply and continue the service to the region that they represent. In addition, the rulemaking process will involve a public comment period for impacted airports to weigh in on the proposed changes.

The bill also includes increased funding that will help airports comply with these new safety measures. The bill includes $16.2 billion over the life of the bill for the Airport Improvement Program, also known as AIP. Airports can use AIP funding to make safety improvements or purchase emergency equipment.

In addition, the bill includes an increase on the maximum passenger facility charge that airports can assess on travelers. Airports can use PFC revenue to preserve or enhance the safety, security, or capacity of the national air transportation system; to reduce or mitigate noise impacts resulting from an airport; or to provide opportunities for enhanced competition among or between carriers. In order to take advantage of this increase, major airports will have to forego a portion of their AIP funds which will be designated for projects at smaller airports.

The FAA Reauthorization Act also includes $70 billion for the FAA's capital programs between fiscal year 2009 and fiscal year 2012 so the FAA can make needed repairs and replace some existing facilities and equipment. This will improve airline capacity and efficiency and, at the same time, improve safety, reduce environmental impacts, and increase user access.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation is long overdue. The President has urged us to pass it. And it is especially timely that we approve a reauthorization of the FAA now, before the summer flight congestion and weather-related delays create even more havoc for the traveling public.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule and to support the underlying legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Florida for his comments, and my colleague from the Rules Committee, and thank you for the history of the Miami Airport. I was not familiar with the importance that it played in the history of the aviation of our country, but I thank you for that.

I just want to point out that, with respect to your comment about amendments, that there were, in all, eight Republican amendments submitted to the committee, of which five were made in order. Yet the Democrats submitted 22 amendments, and only seven of those were made in order. So I would say that the percentage was more than fair on both sides of the aisle.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida, my colleague from the Rules Committee, Mr. Hastings.

I yield the gentleman an additional 2 minutes.

No, we have no further speakers, and I would be ready to close.

I thank the gentleman from Florida, my good friend and colleague from the Rules Committee, for his very capable handling of this rule.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to say that the need to pass this legislation could not be clearer. We're about to enter the summer travel season, and as we saw last summer, the typical increase in passenger travel, coupled with summer thunderstorms, can wreak havoc on our air traffic system and on passengers' travel plans.

H.R. 915 will address the congestion and capacity issues by providing funding to accelerate the implementation of the Next Generation Air Transportation System, commonly known as NextGen, which will replace outdated technology with emerging technologies and automated flight capabilities.

The FAA Reauthorization Act also contains important consumer protection measures that will provide relief to passengers who find themselves helplessly caught in the air traffic system. The bill requires airlines and airports to have emergency contingency plans approved by the U.S. Department of Transportation detailing how airlines and airports will deplane passengers following excessive delays.

The Department of Transportation will have the authority to assess civil penalties against an airline or an airport that fails to adhere to an approved contingency plan. Airlines will also be required to include on their Web sites and on electronic boarding passes the U.S. DOT Consumer Complaint Hotline number and the contact information for both the U.S. DOT's Consumer Protection Division and airline. The bill also requires the U.S. DOT Inspector General to review airlines' flight delays, cancellations, and their associated causes and report back to Congress.

These are important protections that the American public desperately deserves against the often indifferent giant airlines. Let's work together today to see that they are implemented in a timely manner. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I send to the desk a privileged concurrent resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the members of the Korean War Veterans Association, Cayuga County Chapter 296, on their commitment and efforts to renovate the Veterans Memorial Park in Auburn, NY.

The Veterans Memorial Park is nearly a two-year project in the making designed to honor our country's veterans of all wars and conflicts since the Revolutionary War. Notably, this memorial also pays tribute to all those servicemembers who joined the U.S. Armed Forces, regardless of whether they did or did not serve overseas during a time of war. I am proud to represent a district that has chosen, so admirably, to recognize every man and woman that serves our nation. These communities rightfully understand that the decision to join the United States Armed Forces, regardless of one's terms of service, means that an individual is prepared to give his or her life for the safety and future of this country. I have the great pleasure of calling my district home to the Veterans Memorial Park, which may be arguably one of the most inclusive veteran memorials in the country.

The Auburn City Council, Auburn City Manager, and Mayor of Auburn have chosen the following representatives from the Cayuga County Chapter 296 Korean War Veterans Association to lead this effort: John Barwinczok, Chairman; Lyell I. Brown; Professor Joseph M.A. Camardo; Joseph Casper; James Ferris; Donald T. Tavener; and Michael A. Trapani. The dedication of the Veterans Memorial Park is scheduled for June 14, 2009. I wholeheartedly commend these individuals for their efforts on behalf of our veterans and the entire community.

Madam Speaker, I ask that all of my colleagues in the House of Representatives join me today in recognizing the efforts of the Korean War Veterans Association, Cayuga County Chapter 296, as they move towards completing their goal and paying tribute to those who have sacrificed for their nation. I wish them the best of luck in the future as they continue to better our community.

Madam Speaker, I am proud to rise today in recognition of Jewish American Heritage Month. This month provides an important opportunity to reflect on the diverse ways in which Jewish Americans have contributed to the vitality of our nation and the preservation of our values.

The history of the Jewish American community begins in 1654, the year that 23 Jewish refugees from Recife, Brazil, fleeing persecution by the Portuguese Inquisition, arrived in the harbor of New Amsterdam, now known as New York. Although not the first Jews to come ashore in North America, they were the first to attain rights afforded to other settlers, including the right to own property, to erect a house of worship and to engage fully in the political process.

Free to worship and participate in civic life, the Jewish community in the United States has since thrived. Over the past 355 years, the achievements of Jewish Americans in areas such as science, law, literature, entertainment and public service have enriched our country and helped to propel our nation into the 21st century. Their deep devotion to faith and family has strengthened the fabric of our nation and set an example for all.

Madam Speaker, I call on all Americans to join this month in celebrating the history, culture and contributions of the Jewish American community.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order on Wednesday, April 29, at any time for the Speaker, as though pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, to declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for consideration of H.R. 627, and that consideration of the bill proceed according to the following order: The first reading of the bill is dispensed with; all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI; general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the Chair and ranking member of the Committee on Financial Services; after general debate, the Committee of the Whole shall rise without motion; and, no further consideration of H.R. 627

shall be in order except pursuant to a subsequent order of the House.

I thank my good friend for yielding.

Over the past several weeks, many of you have seen the images and read the news about the tragic shooting in Binghamton, New York, on April 3, 2009. Thirteen innocent people lost their lives at the American Civic Association building due to senseless violence.

While I don't represent the City of Binghamton, I represent the suburbs in the area around Binghamton and know many people that work and live in the Binghamton area. I want to take this time to again offer my deepest condolences to the families and friends of those who lost their lives on that day and offer my sincerest gratitude to the local officials and first responders on the ground whose immediate action then prevented further loss of life. And their continued leadership now has allowed for the Binghamton community to start the healing process.

I want to especially mention the Broome County Executive, Barbara Fiala; Binghamton Mayor, Matt Ryan; Binghamton Police Chief, Joe Zikuski; and Broome County Emergency Services Director, Brett Chelis, who led the team of hundreds of first responders consisting of police, fire, rescue and medical staff. To the staff at the local hospitals that cared for the victims of this tragedy and worked tirelessly to save lives, I sincerely say thank you.

I want to say how thankful I am--and I know that so many in the Binghamton community are--to my colleague, Congressman Maurice Hinchey. Congressman Hinchey answered the call at the first sign of trouble and was in his district working with his people to make sure all that could be done was being done throughout the crisis.

I again give my continued full support to all those involved, and ask that we learn from such a tragedy and do all that we can to ensure that an incident like that never happens again.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 352 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz- Balart). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous materials into the Record.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 352 provides for a structured rule for consideration of H.R. 1145, the National Water Research and Development Initiative Act of 2009.

Among the many challenges we face, none is more elemental than protecting our water. Increases in population, growing energy demands and shifting weather patterns jeopardize water supplies across the country. Water is essential and irreplaceable, but many Americans are unaware that many supplies across the country are at risk.

It is critical that we coordinate the efficient use of water resources and maintain water quality. Competent water management is essential if we are to meet the competing needs of transportation, industry, agriculture, recreation, and power production, but currently more than 20 Federal agencies carry out research and development on some aspect of water supply, water quality or water management.

H.R. 1145 would address this issue by creating a National Water Research and Development Initiative to improve Federal, State and local government activities related to water research and development. The bill would improve coordination on Federal research by establishing an interagency committee to ensure Federal agencies work together on critical water issues.

A lack of coordination and competing interests frequently strain agencies and local communities tasked with managing a limited water supply. A perfect example of this problem can be found in my district in Upstate New York, where the Hinckley Reservoir supplies water for 130,000 residents in my hometown of Utica and for the outlying areas; but as with most bodies of water, the reservoir serves multiple uses, not just as a source of drinking water but as a source of hydropower and a water supply for the canal and a recreational site.

After years of battle between the local water authority and the State canal corporation over rights to the water, a couple of summers ago, the Hinckley Reservoir drained to within 3 feet of disrupting the water supply. That was not because of a lack of water. That has never been the issue. Rather, it was the lack of a cogent water policy and agreement by the conflicting interests. The low reservoir level impacted hydropower generation at a local power facility, and it jeopardized drinking water safety. A situation like this is unacceptable, especially when there is a large amount of water available. It is critical that we put measures in place resolving the conflicting objectives and poor communication between agencies.

This underlying bill and the water census it creates is the first step in that process for similar situations that exist, not only in New York State but around the country. That is why I'm offering an amendment that will require the interagency committee created by this bill to study competing water supply uses and how different uses interact and impact each other. Our water supply is invaluable in so many ways, not only for consumption but for the generation of electricity, for the production of food, for transportation, and for recreation, just to name a few. We must be sure to balance these competing interests in an efficient and equitable way.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the National Water Research and Development Initiative Act. I hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will continue to support it as well.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from the Rules Committee for his passionate statement, but I have to disagree with respect to talking about water as an issue that isn't as important as other issues.

Clearly, we have many important issues facing this country, but in the past 2 weeks that I was home, I did 11 town hall meetings, and I can tell you that water came up in every single town hall meeting, whether it was ensuring that the water purity, the ground water purity was safe in the southern part of my district where they are doing hydraulic fracking for natural gas in the shale or whether it is using excessive amounts in hydro plants with the Hinckley Dam that I just spoke of, or whether it is lowering the level of Seneca Lake to feed hydro plants in the Finger Lakes.

People are concerned. And I would submit that other needs and other uses of water are very important. Other things that we do here in Congress are critically important, but nothing is more important than keeping the water that we drink clean and fresh. That is the number one resource of our country, that is the most important thing that we, as a Nation, have, and that is keeping our water supply clean. People talk about how important oil is, and clearly it is. But water is, without a doubt, the most important commodity, resource that we have. We can't live without water, and, therefore, it is the most important thing.

I have already discussed the competing uses of hydro recreation and economic development and water use in my district in one end of it. But as I said, there are other parts of my district, as well, and the Finger Lakes region that are very concerning.

Seneca Lake is the second deepest lake in North America, yet they still encounter safety concerns because the lake levels are going down. Now, not only is that important again for recreation, for hydropower, for water use, for drinking water use, but the level of the lake is going down. It's the water source for the Seneca Falls Power Company. It's located on the Seneca-Cayuga Canal. And at this point, 1 inch of the lake level of Seneca Lake is roughly about 1.2 billion gallons of water, and yet the lake level is down several inches. A number of different State and Federal agencies are involved in the management of the water at Seneca Lake, and yet no one can come together on what the cause is and how to regulate the amount of outflow from the lake.

What is amazing is we have all of these competing uses for a finite amount of water, and yet the agencies that oversee these uses act more like competitors rather than competitive stewards of a very scarce resource.

We need this bill to study how using water for one of these purposes impacts or limits the use of other purposes. That is what is critical. There is nothing more important than our good stewardship of our resource of water.

Seneca Lake, Hinckley Reservoir, two issues in my district alone, and that's just one small congressional district. There are 435 in the country, all with similar issues. To maximize the benefits, we need to make sure we are using the water in the best way. And therefore, Mr. Speaker, I think that it is necessary that we pass this rule and the underlying bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady from Michigan for her insightful comments and certainly her strong leadership on protecting what I believe to be the greatest natural resource not only in America but also in North America and our water supply.

I would inquire if the other side has any other speakers.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart) for his management of this rule.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to thank Chairman Gordon for working to bring this important piece of legislation to the floor. As I said earlier, there really is nothing more important or elemental than our water and our water supply. We must manage it wisely. There is just too much at stake if we do not. I believe this bill is going to go a long way towards improving the way we manage our most precious natural resource and ensure that it is clean, safe, and abundant for future generations.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I would first off like to thank Chairman Gordon and Ranking Member Hall for their leadership on this very important bill, a bill so important to America, not just America today but to the future generations of America, to ensure that our greatest natural resource, that is water, of course, continues, and that we continue to have the abundance of it that we enjoy in this country.

My amendment asks for improvement of understanding of competing water supply uses and how different uses interact with and impact each other.

And I've heard from many of my colleagues throughout the country and seen for myself firsthand in New York the problem that occurs when different interests begin to compete over our precious water resources. And when I say ``compete,'' obviously we have competition for use of water through agriculture, through business, through energy production, through transportation, through business use, and obviously, recreation and consumption and transportation as well. So there are many uses for water.

However, the unique thing about water is that not only is it renewable, but the water resource can be used repeatedly to service several different aspects of our economy and of people's needs. And I think it's important, however, that we study that and see how different interests can interact with each other and most efficiently use our water resource to maximize it.

And I use this example. In my own home district we have a reservoir, Hinckley Reservoir, that is used for drinking water for about 130,000 people. There is also a use of that reservoir for hydropower, and also use of that to feed the barge canal for transportation and recreation use. And there's often disagreements and infighting in terms of how to best utilize that. And I think we need to study that and see what is the most efficient way that we can do it.

I see it again in other places like the Finger Lakes, where again there are disputes between whether we use the water in Seneca Lake for drinking purposes, for recreation or for energy production. So I think it's important that we work to make a determination how best to allow competing interests to interact with each other to most efficiently and effectively utilize our number 1 most precious resource, and that of course is water.

So I would strongly urge the passage of this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman for his comments.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to highlight the efforts of the Herkimer Lions Club, Mohawk American Legion Post 25, Frankfort Kiwanis Club, Little Falls Rotary Club, and the Herkimer Polish Community Home in creating the Fallen Stars Memorial Mural to honor the memory of New York State's fallen soldiers who gave their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Fallen Stars Memorial Mural was unveiled Memorial Day 2008 at Herkimer County Community College's Veterans Memorial Park, in Herkimer, NY. This memorial recognizes 229 brave men and women who selflessly and honorably made the ultimate sacrifice for their country and this Memorial Day, a second mural will be dedicated to further recognize their life and our loss.

I am proud to inform Congress and the nation that each fallen hero has been remembered by either a service project improving the quality of life in Central New York, or by a donation to a veterans' service organization. As a Member of Congress and as a New Yorker, I am forever grateful for the commitment and valor of our veterans, and I am touched by the spirit of their communities as those they left behind work to improve the quality of life for so many in the name of these heroes.

I would like to recognize the following individuals in particular for their dedication to this initiative: RJ Lenarcic, Chairman of Special Projects for the Herkimer Lions Club; Mimi Martin, spokeswoman for the Fallen Stars Tribute whose husband was tragically lost in Iraq in 2007; Kay Lenarcic; Kelly Brown; Devin McDonald; Dan Ferguson; Paul Scanlon; Elmer Heston; and Bob Critser.

Madam Speaker, it is with great privilege and honor that I recognize here today the Fallen Stars Memorial Mural and the individuals who have worked so tirelessly to make this memorial a reality, while paying respect to the American heroes we have lost too soon.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, these past few months have confronted us with some of the most difficult economic choices we have faced in the Nation in recent memory. As job reports continue to show thousands of new layoffs each month and unemployment numbers in my district hover above 10 percent, I am outraged that the very individuals who have contributed to this financial disaster are rewarding themselves with hard-earned taxpayer money intended to get our economy moving again.

We have been called to action to see that those responsible are held accountable and not rewarded. This bill does just that. It ensures that these TARP-taking executives are paid based on the work that they do, not paid for the work they didn't do.

You know, I listen to my colleagues from the other side of the aisle talk, and I guess I understand that some people are critical of AIG. Certainly we understand that. We all are critical of the AIG top executives. I even respect the opinions of those who are critical of this bill.

The thing that I don't understand is how you can be critical of both. You really can't. If you are critical of what happened at AIG, then you have to say that this is exactly the kind of thing that Congress should be doing. We should be going in and we should be regulating. We should be exercising the oversight that our constituents sent us here to Congress to do.

This is a commonsense piece of legislation that reflects the values of this Nation and the very same lessons that we hold in our communities and teach to our children. We will not sit idly by as this money is practically being taken from the American people instead of being used to restore confidence in this Nation as it was intended.

Madam Speaker, we owe it to our constituents and to our children and to our grandchildren to do everything we can to bring justice where it is lacking and repair it so we have a clear road to success.

I want to thank my good friend for yielding, and I want to thank him for having the idea and for bringing this to fruition. It's taken, certainly, a lot of work and a lot of effort, not only on your part, but on the part of your staff, to bring this together, and I want to thank you for that, because, I thank you on behalf of, not just my constituents in New York State, but for constituents and middle class throughout the country.

The things that I think the Populist Caucus stands for are the issues that are important to middle class. And also, I think it's critically important that there is a grain of truth that the middle class gets. They need to have someone out there defending them, looking out for their interests and, most importantly, telling them the truth.

And you know, I was listening with interest, as I know you were, just a couple of moments ago to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle talk about some of the budget proposals of President Obama, and some of the points that I think we'll probably end up talking about at some point during the evening. But they talk about the fact that the numbers in the budget are the largest that they've seen, that there has been in years.

The thing that they don't tell you about that, however, is the fact that, for the first time in our history, the cost of the war is actually put on the books so that the American people get the truth. They actually know how much is being spent. In past administrations that was never on there. We just borrowed the money as we went along and, as we say it, funded the wars off the books. So the American people never knew actually how much it was costing for our war, how much all of these things were costing. This is an honest, this is a true budget.

But the thing about it, and I think the thing that's most important is this is really not just a budget. This is a long-term plan for the future of America, for the future of America's middle class.

And I listen to my colleagues, and I hear them talk, and I hear them criticize, but I did not hear a single alternative proposal with respect to what they were proposing to make the life of the middle class, to make the life of Americans better, to help Americans find jobs, to help Americans improve their quality of life. That's what we're looking for. That's what we, I think, as populists, look for and try to promote.

During the height of the Depression, Franklin Roosevelt once said some words that now adorn the monument to

him that's located just a short distance from where we are right now. And those words are as powerful today as they were when he said them so many years ago. ``The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.'' Very profound words then, and very profound words today.

However, over the past 8 years, the Republican White House and Congress have largely ignored the fundamental truth in favor of the policies that focused on a top-down economic and social policies that benefit, frankly, big business, the wealthy and the well-connected, and don't look out for America's middle class. And that's why we're here.

As a result, the middle class families that have always been the true engines for our national economy, the center of our culture, and the foundation for our national security, have been left behind with the devastating results of our entire Nation. And now we're all paying the price.

The mission of the Populist Caucus is to re-establish the core middle class American values that made this country great as the guiding principles of our political discourse and our government here in Washington.

As history has repeatedly demonstrated, a prosperous middle class means a more prosperous America. A vibrant growing middle class has been the hallmark of our strength as a Nation over the past 70 years.

The Populist Caucus will aggressively fight for the passage of commonsense legislation focusing on the expansion and prosperity of the American middle class.

You mentioned just a little earlier, of late we've been hearing a lot in the media of the so-called populist rage and the anger of the middle class at the AIGs of the world.

Now, we are not here to incite or stir this populist rage, nor to promote class warfare in any way, shape, fashion or form. But we are here to see to it that the issues and interests of the middle class are protected and promoted at all costs.

Specifically, the caucus will focus on legislation that invests in working Americans, improves access to quality education for our children, creates jobs for the middle class that will bolster our economy, increase access to health care for all Americans, ensure that trade is not just free trade, but is fair trade, that the food you eat and the toys that your children play with are safe, and that we promote fiscal responsibility, accountability and discipline, and create a government that actually works for, not just the richest Americans, but for all Americans.

These are the fundamental building blocks that will create a strong foundation for sustained long-term economic recovery and growth in this country. In fact, these priorities are the only proven and time-tested blueprint for long-term economic growth in America. Enacting these reforms represent our best chance at restoring the American Dream here at home, as well as continuing our role as the beacon of freedom and hope for the rest of the world.

I'd again like to thank you for inviting me to be here tonight, for organizing this, and I look forward to a very enjoyable discussion this evening.

Well, thank you for yielding.

There are a couple of points that I would like to make and just touch on. I think you touched upon health care, and I think health care is so important.

One of the things that the President talks about and what I think our budget will reflect--I even hesitate calling it a ``budget'' because I feel like it is more of a blueprint, again, as to the future of how we see the country moving forward over the next several years. One of the things about it is, for the first time, we actually have a budget. It is taking into consideration funding for health care for all Americans. I mean think about that--and I think you did. I certainly did when I ran for office the first time. One of the main reasons that I decided to run was the fact that I could not understand why there were 47 million Americans who did not have health care in this, the richest country in the world, one of only two industrialized countries that does not have any form of universal health care, and we do not have health care.

This proposal, this budget, will have in it for the first time--how shall I say?--a sketch, an outline, of how we will go forward and of how we will pay for health care for all Americans. That is critical. In contrast to what my colleagues said earlier, it is not about dictating to Americans what they need to do, what they have to do. It is about giving them the tools, about giving them access to quality, affordable health care just like the rest of the world has. One of the bills that I have been working on and that I hope to introduce in the near future deals with that, and that has a lot to do with where I'm from.

One of the things that I have found that people do not understand is, when someone's children go to a 4-year college or to a 2-year college, they generally are covered under their parents' health care. However, there is a gap, and there are millions of children who go to technical schools to get certifications who are not covered under their parents' plans. There is no coverage for health care. That is very unfortunate. I mean those are middle class families who have children who want to go, who maybe are not going to go to college to be engineers or who are not going to go to college to be teachers but who are going to go to college to get a very important degree, a very important certification in a technical trade. We need to do that. We need to promote that. That is a middle class value. That is something that we should be helping families do, not hindering it by not giving them insurance. That is one of the things that, I think, populists do. They ensure that all Americans have the ability not only to get health care but to improve their stations.

As my colleague from Ohio said, the ability to aspire to the middle class--to

make better of themselves, to do better for themselves than their parents were able to do--is what, I think, we as populists advocate and work for on behalf of the middle class. So I am really proud to be able to be a part of that.

I look back over what working people have accomplished in their lives, and I see it a lot in my district in Upstate New York--in the Mohawk Valley--in the Utica-Rome area and in Auburn. One of the things that I find most interesting is when looking at the productivity of our workers. I tour plants and facilities all over my district, as I know you do. What is the thing that you always hear from the people who own the plants? ``The productivity of our workers is great.'' The productivity of American workers has dramatically, dramatically increased over the past 20 years. Yet, in that 20-year period when the productivity has gone through the roof for American workers--in fact, they are one of the most productive workforces in the world--the real wages of that workforce have decreased. So we have individuals who are doing more for the people for whom they work, who actually are far more productive and who are allowing the people who own their factories and who own their small businesses to do better, to produce more, which is a good thing. However, they are not earning more than they earned 10 or 20 years ago.

You know, we sometimes hear people say, ``Oh, the problem with the American people is that they charge too much.'' Well, the fact of the matter is you don't charge too much because you want to. When your son or your daughter comes home from school and says, ``Mom and Dad, I need a new pair of sneakers. I'm trying out for basketball tomorrow, and my sneakers don't fit me, and the coach says I need a new pair of sneakers,'' if you don't have the money, you go and you charge it because that is something you do as a parent, but if you're making less than you made 10 years ago or 20 years ago, you don't have that money. That's the kind of thing that, I think, we stand for as populists, the kinds of things that we want to make sure of.

Hey, if the productivity of American workers goes up, then the salaries and the wages that American workers earn should go up as well. It is the fair thing. It is the right thing. It is the American thing. It is what has made America great. Those are things that, to me, are most important in our caucus, and they are the things that, I think, are most important for me as a populist.

Again, I am so pleased to be able to be here to talk about these issues and to bring them to the forefront and to let the American people know that there are many of us here in Congress who are working hard to see to it that the middle class prospers, continues to prosper and achieves all that they can possibly achieve.

Thank you. I yield back.

Would the gentleman yield for just a minute?

I am glad you mentioned that, and I didn't want to let the moment go by without commenting on it.

I consider myself a direct recipient of the GI Bill--of the World War II GI Bill because my dad was a poor kid from the east side of Utica who would never have had an opportunity to attend college, but he served his country in the military, came back, and he was able to go to Cornell University, and as a result of which, he insisted that--my sisters and myself--that we attend college.

So it isn't just a single generation but multigenerational. It is really, as you say, probably the greatest populist piece of legislation that this country ever passed.

And I thank you for bringing that forward and for yielding to me.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I would like to talk a little bit about the corporate accountability and also a little bit about consumer protection.

But first, with respect to corporate accountability, as you know, I am on the Rules Committee, and today we had a hearing with respect to the bill which I anticipate will be on the floor tomorrow with respect to--and you and I discussed it a little bit earlier--with respect to putting limitations on the amount of compensation that executives can get for companies that receive TARP funding.

And I guess I look at it this way. And I listened to the argument and the debate today in detail. And, you know, there is a great deal of dissatisfaction with AIG, and certainly I can understand that. We all can understand that people are critical of what happened at AIG. I am. We all are. And I listen to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and I can understand that some of them are critical with the legislation that we will be considering tomorrow which puts limitations on compensations for executives.

The thing I can't understand is how people can be critical of both of those because if you are unhappy with what happened at AIG, then you really have to support the legislation, if you're a Member of Congress, that we're putting forward tomorrow because that legislation will enable Congress to help put the kind of limitations on and do the kind of oversight that we were all sent to Congress to do.

So I think that if there is dissatisfaction within this House with respect to AIG and what happened there, then we should support and we should vote for the bill that will be on the floor tomorrow because that does give Congress the ability to, again, do what Congress is supposed to do. And that is regulate.

You know, you look back at how it is that we have been and how we are put in this place that we are, and the common denominator, the answer that you keep getting is the lack of regulation.

And I tell the story this way. It was funny because when all of these things were happening with the stock market, with the banks, my daughter called me from home and she said--she plays soccer, and she was telling me about her soccer game, and as most children do, she was complaining about the referees. They lost the game, and she was blaming the referees.

And I listened to her, as most parents do, and it came to me--and I said goodnight to her, goodbye. And it came to me later on that night. And I said to her the next day, I said, ``I know that you feel that you didn't get a fair shake from the referees, but can you imagine what that game would have been like if the referees were off the field?''

Well, that is what has happened over the past 10 years. We have taken the referees off the field. We have done away with the kind of regulation that is necessary. The SEC has fallen on its face and has not done the kinds of things--and we end up with scandals like the Madoff scandal. Those are the kinds of things that we need to put back in. We need to put the regulation back in.

People talk about regulation like it is a bad thing. They don't understand that that's exactly what people elect

us to Congress to do, and this is to ensure that the referees stay on the field and they keep an eye on things, and they keep the playing field level.

With that, I yield back.

Well, first off, I would like to say thank you and commend my colleague from Virginia for his well-thought-out and very articulate presentation with respect to corporate accountability. We certainly can use that kind of passion here in Congress, and I thank you for that, what you said, and what you talked about.

You know, one of the things that I'd like to talk about just for a moment is something we haven't touched on yet tonight but is a very important part of the populist values, as articulated by you earlier, and that's with respect to consumer protection.

You and I took a trip down to the Port of Nogales last year to work with and get a firsthand view of some of the things we're seeing with respect to the border patrol. But one of the things we did see is the fact that the Port of Nogales is one of the largest ports for bringing fruits and vegetables into this country, many of which are from Mexico. And one of the things that I think is very important is that we need to ensure that the fruits, the vegetables, the food that we eat, the toys that our children play with are high quality. They need to be safe.

We put these strict standards on domestically produced food, on the kind of fertilizers that our farmers can use, on the kind of pesticides they can use, to ensure that the food that they produce is safe. And yet, we have these free trade agreements and we have the ability of some other countries to bring products into our country that don't follow the same kind of protections and don't have the same kind of laws that we have here, which I think jeopardizes the quality of the food we get and certainly the products that we get.

So that's something that's so important to us, to the people that I represent back home and I think the people all through America.

So it's an important thing, and I know we're running out of time here, but I think it's something that we need to discuss more and we need to spend a great deal of time on here in Congress because there's nothing more important than keeping the food that we eat and the goods that our family uses as safe as possible.

Before I yield back, I would just like to say one last thing. You know, I want to quote another Roosevelt. I started off quoting Franklin Roosevelt. I want to finish by quoting Teddy Roosevelt, and he said, The welfare of each of us is dependent fundamentally upon the welfare of all of us. That sounds an awful lot like what President Obama is saying, that we're all in this together. We can't forget that whether you're a corporate executive or you're a worker on the line, what is good for the executive is good for the worker, and what is good for the worker is good for the executive.

We are all in this together, and as my colleague from Virginia said, it is important that we remember the things that we do affect each and every American, regardless of where you are or where you work.

So, with that, I would again like to thank my friend for organizing this today.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the State University of New York (SUNY) Cortland Men's Cross Country Team, which won its first ever national title on November 22, 2008. During the NCAA Division III Championships at Hanover College in Hanover, Indiana, the Cortland Red Dragons beat 31 competitors with a score of 80 points. The team solidly outpaced the second and third place finishers who scored 115 and 129 points, respectively, and improved on their previous finishes of fourth in 2006 and third in 2007 to win this year's title.

Four of the team's runners earned All-America honors by finishing in the top 35 competitors over the 8,000-meter course. Junior Seth DuBois of Altamont, New York finished seventh; senior Shamus Nally of Burnt Hills, New York, 11th; senior Josh Henry of Truxton, New York, 15th; and junior Justin Wager of Guilderland, New York, 28th.

The team was led by first year head coach Steve Patrick of Batavia, New York and assistant coaches Kathryn Wagner and Jacob Smith. Coach Patrick was named the 2008 Division III Men's Cross Country National Coach of the Year by the United States Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Association (USTFCCCA).

Overall, the win marks SUNY Cortland's 22nd national team title, including 16 NCAA crowns in seven different sports.

Madam Speaker, I am honored to represent such skilled and hard- working athletes in my district. Please join me in congratulating the team and wishing them the best of luck in their future athletic and scholarly pursuits.

Mr. Speaker, the bonuses announced by AIG are nothing less than a slap in the face to the taxpaying families across my district and across the entire country. Families that are struggling to pay rising energy bills and put food on their table.

To expect hardworking middle class families in my district and across the country to foot the bill for executive bonuses when those same executives failed in their job and dragged our economy down with them is completely unacceptable.

My constituents pay their bills on time. They make hard financial choices, and they meet their responsibilities each and every day without a bailout.

This is truly a nonpartisan issue. I will work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and with the administration to build a regulatory system founded on accountability. That is why I support legislation to hold these irresponsible individuals accountable and demand that they pay back to the American people the money that we gave them in bailouts.

Now is the time for comprehensive financial regulatory reform and accountability. Never again should we leave the foxes in charge of the henhouse.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 235 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz- Balart). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material into the Record.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 235 provides for a structured rule for consideration of H.R. 1262, the Water Quality Investment Act of 2009. The rules makes in order 10 amendments, including all five of the Republicans' amendments considered for consideration.

Among the many challenges confronting us, none could be more elemental than protecting our water. Today, the nationwide system of wastewater infrastructure includes 16,000 publicly owned wastewater treatment plants, 100,000 major pumping stations, 600,000 miles of sanitary sewers, and 200,000 miles of storm sewers. It is estimated that we have already invested over $250 billion on the construction and maintenance of this system. However, we are now in danger of losing that investment, if we do not act to maintain and improve the system.

The vast majority of the Water Quality Investment Act of 2009 is made up of five bills that the House considered and passed during the 110th Congress, four of which were not addressed by the Senate. With any luck, our colleagues in the other body will be able to address these important issues this Congress.

The need for serious investment in our infrastructure is clear. In 2002, the EPA estimated that there will be a $534 billion gap between spending and needs for water and wastewater infrastructure in 2019. The EPA's Clean Watersheds Needs Survey of 2004 Report to Congress documented America's wastewater infrastructure needs at more than $202 billion, and these are numbers from several years ago.

The Water Quality Investment Act of 2009 authorizes $13.8 billion in Federal grants over 5 years to capitalize clean water State revolving loan funds that provide grants and low-interest loans to communities for water and wastewater infrastructure. These funds are critical to so many communities in the district that I represent. During December and January, it seemed like every local official that I met with had a water or wastewater infrastructure project that was shovel-ready and in dire need of stimulus funds. The funding authorized by this bill will help to address that backlog of need.

H.R. 1262 also authorizes $1.8 billion over the next 5 years for Sewer Overflow Control Grants programs. Addressing and eliminating combined sewer overflows is one of the biggest financial challenges facing communities in my district and all over the country.

Communities in the Northeastern United States tend to have old and deteriorating sewer systems. Old clay pipes with leaking joints and other weaknesses in the system allow outside water to infiltrate into the system. During heavy storms or spring snowmelt, this infiltration causes the system to overflow and discharge water and sewage into local rivers.

A number of county and municipal water systems in my district are facing multi-million dollar projects to prevent their systems from overflowing into the Mohawk River that runs from west to east across upstate New York and feeds into the Hudson River. Many of these communities have small populations, incapable of simply passing the cost of these projects on to ratepayers.

H.R. 1262 authorizes extended repayment periods of up to 30 years for the SRF loans to help lessen the burden on local ratepayers.

To further assist rural or small communities like these, the legislation also authorizes technical assistance to help them meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act and to assist them to gaining access to financing wastewater infrastructure. In the upstate New York district that I represent, I often hear from rural communities about the difficulties they have in finding and applying for grant and loan opportunities.

The most reliable way to prevent human illness from waterborne diseases and pathogens is to eliminate human exposure in discharged sewage.

While system repairs and upgrades take time to implement, timely public notice can limit the human exposure when these discharges occur. The Water Quality Investment Act also requires owners and operators of publicly owned treatment works to monitor for and provide timely notification of sewer overflows to Federal and State agencies, public health departments and the public at large.

The legislation properly extends Davis-Bacon prevailing wage protections to contractors on treatment works projects that are constructed with my assistance from the State revolving loan funds. This prevents ``cut-rate'' crews from performing shoddy work and ensures that local contractors can competitively bid on local water infrastructure projects.

The bill also reinstatements the applicability of the Buy American Act to construction projects funded by Clean Water Act. In this way, the bill ensures that the investment we make in our infrastructure has the greatest possible benefit on the American economy. The Buy American provisions included in the Water Quality Investment Act are consistent with the Buy American provisions included in the final conference agreement of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

The bill also increases the authorization to remediate contamination in the Great Lakes. In 2002, the EPA reported that pollution was impairing the use of 91 percent of the Great Lakes shorelines and 99 percent of the Great Lakes open water.

Impairment means that the shoreline of the open waters did not meet all of the designated uses, including fishing, swimming, and suitability for aquatic life. The leading causes of this impairment were pathogens, metals--mainly mercury--and toxic organic compounds. EPA noted that the dominant cause of shoreline impairment was historic pollution in the form of contaminated sediment.

H.R. 1262 increases to $150 million per year the authorization for projects that address sediment contamination in the Great Lakes areas. Areas of concern are defined under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement between the United States and Canada as ecologically degraded geographic areas that require remediation. An area qualifies if at least one of 14 beneficial uses--fishing, swimming, drinking water, et cetera--is impaired as a result of contamination.

By increasing the authorization for the cleanup of contaminated sediment in the most polluted areas of the Great Lakes, the bill will improve opportunities for fishing, swimming, boating, and agriculture. This will help approximately 40 million people who live in the Great Lakes Basin. The level of authorization is consistent with the provision of the House-passed Great Lakes Legacy Act Reauthorization passed by the House in the fall of 2008.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the Water Quality Investment Act. I hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will continue to support it as well.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from the Rules Committee mentioned that this bill is costly. There is no question there is a cost associated with clean water. But I would submit, how do you put a price tag on clean water? How do you put a price tag on keeping the water that your family drinks and the water that is so important to life on this planet clean? There is no real price tag that you can put on it.

In my own county, Oneida County in New York, we are under a consent order from the State of New York to eliminate sewer overflow that discharges into our river during storms. It would cost $150 million for our small community to fix our water system, but it's necessary for us to do that. And I would submit that, without projects such as this, local communities cannot keep their water clean and cannot do the kind of things that are necessary and so important for our country.

I would yield.

I understand.

Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio, a former colleague from the Rules Committee, Ms. Sutton.

Mr. Speaker, this week the President took a critical step to boost groundbreaking stem-cell research and restore scientific integrity across government. The President signed an executive order lifting the ban on Federal funding for promising embryonic system cell research. In doing so he affirmed the administration's support of finding cures for diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, heart disease and diabetes that cause pain and suffering all over the world.

Many thoughtful and decent people are conflicted about or are strongly opposed to this research. The President understands their concern and respects their point of view. That is why the administration will develop and rigorously enforce strict ethical guidelines with zero tolerance for misuse and abuse. This order does not open the door for cloning for human reproduction in any way. We are all opposed to

that. Rather, it unleashes and unharnesses the potential of what this country can accomplish to eliminate the ravages of these diseases and the effects they impose upon humanity.