Floor Statements

Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the Manufacturing Technology Competitiveness Act because this legislation will take some small steps to help strengthen manufacturing technology and education. It will help small and medium-sized manufacturing in Maine by authorizing $2.1 billion for various activities intended to improve the competitiveness of our businesses.

Maine's manufacturing economy has been hard hit in recent years. Since the passage of NAFTA, Maine has lost over 24,000 manufacturing jobs. Job loss is all too familiar to too many Mainers.

During my first term in office after I was sworn in as a Member of Congress, I learned that the mill where I worked for over 28 years was closing its doors. It is the mill my father worked at for 43 years, my grandfather for 40 years, as did a lot of friends and neighbors. The region was devastated.

It is time to turn this economy around for all the mills all across the country. As a member of the House Manufacturing Task Force and Manufacturing Caucus, I have been working hard to promote Federal opportunities for businesses and nonprofit centers. I am also a strong supporter of the Manufacturing Extension Partnership. I am glad to see that MEP gets some funding in this bill even though they deserve more after years of proposed cuts by this administration.

Madam Chairman, the fact is that this should only be a start. I believe this bill is a small step in the right direction, but our Nation is facing a massive loss of manufacturing jobs and businesses. We should pass this bill today; but if we let this be the only thing that we do to help manufacturing this year, then Congress has failed and our businesses and our workers will lose out.

Mr. Speaker, since 1933, Baxter State Park has been one of the most important natural and recreational places in the state of Maine. From an initial purchase of 5,960 acres, the park has grown to 204,733 acres that welcome more than 100,000 visitors each summer from all parts of the United States. Baxter State Park is special for its role as home to many of Maine's most beautiful mountains, lakes, and rivers and as the northern terminus of the Appalachian Trail.

Throughout Baxter State Park's history, no man or woman, besides Governor Percival Baxter himself, has been as important to the park as Baxter State Park Director Irvin ``Buzz'' Caverly. Buzz Caverly began his career at Baxter State Park as a ranger in 1959 and by 1981 had risen to the rank of Park Director, where he has ably and enthusiastically managed the park since.

Buzz recently announced his retirement. Through the years, Buzz earned a well-deserved reputation for thoughtfulness, fairness, and dedication to the legacy of Percival Baxter and to Baxter State Park.

Growing up in the Katahdin region of Maine, Baxter State Park has always been my backyard, and I know that Buzz has continued the proud traditions of conservation and recreational access on which Baxter State Park was founded and which the people of the Katahdin region and all of Maine deeply value.

It can truly be said that Buzz knows Baxter State Park better than any man or woman alive, and his absence will be felt for years to come at the park. Indeed, Buzz's legacy will be remembered not only by those of us that love the park, but by the countless thousands of people who had the good fortune to meet him throughout the years and enjoy his own infectious love for Baxter.

On behalf of the residents of Maine's Second Congressional District, and for myself personally, I would like to thank Baxter State Park Director Irving ``Buzz'' Caverly for his hard work and dedication to Baxter State Park and for protecting an area that will remain a special place for all future generations of visitors from throughout Maine and away. Buzz, thank you and congratulations.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. As a mill worker at Great Northern Paper Company for over 30 years, I rise in strong opposition to CAFTA. Two days after I was sworn in as a Member of Congress, I learned that the very mill that I worked at, that my dad worked at for 43 years, my grandfather before him for 40 years, filed bankruptcy and was shutting down.

The reason? Unfair trade policies that have devastated our industry. Job loss is something that we Mainers know all about. In Maine, in the wake of NAFTA, we have lost 23 percent of our manufacturing base in the last 3 years alone. The unemployment rate in certain areas is over 30 percent.

CAFTA takes most of the language right out of NAFTA. It only has promises of more job losses. Business organizations, family farms, church groups, Republicans and Democrats are united in opposition to

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this evening we heard an hour debate of why Congress and the American people should support CAFTA. And to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) I would like to say, as Paul Harvey would say, Now the rest of the story.

I want to thank my good friend, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), a distinguished member of the Committee on Ways and Means. He has been a remarkable advocate for issues affecting working families. This week the House is expected to vote on a trade agreement that only promises job losses and devastation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight in strong opposition to CAFTA. I rise tonight for all Mainers who have lost their jobs. I rise for all working Americans and their families, many who are still working at this late hour to help make ends meet. And I know what it is like myself. For almost 30 years I worked at Great Northern Paper Company in East Millinocket, Maine, where my father worked for 43 years, my grandfather before him for 40 years. And that is the way it is in a lot of mill towns in Maine and all across the country.

Two days after I was sworn in as a Member of Congress in January of 2003, I learned that the mill where I worked filed bankruptcy and was shutting its doors. The mill was closed largely due to the pressure created by unfair trade agreements, years of poorly thought-out trade deals that placed manufacturing industries at a huge disadvantage. And one would only have to look at the huge trade deficits that are continuing to grow ever since NAFTA went into effect.

I know firsthand, as many Mainers do, that with these layoffs and closures, when these businesses go under because of unfair trade deals, so does the heart and souls of these communities. In Maine alone, since 1998 and to late 2004, the Federal Government had documented 11,724 workers who lost their job due to trade. Although the real undocumented number is much higher, it has been estimated that 24,000 Mainers have lost their jobs due to NAFTA alone.

The number serves to demonstrate yet again what people in Maine already know through our own tough experience. The economy continues to struggle and our workers see fewer good prospects. Maine has lost 23 percent of our manufacturing base over the last 3 years alone.

Now, I heard my colleague who supported CAFTA earlier talk about the unemployment going down. Well, I can say my first year in Congress we had labor market areas in Maine whose unemployment rate was over 35 percent. And the reason why the number is lower today is not because they have found jobs, it is because this Congress, the previous Congress, has failed to extend the unemployment benefits, so they are no longer counted as being unemployed. They just drop off the list.

We are sick of watching our jobs get shipped overseas as our workers stand waving good-bye to them. It is time to get off the fast track of lost jobs and shattered dreams and on to the right track for fair trade agreements.

When it comes to CAFTA, the benefit is pretty hard to find. Despite having 44 million inhabitants, the CAFTA nations' total purchasing power is the same as New Haven, Connecticut. More than 40 percent of the Central American workers work for less than $2 a day. CAFTA outsources our jobs to cheap labor markets with almost nonexisting environmental or labor standards.

How could such a bad deal for our workers pass?

In recent days, the administration authorized House leadership to secure votes with whatever is at hand, from extra funding, as you heard earlier, for individual Members' districts in the highway projects and energy bill, to the still incomplete appropriations bills. Members are being asked to trade away their votes for agreements that trade American jobs away. This is just unbelievable.

Tomorrow, the House is expected to vote on H.R. 3283, the so-called United States Trade Rights Enforcement Act. This bill does nothing to effectively address China's unfair trade practices and their adverse impact on U.S. workers and manufacturers and the Nation's economy. In fact, it makes it harder to stop unfair Chinese trade practices. But it has a good-sounding title.

This bill is an effort to sway votes for CAFTA, giving Members a fig leaf to hide behind so they can say they are standing up against unfair trade agreements. It is nothing but smoke and mirrors. Smoke and mirrors.

Two years ago, these tactics worked to pass the deeply flawed Medicare bill by one vote. Leadership held open a 15-minute vote for 3 hours while they twisted arms in order to ensure passage. It is expected the same will happen with the CAFTA vote. Is this the way the people of the House should be acting? Is this in the best interest of our Nation?

What message does this send the American people and our workforce and our businesses? And why must these votes always happen in the dark of night? It is because while working Americans sleep, their jobs are being traded away.

Mr. Speaker, all Americans who are watching tonight should check for themselves. They should pay close attention to what time the CAFTA vote happens. They should ask themselves why under such cover of darkness should we be voting. It is said that midnight is the witching hour. Americans should wonder what kind of witchcraft is being passed on the House floor as we consider CAFTA in the dead of night.

The administration may want this deal to pass as quickly as possible before more opposition mounts, but the people who have suffered the most under our trade policies, including many of my neighbors, my coworkers and my family, and many of the good people in Maine have earned the right to ask a simple question about what a new trade deal will mean to their families and get some real answers before we move forward.

One of the things I hear a lot of people say is that large stable companies, like Great Northern was, where I worked for over 30 years, will never move overseas because it is too costly. I can tell my colleagues firsthand that the mill I worked at had six paper machines. They uplifted four of them and shipped them overseas. The mill in Millinocket, the Great Northern Paper Company's other mill, did the same thing. It is nothing for large corporations to unbolt their machines and ship them overseas so they can get that cheap labor.

We heard earlier that in some of these CAFTA countries labor is less than $2 a day. That is exploiting workers. It is not to benefit the CAFTA nations. It definitely will not benefit the United States of America. So I hope Members on both sides of the aisle will take a good hard look at this trade policy because we cannot sell-out the American workers. We cannot sell out the American Dream that we have.

We must reverse these trade policies to once again put the United States of America on the path of growth. The only way we are going to be a secure country, the only way we are going to be able to be respected among other nations, like we have in the past, is to make sure that we have a strong economy.

When we look at what happened during World War II, what made this country the greatest country in the world, with our Greatest Generation, was the ability for Americans back home to work in our manufacturing industry, to work hand in hand. But what are we going to do if we continue to ship these jobs overseas? It is going to weaken the United States' ability to be the number one leader as far as our national defense.

We must vote this CAFTA deal down, regardless of what time in the morning it comes up and regardless of how long the leadership holds the vote open. We must do what is right, and what is right is fair trade agreements.

So I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, and I will be with him voting against CAFTA.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me time and for her leadership in this effort.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1220, the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Act of 2005. I believe that this is a good bipartisan bill. Each year we pass the COLA for veterans. This ensures that veterans benefits maintain their value as the cost of living goes up. These benefits were earned by the men and women who have served our country and their families, and they should not be allowed to diminish.

These benefits are critical to helping many veterans and their families make ends meet. I would also like to thank the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley) for her efforts to include a provision to improve benefits that I have been working on since I became a Member of Congress.

Last Congress in response to the VA evaluation, we passed legislation to provide an increase of $250 to the monthly DIC benefits for surviving spouses with children under 18 years of age for the first 2 years of eligibility.

While I believe that we should make this benefit permanent, especially in light of our brave men and women giving their lives in Afghanistan and Iraq, the provision in today's bill is extremely important and will ensure that this benefit maintains its value over time.

Finally, I am pleased that this legislation will allow the VA to continue its important work on Parkinson's disease research. I would like to thank the chairman, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer), and the ranking member, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), for their leadership in this very important legislation.

This is a good bill to help veterans and their families across the country. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Millinocket Regional Hospital for fifty years of dedicated service to the Katahdin Region.

For half a century the Millinocket Regional Hospital has touched the lives of all us in the Katahdin Region. Like most who live in our area, my family has experienced the full range of experiences at MRH, from the joy of childbirth to the care of an ailing loved one. Through it all, the employees of MRH, past and present, have provided a caring and supportive haven for everyone and their dedication to compassionate care is second-to-none.

The Millinocket Regional Hospital will celebrate their half century of service this weekend and I am sure the people of the Katahdin region will unite in celebrating so many dedicated years of service.

The Millinocket Regional Hospital has provided essential access to health care services to our communities and I look forward to MRH's continued service to the Katahdin Region. Congratulations to all who have contributed to the hospital's longevity and success.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly support addressing the funding crisis that is hurting veterans, so I will vote for this measure this evening, but I am deeply disappointed that we are not providing the VA with an additional $1.5 billion. Because this amount is less than the $1.5 billion offered by the Senate, veterans will be in limbo, forced to wait for the care that they have earned. I will vote ``yes'' because I want veterans to get a measure of relief as soon as possible, but we can do better in this House, and we all know it.

Mr. Speaker, we should not even be here. We would not be here if the VA, the administration, and the leadership had listened to the veterans groups and the members of the Committee on Veterans Affairs who warned about this problem in recent years. Let us make no mistake: this shortfall is definitely hurting our veterans.

At Togus VA Medical Center, they ran out of money for medical care, so they had to divert their maintenance fund. Now, when their own brick building is crumbling, they cannot fix the problem. Instead, workers had to put up scaffolding to keep bricks from falling on the heads of sick veterans and their medical staff. This is a disgrace. This is what this shortfall is doing for our veterans.

We also know that even the funding that will be approved this evening still leaves a major gap. For example, I am concerned that this supplemental may not address the shortfall funding for mental health services. Today, I asked Secretary Nicholson whether the $975 million would cover the gap in service for mental health care, including substance abuse.

He would not give me a clear yes or no answer. So we are left wondering again if this supplemental will solve the full shortfall in veterans health care. I am also concerned that the supplemental offered does not deal with the half a million veterans who are barred from seeking care from the VA. Since January of 2003, this administration has instituted a policy of banning a group of veterans referred to as Priority 8 veterans from enrolling in health care. This is wrong.

So in closing, I will vote to support this measure because it is the first step in correcting the outrageous problem, but it should never have been in the first place.

Mr. Speaker, on June 27th and 28th, I have requested an official leave of absence to attend to issues that are of vital importance to the people of Maine. I will be meeting with Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) representative General Lloyd W. Newton at the Defense Finance and Accounting Service in Limestone, Maine. This facility is currently slated to close as part of the BRAC process. I will be leading General Lloyd W. Newton on a tour of the base to present the case that the facility must not be closed.

Currently, 362 hardworking Mainers are employed in the Limestone facility. Aroostook County and Northern Maine have already been devastated by the closure of the Loring Air Force Base. Additional job loss, along with the losses due to the proposed realignment at Brunswick Naval Air Station and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, would have a serious impact in Maine. It is important for me to meet personally with General Newton, along with Governor Baldacci, so that we can stress the critical service that this facility provides for the military and its vital importance to the Maine economy.

Mr. Speaker, doctors of optometry from around the nation will convene in Dallas, Texas, from June 22-26 for Optometry's Meeting, the American Optometric Association's 108th annual convention. On Saturday, June 25, they will elect Dr. Richard Wallingford, Jr. as the association's 84th president.

Dr. Wallingford is a resident of Rockwood, Maine, on Moosehead Lake. He is a native son who has practiced optometry in our state for 30 years. He is a graduate of the University of Maine at Orono and the College of Optometry at the State University of New York. He currently serves as Director of Clinical Services at Vision Care of Maine in Bangor.

Dr. Wallingford has been a leader in his profession at the state, regional and national levels. He has been a member of the Maine Optometric Association since 1975, and served as president in 1982. He was appointed to the Maine Board of Optometry in 1989, and he served until 1999. He was also a member of the New England Council of Optometrists, and he currently serves on the Board of Trustees of the New England College of Optometry.

At the national level, Dr. Wallingford has been a member of American Optometric Association (AOA) since 1971, and has served in the association's volunteer structure since 1983. He was elected to the AOA Board of Trustees in 1998 and was re-elected in 2001.

Remarkably, Dr. Wallingford has maintained his hectic schedule while battling multiple myeloma, a form of blood cancer. Diagnosed with the disease in 2000, he began an aggressive treatment plan last year which included six rounds of chemotherapy and two stem cell transplants. In January, Dr. Wallingford received good news that the myeloma was in remission.

In his community, Dr. Wallingford was elected to the board of Maine School Administrative District (MSAD) #67, where he served as chairman for two years. He was president of the Lincoln Rotary Club and chairman of the Lincoln Recreation Committee. He also coached youth baseball and basketball.

In addition to his professional responsibilities, Dr. Wallingford is a devoted outdoorsman. He has been a member of the National Ski Patrol since 1989 and serves on the Squaw Mountain Ski Patrol. He is a licensed whitewater guide and has a land and sea rating as a licensed private pilot. Dr. Wallingford also owns and manages the Moosehead Lake Sporting Camps and Mt. Kineo Cabins.

Dr. Wallingford and his wife Elaine have been married for 35 years and they have three children. Richard III is a physician and is completing his residency in psychiatry at Harvard University. Denise holds a Master's Degree from Boston College and is an elementary school teacher. Tiffany is a graduate student at Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo, California.

The American Optometric Association is the professional society for optometrists nationwide and has more than 34,000 members. Dr. Wallingford will lead the association on its mission to improve eye and vision care in the United States.

Dr. Richard Wallingford has built a distinguished record of service and leadership in his profession and in his community. I am confident that he will have a very successful term as president of the American Optometric Association. I join his family, friends and colleagues in congratulating him on this achievement and wishing him good luck and good health.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Bradley amendment. I do not believe that the Department of Defense's BRAC recommendations were based on facts and future threats, and I believe this amendment is critical to ensuring that we understand the security environment in which we are making BRAC decisions.

The Department of Defense's recommendations continue an irrational and dangerous assault on New England that would leave it as an undefended region of our Nation.

The proposals would close the best performing shipyard in the country, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, a facility that actually saves the Navy money by completing its work ahead of schedule and under budget. They would realign Brunswick Naval Air Station, the last active military airfield in the Northeast, despite being described as critical to our national security by the Department of Defense. And they would close one of the most cost-efficient and innovative facilities in the Defense Finance and Accounting Service system located in Limestone, Maine.

Worst of all, the BRAC Commission and the affected communities do not even have the detailed information used by the Department of Defense to formulate their proposal. The delay by DOD in releasing the data to the BRAC Commission and local communities is an outrage. It calls into question the credibility of the process. And from reviewing the limited information that DOD has submitted, it turns out that some of the data used by DOD is actually inaccurate. BRAC is not an experiment for testing theories. Once we lose these assets, we cannot bring them back.

Mr. Chairman, our national security is at stake. We must move cautiously when we use these facts to justify our actions, and we must allow the critical actions outlined in this amendment to take place to make sure we understand our future threats before we close any of our key military assets.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to add my voice to those marking this most solemn of days--Yom Hashoah. Holocaust Remembrance Day commemorates one of the darkest periods in our shared human history. We remember the victims of this unspeakable tragedy. At the same time, this day marks the beginning of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, and we celebrate the indomitable spirit of freedom and hope that resides in all of us.

This day does not belong to one people or commemorate just one moment in time. Yom Hashoah reminds us of the darkness and evil that still exists in this world and charges each of us to stand against the atrocities that men can bring about.

We remember only too well the horrors of ``ethnic cleansing'' in the Balkans and the genocide in Rwanda just a few years ago. Not only do we remind ourselves of the evils of our recent past, but also we take this time to look at the world we live in today as well. Religious, ethnic, racial and cultural strife continue to divide people around the world. Despite the lessons of our past, we are shamed by the knowledge that the world community was once again too slow to respond to the tragedy that is taking place in the Darfur region of Sudan. We Are shamed by the knowledge that we have the ability to prevent genocide and suffering, but we do not act.

That is why it is so important that we speak out today to remember the victims of the Holocaust and of all genocides throughout the world. This year marks the 60th Anniversary of the end of World War II. Our greatest generation did not stand still against this evil. We must be ready and willing to follow in their footsteps.

Merely saying ``never again'' is not enough. Only by raising awareness of these atrocities can we begin to stop them from happening to any group or people again. While this day is somber and full of self-reflection, it is important to also recall the kindness of so many who risked everything to save and hide their neighbors, friends, or even complete strangers.

For many people, the bravery of Anne Frank sums up the best hopes for the future of humanity. Though she and her family fell victim to the horror, and ultimate fate of millions, she still wrote in her diary:

``I don't think of all the misery, but of all the beauty that still remains. . . . In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart.''

Through understanding our past and each other, we can create the beautiful, peaceful, and hopeful world Anne Frank once envisioned.

Mr. Speaker, first I want to thank my good friends, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), for allowing me to conduct this Special Order regarding CAFTA this evening. They have been remarkable advocates of issues affecting working families, and they have my gratitude and admiration.

Mr. Speaker, there are several Members who want to come down to speak on this important issue, so I will at this time yield to my good friend, good colleague and cofounder of the House

Labor and Working Family Caucus, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez).

Mr. Speaker, now I would like to yield to the good gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich), a gentleman who has fought for the environment and who has fought for working-family issues.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) for his leadership on this issue and look forward to working with him on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, as a co-founder of the House Labor and Working Families Caucus, I am privileged to be here with

my colleagues to discuss the devastating impact that Central America Free Trade Agreement will have on our economy here in the United States. This so-called free trade deal promises to cripple our industries, both in my home State of Maine and throughout the Nation. Before coming to Congress I worked over 29 years at Great Northern Paper Company in East Millinocket. I have seen first-hand the devastation of the so-called free trade on Maine's economy, and I know what it means to working families.

I could see in 1994, with NAFTA, which has been nothing but a disaster, costing people of the State of Maine over 24,000 manufacturing jobs. In some parts of my Congressional district, unemployment has reached over 30 percent in different labor market areas over the last 2 years. Over 30 percent.

And often when jobs go, so do people, taking the heart and soul of what once was prosperous communities with them. Today, the threat of job loss is not for blue collar workers alone. Even high-tech companies like IBM, Boeing, General Electric are taking their computer and engineering jobs to China, India, and the Far East, while leaving behind a long trail of pink slips.

As a Member of Congress, I have had the opportunity to meet with several prominent free traders, like the trade Ambassador, Bob Zoellick. They like to talk about how free trade is good for everyone and creates jobs. But when I share the story of what happened and is happening in the State of Maine, of the many jobs lost and the lives that are devastated by those jobs lost, they admit to me, well, there will be winners and there will be losers, and that is just the price of doing business.

This is not a game. These are real people who lose jobs every day. They are the ones who lose the jobs who can no longer afford to send their kids to college and who can no longer afford even basic health care for their families.

Now, do not get me wrong. I am glad that there are a lot of Federal program benefits available to help dislocated workers. And I have devoted myself in advocating and fighting for Federal resources to help laid off workers. But, working people do not want a program and handout created by Congress to clean up the mess from these so-called free trade agreements. They just want their jobs. Each and every Mainer, each and every American worker, should be asking, can we afford to lose another job? Can we afford the Central American and Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreements?

The job loss numbers show that we simply cannot afford that. From 1998 to 2004 alone, 11,724 workers in Maine were certified for trade- related adjustment assistance. Companies like C.F. Hathaway Company in Waterville, Gerber Childrenswear in Fort Kent, were among the hardest hit by NAFTA.

The company that I worked for for over 29 years, Great Northern Paper Company, announced only 2 days after I was sworn in as a Member of Congress in 2003, they were filing bankruptcy. My coworkers, my family, my community was devastated. And the culprit was the so-called free trade agreements.

These agreements have created nothing but stagnant economies and rising inequality. And CAFTA is based on the same NAFTA model. You will hear from me and other Members this evening about the specifics of its devastating effects tonight.

This agreement will serve to push ahead the corporate globalization trend that has caused a race to the bottom in labor and environmental standards. American companies are often forced to compete with foreign corporations who are not held to the same labor or environmental standards. This creates an unfair balance.

I have long advocated for fair trade, not just free trade. The fight ahead is to ensure that these trade agreements are fair for our workers, our businesses, our States. We must ensure that all trade agreements respect workers rights to the environment, health and human rights. And I know Members on both sides of the aisle are committed to stopping this flawed agreement that we currently will be voting on in the months ahead.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch) who is also a co-founder of the House Labor and Working Family Caucus.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for his comments tonight and I really appreciate his remarks.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen), a gentleman who I have known for some time, a gentleman who is deeply concerned about the trade agreements and what effect it has on our State, of the State of Maine, and I am very appreciative of the work that he has done for the people of the State of Maine, particularly coming into the 2nd District, which is my district, to see the effect of some of these unfair trade agreements and the job loses that we have.

So I now yield to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen).

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen). I do want to thank him especially for his leadership when we deal with prescription drugs. He has definitely been a leader in that area. I want to thank him very much.

Mr. Speaker, now I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley), a good friend.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from New York, and I really appreciate his efforts in this manner and look forward to working with the gentleman to make sure we do have fair trade agreements.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, it does not take a trade expert to see the economic mismatch between the United States and the nations that make up the Central America Free Trade Agreement: Honduras, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Guatemala, and El Salvador. The way CAFTA proponents talk, you would think that Central America is made up of the biggest economies in the Western Hemisphere. CAFTA nations are not only among the world's poorest countries; they are among the smallest economies as well.

Think about this, as the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch) mentioned earlier: the combined purchasing power of CAFTA nations is almost identical to the purchasing power of New Haven, Connecticut. The U.S. economy, with $10 trillion of GDP in 2002, is 170 times larger than the economies of the CAFTA nations, at about $62 billion combined. So where are the economic opportunities for American industry and American workers?

These kinds of questions are clearly giving people pause. Congress typically votes on trade agreements within 55 days after President Bush has signed a trade agreement, but May 28 will mark the 1-year anniversary of when the President signed CAFTA. Why the long holdup? Clearly, there is dissension in the ranks and people are wondering why we need to make this deal. And for good reason. CAFTA is a dysfunctional cousin of NAFTA, continuing a legacy of failing trade policies.

Look at NAFTA's record, with 1 million U.S. manufacturing jobs lost. NAFTA did nothing for the Mexican workers as promised. They continue to earn just over $1 a day while living in poverty, not exactly an exploding market for the U.S. products either. And yet the United States continues to push for more of the same, more trade

agreements that ship U.S. jobs overseas, more trade agreements that neglect environmental standards, more trade agreements that keep foreign workers in poverty.

For U.S. workers, the only difference between CAFTA and NAFTA is the first letter. It adds up all the same: more lost jobs. CAFTA is not about a robust market for the export of American goods; it is about outsourcing and accessing cheap labor markets. Trade pacts like NAFTA and CAFTA enable companies to exploit cheap labor in other countries, then import their products back to the United States under unfavorable terms.

CAFTA will do nothing to stop the bleeding of manufacturing jobs in the United States and even less to create strong Central American consumer markets for American goods. Throughout the developing world, workers do not share the wealth they create. Nike workers in Vietnam cannot afford the shoes that they make. Disney workers in Costa Rica cannot buy the toys for their children, Motorola workers in Malaysia are unable to purchase cell phones.

Mr. Speaker, we have a historic opportunity before us to empower workers in developing countries. We have a historic opportunity before us to bolster our economy. When the world's poorest people can buy American products rather than just make them, then we will know that our trade policies are finally working.

Mr. Speaker, there are reasons why not only environmental and labor groups but also business organizations such as the United States Business and Industry Council, a leading group representing American businesses, have taken a firm stance against this trade agreement. It is because it is unfair.

I believe in free trade, but it has to be fair trade. We can no longer continue to allow jobs in the United States to be exported overseas when we have a need here in this country. As I stated earlier, in my own region in the State of Maine, the labor market area has risen over the last 2 years to, at certain times, over 30 percent. Over 30 percent of people unemployed because of that market.

So, Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in opposing the CAFTA trade agreement. It is unfair, unneeded, and hopefully it will not pass.

Madam Speaker, an all-out attack on workers' rights is happening in Brewer, Maine; and I come to the House floor today to tell DHL that it is time for them to stop their assault.

These Brewer workers have borne the brunt of these union-busting practices, and they are paying the price. For many, the price of their jobs has been

too much for them and their families to bear. Workers have been fired. Many were put on the street with no severance pay, no insurance, and no assistance to make ends meet. Management has reverted to using interrogation and coercion to keep workers in line.

This is simply outrageous. I know as a union member how important unions are to ensure better jobs and basic protection of rights. I will do all I can to assure that their rights are protected.

Mr. Speaker, this week a tripartisan group of original cosponsors has joined together to reintroduce our bill to create a Northeast Regional Economic Development Commission to invest in the most distressed areas of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and New York.

Economic development commissions are now in existence in Alaska; Mississippi; the Midwest; and, of course, Appalachia; among other places. These bodies have a proven track record of success. For example, since its creation, the ARC has cut the number of distressed counties in their region in half.

Today, when one looks at the statistics, the border region of the Northeast has just as strong a need as the other areas. We need direct Federal investments to turn our economies around. Our bill does that and ensures both local planning and the advancement of regional goals like sustainable land use.

We are proud to have such a strong tripartisan group working together to promote economic development in the Northeast. We look forward to advancing our bill and working with other regions who want to grow their economies and bring prosperity back.

Mr. Speaker, today, along my with my good friend Tom Allen, I am introducing the Commercial Truck Highway Safety Demonstration Program Act of 2005. This bill would allow Maine to increase the weight limits for trucks on interstate highways, by granting a three-year waiver of federal rules. It mandates a study process that will help demonstrate the positive safety effects of this change, and permit the waiver to be extended pending these safety determinations.

This bill is important both for public safety and economic reasons. The administration of the current 80,000 pound federal weight limit law in Maine has forced heavy tractor-trailer and tractor-semitrailer combination vehicles, traveling into Maine from neighboring States and Canada, to divert onto small State and local roads where higher vehicle weight limits apply under Maine law.

The diversion of those vehicles onto such roads causes significant economic hardships and safety challenges for small communities located along those roads. Permitting heavy commercial vehicles to travel on Interstate System highways in Maine would enhance public safety by reducing the number of heavy vehicles that use town and city streets, and as a result, the number of dangerous interactions between those heavy vehicles and other vehicles such as school buses and private cars.

It would also reduce the net highway maintenance costs in Maine because the Interstate System highways, unlike the secondary roads of Maine, are built to accommodate heavy vehicles and are, therefore, more durable.

Finally, this bill would ensure that Maine can remain competitive in the transportation and manufacturing sectors, and that our neighbors do not pass us by in development. This change is fair, and will promote parity in transportation throughout New England.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill, which will enhance safety, lower maintenance costs, and promote economic development.