Peter A. DeFazio

Mr. Speaker, today is a historic day for our water resources and for bipartisan and bicameral work in the Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a joint explanatory statement to accompany the Water Resources Development Act of 2022 and a letter to Chairman Smith.

House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and

Infrastructure,

Washington, DC, December 8, 2022.

Hon. Adam Smith,

Chair, House Committee on Armed Services,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Smith: I am writing to further explain the

intentions of Section 11252, Strategy for Retention of

Cuttermen, of the James M. Inhofe National Defense

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023.

In 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in

Bostock v. Clayton County (590 U.S._(2020)) that the term

``sex'' included sexual orientation and gender identity for

purposes of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Specifically, the Court determined that ``homosexuality and

transgender status are inextricably bound up with sex. Not

because homosexuality or transgender status are related to

sex in some vague sense or because discrimination on these

bases has some disparate impact on one sex or another, but

because to discriminate on these grounds requires an employer

to intentionally treat individual employees differently

because of their sex.''

This rationale is applicable to a range of laws that

prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex or gender.

Indeed, federal courts both prior and subsequent to the

Court's decision in Bostock have determined that our nation's

federal laws that prohibit sex or gender discrimination also

prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity

including Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972,

Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, the Fair Housing

Act, and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. The Supreme Court

in numerous decisions, such as United States v. Virginia (518

U.S. 515 (1996)), has used the terms sex and gender

interchangeably.

Our nation's nondiscrimination laws must be construed

broadly to achieve Congress' aim of eradicating

discrimination. In keeping with these cases and the current

understanding of gender, I want to explicitly state on the

record that the reference to discrimination based on gender

in Section 11252(c) of the James M. Inhofe National Defense

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 also includes

discrimination on the basis of gender identity. I understand

that the Coast Guard shares this view and understanding of

Section 11252(c).

It is critical that the Coast Guard attract and retain a

qualified workforce serving on Coast Guard cutters and that

such a workforce includes underrepresented minorities and

servicemembers from rural areas. I thank you for including

this important section in the NDAA and look forward to

reading the Commandant's strategy for retention of cuttermen.

Sincerely,

Peter DeFazio,

Chair.

Mr. Speaker, this bill makes history as the fifth consecutive water resources development bill, the first time in the history of the United States Congress this has been done.

It authorizes 25 construction reports of the Chief of the Corps of Engineers, essential to Portland, Oregon; Tacoma, Washington; Selma, Alabama; and right here in Washington, D.C.

The bill also meets the challenge of climate change, even though some deny it exists, by rebuilding and maintaining critical navigation jetties and breakwaters to dimensions necessary to address sea-level rise and extreme weather events, impacts of coastal storms, and inland flooding. It also addresses future water supply needs in the arid West and works to make communities more resilient.

For the first time in over a decade, it significantly expands the Corps' environmental infrastructure authorities to assist more communities in addressing their drinking water and wastewater needs.

Finally, it also includes the Don Young Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2022, authorizing $13.6 billion and $14.5 billion for the next year for much-needed shoreside infrastructure.

It also authorizes a third polar security cutter. The Russians have 20 icebreakers. The Arctic is opening up. We need a third cutter, and then we need the smaller cutters.

I thank Ranking Member Graves, Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, Chair Carbajal, Ranking Member Gibbs, and all of my staff for their tremendous work on this committee.

Mr. Speaker, this will be a parable to greed and modern predatory capitalism.

We used to have the most efficient, reliable freight network in the world. Freight was delivered safely, at a reasonable rate, and on time. They had a large skilled workforce reasonably compensated, and the railroads were all moderately profitable.

Then came Hunter Harrison, now deceased. He thought there was something wrong with this. He took over CSX. There is something wrong here. He invented precision scheduled railroading, which is anything but. He slashed the workforce and started running trains that were 4 and 5 miles long. They don't have sidings that are that long, so they block intersections all across the country.

He found new ways to gouge the customers with a host of new fees and jacked-up rates and, as a side effect, as the agriculture, energy, and construction customers have all testified to the Surface Transportation Board, delayed deliveries, disrupted businesses, and increased costs, which ultimately get passed on to consumers.

But he accomplished his goal. Profits are up. In the last decade, railroads bought back $230 billion worth of stock and dividends. In 2021, it was $26 billion in dividends and buybacks and $29 billion in profits. The CEOs, like the now-gone Hunter Harrison, are making out like bandits. They all earned $16 million a year on average or more.

The Wall Street jackals, well, they are just thrilled with the stock price. Warren Buffet was bragging on making $6 billion last quarter with BNSF, which has become the most abusive railroad in the system. They used to be the best. They were the star. I don't know what happened.

Last week, we had to legislate here on the floor of the House. 115,000 rail workers had gone 3 years without a contract. The railroads were intransigent. They couldn't afford pay raises. What? Oh, and no paid sick time. Oh, we couldn't do that.

They testified to the Presidential Emergency Board that record profits were not due to ``any contributions by labor.'' I guess the trains run and maintain themselves.

Despite massive layoffs and a 600 percent increase in productivity of the remaining workforce, I guess it is their just fabulous business acumen that is making all this money.

Because they cut the workforce to the bone, they are particularly adamant that there can be no paid sick time--well, no sick time at all, in fact. They are forcing workers to come to work sick and fatigued in an industry where one little mistake will lose you a limb or might cause a catastrophic accident. There is a 60 percent increase in the violations of time by the railroads.

If they gave all the workers 7 days paid leave, it would take 1 cent off of their profits, 1 cent per dollar of those profits.

Last week, the House voted to lock in the tentative agreements that provide historic pay raises and guarantee reimbursement for work expenses, and they prevented a massive disruption. In addition, 221 Members of the House voted to impose 7 days of paid sick leave--with only three Republicans. Pretty pathetic, guys. Pretty pathetic.

Congress took action because we recognized who makes this country great, who makes it run. It is frontline workers. Without them, just under one-third of our country's freight would sit idle.

It is time for the railroads to face the music. Precision scheduled railroading is an abject failure. Your service is atrocious. You treat your workers with no respect. Don't come crying to the Federal Railroad Administration and Congress to bail you out for your ineptitude, greed, and profit taking. If you can't provide your workers with paid sick time because you don't have enough people working, well, then, maybe the CEOs could take a shift in the rail yard to cover them.

It is time for this to end. Unfortunately, it didn't last week because the Senate overrode us.

I thank my staff who worked so hard on this legislation last week: Auke Mahar-Piersma, Andrea Wohleber, Frances Bourne, Katherine Ambrose, Alice Koethe, Jill Harrelson, Kathy Dedrick, and all the other fabulous members of my team.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record the cost estimate prepared by the Congressional Budget Office for H.R. 5641, the SPEED Recovery Act. The cost estimate was not available at the time of the Committee report filing.

U.S. Congress,

Congressional Budget Office,

Washington, DC, August 22, 2022.

Hon. Gary Peters,

Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental

Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has

prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 5641, the SPEED

Recovery Act.

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be

pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Jon Sperl.

Sincerely,

Phillip L. Swagel,

Director.

Enclosure.

H.R. 5641, SPEED Recovery Act--August 3, 2022

[By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars] ------------------------------------------------------------------------

2022 2022-2027 2022-2032 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Direct Spending (Outlays)........... 0 0 0 Revenues............................ 0 0 0 Increase or Decrease (-) in the 0 0 0 Deficit............................ Spending Subject to Appropriation 0 1 * (Outlays).......................... ------------------------------------------------------------------------