Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the gentlewoman's amendment, although I had an amendment that was to follow this amendment which sought to grab $47 million from the ARPA-E program to fund a jobs program to restore the clean coal research dollars that are stricken in this continuing resolution.

My amendment would have restored funding to the DOE's Fossil Energy Research and Development program to maintain our commitment to domestic coal and natural gas, which powers our Nation. It protects our environment and enhances our energy independence.

Certainly, in being from the State of West Virginia, this is a jobs issue for us. Our coal industry is under serious attack in this administration, both from the regulatory perspective and from other environmental areas. We realize that 50 percent of the Nation's energy is powered by coal. In order to use that most abundant resource that we have in our Nation, we need to find ways to burn it cleaner and mine it more efficiently.

For more than a quarter of a century, Fossil Energy Research has converted taxpayer investment into high-tech advances that in some ways touch every single American's life. Fossil Energy is finding and testing new ways to use coal more cleanly and efficiently by producing energy from coal gasification and by improving technologies to clean, capture, or store the emissions from coal-fired power plants. Over 1,000 American pioneers are doing research in this area, many of them located in our State of West Virginia at the National Energy Technology Laboratory in Morgantown, West Virginia.

The Morgantown facility is the only national laboratory devoted to fossil energy research. So while I'm unable to offer my amendment to strike $47 million from the ARPA-E program and restore the $30.6 million into the clean coal research program, I did want to take this opportunity to emphasize the feeling that I have of how important it is for us to move forward in a bold and technologically superior way to find a way to use our most abundant resource.

The advanced research projects happening at Fossil Energy now will help keep clean, affordable energy from our traditional few resources as an integral part of our energy supply while we innovate and research our way to those new energy resources.

Offered By: Mrs. Capito

Amendment No. 231: Page 213, line 19, after the dollar

amount, insert ``(reduced by $47,000,000)''.

Page 217, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $30,600,000)''.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yielding me the time. Thank you for your leadership on our committee as we work toward better solutions for a modernized financial regulatory structure.

Last year, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act was signed into law. Today we

are realizing the overarching effects such legislation will have on our economy, and this has only just begun. Onerous new regulations and the creation of an entirely new agency with vast influence over consumer choice will only impede our recovery. Instead of expanding the scope of government, we need efficient and effective regulatory oversight to support the private sector which will drive our economy's recovery.

I have deep concerns about what this new law will mean for employment, as do many of my constituents. Charles Maddy, who is the president of Summit Community Bank, testified before our committee. The bank is headquartered in my district, and he testified just this month about the effects of the new rules and regulations enacted under the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation on small institutions. Even though small institutions are supposedly ``carved out'' of this law, Charlie expressed serious concerns about his institution's ability to compete in this new regulatory regime. Banks that didn't take excessive risks or use exotic financial products are going to see higher compliance costs, limited access to capital, and regulatory pressures on lending issues, all of which hurt our ability and his ability to serve the community.

While it is necessary to regulate those that acted irresponsibly, it is important that the regulations be targeted and effective, not broad and burdensome. At a time when we should be creating economic certainty in our markets, we are seeing the unintended consequences of this law. According to Mr. Maddy, ``New standards are being applied without banks having a clear understanding of where they are.'' This will only discourage investment and innovation and hinder job creation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 32 to honor the victims of the senseless act of violence that took place in Tucson on Saturday.

Six members of the Arizona community lost their lives and one of our own, Gabby Giffords, has been gravely injured. It's hard to find the words to describe the deep sorrow we all feel for the families and friends of the shooter's victims.

His actions have shown us human behavior at its darkest, but the heroes of the day represent our society at its best. The innocent bystanders quickly rallied to curtail the gunman and perform triage on the victims. The American people are humbled by the bravery of those who put themselves in harm's way and grateful for the talented first responders and medical professionals who have compassionately cared for the wounded.

As we've all come to know, Gabby is a fighter. With the help of the thoughts and prayers of millions of Americans who are wishing for her speedy recovery, Gabby has beat the odds and has thus far made a remarkable turn for the better. We should all be inspired by Gabby's strength.

Madam Speaker, we cannot forget that this tragedy occurred as Gabby was performing her most fundamental duty as an elected representative: listening to the people. This attack is quite literally an assault on the very democratic values which we seek everyday to uphold in this Chamber. As we struggle with how to handle the aftermath of this tragedy, let us reflect on the values that make our country great.

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

I rise in support of S. 118, the Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly Act of 2009. As my colleague has said, the bill reforms the section 202 elderly housing program making it more efficient and more effective and better able to meet the housing needs of our elderly. S. 118 is similar to H.R. 2930 that passed the House in the 110th Congress by voice vote.

Affordable housing with supportive services is a key component for seniors who want to stay in their own home and age in place. The section 202 Housing for the Elderly program is the primary HUD program that provides housing exclusively for low-income elderly households. The section 202 program has been a very important tool in addressing these housing needs by providing capital advance grants to nonprofit housing sponsors to build new elderly housing facilities and project rental assistance contracts to subsidize very low-income elderly citizens of these facilities.

Many nonprofit sponsors are faith-based organizations with an exclusive mission to serve the elderly. As a condition of receiving a capital advance, which does not have to be repaid, a nonprofit sponsor must make housing available for a period no less than 40 years. As a result of these efforts, the section 202 program currently supplies 320,000 units of housing for our very low-income elderly citizens.

I am very pleased to see that the language that I worked on in the 110th Congress remains in the bill. My provision would help resolve a problem that nonmetro States, like my home State of West Virginia, have experienced when attempting to qualify for funds through the section 202 program. It is important to recognize, of course, that the need for housing for the very low-income elderly extends to nonmetro areas. The very low-income elderly of rural West Virginia deserve the same resources that are available to the elderly living in larger cities.

Participants and developers of the section 202 program maintain that the current regulation and HUD administration of the program can be time-consuming and bureaucratic. S. 118 will improve the section 202 elderly housing program by streamlining and simplifying the development and preservation of HUD's section 202 properties, and by increasing participation by not-for-profit developers, private lenders, investors, and State and local funding agencies.

Madam Speaker, the need for affordable rental housing in America has an effect on renters of all ages, especially our seniors, and this bill will help ease some of the affordability problems for our senior population. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert), a housing advocate and the upcoming chair of the new subcommittee.

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I want to thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for his good hard work, and I encourage my colleagues to support the bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Connecticut for his dedication to this very important piece of legislation. And I would particularly like to thank Ms. Biggert from Illinois for her passion and her advocacy on behalf of the disabled Americans and their housing needs.

I rise in support of S. 1481, the Frank Melville Supportive Housing Investment Act of 2010.

There are nearly 4 million non-elderly disabled adults in the United States that are in need of housing assistance. The section 811 program is the only Federal program that allows persons with disabilities to live independently in the community by increasing the supply of affordable rental housing with the availability of supportive services.

S. 1481 closely resembles H.R. 1675, which passed the House by over 375 votes last year. The bill before us

today restructures the section 811 program in a way that provides for a continued creation of supportive housing and provides rental assistance that would make housing affordable for very low-income people with disabilities.

This bill will improve the section 811 disabled housing program by streamlining and simplifying development of HUD section 811 properties, and makes changes to the program to encourage integration and mixed-use developments such as low-income housing tax credits and HOME program funds.

I would additionally like to thank the very dedicated and hearty group of advocates from my State of West Virginia who traveled here last year to talk about this extremely important issue and the difficulties that they find every day, not only securing housing, but finding more housing for their associates who may suffer disabilities and are unable to find safe, affordable housing. And so I want to thank them for their passion and also for their strength that they exhibit every day in dealing with their disabilities.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to a wonderful advocate for supportive housing and housing in general, the gentlewoman from Illinois, Judy Biggert.

Madam Speaker, I would urge my colleagues to vote in support of this very important bill.

I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

In the past few years, my home State, West Virginia, has walked with a heavy heart. On numerous occasions, we have bowed our heads in solemn reverence for miners that we have lost in tragedy. We have watched as our small towns and their citizens

have been thrust into the Nation's eye for the most unfortunate reasons. As we've heard, in fact, on April 5 of this year, we suffered the worst mine disaster in more than a generation. An underground explosion swept through at Massey Energy's Upper Big Branch mine, claiming 29 lives, which my colleague from West Virginia just enumerated very eloquently.

Let me be clear, the issue of mine safety is a very personal one to every West Virginian. Our families and our friends are in the mines. When West Virginia loses even a single miner, it affects all of us.

Currently, multiple investigations into the Upper Big Branch mine are still searching for answers and following each small detail that could uncover the answer to a larger mystery. And it is just that, an unsolved investigation. Even today, investigators are hampered by water and are working to clear the mine before they can continue their work.

With these investigations still in progress, we do not know which laws were not followed by the operator, which laws MSHA failed to enforce, and which health and safety laws were simply inadequate. And yet Congress intends to lay out its heavy hand again before our questions are answered and before we know exactly what happened.

The late Senator Robert C. Byrd was a leader in mine safety. After the Sago mine tragedy in my district, the West Virginia delegation gathered in Senator Byrd's office, and we sat together to reach a common agenda. The Senator believed that we were there for a purpose of protecting our miners and that all ideas were welcome at the table.

I wish this Congress would heed the late Senator's values. This bill was rushed to the floor in the last days of this Congress with little notice and some changes made at the last minute. I was heartened a few months ago when Congress began a new discussion on miner safety. I appreciate the chairman of the committee having a field hearing in Beckley and allowing me to attend. So I appreciate that. In fact, there were many bills introduced as a part of that discussion. And, unfortunately, this discussion has been too short and a single bill was green-lighted by a select few.

This bill has been rushed to the floor so it can be checked off a list of accomplishments. I wholeheartedly support the legislation's goal to better protect the health and safety of our Nation's miners, but in this case, we haven't gotten close to the goal. Improving mine safety can only happen when all parties work to get involved or are working together to achieve better results. It is shortsighted and, in essence, a shot in the dark before we see the true facts.

The bill being considered today takes harsh and punitive measures that does little to address mine safety but, rather, introduces dramatic regulatory changes and promotes unnecessary litigation which will hurt those mines and miners operating in good faith on behalf of worker safety. It imposes vague new standards for criminal liability, potentially criminalizing most infractions and subjecting officials to sanctions over which they have no direct control.

Any legislation should look at the industry in total, from the companies to the agencies regulating them, and this bill does not do that. If we are to truly get this right, we need to let the investigations move forward and work for a true mine safety bill that would secure the safety of our miners for generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that I applaud the first lady, Michelle Obama, for her efforts in childhood obesity. I hail from the State of West Virginia, which has probably some of the highest percentages of childhood obesity; and I think the issue in the underlying bill is tremendously important for our Nation and for the future, as is the nutritional aspects of that.

And as the gentleman from Florida said, I'm going to talk on the YouCut because I believe cutting spending and not passing on generational debt to those same children is an important issue as well.

Over the last few months, millions of Americans have used YouCut as a way to voice their concerns over the out-of-control spending in Washington, and many have offered their own solutions on how the government can be more efficient and more accountable. Unfortunately, most of these have fallen on deaf ears as the Congress has voted repeatedly not to try to rein in the spending of taxpayer dollars, and we simply cannot continue down this path. Each week we have brought a simple, yet effective way to cut spending before the House, and it has failed every time.

So today I will support eliminating the requirement to print copies of every single bill and resolution--imagine how many pages that is-- that's been introduced in Congress because all of these are already available online.

I want to congratulate Mr. Lee of New York for bringing forth this proposal. This will save millions of dollars over the next decade--a small number in the grand scheme of things--but nevertheless a significant start.

There is no question that cutting the deficit will require some tough decisions on our part, but let's start out now on one which everyone can agree, and I think this should be one of them.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 3814, which extends the National Flood Insurance Program through September 30, 2011. I feel like we're deja vu all over again. We've done this several times, I think, in the last several months and years. That timeframe will give us ample opportunity to craft a bill that fundamentally reforms the program, which needs fundamental reform.

It's unfortunate this Congress has, to date, been unable to enact comprehensive reform of the flood insurance program. Currently, as we know, the flood insurance program is carrying a debt of $18 billion. The program remains underfunded and unable to meet its potential obligations. And its financial shortfall continues to place taxpayers at risk for the cost of property losses caused by flooding.

On July 15, 2010, the House approved H.R. 5114, the Flood Insurance Reform Priorities Act, which included many constructive reforms. However, many of us on this side of the aisle felt that the measure did not go far enough to put the NFIP on a path towards sound financial footing. In fact, despite the reforms included in H.R. 5114, which included several Republican amendments, the CBO projected that if H.R. 5114 were enacted, the National Flood Insurance Program would still need to borrow additional funds from the U.S. Treasury to cover losses and would exhaust its current borrowing authority by the year 2013.

Today, to avoid another lapse in a program that serves 5.5 million residential and business property owners, we are considering S. 3814, the National Flood Insurance Program Reextension Act of 2010, which passed the Senate by voice vote on Tuesday, September 21, 2010.

S. 3814 provides for a straightforward 1-year extension of the NFIP, which otherwise would expire on September 30. According to the Congressional Budget Office, enactment of this bill would have no net impact on the Federal budget.

Madam Speaker, we must move forward with fundamental and fiscally responsible reforms of the Flood Insurance Program. S. 3814 extends the NFIP, as I've said, through September 30, 2011, allowing borrowers in flood-prone areas like mine to close on their mortgage loans and providing Congress the time it needs to enact real reforms. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I'm rising today in support of this bill, H.R. 5981, and as our chairman said, we have been working diligently, I think, to bring forth solid FHA reform. We passed that bill almost unanimously--I think it was 406-4--probably about a month ago, and so the majority, the large majority of this House is in agreement with a lot of the provisions in that bill.

One of the provisions, as he said, is raising the annual premium on FHA, and I think this is right and proper; and I think it's something we need to do because, as we know and as has been brought forth in our committee, the capital reserve fund has fallen, I believe, dangerously low. And what we're trying to avoid is a situation where we may be asked to bail or at least to help the FHA in some sort of infusion of dollars from the Treasury.

So I wholeheartedly will support this bill, but I do want to reemphasize, as the chairman said, we had a whole host of reforms in our original bill. We cannot forget the other important reforms that were in the original H.R. 5072, and we need to move forward with those after our district work period and recess. We need to move forward with this as expeditiously as we did before we left.

One thing in the short bill we're considering today, it does say that the commissioner has to come before the committee within 270 days. I would like to ask the chairman if we could have a hearing in September on this very topic so that we can see what the status, at least interim status, of the fund is.

I yield to the gentleman.

I thank the chairman for that.

I have no requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

General Leave

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Tracy Patton and congratulate her as a state winner of the Library of Congress 2010 Letters About Literature competition.

Letters About Literature is a program developed by the Library of Congress in partnership with Target Stores and state Centers for the Book. It aims to promote reading and writing to young people in fourth through twelfth grades across the nation. Students are encouraged to read a book, then write a letter to the author, dead or alive, conveying their appreciation for the book and its impact on their lives. More than 70,000 students from across the nation that entered the contest, a 25% increase from last year's competition.

The Letters About Literature competition divided students into three divisions by age, and the top letter from each age level were chosen from the states. Level three included all high school students, in ninth through twelfth grades. Tracy was chosen as the Level 3 state winner for 2010 by West Virginia's panel of judges, comprised of authors, editors, publishers, librarians, and teachers. She addressed her letter to renowned playwright and poet William Shakespeare, about his tragedy Romeo and Juliet. Tracy is from Charleston, West Virginia and attends Capital High School. Tracy's teacher, Rosalie Blaul, submitted this winning letter.

It is an honor to pay tribute to Tracy Patton, a student that has committed herself to scholarship in reading and writing. Bright young minds such as hers are truly the future of the Mountain State, and I wish her congratulations.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Molly Lovern and congratulate her as a state winner of the Library of Congress 2010 Letters About Literature competition.

Letters About Literature is a program developed by the Library of Congress in partnership with Target Stores and state Centers for the Book. It aims to promote reading and writing to young people in fourth through twelfth grades across the nation. Students are encouraged to read a book, then write a letter to the author, dead or alive, conveying their appreciation for the book and its impact on their lives. More than 70,000 students from across the nation that entered the contest, a 25% increase from last year's competition.

The Letters About Literature competition divided students into three divisions by age, and the top letter from each age level were chosen from the states. Level two included all students in seventh and eighth grades. Molly was chosen as the Level 2 winner for 2010 by West Virginia's panel of judges, comprised of authors, editors, publishers, librarians, and teachers. She addressed her letter to Jean-Dominique Bouby, about his book, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly. Molly is from Fairmont, West Virginia and attends Bluefield Middle School. Molly's teacher, Mrs. Putorek, submitted the winning letter.

It is an honor to pay tribute to Molly Lovern, a student that has committed herself to scholarship in reading and writing. Bright young minds such as hers are truly the future of the Mountain State, and I wish her congratulations.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Cara Laswell and congratulate her as a state winner of the Library of Congress 2010 Letters About Literature competition.

Letters About Literature is a program developed by the Library of Congress in partnership with Target Stores and state Centers for the Book. It aims to promote reading and writing to young people in fourth through twelfth grades across the nation. Students are encouraged to read a book, and then write a letter conveying their appreciation for the book and its impact on their lives to the author, living or dead. Of the 70,000 students from across the nation that entered the contest, a 25% increase from last year's competition. Cara was chosen as the 2010 state winner by West Virginia's panel of judges, comprised of authors, editors, publishers, librarians, and teachers.

The contest divided students into three divisions by age, and the top letter from each age level were chosen from the states. The youngest division included students from fourth through sixth grades. Cara Laswell from Fairmont wrote the winning Level 1 letter from West Virginia. Her letter was addressed to Jerry Spinelli about his book Stargirl. Cara attends Fairmont Catholic Elementary School, and her letter was submitted by her teacher Cynthia Garcia.

It is an honor to pay tribute to Cara Laswell, a young student that has committed herself to scholarship in reading and writing. Bright young minds such as hers are truly the future of the Mountain State, and I wish her congratulations.

Mr. Speaker, just briefly, I would like to join with the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Frank, in full support of this bill. I would also like to thank the Appropriations Committee for letting us bump up two bills so we could get ahead a little bit on our evening.

I would like to reiterate just very quickly that this FHA program is a critical source of financing for affordable rental housing, and I am in full agreement that we should pass this bill, as it will help to mitigate any disruptions in the housing market.

I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I know we're going to have a big debate on flood insurance and wind insurance and I'm going to be participating in that, but I wanted to talk about, obviously, the YouCut program.

There is nothing that is upsetting to more people across the State of West Virginia that I see every day than the overspending, the debt and deficit that is just overwhelming them and this country. But the YouCut program, since its inception, 1.3 million Americans have weighed in on where they think we can cut government spending. Folks from all across America are tightening their budgets. This summer, they're deciding? Can we go on vacation. Can we go for 2 days. Can we go for a week. Can we fly. Can we drive. Should we go out to dinner? Should we stay in?

All these are economic questions that we ask in our families every single

day, and those are the kinds of questions that we should be asking here in Washington. Where can we tighten our belts and save our money so that our next generations and the generations beyond us are going to have the kind of America that we have and our parents enabled us to have?

People are rightly disgusted by the gross abuse, I think, of taxpayer money on pet projects and overbloated Federal programs, but I think we're listening. Republicans are listening and we're taking action. House Republicans have already offered $120 billion in spending cuts, but the Democrats insist on continuing down this dangerous path of overspending.

Now, some of the cuts we've offered haven't really been what would be considered, around Washington, huge amounts, maybe just hundreds of millions or billions, but come on. This is real money. This is taxpayers dollars, and so if you have to start on a smaller amount and grow it larger, we all know it eventually will make a dent.

So this week I'm casting my vote in support of my colleague's proposal to quit subsidizing first class subsidies to Amtrak. Only 16 percent of the passengers opt for first class, yet we are subsidizing the first class seats in Amtrak to the point of $1.3 billion of subsidy that goes to those who choose to purchase first class seats with Amtrak.

Amtrak's a great thing, comes in my district, goes right through the center of the State on out to the West. But people who have first class and want to buy first class seats should be able to pay for it. It should be priced accordingly. So I think this is a good way to save, over 10 years, $1.2 billion of taxpayers' money.

Let's give the American people what they're wanting, that is, fiscal restraint and responsibility. That's what American families across this country are exercising across their kitchen table. That's what we should be doing here across the budget table in the United States Congress.