Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York, a fellow member of the Blue Dog Coalition, for yielding. I rise today in strong support of the rule on H.R. 2920, the Statutory Pay-As- You-Go Act of 2009. I would especially like to thank Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer, whose steadfast support for PAYGO rules have been absolutely essential to the efforts of the Blue Dog Coalition and others across the spectrum in our caucus, including George Miller of California and Peter Welch of Vermont, who have worked to restore this critically important budgetary tool, a tool that helped to move the Nation from dangerous deficits to surpluses in the late 1990s, a tool that was abandoned by the Republicans during the Bush administration.

In 2007, the new majority established House PAYGO rules in an effort to restore fiscal discipline to Congress. The House PAYGO rules and this statutory PAYGO bill stand for a simple principle: new entitlement spending and new tax cuts should be paid for. We can't have everything we want. We need to do what families in South Dakota and across the Nation do: make hard choices and budget responsibly. If not, make no mistake, our Nation will pay the price.

When OMB reports that we paid, as a Nation, $249 billion in net interest to service government debt in fiscal year 2008, we know something is terribly wrong with our priorities. Think of what we could do with an extra quarter of a trillion dollars. We could invest in needed priorities, or we could pay down the debt. The House PAYGO rules are the first step in countering the bad habits throughout the 8 years of the Bush administration. The massive buildup of debt that occurred over that period not only threatens our economic future but puts our national security at risk. By August of 2008, foreign-held debt had grown more than 200 percent, increasing from $1 trillion in January 2001 to $2.7 trillion, which works out to be more than 80 cents of every dollar of new debt issued since 2001 being bought by foreign entities. China alone upped its holdings of Treasury securities by 850 percent.

Today, we finally have a President who is committed to PAYGO. The first bill he sent to Congress was a statutory PAYGO bill. Many of our friends on the other side of the aisle have suddenly become concerned about deficits. And I welcome that concern. We should all be concerned about the national debt as one of the most pressing and most consequential issues facing our country. And we should likewise recognize statutory PAYGO as one tool among many, but a very strong tool, in forcing the Congress to spend within its means. Statutory PAYGO, controlling both spending and tax policies, is absolutely critical in the long term for long-term growth and prosperity. And that is something that people across the political spectrum should be able to agree on.

Many people talk about a commitment to fiscal responsibility. But no one can be taken seriously in that claim if they do not support the strong, effective and proven tool of statutory PAYGO. So today, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of our Nation's children and grandchildren, I urge the House, for colleagues on both sides of the aisle, to vote to restore this crucial tool of fiscal responsibility for the sake of the future of the Nation. I thank the gentleman from New York for the time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today as the co-chairman of the Blue Dog Coalition which has long advocated for restoring statutory PAYGO as an important budgetary tool necessary to impose discipline in both chambers of Congress as it regards the collection and use of taxpayer money. I would like to thank the majority leader, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), for his strong, steadfast, and unquestioned support for statutory PAYGO and for his words earlier this morning in support of this important legislation.

As I stated and as the majority leader has, this is an important budget tool to impose discipline. It is a tested and proven tool from the 1990s that again, as has been mentioned, President Clinton and former Speaker Newt Gingrich agreed to back in the 1990s. I think it is imperative that opponents of this legislation explain more clearly why they lived with PAYGO with little or no complaint in the last decade, and the surpluses aided by such disciplines, and why they abandoned such discipline which led to a doubling of the national debt over the last 8 years.

We need to make priorities and tough decisions so as to ensure fairness to future generations. It is essential to adopt statutory PAYGO as one step, among many others, to ensure both economic and national security. It is not fair to future generations for the United States to in any way be beholden to foreign creditors. The interest on the national debt alone is more than we spend on education and veterans combined.

Statutory PAYGO is necessary to impose discipline in both Chambers. One of the earlier speakers mentioned that since adopting PAYGO in the House rules, that the deficits have worsened. Unfortunately, much of the legislation passed out of this Chamber that abides by House rules for PAYGO come back to this Chamber after action in the Senate that strips how we pay for our priorities. That's why again reinstating PAYGO as a budgetary tool in statute is necessary for both the House and the Senate, and fortunately is supported by the current administration.

So, Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to ask the hard questions about what worked in the 1990s to produce budget surpluses, about what didn't work over the past 8 years to result in a national debt, a record national debt, and what tools are necessary to get us back on the path of fiscal discipline and surpluses once again. Statutory PAYGO is one key, one tool, among others, that will lead to the kind of tough decisions and priorities necessary to restore the fiscal health of the country.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman, the distinguished gentleman from California, for yielding.

I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1037, the Pilot College Work Study Programs for Veterans Act of 2009, as amended, which the Veterans' Affairs Economic Opportunity Subcommittee passed on June 4 and the full committee approved on June 10.

I was proud to introduce this important legislation, and I would like to thank the full committee chairman, Mr. Filner, the ranking member, Mr. Buyer, for their leadership in support of this legislation, as well as the support of Congressman Grijalva of Arizona, who was an original cosponsor. I have been pleased to be able to work with the distinguished ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. Boozman of Arkansas, in a bipartisan way to advance this legislation to the full committee and now to the floor. I also

want to thank Congressman Teague of New Mexico for offering an amendment to this bill during the subcommittee markup that clarified the effective end date of the pilot program.

This legislation works to expand and improve the educational benefits available to our country's veterans by directing the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs to conduct a 5-year pilot project that tests the feasibility and advisability of expanding the scope of work study activities available to veterans receiving educational benefits through the VA.

Currently, eligible student veterans enrolled in college degree programs, vocational programs or professional programs, are eligible to participate in the work study allowance program. However, they are limited to positions involving VA-related work, such as processing VA paperwork, performing outreach services, and assisting staff at medical facilities or the offices of the National Cemetery Administration. Thus, veterans aren't afforded opportunities similar to those offered to nonveteran students.

This pilot program would expand the qualifying work study activities allowed to include positions in academic departments, such as tutoring or assisting with research, teaching and lab work, as well as student services such as positions in career centers, financial aid, orientation, cashiers, admissions, records, and registration offices.

Given the wide variety of tasks our men and women in uniform perform while serving their country, our Nation should be capitalizing on the unique training and skill sets that veterans who are pursuing their degrees bring to their educational institutions.

This pilot program will run from 2010 to 2014 and will give the VA an adequate opportunity to determine if this expanded work study program should be further expanded.

This bill also requires the Secretary of the VA to publish regulations on the supervision of veterans participating in these expanded work study positions.

Educational benefits are one of the essential benefits that our country gives its veterans. These benefits help our veterans take that experience that they have gained while serving, and translate that knowledge into college degrees and other types of professional development. The money we, as a Nation, invest in the education of veterans, has a direct positive economic benefit for the country.

As chairwoman of the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee, I look forward to continuing to work in a bipartisan manner with Mr. Boozman and our subcommittee members to ensure veterans are receiving the best possible educational benefits.

On a personal note, Mr. Speaker, it has been 20 years now, but as a work study student myself, I wouldn't want any of my contemporaries then, and certainly the young men and women who are serving in uniform today, to be denied particular opportunities available in an academic environment to pursue their own educational aspirations or to serve their fellow students on campus in any capacity that VA education benefits are intended to provide.

So again, I want to thank Chairman Filner for his leadership on this issue, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.

Madam Speaker, today the House is voting on a bill that is designed to shape the course of our nation's economy and way of life for decades to come. Unfortunately, I believe the process has been too rushed, and I cannot support the bill in its current form.

I believe it's imperative for Congress to address climate change. I agree with the scientific consensus that human activity has substantially increased the accumulation of greenhouse gases and is contributing to a rise in average global temperature. This rise threatens to create a number of dramatic and negative impacts. With much of South Dakota's economy dependent on agriculture, which in turn depends on our climate, global warming could have a profound effect on South Dakota's economy and our way of life.

Moreover, the alternative to no action by Congress is action by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Clean Air Act to step in and in a more punitive fashion dictate rules and impose costs on industry. Given the complexity both of the climate change problem and the steps needed to address it, we need to take time to get it right. The stakes are simply too high for a rushed solution that can potentially create more problems than it solves.

While I can't support the bill before the House today, it has already come a long way from where it started both in its discussion draft form and in the form the Energy and Commerce Committee approved. Both of those versions were imperfect and incomplete and would have imposed regional inequities on a greater scale than the legislation before the House today. Since the committee approved its version of the bill, there have been some positive changes made, most notably in the agricultural sector.

Important and common sense improvements have been made that go a long way towards recognizing the value that agricultural producers in South Dakota can bring to the climate change issue. I commend Agriculture Committee Chairman Peterson's efforts as he worked together with many members of the Agriculture Committee to ensure that agriculture's concerns are addressed in this legislation. This has been a priority for me over a long period of time, and I am pleased with the progress made.

The inclusion of an agricultural and forestry offsets program will enable farmers, ranchers and forest owners to fully participate in a market-based carbon offset program, earning income for activities they undertake to address global climate change while also ensuring environmental integrity and protecting early actors. Importantly, these provisions put the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), not the EPA, in charge of regulating the use of farm and forestry projects intended to offset carbon dioxide emissions from industrial sources. The EPA itself has estimated that agricultural and forest lands currently sequester approximately 12 percent of our nation's carbon emissions and that the agriculture and forest sectors can sequester up to 25 percent of emissions. As such, the agriculture and forestry industries must play an essential role in efforts to mitigate climate change.

I am pleased that the manager's amendment also corrects the controversial and unproven methods for calculating indirect emissions through the lifecycle greenhouse gas analysis for biofuels. EPA's current indirect land use proposal would be put on hold for five years pending a needed scientific study and consultation with federal agencies and Congress. Importantly, USDA, the Energy Department or EPA could veto the results of the study if it is not based on sound, peer- reviewed science. The bill also makes it very clear that agriculture and forestry sectors will be exempt from the greenhouse gas emission reduction requirements.

Lastly, this bill ensures that Wall Street speculators will not be able to further drive up energy costs through dark market and secretive trading of derivatives of carbon allowances, offset credits, or renewable electricity credits by requiring that all carbon derivatives trading is conducted only on Commodity Futures Trading Commission- regulated markets.

However, while I am supportive of many of the changes made to the bill that stand to benefit agriculture, serious substantive and process concerns remain when it comes to doing right by rural America. The following represent some of my concerns.

I have heard from several utilities serving South Dakota, such as Black Hills Corporation, which serves tens of thousands of South Dakotans, that the allowances for emissions in the bill still aren't fairly distributed and this disparity could mean dramatic rate hikes for its customers in South Dakota.

Additionally, the bill does not adequately fix the flawed definition of renewable biomass in the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) or in the proposed Renewable Electricity Standard (RES). Again, the definition of biomass has improved greatly from the highly restrictive definition included in the discussion draft. However, the flawed definition used in the final bill before the House today unnecessarily and unwisely excludes much federally-sourced biomass from counting toward the RFS and a new RES. It also overlooks the essential role forests can and should play in sustainably generating renewable energy, ensuring our nation meets the cellulosic biofuels mandate in the RFS, moving our nation toward energy independence, and creating jobs in rural communities across the nation. I continue to believe strongly that we can take advantage of this amazing potential within the existing protections provided under current environmental laws and responsible forest management policy.

I have worked for nearly two years to broaden the biomass definition to allow for federally-sourced biomass to count toward the RFS and have urged its inclusion in this legislation, as well as the application of this definition to the RES. Overall, a federal RES presents tremendous economic opportunities for South Dakota in large part because of our state's tremendous wind potential. That is why I was a strong supporter of including an RES in the 2007 Energy Bill, and helped generate support for the RES Amendment when it passed the House. An RES has the potential to create

thousands of jobs and generate economic development all across South Dakota, for farmers, ranchers, and rural communities, as well as our sovereign Native American tribes. And much of what is in the RES in this bill presents great opportunity for South Dakota.

However, the definition of biomass added in the manager's amendment is still flawed. I am concerned with the ``harvested in environmentally sustainable quantities'' requirement, which I think invites new analysis, appeals and/or litigation about biomass in general, but more specifically, about trees that have been killed by fires or insect epidemics. Likewise, I'm concerned with the ``old growth'' and ``late- successional'' forest stands restriction because there is no generally accepted definition of either term, and the bill doesn't define either term. So, that would leave an avenue open for challenges, and would leave uncertainty about supply for potential investors. These are some but not all of my concerns regarding the biomass provisions included in the manager's amendment. I hope they will be addressed during the remainder of the legislative process.

Underlying these specific policy concerns are serious concerns about the rushed process for such an important and consequential bill. This bill is intended to help guide the economic future of our nation for decades and I think the process of fixing the bill since it's been approved by the committee has been too rushed, and has raised too many questions about whether the concerns of rural America are adequately addressed. Therefore, I will vote against this bill, but I hope that the legislative process will address these concerns, and ultimately, a bill can be presented to the House that treats South Dakota and rural America fairly as it moves the nation toward the new energy economy and addresses the real threat of climate change for our nation's future.

I thank the gentleman, the distinguished chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, for yielding and for his kind words in support of the work of the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity.

I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1172, as amended. I would like to thank the chairman, Mr. Filner, Ranking Member Buyer, and the sponsor of the bill, subcommittee ranking member, Mr. Boozman, for their leadership and bipartisan support of this bill, which the full committee passed on June 10.

As Mr. Boozman discussed, this legislation directs the Secretary of the VA to include a list of organizations that provide scholarships to veterans and their survivors on its official Web site. This list will help increase the educational opportunities available to veterans and their survivors by providing an easy-to-find portal to this information.

A key part of the VA's responsibility to our veterans is properly managing and providing the educational benefits our veterans have earned through their service. Legislation such as H.R. 1172 helps fulfill this responsibility and will give veterans and their survivors easier access to college scholarships for which they are eligible.

As Chair of the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee, I am extremely pleased to work with Ranking Member Boozman in a bipartisan manner to improve educational benefits for veterans. We have held a series of important hearings on the post-9/11 GI bill, as well as other educational assistance programs, such as the Vocational Rehabilitation and Education Service. I appreciate Mr. Boozman's efforts and cooperation on this important oversight, and I am pleased to support his bill today.

I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1211, the Women Veterans Health Care Improvement Act, as amended, which the Veterans' Affairs Health Subcommittee passed on June 4 and the full committee approved on June 10.

I would like to thank Chairman Filner, Ranking Member Buyer, Subcommittee Chairman Mike Michaud and Subcommittee Ranking Member Brown for their leadership and support of this bill, as well as my colleague on the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, the distinguished ranking member, Mr. Boozman of Arkansas, for cosponsoring this important legislation.

I would also like to take a moment to give special recognition to Chairman Filner for his leadership on this very important issue. He had mentioned the roundtable that the full committee hosted, his brainchild to bring all of the women who represent different veterans service organizations and women veterans themselves to speak to their experiences and to better inform and educate committee members about the extraordinary circumstances that they have faced time and time again as they have sought care in VA medical centers.

So I was extremely pleased to introduce this important legislation on February 26, 2009, proud of the bipartisan support the legislation has garnered. And the roundtable discussion hosted by Chairman Filner illustrated even further how imperative the passage of this bill is for our women veterans.

Before I discuss the bill in greater detail and the needs of women veterans, I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the Disabled American Veterans for their continued leadership and the effort to address the needs of female veterans and their support for this important legislation.

I also want to thank Cathy Wiblemo and the rest of her team for the great work that they have done on the health subcommittee. Cathy and her staff did excellent work in assisting with this legislation and shepherding it through the legislative process.

Today women make up approximately 8 percent of veterans in the United States, and that percentage will continue to rise as more and more women answer the call to duty to serve their country. With an increasing number of women seeking access to care for a diverse range of medical conditions, the challenge of providing adequate health care services for women veterans is one that the VA must meet.

Unfortunately, services at VA facilities often fall short of properly providing for the health care needs of women. There is too much fragmentation of care and not enough clinicians with the correct training and experience.

Child care considerations aren't being met adequately for male or female veterans, and currently the VA does not cover care for the newborn child of an eligible veteran.

To answer these challenges and others, H.R. 1211 takes a number of important steps to help the VA provide the services and care that our women veterans need and sets the VA on a path toward providing even better care in the future.

H.R. 1211 authorizes the VA to conduct two important studies. First the VA will examine barriers to health care that women veterans experience within the VA system. The study will examine the full range of barriers, including the lack of comprehensive primary care, the sensitivity of VA providers regarding gender-specific issues, the stigma of seeking mental health care services, and the availability of child care.

The second study is a comprehensive assessment of the VA's women's health program, with the task of developing a strategy to improve services at every VA medical center. The bill also works to enhance the VA's sexual trauma and post-traumatic stress disorder programs for women by requiring the secretary of the VA to ensure that all mental health professionals have been properly and consistently trained to help women veterans.

Female veterans who have suffered such attacks have already suffered enough. They need to know before they begin treatment that every VA mental health professional is prepared to help them, understands the best methods and practices, and can make them feel secure in seeking treatment.

Child care concerns also have emerged as a crucial issue for women veterans seeking care. Sometimes veterans without access to appropriate child care are forced to forego important health care appointments.

H.R. 1211 begins to address this issue by authorizing a child care pilot program for patients and requires the VA to carry out this study in at least three veterans service networks. Possible forms of child care assistance include stipends for child care centers, the development of partnerships with private agencies and collaboration with other Federal agencies that have similar programs.

H.R. 1211 also requires the VA to provide 7 days of medical care for the newborn children of women veterans. Currently the VA has no provision to provide care for these infants. However, 86 percent of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom women veterans are under the age of 40, and this benefit represents an important update of VA policy.

Finally, the bill requires the VA to add recently separated women and minority veterans to serve on key advisory committees, such as the advisory committee on women veterans. The VA must ensure adequate attention is given to women veterans programs so quality health care and specialized services are available for both women and men.

I believe my bill will help the VA better meet these specialized needs and develop new systems to better provide for the health care of women veterans, especially those who are sexually assaulted, suffer from PTSD or who need child care services. Congress must honor our Nation's commitment to all of our veterans, and this legislation furthers that aim.

Again, I want to thank Chairman Filner for his outstanding leadership on this issue, and I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 1211.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Colonel Scott Vander Hamm, commander of the 28th Bomb Wing at Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota, for his commendable record of service to our country. Colonel Vander Hamm is leaving Ellsworth for a new assignment, but his efforts have left a lasting impact on Ellsworth, my state of South Dakota, and the security of our country.

Over the course of a career that has seen him earn the Distinguished Flying Cross and the Bronze Star, Colonel Vander Hamm has logged more than 4,200 hours as a pilot, which adds up to 167 days in the air. He has the flown the B-52, the B-2 and now the B-1. He flew a combat mission the first night of Operation Iraqi Freedom, a mission Col. Vander Hamm has referred to as one of his most memorable flights. As the 7th Operations Group Commander, Colonel Vander Hamm also led planes in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, and the expeditionary group he commanded flew over 900 combat and combat support missions.

However, Colonel Vander Hamm describes himself as an officer first and an aviator second. At Ellsworth, he commanded the largest B-1 combat wing in the U.S. Air Force, with 29 aircraft and more than 4,300 personnel. His organizational skills and drive kept that force in top shape, ready to respond to a crisis at a moment's notice.

He's also a proud family man. His wife Joanna, seven daughters and four sons have all helped shape the Colonel into a great leader of men and women. The Vander Hamms have become an important part of the Ellsworth family and their looming absence will be felt by the entire base.

The leadership and diligence shown by Colonel Vander Hamm and our nation's other military commanders are second to none. I am personally immensely grateful for the values and honor that soldiers such as he have instilled in the fabric of our society. And I am sure the people of South Dakota and the entire country join me in thanking him for his sacrifices in helping keep all of us safe.

Madam Speaker, it is with enduring pride and respect that I rise today in recognition of Col. Vander Hamm and his service at Ellsworth Air Force Base. The state of South Dakota will miss him, but we are all fortunate that his service to our nation continues.

Madam Speaker, today I am pleased to introduce the AmericaView Geospatial Imagery Mapping Program Act.

AmericaView is a nationwide program that focuses on satellite remote sensing data and technologies in support of applied research, K-16 education, workforce development, and technology transfer. AmericaView is administered through a partnership between the U.S. Geological Survey and the AmericaView Consortium, which is comprised of over 30 ``StateViews.'' The Consortium is the federal government's primary partner in achieving the program's vision and goals. Specifically, applied researchers at universities in each member state collaborate with each other and with government agencies to develop and share information and techniques for using remote sensing data.

The purpose of this bill is to authorize the AmericaView Geospatial Imagery Mapping Program. By authorizing this program, Congress recognizes the important work conducted by the AmericaView Consortium in collaboration with U.S.G.S. Since the 1970s, the federal government has invested in earth-observing satellites that provide remote sensing imagery. When federal geospatial imagery is available in a cost- effective and timely manner, state, local, and tribal governments as well as educational institutions are able to develop new scientific, educational, and practical applications for the data and to adopt new tools for applied research, education, and training.

The AmericaView program is uniquely positioned to help each state develop applications and skills necessary to effectively apply geospatial imagery for multiple state-focused mapping purposes, and to expand the use and benefits of geospatial imagery for research and operational purposes within each state.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I look forward to working with all my colleagues to promptly pass the AmericaView Geospatial Imagery Mapping Program Act.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the chairman for yielding.

As the chairwoman of the Veterans Affairs' Economic Opportunity Subcommittee, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1170, as amended. I would like to thank Chairman Filner, Ranking Member Buyer on the full committee and the sponsor of the bill, and subcommittee ranking member, Mr. Boozman, for their leadership and bipartisan support of this bill, which the full committee passed on May 6.

The bill offers important improvements to the Department of Veterans Affairs' Specially Adapted Housing Program by creating a 5-year pilot program to promote the research and development of adaptive technologies. With many veterans returning from the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan with injuries such as traumatic brain injury, it is important that research and development help meet the demand for cost- effective solutions that could mitigate the needs for around-the-clock nursing care or institutionalization for seriously wounded veterans. These solutions can be as simple as ramps or other structural modifications or they can be more complex, such as voice recognition controls for a home's heating system.

Also, H.R. 1170, as amended, gives the Department of Veterans Affairs a 30 percent stake in any patent approved as a result of this grant program. This

measure will allow taxpayers to receive a reasonable return on their investment as well as to promote creativity and ingenuity among the designers and inventors working with the VA on these grants.

The Specially Adapted Housing Program has been a tremendous help to many veterans, and it is expected to fund 1,250 projects in 2010. This bill will expand and improve this program, and it is a wise investment in our veterans.

I thank Chairman Filner for noting the working relationship that I have with the distinguished ranking member, Mr. Boozman of Arkansas. When he once chaired the subcommittee, we worked together then and continue to work today on a whole host of programs, particularly housing for our disabled veterans in light of the current needs of veterans and their families.

I want to thank Mr. Boozman for sponsoring this important bill, and I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 1170, as amended.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the chairman once again.

I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1088, the Mandatory Veteran Specialist Training Act of 2009, which the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee passed on March 19 and which the full committee approved on May 6.

I want to thank again Chairman Filner, the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Buyer, and once again the distinguished ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. Boozman, for their leadership and for, again, their bipartisan support of this bill, which I introduced on February 13, 2009.

The bill would amend title 38 to reduce from 3 years to 1 year the period during which disabled veterans' outreach program specialists or local veterans' employment representatives with the Department of Labor must complete the specialized veterans' employment training program provided by the National Veterans' Training Institute. The National Veterans' Training Institute program is designed to give those specialists the correct skill set that can help veterans so that they can

help veterans with a wide variety of employment services such as transition assistance and case management.

Through several oversight hearings held by the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity that we have held throughout the 110th and 111th Congresses, we learned it was taking on average 2.5 years before individuals were completing the National Veterans Training Institute Program. This fact, therefore, leaves untrained specialists who don't have the necessary skills trying to help veterans with their employment needs. So this bill takes an important step in the right direction to providing better employment assistance to those who have bravely served their country.

Again, I thank Chairman Filner for his support of this important bill, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for being so supportive of the work of the subcommittee.

I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1089, as amended, the Veterans Employment Rights Realignment Act of 2009, which the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee passed on March 19 and the full committee approved on May 6.

Once again, we wouldn't be able to consider this bill today if not for the support and leadership of the chairman and ranking member both of the full committee as well as Mr. Boozman on the subcommittee. And we introduced this bill on February 13, 2009, again in response to a number of hearings that were held in the 110th Congress.

The bill would amend title 38 of the U.S. Code to move the enforcement of the Uniform Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act--known as USERRA--to the enforcement of those protections, USERRA protections, of veterans and members of the armed services employed by Federal executive agencies to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel.

The Office of Special Counsel is an independent Federal investigative and prosecutorial agency that was created by Congress with the goal of protecting employees, former employees and applicants for employment from prohibited personnel practices.

Under a demonstration project established by Public Law 108-454, the Office of Special Counsel investigated some Federal sector USERRA claims from 2004 until 2007. This demonstration project showed that the Office of Special Counsel had the expertise and ability to quickly obtain corrective action for federally employed veterans.

By granting the Office of Special Counsel initial jurisdiction over all of these Federal USERRA claims, we give claimants a single agency to investigate and resolve their complaint. This will be more efficient than the current circumstance where first the Department of Labor investigates the claim, and then the claim is then transferred to OSC at the veteran's request if the Department of Labor fails to find a resolution, which then prompts a second investigation.

So, again, I want to thank the chairman, Chairman Filner, for his support. I also want to thank Congresswoman Kirkpatrick for her amendment during the subcommittee consideration of the bill that clarified the role of the Office of Special Counsel in this important piece of legislation. Again, I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 1089.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to discuss H.R. 1924, the Tribal Law and Order Act of 2009. I was proud to reintroduce this legislation designed to address the serious deficiencies and systemic flaws within the Federal agencies charged with providing law enforcement and justice programs in Indian country.

As the at-large Member of Congress for South Dakota, I am proud to represent nine sovereign Native nations. The Federal Government has a unique relationship with the 562 federally recognized tribes. This government-to-government relationship is established in the U.S. Constitution, recognized through hundreds of treaties, and reaffirmed through executive orders, judicial decisions and congressional action.

Law enforcement is one of the Federal Government's responsibilities to federally recognized tribes. Yet on many counts, we are failing to meet that obligation. In April, Oglala Sioux Tribe president, Theresa Two Bulls, testified at the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies' oversight hearing on law enforcement issues in Indian country. President Two Bulls discussed the law enforcement crisis on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in southwestern South Dakota. She explained how large, land-based reservations struggle to maintain the level of officers needed to protect tribal members.

President Two Bulls illustrated the seriousness of the public safety crisis by telling the committee of one case. A young woman living on the reservation received a restraining order against an ex-boyfriend who battered her. One night she was home alone and woke up as he attempted the break into her home with a crowbar. She immediately called the police, but due to the lack of land lines for telephones and the spotty cell phone coverage, the call was cut off three times before she reported her situation to the dispatcher. However, the nearest officer was 40 miles away. Even though the young police officer who took the call started driving to her home at 80 miles per hour, by the time he arrived, the woman was severely bloodied and beaten. The perpetrator was nowhere in sight.

All Americans should be outraged by this grossly inadequate law enforcement infrastructure which is clearly ill-equipped to deter, prevent or prosecute crimes and criminals. For families who take a basic sense of safety and security for granted, these stories should serve as a wake-up call.

And it is not an isolated incident. As I meet with tribal leaders throughout South Dakota and Indian country, I know that these tragic stories are not unique to the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. Amnesty International has reported that violence against Native women is particularly widespread. American Indian and Alaska Native women are more than 2\1/2\ times more likely to be raped or sexually assaulted than women in the United States in general. Yet the majority of these crimes go unpunished.

While addressing the lawless conditions in Indian country will require significant changes in the way that the Federal Government works with tribes, as well as a meaningful influx of resources into reservations in most need, H.R. 1924, the Tribal Law and Order Act, is an important step to addressing the complex and broken system of law and order in Indian country. This bill would establish accountability measures for the Department of the Interior and the Department of Justice with regard to tribal law enforcement. This bill also seeks to increase local control to tribal law enforcement agencies and to authorize additional resources for tribes to address the safety and security needs of their communities.

Specifically, this bill would clarify the responsibilities of Federal, State, tribal and local governments with respect to crimes committed in tribal communities. It would increase coordination and communication among Federal, State, tribal and local law enforcement agencies. It would empower tribal governments with the authority, resources and information necessary to effectively provide for the public safety in tribal communities. It would reduce the prevalence of violent crime in tribal communities and combat violence against Indian and Alaska Native women. It would address and prevent drug trafficking and reduce rates of alcohol and drug addiction in Indian country and increase and standardize the collection of criminal data and sharing of criminal history information among Federal, State, and tribal officials responsible for responding to and investigating crimes in tribal communities.

Native American families, like all families, deserve a basic sense of safety and security in their communities. The Tribal Law and Order Act is an important step toward meeting the Federal Government's responsibility to Native communities. And I urge my colleagues to join me in moving this important legislation forward.

Madam Speaker, today, I am pleased to reintroduce the Tribal Law and Order Act of 2009, critical legislation to address needs of law enforcement and justice services in Indian Country. I want to thank Senator Dorgan and his colleagues and staff on the Senate Indian Affairs Committee for their tireless dedication to these issues.

The Tribal Law & Order Act would establish accountability measures for the Department of the Interior and the Department of Justice with regard to tribal law enforcement. This bill also seeks to increase local control to tribal law enforcement agencies and to authorize additional resources for tribes to address the safety and security needs of their communities.

In June 2007, the House Committee on Natural Resources held a hearing on the Lower Brule Reservation in South Dakota. Entitled, The Needs and Challenges of Tribal Law Enforcement in Indian Reservations, tribal leaders and law enforcement officials from eight tribes testified for the need to improve government-to-government consultations between tribes and the federal agencies charged with supporting their law enforcement goals. Witnesses explained the need for more resources for officers, equipment, jails, and tribal courts.

For example, the Law Enforcement Department of Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe of South Dakota serves a population spread across 19 communities with a land base of approximately 2.8 million acres. Some of these communities are located as far as 90 miles away from department headquarters. With approximately 4,500 miles of roadways on the reservation, it often takes officers a considerable amount of time to address calls, including emergencies.

At current funding levels, the Cheyenne Rivers Sioux Tribe Law Enforcement Department is unable to provide adequate police protection to all of these communities. In FY08, the tribal police force was reduced by 10 patrol officers due to budget constraints. Now, officers are logging over 4000 hours of overtime each quarter, which leads to stress and strain on the officers and their families, and ultimately, undermines retention efforts and leads to communities that are not as safe as they should be.

From my work with tribal communities in South Dakota and as a Member of the Committee on Natural Resources, I know that Cheyenne River is not an extreme case. In fact, across all Indian Country, there are less than 3,000 tribal law enforcement officers to patrol over 56 million acres of land. This figure represents less than one-half of the law enforcement presence in comparable rural communities. This disparity is unacceptable and shameful.

The Tribal Law and Order Act is an important step to addressing the complex and broken system of law and order in Indian Country. This bill would clarify the responsibilities of Federal, State, tribal, and local governments with respect to crimes committed in tribal communities; increase coordination and communication among Federal, State, tribal, and local law enforcement agencies; empower tribal governments with the authority, resources, and information necessary to effectively provide for the public's safety in tribal communities; reduce the prevalence of violent crime in tribal communities and combat violence against Indian and Alaska Native women; address and prevent drug trafficking and reduce rates of alcohol and drug addiction in Indian country; and increase and standardize the collection of criminal data and the sharing of criminal history information among Federal, State, and tribal officials responsible for responding to and investigating crimes in tribal communities.

The Senate Indian Affairs Committee has held numerous hearings and has reached out to tribes across the United States while crafting this bill, and I appreciate their efforts to address the concerns raised by tribal members and leaders. I recognize that this bill alone will not solve the problems raised by tribes in these consultations and hearings. As such, I will continue to work for increased funding for law enforcement personnel, detention facilities, equipment and training, tribal courts, and other components required for a successful justice system. I will continue to hold the Bureau of Indian Affairs accountable for upholding the trust responsibility within the realm of law enforcement. Ultimately, I believe that this bill offers important and necessary tools in our shared goal of making Indian Country a safer place to be.

Madam Speak, I urge my colleagues to join with me to pass the Tribal Law and Order Act into law.

Mr. Speaker, today, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 146: Omnibus Public Land Management Act 2009. Included in this bill is the authorization of Preserve America and Save America's Treasures.

I want to take this opportunity to express my appreciation of and support for the role that State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices play in national historic preservation efforts. In 1966, Congress passed the National Historic Preservation Act. This Act charged State Historic Preservation Offices with several responsibilities, from locating historic resources to providing technical assistance to federal agencies.

Furthermore, the National Historic Preservation Act emphasizes the need for cooperation and coordination among federal, tribal, state, and local governments as well as private organizations and individuals. In South Dakota, State and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers play a crucial part in many projects and initiatives, such as preserving significant buildings and landmarks and ensuring that Native American sacred sites are protected.

South Dakota has received a handful of grants through both the Save America's Treasures and Preserve America programs. However, the majority of our preservation funding comes from, and I expect will continue to come from, the State and Tribal Historic Preservation Programs.

While I support the Save America's Treasures and Preserve America programs, it is imperative that we also recognize the statutory responsibilities of State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices to carry out federal historic preservation activities. In turn, I want to state my support for ensuring that State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices have the funding and resources that they need to carry out their multifaceted missions. I anticipate that authorizing Save America's Treasures and Preserve America will complement the work conducted by State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices across the United States.

My hope is that Congress recognizes that the Preserve American and Save America's Treasures programs are meant to supplement the baseline activities of State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (S/THPOs) which carry out the mandates of the National Historic Preservation Act. The work of the States and Tribes provides the necessary foundation for the supplemental assistance provided by Preserve America and Save America's Treasures grants.

Madam Speaker, today I am pleased to reintroduce the Lower Brule and Crow Creek Tribal Compensation Act. This bill would fully compensate the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe and the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe in South Dakota for the lands that they lost as a result of the federal government's construction of the massive dams on the main stem of the Missouri River.

The Lower Brule Sioux Tribe and the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe reservations border on the Missouri River in central South Dakota and are connected by the Big Bend Dam. The 1944 Flood Control Act flooded and devalued tribal lands. The flooding also took an enormous toll on the people of both tribes and their economies. It is critically important that we seek to fully reimburse these tribes for the lands they lost.

Congress created a trust fund for the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe in 1996, and a separate trust fund for the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe in 1997. These trust funds sought to compensate the tribes for the value of their land that is now permanently inundated as a result of the construction of the Big Bend Dam.

Regrettably, the compensation amounts varied between separate but similarly-situated tribes along the Missouri River. The result was unfair and inadequate compensation trust funds for Lower Brule and Crow Creek, and therefore, Congress should revisit the compensation levels provided to these tribes in the 1990s. This act is designed to create consistency among the affected tribes and to bring some long-overdue closure to the people of Lower Brule and Crow Creek.

Compensation for these tribes would give the tribes the tools they need for economic recovery in the face of lasting impacts from the 1944 Flood Control Act. This compensation would enable the tribe to improve their community facilities and fix their roads. It would mean better health care and newer schools. Most importantly, it would mean a real chance for these tribes to provide future generations with the tools that so many of us take for granted.

I am hopeful that the House will move quickly in the 111th Congress to advance this important legislation. An earlier version of this bill was reported by the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs in the 108th Congress and ultimately passed the Senate. In the 109th Congress it was amended in the Senate after further hearings and then reported. In the 110th Congress, the Committee on Natural Resources Water and Power Subcommittee held a legislative hearing on an identical bill.

In closing, I respectfully ask my colleagues to support the Lower Brule and Crow Creek Tribal Compensation Act and work with me to enact legislation that would fairly and appropriately compensate members of the Lower Brule and Crow Creek Sioux Tribes.