Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Doctors Henry and Marsha Laufer and their family for the many outstanding contributions to scientific research and learning on the occasion of the opening of the new Louis and Beatrice Laufer Center for Physical and Quantitative Biology at Stony Brook University in my district.

For more than forty years, the Laufer family has demonstrated an unyielding commitment and tremendous generosity with their time, talents and resources in supporting Stony Brook University. Their influence and many contributions have made an indelible impact on the campus and surrounding community.

Dr. Henry Laufer is a former member of Stony Brook's faculty who won the prestigious Alfred P. Sloan Fellowship and helped distinguish the Mathematics Department through his breakthrough work on complex variables and algebraic topology. Dr. Marsha Laufer is a

former speech pathologist and research associate professor in the School of Allied Health Professions who directed graduate student research, taught courses in research design and communications disorders, and is a founding member of the Friends of Staller Center Advisory Council.

The culmination of these ongoing efforts is the May 7, 2012 opening of the newly remodeled building to house the Laufer Center on Stony Brook's campus. The Center was established in 2008 in loving memory of Louis and Beatrice Laufer by their children Helen Laufer Kaplan and Howard Kaplan, Jeffrey and Barbara Laufer, and Henry and Marsha Laufer. At that time, Stony Brook University President Shirley Kenny praised the Laufers as ``people of remarkable vision and generosity'' and recognized the Center's potential to ``explore new frontiers in research and education and . . . have a profound impact on the future of biomedical research and health care for generations to come.''

The Center brings together academic experts and students in math, physics, genetics, biochemistry, engineering, and computer sciences to advance research and innovation that will lead to groundbreaking discoveries in biology and medicine. The Center uses an interdisciplinary approach and involves collaborations among scientists at Stony Brook University, Brookhaven National Laboratory and Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory to provide an important interface between the physical and life sciences.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to have known the Laufer family for many years and am very proud to call them close friends of mine. They are a great source of inspiration, enthusiasm, and dedication to major advances in research, learning, and a better a way of life. On behalf of New York's first congressional district, I congratulate the Laufer family for its generosity and outstanding contributions to Stony Brook University and to our community on this occasion marking the opening of the Louis and Beatrice Laufer Center for Physical and Quantitative Biology.

I thank Ranking Member Rahall for yielding and for his leadership on this issue and his leadership on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I support this commonsense motion to put America back to work by preventing the harmful outsourcing of American jobs. The U.S. is still recovering from the worst recession since the Great Depression. The manufacturing and construction sectors have been particularly hard-hit. In the past decade, more than 56,000 U.S. factories have closed or moved overseas. An additional 90,000 manufacturing firms are at risk of going out of business. More than 2.2 million construction and manufacturing workers remain out of work.

This motion to instruct directs conferees on H.R. 4348 to address important loopholes in Buy American laws in order to create more American jobs. Provisions contained in the Senate amendment to H.R. 4348 will help ensure that all steel, iron, and manufactured goods used to construct highway, transit, and rail projects are produced in the United States. By closing loopholes, these provisions will make certain that projects financed by U.S. taxpayers will be made in America, with jobs in our communities, not outsourced overseas.

This motion to instruct directs conferees to adopt several Senate Buy American provisions that would prohibit project segmentation on certain projects, require public notice and comment on waiver requests, require review of longstanding waivers, and require an annual report on waivers. I think that reasonable people would agree that this isn't too much to ask for projects that are paid for with U.S. taxpayer dollars.

Federal transportation dollars should not be used to outsource American jobs. It doesn't make sense. It isn't right. I urge my colleagues to support this motion to instruct conferees.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor the immense success that the members of the Local 25 chapter of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers have achieved. The 2,600 members of Local 25 have, for 80 years, dedicated themselves to the service of their community and achieving excellence within the electrician profession.

IBEW Local 25's service to Long Island began in 1932, when some of the finest crafts people in the world wanted to better facilitate their remarkable skills. IBEW is deeply committed to the ongoing training of its members. Seasoned associates of Local 25 eagerly pass down their accumulated knowledge to the younger generations of electricians in a fair, equal opportunity setting.

Local 25 is of vital importance to the Long Island community, and I am proud of their heritage and remarkable skill sets. The mission of this coalition of tradesmen is to produce the finest skilled electricians in the world who will produce the highest quality electrical installations. I believe the great members of Local 25 have achieved that goal.

Mr. Speaker, I honor the fine members of IBEW Local 25 for their invaluable and continuing contributions to our community. It is my great hope that they will continue to serve as an inspiration for others through their work and ongoing devotion to the great State of New York.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate the Riverhead Blue Waves

Girls Basketball Team on their history-making 2011 2012 season.

The Blue Waves of Riverhead, New York went all the way to the state Class AA Final Four tournament in Troy, New York, a first in the team's history and a truly remarkable achievement. Along the way they won the 2012 Long Island Championship in a 56 50 victory over the Baldwin Bruins amidst waves of cheering fans known as the ``Blue Krew.'' They also won the Suffolk County Class AA championship, and the Suffolk County Section XI championship, finishing the season with a 23 2 record.

Their coach, Dave Spinelli, was named Suffolk County Coach of the Year, and senior guard Jaylyn Brown was named a first-team All-Long Island player. The team was named a New York State Scholar Athlete team for the seventh consecutive year with a team grade-point average this year of 93.1.

Hailed as hometown heroes, the athletes were honored with a parade down East Main Street sponsored by the Riverhead Central School District and the Town of Riverhead on April 29th, and the entire day was designated a day of celebration. Riverhead School Board vice president Greg Meyer said the team acted as a catalyst for the entire community. ``The girls played their hearts out for their team and for this community, and the residents of Riverhead and the rest of the school district came together to support the team in a major way.''

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have such a talented and dedicated group of young athletes in my congressional district. They demonstrated commitment, teamwork, leadership and serve as role models for their community, proving that with hard work and a good defense, dreams do come true.

I thank Mr. Rahall for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I rise to speak in support of the motion to instruct conferees. This motion would direct conferees to adopt the Senate bill, MAP 21, which I introduced as H.R. 14 in March. This legislation can provide State DOTs, transit agencies, and contractors with the certainty they need to create and sustain jobs for the thousands of Americans who are still out of work as a result of the economic downturn.

MAP 21 not only passed overwhelmingly in the Senate with a bipartisan majority of 74 22, but the Senate bill is fully paid for and will save an estimated 1.8 million jobs and create up to 1 million additional jobs when implemented. During a weak economic recovery looking for a jump-start, this is precisely what we need to do.

Given that H.R. 4348 is merely a 90-day extension of highway programs at current levels with a few policy additions, we could put the construction industry back to work that much faster, given that the construction season is in full swing if this motion to instruct is adopted.

MAP 21 has the support of three-quarters of Congress, Senate Democrats, Senate Republicans, House Democrats; it has the support of the White House. It's time that the House Republicans got on board with job creation instead of fighting it. Americans

want safe roads and bridges; but, above all, they want jobs.

The Senate passed the biggest job-creating bill in this Congress by an overwhelming bipartisan margin. The House has done nothing. Let's get this country moving again by passing the Senate bill so the President can sign it. Let's create jobs. Let's Make It in America.

I urge my colleagues to support this motion to instruct conferees.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the Church of St. Mary in Hampton Bays, New York as it celebrates one hundred years of ministry and worship. I offer my congratulations to the rector, wardens, vestry and congregation of St. Mary's Episcopal Church, a beautiful and historic church that stands as a testament to the devotion of its members.

From its modest beginnings in the home of Earl B. Squires in 1912 to its present-day position as the first and most active partner in an outreach program to the East End's homeless, St. Mary's has been a vital part of the community. On March 26, 1912, the Reverend Samuel Centennial Fish conducted the first service in the home of Earl Squires opposite the present location of the church at 165 Ponquogue Avenue.

In 1917, Virginia Taylor Hardy donated the property and present church, nestled amid a grove of oak trees, to serve the population of Good Ground, a portion of present day Hampton Bays. Its Norman architecture is accentuated by slate and tile floors, varying peaked tile roofs and English oak pews and paneling. The stained glass windows in the baptistery and above the altar are the work of Otto W. Heinigke, one of the foremost stained glass artists in the country. The church building, recognized as one of the most beautiful small churches in America, was consecrated on September 4, 1920 by the Right Rev. Frederick Burgess, Bishop of Long Island. In 1966, the church was granted parish status after 52 years as a mission.

The current rector, the Rev. Bernadette M. Sullivan, is the first woman to serve as the church's spiritual leader. In 2001, the rector volunteered St. Mary's as the first church to commit to participate in the Maureen's Haven Ministry to the homeless. Many members of the congregation have been inspired to become involved. After ten years, more than 30 other churches are participating in the program providing beds, hot food and counseling for more than 252 guests.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have such a strong and long-standing congregation in the First Congressional District of New York, and I offer best wishes for the future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor the courageous volunteer fire departments of Long Island for their skill and dedication in combating the recent outbreaks of wildfires in my district. Once again, they have proved their mettle and won our trust and admiration.

While, thankfully, no lives were lost, the fire, now extinguished, consumed roughly 1,100 acres, destroyed three homes, and damaged or destroyed six other structures, including one commercial building. If not for the actions of our local firefighters, the damage could have been far worse.

We are also fortunate that the three firefighters who were injured fighting the fire are all recovering well.

As a lifelong resident of Suffolk County, I was inspired by the willingness to help shown by the county's fire departments, all 109 of which participated in the effort to combat what turned out to be the seventh-largest fire in Long Island history. Through their combined and coordinated efforts, a larger crisis was averted.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that you join me in thanking all of Suffolk County's Fire Departments, as well as our local elected leaders who supervised this operation, for their dedication and exceptional skill in subduing the recent fires.

Thank you very much for the opportunity, Congressman Courtney. And let me begin by commending you for being the sponsor of H.R. 3826. I'm proud to join you in that effort, and over 100 of our Democratic colleagues have joined in this effort. And I find it both distressing and, frankly, shocking that we don't have a single Member from the other side of the aisle who cares about students and wants to see the student loan rate maintained at 3.4 percent.

Let me start with a statistic that ought to give pause to everyone who cares about the future of our country. We have fallen from first to 15th in the world in the proportion of our population ages 23 through 35 that has a college degree. In an intensely competitive global marketplace, we are going to continue to struggle if we do not have the educated populace that we need to have to compete in that global marketplace. And if we continue to make it more difficult for students to go to college, that's precisely the outcome that we'll have.

And so, at the very moment when we ought to be doing everything that we possibly can to facilitate college enrollment, we are, in fact, in the House of Representatives, being led by people who are taking us in the exact opposite direction.

The student loan issue is crucial. As you say, we have 73 days to act before students take on a significant additional hardship, doubling the interest rate.

But look at what the House Republican budget that has now been passed twice in this Chamber, once before Easter recess and as recently as yesterday, look what it does to higher education. It cuts funding for the Pell Grant program, as Representative Cicilline said, the core program, the core student financial aid program that came about as a result of the leadership of Senator Pell. It cuts it by $104 billion over 10 years, $104 billion over 10 years at a time when we're trying to facilitate college enrollment.

It will render 18,000 students in my home State of New York ineligible for Pell, students who are eligible for it now who won't be eligible for it next year. Across the country, 400,000 students who are eligible for Pell now won't be eligible for it.

And at the very time that the Republican leadership of the House of Representatives is proposing that, they are also proposing to make it more expensive for students to do the only thing they could do to replace the dollars they're going to lose from Pell, and that's borrow. So we're going to hit them both ways. We're going to take away non- repayable assistance, grant assistance, and then we're going to make it more expensive for them to borrow. And it's just simply wrong.

We ought to be about opportunity in this country. And when I hear a Presidential candidate talk about how the desire to send more students to college is elitist, it, frankly, gives me great pause. And if we look at the history of higher education in this country, before World War II and the GI Bill, it was elitist. And then with the advent of the GI Bill and then the community college, higher education became egalitarian. And it's what built the great

middle class in this country. It is what has allowed us to thrive and become the strongest and most prosperous Nation in the world.

We cannot afford to take a step back; and this dual effort to both diminish Pell, significantly diminish Pell, and then make it more expensive for students to borrow, the consequence of that will be to move us backward at a time when we need to be aggressively charging forward.

I want to pick up on a couple of points but certainly on the point, Congressman Courtney, that you made with respect to students who are making decisions right now. I mean, they were notified of their acceptances between April 1 and April 15, and they've got to respond to the colleges that accepted them between May 1 and May 15.

They are making life-altering decisions right now. And we here in the Congress, I believe, have an obligation to give them the information they need to have in order to make informed decisions. If they're going to have a significant additional repayment burden upon graduation, that's going to affect their decisions. If a student has excelled and worked hard and gotten into the college of his or her choice, for them not to be able to accept that offer of admission in part because we haven't given them the information that they need, that's unconscionable.

The other point I would make is that governing is about choosing. What we're talking about here is an increase of $550 a year over the life of a 20-year repayment for 7.5 million students. If anyone walked into this Chamber and proposed a $550 tax increase on an annual basis for 7.5 million people, our friends on the other side of the aisle wouldn't discuss it, wouldn't hear it at all, and yet they are willing to sit silently by while we're going to impose that very kind of payment increase on 7.5 million students.

The last point I would make is that there is this myth that increased availability of student financial aid drives up college costs, and it is one of the arguments that is made. When people argue for reducing access to student aid, they say that if we reduce access to student aid, college costs will at least moderate, if not come down, because that is what is allowing administrators to raise prices. It is a myth that has absolutely no basis in fact. It is insidious, and it is damaging because it drives the kind of decisionmaking or priority- making that we're seeing here in this move to reduce Pell, this move to increase student loan rates.

The principal driver of student costs right now is diminished support from State and local government. We are funding public higher education, per FTE, at the lowest level we have funded it in 25 years. That's what's driving college costs. Seventy percent of the students in this country go to publicly supported colleges. Publicly supported colleges are increasing at a rate of 8\1/2\ to 9 percent a year because the funding for FTE from the State government or from local government, in the case of community colleges, is going down. That's what is driving costs. If our response to that increased need is to say that's not bad enough, we're going to make it even worse, we're going to take away Pell, and we're going to make your student loans much more expensive, we're going to rue the day we did that because 5 years from now, 10 years from now, 15 years from now we're not going to have the educated workforce we need to have to drive this country forward.

Full-time equivalent student.

I would absolutely agree.

I would also observe that when we passed it for 3.4 percent, it was at a time when this Congress was less racked by the partisan antipathy, frankly, that seems to have taken over our Congress. This is an example of that. We have just lived through the last several weeks of perhaps the greatest example of that. We've taken something that historically has sailed through this Congress on a bipartisan basis with little or no objection--the surface transportation bill--and we have been unable to pass the surface transportation bill in this House. It's an embarrassment.

In 2004, I believe it was, or 2005, we passed a surface transportation bill written by Chairman Don Young, Republican of Alaska. It was a very good bill. We passed it with, I think, 30 dissenting votes. And it was written with bipartisan involvement and bipartisan support. That's gone away. I think when we were able to pass the legislation that did the student loan reduction in interest, we had bipartisan support, we had bipartisan involvement. And I hope perhaps this is the issue around which we can coalesce and bring it back, bring back that kind of bipartisan cooperation.

If I may just pick up on that point.

In President Obama's State of the Union address of January 2011, he said that in order for us to win the 21st century, we have to out-build the rest of the world, we have to out-innovate the rest of the world, and we have to out-educate the rest of the world. The innovation piece and the education piece is all about access to higher education.

This is about our future competitiveness. This is about our future economic stability and economic security. It's about filling the jobs that the economy of the 21st century is going to create. The economy of the 21st century is going to create jobs that require postsecondary training. If we make it more difficult for students to access that training, those jobs are going to go unfilled, and our economy is going to continue to struggle.

I couldn't agree more. Again, I want to commend you for your leadership first in filing the bill, generating over 100 cosponsors that the bill has, organizing this Special Order tonight. This is a very, very important effort.

One last thing I will say. I will say to the students of America, what I have found is the most compelling effort of advocacy that individuals can put forward is to put a human face on the consequences of our failure to act. If the students all across this country could make their Members of Congress aware of what this is going to mean for them, both in terms of their repayment and the future students in terms of the choices they are going to have to make, I think the decision we need to make will become a lot easier for many of our colleagues to make.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

The purpose of my amendment is straightforward. It opens an area off the coast of my congressional district to recreational striped bass fishing. Striped bass is a popular game fish in New York, and it has long been an important catch for recreational fishermen.

The formation of an exclusive economic zone creates a small area of Federal water in the Block Island Sound between Montauk Point, Block Island, and Point Judith, Rhode Island. In most cases, when you hit the 3-mile point off the coast of the United States, you have nothing but Federal waters in front of you. This is not always the case for New York fishermen. Because of this geographic anomaly, when the ban on striped bass fishing in the EEZ went into effect, it closed off 60 percent of New York's traditional striped bass recreation areas from fishing, according to the Montauk Boatmen and Captains Association in my district.

The National Marine Fisheries Service recognized this unique area by designating it as a transit area where it was permissible for fishermen to possess striped bass on their boats as long as no fishing takes place while in the EEZ and the boat is in continuous transit.

My amendment goes one step further and opens this relatively small area to recreational fishing. Mindful of the need for reasonable conservation, my amendment also provides the ability to take necessary action for conservation purposes.

Fishermen and charter captains on Long Island know these waters better than anybody in Washington, D.C. Our friends on the other side of the aisle talk about government regulation stifling the economic recovery. After all, fishermen are job creators, both directly and indirectly. They hire crews, they have their boats maintained by mechanics, and they sell their catch to restaurants where Americans go out to eat.

I support fisheries management that is designed to promote robust health of fish stocks; but as the representative for the oldest fishing ports in New York State, I also support sensible efforts to ensure our fishermen can fish and earn their livelihood.

Opening this area would once again give recreational fishermen access to fruitful striped bass fishing grounds. Charter boats will benefit, as will the ports they depart from as people come to the east end of Long Island for great fishing. This will promote job growth and tourism, which is the goal of the underlying legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

I yield to the gentleman.

I very much appreciate that offer, Mr. Chairman. Based on your assurance that this issue will receive a full hearing in your committee or in the appropriate subcommittee, I will ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

I appreciate that.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule, and I oppose the motion to move the previous question.

I am growing more and more deeply concerned that our Republican colleagues simply don't get it. They do not understand that their ideological crusade to ``starve the beast'' has only resulted in starving the American worker.

Here we are today taking up the third version of the Republican kick- the-can infrastructure plan down the road in a single week, the third version in a week.

If that's not a complete failure of leadership, I don't know what is.

We are a mere 2 days away from the expiration of our highway programs, and they have their hands over their ears, desperate not to hear commonsense solutions like the bipartisan Senate highway bill.

Since the beginning of the 112th Congress, we have witnessed time and time again their ``my way or the highway'' approach to governing. As a result, job creation is suffering; working families across the Nation are suffering; the construction industry is in the middle of the construction season, and it's suffering because House Republicans want to score political points with their ideological base rather than solve real-world problems with real-world solutions.

This week, the House Republicans were forced to remove two short-term highway extension bills from floor consideration because they would rather dig deeper into the conservative ranks of their caucus than reach across the aisle to discuss solutions for the American worker. Sadly, this is nothing new. They have been doing this for the past 15 months. We have lurched from self-created crisis to self-created crisis. I've counted at least five over the last 15 months. Yet they wonder why the

American public's perception of Congress is at an all-time low.

Meanwhile, I've sponsored H.R. 14, the Senate highway bill, which is a bipartisan path forward that makes meaningful reforms and provides certainty to States. I am proud to be offering this bipartisan legislation in order to refocus the discussion on jobs and economic opportunities rather than that of the Republican message this week of tearing down Medicare and protecting the 1 percent at the expense of middle class families.

As of today, House Republicans have yet to put forward a credible highway reauthorization that puts Americans back to work. Their only attempt, H.R. 7, the Boehner-Mica authorization, was called the worst highway bill ever by Secretary of Transportation LaHood, a former distinguished Member of this body, a Republican. It was drafted in the dark of night without any Democratic input. It removed transit from the highway trust fund. It broke a 30-year bipartisan cooperation to fund transit, and it couldn't attract a single Democratic vote nor even a majority of Republican votes.

Over in the Senate, MAP 21 passed overwhelmingly with a bipartisan majority and is fully paid for, something House Republicans seem unable to come close to achieving. The MAP 21 pay-fors are less controversial than those contained in the House Republican bill. The Senate has estimated that MAP 21 will save 1.8 million jobs and will create up to 1 million more jobs. That's almost 3 million jobs wrapped up in this legislation. During a weak economic recovery that is looking for a jump-start, this is the kind of legislation we need to be passing.

House Republicans had their chance to address our infrastructure needs with H.R. 7. Instead, they chose to pander to their base and chase ideological extremes. I am sorry to say their effort was an utter failure. MAP 21 has the support of Senate Democrats, Senate Republicans, House Democrats, and the administration.

It is time that the House Republicans got on board with job creation instead of fighting it. Americans want jobs and safe roads and bridges. The Senate passed the biggest jobs-creating bill in this Congress by an overwhelming bipartisan majority. We have the chance to do the same thing. Let's move H.R. 14, and let's put this country back to work.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, let me see if I have this right. Our Republican colleagues are telling us that we should forget about the 15 months that have passed since they started crafting the highway bill. They're telling us we should forget about the last 6 weeks during which time their bill, H.R. 7, imploded and the bipartisan MAP 21 bill passed the Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support. Now they're telling the American people that they simply need 3 additional months to find the money and shape a policy--an effort that thus far has eluded them--that can garner a majority of votes in the House and overcome the 60-vote threshold in the Senate and be signed by the President of the United States.

It gets better. On the very same day that they make this outrageous argument, they will vote for a Republican budget that slashes investment in transportation infrastructure by 46 percent, a 46 percent reduction in investment in infrastructure.

Now, if they're serious about this vote, if they're serious about seeing this destructive level of funding enacted into law, how can we take them seriously when they talk about a 5-

year bill? They talk about certainty. How can we give the American people or the construction industry or construction workers certainty when they say, Just give us 90 more days and we'll craft a 5-year bill, but in the meantime, we want to cut highway funding by 46 percent? These don't line up. No reasonable person can take that seriously.

To make it even worse, at the end of today, we're going to adjourn the House for 2 weeks. Asking for a 90-day extension, but in the first 2 weeks of that 90-day extension, they're going to adjourn the House and go home. And they're going to do that while construction workers are wondering where their next paycheck is coming from. They're wondering how they're going to be able to provide for their families. This is unconscionable.

If Republicans want 90 more days, we should stay here and work through the issues with the bipartisan Senate bill MAP 21, H.R. 14, here in the House as the basis for these discussions. We know we can get it through the Senate; and I am confident that if Republicans are released by their leadership to vote for it, they'll vote for it here in the House.

Let's pass H.R. 14.

Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to the Republican Fiscal Year 2013 Budget. Budgets are statements of priorities. Unfortunately, this budget does not reflect the priorities of my constituents and the American people: bolstering a strong middle class, investing in job creation, and ensuring a secure retirement.

The American middle class is the bedrock of our society. But the Republican Budget fails to recognize this. It gives the bulk of its $4.6 trillion in tax cuts to wealthy Americans. It cuts $166 billion from Pell Grants and federal student loans, effectively telling students to think twice about a college education. And it puts job creation on hold by cutting $31 billion from transportation and infrastructure investment in the next fiscal year.

The Republican Budget also cuts $11 billion from science and medical research by 2014. The two largest employers in my district are Stony Brook University and Brookhaven National Lab. When you factor in the additional $1 trillion in unspecified non-defense discretionary cuts over 10 years, reductions like these jeopardize the economic recovery and stifle the advances that can make the United States a competitive force in a global economy. And yet, the Republican Budget does not ask those who have benefited from investments of this type made in the past to shoulder any responsibility in resolving our fiscal issues.

After decades of hard work and sacrifice by our Nation's seniors, the Republican Budget replaces Medicare's health coverage guarantee with a voucher to purchase traditional Medicare coverage or a private insurance plan. If one scrutinizes this proposal, they will discover the voucher will very likely fail to keep pace with medical inflation, thereby threatening seniors' financial security by forcing them to bear the bulk of their medical costs and even leaving some retirees without health insurance as the Medicare eligibility age is raised.

The Republican Budget also makes drastic cuts to Medicaid, jeopardizing the ability of seniors to access nursing home care and threatening the health coverage Americans with meager incomes rely on.

Mr. Chair, it is important that this Congress refocus our efforts on bolstering the middle class, investing in job creation, and ensuring a secure retirement. That is how we will build an economy to last and make a better future in America for our children. The Republican Budget fails at this, and I urge my colleagues to vote against the resolution.

I thank Mr. Hastings for yielding, and I apologize for my tardy arrival on the floor.

As Yogi Berra once said, it's deja vu all over again. Here we are a week later and we still have not addressed the imminent expiration of our highway programs.

As we witnessed with the implosion of H.R. 7 six weeks ago, we once again saw last night the inevitable result of the Republican mantra: My way or the highway. Last night, House Republicans were forced to remove from floor consideration their short-term extension bill, in part because they absolutely refused to reach out to their Democratic colleagues to get anything done. Meanwhile, I have sponsored the Senate bill, MAP 21--now called H.R. 14 here in the House--a bipartisan path forward that makes meaningful reforms and provides certainty to States.

I'm proud to be offering this bipartisan legislation to refocus the discussion on jobs and economic opportunities rather than the Republican message this week of tearing down Medicare and protecting the 1 percent at the expense of middle class families.

As of today, House Republicans have yet to put forward a credible highway reauthorization that puts Americans back to work. Their only attempt, H.R. 7, which is the Boehner-Mica authorization, was called the worst highway bill ever by United States Department of Transportation Secretary LaHood, who is a former Republican Member of this body. It was drafted in the dark of night without Democratic input. It removed transit, the transit guarantee, from the highway trust fund, and it couldn't attract a single Democratic vote nor even a majority of Republican votes.

MAP 21 passed overwhelmingly in the Senate with a bipartisan majority, a vote of 74 22, and it is fully paid for--something House Republicans seem unable to come close to. MAP 21 pay-fors are less controversial than the House Republican bill. The Senate has estimated that MAP 21 will save 1.8 million jobs and will create up to 1 million more jobs. During a weak economic recovery that's looking for a jump- start, this is the kind of bill we need to be passing and passing as quickly as we possibly can.

Is MAP 21 the silver bullet to our surface transportation needs? No, but there is no silver bullet when it comes to our infrastructure needs.

We all would prefer a 5-year bill, but we need to get a bill passed. MAP 21, H.R. 14, is the path forward. I would urge my Republican colleagues to bring that bill to the floor so that we can vote for it in a bipartisan fashion and send it to the President.

I thank Mr. Rahall for yielding.

I rise in opposition to H.R. 4239, the Republican 60-day highway bill extension.

As prime construction season begins, thousands of construction workers and their families will continue to struggle because our Republican colleagues would rather engage in hyperpartisan politics than put Americans back to work. Today's highway extension is yet another example of the failed leadership and absent policies of the Republican Party.

Unlike the successful bipartisan efforts of SAFETEA LU, TEA 21, and ISTEA that put millions of Americans to work and made our highways and transit systems the envy of the world, today's Republican extension merely allows the Nation to limp forward, impeding our ability to rejuvenate our economy.

Let me be clear. This extension does nothing to create jobs or provide certainty to States. It does nothing to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, and it does nothing to improve safety on our roadways and bridges.

It's been 6 weeks since the Rules Committee approved the rule for H.R. 7, the Republican highway reauthorization that was drafted in the dark of night and was passed out of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee without a single person other than Chairman Mica having read the bill. When our Republican colleagues finally did read the bill, they, too, were struck by the overwhelmingly negative consequences for many of their States. The bill has been in limbo ever since.

If the priority of the Republican caucus was to create jobs, they would immediately take up and pass H.R. 14, the bipartisan Senate highway bill that will save 1.8 million jobs and create up to another million jobs, supporting over 113,000 jobs in my State of New York alone.

If the priority of the Republican caucus was to reduce the deficit, they would take up and pass H.R. 14, the only proposal in town that is fully paid for.

If the priority of the Republican caucus was to provide certainty to the markets and the States, then we would take up H.R. 14, the 2-year Senate bill, and not the 60-day extension the House Republicans now propose.

H.R. 14 not only passed by an overwhelming bipartisan majority in the

Senate--74 22--the bill enjoys 114 cosponsors in the House.

As House Republicans continue to isolate themselves from the mainstream, Americans continue to wait for much- needed infrastructure jobs and the thousands of businesses they support.

I urge my colleagues to reject this shortsighted extension of our Nation's transportation programs and pass H.R. 14, the bipartisan Senate bill.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove the name of Mr. Pitts of Pennsylvania as a cosponsor of H.R. 3596.

I thank my friend from Florida for yielding.

Time and time again over the last several months, we have heard from Republican leadership. We've heard their talk about the highway bill, H.R. 7, and they've talked about it as their principle jobs bill for the 112th Congress. Well, here we are, March 21, 10 days before the expiration of the current extension of the surface transportation bill, and where are we with respect to this incredibly important jobs legislation? We're nowhere. We're absolutely nowhere.

As of today, House Republicans have yet to put forward a credible highway reauthorization that puts Americans back to work. Their only attempt, H.R. 7, the Boehner-Mica authorization, was passed on February 14 in the Transportation Committee--passed on a party-line vote with, in fact, a couple of Republicans voting against it. Then something happened on the way to the floor. On the way to the floor, the Republican leadership realized that they didn't have the votes on their side of the aisle to pass it.

And what about this bill? Well, Secretary Ray LaHood, a former distinguished Member of this body, Republican from Illinois, current Transportation Secretary, described it as the worst highway bill he's ever seen. He's been in public life for 35 years; he said it was the worst he's ever seen.

The bill was drafted in the dark of night without any Democratic input. Remarkably, it removed transit from the highway trust fund-- removed the guaranteed Federal funding that's been in place on a bipartisan basis for 30 years, removed it. It couldn't attract, understandably, a single Democratic vote; but they found out on the way to the floor that they couldn't get enough Republican votes to pass it either.

Now, I'm proud to be offering the Senate bill, MAP 21. We're calling it H.R. 14 here in the House. This bipartisan legislation should refocus the discussion on jobs and economic opportunities rather than the Republican message this week of tearing down Medicare and protecting the 1 percent at the expense of middle class families.

MAP 21, or H.R. 14, represents a bipartisan path forward that makes meaningful reforms and provides certainty to States. MAP 21 passed overwhelmingly in the Senate with a bipartisan majority. As you heard Mr. Andrews say, three-quarters of the Senate voted for this bill. It's fully paid for--something that the House Republicans seem unable to come close to achieving--and the MAP 21, H.R. 14, pay-fors are less controversial than the pay-fors in the House Republican bill.

It's been estimated that this bill will save 1.8 million jobs and create up to 1 million more jobs. During a weak economic recovery looking for a jump-start, why aren't we passing this bill? Why aren't we even debating this bill? Why are we 10 days away from the expiration of the current extension and there is no plan in this House to move forward?

Is H.R. 14 the silver bullet to our surface transportation needs? No, it's not.

I appreciate the gentleman for yielding.

There is no silver bullet when it comes to our infrastructure needs. I, and a great many others, would prefer a 5-year bill; but given the hyper-partisan fashion in which the House Republicans have advanced H.R. 7 and some of the deeply flawed proposals included in their bill, H.R. 14 is the only proposal out there that currently Democrats and Republicans can stand behind. Democrats will not wait around for House Republicans to pander to their base and chase ideological extremes. Americans want jobs and safe roads and safe bridges.

The Senate passed the biggest job-creating bill in this Congress by an overwhelming bipartisan margin. The House has done nothing. Let's get this country moving again by passing H.R. 14 so the President can sign it. Let's create jobs. Let's make it in America, and let's pass this bill.