Doug Bereuter

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member would ask his colleagues join in commending and congratulating a long-time employee in this Member's personal office, Ms. Robin Evans, who is retiring next week after almost 23 years of congressional service. This Member hired Robin on February 1, 1982, and she has worked for this Member continually since that time with the exception of a 9-month period when Robin tried working for the other body, but she saw the light and returned to the House and this Member's office as our Office Manager. Robin is one of those exceptionally outstanding employees who does her work exceptionally well and in a very professional manner. She is one of the most organized, conscientious, and capable people that this Member has had the pleasure to work with in his many years of congressional service. Robin will be greatly missed not only by this Member and this Member's staff, but also by the many people on Capitol Hill and in my constituency in Nebraska who have worked with her throughout these many years. Please join this Member in wishing Robin all the best as she returns to her home area on Maryland's Eastern Shore and embarks upon a new career with the Morgan Stanley office in Salisbury, MD.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his support and appreciate the assistance of the staff on both sides of the aisle as we moved in this direction.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the distinguished chairman of the committee.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be modified in the form at the desk.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes. Mr. Chairman, first, I want to thank the leadership of the committee for accepting the perfecting amendment. It does track the existing regulations. This amendment, based upon H.R. 871, which this Member offered last year, would assure that agriculture transporters would continue, that is the important part, would continue to be exempt from hours of service requirements when operating within a 100-mile radius of their point of origin during the very busy and at times short, weather- restrained planting and harvesting seasons of the year. This is a matter of great importance to the transporters of agriculture commodities and supplies as well as consumers. However, this amendment narrows the definition of commodities and farm supplies, and I think it is appropriate. The business of farming is driven largely by the weather and the significant demands of spring planting and fall harvest, and farmer's yields and the qualities of their crops depend, to a major extent, on timing. Planting, fertilizing, application of crop protection products and harvest all must be done at the right time, fitted in and around the ups and downs of weather. During the 1995 National Highway System Designation Act, this Member's initiative led to regulations creating the current exemption. This relief has been threatened by proposed changes to hours of service rules. The provisions to include this amendment are needed to safeguard the continuation of this necessary exemption and to provide a clearer definition and a more restricted definition of agriculture commodities and farm supplies. It is for this reason that I offer the amendment today. The legislation is supported by 40 cosponsors on a bipartisan basis. The chairman and the ranking member of the committee have received letters from about 35 organizations supporting the amendment. I ask for its approval.

Mr. BEREUTER. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, that is correct.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman very much. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the cosponsor of the legislation, the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm).

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, this Member rises in strong support of H.R. 3550, the Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users. This Member would like to begin by thanking the distinguished gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the Chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and the distinguished gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) for their extraordinary efforts in bringing this bill to the Floor. This Member would also like to express sincere appreciation to the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) and the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) for their hard work on this important legislation, which is designed to enhance our nation's highways, bridges, and transit, while improving safety and creating jobs. Clearly, a higher level than the nation currently spends on our highways and bridges is justified. Due to the dramatic deterioration of our nation's transportation infrastructure and the substantial growth of our population with attendant travel, our country must make a significant investment in our roads, bridges, and transit systems. This Member believes that is important to recognize that transportation funding must be based on needs. It is clearly necessary to address the very real and pressing transportation requirements of this nation. Substandard roads contribute to increased congestion and greater danger for motorists. Better roads improve safety and efficiency. It is important for the new surface transportation bill to not only maintain our current infrastructure of highways and bridges, but to improve it. Last year, the Federal Highway Administration released its 2002 version of the Conditions and Performance Report on the Status of the Nation's Highways, Bridges, and Transit. According to this document, the previous Highway Bill--TEA 21--has had a positive effect on improving road conditions generally. The report also noted that states and local governments have also increased their investment in transportation projects. Despite these improvements, the performance report stated, ``There is significant room for increases in highway capital investment that would result in positive net benefits to the American people, in terms of reductions in travel time, vehicle operating costs, crashes, emissions, and highway agency costs.'' Improving our transportation system is good for the economy and it benefits each American. In fact, accelerating the funding for transportation infrastructure is in itself one of the best economic stimulus actions. This Member would like to take this opportunity to mention several issues of importance to Nebraska and the First Congressional District. First, this Member is very pleased that TEA-LU authorizes funding to address the problem of railroad-highway crossings and the elimination of road hazards. This issue--which was the focus of the field hearing in Lincoln, Nebraska, last year--affects many states, but the problem is especially acute in Nebraska, which has 4,000 public and 2,700 private rail grade crossings. Nebraska has the highest number of rail/highway grade crossings per mile in the U.S. and has the most heavily used rail corridor in the nation. Nebraska is taking action to ensure that the safety issues surrounding the rail crossings are addressed. However, the state clearly lacks the financial resources to finance the hugely expensive program to reduce the safety risk associated with the more important of these crossings. Nebraska is served by both the Union Pacific and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroads. Combined, these railroads account for 70 to 140 trains per day using their two main lines across the whole west- east distance of Nebraska. The railroads continue to play an important economic role in the state, but additional, dramatically increased efforts must be made to improve the rail crossing issue. According to Nebraska Governor Mike Johanns, a state rail study found that public crossings are blocked by moving trains over 2,300 hours a day and that even in a low population state like Nebraska, its drivers spend an estimated 6,350 hours a day waiting for trains to pass. This problem will not go away on its own. In fact, the average coal train length has also grown from 110 cars to 135 cars, while the number of trains has doubled in the past 20 years. Governor Johanns has further noted that the State of Nebraska currently receives about $4.7 million of Federal and $3.3 million of state rail safety funds per year. However, the needs are much greater. The state's total rail/highway safety funding needs are more than $420 million which would cover just 85 possible rail/highway grade separations from a much larger total. This Member would also like to emphasize support for including in the final surface transportation bill the provisions from two bills he has introduced in the 108th Congress. This Member believes that it is important that the final version of the surface transportation legislation ensures that agricultural transporters would continue to be exempt from hours of service requirements when operating within a 100 mile radius of their point of origin during planting and harvesting season. This is a matter of great importance to the transporters of agricultural commodities and supplies as well as to consumers. Although the 1995 National Highway System Designation Act included my proposal which led to a rule creating the exemption, this relief has been threatened by proposed hours or services rule changes. This provision, based on a bill this Member introduced last year--H.R. 871--is needed to safeguard this necessary exemption and provide a clearer definition of ``agriculture commodities.'' The bill has been endorsed by the Agricultural Retailers Association and the Agricultural Transporters Conference of the American Trucking Associations. This Member also supports inclusion in the final version of the legislation a provision based on the ``Safer Roads Everywhere Act'' introduced by this Member last year. This proposal--H.R. 1226--is designed to enhance global traffic safety and would benefit Americans who are traveling or living abroad. The legislation also is designed to provide the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) with the authority it needs to conduct activities to improve worldwide traffic safety. Furthermore, it would provide the Department of Transportation with opportunities to gain knowledge about international traffic safety practices and programs which could be incorporated in the U.S. The bill is supported by the Association for Safe International Road Travel, the Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, and the Institute of Transportation Engineers. My staff has worked with NHTSA and the World Health Organization in developing the legislation. This Member is also supportive of a provision which is designed to improve public safety through improved enhanced emergency response and increased security of intermodal containers. This provision would also authorize a pilot project to demonstrate emergency communications systems that provide wideband, two-way information transfer capabilities. This Member is pleased that H.R. 3550 includes provisions approved by the Ways and Means Committee designed to address the ethanol issue as it affects the Highway Trust Fund. Importantly, the Ways and Means Committee increased the funding available for transportation while protecting ethanol by shifting the cost of the Federal ethanol subsidy from the Highway Trust Fund to the general fund. The Committee did this by creating an equivalent tax credit in place of the ethanol tax exclusion of 5.2 cents per gallon. In addition, the Committee transfers an existing 2.5 cents per gallon ethanol tax from the general fund to the Highway Trust Fund. These actions are important not only for transportation, but also for Nebraska's agricultural community. This Member is also very pleased that H.R. 3550 includes funding for several projects which would provide significant benefits to the 1st Congressional District, Nebraska, the region, and the nation. Nebraska Highway 35--$13,000,000 The intent of the Nebraska Highway 35 project is to develop the most efficient route from Norfolk to South Sioux City. Currently, this route is comprised of several short segments of highway winding its way to the northeast. This project has significant regional and national importance. The 68-mile project will provide a more direct regional connection and greatly facilitate travel, for example, between the Twin Cities of Minnesota and Denver as well as regional north-south traffic. It is also a project of great importance to the area's local communities. The new corridor will provide significant safety, congestion mitigation, and economic development benefits and reduce travel time. The Nebraska Department of Roads classified the Highway 35 project as a ``planned expressway'' in 2001. Lincoln South Beltway--$14,566,300 The South Beltway is a vital component of Lincoln, Nebraska's long- range transportation plans and will be an important solution to the highway traffic congestion in a wide swath of central Lincoln with the substantial truck traffic resulting from the newly completed State Highway 2 Expressway connection to Interstate I-29 in western Iowa. The South Beltway is a vital component of the City's long-range transportation plans and will be an important solution to the traffic congestion that is beginning to affect this growing community. This Member has been personally interested in advancing this project, which will be beneficial to the entire region. Funding is needed to build upon past congressional support for the South Beltway. Antelope Valley (Lincoln)--$4,000,000 The Antelope Valley project is a comprehensive plan to protect and enhance highways and flood control in downtown Lincoln that has emerged from a partnership between the City of Lincoln, the State of Nebraska, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UN-L), the Lower Platte South Natural Resources District and the Army Corps of Engineers. The project involves transportation, flood control, and community revitalization, many portions of which must be developed concurrently for maximum efficiency. For Phase I of the transportation component of the Antelope Valley Project, funding is needed for a new north-south roadway and a new east-west roadway within the redevelopment corridor. Between $7-8 million in Federal highway funding has already been devoted to this large-scale project. Fremont Railroad Grade Separation--$1,807,300 Funding is needed to create a grade separation structure across a railroad corridor in the western part of the City of Fremont. This location is at the top of the Nebraska Department of Roads' list of grade separation needs across the state. The project will create significant safety and economic benefits. Louisville Bypass--$1,626,400 This project, which has the support of the Louisville mayor and city council as well as the Cass County Commissioners, to implement a Nebraska Department of Roads study, would relieve severe truck/traffic problems on Nebraska Highway 66 in the community and thus provide significant safety and economic development benefits for the area. This state highway is becoming more frequently used as a short-cut between I-29 and I-80 and that trend will accelerate when the two new Missouri River bridges in Sarpy and Cass counties are put in place. U.S. 34 Iowa/Nebraska Missouri River Bridges--$12,000,000 The distinguished gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) and the distinguished gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King), whose districts are also part of the site for the two-bridge, bi-state project across the Missouri River in Cass and Sarpy counties for access to I-29 support its construction as does this Member. The total funding represents the separate but complementary requests of the distinguished gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry), the distinguished gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King), and this Member. This important project is urgently needed to replace two obsolete and deteriorating bridges crossing the Missouri River. The construction of these replacement bridges will result in increased safety and improved economic development in the area. The agreement leading to this request for funding was the result of intensive discussions and thus it continues to represent the consensus of city, county and state officials as well as the affected Members of Congress. We believe it is the best approach for Nebraska, Iowa and the entire region. Pflug Road & I-80 Interchange--$3,000,000 A future interchange at Pflug Road would provide a major catalyst for the development of southern Sarpy County. The existing Pflug Road bridge over I-80 will be removed as a part of the I-80 widening project between Omaha and Lincoln. In order to accommodate the interchange, the new Pflug Road bridge will be constructed approximately \1/4\ mile to the south of the existing location. Currently, the nearest interchange south of Pflug Road is Nebraska Highway 66, which is about five miles southwest, while the closest interchange north of Pflug Road is Nebraska Highway 31, about two miles northeast. This Member is pleased to join the distinguished gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) in supporting this project. The total funding represents the separate but complementary requests of the distinguished gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) and this Member. Cordova Road--$1,500,000 This project would involve paving 5.5 miles of road north of Cordova to I-80. Paving this road would provide an important long-missing transportation link in Seward County, Nebraska, (and for areas south of the county) which currently lacks the funds to complete the project. It would also provide economic development benefits in the area. Nebraska Statewide Rural Transit Needs Assessment--$300,000 This project is needed to assess capital and operating financial needs of rural transportation in Nebraska. This Member would also like to express strong support for designating the University of Nebraska--Lincoln as a participant in the University Transportation Center (UTC) program. The UTC provisions in H.R. 3550 currently provide for a competitive selection process among the universities. However, if this process is revised and universities are designated in the final version of the legislation, this Member strongly urges that the University of Nebraska--Lincoln be included. UN-L is uniquely qualified to be included in the UTC program. UN-L has already developed a strong area of expertise in the area of transportation safety research; therefore, this Member believes that it would be an excellent addition to the UTC program. In recent weeks it has come to this Member's attention that an important project--Antelope Valley in Lincoln--may require clarifying language to help ensure that work may continue in a timely manner. This Member urges the final version of the legislation to include the following provision or something similar: (A) Antelope Valley Project.--The Secretary shall enter into an agreement with the Corps of Engineers to allow for the Federal flood control funds to be matched with Federal surface transportation funds as the non-Federal match. The Antelope Valley Project in Lincoln, NE, has successfully demonstrated the cost savings that can be derived from a coordinated effort between federal, state, and local agencies to study, plan, and construct a major infrastructure project that will mitigate flooding and transportation congestion while revitalizing the heart of downtown. This Member strongly supports H.R. 3550 and urges his colleagues to vote for it. Ms. DeLauro. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this legislation. Few responsibilities of the Federal government touch the lives of American families like funding for our Nation's highways. Whether you are a business owner moving product or a parent getting the kids to school before going to work in the morning, we all recognize the importance of well-designed and maintained roadways. And with almost 9 million Americans out of work and 47,500 jobs created for every billion dollars put toward federal highway and transit spending, we recognize that investing in our highways is an investment in our Nation's future, in our families and in our quality of life. While all of our States have transportation needs, by no means are they equal. At the same time I-95 truck traffic is expected to double in 10 to 15 years, the Northeast has one of the oldest highway and transit infrastructure systems, as well as some of the oldest and most heavily used bridges in the United States. Last week's fuel tanker crash on 1-95 in Bridgeport only highlighted these shortcomings, pointing to Connecticut's dire need for a viable alternative to our congested highways. I believe most members of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee would agree we should provide at least as much funding nationally as the other body has. I remain concerned about ongoing attempts to raise the minimum guarantee rate in this bill to 95 percent. Raising the minimum guarantee not only destroys the concept of needs-based aid, it does so at a time when assistance is most urgently needed. Mr. Chairman, as this legislation moves to conference, it is critical that we remain committed to providing funding to the States that require improvements the most. That is how this body can serve the Nation best, and that is what this bill should aspire to.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member would ask his colleagues join in congratulating Brad and Amy Williams of Cedar Bluffs, Nebraska, for being one of the four winners of the 48th Annual National Outstanding Young Farmers Awards presented by the U.S. Junior Chamber (Jaycees) and the John Deere Company. The 2004 awards event marked the 38th year that the John Deere Company sponsored the program, which is administered by The U.S. Junior Chamber (Jaycees), and supported by the Outstanding Farmers of America Fraternity and the National Association of County Agricultural Agents. Brad and Amy Williams both stated that they didn't think they would win. But win, they did. An AP wire article on the Williamses stated, ``The Cedar Bluffs couple underestimated themselves and their farming operation. Before the ceremony was over, they were in the spotlight.'' And, it is a well-deserved spotlight as the couple won the award by farming 2,015 acres of corn, soybeans and hay along with working a 2,700 swine farrow-to-feeder pig operation. In addition, the Williamses have increased their number of no-tilled acres during the past 16 years. In 2003, they used the no-till method on 65 percent of the 2,015 acres they farm thereby conserving soil moisture, reducing erosion and lessening soil compaction. In doing so, they also provided additional cover for wildlife including pheasants and quail. But, farming for Brad and Amy Williams is not just about conservation, it is also about keeping up with rapidly changing technology and becoming more efficient. In all of these areas, Brad and Amy Williams' efforts have paid off--not only in receiving this award for being Outstanding Young Farmers, but also about in being successful stewards of the land.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 558) welcoming the accession of Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. BEREUTER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 558, as amended.

Mr. BEREUTER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, this Member is extremely pleased to offer this resolution welcoming the accession to NATO membership of seven Central European democracies: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. Yesterday, these seven nations became America's newest allies when their prime ministers presented Secretary of State Powell with their instruments of accession. Secretary Powell recalled their struggle for freedom and promised that ``by joining NATO's bond of collective security, Article 5 and all, you will remain free.'' Later, President Bush yesterday publicly welcomed their leaders to the alliance on the south lawn of the White House. In his remarks, the President noted, ``The countries we welcome today were friends before they were allies, and they were allies in action before becoming allies by treaty.'' The decision to admit former communist nations from Central and Eastern Europe, Madam Speaker, into the Atlantic Alliance, is one of the great successes of American and Alliance foreign policy since the end of the Cold War. It is a bipartisan success promoted by Republicans and Democrats in the Congress and by both the Clinton and Bush administrations. It is also a success in which the House of Representatives has played an important role. Since 1994, the House has repeatedly declared its support for NATO enlargement and the fundamental role of NATO in transatlantic security. We recognize that throughout its history NATO has succeeded not only in keeping its MEMBERS free, but in extending that freedom to new lands that have long yearned for freedom's blessings. Already, the three nations that joined NATO in 1999, Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, have been contributing to the Alliance and its operations in Bosnian and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Afghanistan. Furthermore, Poland has been a major contributor to Operation Iraqi Freedom and currently commands a multinational force in south central Iraq. The current round of enlargement, the fifth in NATO's history, will further erase the dividing lines across Europe that were drawn at Yalta and will further extend the zone of peace and security in the North Atlantic region. Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia are already contributing to the Alliance, with each of these new allies contributing to one or more of NATO's ongoing operations. In addition, six of them have forces on the ground in Iraq. That is far from their only contribution. Last year as president of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, this Member traveled to all seven of these countries; and after those visits, this Member is confident that they and their membership will reinvigorate the Alliance. In fact, the new vigor is already being felt. Because the citizens of these new MEMBER countries have recent memories of living under oppressive dictatorships, they are especially committed to NATO and its collective defense guarantee. Having fought so long and hard to gain their freedom, they know how precious freedom is and how fundamentally important the defense of freedom remains. They have pledged that they are ready to defend their freedom and ours, and we are very fortunate to be able to call them our allies. In addition to noting the accomplishments of the incoming NATO members and welcoming their accession to the Alliance, this resolution also reaffirms the support of the House for the process of NATO enlargement and for keeping NATO's doors open. Finally, this resolution expresses our support for the remaining candidates for NATO membership, at this point, Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia. To ensure that the enlargement process continues after the accession of the seven new members, the resolution recommends that the leaders of the NATO nations at this summer's Istanbul Summit ``should agree to review the enlargement process, including the applications of Albania, Croatia and Macedonia, at a summit meeting to be held no later than 2007.'' This language is consistent with the language of the relevant communique from the 1999 Washington Summit at which Alliance leaders welcomed Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic to NATO membership. That communique called for a summit meeting to review the enlargement process to be held ``no later than 2002,'' that is, 3 years after that summit. Scheduling a 2007 enlargement summit would also establish a 5-year cycle for NATO enlargement. Three nations received invitations in 1997 at Madrid, and seven nations were invited in 2002 in Prague. This Member believes that this is a reasonable timetable, one that gives NATO time to incorporate the seven new members, while absolutely ensuring that the three remaining candidates are not forgotten and that they have met the necessary requirements to be full-fledged partners in NATO. Madam Speaker, yesterday was a historic day for America's seven newest allies as they joined the most successful Alliance in history and thereby secured the freedom that they had fought so hard to gain. This Member urges his colleagues to vote for this resolution in order to welcome these countries to NATO and to ensure that NATO's door remains open to Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, and probably to countries to follow. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BEREUTER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume for a brief set of comments, and I want to thank the gentleman for his outstanding statement and for his generous remarks directed toward this Member. I would say to the gentleman with respect to Iraq and with respect to Afghanistan, the two subjects that the gentleman addressed towards the remaining part of his time, I certainly am in absolute agreement. The gentleman will recall, of course, that the House and the Senate have both expressed their view that NATO should take a larger role in Iraq and that, in fact, we should call upon the resources of the United Nations where appropriate. I am sure the gentleman is concerned about the lack of resources from NATO countries being directed towards Afghanistan at this critical time. Madam Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield time shortly to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus), who is a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy and who had the experience of being an infantry officer in a combat unit stationed on the Czechoslovakian border before, in fact, the Wall came down and before we moved to now admit, some 3 or 4 years ago, the Czech Republic to NATO. The gentleman has taken an outstanding interest and involvement in the NATO Parliamentary Assembly as a rapporteur or co-rapporteur on a number of important reports for the Defense and Security committee and, I might also say, he has a special interest in our Baltic neighbors who are, by actions yesterday, joining NATO. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus). (Mr. SHIMKUS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BEREUTER. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for her kind remarks and knowledgeable comments. I thank my colleague from California (Mr. Lantos) again for his continued interest and leadership in this subject area. Madam Speaker, I urge all Members to support this resolution. I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 254) to authorize the President of the United States to agree to certain amendments to the Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the United Mexican States concerning the establishment of a Border Environment Cooperation Commission and a North American Development Bank, and for other purposes.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the chairman of the Committee on Rules. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and include extraneous material thereon.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this Member rises today to express his support for H.R. 254, as amended by the Senate. This bill makes necessary changes to the charter agreement of the North American Development Bank, or NADBank. This bill, which this Member reintroduced on January 8, 2003, contains legislative changes requested by the administration. This legislation passed the House on February 26, 2003. Over a year later, the Senate did pass H.R. 254, with an amendment, on March 12 of this year. First, this Member would like to thank both the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), the chairman of the Committee on Financial Services, and the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) for their efforts in bringing this measure to the House floor. I would also like to thank the following four members of the House Committee on Financial Services who are original cosponsors of this legislation: two distinguished gentlemen from California (Mr. Ose) and (Mr. Royce) and two distinguished gentlemen from Texas (Mr. Gonzalez) and (Mr. Hinojosa). All four of these Members, who provided valuable input into H.R. 254, have a distinct interest in this subject, as they come from a State, either California or Texas, where the NADBank is commissioned to work along the international U.S.-Mexican boundary. In addition to these Members, the following Members are seven additional bipartisan cosponsors of H.R. 254: the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank); the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bonilla; the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva); the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe); the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz); the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes); and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez). All of these Members, with the exception of the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), represent a portion of the U.S.-Mexican border. In this Member's opening statement on H.R. 254, he would like to briefly discuss the following three items: the background on the NADBank; the contents of H.R. 254; and the description of the Senate amendment to H.R. 254. First, as to background, during the 1993 debate on the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, environmental issues emerged. A particular concern was that NAFTA could result in the industrialization and population growth in the U.S.-Mexico border region, which could further exacerbate pollution problems in the area. In addition, during the NAFTA debate, some Members of Congress were concerned that the perceived lax enforcement of environmental laws by the Republic of Mexico would not be sufficient. As a result of these factors, which were raised in the NAFTA debate, the U.S. and Mexico agreed to create the NADBank which was charged with financing environmental infrastructure projects on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico international boundary. The NADBank currently assists communities within 100 kilometers of the U.S.-Mexico border by financing environmental infrastructure projects that address the need for waste water treatment, drinking water, and disposal of municipal solid waste. As the administration has testified, the NADBank's overall performance thus far has been inadequate and unsatisfactory. As of March 10, for example, of this year, the NADBank had approved only approximately $96.4 million in loans to projects and disbursed only $20.8 million in loans, despite having $450 million in scheduled paid- in capital and a total lending capacity of $3 billion. In order to address the inadequacies of the NADBank, U.S. President Bush and Mexican President Fox came forth with a joint agreement which was announced in Monterrey, Mexico, in March of 2002. Two of the provisions in this joint agreement require U.S. congressional approval as they are amendments to the Border Environment Cooperation Agreement which established the NADBank. Of the second thing, the legislation before us today includes the following changes agreed to by Presidents Bush and Fox. These provisions are as follows: Number one, NADBank would be able to make grants and nonmarket rate loans out of its paid-in capital resources with the approval of the board of directors. Currently, NADBank can only finance market rate loans. Two, the region that the NADBank serves will be expanded on only the Mexican side from 100 kilometers of the international boundary to within 300 kilometers of that boundary. With respect to the first legislative change, the administration believes that NADBank's current financial framework is having a limited impact in regions with high poverty rates. Communities in the border regions in many instances have been unable to afford market rate financing for environmental infrastructure projects. An element of the financing which involves grants and nonmarket rate loans will make the NADBank more affordable for the eligible communities. With respect to the second legislative change, the administration believes that the geographic expansion on the Mexican side of the international boundary will give the NADBank more opportunities to address a greater scope of environmental issues that affect communities along the U.S. and Mexican border. For example, with this change the NADBank will be better able to undertake projects that improve water use over a broader geographic area. Furthermore, H.R. 254 would also enhance congressional oversight through an annual reporting requirement on the subject of the NADBank by the Secretary of the Treasury to both the House Committee on Financial Services and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. Currently, there is no such reporting requirement. In addition to this report, H.R. 254 also includes four different senses of the Congress resolutions which address either water pollution or water conservation. Third and finally, the Senate amendment, which was authored by the distinguished senior Senator from Texas, would limit the amount of grants which can be given for any one project. The rationale behind this argument was to help ensure that NADBank does not run out of money by using grants exclusively for just a few projects. Specifically, the Senate amendment requires the U.S. representatives to the NADBank to oppose any proposal which would either: (1) Be for a project that is not being financed, in part, by loans from any source; or (2) for a NADBank grant to account for more than 50 percent of the financing for an individual project. The Senate amendment also includes an exception to this above rule, however. The U.S. representative to the NADBank cannot oppose a proposal if the President determines there are exceptional economic circumstances for making a NADBank grant, which does not exceed $250,000, and the grant is made for a project for which finding a loan is impractical. If the President would make this determination, the President must consult with the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and the House Committee on Financial Services. In conclusion, for the reasons stated and many others, this Member urges his colleagues to support H.R. 254, as amended by the Senate. We have been told that the President is eager to sign this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member rises to pay tribute to Dr. Brian Aprill, Captain in the U.S. Navy, on the occasion of his retirement from the U.S. Navy on May 1, 2004. Dr. Aprill has accompanied the House of Representatives' delegation to NATO Parliamentary Assembly meetings, on seven separate occasions, in his capacity as the delegation's physician. As Chairman of the House Delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, this Member would like to thank Dr. Aprill for his truly outstanding performance in his professional competence, good nature and fine assistance to the delegation which is greatly appreciated by all Members of the delegation. Dr. Aprill is a graduate of Whittier College and Washington University School of Medicine. Currently, he is the Staff Endocrinologist in the Endocrinology and Metabolism Division, Department of Internal Medicine at the Bethesda National Naval Medical Center. In addition, he is the Assistant Professor of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, and Program Director, Transitional Year Program. In 1991, Dr. Aprill received the Navy Achievement Medal and in 1996, the Navy Commendation Medal. This Member, in behalf of himself and the House delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, commends Dr. Aprill on his outstanding career with the U.S. Navy and wishes him well in his new capacity as a Staff Endocrinologist with the Frist Clinic in Nashville, Tennessee.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, this Member has been a strong supporter of regulatory burden relief for our financial institutions in the past. However, this Member will oppose the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2003 (H.R. 1375) because of the provisions which preempt the laws of over 30 states on either interstate bank branching, the bank acquisition ``age'' requirements or both. As a former State senator in the Nebraska Unicameral legislature, this Member believes Congress should continue to defer to State legislatures on these questions. Under current Federal law, State and national chartered banks can branch de novo into a new State only if the State explicitly permits de novo interstate branching. This provision of Federal law was enacted in the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994. Furthermore, under Riegle-Neal, bank holding companies are permitted to acquire an existing bank in any State. However, under this law, a state can adopt ``age'' laws which provide that a bank holding company located out-of-State can only acquire a bank in the State if the bank has been in existence for a certain amount of time (up to 5 years) as determined by the State. Section 401 of H.R. 1375 would preempt State laws as they relate to both interstate bank branching and the ``age'' requirement for the acquisition of existing banks. In the 107th Congress, this Member did offer an amendment on this subject during a Financial Services Committee Markup of the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2002. This Member's amendment would have deleted the provision of this bill which preempted the laws of States on bank branching and bank acquisition. Unfortunately, the amendment was defeated by a vote of 13 to 32. In conclusion, this Member will oppose H.R. 1375 because of the provisions in Section 401 which preempted the laws of over 30 States. This Member strongly believes that these banking questions should be left to our State legislatures.