Earl Blumenauer

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, today, I am introducing a resolution of inquiry regarding the recent reallocation of Transportation Security Administration airport screeners that is leading to massive cuts in screener workforce levels at Portland International Airport, in my district, and at many other airports across the country. This resolution directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to turn over to Congress all the information in his possession regarding this screener reallocation. Only with this information can our airport authorities ensure that they were treated fairly by this process and can Congress do its oversight job to ensure that our air transportation system is safe, efficient, convenient, and an engine of economic growth for our communities.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, had I been present for the three final votes on Thursday, September 8th, 2005, I would have voted as follows: Rollcall vote No. 462: I would have voted ``aye'' on H.R. 3668, the ``Student Grant Hurricane and Disaster Relief Act.'' Rollcall vote No. 463: I would have voted ``aye'' on H. Res. 428, expressing the sincere gratitude of the House of Representatives to the foreign individuals, organizations, and governments that have offered material assistance and other forms of support to those who have been affected by Hurricane Katrina. Rollcall vote No. 464: I would have voted ``aye'' on H. Res. 427, relating to the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, Head Start is a program with many success stories, providing more than 900,000 low-income children with comprehensive educational, medical, dental, and nutritional services. It is an investment in our future. I am happy to see some improvement offered in the School Readiness Act of 2005, such as abandoning block- granting, increasing accountability on academic performance and content, and teacher quality. Unfortunately, this bill falls short of the expectations set by my local community and I cannot support it. It does not go far enough in providing additional funding for teachers so they may acquire bachelor's degrees by 2011. In Oregon, only 58 percent of the eligible children are being served. Instead of focusing on getting more eligible children into the program, the Republican Leadership is once again attempting to repeal civil rights protections by introducing an amendment permitting religious organizations to use federal funds to discriminate in hiring and firing decisions. Faith-based organizations have long participated in the Head Start program and have successfully received federal funding without discriminating. Head Start is a bright light for families and children who need an extra boost into the future. It is a program that demonstrates that we care about all families within our communities. I cannot support a bill that discriminates and ignores equality protections.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, despite our recent flood insurance reforms, Katrina revealed that much remains to be done. Damage on a massive scale triggered payouts and borrowing that mean the program must be revised, including a significant one-time-only subsidy. We should reconsider who must be covered and how the insurance premiums will be paid as well as the tricky question of flood versus wind damage. And certainly more attention must be given to the role and responsibilities of communities to make their citizens safer. It is very likely that some of the weakest regulatory protections in the Nation contributed to the Katrina devastation. I urge my colleagues to join me in this critical effort to fix the flood insurance program today and reform it for the future.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, we are united not just in our compassion for the victims of Katrina, but a sincere interest in doing recovery right. Republicans and Democrats, both ends of the political spectrum, can agree that we do not want some Stalinist plan imposed on a manufactured community doomed to fail. We need the courage to be partners respectfully, the wisdom to define the role carefully, the stamina to follow through thoroughly, and the integrity to avoid partisanship. We must meet the immediate needs of the refugees affected; but we must restore communities that are stronger, safer, and more sustainable. We must involve all Americans with the skills and concerns starting with locals, wherever they may be. We must make this a model for how to do it right because it is not just about rescuing a damaged region; it is about how to make the Federal Government more effective.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chairman, I am proud to support H.R. 250, the Manufacturing Technology Competitiveness Act. In this era of globalization, Congress must make a commitment to providing the right incentives and resources to keep our manufacturing sector competitive. I have met with a group of public and private organizations in Portland, Oregon, the Manufacturing 21 Coalition, and was told that a skilled workforce and incentives for innovation are their priorities. This bill will provide funding for valuable research and development programs to develop new technologies and education dollars that will help ensure we develop a workforce that is able to efficiently work with new technologies. I was displeased to see that the Rules Committee ruled out of order some amendments that would have enhanced the benefits of this legislation. Nevertheless, I am pleased that the House is taking steps to ensure that we enhance manufacturing businesses in our local communities.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and for his courtesy in permitting me to speak on this proposal. I applaud what the committee has done, moving forward with specific tax relief that is going to make a difference for people in this devastated area. I am hopeful that this will signify the start of a creative effort on the part of a number of committees, people on both sides of the aisle, to figure out ways that we can have assistance that is commensurate with the challenge and, in fact, employs some of the techniques that we have used in other parts of the world. Some of us visited the tsunami-ravaged area days after that devastation, and we saw on the ground people in Indonesia, in Sri Lanka, and in Thailand that were being put to work virtually overnight with a cash-for-work program that had people doing essential labor- intensive work that made the community better so that the recovery could proceed. I would hope the creativity, ingenuity, and bipartisan spirit demonstrated by the Committee on Ways and Means on these important provisions could be extended to other committees, other parts of our organizational efforts here to have a program so that every able-bodied person in the three States who wants to be able to work restoring their community is given that opportunity. It will be far cheaper in the long run than employing expensive contracts from people out of State, and it will give people a sense of ownership and involvement, and it will get money circulating in those devastated local economies. Madam Speaker, I am hopeful that we will be able to use the creativity to bring other people together for a planning effort that involves the people in Mississippi, in Alabama, and in New Orleans, because we are going to be putting at least another $100 billion on the ground. We ought to make sure that this is not just a monument for rapid Federal reaction. It should be a model, for the very first time on this scale, taking this blank slate and working with the people who had their lives turned upside down, and making them full partners in putting the pieces back together.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, for several years I have come to the floor of the House using the perilous situation that faced New Orleans as a rallying cry for us to get our policies right dealing with water resources, floods, and disaster mitigation. We now have a wide variety of plans and proposals that are flying about, which is encouraging. But it is important that we do it right, that any plan that we undertake is comprehensive and harnesses the forces of nature to solve problems rather than create them. It is important that we start now with the vast sums of Federal money that is flowing into the gulf region, and it is critical that we involve the local people in shaping their own destiny. Last but not least, we must implement long overdue reform to the way the Corps of Engineers operates, and even more important, how Congress treats the Corps of Engineers. This will go a long way towards not just helping New Orleans and the Katrina damaged area; but it will make all our families safer, healthier, and more economically secure.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on this bill. Mr. Speaker, I have come to the floor of this House repeatedly over recent years using this specific example of New Orleans as a call to arms to change how we do business. I cannot tell my colleagues how disappointed I am that we are having before us today a proposal that does not provide an opportunity for this Chamber to adequately discuss what is at stake and to deal with opportunities. The devastation of Hurricane Katrina has presented us with an unprecedented opportunity to focus the spotlight of public attention and political concern on how to do not just the best job of helping the victims of this tragic storm but in making it less likely that others suffer needlessly in the future. Preventing future devastation is the best way to honor the memory of thousands who have died and respect the losses of hundreds of thousands or more who are living. But we are not going to have the opportunity now to come forward with important issues that bear on over $50 billion. We need to be debating how the Federal Government can use taxpayer dollars to put people, places, and property back in harm's way. We should be working to make sure that citizens are directly engaged in the work of disaster recovery and mitigation, planning the future of their communities and putting them to work immediately, the same way I saw when I was in the tsunami region earlier this year. In just 1 week we were already putting tsunami victims to work on a cash-for-work program restoring their communities. We need to clarify the role that the Federal Government is going to play in disaster prevention, mitigation, and relief because we are throwing billions of dollars at problems that we could have taken steps to minimize in the beginning. Congress should encourage and support State and local responsibility for disaster prevention, mitigation, and recovery; and we must employ natural solutions wherever possible. We cannot do that today. There is no reason that we are not able to have a rational discussion. I hope this is the last time the Committee on Rules treats us this way.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in permitting me to speak and allowing this to move forward. I appreciate his leadership and partnership with the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Oxley) and the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Ney) for the follow- through on the important flood insurance reform that was, as he mentioned a moment ago, enacted this last year. The committee has been focused on making sure that the promise of flood insurance reform is, in fact, realized. While our hearts go out to those who have suffered what has happened in the gulf region, I think the spotlight of this terrible catastrophe will help us follow through on the important work that we have started with the committee and in terms of dealing with the flood insurance program. I acknowledge that what we are doing here today is an important, necessary step. The additional $2 billion in borrowing authority is unprecedented, but the floods are unprecedented. I think we should acknowledge on the floor that this is just the down payment; that the $2 billion, by no stretch of the imagination, is likely to be enough. We are probably going to be back asking for another $2 billion or $4 billion before we are done, but it is important to allow FEMA to move forward at this point. I hope that this will enable us to provide a platform for further reform. I hope, and I appreciate the prodding that the subcommittee did earlier with FEMA and its performance. It is appalling to me that FEMA never pushed forward requesting the mitigation funds that were authorized. Now we have the money in the House version of the appropriations bill, but we need to move forward to see to it that this Congress puts money in place that will move people out of harm's way. I hope the committee will work with us to look at other adjustments that may be necessary in the flood insurance program. Certainly the notion that people who live protected by levees, and I use the term ``levee protection'' advisedly, may not need flood insurance. Well, I think we are seeing an example of where, in fact, they probably do need flood insurance. I think there are other questions that we need to explore. I know the Committee on Financial Services is exploring other aspects; and I appreciate consultation with the gentleman from Massachusetts (Ranking Member Frank), is about issues in terms of the viability of small financial institutions that have been wiped out. Well, I hope that with the same spirit of necessary reform and accommodation, we can look at how we finance the flood insurance. Can we afford to put $2 billion, $4 billion, $6 billion of additional flood losses on the backs of 4 million policyholders? It seems to me from a distance that that would be both unfair and undesirable. I hope that this is the first step to be able to move forward with these longer-term reforms. I appreciate the work that the committee is doing. I appreciate moving forward with this expeditiously, but our work has just begun, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on these next important steps.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, as we all reel from the devastation of Katrina, what is surprising is that so many claim to have been surprised by an event both predictable and inevitable. This is the moment when the Nation's attention is trained upon not just this tragedy but what we must do to prevent future unnecessary suffering and loss. Today with a majority of Americans at risk from natural disasters, this is more important than ever for us to get the job done right. Four years ago, we got it wrong as FEMA lost its focus in the vast Homeland Security bureaucracy. We need to listen to each other this time and to the consensus of independent experts. We need to deal with the long term and to find an appropriate Federal role. We need to use the forces of nature to protect against the power of nature. We must assure that each step along the way that we take as a Congress leaves our communities more liveable and our families safer, healthier, and more economically secure.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on this resolution. The devastation of Hurricane Katrina has presented us with an unprecedented opportunity to focus the spotlight of public attention and political concern on not just doing the best job possible for the victims of this tragic storm but make it less likely that others suffer needlessly in the future. I think that this is the best way to honor the memory of the thousands who have died and respect the losses of tens of thousands more who are living. I agree that the last thing we need to do is to jump to conclusions or be satisfied by drawing up a list of suspects responsible for what went wrong. There will be plenty of time to do this as the sad tragedy continues to unfold; but after having been in Congress for a decade, the greatest danger now I fear on the floor of the House is that we, under the pressure, will adopt a quick fix so that Congress looks like it is doing something. While we focus relentlessly on rescue and relief, it is not too early to think about how to make sure that not only the residents of the Gulf of Mexico States are better off in the long run, but that all Americans are safer and more secure. What is frustrating for me is not that this was just so obvious. I am tempted to ask how any official could assert the failure of the levees was unforeseen. Steps could have been taken to moderate the losses. I truly believe that thousands of people were killed, injured or lost their homes unnecessarily, and we must assure that it never happens again. As Members of Congress, we are all concerned about the administration's well-publicized problems with performance, but I also know that long-term security must also start with State and local governments who must pay careful attention to making sure that people are not put in harm's way in the first instance. Businesses and individuals are going to have to share responsibility for their actions and their policies. I am also concerned that we here in Congress acknowledge our responsibilities, because ultimately they are our budgets. We establish the Corps of Engineers' project list. We are the ones who put FEMA into the Department of Homeland Security. It is important for us to draw the right lessons from this situation. The rushed reaction to 9/11 put FEMA in a flawed Department of Homeland Security, which haunts us today and contributed to the misery of Katrina's victims. We should establish fundamental principles from the outset that guide reconstruction. One critical overarching principle which is obvious, but sadly has not been practiced in the past, is that there should be no Federal investment that merely puts people back in harm's way and leaves the environment the same or worse than before. Our investments and our actions must leave people and the environment better than it was before. We must make a commitment for what we do in metropolitan New Orleans and indeed throughout the tri-State region of devastation to be a model about how to do it right. We must use this specific opportunity on a broad level to do the planning correctly. As someone who has been working on these issues since long before coming to Congress, I look forward to working with all my colleagues, for we must come forward with our suggestions to advance the serious discussions and highlight the critical elements that must be included in any final plan. We must, at the end of the day, make sure that these communities are more livable and that all these families, indeed all American families, are safer, healthier, and more economically secure.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the leadership. I want to acknowledge the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert). I know the gentleman has played a key role; perhaps unlike any Speaker in history, with the difficult dynamic we had, he played a key role. I appreciate the committee leadership that has been acknowledged. I would also like to express my appreciation for what people out in the country did. We have assembled the largest coalition in support of infrastructure investment in the history of the United States. Groups that ranged from the Women's Federated Garden Club of America, organized labor, environmentalists, people who move freight, people who build the facilities all came together with community activists to provide a critical push, given the political difficulties that all have acknowledged. It was testimony also to the people who know how important these transportation investments are. I appreciate being able to have a series of things in this legislation that I care deeply about. I have been working on small starts legislation that would help with streetcars, with commuter rail, with bus rapid transit, and I appreciate the committee having 3 years of investment that is going to help give communities more choices. And certainly with the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and the ranking committee member, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), we were assured that this was going to be the best bicycle bill in the history of the United States, and we have it. I am also appreciative that we have been able, through all of the travails, to keep the fundamental framework of the historic 1991 ISTEA legislation. This legislation produced the flexibility, it produced new tools for communities, it had a bias for being able to plan and put together the pieces right. We have had lots of upheaval in Washington, D.C. and in the countryside since 1991. It has not been without controversy, but the basic framework is intact. And it means, even though this is not as much money as I would like to see us invest in America's infrastructure, it will be spent more efficiently in ways that communities want. Because it has taken us 2 years to get to this point, one other thing should be reflected upon. We only have 4 years before we are doing it all over again. I hope that we take this time, learn from the experience, keep the coalition alive in Congress and in the country to make sure that when we come back here in 4 years, which is, sadly, a very short time in terms of major policy, that we are able to build on this, not get hung up over the level of funding, and that we are able to deal with critical questions that cry out for adjustment. We need to think about what the appropriate role is for Federal oversight. There is a lot of work that is done with the Department of Transportation, frankly, that costs people money in time and energy that may no longer be necessary. I hope we are able to look at that role and gear appropriate Federal oversight in ways that add value, not take it away. I think it is time for us to look at the match methodology, to have a uniform set of match provisions so that we are not affecting the transportation decisions based on how many dollars we give to the particular project. We need to develop more new tools like the Small Starts project. We have to critically focus on urban freight mobility. This legislation moves us in the right direction, but we have a long way to go, and I do not think individuals have spent enough time and energy working in their own districts to craft the appropriate solutions. We need to look at the critical connections and refine the connections between rail, air, and roads. The Speaker referenced them in his presentation, but it is not just investing in each of them, it is how they fit together and enhance one another. Mr. Speaker, there is no better Federal investment than in infrastructure that deals with the environment and transportation in communities. Spent properly, it is the best dollar spent to strengthen that community, make our families safe, healthy, and economically secure. This bill is a step in the right direction, and I look forward to working to make sure that it is implemented properly.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, when Congress passed ISTEA, it revolutionized policy and how our transportation dollars are spent. Congress said that we were not just investing in highways, we were going to fund a broader range of transportation modes that truly help to build more livable communities. Transit, bikes, pedestrian access, a greater role for planning and coordination so that we make sure that we are doing the right thing to improve neighborhoods, protect the environment, provide working families with better access to jobs--these were key elements in the original legislation. I am very happy that TEA-LU continues to move us in the right direction as a nation. The team from Oregon, the entire Congressional delegation, played a critical role in making sure that this bill maintained the funding flexibility and innovative tools that Oregon has come to rely on. We also worked hard to maximize the impact in our State and the Portland Metropolitan area. The most important element is making sure that Oregon gets its fair share, which has been achieved in no small part due to heroic efforts on the part of Peter DeFazio, who played a critical role in negotiating the final elements. The Oregon Senators recently released a joint list of over $100 million of projects of statewide significance with a number in the Portland metropolitan area. We have all worked to make sure that regional highway and transit projects are able to move along in times of difficult funding at the State level. I am particularly pleased that we were able to secure authorization of the next round of expansion for the MAX light rail system. There are streetcar provisions that will help continue Portland's growing and nationally significant streetcar, so critical to the revitalization of neighborhoods. There are also elements that deal with vital freight movement and efforts for programs of statewide significance. There's also important bike funding, including safe routes to school and work that I had done with Congressman DeFazio to create a bike route from The Dalles to Eugene along the scenic Columbia River highway and down the Willamette Valley. Most important, the delegation's work together has enabled us to begin laying the groundwork so that we will be in a stronger position from a local level and for Federal policy when it comes time for the next reauthorization. Since the current bill has been delayed for nearly two years with eleven extensions we will be right back in this process in just a couple of years, so it is critical that we take advantage of these investments and continue an aggressive future program.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, an essential component of livable communities is the ability to avoid, withstand and quickly recover from disaster events. Today I am joined by my colleague from Pennsylvania, Curt Weldon, in introducing the Safe Communities Act 2005. This bill will give communities the tools to help them plan for and reduce the impact of disaster events. The Safe Communities Act will create a new grant program to support state, local and regional planning activities aimed at reducing threats posed by natural and human-caused disasters. Grant-eligible projects include: comprehensive risk assessment and inventory of critical infrastructure, land-use planning for natural hazards and terrorism security, updating building codes and urban design techniques for risk- reduction. The bill will also create a research program to investigate the best practices in comprehensive land use and community planning aimed at reducing threats posed by natural hazards and acts of terror. The number of people who live in harm's way is expanding dramatically; more properties and more lives are at risk from both natural and human-caused disasters. It is estimated that almost 75 percent of our communities are at risk for some type of natural disaster, be it wildfire, hurricane, flooding, or earthquake. Rising disaster-recovery costs impact us all: taxpayers, the financial services and insurance industry, as well as local communities. Federal investment in natural disasters should include prevention and mitigation as well as response and recovery. Investment in prevention can save money in the long-term: The World Bank and U.S. Geological Survey have estimated that $40 billion invested in risk reduction strategies could have saved as much as $280 billion in worldwide economic losses from disasters in the 1990s--a $7 return for each dollar invested. I hope that this bill moves quickly through the legislative process so that the Federal Government can be a good partner to communities to help them prepare for and prevent natural disasters.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on the rule on the energy bill. One is just struck by the rhetoric surrounding this because only people who are captive inside the beltway bubble would believe the rhetoric about this being a positive development for our country. People do not have to take the word of politicians for this. Any person can deal with reputable independent analysis from academics, from scientists, even looking at conservative think tanks to find out that the arguments are not sustainable. This is, unfortunately, serious business. It is not just a list of special tax breaks and dodging hard issues. This is serious business for our country because our addiction to huge amounts of foreign oil that come from unstable parts of the world dooms us to costly dependency and means that we will continue to finance both sides of what they used to call the ``war on terror.'' This bill has no vision of a sustainable energy future for renewables and meaningful conservation, not window dressing but meaningful conservation. People are lining up in this country to buy energy- efficient vehicles that are only available by a handful of producers, and there is an opportunity lost to change that in terms of fuel efficiency. Ten percent of the world's supply of oil is dealt with in our addiction to inefficient energy transportation. We are even falling behind not just the developed countries like Germany and Japan who have much more efficient use of energy; we are falling behind emerging countries. People on the floor are apoplectic about China buying an oil company, Unocal. Well, China at least is getting its energy house in order. As an emerging country, it has officially committed to a much more dramatic and aggressive program for renewables than the United States. This bill is not an energy policy. It is a list of tax breaks and special interest favors that does not by any stretch of the imagination translate into a cohesive approach which global reality today demands for this country, demands for any country. It spends over $7 billion in subsidies to oil companies, the most profitable sector of our economy already flush with cash. I will not detail the harmful provisions that are going to come forward that are unnecessary exemptions for the oil and gas industries for compliance with the Clean Air Act, the backdoor immunity to MTBE producers and distributors that unfairly and inappropriatly denies injured parties. That will be discussed, I think, further here in the course of the debate. But the point that I want to make is that instead of being a milestone for energy policy in this country, people will look back at what Congress does--because I have no doubt that the rule will pass and the bill will pass--but it will be inexcusable, inexcusable, as people are asked by our interns in the future, by our constituents, by our children, how could we be so wrong-headed? What should have been a milestone for energy policy at this critical time will instead be a tombstone, a monument to an energy policy of previous decades that we will enact to the detriment of our economy, the environment, and our children for years to come.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I do not mean to belabor this. I have great respect for the skills, the great skills, of the chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee. But it is just laughable to suggest that this is not your bill if you think you ought to dictate to the American public that you have to drive a car that gets 55 miles to the gallon, as if that were the only choice. A meaningful choice to raise CAFE standards the way other countries have done to their great advantage. That would have made more choices available to the American public and is something that is within our power, that we could do. It has nothing to do with forcing Americans to drive a car that gets 55 miles to the gallon. But the lack of a meaningful policy dealing with vehicle efficiency means that it is very difficult. There is a huge waiting list. It took me 6 months to get a hybrid SUV. We are dropping the ball here. As to the notion that this is the best opportunity in terms of renewable energy, talk to the people in the industry who are ready, willing and able. Ask them if it is the best bill ever. That is not what I hear from people in this industry. I respectfully disagree.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, there are two ways of dealing with the medical malpractice problem. One is to take the approach that the House Republican leadership has chosen for years; a narrowly drawn proposal that appeases their partisan supporters but doesn't solve the problem. As I said last year, the rationale was weak and there was little evidence it would succeed. Instead, it may do more harm to the health care community and doctors. Most important, because it is so narrow and partisan, it's very unlikely to become law. Pushing a political solution is the approach that has been tried repeatedly and is what Oregon voters rejected again at the polls last year. The other approach is to work cooperatively, bringing people to the table to make progress. This is what appears to be happening in Oregon in the aftermath of the last defeat. In Oregon, doctors, hospitals, and other healthcare professionals are working with consumer advocates, trial lawyers, and people from government to fashion a solution that is acceptable; to make progress building on cooperation and trust. Between the two approaches it's clear that the narrow, partisan, and unbalanced approach is not only questionable on its merits, but is a political dead end. I see no reason to change my longstanding opposition to both the narrow solution and to the approach that created it. Given the nature of the crisis of healthcare in the United States, the problems will only get worse; politicizing them will only put off the day when real progress is achieved.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, when it has never been clearer that the United States needs to catch up to the rest of the world dealing with energy efficiency and global warming, even the supporters of this legislation agree with the taglines in the New York Times and the Washington Post, ``it is not a disaster'', ``it could have been worse''. Forget about explaining to our grandchildren; how will the Members of this Congress explain to next Congress' interns about why we settled for the lowest common denominator, continued to finance both sides of the war on terror with our continued dependence on Middle East oil. If we could not get landmark legislation, hopefully this bill will be a tombstone for the energy policy for the last century.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I take my 1 minute today to discuss CAFTA because there will be little meaningful debate on the most important trade bill of this Congress. CAFTA is important less because of what is in it than what is not and because what it has come to represent. I come from a trade-oriented community, and I believe in honest trade. I personally asked President Bush to insist upon bipartisan trade legislation that would command at least 250 votes in this Chamber. This is possible if we are fair to workers at home and abroad and more sensitive to the environment. Instead, CAFTA has been crafted to be the lowest common denominator calculated to pass. By pandering to special interests, it reminds one of the old television show ``Let's Make a Deal.'' This is a lost opportunity. I will no longer support suboptimal trade agreements and await the day when we put principle and people before raw political calculation, pretending that it is trade policy.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I am about to cast my first vote ever against a trade agreement. While this has very little impact overall in the United States economy, it is very important for the direction of our trade and economic policy. Are we going to continue to parcel out piecemeal agreements? When pushed, are we going to cut side deals and understandings like we have done of late with citrus and steel and textiles and sugar? Are we going to fail to own up to our own agriculture subsidies? We do not do a very good job in this country anymore enforcing our own labor laws. I am no longer interested in one more suboptimal agreement. Because it has such a small impact, there is no excuse for not advancing workers and their environment at home and abroad. There is no reason to settle for this agreement, and I urge its rejection.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on this rule. I rise in support of the approach that has been taken. I add my praise for the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), for the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), for the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), for the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), for people who have labored long and hard dealing with the first post office update in over a third of a century. What we have before us is a carefully balanced effort to update and modernize this critical service. I became involved with this effort when I first came to Congress 10 years ago, dealing with one specific element of focus, and that is to make sure that the post office, the local post office, which is the cornerstone of a livable community in small neighborhoods, in small- town America, in downtowns, that those 38,000 postal facilities in every way were assets to the community. Sadly, what we found was a litany of efforts in the past where the post office basically did not play by the rules. It was idiosyncratic. Local land-use decisions were turned into political footballs. We had a series of efforts where the post office unfortunately ignored environmental regulations, local needs and desires. We set about to fix that with legislation that basically would have required the post office to play by the same rules as the rest of America. I will say over the course of the 10 years, working with some of the colleagues that I mentioned, working with the Board of Governors of the Postal Service, working with three Postmasters General and others who are active in this effort, that we have come a long way. In fact, in many areas of the United States, we have seen examples where the post office has taken seriously its responsibilities and has been a model player providing that essential cornerstone. It is important that this not be idiosyncratic. It is important that this approach, this way of doing business, must be codified into law so everybody can be protected. One of the reasons I support H.R. 22 is because it does just that. It requires the post office to obey zoning, planning, environmental regulations. It will be better for the post office; it is better for our communities. But I want to go a little beyond that, because as I have been involved, I have been struck with the importance, not just in bringing up the physical facilities of 38,000 postal offices around the country, but to be active in terms of the change that is taking place. The United States Postal Service occasionally comes into criticism by people who are concerned about it, but the fact is the post office handles one-half of the mail in the entire world. They collect only one-quarter of the revenue; they have less than a fifth of the work force; they are more than three times as productive as postal services around the world, and their rates are lower than any other of the developed countries. It is also important that we are ready for the changes that are cascading down upon the Postal Service. The status quo is not tenable. This legislation recognizes that. I strongly urge, however, that as we come forward with a range of amendments that they be rejected. I appreciate that they are well- intended. Some of them in other contexts I may be interested in, but this is part of this carefully crafted balance. It is important that we not upset the apple cart. It does not take much to derail it. It has been a hard pull to get to this point. I strongly urge that we support making the post office a full partner, that we resist amendments that would upset the balance, and that we can all be, after the approval of H.R. 22, the modernization, so that we can be about the business that is going to have to go on from here. Because there is more work that is going to be done. Controversy is not going to go away. Luckily, this legislation provides a platform that is going to help us all do this important work.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, today we will be considering important legislation dealing with the modernization of the Postal Service. It contains some important provisions I have been working on since I came to Congress to make sure that the postal facilities, which are the cornerstone of a livable community, are, in fact, playing by the same rules as the rest of America. Too often the Postal Service has not played by those rules, with bad results in site location, building and remodeling. While the Postal Service has made some improvements in recent years managing these facilities, this legislation makes clear that the Postal Service will obey local land zoning, planning and environmental regulations, very important developments, playing by the same rules as the rest of America. It will hasten the day when the U.S. Government itself as the largest landlord, landowner and employer, will lead by example, and behave the way we expect the rest of Americans to behave. It will not cost any extra, but it will help make American families safer, healthier and more economically secure.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that while we are in the midst of a healthcare crisis for the uninsured, for small businesses, and for practitioners, Congress is recycling the same flawed legislation. The proposal would allow association health plans to bypass the State solvency framework requirements, leaving the consumers at a significant risk. The reason that over 1,350 business, labor, and community organizations oppose H.R. 525--including organizations such as the National Governors Association, 41 Attorneys General, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, Blue Cross/Blue Shield, National Small Business United and 69 local Chambers of Commerce--is because it not only misses the point, it will make things worse. The bill would undermine our efforts to provide essential services to everyone by providing incentives to insure only the healthiest and wealthiest, leaving the vast majority of over \1/2\ million uninsured Oregonians and 45 million uninsured Americans behind. Even worse, the adverse selection process will mean that the insurance pool will be narrower and sicker, resulting in more expensive insurance for most families. Furthermore, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that 8 million individuals who currently have health coverage will be switched to a lower benefit plan. Consumers may be denied the proper screening, procedures and treatment they deserve. These are critical issues for taxpayers and businesses alike. I will continue to work with the healthcare and business community to produce the type of process, discussion and legislation Americans critically deserve.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I came to Congress to help the Federal Government be a better partner and make communities more livable. One of the simplest ways to achieve that objective does not require new rules or regulations. It simply requires that the Federal Government follow the same rules as others. Well, H.R. 22 contains language from the Community Postal Partnership Act which I first introduced in the 105th Congress. It requires the Postal Service to abide by the same zoning and land use laws as everybody else and requires that the Postal Service garner input from communities on proposed changes for facilities. We have had tremendous support for this concept, from homebuilders, the National Association of Postmasters, the Trust for Historic Preservation, Realtors, landscape architects, planners, and from within the postal community itself. Good government organizations across the country have joined with mayors and local officials who understand that the over-37,000 postal facilities are not just remote outposts of Federal activity. They can, often are, and always should be centers of community activity. This legislation has had bipartisan support from the majority of the House of Representatives and has passed the Senate, only to become victim of the politics of postal reform which I am pleased the committee has been able to sort out. It is time, however, to make this relationship something that every community can count on. It should not be the exception, nor should it require extraordinary political action. There should be no variation in the commitment to provide the finest facilities that are part of each and every community. I am happy that the committee has chosen to include this language in the comprehensive postal reform bill. In turn, I think it is essential that we recognize the valuable service provided by the Postal Service. It delivers more items in one day than Fed Ex does in a year; it manages half the world's mail with one-fourth of the revenue and a fifth of the workforce. It is important that we not just applaud these accomplishments, but give the Postal Service the tools it needs to continue to deliver its valuable service. This bill accomplishes that goal. It is a delicately balanced compromise which I hope the House will support, rejecting amendments that would upset that balance, and build on this for a better Postal Service in the future.