Earl Blumenauer

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, this is one of those rare occasions where Congress can put everything together for a holiday gift for Americans. People in this city and across the country are obsessed with the concern to create jobs. It is appropriate and imperative that we do so. All the objective evidence suggested that the economic recovery package made a huge difference, but not enough.NOTICE If the 111th Congress, 1st Session, adjourns sine die on or before December 23, 2009, a final issue of the Congressional Record for the 111th Congress, 1st Session, will be published on Thursday, December 31, 2009, to permit Members to insert statements. All material for insertion must be signed by the Member and delivered to the respective offices of the Official Reporters of Debates (Room HT-59 or S-123 of the Capitol), Monday through Friday, between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. through Wednesday, December 30. The final issue will be dated Thursday, December 31, 2009, and will be delivered on Monday, January 4, 2010. None of the material printed in the final issue of the Congressional Record may contain subject matter, or relate to any event, that occurred after the sine die date. Senators' statements should also be formatted according to the instructions at http://webster/secretary/cong_record.pdf, and submitted electronically, either on a disk to accompany the signed statement, or by e-mail to the Official Reporters of Debates at ``Record@Sec.Senate.gov''. Members of the House of Representatives' statements may also be submitted electronically by e-mail, to accompany the signed statement, and formatted according to the instructions for the Extensions of Remarks template at http://clerk.house.gov/forms. The Official Reporters will transmit to GPO the template formatted electronic file only after receipt of, and authentication with, the hard copy, and signed manuscript. Deliver statements to the Official Reporters in Room HT-59. Members of Congress desiring to purchase reprints of material submitted for inclusion in the Congressional Record may do so by contacting the Office of Congressional Publishing Services, at the Government Printing Office, on 512-0224, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. daily. By order of the Joint Committee on Printing. CHARLES E. SCHUMER, Chairman. As my friend and colleague Mr. DeFazio, from the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, has documented, the economic recovery package had only 4 percent of its funds dedicated for infrastructure, but it created 25 percent of the jobs. Mr. Oberstar, and Subcommittee Chair DeFazio, have been working for 3 years on the reauthorization of the biggest infrastructure package that we will look at--the Surface Transportation Act. The evidence is that they are, literally, just weeks away from the opportunity to bring this legislation to the floor. At the same time, we see the consensus building, at least on the Democratic side of the aisle and with the administration, that it is time to revisit efforts to revitalize the economy, that the original economic recovery package simply wasn't big enough considering the problems that we were facing. There is an opportunity to take unused TARP money, part of the hundreds of billions of dollars that was set aside, to help the financial sector recover after it brought our economy to, literally, the brink of collapse. Well, we've seen at least that area stabilize. Some of the money is being repaid, and the balance is not likely to be needed for an economic emergency like we saw last year. So we should be able to take a significant portion of that unused TARP money and, rather than sending it to Wall Street, sending it instead to Main Street, perhaps to your street to be able to front-load the reauthorization of the Surface Transportation Act to be able to have 6-year funding certainty. This is a very important opportunity that we should not lose because, at a time when we are concerned about deficits in the Federal budget, there is a yawning deficit in the highway trust fund which simply is not going to be able to meet the current needs of America's highways and transit projects, let alone its future. At the same time, there is an opportunity for us to improve the Federal balance sheet. There is support for the concepts of having user fees that are available to be able to shore up those trust funds that fund infrastructure. For instance, the administration has placed in its budget the reimposition of the Superfund tax--a tax on the polluters who created these toxic problems all across America, a tax that expired years ago. The previous folks who ran this place would not allow us even to consider its reenactment. Well, it's in the President's budget, which is one example of where a simple action--having polluters pay--will be able to have the economic activity of cleaning up Superfund sites while we are shoring up the Federal budget. Madam Speaker, if we move forward with the reauthorization of the Transportation Act, if we deal with water infrastructure, if we beef up our economic recovery efforts, and reenact a Superfund tax, we will have an opportunity to invest in America's future and to put millions of Americans back to work. Unlike other areas of expenditure, this is truly an investment in America's future, which will generate other economic activities and will help the long-term fiscal health of our Nation while we strengthen our families and our communities. I hope there is a green light for floor time for the Transportation bill. I hope there is a commitment to front-load the Transportation bill with TARP money and that we can get a Transportation bill passed next month and on its way to the Senate so we can put America back to work.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, as we listen to the debate in the other body, there are two missing factors that would create the momentum for reform and revitalization of our health care. There is a stunning disconnect between the two sides on the nature of the problem and the impact of government's involvement in health care. Opponents argue, with apparent sincerity, that America has the best health care in the world and it would be ``destroyed by Federal involvement undermining the quality of existing care'', while supposed cost increases would make health care unaffordable for individuals purchasing insurance and ultimately for the taxpayer as well. What opponents describe could not be more different from what my research, my constituents and my personal experience tells me. For many in Congress, there is no sense of urgency to compel action because Members of Congress are perhaps the most health care secure people in the world and all can enjoy the finest health coverage in the world. No one in Congress is likely to go bankrupt this year, or the next, from their preexisting conditions. It doesn't matter because all are eligible for participation in the Federal employees health benefits program. They are able to access the House physician. When they travel overseas, they have military doctors. About a quarter of the House and Senate are eligible for Medicare and for veterans' programs. No wonder there's no sense of urgency, and Senators and Congresspeople can be sincere in their conviction that America has the best health care in the world. The disconnect is my colleagues' failure to recognize the government's role in all that they enjoy. There is a simple solution to break this deadlock--support my bill to end government involvement in the health care of Members of Congress. I propose, until comprehensive health care reform is signed by the President, there be no Federal investment in health insurance for Members of Congress. No Federal involvement in negotiating their Federal Employees Health Benefits. They would not be eligible to be participating in the dreaded government single payer program--Medicare. There would be no veterans, no House physicians, no military doctors. Those, after all, are socialized medicine. Members of Congress would be in exactly the same position as over 200 million Americans who are currently underinsured, uninsured, or are relying on the good intentions of a spouse's employer, or their ability to negotiate insurance on the private market, contending with their preexisting conditions and the fine print. Mr. Speaker, I am absolutely confident that within 6 months of Members of Congress experiencing the health care world of most of America, dealing with the fine print, the preexisting condition, the uncertainty, the bureaucracy, we would have the consensus necessary to be able to move forward with the comprehensive health insurance reform that Americans want, need and deserve. I would urge my colleagues to join me in sponsoring this legislation to get government out of the health care of Members of the House and Senate until all Americans can enjoy such health security.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy as I appreciate his leadership on this issue. This is the culmination of a 12-year example of how not to create tax policy. I listened with interest to my good friend from Texas say, you know, they can do better than this bill. Well, ladies and gentlemen, they had 12 years to do better. And what did the Republicans do? They didn't reform the inheritance tax. What they did is they established a 10-year gain where it was reduced a little bit each year until next year it disappears, and then they give it back to the American people at a $1 million level and 55 percent marginal rate. That is the best they could do. And as my good friend from North Dakota pointed out, it's even worse than that because they would have 70,000, not 7,000, the top two-tenths of a percent, but 70,000 people who are the real small business, the entrepreneurs, be subject to a capital gains tax. And I will tell you that the tax itself is only the tip of the iceberg because it will be an accounting nightmare to go back and figure out what grandma paid or what Uncle Charlie paid for the asset. Some people will spend more time researching and on accountants than they will pay in the tax. That's the best that the Republicans could do. What Mr. Pomeroy and our committee have done is to take generous levels, $3.5 million per person, and exempt below that the administrative nightmare of the capital gains tax. Is it a perfect solution? No.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. But compared to the best that the Republicans could do for 12 years, it's night and day. With all due respect, declaring one of my heroes, Teddy Roosevelt, who brought about the inheritance tax, as being un-American is an insult to the Republican Party who knows that the vast wealth in this country, you don't get to be a billionaire on a W2. So a lot of this money was never even taxed once. Let's get a grip. Let's pass this bill and move on.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on this, as I appreciate his clarity in moving it forward. It is my privilege to represent part of Clackamas County in my congressional district. Now while I don't actually have the area in question, I have worked very hard with my colleague Congressman Schrader to make sure that the interests of this diverse county are, in fact, represented. And if one came from Mars and listened to the debate, they might be a little confused on this point. First, the land in question is not O&C land. It is BLM land. There is no fiscal impact here. There is no timber that is involved. I worked very closely with this county and have for decades. The county commissioners now, as they have in the past, have been very careful to heed the balance of resource protection, economic development, the environment, and tourism in the broad range of areas. I have worked with them on wilderness legislation, in wild and scenic legislation, including the one signed into law by President Obama at the beginning of this year. I have had times when they have been hesitant because they have had questions about whether the benefits of economic development of tourism, of wilderness protections, would offset potential loss of timber production. The county has gone through the process here yet again. It is their judgment, and one that I strongly support, that the resource protections to have this stretch of the Molalla River being granted Wild and Scenic protection is well worth it. There is a minuscule amount of land that would not be removed from potential harvest, but it's not going to be harvested now. It's not going to be harvested in the future. If the gentleman would come with me to Clackamas County, Congressman Schrader and I would be pleased to show him this precious resource and why there was never any question that this would not be harvested. So people can go on and confuse BLM land with O&C land. They can talk about their disputes with this administration and past administrations about timber practices. That's fair game. And they will battle that. Frankly, the American public supports wilderness protection. The American public wants the protection not just of Wild and Scenic Rivers but of our precious watersheds where half the people in my State get their water from national timberland. As my friend from California knows, this is a very sensitive issue these days. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support this rule. I am proud to support this underlying legislation. It has been carefully crafted by my friend, the gentleman from Clackamas County. He lives in this county not very far from the river that would be so designated. It is a testament to his quick assimilation into the ways of the House of Representatives, to be able to move forward with significant wild and scenic legislation, to be able to work with the local environmentalists, work with the county commission, to come forward with something that not only will protect a natural resource for years to come, but it is also going to enhance the local economy. This will in fact deal with the future of the children of Clackamas County because the economic development potential that will be generated by people who use this waterway, you come year round and not just in high water times, people navigate these waters in Clackamas County. It is a growing and thriving area of economic development, of recreation for people young and old, and for the character of a unique county in our State and in our Nation. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to speak in support of the rule, the underlying legislation, and I look forward to passage of both.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the courtesy and the leadership of my friend from Arizona in permitting me to speak on this bill. It is my honor to share the representation of Clackamas County, Oregon, with my friend and colleague, Congressman Schrader. While I don't represent this particular area, it is an area that is known to me and one that I am pleased that he has been able to assemble a broad coalition at home to have meaningful legislation literally within a few months of his joining this body. This is an area that should never be logged. That is one of the reasons he has been able to assemble a broad coalition of interests in our community to make sure that it is given the wild and scenic designation. I have worked for years with the Clackamas County Commission, a group of men and women that is very sensitive to the dynamics of forest resources, agriculture, and industry. Clackamas County is a very diverse area that represents Oregon itself. I have worked with them on a number of wilderness provisions, and I will tell you that the agreement of the Clackamas County Commission does not come easily. They want to make sure that they know what they are getting into. They want to make sure that they are protecting the economic resource base. They are well aware that some of the revenues that come from our national forest lands find their way into local communities, particularly education. That is why it took us years to work on legislation that President Obama signed into law in his first weeks in office with the National Wilderness Act. The homework has been done here. This is an area, as the chairman mentioned, as the sponsor mentioned, that is not affecting any, any, land that will be harvested now or, frankly, into the future. You ask the people in that community whether they would like to, at some point, risk this precious resource and they will tell you no. This is an area, however, that is going to generate a great deal of economic activity. The gentleman from Canby referenced the proximity to the metropolitan area, that people who are kayakers, hikers, fishermen, other recreationalists already flock to this year-round. The designation and the protection of the Wild and Scenic Act is going to enhance that. Now ours is a State, unlike my friend from the State of Washington, that has protected far more of their forest resources. Oregon doesn't protect that much. In fact, that is why we are working to provide a greater array of protections for recreation, for water resources. This is an important step. I would like to express my appreciation to the sponsor for zeroing in on this early, for assembling an unprecedented coalition in Clackamas County of people who understand this is important today and in the future. I appreciate his being clear that his county would not be at risk economically, raising the question and working with the committee and the administration to make sure that that is dealt with. And anybody who has watched the career of this gentleman over a decade in the State of Oregon knows that he is in tune with the district and their needs. He has a long record of working with the natural resource industries, most particularly the timber industry. Whether or not they happen to agree on any particular item, he has enjoyed the support and respect from the timber industry because he does his job right. And the committee and the sponsor have done their job right with this piece of legislation. It's going to make a difference for the county that we both represent and the State of Oregon for generations to come. I salute his leadership, and look forward to supporting it and hope that this is another signing ceremony that we can share at the White House.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy. This is a necessary budget adjustment, the consequence of the Republican gimmick that I voted against in 1993 because it was an artificial attempt that nobody had an expectation we were actually going to do. Indeed, every single year, except one, the Republicans blinked and kicked the can down the road. We are facing up to the problem today in a comprehensive way, not holding doctors and their patients hostage. Health care reform actually moves us in the direction to be able to reduce costs in the long term, and I'm optimistic that what the House has already done will move us in that direction. But whether or not reform is enacted, failure to pass this inflicts unacceptable damage on our constituents. This legislation gets us off the merry-go-round. I would strongly urge my colleagues to vote with us, my Republican friends not to vote ``no,'' but work with us with a strong, resounding vote of support, and then work with the Senate to adopt this reasonable long-term adjustment.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, it seems the issues that face Congress fall into two categories: the issues that are so great, so expensive, so contentious, so complex that they seem almost beyond our ability to influence--war and peace, the economy, climate change and, more recently, health care--too big and too controversial for effective, quick, meaningful congressional action. The other category seems to be the simple and the mundane, almost too routine--housekeeping, like renaming a post office. The truth is, we pursue both because they're an important part of our job and are important to the American public. We're not going to give up on the big issues of the day no matter how complex, controversial and frustrating because, after all, they are the big issues of the day. That's why we're here when even modest impact can have a huge ripple effect on lives around the world, the safety of Americans, protecting the public Treasury and our soldiers. A post office may seem mundane and trivial to some, but to the family of that fallen hero and community, it's very important indeed, as it is to all Americans who honor and respect that sacrifice. There is a reason for these items, low cost but high impact. Then there are vast numbers of issues that are sort of in between. Animal welfare is often put in that category, seemingly at times unimportant or trivial, tangential--except, of course, when it has a devastating impact on human health, safety and environmental balance. I was recently touring the Everglades with my colleague Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Part of the briefing materials dealt with the problem of up to 100,000 pythons that started out as pets or exotic curiosities and ended up in that environment. Pets, farm animals, even whole alligators have been attacked and ingested. Earlier this summer, an infant in its crib was strangled by a python. Too expensive? Secondary? What's the price of that baby's life? And how much are we going to try to spend to reclaim the Everglade habitat from tens of thousands of pythons that have been described as the most lethal killing machine ever? Earlier this year, I had legislation that overwhelmingly passed this House to ban the interstate transport of primates. It had been derided by one of my colleagues as a ``monkey bite bill,'' ironically at just the same time a woman in Connecticut had her face ripped off by a neighbor's pet chimpanzee. I don't use that term metaphorically. Her face was literally ripped off. Indeed, Mr. Speaker, the woman who was so horribly disfigured had the courage to take her story and her mangled face to the public on The Oprah Winfrey Show this week. I simply cannot bring myself to display the picture on the floor of the House, but millions of viewers saw the tragic evidence for themselves. It's too late for this woman and her family, but it's not too late for the other body to act so that we can make events like this less likely. It's a symbol of the dysfunctionality of the other body that one Member--ironically a doctor, of all people--has put a hold on this legislation, refusing to allow the Senate to even consider it, and inexplicably, the other body goes along. The reason, we're told, is cost. The Senator is concerned about cost. Well, what is the cost to a woman whose eyes were torn out of her head so she couldn't see her daughter on prom night? What is the cost of the unbelievable reconstructive surgery, taking flesh from her leg to try to replace part of the missing face? Mr. Speaker, animal welfare is about much more than concern for God's creatures. It's about human welfare. It's about environmental balance. And yes, to the good doctor from Oklahoma, it's about saving money. The millions of Americans who watched The Oprah Winfrey Show saw the tragic case and its consequences. They should ask themselves why their Senators are not speaking out, why the other body is not passing this simple bill that can have such significant consequences. It may not change the world, but if it prevents just a few cases like this, it will be another example of simple legislation that we cannot afford not to pass.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 1314) to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 630 Northeast Killingsworth Avenue in Portland, Oregon, as the ``Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Post Office''.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I would ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to present Senate bill 1314 for consideration. This legislation would designate the United States postal facility located at 630 Northeast Killingsworth Avenue in Portland as the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Post Office. Hopefully, today we will finish an effort I've been involved with for the last two Congresses to accomplish this honor for Dr. King, but more important, for our community. This legislation passed last Congress, but the Senate somehow didn't get around to acting upon it, and we passed it again this Congress, September 22, by a 411-0 margin. The legislation enjoys the unanimous support of the entire Oregon House and Senate delegation. Senate bill 1314 was introduced by my friend and colleague, Senator Ron Wyden, last June, and passed the Senate this summer by unanimous consent. Mr. Speaker, I would thank the Committee on Government Oversight and Reform for their continued partnership in moving the legislation through the House and bringing us to this consideration. I am pleased to have worked with Senator Wyden to move his identical Senate version of the bill back to the House, as our legislation was held under a procedural hold in the Senate. Regardless, we have an opportunity now to be able to put a final note on this chapter to make this important link to a postal service in our community. It is appropriate as we think about the United States Postal Service that has been voted for five consecutive years as the most trusted government agency. For Americans, the Postal Service provides a consistent and positive connection between the government and the people. And it's, I think, appropriate that the genesis of this legislation was the result of a community-led effort that was inspired by two local letter carriers from my district. Back in 2007 Mr. Jamie Partridge and Mr. Isham Harris collected employees' signatures supporting the naming, as well as letters of support from all the surrounding neighborhood associations. These individuals brought the community together to honor not just Dr. King, but also Oregon's somewhat rocky path to racial equality and social justice. While our State ratified the 14th amendment expanding citizenship and providing equal protection under the law back in 1868, our State, sadly, continued to deny African Americans the right to vote under the terms of the original state constitution. This was an area of great struggle in our community. Oregon had a sad chapter where it had a virulent, powerful, Ku Klux Klan presence, electing elected officials and inspiring some really unfortunate State legislation. In part, inspired by this struggle, in 1914, the NAACP opened a chapter in Portland which continues to this day as the oldest continually chartered chapter of the NAACP west of the Mississippi. They were part of the leadership that finally amended the Oregon Constitution in 1927 to remove the clause denying African Americans the right to vote. For the next 30 years they were involved in efforts with leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King not just to end segregation and racial discrimination, but to promote equality. It was a struggle that we faced continuously in our community in the 1950s, such as battles over open housing. We are well familiar, all of us, with the remarkable life and legacy of Dr. King, who provided a face and a voice to the civil rights movement, one of the greatest orators in the history of the United States who provided national leadership and local inspiration in our community. I am pleased to honor this legacy with the full support of the Oregon congressional delegation. This post office will serve as a daily reminder of Dr. King's legacy and of the struggle in Oregon and around the country to reach our objective of individual dreams being fulfilled free of artificial barriers such as skin color, religious affiliation, gender, and sexual orientation. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting S. 1314 and achieve that goal. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend from Tennessee for his thoughtful words of support, for his concern and his adding historical perspective on how we're all in debt to Dr. King and how it has, in fact, inspired people north, east, west and south to be able to deal with the legacy of promoting a world hopefully free of discrimination. Mr. Speaker, I would hope that the House would join us in approving this measure to honor not just Dr. King, but, as I mentioned, focus on the struggle in our community to reach these ideals, one that continues to this day. The designation of the post office in honor of Dr. King will be an ongoing reminder of what we have to do ahead as well as the progress we've made. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time.

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

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, passage of the Affordable Health Care for America Act marks the most important single step in 100 years in addressing the health care needs of American families. For the first time, the U.S. government has dealt comprehensively with the entire health care system. Tonight I voted for every Oregonian who has faced bankruptcy when they've lost their care or has been denied coverage because of a pre- existing condition. Tonight, I voted to protect every Oregonian who has health insurance but sees their costs rising every year. I'm pleased we were successful in the incorporation of major reforms, improving care for all Americans while strengthening the position of Oregon medical care providers. This critical milestone, while historic, signals more hard work ahead to get the bill to the President's desk. I will work to strengthen the reforms while fighting to lower costs to make health care more affordable for families and the federal treasury. We must then be prepared to keep working to implement this sweeping change. But tonight we should all pause to celebrate this moment in history.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, one of the strangest sights, and now a symbol of the health care debate, was the red-faced protesters, egged on by my GOP colleagues to ``keep government out of their Medicare''. These people are not ignorant; they are uninformed, and unfortunately, purposely misled by some on the other side of the aisle, by Republican talking points that deny government can have a constructive role in health care, even as they rely on government for health care for seniors, veterans, emergency services and, of course, for themselves. When most Americans are given the facts, they are pleased that it is now time to take the next steps beyond our seniors, beyond our veterans, beyond emergency services and, of course, beyond Members of Congress. Today we can extend those benefits to more Americans while we protect those with insurance from abuse and reform a Medicare system that is in trouble. Americans await Congress to take these next critical steps to give Americans the health care they need and deserve.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy. I hope every American examines the plan that has been offered to us by the Republicans. Our citizens are outraged by practices of taking away insurance when you need it or denying coverage for preexisting conditions. Our bill fixes it. You won't find it in the Republican bill. Republicans strip out provisions so important to Oregon and other low-cost, high-quality States. Republicans do not deal with those vast regional disparities. They ignore the extra costs faced by seniors caught in the prescription drug doughnut hole while Democrats provide financial relief within the next 2 months. If Republicans have their way, there will be more uninsured Americans in 10 years than there are today. Weaker protections ignore the needs of the most vulnerable, yet the CBO says the Republican plan will increase the deficit by $36 billion more than the Democratic plan. Mr. Speaker, this is a colossal failure of imagination. The Republicans could have passed this package any time during the 6 years they and George Bush ran everything. They didn't bother because it wasn't worth it. Last March, Republican Minority Leader Boehner famously said that his Members shouldn't legislate. With this package as the best they could do, the Republicans have met the challenge not to legislate.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, Oregon has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country at 11.5%, which means that hundreds of thousands of Oregonians are without work. In the Portland region, roughly 140,000 residents are out of work. The average weekly unemployment insurance benefit in Oregon is $310. Each week, I receive letters indicating how much of a lifeline these unemployment benefits are. Unfortunately, many families are nearing the end of these benefits. Today, I voted to provide stability to American families hit hardest by the recession by extending unemployment benefits. The legislation will provide families with at least 14 weeks of additional benefits, and six more weeks to those living in the 27 states with the highest unemployment rates--states including Oregon. This means over 11,000 Oregonians will retain their insurance for an additional 20 weeks. Also, this bill does not add to the deficit. Rather, it is paid for by extending a federal unemployment tax that has been in place for more than 30 years. It is important to recognize that the losses from unemployment will last long after these workers--and the millions like them around the country--have again found work. Income losses for workers who are let go in a recession can persist for as long as two decades, and in some cases longer. The economic crisis gripping the United States is one of the greatest economic challenges that the country has faced. It can be squarely traced to the ideology of economic deregulation, leaving the government with few tools to address the reckless actions of many financial institutions until it was too late. It is time to rebuild the foundations of our economy and improve our fiscal fitness. I look forward to working with my colleagues to create a nation where every family is safe, healthy, and economically secure.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, obesity rates for children between the ages of 12 and 19 have more than tripled in the past fifteen years, with 17.6 percent of high school age children now classified as obese. This has a profound impact on the long-term health of our nation, as 80 percent of obese children become obese adults, putting them at a higher risk for diabetes, hypertension, cancer, and other chronic health conditions, and placing an increased long-term burden on our healthcare system. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommends that children be active for at least 60 minutes five times a week, but statistics show that activity levels drop rapidly as students head into their high school years. Increasing opportunities for adolescents to be physically active will help combat the rise in teenage obesity. We should provide students with safe, active ways to get to and from school and encourage healthy, active lifestyles and daily exercise at a time when they are seeking independence and cementing lifelong habits that will make them safer and healthier. This is why I am introducing the Safe Routes to High Schools Act, a bill to expand the popular Safe Routes to Schools program to include high schools. The Safe Routes to Schools program has been extraordinarily successful, with over 4,500 programs across the country, but it currently does not cover high schools. High school students represent a population most likely to suffer from high rates of obesity and also most in need of flexible, independent, and low-cost transportation choices, especially in times of economic crisis. This simple policy change will allow an already successful program to serve the students who need it the most. I hope that my colleagues will join me in supporting this legislation to ensure that children of all ages have safe ways to get to school burning calories instead of carbon.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, I have been dismayed for many years now about the performance of some of our financial institutions in the way they treat our citizens. There are too many examples of recent banking history that reveal too many tales of abuse and greed. Americans pay around $15 billion in penalty fees every year. Credit card contracts seem to be drafted not to inform, but to confuse. Mysterious fees appear on statements. Payment deadlines shift. Terms change and interest rates rise arbitrarily. In May, the President signed the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act into law, shielding credit cardholders from these widespread abusive practices. That law allowed the credit card companies a grace period to adjust their business practices to the new law. Rather than use this time to prepare for the new consumer protections and procedures, many credit card companies accelerated their aggressively targeted tactics to vulnerable consumers. In a comprehensive survey of credit card practices, the Pew Charitable Trusts found that in the first half of 2009, credit card rate increases ranged from 13 to 23 percent; that 100 percent of credit cards used practices labeled ``unfair or deceptive'' by the Federal Reserve and none of these cards would meet the standards of the new laws; and that even while the Federal Reserve is promulgating new consumer-oriented standards for penalties, credit card companies are charging substantially higher penalties. The Expedited CARD Reform for Consumers Act marks a step forward in bringing consumers badly needed relief by moving up the effective date for nearly all of the credit card reforms to December 1, 2009. Too many Oregonians, like students and families across the country, are heavily burdened by credit card debt. I support this bill because it requires fair terms and it levels the playing field by increasing consumer protections. Not a moment too soon.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. One of the most sad expressions that we heard in this Congress was by John Boehner, the Republican minority leader, March 15, 2009. ``As I told my colleagues, we don't have enough votes to legislate. We are not in the majority. They,'' referring to his Republican colleagues, ``ought to get the idea out of their minds that they are legislators. But what they can be is communicators.'' Madam Speaker, that is an unfortunate misreading of the role of Members of Congress. It is much too narrow and limited, tragically so. I spent 11 years in the minority in this Congress, and at times I must confess extraordinary frustration on some of what I thought were decidedly wrongheaded policies like the tragic consequences we are seeing played out on Wall Street and in Iraq today. But in the course of those 11 years, I never stopped looking for ways to work cooperatively to find a majority of people on both sides of the aisle to make productive change for America. Some of my proudest moments were as a member of the minority when we were able to take small, bipartisan steps that made a huge impact. For example, the passage of my Water for the Poor Act, that was bipartisan legislation in both the House and the Senate that now enshrines in Federal policy an active effort to provide safe drinking water and sanitation around the world to save lives, while it improves the role and image of Americans abroad. There has been described by some commentators, including some of my friends on the other side of the aisle, a ``take no prisoners'' approach. It's disturbing, as one who authored the end-of-life provisions that were hijacked and blatantly lied about to deal with what they called death panels, to see that ``take no prisoner'' approach in action. Well, we exploded that myth and I'm pleased that we do have strong, voluntary end-of-life provisions in the bill to protect the wishes of American families about how their families would be dealt with. But one of the myths is that this ``take no prisoners'' attitude is just directed towards the Democrats because the consequence of a ``take no prisoner'' attitude might be, if they're successful, destroying our efforts at health care reform, where we have come further than any time in our history. In that case, the prisoners will be the American public that will be sentenced to continuing a process where we have millions uninsured and others who are not protected by the insurance which they are paying for. Sadly, ``take no prisoners'' has actually affected the minority itself, because this attitude of being dismissive of a constructive role of legislation, being dismissive of the truth, actually has resulted in holding them hostage to the lowest common denominator--the TEA Party, tin-foil-hat people who have a paranoid, limited view of what America is and can be. In the end, Madam Speaker, America deserves better. I think it will get better. But I sincerely hope that Republicans choose to stop being communicators, especially misrepresenting what we have brought before the American people, roll up their sleeves, and work with us constructively to reform America's broken health care system with costs out of control and coverage too limited. Madam Speaker, together, we can make progress. Together, we can legislate and work on things where there is a common vision and a common goal. Together, we can make our government work better and our communities more livable and our families safer, healthier, and more economically secure.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I thank Chairman Berman for his courtesy and for the prompt action of the committee. I deeply appreciate the bipartisan support and the quick turnaround that we've had from both sides of the aisle on the committee. It is important to move quickly, and I deeply appreciate putting this on the agenda. The irreplaceable role of healthy forests as havens for biodiversity, carbon sinks, and renewable resources demands that we fight against and reverse a global legacy of environmental pillaging. Illegal logging and resource extraction is not just about environmental decimation, with watershed pollution, loss of biodiversity, and increased carbon emissions. It's about human loss as well, the local communities left devastated without resources for survival and for their future and beyond to everyone on the planet. We all benefit from the medicines, the carbon captures, and species diversity that these forests provide. For years it's been a personal project of mine to work against the illegal logging trade, to make sure that the United States can lead by example and stop our own demand for illegally logged wood. I was pleased that our Legal Timber Protection Act was incorporated into legislation and signed into law by President Bush last year. The United States Government is now empowered to ask where imported wood and plants actually come from to promote legal harvest. Yet the illegal trade continues. Last month, with Chairman Payne and Chairman Faleomavaega, I introduced this legislation to condemn the illegal logging and extraction of Madagascar's unique and invaluable natural resources. As has been pointed out by my two colleagues, Madagascar hosts some of the planet's greatest diversity. It's an island larger than the State of California. It broke off from the African mainland 160 million years ago, thus spawning the biological laboratory that my colleagues referenced, the diversity of plants and animals found nowhere else, massive moths, towering trees. There are more than a hundred species alone of lemurs. Sadly, the majority of Madagascar's people are trapped in a cycle of poverty, less than $2 a day. That's why the United States did step forward with the first Millennium Challenge program. And protection of these incredible and unique resources, only 10 percent of which remain, could be key to a sustainable and economically secure future. As has been referenced on the floor, the political turmoil is putting the honest livelihoods of many, as well as our planet's greatest treasure, in extreme peril. Political instability breeds corruption and mismanagement. Twenty years of partnership with the United States Government and NGOs that has resulted in more effective management and preservation is being undone in a matter of months. The de facto regime is using the endangered resources to boost its regime and has issued sweeping decrees allowing the harvest and export of woods from protected forests and World Heritage Sites. The reports from Madagascar are dire and detail rampant illegal logging, mining, and resource degradation. Traffickers smuggle out record numbers of the world's rarest tortoises to Asian and European collectors. Poachers kill and roast scores of lemurs for restaurants. Armed loggers brazenly plunder protected forests, looting dwindling hardwood for furniture. The media has detailed this ongoing destruction. Activities that not only deny access to basic resources to locals, they degrade the country's thriving ecotourism industry which brought in almost $400 million badly needed last year. The United States has condemned the current government, suspended all nonhumanitarian aid, and terminated assistance from the aforementioned Millennium Development Corporation compact. I am pleased that we will join today with the World Wildlife Fund, Conservation International, and the Wildlife Conservation Society, all of whom have denounced this wholesale exploitation of these precious resources. I am pleased, Mr. Speaker, that we are moving forward. I deeply thank the prompt action and bipartisan support for this legislation.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, one of the most bizarre assertions from some of our Republican friends from the other side of the aisle is that there is some massive health bill that's being cooked up in secret, that they are being denied knowledge, that they don't know what's going on. Mr. Speaker, everybody on Capitol Hill who wants to know can find out what is in the legislation. They can not just go online, but the news accounts, television shows, and trade publications. In fact, yesterday, in the Wall Street Journal it was outlined again. There are some sticking points yet to be resolved, as those are being debated, they're public knowledge. People know about the public option, options. Indeed, the notion that somehow we could keep a secret in our little Capitol Hill village of 5,000 compulsive leakers is laughable. Everybody knows that to be the case. If Republicans were still confused or couldn't figure it out themselves they could have just listened to some of their colleagues who were talking about how they disagreed with what was in the bill. They should talk to each other.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, the challenge for all America, not just the new administration and Congress, but our communities, our businesses, especially American families, is how to revitalize our economy. There is a great deal of contention occasionally here in Washington, D.C. about the best approach, but this problem takes on a new urgency as the experts now tell us that while the economy appears to be recovering, the jobs aren't: A jobless recovery, posing special problems for Americans from coast to coast. But beyond the problems with the economy, there are serious issues dealing with the state of repair of America; our electrical grid is inadequate and unreliable, too many roads and bridges are in serious disrepair, and there are problems with inadequate or nonexistent sewage collection and leaking water mains. And there is environmental damage in sites from coast to coast with Superfund, brownfields, even unexploded ordnance and military toxics on military defense locations. The opportunity and the challenge is to combine the problems with the economy with what we need to do to rebuild and renew America. Luckily, this is a solution that is overwhelmingly supported by the vast majority of Americans--Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. This is a solution that in times past has been able to bring together people in Congress to deal with the revitalization of our infrastructure. We have opportunities right now. There is pending a reauthorization of the Surface Transportation Act. If Congress acts, and the administration signs it, this could mean 6 million jobs revitalizing transportation from coast to coast, border to border. I have legislation, House bill 3202, a water trust fund, that would enable communities to deal with serious problems like leaking water mains. We lose 6 billion gallons of water a day, enough to fill Olympic size swimming pools from here to Pittsburgh. Coincidentally this bill can help fix these problems while putting hundreds of thousands of more Americans to work dealing with those problems. The administration has requested, and we have introduced, legislation to reintroduce the Superfund tax to deal with the problems of Superfunds again that are found in every State of the Union. Left unattended, the pollution actually gets worse and migrates, becoming more expensive to clean up over time. This is an opportunity to solve the environmental problem and return this land to productive use. This is something that America supports. The time for the Obama administration and this Congress to unite on a vision to rebuild and renew America is now, to enact it into law and provide appropriate funding. This action will pay dividends to Americans for decades to come, making our communities more livable and our families safer, healthier, and more economically secure.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, one of the interesting debate points that we are listening to today is the assertion that somehow what we need to do is just allow people to sell insurance across State lines, and that's going to solve all our problems. Well, first of all, you can buy insurance today across State lines. What we don't do is allow somebody who incorporates in a State with very weak protections and minimal provisions to go in and undercut the laws of other States that seek to protect their citizens. You can buy insurance as you see fit. It's just that people who are going to play in a market have to play by the rules, and if somebody cheats, then there is an opportunity to use the local insurance commissioner to protect the consumer. Under the legislation that we're proposing, the only thing that changes is that for the first time, some of the States that haven't protected their consumers will have higher standards. This is a good thing.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The United States is facing a challenge today in terms of fraying infrastructure from coast to coast. The need to rebuild and renew America has never been more critical; not only to strengthen our economy, to protect our health, to reduce global warming, it's important for our national and international competitiveness. Mr. Speaker, nowhere is this more important than dealing with long- neglected water infrastructure, because as bad as things are on the surface with problems with our electrical grid, crumbling roads and bridges in poor repair, what is under the surface is an even worse condition. We have 72,000 miles of sewer pipe and water main that are over 80 years of age. Every year there are almost a quarter million water main breaks which cause everything from traffic jams to supply disruptions. Who can forget a few months ago when a main broke on River Road here in metropolitan Washington and they had to send in a helicopter to rescue a stranded motorist? Water infrastructure problems result in 1.3 million cases of waterborne disease each year, while sewer overflows during rainstorms send raw sewage into our oceans, our bays and our rivers, resulting in an estimated 1.8 to 3.5 million illnesses. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that there is a $534 billion gap between our current water investment and the projected needs over the next 20 years, just for water and wastewater. To deal with that, Mr. Speaker, I have introduced the Water Protection and Reinvestment Act, H.R. 3202. At a time of economic problems for our country, this bill will create between 200,000 and 267,000 new jobs in engineering, construction and related industries. The bill is deficit neutral, attaching small fees to those activities and industries that benefit from clean water or who complicate our need to purify water. It will raise $10 billion in a deficit neutral way. Because of the need and because of the focused solution of this legislation, H.R. 3202 is supported by a broad cross-section of stakeholders. There are already 19 bipartisan Members of Congress who have signed on, but we have the Associated General Contractors, the American Society of Civil Engineers, the International Union of Operating Engineers, the National Utility Contractors Association as just some in the private sector. We have water utilities and government officials, from the National Association of Clean Water Agencies, the American Public Works Association, the Association of Floodplain Managers. And we have public interest groups, like American Rivers, the Rural Community Assistance Partnership, the Clean Water Network and the Alliance for Water Efficiency. Mr. Speaker, by providing this funding through existing State revolving funds, money will be equitably distributed to all States. We have special provisions to ensure that small rural communities and large urban areas get funding specific to their needs. We can't afford to leave anyone or any community out. I strongly urge my colleagues to reflect on what we have here in our community in Washington, D.C., and back home in our own districts. Too many of these systems rely on brick and water sewers that date back decades; in some cases centuries. The economy cannot stand it, the health of our communities cannot put up with this neglect, and frankly the pressure on local taxpayers and ratepayers is such that they need and deserve our help. I strongly urge that my colleagues who haven't yet examined this legislation do so, and that they join the bipartisan support for H.R. 3202, the Water Protection and Reinvestment Act.