Earl Blumenauer

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the courtesy of my good friend permitting me to speak on behalf of this. I listened to my friend from Arizona. The fact is the last bill was paid for, but because of the Republican refusal to right-size the trust fund, it was scaled down. But it was paid for. It wasn't right-sized for America. Mr. Oberstar and the committee are working to try to do this. I hope this is the last time we come to the floor to deal with the short-term deficit in the Highway Trust Fund; but, unfortunately, we are going to come back again. Mr. Oberstar and his Chair, my good friend Mr. DeFazio, have been working for months on a new vision for transportation; and I hope we have that on the floor sooner rather than later. Along with this is the notion of how we squeeze more value out of each Federal dollar invested. That is part of the work of the new Department of Transportation. It is part of what the committee is working on, and we as Congress need to be involved with that. New vision, more value, but, frankly, we are going to need more money. We haven't raised the gas tax since 1993. There aren't the resources available to meet what we are seeing in every community across the country. That is why there is a consensus that is building, as Mr. Neal said, from the chamber of commerce, to the garden club, to the Sierra Club, unions, environmentalists, local government officials, Republican and Democrat alike, who say come forward with a long-term funding proposal. What we are going to have to do sometime this decade is increase the gas tax for inflation. What we are going to have to do sometime this decade is have a new mechanism in place that is a true user fee that will enable us to match the people who use the roads or the people who benefit with the financing. This is within our capacity. And this is one area where I hope that we can get past some of the partisan bickering.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, sir. I hope that every Member will take the time to go back to their districts this next month and talk to the local chamber of commerce, talk to local government, talk to local business people that are attempting to solve these problems, and find out the support there is for Congress to be able to move forward with a broader vision for finance. It is there, if we will do it. And if we do, it is going to have more long-term impact on the financial health of this country than anything else that we will do. I urge people to do their homework at home so they can come back and support the financing that is necessary for the long-term vision that Mr. Oberstar and Mr. DeFazio will give us in the months ahead.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, we in Congress and the new administration have been given a gift of serving in a time of opportunity to solve some of the long-festering problems with the American health care system. One opportunity to achieve true reform is to provide greater value to patients when they are most vulnerable, when loved ones are facing the last few weeks of life. Today, these patients have a wide variety of treatment options available. We can test them, hook them up to machines, poke them with needles, perform all sorts of heroic measures, and where appropriate, we can accomplish amazing results with virtually no cost to older citizens. Yet, when it comes time to help people understand what their choices are, to have their questions answered, to be able to shape treatment for what their values and interests might be, we fail them utterly. H.R. 3200, health care reform, does have a simple solution to empower people and their families. Yet, this carefully crafted provision has been attacked by some opponents of reform, for example, Betsy McCaughey in The Wall Street Journal claiming wildly that somehow this would be mandatory, that it would be done by a government assigned physician, with the threat of coercing senior citizens. A simple reading of the provision shows that that's simply not the case. Like all other Medicare provisions, it would be voluntary. It would by the physician of one's choice. There's nothing mandatory about it. It has led the American Association of Retired People to issue a statement about this opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal. ``Ms. McCaughey's criticism misinterprets legislation that would actually help empower individuals and doctors to make their own choices on end- of-life care. ``This measure would not only help people make the best decisions for themselves, but also ensure that their wishes are followed. To suggest otherwise is a gross, even cruel, distortion, especially for any family that has been forced to make the difficult decisions on care for loved ones approaching the end of their lives.'' The AARP makes clear, ``We will fight any measure that would prevent individuals and their doctors from making their own health care decisions. We will also fight the campaign of misinformation that vested interests are using to try to scare older Americans in order to protect the status quo. Profits should never be allowed to come before people in this debate.'' And sadly, it's not just right-wing pundits who are involved with an effort of distortion. I would hope that my friends in the Republican leadership would reconsider their ill-advised attempt to equate this bipartisan effort to empower families with a slippery slope on pressuring seniors or even euthanasia. This is simply categorically false and destructive. The provision in question was carefully considered. It was the result of real bipartisan cooperation to help families. Indeed, some of the most moving comments in our committee deliberations came from Republican colleagues who talked about the concerns that they faced with their families in this difficult end-of-life situation and how we needed to do better. Madam Speaker, there are lots of areas where we can disagree as we're dealing with health care reform. By all means, let's debate and argue over areas of genuine disagreement, but let's not attack this long- overdue assistance to families facing the difficult situation at the end of life. Let's not attack it. Let's embrace it. American families deserve no less.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, I strongly support the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. This bill strengthens our economy and our communities by improving education, expanding job training, and strengthening our health and social services safety nets. I appreciate strategic investments made in Oregon and around the country to make our communities more livable and our families safer, healthier, and more economically secure. There are two important pieces of this bill I'd like to highlight: funding for public broadcasting and the University Sustainability Program. Nationwide, the economic downturn has struck businesses and individuals hard. The free, noncommercial, cultural and educational programming services provided by public broadcasting are now more valuable than ever. Many communities rely on public broadcasting stations as a sole source of news and information. States and local governments use the public broadcasting system for both day-to-day and emergency communications. Stations, which receive most of their funding from donations, have been hard hit by the recession as well. I am pleased that this bill includes $40 million in fiscal stabilization grants, 100 percent of which will go directly to stations in need, to shore up these local stations and local jobs. And I appreciate the continued advance appropriations for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting included as well, which helps ensure broadcasters can provide continuity of service and plan budgets adequately. Public broadcasting connects people with their local community, their nation, and their world in a way that no other outlet can or does. Because American citizens have come to rely on these services and programs, I am pleased Congress is fulfilling its responsibility to support public broadcasting. In addition, on behalf of the thirty members of Congress who requested funding for the University Sustainability Program, I would like to thank the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies Appropriation Committee for recognizing the important role that this program will play in helping revitalize the American economy. I'm proud that the committee has recognized the need for credible, multi disciplinary, innovative education centers to help our universities prepare students for the economy of tomorrow. There is a growing awareness that transitioning to a green economy presents a tremendous opportunity for those who embrace it--and a great risk for those who ignore it. Making this transition promises to create a new engine to drive America's economy, achieve greater energy security, and reduce impacts from global warming--and reduce chances of losing American jobs to other countries which charge ahead and take the lead. This program will provide competitive grants for the development, implementation and evaluation of sustainability programs in American colleges and universities. It was created in the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008, based on legislation that I introduced in 2007, the Higher Education Sustainability Act. Industry leaders in energy management, green building design and materials, waste management, toxics management, and sustainable transportation are hungry for a well-trained workforce trained in the latest technologies and approaches. A recent study of Fortune 500 CEOs reported that, while 90 percent agreed that ``sustainable development is important to their company's future,'' only 30 percent say they have the ``skills, information, and personnel to meet the challenge.'' It's not surprising that company leaders feel this way. The United States lags far behind other countries when it comes to preparing our students to understand the environmental problems we face and come up with innovative technological and organizational ways to attack them. According to the International Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, the U.S. ranks 34th out of 57 developed countries when it comes to students' knowledge about the environment and environment- related issues, behind Estonia, Croatia and the Slovak and Czech Republics. According to the National Renewable Energy Lab, the major barriers to a more rapid adoption of renewable energy and energy efficiency in America are insufficient skills and training. The University Sustainability Program is supported by the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education, the American Association of Community Colleges, Associations of College Unions International, Campaign for Environmental Literacy, National Council for Science and the Environment, Nike, National Wildlife Federation, Association of College and University Housing Officers International, Mary Kay, Inc, Earth Day Network, Chesapeake Bay Foundation, American Academy of Religion, and many more companies, organizations and leaders. I strongly support this bill and hope that the Senate will also include this much needed funding to support universities as they work to overcome some of the barriers to providing real, hands-on, environmental education to prepare students for the changing economy.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, just a moment ago I heard the minority whip profess interest in working with the Democrats to reform the health care system. Yet, I'm sad to say that the minority whip, the minority leader have been part of an effort to deal with fear and misrepresentation, attacking bipartisan legislation that would have done precisely that, reform the health care system. Sadly, Mr. Speaker, there are some here who simply are not expressing the sense of urgency that most of us feel from the American people, a sense of urgency about fixing a broken health care system that costs too much, that produces wildly uneven results, and leaves too many outside the system of coverage, and others, with health insurance, at risk. We cannot continue along this path. Americans are not getting the help they need, even if they have insurance coverage. I was, I must say, disappointed, to say the very least, to see the attack on bipartisan legislation that we have worked on to help reform the health care system. In a statement from the minority leader, and with the whip, and Mr. McCotter, there is an allegation that somehow there is legislation in the health care draft that may place senior citizens in situations where they feel pressured to sign end-of-life directives that they would not otherwise sign that may start us down a ``treacherous path towards government-encouraged euthanasia if enacted into law.'' Well, Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. Had the minority leader, and his whip, and the conference Chair bothered to check how that legislation came to be enacted into our health care legislation, they would have found out that it was work of a bipartisan group of Ways and Means Committee members. There were Republicans cosponsoring it along with Democrats. We had spirited discussion dealing with the fact that too often senior citizens and their families are not given the information they need to be able to cope with the most serious situation any of us will ever face as we have a loved one move into the end of his or her life. We discussed how Medicare would pay for tests to hook people up, to poke them, to run them through machines, to have them on ventilators, to do all sorts of things; but it will not pay a health care professional to sit down with that patient, with that family, and let them know what they expect, answer their questions, help them know what their choices are. We had examples of committee members talk about their loved ones, and I would say, Republican committee members talk about how their loved ones didn't get that type of help at the end of life and actually were subjected to things that they thought were not in the best interests of their loved one. If they had a choice, they wouldn't have done it over again, and it didn't prolong their life, it actually made them less comfortable. We're seeking to change that, to be able to adjust Medicare so that it speaks to the needs of American seniors and their families, that they're given the attention they need to prepare for this difficult period of time. There's nothing in this legislation that would force people to have consultations. There's nothing that would force them to sign advance directives. It's not going to choose a health care professional by the government and force it on them. It's the type of sad, inflammatory rhetoric that suggests that people aren't serious about health care reform, not serious about meeting the needs of American families, but, rather, they're playing political games. Mr. Speaker, I can't tell you how disappointed I was to see this type of reaction to a carefully crafted piece of legislation that we've been working on for more than 6 months that is bipartisan and that speaks to the needs of American families. The American public, especially our senior citizens, deserve our best efforts to meet their needs, not treat them like political footballs. I hope the Republican leadership will reconsider, and that we'll be able to enact provisions like this to help our senior citizens.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, the Department of Transportation estimates that the Highway Trust Fund will run short of funds this August, and that Congress will have to transfer $5-7 billion to it to avoid a shortfall. This shortfall is occurring because the gas tax is becoming obsolete. As vehicles become more fuel efficient, they increase the demand on our transportation system, without contributing as much to its maintenance. The current revenue system has lost 33% of its purchasing power during the last 15 years, today generating only two- thirds of the revenues needed to maintain current levels of investment. Until we tie our transportation revenues to our transportation demands, this situation will worsen. Failure to adequately fund transportation infrastructure imposes huge costs on American citizens and businesses: Congestion costs urban Americans 4.2 billion hours and 2.8 billion unnecessary gallons of fuel each year; expressed in dollar terms this is $87.2 billion, or $757 per traveler. Roughly 40,000 people every year are killed on our streets and highways, with 2.5 million more injured, at a staggering annual economic cost to society. Higher transportation costs and higher inventory carrying costs-- partially attributable to an unreliable transportation system--have pushed logistics costs to nearly 10% of GDP. Failure to act puts America on hold, when we should be putting America to work. It is time we sought out innovative solutions to this challenging problem. The Oregon Department of Transportation successfully tested a model where they charged drivers for the number of miles they traveled rather than the fuel they consumed. The test was convenient for drivers, protected personal privacy, and proved easily administrable. This concept was also highlighted by two blue ribbon commissions established in the prior transportation authorization. The National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission noted that a vehicle miles traveled charge is ``the most promising alternative revenue measure'' to our existing gas tax, while the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission reported that ``a charge for each mile driven . . . has emerged as the consensus choice for the future.'' Both commissions found that this system was efficient at raising revenue, closely linked system demand to revenues, and could win broad public support. My legislation calls on the Department of the Treasury to study the viability of this revenue source in every State. While evaluating mileage based revenue sources, Treasury will ensure the system protects privacy and is simple to administer. It will also convene working groups to address the most complex aspects of this transition, including road use, demand management and climate change, and technological needs. Finally, the bill creates a grant program to ensure the necessary technology is available. The condition of our national highway and transit systems and the maintenance of our infrastructure, and the investments that we make in these systems, touch the life of every American, strengthen our economy, and protect our environment. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this important legislation.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, Americans have made it clear that they want transportation options. In a recent study by the Pew Charitable Trusts, 52% of Americans support increased funding for bike, pedestrian and public transportation programs. On average, transportation costs are now Americans' second largest expense after housing. This impacts on business owners, as employees spend over 4.2 billion hours stuck in traffic each year--averaging up to almost a week per year per employee. If more Americans commute using alternative modes of transportation, we will see improvements in the economy, workplace productivity, and quality of life. In order to help communities provide families with more choices and level the playing field for people who want to be less auto-dependent, the federal government must be a better partner in these efforts. This is why I am introducing the ``Green Routes to Work Act of 2009,'' which will provide consumers with commuting choices. The bill will help companies provide their employees with options, improve service to deal with increased demand and ensure that the federal government leads by example. As gas prices increase, many Americans are already changing their daily behaviors to decrease fuel costs: taking fewer trips, keeping their cars tuned, even trading in their gas guzzlers for more fuel- efficient models. Through the incentives in this bill, the federal government can support consumers who wish to use environmentally friendly, active transportation modes that save them money in the long run, such as public transit, carpooling, biking, walking and telecommuting. For too long, the federal government has supported commuters who drove to work, but has not helped those who use other methods of transportation. The passage of legislation last year to allow employers to provide transportation fringe benefits to bike commuters was a good first step. But with a changing climate, expanding waistlines and more congested roadways, it's time for the federal government to become more aggressive in helping to provide choices. This not only makes environmental and public health sense, it makes economic sense: at $4 a gallon gasoline, American families can save $5.6 billion each year on gasoline costs by using transit. Bicycle commuters annually save an average of $1,825 in auto-related costs, conserve 145 gallons of gasoline, and avoid 50 hours of gridlock traffic. I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this legislation to support businesses in their effort to provide choices for commuting employees.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. It's been fascinating watching some of my friends parade to the floor making some pretty outrageous claims. The most recent one was, my good friend from Florida suggesting that by having the administration follow the law, that if the cost-of-living has not increased sufficiently, so that there isn't a cost-of-living increase for Social Security, somehow this is an administration assault on senior citizens. This is a rather bizarre notion when we think about their record when they were in charge, seeking to undercut formulas like the one in question to move them back in the other direction. When it comes to health care, when our friends on the other side of the aisle, strong-armed their prescription Medicare drug coverage program into law; did not seek concessions from the pharmaceutical industry; created the ``doughnut hole'' that has created a massive gap in coverage and no mechanism to pay for it. What we're doing at this point is trying to move forward in a constructive fashion to give the American people choices, follow the law, save money, and improve the quality of care.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. One issue that is too often out of sight and out of mind is the quality and the condition of our drinking water and wastewater pipes under the ground. Just 6 months ago, we all watched in shock as rescue workers airlifted people from vehicles caught in a massive rush of water caused by a water main rupture on River Road just outside of Washington, D.C., because of the failure of a single, corroded pipe installed over 40 years ago. In fact, 72,000 miles of sewer main and water pipe are over 80 years of age. This morning, there was a water main break that closed 23rd Street at I, near the George Washington Hospital. The EPA estimates that American communities suffered more than 240,000 water main breaks last year. Combined with overflowing combined sewer systems causing contamination, property damage, disruption in water supply and, often, massive traffic jams. The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates an average of 6 billion gallons of water is lost every day through leakage--enough to fill over 9,000 Olympic-sized swimming pools. The Engineers have given our Nation's drinking water and wastewater infrastructure a D-minus grade in their most recent report--sadly, a grade that was not improved over the report from 5 years ago. The House of Representatives recognized the need to upgrade water infrastructure earlier this year, passing H.R. 1262, the Water Quality Investment Act, which would update and reauthorize Clean Water State Revolving Loan Funds. But they simply don't have enough money. The EPA's most recent estimate is there is an over $500 billion gap between current investment and projected needs over the next 20 years. Surface and air transportation infrastructure, while facing their own challenges, at least have a dedicated source of funding. Water does not. In the spring of 2005, the famous Republican pollster, Frank Luntz, released a poll that showed Americans would support a sustainable, dedicated source of water funding for infrastructure. He found the public sees clean water as an even higher priority than investments made in transportation and airways--71 percent prioritized water above other infrastructure. It is time to stop talking about it and do something: creating a dedicated firewall trust fund for water infrastructure. This afternoon, I will introduce legislation to create this trust fund financed by a number of funding mechanisms that are simple, equitable and adequate for $10 billion a year. The Water Protection and Reinvestment Act will establish a trust fund to finance clean water and drinking water infrastructure. Most of the money will go through the State revolving funds for sewage and drinking water improvements. The financing mechanisms in the Water Protection and Reinvestment Act will include a fee based on water-based beverages, products that are disposed of in wastewater, pharmaceutical products, and corporate profits. These fees would be assessed at the manufacturer level so they will be easy to administer and will have a minimal impact on the consumer. They will be at a level that is so low that it would not place the entire burden on any one industry or group of consumers. With a mix of funding, everyone will contribute to a solution from which everyone will benefit from. I am pleased that the legislation already has a diverse support of stakeholders from the Associated General Contractors, American Rivers, the National Association of Clean Water Agencies, and Rural Community Assistance Partnership, and a wide range of bipartisan original cosponsors, including Congressmen Norm Dicks, Steve LaTourette, Michael Simpson, and Thomas Petri, representing a base of support from thoughtful, bipartisan legislators. While the funding question is always complicated, the public is with us. In January of this year, pollster Frank Luntz released a new poll-- and remember, he is the famous Republican pollster--finding that a nearly unanimous 94 percent of Americans are concerned about the state of our Nation's infrastructure. He found that this concern cuts across all regions of the country: urban, rural, suburban. He found that 84 percent of the public wants the Federal Government to spend more money to improve infrastructure, and that 81 percent of Americans are personally prepared to pay 1 percent more in taxes for the cause. The need is clear. The public is supportive. My hope is that my colleagues will join me in a solution that will make all of our communities more livable, and our families safer, healthier, and more economically secure.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, today I am proud to introduce a resolution honoring the Government Services Administration (GSA) for their sixty years of hard work and dedication to federal employees. On June 30, 1949, President Harry S. Truman signed legislation to create GSA and streamline the administrative work of the federal government. The Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 took effect almost 60 years ago today, on July 1, 1949. GSA consolidated the National Archives Establishment, the Federal Works Agency and its Public Buildings Administration, the Bureau of Federal Supply, the Office of Contract Settlement and the War Assets Administration. GSA was tasked with administering supplies and providing workplaces for federal employees. GSA's original mission was to dispose of war surplus goods, manage and store government records, handle emergency preparedness, and stockpile strategic supplies for wartime. GSA also regulated the sale of office supplies to federal agencies. Today, through the Public Buildings Service, Federal Acquisition Service, various staff offices and 11 regional offices nationwide, GSA provides workspace to more than 1 million federal civilian workers. It oversees the preservation of more than 408 historic buildings. It facilitates the purchase of high-quality, low-cost goods and services from quality commercial vendors. GSA has a history of providing environmentally sound or sustainable products and services that reduce waste and pollution, and providing federal employees with healthy work environments. GSA's efforts to design, build and manage federal properties in a sustainable and environmentally sensitive manner helps reduce energy consumption by the federal government. Today, GSA touches the lives of nearly every U.S. citizen by providing goods, services, and workplaces at best value to its federal agency clients. The GSA has worked to ensure that the federal government leads by example--promoting fiscal fitness and environmental responsibility throughout the federal government. As we mark its 60th anniversary, the GSA is playing a critical role in revitalizing our economy. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act included $5.5 billion for GSA building projects and $300 million for energy efficient motor vehicles. Just as importantly, GSA is assisting other federal agencies in meeting their goals under the legislation, and has used its technical expertise to support Recovery.gov as part of the government's commitment to openness and transparency. As GSA enters its seventh decade of service, it does so with a new slogan: ``A Legacy of Service, a Pursuit of Excellence,'' that articulates the agency's storied history and continued excellence on behalf of its customers and American citizens. I am proud to offer this resolution honoring the men and women who work to keep our government running.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, more than 75 percent of Americans participate in active outdoor recreation each year, experiencing America's wild lands and outdoor spaces in ways large and small. In recognition of this group, I am introducing the ``United States Optimal Use of Trade to Develop Outerwear and Outdoor Recreation Act'' or the ``U.S. OUTDOOR Act''. This legislation will reduce the high tariffs on outdoor apparel and will invest in research to shrink the environmental footprint of the American textile industry while increasing its international competitiveness. According to recent surveys, roughly 33 million Americans went fishing last year and 56 million went hiking. Through healthy outdoor activities like bird watching, ice climbing, hiking, and bass fishing, outdoor recreation contributes $730 billion and 6.5 million jobs to the U.S. economy. Unfortunately, recreational performance outerwear--jackets and pants used for skiing and snowboarding, mountaineering, hunting, fishing and dozens of other outdoor activities--is assessed some of the highest duty rates applied to any products imported into the United States. While the average duty on imports is less than 2 percent, the rates on recreational performance outerwear average 17 percent, with some as high as 28 percent. These disproportionately high tariffs were originally implemented to protect U.S. manufacturers from foreign competition, but now no longer serve that purpose. Instead, they stifle innovation and raise costs throughout our economy. In a recent report, the U.S. International Trade Commission recently found that there was no commercially viable production of recreational performance outerwear in the United States. To better reflect this economic reality, the U.S. OUTDOOR Act will establish new tariff classifications for these products and will eliminate the disproportionately high tariffs assessed on them. The legislation will also establish the Sustainable Textile and Apparel Research (STAR) Fund. Access to STAR Fund grants will be made available to certain non-profit organizations through a competitive process, with the overarching purpose of advancing U.S. competitiveness in lean manufacturing technologies and supply chain analysis. The STAR Fund will ultimately help the global textile and apparel industry in minimizing energy and water use, reducing waste and carbon emissions and incorporating sustainable practices into a product's entire life cycle. Through these mechanisms, this legislation will support the outdoor industry, consumers of outdoor products, and environmental practices throughout the textile industry supply chain. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this important legislation.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on this, as I appreciate her leadership in being able to advance a cause that's near and dear to both of our hearts. Mr. Chairman, I will speak for 2 minutes. In the course of that time, about 10 children around the world will die needlessly from waterborne disease. We have been working, over the course of the last 5 years, for the United States to exercise its appropriate leadership to try to eliminate this tragedy. I deeply appreciate the work that the subcommittee has done. Indeed, in the manager's amendment it takes an increase from last year and has a further increase of $25 million, meaning $335 million to help implement our Water for the Poor Act, dealing the world's number one public health problem. Mr. Chairman, we have more than a billion people worldwide who lack access to both sanitation and clean drinking water, without which children cannot learn in school; the sick, including those with HIV/ AIDS, cannot take their medication; stable societies cannot be built; and millions needlessly continue to die. Entirely preventable tragedies trap countries in poverty and diminish our own development and security efforts. It's no coincidence that the Middle East and North Africa, the most water-stressed region in the world has some of the most complex security issues. The State Department has said securing fresh drinking water is a significant part of the Middle East peace process and one that brings people together rather than dividing them. I deeply appreciate the chairwoman and her staff for working with me and my colleague Don Payne, who has been tireless in advancing this issue. I hope that the administration, with the leadership of Secretary Clinton, will join in this effort so that we can make the progress that poor people around the world deserve and that we all need.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, U.S.-flag ships that compete in international trade face many disadvantages. The U.S. tax code should not be one of them. Today I am introducing legislation that will help smooth the seas for U.S.-flag shippers and increase their international competitiveness. The version of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 that passed both the House and Senate provided for the application of a ``tonnage tax'' based on the tonnage of a vessel, rather than taxing the U.S. vessel's international income at corporate tax rates. In the conference process on that legislation, however, new language was inserted which states that a U.S. vessel cannot use the tonnage tax on its income from international operations if that vessel also operates in U.S. domestic commerce for more than 30 days per year. This 30-day limitation dramatically limits the availability of the tonnage tax for those U.S. ships that operate in both domestic and international trade and hinders their competitiveness in foreign commerce. It is important to recognize that ships operating in U.S. domestic trade already have significant cost disadvantages. The inability of domestic operators to use the tonnage tax for their international service is a further burden on their competitive position in foreign commerce. Foreign registered ships now carry 97 percent of the imports and exports moving in United States international trade. These foreign vessels are not held to the higher Coast Guard operating standards that apply to American-registered ships and foreign vessels are virtually untaxed. Adding to the perversity of the provision, in December 2006, Congress repealed the 30-day limit on domestic trading for approximately 50 ships operating in the Great Lakes. There are 13 U.S.-flag vessels outside of these Great Lakes ships that remain caught in these tax provisions. In the interest of providing equity to these 13 vessels, this legislation would repeal the 30-day limit on domestic operations, enabling these vessels to also utilize the tonnage tax on their international income. Under this legislation, these ships will continue to pay the normal 35 percent U.S. corporate tax rate on their income for operations in domestic commerce. Repeal of the tonnage tax's 30-day limit on domestic operations is a necessary step toward providing tax equity between U.S.-flag and foreign flag vessels. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this important legislation.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, more than 2 million farms make up America's rural landscape. Ninety-eight percent of these farms are owned by individuals, family partnerships, and family corporations, producing about 86 percent of U.S. agricultural products sold. The most significant asset held by many of these farmers is their land. In some cases, when the owner of the farm dies, surviving family members must sell portions of the farm to cover their estate tax costs. Today I am introducing legislation to help ensure that families are not forced to sell the farm and that their land resources are available for agricultural and conservation use by future generations. In 1997, in order to encourage the conservation of sensitive lands and farms, Congress enacted an estate tax exclusion for land placed under a conservation easement. 26 USC 2031(c). That law caps the exclusion at $500,000. Given the significant rise in land values over the past decade, especially for agricultural regions near urbanizing areas, that cap is now too low to provide a meaningful incentive to many farmers. My legislation updates and increases the exclusion to $5 million. By increasing the current cap on the property value that can be excluded from an estate when the land is protected by a conservation easement from $500,000 to $5,000,000 (and by raising the exclusion percentage from 40 percent to 50 percent, this bill will encourage significant additional protection of farmland across our country. The voluntary placement of a conservation easement on private land is a very effective and successful tool for protecting and conserving our nation's open spaces and sensitive lands. As the American Farmland Trust has written, ``We strongly believe that the proper incentives are the most effective way of encouraging landowners to conserve land.'' This legislation provides strong land protection incentives and will result in the preservation of America's vital farm and ranchlands.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy. For the last 2\1/2\ years, I have had the privilege of working with the Speaker's Select Committee on Global Warming, driving home the reality of climate change. Today we have a major opportunity to rebuild and renew America while protecting the planet. I want to thank the Ways and Means Committee and the Commerce Committee for working with me to harness billions of dollars over the life of this bill to develop transportation that reduces carbon footprint for transit, bike, and pedestrian, development patterns, things that will make a difference for a country that emits more carbon with its transportation than China, India, and Europe combined. We have an opportunity to protect the planet, but unless you're prepared to lead, China and India will continue to pollute more and more. This is the first step in this leadership, and I urge the courage to vote ``yes'' on this legislation today.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, Chairman Waxman, I appreciate your courtesy as I appreciate your leadership. It's strange that the debate boils down to our friends from the minority party being unable to access the Web site of the Rules Committee to print out the rule that has been available to any Member of the House. And I understand some of them were waving it earlier in the day talking about provisions that they didn't like. But I guess we shouldn't be surprised because this is the same leadership that continually misrepresents the MIT study, citing $3,000 of costs that has been refuted by the author of that report and asks the Republican leadership to stop misrepresenting his handiwork. The CBO and the EPA have given estimates that are pennies a day, not thousands of dollars a year. And we're not talking about the long-term benefits of transitioning to an economy of the future. I appreciate the leadership. On a recent trip to China with the Speaker, we saw the Chinese moving ahead. This legislation is an opportunity for us to keep pace and assume our rightful leadership within an economy for the future.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy as I appreciate his leadership in an area that has been of concern for me for a long time, the disappointing and widespread environmental legacy of the Department of Defense. In every State, communities must deal with former training grounds contaminated with live bombs, leftover shells, leaking chemicals. I have a map here. Every single State, every territory of the United States--and it is an ongoing problem. In June, in Florida, fishermen hauled aboard a live guided missile. On May 22 a farmer plowing his field overturned a live rocket. We need to be more serious about it, and I appreciate the committee's help, first of all, in focusing with the Department of Defense, requiring the Secretary to report clearly the funding levels requested for the program. We have a new administration. We hope there will be a new commitment to work on this. With additional transparency, we are much more likely to know at least where we are. It's also time for military to be proactive and reduce the amount of munitions generated in the first place. I'm pleased that they have agreed to another amendment offered by my friend Ms. Brown-Waite from Florida to require the Department of Defense to think strategically about ways to lessen the long-term health and environmental consequences, specifically, development of lifecycle accounting for munitions, review of live-fire practicing, and recommending ways to reduce the costs and incidents of unexploded ordnance. Smarter procurement and testing will reduce the long-term impacts of munition, saving money, resources, having safer American lands and more successful operations abroad. Just a few volleys of a standard rocket system with a 5 percent failure rate generates thousands of unexploded ordnance for training lands here at home, and it complicates our missions abroad. Consider the plight of civilian populations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the millions who will rebuild their lives amidst the munitions wreckage left over the last 6 years of combat. This is a problem at home in the United States. This is a problem abroad. It is time for us to face up to it. I appreciate the committee's leadership in helping zero in on it. I hope we can do a better job because it will save money while it saves lives at home and abroad. I enter into the Record a list of Munitions and Unexploded Ordnance, UXO, incidents and news for May and June 2009. June 11, 2009 in Pachtua, MS, 20 Small Unexploded WWII White Phosphorous Bombs Found During Pipeline Work June 10, 2009. Long Hill, NJ, World War II vet finds ``souvenir'' and alerts bomb squad June 9, 2009, Norwood, OH, Deactivated Explosives Found At Park June 9, 2009. Arden Hills, MN, Cleanup Costs Too Much for Potential Developer June 9, 2009. Arden Hills, MN, Cleanup Costs Too Much for Potential Developer June 8, 2009. Madiera Beach, FL, Fishing Boat Hauls Up Guided Missile June 8, 2009. Camp LeJeune, NC, U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Case About Toxic Water at Camp Lejeune June 8, 2009. California, MD, Ordnance Uncovered at Landfill June 4, 2009. Columbus, OH, Road Closed after Artillery Shell Discovered June 1, 2009. Turtlecreek Township, OH, Discarded Hand Grenade Found June 1, 2009. Nantahala National Forest, NC, Ordnance Found Near Trail May 22, 2009. Woolmarket, MS, Explosion Rocks Woolmarket Neighborhood

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, today I am introducing a bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located as 630 Northeast Killingsworth Avenue in Northeast Portland, Oregon as the ``Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Post Office.'' This post office shall serve to remind us of the civil rights leader who inspired a nation and served as a catalyst for change. Our nation has come a long way since the days of the civil rights movement and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream of equality and brotherhood between all people continues to inspire. In fact, this bill is a result of a community effort led by local letter carriers Jamie Partridge and Isham Harris. In 2007, Mr. Partridge and Mr. Harris collected employee signatures supporting this naming, as well as letters of support from the Piedmont and Concordia Neighborhood Associations, and the Sabin Community Association. I am pleased to carry their effort forward and am proud that Representatives Wu, DeFazio, Walden, and Schrader, the full Oregon Congressional delegation, have joined as original cosponsors in the House. Senators Wyden and Merkley will soon introduce companion legislation in the Senate. Naming one of our community's postal facilities after one of the century's most inspiring leaders is a personal reminder of Dr. King's achievements and the work that remains to be done. I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure the swift passage and enactment of this bill.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, today I am proud to introduce the Advance Care Planning and Compassionate Care Act of 2009. This important legislation will provide the tools and resources necessary to dramatically improve care at the end of life. As we approach health care reform, there is no other area more vital for honest discussion and careful analysis than what happens at the end of a patient's life. For most of us, the majority of our lifetime health care will be administered in that last year. Indeed for some, the last few months is when we will use the most doctor care, the most medical procedures, and spend the most days in a hospital. Advances in health care have led to an aging population facing increasingly complex end of life health care decisions. These strains make complicated decision-making regarding medical care incredibly difficult. Too often, decisions are avoided until a crisis occurs, resulting in inadequate planning, unknown patient preferences, and families left struggling with the burden of determining their loved ones' wishes. For both families and patients, this is a time of incredible stress, confusion, and pain. This legislation will provide valuable resources to patients, their families, and health care providers to ensure that care at the end of life is aligned with patient wishes and values. The Advance Planning and Compassionate Care Act of 2009 would: Improve consumer information about advance care planning and end-of- life care. This legislation would provide critically needed information and assistance to consumers and their families in order to guarantee that an individual's final wishes for care are carried out. Improve provider education and training about advance care planning and end-of-life care. This legislation would establish a National Geriatric and Palliative Care Service Corps modeled after the National Health Service Corps. Require portability of advance directives. The legislation would improve the portability of advance directives from one state to another, and require any existing advance directives to be prominently placed in a patient's medical record so they are easily visible. Authorize funding for new and innovative approaches to advance care planning. Grants would be made available to states for development of electronic advance directive registries. Grants would also be made available to develop systems to identify that a person has an advance directive using driver's licenses, similar to how organ donor status is indicated. Provide Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP coverage for advance care planning consultations. This legislation provides Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP coverage for advance care planning so that patients can routinely talk to their physicians about their wishes for end-of-life care. Improve consumer access to hospice and palliative care. This legislation provides greater consumer information about hospice and palliative care, so the public is well informed of the care options available at the end of life. Provide concurrent care for children. This legislation requires that concurrent care--the provision of both curative and hospice care at the same time--is available to children who qualify for hospice. This will make it possible for children to receive the palliative services they need from hospice while still pursuing potentially curative treatments. Require the development of quality measures to assess end-of-life care. The Secretary of HHS, acting through the Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, shall require specific end-of-life care quality measures for each relevant provider setting. The legislation would also develop and implement accreditation standards and processes for hospital-based palliative care teams. Establish the National Center on Palliative and End-of-Life Care at the NIH. Biomedical and health services research is vital across all phases of life. A new National Center on Palliative and End-of-Life Care at the NIH will lead biomedical research on palliative and end of- life care.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, for too long, the federal government has enabled the inefficiencies of our health care system. This is not only wasteful, but inequitable to taxpayers in efficient, low-spending regions such as Oregon, Washington, Wisconsin, North Dakota and Minnesota who are subsidizing high-spending regions of the country. Medicare beneficiaries living in Miami, Las Vegas, New York and Houston receive approximately 60% more services than those living in low-spending regions. This higher spending has not produced higher quality of care or superior outcomes. In fact, research shows that health care outcomes and patient satisfaction are often greater in regions that spend less. We cannot afford to ignore this problem any longer. The June 2008 Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) report stated that ``. . . our health care system is not delivering value for its stakeholders . . . if current spending and utilization trends continue, the Medicare program is fiscally unsustainable.'' Today I am introducing two bills to address this looming problem. The first would change the financial incentives in our health care system to reward low-spending Medicare regions through a 5% bonus payment. Currently, there is no financial incentive for high-spending regions to reign in spending. This would create that incentive and reward regions that have made a concerted effort to efficiently use health resources. The second would lay the foundation for better, more accurate research for Congress to use in analyzing Medicare policy recommendations. The legislation will change MedPAC's statutory mandate to include an annual report to examine each Medicare region, evaluating access to care, quality of care, increases or decreases in volume of services, and the potential effects of other policy recommendations under consideration. This new report will provide critical data and result in more accurate and targeted policy recommendations that take into effect geographic variations and recognize that distinctly different delivery systems should be treated differently. These strategic investments in Medicare will lay the groundwork for future improvements and refinements to the program as we promote efficiency and quality in all regions of the country.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Forty-nine years ago, the 1960 October Harpers Magazine cover story was ``The Crisis in American Medicine.'' Well, we are still in crisis, but change is in the air. The facts are clear: High costs, more procedures, tests, and hospitalization is not better care; it is a symptom of poor care. Every major Nation spends less, and most have better outcomes than the United States. Getting 50 million Americans health insurance and giving the rest of Americans with insurance, stability, will cost more, but about half of this cost can be achieved by reforming the system, and having the government pay the balance will cost far less for business and people with insurance over the next 10 years than business as usual. With a President who gets it, a Congress listening to what the people want and a public plan to keep the system honest, it means that there won't be a cover story 50 years from now about American medicine still in crisis.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I rise, Mr. Chairman, and urge that clean water and sanitation be addressed at the highest level at the State Department and USAID. The lack of safe water and sanitation is an ongoing threat to global security. It remains the world's preventable health problem, accounting for 2 million deaths a year, a child dying every 15 seconds and half the illness in the developing world. We simply cannot meet our goals to deal with poverty, health and development without addressing this crisis. On Earth day, I introduced the bipartisan Paul Simon Water For the World Act with the goal to provide a hundred billion of the world's poorest with first-time access to safe drinking water and sanitation. I would like to work with you, Mr. Chairman, to assure that clean water and sanitation are adequately funded and represented at the highest level of our diplomatic and development efforts.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your attention to this critical issue and am looking forward to working with you under your leadership.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, today I am proud to introduce the Medicare Transition Care Act of 2009. When people leave the hospital after an operation or illness, they are often overwhelmed by a complicated and risky road to recovery. Patients frequently report difficulty remembering clinical instructions, confusion over medications, and, in cases where multiple providers are involved, often get conflicting instructions from different providers. Providing a transitional care benefit within Medicare will help coordinate care, develop a care plan for patients and their caregivers, identify potential health risks, and prevent unnecessary hospitalizations. This bipartisan legislation gets to the heart of improving quality while reducing costs. A study published in April 2009 in the New England Journal of Medicine found that almost one-third of Medicare beneficiaries studied who were discharged from a hospital were re- hospitalized within 90 days. Additionally, one-half of the individuals re-hospitalized had not visited a physician since their discharge, indicating a lack of follow-up care. The study estimated that Medicare spent $17.4 billion in 2004 on unplanned re-hospitalizations. The Medicare Transition Care Act will directly address continuity of care problems by increasing support to patients as they move from the hospital to their new care setting and ensuring that appropriate follow-up care is provided during this vulnerable period. The benefit would be phased-in, initially targeting just the most at-risk individuals by providing evidence-based transitional care services tailored to their specific needs. I am proud to partner with Congressman Boustany, a cardiothoracic surgeon, on this commonsense legislation that will improve the quality and efficiency of our health care system.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, as one-fifth of the world's population relies on freshwater that is either polluted or significantly overdrawn, the lack of safe water and sanitation is an ongoing threat to global security and remains the world's greatest health problem, accounting for 2 million deaths a year and half of the illness in the developing world. Before I finish speaking, 15 more children will die needlessly from waterborne disease. To address this slow-motion disaster, I worked with the then Chair and ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Henry Hyde and Tom Lantos, and the Senate majority and minority leaders, Bill Frist and Harry Reid, to enact the Paul Simon Water for the Poor Act of 2005. This landmark, bipartisan legislation established investment in safe and affordable water for the world's poorest as a major goal of United States foreign assistance. But, sadly, with the last administration, we were slow to implement, and until last year, slow to fund it. We are more than halfway to the 2015 Millennium Development goal with mixed results, and we must redouble our effort. A special concern is Sub-Saharan Africa that lags so far behind that we will miss our modest goal to cut the people without safe drinking water and sanitation by one-half by 2015, that Sub-Saharan Africa will miss that target date by 25 years for water and sanitation by 61 years. And these are not just numbers; these are millions of people's lives. Some progress is being made through innovative partnerships between the United States, NGOs, businesses, and local partners. But the stark truth remains: Nearly 900 million people worldwide still lack access to safe drinking water, and two out of five people on the planet lack basic sanitation services. And this is going to become more of a challenge in the future. Because of climate change and rapid population growth, there will be further stress on water resources. By 2025, 2.8 billion people in more than 48 countries will face devastating water shortages. To help accelerate the progress, on Earth Day I introduced bipartisan legislation, the Paul Simon Water for the World Act of 2009, along with Representatives Payne, Rohrabacher, Jesse Jackson Jr., Zach Wamp, Welch, Boozman, Burton, George Miller, and Fortenberry. The purpose of this act is to empower the U.S. Government to respond to the pressing poverty, security, and environmental threats presented by the dire mismanagement and shortage of global freshwater. The goal for the Water for the World Act is for the United States to provide 100 million people of the world's poorest first-time access to safe drinking water and sanitation on a sustainable basis by 2015. To accomplish this goal, the legislation builds on the Water for the Poor framework for investment, expands U.S. foreign assistance capacity, and recognizes sustainable water and sanitation policy as vital to the long-term diplomatic and development efforts of the United States. I applaud the leadership of Senators Durbin, Corker, and Murray, who have introduced companion bipartisan legislation in the Senate. This legislation will help the United States focus its efforts and fully implement a smart and efficient global water strategy that meets our commitment to extend safe drinking water and sanitation to over a billion people in need. I urge every Member of Congress to make water policy and funding a priority, to save the life of a child every 15 seconds who dies needlessly from waterborne disease.