Earl Blumenauer

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, today I am introducing the ``Energy Saving Mortgages Amendment'' to H.R. 1427. This amendment calls on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac work with lenders to quantify a household's monthly savings for purchasing an energy-efficient home or from living in a neighborhood providing transit and other transportation alternatives and shifts those savings into the ``shelter'' category of expenses. The amendment forces lenders to recognize the added purchasing power homebuyers generate by saving on energy and transportation costs. This allows the homebuyer, based on their enhanced buying power, either to qualify for a mortgage or to qualify for a larger mortgage. By requiring lenders to quantify these savings, the amendment helps lower-income or first-time homebuyers qualify for mortgages to purchase homes located in transit-friendly locations or for homes that incorporate greater energy efficient building technologies. It also increases the lending ceiling for homebuyers purchasing a home in a neighborhood that allows for transportation savings from access to transit or other forms of transportation and for home buyers purchasing an energy efficient home.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy in permitting me to add my voice, expressing the appreciation to Mr. Loebsack and to the Iowa delegation for bringing this resolution forward commemorating the service of our friend and former colleague, Jim Leach. The 30 years that we were privileged in this body to watch him at work, the words, the recitation to what Jim Leach did doesn't do him justice. He was dignified and principled, one of the few people who could navigate these Halls successfully without ever being mired in partisan politics, doing it his way, a way that was right for the country, if often difficult for him politically. Just reciting the facts misses the quality of his service. Jim Leach predicted the savings and loan crisis. He was spot on in his observations about American diplomacy from the Middle East to North Dakota. I meant to say North Korea, probably North Dakota as well, as I think about it. He, as an example of his principled nature, resigned from the Foreign Service in protest of President Nixon's firing of special prosecutor Archibald Cox. In his congressional campaigns, he was one of the few people who refused to accept PAC contributions and out of State donations. He wouldn't run negative ads, and he tried to stop outside groups who were supporting him from, in turn, running negative ads. In 1997, he refused to vote for Speaker Newt Gingrich because of deep ethics concerns. And while it was the right thing to do, as history has shown, it was a tough vote against a sitting Speaker in your own party. But it was an example of how Jim Leach operated. He correctly predicted what was going to happen with our ill-advised adventure in Iraq with great clarity and force in committee and on the floor. And then he voted against it, again, at some difficulty for himself politically, particularly at that time. That wasn't the direction of the prevailing winds in his party or in the country. But that's how Jim Leach was. He thought about issues. He analyzed them. He shared his analysis in his own thoughtful, understated way. He was usually right, and the congressional deliberations were better as a result. I must say that I'm sorry that President Bush chose not to take the advice of dozens of Members in this body on both sides of the aisle who urged that Jim Leach be appointed as the U.S. Representative to the United Nations, a post for which he would be eminently well qualified. I am confident we will see a new chapter in his distinguished career whether in the United Nations, perhaps in a new administration. As a friend, a colleague and an American, I look forward to whatever that next chapter is in Jim's career.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 1700, the Community Oriented Policing Services Reauthorization Act, which has provided greater numbers of police officers to protect our citizens in every State in the union. My district in Oregon has benefited significantly from this program through the addition of 279 police officers and a total of over $24 million secured for local law enforcement agencies since 1994. I find it perplexing that the administration continually attempts to reduce funding for COPS when independent studies confirm that the grants significantly contributed to the crime reduction in the late 1990s. Nationally, the strain on law enforcement has never been greater, as resources are stretched to combat the recent rise in crime while also addressing homeland security responsibilities. For this reason, I support the revitalization of this program to protect our families and give law enforcement the support they need.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, Iraq is the scene of the world's fastest growing humanitarian crisis: 4 million people displaced, half of whom have fled the country altogether, with another 50,000 or more added to the rolls every month. What are we doing to help, especially the tens of thousands who are in danger because they helped the United States, like serving as interpreters? Last month the United States allowed exactly one Iraqi refugee to enter the United States. No matter what your position is on the war in Iraq or its future, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor H.R. 2265, the Responsibility to Iraqi Refugee Act, comprehensive legislation that would put somebody in charge, set modest levels for refugees entitled to come to our country, and authorize programs to help them. It is the least we can do for people whose lives are at risk because they helped Americans.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, today's votes on the Iraq supplemental with benchmarks and the Iraqi withdrawal bill are important steps as congressional Democrats do everything we can to reverse the President's disastrous Iraq policy. I support the vote to withdraw troops because it is consistent with the comprehensive legislation I introduced, ``The New Direction in Iraq Act'' and the supplemental because it is a way to keep the pressure on the President. Support for the continued occupation of Iraq is fraying, as Republicans have started to say in private what the American people started realizing long ago. I have opposed the war from the start, and these votes hasten the day when we bring the tragedy of the Iraq war to a close. I will continue to do everything in my power to end this tragic chapter in our history.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take up where my good friend from Minnesota left off in terms of dealing with the money that is in this legislation that would help us deal with the crisis that is occurring in our Nation's forests. One of the legacies, unfortunately, of the last Congress where we had a meltdown of the budget process is that these issues were left unresolved. We have eviscerated the budgets for the Department of the Interior, shifting money out of operating budgets for purposes of firefighting. This is going to help us move back in the right direction. One of the other casualties was the county payments program. In the last session, the implosion of the budget process where the Republican majority and the administration could not follow through, left 4,600 school districts across the west, including a number in my State in Oregon in a lurch. This legislation steps up and meets the needs. It is not extraneous. I sincerely hope the President changes his tune and withdraws his veto threat.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in extending time. I, too, am perplexed by the debate that is being advanced in terms of being able to focus on the national security implications of the threat of global warming. I sat on the committee, the Special Committee on Global Warming and Energy Independence, as we listened to three and four star admirals and generals, as we listened to the former head of the CIA talking about the defense implications for the United States of Global Warming. These men were not radical environmentalists. These are respected experts who have led a lifetime of service to protecting the integrity, the defense, the security of the United States. They are deeply concerned that our dependence on foreign oil from unstable areas of the world. The overwhelming scientific consensus that climate change, global warming is a reality, led them to argue in the most strong terms that we need to be serious about it. Item after item, about the strategic implications, about what happens to defenses of the United States, to instability around the world of water-stressed areas, to new disease patterns, these are not arcane, philosophical issues. This isn't environmental fringe. This is the nuts, and bolts of the future, of our country. It has already been made clear that we already have a great deal of work that is underway. What this would require is assembling it under the guise and guidance of people who are experts in national security to put it in the national security context. Other major countries around the world are grappling with this. I think the Rules Committee was entirely appropriate to put what I think is a misguided amendment on the floor because I think it is time for people who care about the future of the country, who are looking at the evidence, to have an honest and thoughtful debate. But to somehow dismiss this as the province of radical environmentalism or a detraction from the hard work of planning for America's security future is, I think, sadly misplaced. I appreciate what the Rules Committee has done. I support the rule and look forward to the debate later.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, today, along with Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky and Congressman Christopher Shays, I am introducing the ``Responsibility to Iraqi Refugees Act.'' Iraq is the world's fastest growing refugee crisis, yet the U.S. response has been minimal. For one group in particular, however, our moral responsibility is unquestionable--Iraqis who are at risk because they helped the United States. Having cooperated with the United States military, the United Nations or even with a nongovernmental organization can literally mean a death sentence at the hands of any of the many sides in this civil war. Our legislation would admit Iraqis to the United States who are at risk because they helped coalition or reconstruction efforts in Iraq, establish a Special Coordinator for Iraqi Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons and require strategies to ensure the well-being and safety of Iraqi refugees in the region; and increase the number of persecuted Iraqis who can be admitted to the United States as refugees. I urge every Member of the House to cosponsor this broad, ambitious and comprehensive response to the Iraqi refugee crisis before it is too late for the people whose only crime was working with Americans.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy, and it is a pleasure to work with him in cosponsoring this amendment. Mr. Chairman, the Federal Government is the largest consumer of energy in the world. If we harness the ability of our Federal agencies in terms of what they do with energy, what they do with procurement, we have an opportunity to revolutionize the business practices in this country in a way that doesn't require a lot of new rules and regulations and fees. It is simply leading by example. It has been my privilege early in my career to do work dealing with minority enterprises, with women-owned enterprises, with small business; because, as the gentleman from Vermont mentions, these are areas that are tremendously underserved, but there is a great deal of energy and vitality and it has made our economy stronger. This is the next logical addition to that portfolio of activities. By giving a preference to procurement with small businesses that are environmentally sound, it is going to help nurture an explosion of new technology, of new business opportunities, and, most important, most important, it is going to help to bring these activities to scale. It is going to make best green practices more cost effective. It is going to be a better value for the taxpayer. It is the cheapest way to improve the environment. And, ultimately, it is going to strengthen our economy, because areas in the European Union, in Canada and, dare I say, even in Asia dealing with China and Japan, progress is being made. This is going to help us. It is going to give a better value to the taxpayers. It is going to jump start these. I look in Portland at TerraClean, Ecos Consulting, Rejuvenation House Parts, ecological small businesses. If this is enacted, they will be able to do a better job in the future. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy and leadership.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy. It is an interesting debate that is going on here today because in terms of the motion to instruct, there really isn't that great a difference of opinion. We are, in fact, going to be able to meet the objectives. We are working hard in our budget to make sure that we deal meaningfully with tax relief for those who need it. The difference between the Republicans and the Democrats is that they are not willing to make any distinction. For them it is Paris Hilton who is first in line. We have made it clear that we are going to work to make sure that real priorities for American families are adopted. We have proven that in terms of what we have stood for in the past as well as what we are working for in the future. Democrats have repeatedly voted for a lowered tax bracket on lower- income people, the expansion of the earned income tax credit, marriage penalty relief, increase in the child tax credit, acceleration of the expansion of the 10-percent bracket, increased expensing for small businesses. These were things that people here on the floor who are on our side of the aisle offered up as a responsible alternative when our friends on the other side were engaged in a rather extensive and unfocused effort to try to provide tax benefits for those who need them the least while ignoring the needs of those who need it the most. They have given some modest bones to a few in America. Those that merit our support will, in fact, be continued. And, more important, we are going to deal with what is the largest tax increase in American history, which the Bush administration and my Republican friends on the other side of the aisle have set the stage for, and that is the tsunami of the alternative minimum tax. That is going to cost $1 trillion over the next 10 years, and we have made it clear that that is our number one priority to solve, as in the House Committee on Ways and Means we working on this. We don't have to accede to every single detail for Paris Hilton in order to make sure that we deal with the needs of working Americans and the tax tsunami of the alternative minimum tax, which has been ignored session after session after session by the Republicans when they were in charge. I find no small amount of irony to hear my good friend from Wisconsin talking about how he has proven it is possible to have a unified budget surplus when for 12 consecutive years of ironclad Republican control they wrote all the fiscal rules, wrote the budgets, wrote the tax policy. I invite anybody to look at what the now minority proved that they could do. It's a pretty sorry record of fiscal irresponsibility. Mr. Speaker, my point is simply that the budget resolution that we brought forward is a reasonable, meaningful approach to deal with these fiscal problems. Independent observers agree that there is no tax increase this year or the next. And we are on a path allowed for in our budget resolution and the work we are doing in the Ways and Means Committee right now to make sure that we solve the tax tsunami of the alternative minimum tax. I look forward to our getting past this type of discussion here, as my friends on the other side of the aisle seek to substitute rhetoric for their sorry record of non-accomplishment, and look forward to moving forward.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I am privileged to take the floor after my colleague from Virginia and I am in agreement with the sentiment that he has expressed. However, I would like to speak for a moment about the second greatest refugee crisis in the world after Darfur. Four years after the fall of Baghdad, many of the worst fears expressed at the beginning of that war have come true, as Iraq and its neighbors are in the midst of a humanitarian crisis rivaled only by the ongoing genocide in Darfur, referenced by my good friend from Virginia. Iraq has the fastest growing refugee population in the world. The United States has a responsibility to try to protect the innocent victims of massive violence wherever it can. However, having made the decision to begin a war of choice in Iraq, we have a particular responsibility to those who are suffering as a result of America's actions. Whatever one believes about the wisdom of the war or the future of the United States' engagement in Iraq, we have a responsibility to those innocent Iraqis who have been driven from their homes or fear for their lives every day. The numbers are sobering. The United Nations High Commission for Refugees estimates 4 million Iraqis have been made refugees, 2 million of which have left for adjacent countries like Syria and Jordan. Every month, another 50,000 to 70,000 Iraqis continue to be displaced from their homes, and these figures likely underestimate the magnitude of the problem. These are the front lines of a regional humanitarian crisis, one that could easily destabilize these front line countries that neighbor Iraq and turn a humanitarian crisis into a security disaster. For one group in particular, however, our moral responsibility is unquestionable--Iraqis who are at risk because they helped the United States. Having collaborated with the United States military, the United Nations or even with a nongovernmental organization can literally mean a death sentence at the hands of any of the many sides in this civil war. Tens of thousands of Iraqis, who worked as translators, drivers, even construction workers, live every day in fear of being targeted. However, the United States is only allowing 50 Iraqi translators to start their lives over in the United States. Over the next few months, that may be raised to 500, a number that is still dwarfed by the need. I became acutely aware of this problem working with a local high school in Portland who were partnering with members of the Oregon National Guard who had served in Iraq who were trying to bring their translator to the United States to save her life but kept running into bureaucratic hurdles. Since then, I've heard the same story over and over again. We should keep faith with those who have served alongside our brave men and women in uniform. This is a basic moral responsibility and a simple issue of fairness. Yet in March, the United States admitted only 11 Iraqi refugees. Since the war began, we have admitted only 700-- remember, out of 4 million displaced. I am introducing legislation this week, the Responsibility to Iraqi Refugees Act, to address this ongoing humanitarian crisis to use all of the tools at our disposal, admitting refugees, providing assistance to the region, and using diplomacy to ensure their well-being. It creates a program to admit to the United States Iraqis who are at risk because they helped coalition or reconstruction efforts. It establishes a special coordinator for Iraqi refugees and internally displaced people and requires the United States to develop plans to ensure the well- being and safety of these Iraqi refugees. Most important, it increases the number of persecuted Iraqis who can be admitted to the United States as refugees. And, finally, it would authorize additional funding for assistance to those refugees, their resettlement and fixing the bureaucratic process that often hampers even the most well-intended efforts. I urge every Member of the House to cosponsor this broad, ambitious and comprehensive response to the Iraqi refugee crisis before it is too late, too late for the people whose only crime was working with Americans.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, we make progress in dealing with discrimination based on sexual orientation when we're not distracted by myth and bigotry, but when we deal with the rights and needs of real people. I am pleased that that is why we will pass this hate crime legislation today which follows progress in my State of Oregon just this week, where we have provided protection for domestic partnerships and antidiscrimination legislation. I hope it will herald changes on the Federal level in the military for gays and lesbians, and in the workplace with non-discrimination protection for all Americans. When we deal with real people, their rights and needs, we will solve these problems and America will be a better place.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, as chair of the U.S.-Vietnam Caucus, dedicated to strengthening the bilateral relationship between the United States and Vietnam, I strongly support efforts to help Vietnam improve its human rights record and I support this resolution. Nothing would do more for this important relationship that continued steps by Vietnam towards respect for free speech, human rights, religious freedom and democratization. I have raised this issue at the highest levels of Vietnam's government and continue to do so at every opportunity. However, given that Vietnam has made significant progress over the last decade, I wish that we could have passed the version as introduced, which focuses on the steps Vietnam needs to take, rather than this Committee-passed version which now includes unhelpful language about placing certain sanctions and restrictions on the U.S.- Vietnam relationship. I continue to believe that the path of engagement and honest dialogue will be a more fruitful avenue for the advancement of human rights and democracy in Vietnam.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, today's legislation marks a continuation of the important effort to advance animal welfare in the 110th Congress. One of the stark differences with the new congressional majority is the ability to deal meaningfully with important animal welfare provisions. Congress, as one of its first orders of business, passed the long-stalled animal fighting legislation, ending barbaric cruelty that helped foster and advance other illegal and dangerous activities. Today Congress has the opportunity to take another step reaffirming policies that deal with the protection of horses and wild burros; protection of free roaming horses and burros from commercial sale and slaughter. Actually, it's embarrassing that it had to get to this point because, since 1971, the Federal Government has had a policy to protect these animals. Unfortunately, in the last Congress, without hearing or public notice, a rider was slipped into legislation that eliminated these protections. I'm pleased that a majority of the Commerce Committee and a strong bipartisan majority has voted to support this important provision. The Senate is also moving to protect animals by ending the sale of horse meat for human consumption. These are important steps reflecting a renewed commitment to animal welfare, an essential part of any vision of a livable community. It is important and overdue that Congress renew our commitment to developing a policy framework strongly supported by the American public.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, by calling for a withdrawal date from Iraq, today the House is making a compromise that marks another stage in the unfortunate struggle with the President to end the war. Yet despite our hard work and the desire of the American people, this bill faces a veto from a President who is out of touch both with what the American people and the Iraqi people want: winding down the presence of American troops who are stuck in the midst of a civil war. This is not the precise legislation I would have written, but it is a fair compromise that reflects the mindset of Americans who voted for a new direction in Iraq. The U.S. spends $8 billion a month on the war, and Oregon has already lost 54 brave men and women in Iraq. I have opposed the war from the start, and this bill hastens the day when we bring the tragedy of the Iraq War to a close. I urge support for it.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I have been intrigued by the debate that has been transpiring here. I wanted to come to the floor to make one simple point, and that is that I appreciate the efforts on behalf of the Financial Services Committee and Chairman Frank to start demystifying the process. There is a lot of talk about supporting of shareholder rights and what not. But the fact is that we don't have a uniform system in this country that actually guarantees people the right to exercise corporate democracy in ways that most people would take for granted. In terms of the most important stakeholders, the people who own these corporations, they are too often treated like children that need to be kept at bay. You don't have to read very many business pages in the New York Times, just for the last year, to discover areas of systematic abuse in terms of what anybody would expect to be the treatment of shareholders. And, unfortunately, that is aided and abetted by government policy. I appreciate what is happening with the Financial Services Committee to take some steps to try and demystify the process. I see this as one simple step to allow shareholders just an advisory vote on compensation. I thought it was a pretty good idea. I thought it was being part of a larger conversation. I think it is a warning shot about corporate behavior and to State regulators to take seriously the rights of the people who own these companies. All of us, I think, support capitalism. But the way that the shareholders are treated must make us be suspect. Then on top of this, I hear the amendment from my friend from Florida. Again, I may be a little biased, getting my information from the business pages of the newspaper, but the Sunday before last, it was fascinating looking at the hash that has been made by SEC in terms of trying to explain what total compensation is. It is almost now beyond the capacity of individuals to understand because we get in here, make these distinctions that torture and twist information. I thought the proposal that is brought forward by Financial Services, was pretty straightforward. Yet this amendment again would start parsing that out, distinguishing between different types of compensation and making it harder for shareholders to have a clear understanding. I would respectfully suggest that we vote against this amendment; we support the underlying bill; and most important, we support the philosophy from Financial Services to demystify corporate governance, that we give a little more respect to the rights of shareholders and our responsibility as people who establish the rules of the game. I think the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation was rushed through after years of sort of holding it at bay in the aftermath of scandals where Congress wouldn't act, to the point where Congress was forced to act. I appreciate what is happening in the Financial Services Committee where they are looking at this subject in a systematic fashion. I look forward to subsequent proposals that come forward so that we can give shareholders the rights that they deserve as the people who are after all really the owners of our capitalistic system.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Then I will close. I deeply appreciate the words of support that have been offered here by my colleague from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri); from my distinguished chairman, Mr. Oberstar; and from the former ranking member of the Water Resources Committee, Mr. Costello. I want to be clear that what was offered up by my friend, the distinguished ranking member of the subcommittee, in no way undermines what I said. These principles and guidelines have not been updated. There are procedures and circulars discussed by the gentlemen from LA. They have not been incorporated into an updated, revised principle and guideline for the Corps of Engineers. That is why the National Academy of Public Administration, one of the many scientific organizations to recommend updating the principles and guidelines, they released their recommendation after the circular that the gentleman from Louisiana mentioned. His information simply is not current in terms of how the Corps is operating and all the independent bodies, the Science Board, the public administrators, why the American Engineering Association, as well as taxpayers and environmental groups say it is past time to fix this situation. For those of you who care about getting something actually through Congress, you ought to support this amendment. One of the hang-ups between the House and the Senate has been this issue of reform. The Senate has stronger language than this. I think it will help bridge the gap. I urge its adoption.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to the time remaining?

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), our distinguished chairman.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello).

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch).

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri).

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Engineering Circular that has not been incorporated into their principles and guidelines.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. And my question was, Is it not true that the Corps has not adopted those things into the principles and guidelines?

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I want to be clear that what you just stated that our goals, the things that you just cited, have never been incorporated into the principles and guidelines, have they?