Rick Berg

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. I want to thank the gentleman from California. It's been a distinct honor for me to represent the people of North Dakota in this Congress, the 112th Congress. I ran for Congress because I believed that we needed to continue to have an economic environment, an economic climate that has stability and encourages growth and encourages jobs. And I'm sure we can all agree that there is more work that needs to be done. But I'm hopeful in the days, the weeks, the months, and the year ahead that we can finally come together, not as Democrats and not as Republicans, but as Americans who are concerned about the future and concerned about that next generation. In doing so, I know that we will tackle the challenges that our country faces. I'm always proud to tell the people I meet that I represent North Dakota. Down here in Washington, we are the envy of the Nation. We have the lowest unemployment in the country, a budget surplus, we are seeing unprecedented economic growth, and one of the brightest futures ahead. To the great people of the State of North Dakota, I want to express my deepest gratitude for giving me the opportunity to be North Dakota's voice, a voice here in the U.S. House of Representatives for the last 2 years. I would also like to thank my staff for their hard work. I've put them through some long hours serving the people of North Dakota, and I know the people of North Dakota appreciated the hard work and the dedication that they brought forward. My faith in the democratic process is unwavering, and I truly believe that America's brightest days are ahead. Serving the people of North Dakota in Congress was an adventure and an experience of a lifetime. It's something that I will always look back at with pride and appreciation. Personally, I'm not sure what lies ahead, but I'll say this: it will be great spending a lot more time in the great State of North Dakota. Thank you, and may God bless.

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. I thank the gentleman for yielding and joining me in this amendment. I rise to support our amendment to ensure States continue to have control over regional haze regulations. When Congress first established EPA's Regional Haze Program, it acknowledged that regional haze and visibility regulation has to do purely with aesthetic value and not public health. For that very reason, Congress emphasized that the States, not EPA, should be the decisionmakers when it comes to regulations of regional haze. Instead of empowering States to do what's best for their citizens, the Obama administration has, again, imposed another costly one-size- fits-all regulation for the producers of energy, who are the most critical job creators in my State and across the country. Our amendment will limit EPA's availability to override States' management of regional haze, and it empowers States to implement their own regional haze management plans, the plans that best fit their individual needs. It's time to stop the war on coal, and I urge my colleagues to support our amendment on the underlying bill.

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support this critical piece of legislation to stop the tax hike. We have a choice to make here: We can support job creators like small business men, farmers, and ranchers that have made North Dakota's economy so strong, or we can abandon them and allow our Nation to go over the so-called ``fiscal cliff.'' I have to remind my friends on the other side, this is something we talked about in a recent Ways and Means hearing. Small businesses are not ``the wealthy.'' They are not pocketing huge profits. They are trying to grow their businesses by reinvesting back into their business. That's what's creating jobs. At a time like this, we need to create jobs. We can't afford the Democrat plan which will increase taxes and decrease over 700,000 jobs. We need stability. We need certainty. And we need to pass this legislation so we can provide stability and certainty to our job creators until we complete comprehensive tax review.

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, Senate bill S. 2039 is a bipartisan bill sponsored by Senators from North Dakota Conrad and Hoeven, which passed the Senate by unanimous consent in January of this year. This bill will provide a great deal of help to the citizens of our State. The text of S. 2039 allows for a process of building permanent levees on Federal land in North Dakota, with the approval of FEMA and the Army Corps of Engineers. I want to highlight the unique situation we have in North Dakota, and this legislation intends to address just that. First of all, Fargo, North Dakota. It has faced repeated flooding along the Red River, which runs through the heart of the city. The city has constructed a permanent levee that runs along as much of the river as possible. However, over the years, some properties have been bought out along the riverbank with Federal funds. As a result, we have a patchwork of properties that exist along this levee system with gaps in the system. Recurring flooding along the Red River requires temporary levees to go up nearly every year only to be taken down, and what happens, repeatedly, over and over, is a taxpayer waste of money. Minot, North Dakota, will have the same problem. As my colleagues know, Minot faced enormous flooding last spring. Thousands of homes were lost, and the community sustained hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. The city of Minot now plans to rebuild a major new flood protection system, including rebuilding the levees that were in place. This is in the middle of the city along the Souris River. This means that Minot will face the same frustration and expense of constructing and removing temporary levees year after year, just as it is in Fargo. The solution is to simply permit levee construction on federally purchased property in these areas of North Dakota, with the approval of FEMA and the Corps. It's important to note that in both Fargo and Minot, a levee will be in place regardless of this legislation. What this commonsense bill is trying to prevent is the absurdity and the expense to taxpayers of building and then taking down a temporary levee every year every time there's a flood. This bill does contain important restrictions to ensure undue Federal costs are not incurred. Under this bill, before approving any project, FEMA and the Army Corps of Engineers must first determine that the levee will be effective in mitigating against the flood risk versus having an open floodplain, that permanent levee flood protection would be the most cost effective measure to protect against flood risk and minimize the future cost to the Federal Government, and also, that the State or local government seeking to build the levee has provided adequate, detailed plans for maintenance of the proposed levee and the State or local government has a detailed finance plan to pay for it. All of the above must be demonstrated before the construction plan can be approved. Furthermore, this Federal review itself must be paid for entirely by the local or State government. Mr. Speaker, the construction of a permanent levee is far more fiscally responsible than the annual costs associated each year with tearing down, building and tearing down these temporary levees. Most importantly, this legislation eliminates the cost that FEMA and the Corps of Engineers have already incurred time and time again as they're forced to build these and tear them down, the temporary levees in the State of North Dakota. This legislation provides better stewardship of taxpayer dollars. It provides sound protections against future Federal expense, and it will save the local, State and Federal Government money. Most importantly, it will ensure better flood protection for the communities of Minot and Fargo in North Dakota. I ask my colleagues for their support of this legislation and reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BERG. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to just really make this perfectly clear. This is not affecting the Missouri River. This is focused on a very flat area in the eastern part of our State. As was mentioned, this came through the Senate with unanimous consent. Senators along the Missouri River from North Dakota all the way down were supportive of this. The essence of this problem is that we have a levee. This is a downtown levee that's in a city, and there are gaps there. And what happens is when there's a flood--and every year we have a recurring flood--a temporary levee is put in. Trucks come in and clays come in, it tears it up, and they build it, and as soon as that's done, it's all torn down again. This is disruptive, and it impacts the natural habitat there. That is where this is focused to be. The other thing that is really important here that I would like to stress, this legislation requires the Corps of Engineers to approve it. Those of us who have been dealing with the Missouri River know the Corps management would not approve of anything that would disrupt the Missouri waterway all the way down. Mr. Speaker, this is an urgent thing. The reason it's urgent is our State has had 10,000 people dislocated from 4,000 homes, and these people had the uncertainty of not knowing where they can rebuild, what they can do. This will help the city of Minot move forward with their housing needs. There are 1,400 families that are currently not back in their homes. They're living in trailers, living with neighbors and living with friends. They're not sure when these temporary levees go down what they should do next. That's really the urgency of this bill, and why that's why it's before you today. So, Mr. Speaker, I do urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BERG. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I mean, these are exactly why we need to do this. I mean, there's passion when it comes to floods, passion when it comes to levees. What concerns me is people don't understand probably what the Red River Valley is like. This is flat. When there's a break in the levee, this is not just a few homes, this will be miles and miles and miles. I want to be very clear: the levee will be there, it's going to be there. The only thing we're doing here is, right now, the Federal Government, when there is a flood, pays for this. The Federal Government shares in the cost to build a temporary levee. A month later, they pay for it to tear it down--time and time again. If you're concerned about the environment or you're concerned about disruption, this is where we need to have that part of a levee system, a permanent levee system that's already in place that has very little impact on the environment. As we can work through these commonsense things, these commonsense solutions, this will help build a relationship so we can solve these problems and move longer term, both in flood protection as well as the Missouri River. Again, just to reiterate that point: this bill has nothing to do with the Missouri River--in fact, it did pass under unanimous consent in the Senate, with the Senators up and down Missouri supporting it. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BERG. I am prepared to close. Mr. Speaker, again, Members of the assembly here: there are 1,400 people in Minot that aren't living in their homes--there are 1,400 families, not people. Every year creates an uneasiness on the people that live in this flat valley, in the Red River Valley. This is an important bill. It's critical for long-term planning and clearly will save not only the Federal Government money, but it will save the local government money. It also will save all the volunteer time that goes into building a levee, taking a levee down. I do believe if you saw the area where this will go, you would agree that a permanent levee system that ties into the landscaping would really be a positive impact on the wildlife and the habitat in those areas. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. Mr. Speaker, last week, the House Ag Committee reported out of committee a version of the House bill. I rise today to call for this important measure to be brought to the floor for a vote as soon as possible. Agriculture is the backbone of North Dakota's economy. Our great State leads the Nation in nine different commodities. This farm bill takes into consideration unique things within our State and within many other States as it relates to agriculture and those commodities. Specifically, it implements a strong crop insurance program that would be so beneficial in times like these where we're facing severe drought in much of our Nation. North Dakota's farmers and ranchers need the stability that this farm bill can bring, and it needs to be a long-term authorization. Now is the time for the House to act. For farmers and ranchers across this country, now is the time to ensure that we act on this important piece of legislation and get it reauthorized for the long term. The time for the farm bill is now.

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BERG. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. BERG. Mr. Chairman, I have the distinct honor to represent several military installations in my State of North Dakota, including the Minot Air Force Base, the home of the 91st Missile Wing and the 5th Bomber Wing, which relates to the amendment I have to offer today. The amendment, which I offer today, along with my colleagues Mrs. Lummis of Wyoming and Mr. Denny Rehberg of Montana, is very straightforward. It prohibits the fiscal year 2013 funds from being used to implement plans under the New START Treaty to reduce the number of nuclear weapons and their delivery system, which significantly reduces America's ability to develop and use our nuclear defense capabilities. We all know that during the 2010 lame duck session the Senate ratified the New START Treaty, and President Obama made a promise to Congress that as long as he was President we will continue to invest in nuclear modernization. Mr. Chairman, since then, he has backed away from his promise, and we all heard the President's unsettling off-mike comments that he would have more flexibility after the November elections. The treaty provides for 7 years for the United States and Russia to reduce the number of deployed ICBMs, deployed submarine-launched ballistic missiles and deployed heavy bombers equipped to carry nuclear armaments to no more than 700 weapons. I know that many of us may not agree on the appropriate level of deployed nuclear weapons or our view on the New START Treaty. However, we need to make one thing clear: nowhere in the New START Treaty does it require reductions from the United States to make these cuts prior to fiscal year or during fiscal year 2013. Furthermore, we're still waiting on the administration to tell us exactly how sharp the cuts in our deployed nuclear weapons could be under the New START Treaty. The Associated Press has reported the Obama administration is going beyond the level laid out in the New START Treaty and is considering as much as an 80-percent reduction in our current nuclear arsenal. It appears that the administration is planning drastic cuts to our nuclear arsenal and could be planning to move away from our nuclear triad strategy altogether. All three legs of our Nation's nuclear triad are complementary to the defense of our Nation. Drastic cuts in our overall level of our Nation's nuclear arsenal puts our national security at risk and sharp reductions to any one leg of the nuclear triad would destabilize a sound defense strategy. Therefore, since the President made an agreement to modernize our arsenal, and Congress is still waiting to hear what those specifics are, Congress should not provide funding to facilitate these reductions. I urge adoption of these amendments.

Mr. BERG. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. BERG. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. Today, I rise to urge Congress to grant permanent normal trade relations, also known as PNTR, with Russia. Russia will soon join the World Trade Organization. This will increase trade with Russia, and it will create significant export opportunities. However, before we can take advantage of these trade benefits, we must grant permanent normal trade relations with Russia. This is a great opportunity for our State of North Dakota to increase trade with the ninth largest economy in the world. In 2011, last year, North Dakota had over $46 million worth of exports to Russia. This impacted 160 jobs in our State directly. That number will grow significantly if we grant PNTR to Russia. On the other hand, failing to grant them PNTR will significantly impact North Dakota businesses as well as all American businesses. It will put us at a competitive disadvantage. This is why it is important for Congress to grant permanent normal trade relations with Russia and to do it as quickly as possible.

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. Madam Speaker, last night the House Agriculture Committee finished its work on the farm bill, late last night, and I applaud Chairman Lucas and Ranking Member Peterson for their work. I rise today to call for full consideration of the farm bill before the House. Agriculture is the backbone of North Dakota, and North Dakota farmers and ranchers deserve the stability and certainty that a long-term reauthorized farm bill would provide. With the farm bill passing through committee with bipartisan support, including strong crop insurance, now is the time for the full House to act on it. I urge my colleagues to join with me and work together to get this bipartisan farm bill passed.

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. I thank the gentleman for recognizing me today. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the underlying bill, the Domestic Energy and Jobs Act. In my home State of North Dakota, we're seeing unprecedented growth. As it was mentioned, at 3 percent, North Dakota has the lowest unemployment rate in the country. We have a nearly $2 billion budget surplus. We have stabilized our finances, and we've created certainty. And I couldn't be more proud of our State. A large part of our economic success is due to a comprehensive energy policy and a commonsense regulatory environment which, in North Dakota, is known as EmPower North Dakota. In North Dakota, we know that all energy production is good energy production. Rather than picking winners and losers in energy, this EmPower act creates a stable, business-friendly climate. It does this by encouraging all energy production. North Dakota embraces all forms of energy production and natural resources capabilities across our State. And North Dakota is really proof that ``all-of-the-above'' really does work, and there's no reason why we should not be taking this proven approach to developing energy and domestic energy production and applying it nationwide. That's really the goal of this legislation that's being considered here in the House today. I am proud to offer my strong support for this legislation, and I encourage all of my colleagues to do the same by supporting this rule.

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. BERG. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4282) to amend part D of title IV of the Social Security Act to ensure that the United States can comply fully with the obligations of the Hague Convention of 23 November 2007 on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. BERG. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the subject of the bill under consideration.

Mr. BERG. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today with my colleague, Mr. Doggett of Texas, and other members of the Human Resources Subcommittee of the Committee on Ways and Means. I urge support for House Resolution 4282, as amended, the International Child Support Recovery Improvement Act of 2012. This bill provides the implementing legislation for the Hague Convention on International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance. Negotiation of this treaty began in 2003, and it was eventually signed in 2007. The Senate then provided its consent in 2010. Now States cannot take advantage of the benefits of this treaty until Congress moves forward. Currently, States have the option to recognize child support orders from other countries and many of them do. However, States have found that other countries are less cooperative in recognizing our orders. The Hague Convention seeks to address this issue by establishing a standardized process so more countries cooperate in the collection of child support. This will ensure that children in the United States have the same access to financial support even when one of their parents is abroad. This bill is about empowering the States, which operate the child support enforcement program, to do more for families and, most importantly, for children. My home State of North Dakota has already made the necessary changes to its State law to accept the Hague Convention. Unfortunately, we are one of only 10 States that have done so. The United States cannot ratify the Hague Convention until all States make the necessary changes, so now is the time to act. On March 20, the Human Resources Subcommittee of the Committee on Ways and Means had a hearing on this issue and heard that States are waiting to follow our lead. It's time for this Chamber to do its job and pass this bill, which will improve the program while resulting in modest savings. This bill also includes the continuation of our subcommittee's bipartisan efforts to standardize the process and data, and improve the exchange of data within and across human services programs. While the child support system already relies heavily on data exchanges, it's important for those efforts to be consistent with provisions we have recently enacted in child welfare, TANF, and unemployment programs. The goal is simple: improve government's efficiency; provide benefits to those who are eligible; and drive out waste, fraud, and abuse. Finally, this bill expands researcher's access to a database maintained by the Office of Child Support Enforcement. The National Directory of New Hires, NDNH, captures employment information for individuals working in most jobs in the United States. Expanding access to earning data in the NDNH will improve our ability to determine whether Federal education, training, and social service programs help people find and keep jobs. According to the administration, most Federal agencies do not currently have reliable access to data that can show the impact of their programs on a participant's employment and earnings. In an era of tighter resources, it's critical that we have reliable data to conduct rigorous evaluations and make sure that Federal investments are getting results. The National Child Support Enforcement Association represents the views of State agency child support directors and actively participated in the negotiations of the Hague Convention. I would like to thank Congressman Geoff Davis, the chairman of the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Human Resources. I would also like to thank the subcommittee's ranking member, Mr. Doggett, who joins me on the floor today, as well as other members of the subcommittee for their support and original cosponsorship. I invite all Members to join us in supporting this important bipartisan legislation. It will move us a step closer to ratifying the Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and ensuring that more children living in the United States receive the financial support they deserve. I urge all my colleagues to support it and reserve the balance of my time. Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy, April 10, 2012. Hon. Geoff Davis, Chairman, House Committee on Ways and Means, Subcommittee on Human Resources, Washington DC. Hon. Lloyd Doggett, Ranking Member, House Committee on Ways and Means, Subcommittee on Human Resources, Washington DC. Dear Chairman Davis and Ranking Member Doggett: I'm writing to express our strong support for your subcommittee's efforts, in H.R. 4282, to increase researcher access to the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH). As background, the Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, whose mission is to increase government effectiveness through rigorous evidence about ``what works.'' We have no financial interest in this or any other policy proposals or initiatives. Our support for your proposal to increase researcher access to NDNH is based on its potential to greatly lower the cost and burden of conducting scientifically-rigorous evaluations of employment programs, by enabling such studies to measure employment and earnings outcomes using existing administrative data rather than engaging in costly new data collection (e.g., individual interviews). As summarized in a short brief we recently developed-- Rigorous Program Evaluations on a Budget--in other policy areas where administrative data are more accessible, such as education and criminal justice, large-scale rigorous evaluations have sometimes been conducted for as little as $50,000 $100,000, producing valid evidence that is of policy and practical importance. Researcher access to NDNH data could bring this capability to workforce development policy, greatly accelerating the development of credible evidence about what works to improve the employment and earnings of U.S. workers. We appreciate your leadership on this important issue. Please let us know if we can be of assistance as it goes forward. Sincerely, Jon Baron, President.

Mr. BERG. Again, this legislation will help families, and most importantly, children--help them receive the financial services they need, regardless of where they live or where their parents live. I appreciate the comments of our subcommittee ranking member who has joined me here today on the floor in support of this bill, and I look forward to continuing to work with him as we improve the child support enforcement program. I yield back the balance of my time. Congress of the United States, House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, DC, May 18, 2012. Hon. Dave Camp, Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, 1102 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Camp, reference is made to H.R. 4282, the ``International Child Support Recovery Improvement Act of 2012,'' with respect to which the Committee on the Judiciary received a referral. I understand that the bill may soon proceed to consideration by the full House. As a result of your having consulted with the Judiciary Committee concerning provisions of the bill that fall within our Rule X jurisdiction, and your agreement to call up an amended version of the bill that is consistent with our mutual understanding with respect to those provisions, I to agree to discharge the Committee on the Judiciary from further consideration of the bill so that the bill may proceed expeditiously to the House Floor. The Judiciary Committee takes this action with our mutual understanding that, by foregoing consideration of H.R. 4282 at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or similar legislation, and that our committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as the bill or similar legislation moves forward so that we may address any remaining issues that fall within our Rule X jurisdiction. Our committee also reserves the right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this or similar legislation, and requests your support for any such request. Finally, I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming this understanding with respect to H.R. 4282, and would ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the Congressional Record during floor consideration thereof. Sincerely, Lamar Smith Chairman.

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. Mr. Speaker, in North Dakota, we know jobs come from small business, not from Big Government. Small business is the backbone of our economy, and it's the engine to get America back to work. Unfortunately, all too often, instead of helping small business, Washington serves as a roadblock to its growth by piling on excessive regulations and imposing burdensome complex Tax Code on the job creators. The legislation I'm introducing today is known as the Small Business Tax Simplification Act. It will simplify our Tax Code for small businesses. Instead of being bogged down with complex tax-reporting requirements, this bipartisan legislation will allow businesses to use a simplified form of accounting that more closely matches the way small business owners run their businesses. This bill represents commonsense change that would ease the burden of tax complexity for many small businesses, as they can spend more of their time and resources doing what they do best, and that's growing jobs and helping our economy.

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. Mr. Chair, on rollcall Nos. 24, 25, 26, and 27, had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' Amendment No. 8 offered by Mr. Cicilline

Mr. BERG

Mr. BERG. I thank the gentleman from Texas who understands the best solutions come from those people that are closest to the problem. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the Democrats' motion to instruct. With section 2123 of House bill 3630, we give States the waiver authority for unemployment insurance to test and expedite re-employment on individuals who are receiving unemployment benefits. We are empowering the States, who know their workers best, to be creative, to be innovative and to do more for workers to get them back to work. In my home State of North Dakota where the unemployment rate is the lowest in the Nation, we have tremendous re-employment programs that are operated through job service. The participants in these re- employment programs have even said, I would make this program a permanent feature so that all people who are unemployed have a chance to utilize it. And others who said, You will learn something you never thought about before. No one goes away without something. Instead of continuing the same Washington business-as-usual, inflexible approach to unemployment insurance, it's critical that we make commonsense reforms now. To me it's obvious: States know their workers best. Let's empower them. It's time for Washington to learn from the States, give them the flexibility they need. With that, I urge my colleagues to oppose the Democrat motion to instruct and support the underlying bill.