Ken Calvert

Mr. CALVERT

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I know a lot about the DERA program, obviously, from southern California, probably the most controlled air quality area in the United States, and there are a lot of things in EPA that don't work. There are a lot of things that EPA does to regulate, to create paperwork, and to create headaches for small- and large-business people. We have included a great number of policy provisions to address this EPA regulatory overreach in this bill. We have cut the EPA budget dramatically, as the gentlewoman just referred to. However, I believe this specific amendment targets a program that actually yields great benefits. Many counties across the Nation are currently in nonattainment with EPA's existing standards for the particulate matter and ozone. We are not talking about the standards that are being talked about. We are talking about the standards that were put in place in 2008. In many instances, these counties have been in nonattainment for years, and those communities need help to improve their air quality. The Diesel Emission Reduction Program, or DERA, is a proven, cost- effective program that provides grants to States to retrofit old diesel engines. So it is a program that supports manufacturing jobs while reducing pollution. Another benefit is that these grants are highly leveraged, producing $13 of economic benefit for every Federal grant dollar. Today's newer engines produce 90 percent--let me say that again--90 percent less toxic emissions than the older diesel engines. Remember, I have experience with trucks, and these independent truck drivers, those who have those trucks, get a lot of miles out of those trucks, sometimes well over a million miles off a truck. However, only 30 percent of the trucks and heavy-duty vehicles have transitioned to cleaner technologies, typically because especially these small truck companies just can't afford to get this new technology. We need to follow the science and accelerate the replacement of older engines with these new, clean engines, which, by the way, get better mileage and, at the same time, clean up the air considerably. This is a program that is actually working. We have seen significant--I know the Obama administration doesn't like this program. They don't like programs that actually work. They want to get rid of the programs that work and have money be put into these esoteric climate change studies and so forth and so on, and I can tell the gentleman, from experience, that this had significant impacts in the South Coast Air Quality District where I live in, an area that has probably been impacted with all the problems of air quality more than any other region in the United States of America. Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge Members to vote ``no'' on the gentleman's amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, this is an important debate. I recognize that we have had Federal agencies that have had overreach and have done things that go beyond their training and possibly should be done by other agencies. I won't disagree with that; but doing this in an appropriation bill is not the right place to do this. The authorizers should have this debate, and we shouldn't be making these determinations with an appropriations bill which just broadly states that we are going to get rid of a whole swath of law enforcement, whether they are good or bad. It doesn't determine that because we can't do that in this type of legislative process. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum).

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I will just restate my opposition to this amendment. And I would hope that the gentleman could work with his colleagues in South Carolina and work all this out. But I must oppose the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it provides an appropriation for an unauthorized program and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI. Clause 2 of rule XXI states in pertinent part: ``An appropriation may not be in order as an amendment for an expenditure not previously authorized by law.'' Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes to appropriate funds. The amendment, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI. I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. CALVERT. As someone who has always had the utmost respect for our fellow countrymen from the territories, I look forward to working with the gentlewoman from American Samoa, and I want to thank her for her efforts to inform the committee on the issues of the insular areas. I am well aware of just how dedicated to our country the people of American Samoa are, as displayed by their extremely high rate of enlistment in our Nation's Armed Forces. Your membership in this body is highly valued, and the appointment as vice chairman of the Indian, Insular, and Alaska Native Affairs Subcommittee as a first-term member is a testament to the perspective and leadership you bring to Congress. Through your leadership, your people are well respected and have found themselves a champion for their cause.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is the mirror opposite, as the gentleman knows, of the Hudson amendment that is currently pending via a rollcall vote. The Hudson amendment would allow lease 260 to move forward under the Department of the Interior's next 5-year offshore leasing plan for 2017 through 2022. The Sanford amendment would prevent lease 260 from moving forward under the next 5-year plan. And given the competing amendments, I must oppose this amendment, since we accepted the other amendment last night. So I would ask for a ``no'' vote on this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I must rise in reluctant opposition to this amendment.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from American Samoa (Mrs. Radewagen) for the purpose of a colloquy.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. CALVERT. I would just, again, oppose this amendment. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CALVERT. The amendment doesn't recognize the suspension and debarment process that is already in place for Federal contractors. It does not provide exceptions for critical, urgent, or compelling needs or allow for the consideration of mitigating factors. I am concerned that this amendment would impose strict legal triggers and take away the ability for Federal agencies to investigate and determine appropriate remedies. I am also concerned that it would deny the due process that the current suspension and debarment system provides. And finally, this is an issue that should be thoroughly vetted through the authorization process, not through the appropriation process. I would urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I thank the gentleman. Again, Mr. Chairman, I think this is a program that has worked, continues to work, and has had significant improvement in my area in California and, I know, throughout the United States, where we have a program that actually does work. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), my ranking member, who has a couple of comments.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 2822.

Mr. CALVERT

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. CALVERT

Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I just want to say that I enjoyed and continue to enjoy working with the gentlewoman as we move this process forward and appreciate her courtesy and kindness. As I say, we will continue to work at this process as we move ahead.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. CALVERT. This amendment will codify existing National Park Service policy and directives with regard to the declaration of cemeteries and concession sales. I urge adoption of my amendment.