Lois Capps

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mrs. CAPPS. May I ask how much time is left?

Mrs. CAPPS. I am happy to yield my 1 minute to my colleague from Florida, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a mother of three young children.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. I thank my colleague for yielding time. Mr. Chairman, I express my strong opposition to this bill that will dismantle public health standards and safeguards and increase air pollution. The TRAIN Act may have started as a ``study,'' but it has transformed into a fundamentally different beast. It will neither create jobs nor stimulate the economy. Instead, the TRAIN Act indefinitely blocks the EPA's Cross-State Air Pollution Rule and Mercury and Air Toxics Standards. These are designed to protect our children and our families from dangerous pollutants. We know that blocking these standards will lead to tens of thousands of premature deaths every single year. It will lead to more heart attacks, more respiratory illnesses, more children in the hospital hooked up to respirators. The TRAIN Act means more exposure to toxic mercury as well, a brain poison that causes developmental disorders, especially in small children and the unborn. But, Mr. Chairman, the TRAIN Act will also hurt the economy. It will make it harder for families to make ends meet. It will force Americans to miss millions of days of work each year in order to care for sick family members or themselves. It will waste billions of taxpayer dollars treating preventable illnesses and disease caused by pollution, which could have been prevented. And it will saddle families and businesses with out-of- pocket medical costs and higher insurance premiums. That's what the TRAIN Act is really about, blocking the EPA from ridding our air of pollutants that cause asthma attacks, respiratory illnesses among children, heart disease, and premature deaths. And the other side of the aisle wants to make it worse than it already is. Later today, Mr. Whitfield will offer an amendment that imposes even longer mandatory delays on EPA's two lifesaving clean air standards, and it would rewrite the Clean Air Act to reverse the way toxic air pollution standards are set. Instead of basing standards on the cleanest plants, the standards would be based on what the oldest and dirtiest plants are doing. Today Administrator Jackson testified that this change alone would make it impossible to ever issue a cross-State pollution standard. Another amendment, led by Mr. Latta, would invert the Clean Air Act's 40-year-old requirement that EPA set its clean air standards on health science and medicine alone. His amendment would eliminate that right, which Americans depend upon. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on these dangerous amendments because Americans don't want millions of tons of toxic pollution dumped into their lungs. They want jobs, and they aren't fooled that they need to pay for those jobs with more pollution. They want a stronger economy, not increased health care costs and suffering. And, most importantly, they want their children to breathe clean and safe air. I urge my colleagues vote ``no'' on this bill.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Madam Speaker, as I traveled throughout my district these last few weeks, one issue dominated all conversations--jobs. As my colleagues on the other side created the default crisis this summer, the American people threw up their hands in disgust and dismay, and I don't blame them. Our constituents know the number one issue facing this country is jobs, and they know this Congress must take concrete actions to grow our economy, and it must take them now. The good news is we have a plan. The American Jobs Act is a commonsense, bipartisan plan to put Americans back to work and strengthen our economy. It keeps teachers in the classrooms and cops and firefighters on our streets. It rebuilds our crumbling roads and bridges, modernizes our schools, and rehabilitates our neighborhoods. It cuts taxes for small businesses, workers and their families. The time for political games--which are costing jobs and creating economic uncertainty--has passed. I urge the House leadership, help us pass the American Jobs Act, and let's pass it now.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, Sunday marks the 10th anniversary of one of our Nation's most tragic days. This weekend, we remember and honor those we lost and those they left behind. In the days and months following these attacks, our Nation was in mourning, but there was also hope as we came together to build a stronger country. This anniversary, let us reawaken that spirit. Ten years ago, we stood on the Capitol steps, Republicans and Democrats alike, in a show of national unity and resolve. The spirit of that moment was only a tiny symbolic action dwarfed by the enormous outpouring of kindness and volunteerism across this Nation, but it is one we clearly need to see again. Let us once again channel the strength we found in the aftermath of 9/11 and begin a new chapter in rebuilding America.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor and celebrate a dedicated public servant and my longtime staffer and friend, Barbara Haile. Barbara Haile would make a good book. Each chapter could start with, ``When I had dinner with . . .'' Unfortunately, many of those passages would be left out because she could recognize their faces but not always their names. Some dinner stories would start with professional athletes, such as Baseball Hall of Famers Willie Mays and Willie McCovey or they would end with after dinner taxi rides with people like Norman Mailer arguing with one of his many wives. If you drop a name of an iconic American in the last half century, it's a good bet Barbara knew them or at least had dinner with them. Her life story took her from Jamaica to the United Nations in New York, to Saudi Arabia to San Francisco during the late 60s, eventually landing in San Luis Obispo with her husband Allen Haile and two children, Jonathan and Courtney. And speaking of books, Barbara can recite the Good Book from memory and may break out singing an old-time hymnal, though she would never describe herself as a religious woman, just the product of a traditional Jamaican upbringing. Whether the results of her traditional Jamaican work ethic or her life experiences she could also write a how- to on helping those in need. The consummate caseworker, Barbara's name is known throughout federal government agencies. If you work in one of my offices and have the occasion to speak with a Federal social service agency you will eventually be asked, ``Oh, Representative Capps's office. Do you work with Barbara Haile?'' It is not because she had dinner with these folks but because she is a caseworker extraordinaire who found ways to help people who had given up hope. Barbara Haile was the last hope for many people facing walls of bureaucracy and red tape or those without options until she authored one of her countless letters. Her tenacity for helping those in need likely led to officials trying to find a way to help because they knew she would not go away. While her countless stories of finding homeless veterans a place to live, getting seniors needed healthcare or assisting immigrants to become American citizens are confidential, the volume of files on her cases would make Superman, possibly a dinner guest, cringe at moving her cabinets to make room for more. Barbara will be sorely missed not only by me but by the entire community of the Central Coast of California. Not only has her hard work helped countless constituents but she is a true example of a dedicated public servant. Her service and diligence to both me and my late husband Walter--and, most importantly, to the constituents we serve--will not be forgotten. I am honored to have worked with her, and proud to call her my friend.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to my good friend, Henry L. ``Hank'' Lacayo, an exceptional individual who has dedicated his life to public service, community leadership and social activism. On August 20, 2011, the Henry L. ``Hank'' Lacayo Tribute Committee will be celebrating Hank's 80th birthday, and honoring him for his endless contributions to the county of Ventura, the State of California and our Nation. Hank is currently serving a fifth term as State President of the Congress of California Seniors, a statewide senior advocacy organization. But Hank has been an active and engaged community leader for more than half a century. He first began his labor career in 1953, and was soon elected to become the President of UAW Local 887, representing over 32,000 workers at North America Aviation/Rockwell International in Los Angeles. During his presidency Hank served as an instrumental figure in several events that forever changed our nation. Hank's activism during the civil rights movement was one of them. In August of 1963, Hank led a delegation from the L.A. area to join Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. at the Washington DC. civil rights march. Hank also showed his support of Cesar Chavez by serving as a key individual in encouraging the UAW to financially aid farm workers. Although Hank's trajectory has been focused within the work of labor unions, he has also been heavily involved within the Latino Community. Raised in Chihuahua, Mexico, Hank has stayed close to his roots and culture. He joined the late Willie Velazquez and Dr. Juan Andrade to help found the U.S. Hispanic Leadership Institute, and he served as its first President and Chairman of the Board. Hank also currently serves as the Chair of the Vision Committee and co-founder of Destino: The Hispanic Legacy Fund of the Ventura County Community Foundation. Hank has been recognized on numerous occasions and has received various prestigious honors and recognitions. These include the Tri- Counties Labor Leader of the Year, The Pat Brown Institute Life-Time Public Service Award, California Lutheran University Exemplar Medallion and, among many others, the U.S. Hispanic Leadership Institute National Hispanic Hero Award. Hank has been able to expand his life legacy to many broad aspects of community leadership and public service. It is my distinct pleasure to ask my colleagues to join with me in wishing Henry L. ``Hank'' Lacayo a happy 80th birthday and in saluting him for his years of public service and community leadership.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the Republican Default Act. I oppose this bill because it does nothing but guarantee another default crisis in six months. It's nothing more than another partisan gimmick that will quickly be voted down in the Senate. The majority says it wants a plan to address our nation's deficit, and the President has worked with them to achieve this goal. He has negotiated in good faith and put everything on the table, demanding only that the plan be balanced and responsible. And how did the majority respond? They refused to compromise and walked out of negotiations . . . twice. Clearly, the majority is more focused on pushing their ideological agenda to end Medicare and preserve tax breaks for Big Oil and Wall Street than forging a good faith compromise to avoid default. Mr. Speaker, compromising is what the American people send us here to do. As the President said, they voted for a divided government, not a dysfunctional one. It's time to stop the gimmicks and ensure our country does not default on its obligations. Default would destroy close to 700,000 jobs, spike interest rates on credit cards and mortgages, and cause untold damage to our struggling economy. Ronald Reagan took the necessary steps to avoid default 17 times. George W. Bush did it 7 times. No games. No gimmicks. Just a clean vote to avoid default and maintain the full faith and credit of the United States. I urge my colleagues to come back to the table and forge the balanced and responsible compromise the American people deserve.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor 21-year-old United States Marine Lance Corporal Cody James Elliott of Pismo Beach, California. On June 12, 2011, while out on patrol, LCPL Elliott ran to help his Brother in Arms, Josh McDaniels, who had been injured in an IED explosion. While en route to his fallen comrade--without regard for his own safety--LCPL Elliott was severely wounded by another IED explosion. Every day, magnificent men such as Cody shine on the battlefields of honor, bringing their light of heroism and selflessness to the darkness of war--making us all proud to be Americans. In the blast, LCPL Cody lost his left leg, broke his tibia in his right leg, and lost one of his fingers. In just a few short weeks, he has come a long way in dealing with his wounds and is moving full speed towards recovery. With the help of his family, he continues to recover and show us what it means to bravely serve our country. I ask that this poem penned in his honor by Albert Caswell be placed in the Congressional Record. Run To Me (By Albert Caswell) Run . . . Run to me . . . On battlefields of honor bright . . . There are but all of those who so carry the fight! All with their most magnificent light! To win that day, to that night! Who so shine, all in their most sacrificial light . . . Who for all of their Brothers In Arms, are but so ready to die! All in the blood that binds them, this most sacrificial tie! Which brings such tears to the Angel's eyes! As it was on the day in June, when Cody you so ran . . . as your heart so swooned! As your Brother Josh lay dying, as you ran to him . . . not asking why then! All in your most magnificent shades of green, oh yea you United States Marine! As when that bomb went off, as you lie there in all its cost . . . All in what you had given, all in what you had lost! As the tears rolled down your face, all in what this war had brought! As up ahead but lie a new front . . . Only twenty-one years old, and barely hanging on . . . As it was then there you so saw you had a choice! As you told yourself, get up Marine . . . while listening to your most inner voice! As from deep down within, but came such a force! As now Cody, your new life would so begin . . . With that first step, all in that pain and heartache which lie so up ahead . . . As somehow, you lifted up your fine head and so said! I did not die, I am not dead! As you so chose to feel that wind upon your face . . . All for your Fallen Brothers, all in your heart they now so hold such a special place! For you've got a life to live, as now you picked up the pace! A life to lead, as it's now Cody you've so chosen to move at light speed! For you are a United States Marine, all in what your recovery has so seen . . . You see, people like you Cody . . . so give to us all what we so need! Because, You So Teach Us! And You So Beseech Us! As so deep down inside, You So Reach Us! With all of your most courageous faith, You So Speak To Us Out On Our Ways! For you will run, and you will breathe . . . and oh yea Cody you will so succeed! And if I ever, I so have a son . . . I pray that he may be as courageous as you my son . . . Whose heart to me so runs! Because, Cody in heaven you need not arms or legs, and that's where you are going one day . . . And, you will hear our Lord so say, ``Cody, Run To Me!'' All for what you gave, Run To Me!

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chair, I want to speak in favor of Mr. Bass' amendment to restore funds to the Land and Water Conservation Fund. More than 40 years ago, Congress made a commitment to the American public--a commitment to use a small portion of revenues from offshore drilling toward natural resource conservation and outdoor recreation programs--a commitment to partially offset the depletion of limited natural resources that belong to us all. Diverting these funds goes against the promise that Congress made to the American public back in 1965 and the American public doesn't support it. A new bipartisan poll released today by the LWCF Coalition shows that 85 percent of Americans support full funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund. The nation's primary tool to conserve land for parks, wildlife refuges, forests, rivers, trails, historic and cultural sites. Cuts to the LWCF undermine the economic asset that our Federal, State, and local public lands represent in this country. And rob the American public of the opportunity to enjoy and recreate in these special places. According to the Outdoor Industry Foundation, outdoor recreation activities, including hunting, fishing, camping, and other activities contribute a total of $730 billion annually to the economy. Supporting 1 of every 20 jobs in the U.S. and stimulating 8 percent of all consumer spending. Support jobs, support our natural treasures, and keep our commitment to the American public. Vote ``yes'' on the Bass Amendment to restore funds to the LWCF.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chair, I want to speak in favor of Mr. Moran's amendment to strike an irresponsible provision in the underlying spending bill. Sec. 124 puts our wild lands in harm's way by prohibiting funds from being used to implement, administer, or enforce Secretarial Order 3310, or the ``wild lands'' policy. This policy is a reasonable, well-grounded approach that will facilitate public participation and will restore balance to our public lands management policies. Most importantly, it will protect cherished natural icons from development. I commend the Secretary on his Order to resume the Interior Department's compliance with Wilderness Act and other existing laws that guarantee wilderness preservation. The Secretarial Order overturns a flawed decision made by former Interior Secretary Norton during the Bush Administration to halt all assessment or new protection of public land with wilderness characteristics. In effect, the Bush Administration stopped complying with the statutory requirements of the Wilderness Act and other laws. The Salazar Order reverses that decision. As a Member of Congress who understands the value of preserving wild places I fully support Salazar's decision to restore balance to public land management and any other measures taken to ensure the protection of ecologically important spaces. Clearly, some of my colleagues do not agree with me. Once again, the majority is trying to block BLM's and Congress' ability to manage public lands for the people. They are breaking with years of bipartisan tradition of protecting these important spaces. But we've witnessed these same tactics before with H.R. 1 earlier this year. Blocking funds for the ``wild lands policy'' will have the immediate effect of despoiling thousands of acres of wild lands. Destroying what could have been a legacy for future generations. It allows the American people, through their elected representatives, to decide which lands should be permanently preserved as wilderness. It is supported by the millions of Americans who are committed to the preservation of our wilderness heritage. Without the policy, many of our nation's pristine wild and public lands remain at risk. Don't take nature away from the American people. Vote ``yes'' on Mr. Moran's amendment to strike this irresponsible provision from the Interior spending bill.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, in the over 200 days since the majority has controlled this House, they have yet to bring a bill to the floor that would create jobs or help working families, not one. Not one bill to create jobs and build a stronger economy for the future. Not one bill to invest in education, innovation, or infrastructure. Instead, we have a partisan agenda to unfairly burden the middle class with deep cuts while preserving tax cuts for the wealthy and loopholes for Big Oil and corporations that ship jobs overseas. And to make things worse, the majority is threatening to force an unprecedented default on our Nation's debt. A default would destroy close to 700,000 jobs, spike interest rates on credit cards and mortgages, and cause untold damage to our struggling economy. This is not what the markets are looking for, and it's certainly not what the American people want. They want us to help create jobs and reduce the deficit. They want us to compromise on a fair and balanced approach that doesn't just kick the can down the road. The American people are asking us today to put aside our differences for the good of this country. I support this responsible approach and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, the legislation we are considering today undermines the ability of the Federal Government to continue protecting our Nation's air, land, and waters. I intended to offer an amendment, along with my colleague from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and my colleague from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), to fully fund the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, fully fund the national agency in charge of regulating offshore oil and gas drilling. Unfortunately, due to changes by the Republican leadership to the House budget process, we weren't allowed to offer this amendment. Mr. Chairman, it's been over a year since the Nation's worst offshore oil spill. And I think our constituents would be surprised to learn that rather than taking action to prevent another deadly spill, this House continues to talk about expanding offshore drilling while sidestepping environmental laws to do so. They would also be surprised to learn that the underlying bill blocks the bureau's ability to collect inspection fees, and, as a result, the agency would see a $35 million cut in their budget. Mr. Chairman, in his fiscal year 2012 budget request, President Obama asked for a significant increase for the bureau over his 2010 budget. He asked for this new money to hire additional inspectors, to enhance environmental reviews, and to enforce strengthened regulations. If we recall a year ago and the events following the spill, we will understand why this is the case. While this request was a significant increase over prior years, the administration proposed to offset nearly half of the request by increasing the inspection fees on offshore rigs. This was a key recommendation of the President's bipartisan, independent national oil spill commission. In their final report, the commissioners recommended the industry fees should be increased to, and I quote from their report, ``provide adequate leasing capabilities and regulatory oversight for the increasingly complex energy-related activities being undertaken on the OCS.'' Our straightforward amendment adopts this key recommendation to provide the funding needed for government regulators to do their jobs, and it will ensure a safer and more environmentally responsible industry. Mr. Chairman, knowing what we know now, if we continue to allow offshore drilling in U.S. waters, the government has a responsibility to ensure that they are protecting us against a repeat of last year's disaster. And if oil and gas corporations want the opportunity to drill, it's only fair for them to help cover the cost of ensuring it's done properly, that their workers are protected, and the surrounding ocean is safe. But, ultimately, Congress holds the purse strings, and we must require these corporations to step up so the bureau can ensure that the people, communities, economies, and environment in the gulf, Alaska, and off the southern California coast are sufficiently protected against a spill. Whether or not we have an agency capable of properly regulating the oil and gas industry is dependent upon our decisions. Without these fees, taxpayers, rather than the industry, would have to shoulder the costs of these operations. If we want to ensure safe and responsible energy development, we must put the lessons learned from the BP oil disaster to use. I urge my colleagues to vote down this bill which blocks the bureau's ability to collect inspection fees. It's what is needed so we do not have to endure a repeat of the horrific disaster that is still inflicting pain and damage to the Gulf of Mexico and to those who make their living from it. What a terrible legacy of this Congress that we have done so little following the gulf oil disaster. What a legacy should, God forbid, a future disaster take place and we would have remembered that on our watch we could have done something about it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPPS. I move to strike the last word.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. I thank my colleague for yielding. Madam Chair, I rise to speak against this hazardous piece of legislation. H.R. 1938 directs the President to allow Canadian oil companies to build a dangerous pipeline through American lands and waters. And H.R. 1938 would expedite the pipeline's permitting process despite a long list of unaddressed concerns from numerous communities. The environmental impacts of this pipeline--which would extend over 1,600 miles through six States--have not been thoroughly considered. And we know that this project has the potential to significantly impact the environment. We have already seen what damage can be done. There have been 12 spills along TransCanada's Keystone pipeline in its first 12 months of operation. And the Keystone XL pipeline will deliver some of the most destructive oil on the planet. Tar sands oil contain higher concentrations of toxic chemicals, like sulfur, nickel, nitrogen, and lead, than conventional oil. And a barrel of tar sands oil emits up to three times more climate-disrupting gases than conventional oil. Building this pipeline would be the greenhouse equivalent of adding roughly 6.5 million passenger vehicles to a highway or constructing 12 new coal-fired power plants. Major concerns arise about the negative impacts of the pipeline on public health and the environment. At a time when we must find ways to end our dependence on fossil fuels, it is simply not in the national interest to deepen our reliance on one of the most dirtiest forms of oil on the planet. I believe that conducting the appropriate analysis under NEPA, which cannot be done properly if it's rushed, will make this abundantly clear. We need to be moving forward by supporting clean, renewable energy in this country. And while the President is calling for a reduction in oil imports, this bill calls for an increase. For all these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 1938.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I am in favor of Mr. Dicks' amendment to remove this destructive and shortsighted anti-wildlife rider from the underlying bill. The rider would gut the Endangered Species Act, as we've been discussing--a law that has worked for 40 years to successfully conserve our Nation's plants and animals. It would do this by blocking the Fish and Wildlife Service from new listings and bar the designation of critical habitat for currently listed species. As has been said on both sides of the aisle this evening, this provision creates a one-way path to weakening wildlife protections by allowing the service to delist and downgrade a species' status from endangered to threatened but not to list new species. Unless a species is listed, it receives no protection under the ESA. Currently, the service has identified over 260 species that warrant protection but cannot be listed due to a lack of Federal resources. That's 260 species of plants and animals found across the Nation that are in dire need of assistance and are at risk of disappearing forever. Mr. Chairman, America's native plants and animals are already in serious trouble--under constant threat from toxic pesticides, air and water pollution, habitat destruction, and climate change; but this shortsighted and irresponsible rider may prove to be the most immediate and serious threat of all, sending countless species into extinction and destroying America's great conservation legacy. It is our responsibility here to protect and conserve our Nation's most precious resources for future generations, and of course, that's why the Endangered Species Act was written. It codifies our commitment to good stewardship, and it preserves what we hold dear for the benefit of our children and our grandchildren. Since its initiation, we've witnessed incredible comebacks. Animals that were once on the verge of disappearing forever are thriving once again. Because of the Endangered Species Act and other successful partnerships, bald eagles have returned, not only to Washington State, but to the Channel Islands off the coast of my congressional district. Just a few years ago, a pair of nesting bald eagles produced the first wild-born chicks in 50 years on Santa Cruz Island. Also on the Central Coast, we've seen California condors and peregrine falcons soaring through our skies once again. The Guadalupe fur seal, which was hunted to near extinction, can now be seen swimming off the Channel Islands. There are similar success stories for the southern sea otter and the blue whale, both found in the Central Coast waters of California; and the return of Island Foxes, whose population dropped down to less than 100, is now back above 1,200. Mr. Chairman, of course there are so many examples across the country--Florida panthers, gray wolves, grizzly bears--and hundreds more species that have not gone extinct after receiving protection under the act. These species can't wait any longer, and we can't let them disappear forever on our watch. I strongly urge my colleagues to support Mr. Dicks' amendment to strike this irresponsible provision in the bill. We can and must do better. Our children and our grandchildren are depending upon us. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPPS. I move to strike the last word.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I want to speak in strong opposition to this reckless bill and the abundance of extraneous and irresponsible provisions that it contains. Right now we are down to the wire on defaulting on our debt. But instead of focusing on a way forward, the majority is offering up this ill-conceived piece of legislation, a bill that is polluted--and I emphasize ``polluted''--with unrelated and inappropriate riders that do not belong in a spending bill. The reality is that these riders will have very little impact on our national deficit, but they will have a huge and lasting effect on our health, our environment, and our natural resources. So why are these programs being targeted? Well, we've seen this before with H.R. 1 earlier this year, and we're seeing it again now. The majority is choosing to reward Big Oil and polluters at the expense of the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the wildlife and wild places we hold dear. Mr. Chairman, it's not an exaggeration to say that this bill drastically undermines our government's ability to protect our environment. This bill jeopardizes the conservation and protection of places like the Channel Islands National Park in my congressional district and the wildlife this special place harbors; closing a quarter of national wildlife refuges across the country, affecting places like the Guadeloupe Dunes near Santa Maria; slashing support for Federal programs that support our outstanding natural areas, like the Piedras Blancas Light Station or the Carrizo Plain National Monument in California; opening up protected and sensitive areas in California's national forest to off-road vehicle use, putting places like Los Padres National Forest at risk; and blocking the protection of wilderness- quality lands. And as the bill stands, Mr. Chairman, it would bar new listings of threatened and endangered species as well as critical habitat designations. And it would gut the successful Land and Water Conservation Fund, which is our Nation's principal source of Federal funding to preserve irreplaceable lands and waters. Under this disaster of a bill, the LWCF would be reduced to the lowest level in its 45-year history, an 80 percent cut compared to last year's funding. And who will benefit from this cut? Not the American taxpayer because this fund is paid for from offshore drilling revenues. Instead, communities will lose important conservation and recreation projects that create jobs and improve the quality of life for working and middle class Americans. But this assault isn't limited to our lands and wildlife. This dirty legislation is also littered with riders that seek to gut the protections of the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts, such as preventing the EPA from strengthening limitations on polluted storm water runoff, blocking the EPA's oversight on water used by power plants, and impeding the clarification of which streams and wetlands are protected under the act. Under the House spending plan, the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds will also see significant cuts. These are the funds established for States to complete water infrastructure projects, projects which create jobs and provide clean, safe drinking water. The riders in this bill, Mr. Chairman, are also an assault on the very air we breathe. They would prevent the EPA from limiting carbon pollution from power plants and other stationary sources, from updating limits on smog and mercury emissions. One rider would block the EPA from setting new mileage standards for cars, and won't even allow the State of California to set its own standards. Surely we can think of better solutions to solve our fiscal problems rather than attacking our air, our water, and our lands. Sadly, this Interior appropriations bill deeply undermines our important role of passing on an America whose land, water, and air are clean, healthy, productive, beautiful, and accessible for all to enjoy. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this terrible, terrible bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Madam Speaker, last year we enacted historic new consumer protections as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. This landmark law created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the first Federal regulator dedicated exclusively to protecting consumers from deceptive practices and potentially harmful financial products and services. Protecting consumers from predatory lending and confusing credit cards is something we should all be able to agree on. It is good for consumers, and it is good for businesses that want to know their competitors are playing by the rules. But the majority has made it clear they don't like these new protections and has worked actively to undermine them. This week, the House will consider H.R. 1315, a bill that increases bureaucratic redtape and seriously weakens the bureau's authority to protect consumers. Sadly, the majority is yet again choosing Wall Street and its high-paid lobbyists over middle class families. I urge my colleagues to put the needs of Main Street over those of Wall Street and vote ``no'' on H.R. 1315.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to applaud the work of the Institute of Medicine's Committee on Preventive Services for Women, who released their critically important final report yesterday. The IOM's recommendations are clear. Women need access to annual well-woman preventive visits, access to screening for domestic violence, gestational diabetes, and a full range of sexually transmitted diseases. They need to have increased breastfeeding support, and they need to have access to contraceptives, all without cost sharing. In these hard economic times, these recommendations underscore the imperative that women and their families should not have to choose between preventive care and paying their bills. The IOM was bold. It broke through the extreme politics surrounding women's health and, instead, relies on rigorous science to make its determinations. We must follow the IOM's lead and ensure all women have access to these services, no matter where they get their health care or how much they earn.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I was not able to be present for the following rollcall vote on July 18, 2011. I would have voted as follows: rollcall No. 601: yes; rollcall No. 602: yes.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I rise is strong opposition to H.R. 2560. This misguided legislation is a ridiculous gimmick that has been dismissed as such by budget and economic experts on both sides of the aisle. It does nothing to pay our bills. It does nothing to create jobs and grow our economy. And it does nothing to address the rapidly approaching default crisis. So what would it actually do? It would destroy jobs and cause economic catastrophe. It protects tax breaks and loopholes for Big Oil and Wall Street by cutting the critical safety net programs seniors, children and American families depend on. And, it would double down on the draconian Ryan Budget, ending Medicare and more than doubling health care costs for seniors. Rather than wasting yet more time debating a bill that won't pass the Senate and would be vetoed by the President, we should be doing the one thing guaranteed to reduce our deficit immediately--create jobs. Yes, we must make tough choices to reduce spending and balance our budget. But these cuts must not endanger our economic future. We still need to invest in innovation, infrastructure and education to create the jobs today and in the future and to ensure a well-trained workforce to do those jobs. Putting people to work and helping businesses grow increases revenue streams and decreases budget deficits. This is the most effective way to reduce the deficit and pay our bills while still protecting our economic future. This bill, however, would do the opposite by balancing the budget on the backs of seniors, the middle income families and the most vulnerable among us. Our deficit is a serious problem that requires serious solutions. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2560 is not a serious solution, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. I yield myself as much time as I may consume. My amendment would ensure the Nuclear Regulatory Commission does not move forward with the license renewal process for the Diablo Canyon power plant, located in my congressional district, until advanced seismic studies are completed and independently reviewed. Over the last several months, I've called for a short pause in the relicensing effort currently under way at this nuclear power plant until a myriad of seismic questions at the facility are answered. Further studies are needed to demonstrate if the plant's design and operations can withstand an earthquake and other potential threats, including a previously undetected fault line, the Shoreline Fault, which runs within a few hundred yards of the plant. Even PG&E, the plant's operator, has acknowledged the validity of these concerns. Earlier this year, the utility acceded to my request and asked the NRC to delay the finance issuance of the plant's license renewal while it completes recommended advanced seismic studies of the area. The NRC agreed to review those findings before making a final decision. PG&E also asked the California Public Utilities Commission to suspend proceedings associated with license renewal for Diablo Canyon until the studies are submitted to the NRC. But, Mr. Chairman, PG&E and the NRC are only talking about delaying the final decision. The relicensing process is still going forward, despite the fact that virtually all of the decisions that would be made about the relicensing of the plant would be affected by what the seismic studies tell us. The cart is clearly being put before the horse here, and we need to rectify this. My constituents deserve answers to questions regarding the ability of the plant to withstand an earthquake and nuclear accident at the same time and how long the plant would be self-sustaining in the event of such damage. It is particularly pertinent given that in March the NRC confirmed that Diablo Canyon is one of two nuclear power plants in the highest risk seismic areas in the country. I am, to put it lightly, concerned that the NRC has not taken this seismic risk seriously enough. For example, it has failed to support the recommendations from a 2008 California Energy Commission report clearly delineating that more information is needed to determine the true seismic risk at Diablo Canyon. And just yesterday, an NRC task force review of the Japanese reactor meltdowns determined that our reactors are not sufficiently prepared to respond to catastrophic events or even simple power outages, like the one that triggered the Fukushima meltdown. The NRC should quickly move to adopt the recommendations of this report as well as the full complement of lessons that can be learned from this disaster, and it should do it before moving forward on issuing new operating licenses to PG&E to run Diablo Canyon long into the future. Finally, it is important to note, Mr. Chairman, that there is no hurry to relicense Diablo Canyon. The current operating licenses run to 2024 and 2025. Surely that's more than enough time to adequately investigate seismic concerns in a thoughtful and transparent manner. To be clear, I'm not calling for Diablo Canyon to be shut down or for the plant to be denied new operating licenses. What I am doing with this amendment is asking that the relicensing process be paused, briefly, until comprehensive, independent analyses of the seismic issues are completed and that they be considered as part of the relicensing process. Diablo Canyon provides over 3 million people in California with affordable electricity. It provides many jobs in my district. It's an important element of the tax base of San Luis Obispo County; but this is an issue about safety, and we all agree that safety must be everyone's number one concern here. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment that would ensure that this is the case. I yield back the balance of my time. Point of Order