Dennis Cardoza

Mr. CARDOZA

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Speaker, in the 7 years that I have been here and the years that I have watched this Congress beforehand, I sometimes watch the floor and I can't believe what I'm hearing. I can't believe my ears. Today what I'm hearing on the floor really takes the cake. The gentlewoman from North Carolina in her statement just now indicated that the Republican GOP had passed the Civil Rights Act legislation with almost no help from the Democrats. I can't believe my ears. It was the Kennedy and Johnson administrations where we passed that Great Society legislation. It was over the objections of people like Jesse Helms from the gentlewoman's State that we passed that civil rights legislation. John Lewis, a Member of this House, was beaten on the Edmund Pettus Bridge to get that civil rights legislation passed. Tell John Lewis that he wasn't part of getting that legislation passed. I sometimes cannot believe what I hear on this House floor. And I will tell you today that I will stand by these statements, and I am very proud of what my party has done to advance civil rights legislation in the United States of America. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the gentlewoman's statement where she talked at great length about the fact that the House is being closed down, that the debate is being stifled. And I would like to remind the House of an earlier statement that I made that there were only two amendments submitted to the Rules Committee on H.R. 2781. One of the amendments was nothing more than a change of the title which consisted of political talking points, added zero substance to the bill. The other amendment was both nongermane and a violation of the PAYGO requirements of this House, two of the most important rules that are part of the conducting of debates in this House. So the gentlewoman is advocating that we break the House rules and agree to an amendment that is really de minimis to the grander aspect of what we're trying to do here. The local community has asked for this designation, the local Congressman. In fact, you've heard today that three Members of Congress from Oregon all advocate for this bill. I'm sure there are more. The reality is that the local folks have determined that this is the best way to create economic development, and the 420 acres that are being so grandly discussed by the other side as reason to oppose this bill, that are going to cause economic devastation for both this area and the country--well, the local folks don't believe it, and neither does anybody else. This is a good bill, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to now yield 5 minutes to my colleague from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).

Mr. CARDOZA. I yield the gentleman from Oregon 1 additional minute.

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Speaker, we've heard quite a debate today. The debate was about designating a wild and scenic river in Oregon. But it has gone far, far afield from there. We've heard about the deficit. We've heard about jobs. We've heard about the Civil Rights Act and who was responsible for passing the legislation that did that historic. We've heard quite a lot that doesn't have anything to do with the reason we are here today, and that, Mr. Speaker, is designating the Molalla River as part of the Wild and Scenic Rivers System, which will help ensure that social, cultural, and economic benefits of the area will be preserved. For several years, an alliance of over 45 organizations has been dedicated to river restoration efforts and protecting the area from destructive acts. And the local community around the Molalla has asked for this designation. It is now up to Congress to act on behalf of the citizens and the communities at hand to preserve the river's historic, scenic, and recreational values; to protect the river's water quality and its free-flowing character; and ensure that Americans and Oregonians can enjoy the original character of this river for generations to come. Mr. Speaker, I think it's a good bill. The bill deserves strong support of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and I ask for that support. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and on the previous question.

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. CARDOZA

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

Mr. CARDOZA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, my district in California has been especially hard hit by the current economic crisis. Even if nationwide indicators begin to reveal a healthier national economy in the coming months, it is clear that my district and others in California's Central Valley region will suffer from severe economic underdevelopment for years to come. The 18th Congressional District's struggling economy is the reason I continue to try to use every available opportunity to push for amendments and legislation that will spur job creation and economic development and provide relief to the hardest-hit communities in the country. The Bureau of Labor Statistics ranks the metro area of Merced, Modesto, and Stockton with some of the highest unemployment rates in the Nation. All three are above 15 percent, and all three well above the national unemployment rate of 10.2 percent. My amendment simply provides a little more direction during the grant writing process by including unemployment rates in the criteria used to evaluate these various grant applications. This will provide a little extra help to communities like Los Banos and Merced to maintain and improve their fire protection services. These and many other cities in my district and across the country have critical needs that they cannot meet under the current financial stress that they are having. Instead of hiring additional personnel and boosting employment, they are forced to lay off valuable employees and risk the safety of their communities. I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this commonsense amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I will respond to my friend and colleague that we have taken and watered this language down so that it applies to all areas. Severe unemployment is only one of many criteria that can be considered and only when the situation is a desperate situation. We talked about our area in central California being the Katrina of California where we have such devastating consequences that we may not be able to meet some of our fire needs in our communities as they just collapsed financially. So if we find situations where we're not meeting the fire protection needs of those communities, we think that it's very important. This has just become one of many criteria in evaluating these grants. Not the sole criteria, not the most important criteria, but certainly to allow those individuals who are making the decisions to just take this into consideration. That's the purpose of my amendment. The communities of Merced and Los Banos, in particular, have contacted my office, indicating that this is something they feel is a necessary imperative. But I can imagine cities across the country-- Miami, Detroit, other places--where they may find themselves in similar kinds of economic situations. It might be your State by the time this bill becomes law. So I would just say that I think it's something that is important for everyone to have as a capability to be taken into consideration. It's not something that will override the other considerations that the gentleman has outlined. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CARDOZA

Mr. CARDOZA. Madam Speaker, I was unable to be present for several votes taken on the House floor yesterday afternoon, Thursday, October 22, 2009, due to illness. As a result, I missed rollcall votes No. 801 through No. 811. Had I been present: on rollcall vote No. 801 I would have voted ``no''; on rollcall vote No. 802 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 803 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 804 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 805 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 806 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 807 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 808 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 809 I would have voted ``aye''; on rollcall vote No. 810 I would have voted ``aye''; and on rollcall vote No. 811 I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. CARDOZA

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be present for several votes taken on the House floor today, Friday, October 23, 2009, due to illness. As a result, I missed rollcall votes Nos. 812 and 813. Had I been present: On rollcall vote No. 812 I would have voted ``aye'' and on rollcall vote No. 813 I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. CARDOZA

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

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my amendment, a measure that expands the type of technologies that the Department of Energy should consider when planning for future solar. The Central Valley in California is home to many solar technology companies and to the University of California at Merced, a leader in solar research. However, my constituents tell me that they are unable to take advantage of several of the Department of Energy grant application processes because the Department has a very narrow view of the future of solar. As someone with solar panels on my home in my hometown of Atwater, I understand the tremendous benefit that solar power will have on our country and economy, and I want to ensure that our current planning is done correctly. Instead of limiting the potential of solar power, we should be expanding that potential and letting the full imagination of American ingenuity take charge. My amendment is very simple: it expands the type of technologies that the Department of Energy should consider when planning solar technology road maps, and it directs the Department to focus resources on different types of solar technology. Specifically, my amendment expands the definition of solar technology to include solar thermal power technology and not just electronic photovoltaic technology. This would facilitate the funding of solar projects and replace all types of polluting technologies, including diesel. Secondly, my amendment directs the Department of Energy's demonstration program to include solar thermal projects that operate using solar power only. Some solar plants are built with gas-fired plants next door to them to generate power when the sun is not available. If we as a country are going to wean ourselves away from dirty energy, then we must develop technologies that eliminate the use of pollutants completely and stop settling for hybrids. I know we can do better than this. And this amendment instructs the Department of Energy to look harder and wider at these technologies. I urge the passage of my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague and my friend, the gentleman from Texas, for his support of this amendment. I would like to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CARDOZA

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to this rule. We have heard a lot of debate this year about California's water crisis. We are suffering from our third year of drought, and the situation has been compounded with a ``regulatory drought'' that has restricted our ability to deliver water even when it is available. Over 40,000 people are out of work, over 500,000 acres of some of the world's most productive farmland have been fallowed, farmworkers are now standing in food lines, people are losing their homes, and more importantly people are losing their hope, all because of a lack of water. The Federal Government is in part responsible for the regulatory drought, and it is time for the Federal Government to take action to address this crisis. I support this underlying bill, Mr. Speaker. But quite frankly, I am completely fed up with the lack of a response to our water crisis in the San Joaquin Valley. My definition of ``crisis'' is a disaster that requires an immediate response. The fact is, there still is no immediate response--in fact there is hardly even any response. And it's high time that the Federal Government admits that not enough is being done to address the valley's water needs. In fact, I have with me a list of 26 projects that the Federal Government can work with us on to relieve the pressure that the lack of water has created on the valley. My friends and colleagues from the San Joaquin Valley, Mr. Radanovich and Mr. Nunes, offered amendments in Rules Committee last night but they were not made in order. My folks need relief. They are suffering and can't wait any longer. And farmers in the valley have planting decisions to make in the near future. They simply can't go through another farm season not knowing if they will have any water. Mr. Radanovich and Mr. Nunes deserve to have their amendments on the floor today. Their amendments would have ended this regulatory drought once and for all and provided much-needed relief to our farmers. Because San Joaquin Valley farmers are prevented from getting the water they so desperately need, I urge all of my colleagues to oppose this rule. Actions and Projects To Address California's Water Supply Crisis Reconsultation of FWS and NOAA Biological Opinions. Undertake a National Academy of Sciences 6-month review of all the factors in the decline of the Delta. 2-Gate Fish Protection Demonstration Project--coordination and funding. Delta Mendota Canal and California Aqueduct Intertie-- coordination and funding. Completion of a long-term, multi-year water transfer program. Develop a program to coordinate schedules on North to South transfers. Support permanent reform of intra county East-West transfers within the CVP. Patterson Irrigation District Pumping Plant and Fish Screen. Patterson Irrigation District Pipeline Project. Diversify Level 2/Level IV Refuge Program. Announce 2011 rescheduled water decision in the Spring, 2010. Additional federal support for the Westside Water Use Efficiency and Conservation program. Support the removal of restrictions under the Emergency Drought Relief Act which restrict funds to temporary projects. Mendota Dam Replacement. San Luis Drain Rehabilitation. Allow the use of Whiskeytown Reservoir to be used to meet the water supply needs of the most impacted areas. Work in collaboration with the state on the development of a long term Joint Point of Diversion program. Friant-Kern and Madera Canals Capacity Correction. Friant-Kern Canal Reverse Flow. Pipeline Replacements in the San Luis Unit. Westlands Water District Reclamation Project for drainage impacted areas and reclamation of poor groundwater. West Stanislaus Irrigation District fish screen and pipeline. Stockton East Water District intake structure and fish screen. Merced Irrigation District New Exchequer Dam Spillway Modification Project. Semitropic-Rosamond Water Bank Authority Antelope Valley Water Bank Initial Recharge and Recovery Facility Improvement Project. Semitropic Water Storage District Pond-Poso Spreading and Recovery Facility.

Mr. CARDOZA

Mr. CARDOZA. Madam Speaker, today with Congressman Costa, I introduced the ``Water Transfer Facilitation Act of 2009.'' the measure should reduce unnecessary delays in water transfers at a time when Central Valley farmers have been hard hit by a three-year drought. It would allow new water transfers of roughly 250,000 to 300,000 acre-feet of water per year. The bill would grant authority to the Bureau of Reclamation to approve voluntary water transfers between sellers and buyers in the San Joaquin Valley. The measure also would streamline environmental reviews for Central Valley water transfers by ensuring that they occur on a programmatic basis, instead of the current project-by-project basis. Transferring water between and within counties for water districts is a critical tool during periods of drought. While the best solution would be to fully operate the federal and state pumps, this change in the law provides us some relief. This legislation makes permanent the ability to transfer water to our Valley's farms when it is most needed, therefore, allowing our farmers a lifeline to continue to grow crops and help our local economy. More will need to be done to protect the Valley's water, and I will continue that fight. The bill is supported by a great number of water users across the Central Valley, including the following: Friant Water Users Authority, San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Authority, Delta-Mendota Canal Authority, Westlands Water District, Metropolitan Water District, Glen Colusa Irrigation District, Northern California Water Association, Banta-Carbona Irrigation District, Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority, Association of California Water Agencies, Placer County Water Agency, Conaway Preservation Group, and the Reclamation District 2035. I have submitted several of these support letters here for the record, and I understand that Mr. Costa will submit additional letters as well. Association of California Water Agencies, October 6, 2009. Re ACWA support for Water Transfer Legislation. Representative Cardoza, Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC. Representative Costa, Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Representatives Cardoza and Costa: Thank you for introducing water transfer legislation for the Central Valley Project (CVP) which ACWA is pleased to support. As California's water supply challenges multiply, this legislation can provide greater flexibility for management of CVP water supplies. As you know, ACWA's 450 public agency members are collectively responsible for 90 percent of the water delivered in California for residential and agricultural uses. California's water supply situation is dire and worsening. Three years of below average precipitation along with heavy regulatory restrictions through the ESA and Biological Opinions, have seriously diminished California's water supplies. Under these conditions, it is essential that short term actions, such as provided by your legislation to flexibly enable water supplies to move across the San Joaquin Valley, be pursued. Again, thank you for introducing water transfer legislation. ACWA looks forward to working with you to secure its passage in an expedited manner. Sincerely, Timothy Quinn, Executive Director. Northern California Water Association, Sacramento, CA, October 2, 2009. Re Support for Water Transfer Legislation. Hon. Jim Costa, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Congressman Costa: On behalf of the Northern California Water Association (NCWA), we thank you for introducing legislation authorizing and establishing a permanent long-term program to promote and manage water transfers in the Central Valley of California. We support your efforts and this legislation as a means of providing greater flexibility in the management of Central Valley Project (CVP) and other water supplies to help meet unmet needs critical to the future of the State of California. As you are aware, the devastating impacts of diminished water deliveries to the CVP as a result of three years of below average precipitation have been made even greater by the various regulatory restrictions, including the requirements established by the recent federal biological opinions for endangered fish under the ESA. Your legislation will provide immediate, much needed relief in the form of a flexible and useful tool that will allow water to be transferred from willing parties to those in need within the

Mr. CARDOZA

Mr. CARDOZA. Madam Speaker, due to overwhelming response from water users in the Central Valley, I am compelled today to introduce additional letters of support for the Water Transfer Facilitation Act of 2009. The bill would grant authority to the Bureau of Reclamation to approve voluntary water transfers between sellers and buyers in the San Joaquin Valley and streamline environmental reviews for Central Valley water transfers. The bill is supported by a great number of water users across the Central Valley, including the following: Friant Water Users Authority; San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Authority; Delta-Mendota Canal Authority; Westlands Water District; Metropolitan Water District; Glen Colusa Irrigation District; Northern California Water Association; Banta-Carbona Irrigation District; Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority; Association of California Water Agencies; Placer County Water Agency; Conaway Preservation Group; and Reclamation District 2035. Thank you.

Mr. CARDOZA

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the FY 2010 Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. I would like to point out two provisions of the report that help to address the water supply crisis in California's San Joaquin Valley. California is experiencing its third consecutive year of dry conditions. Our State's water supply outlook is further exacerbated by the ``regulatory drought'' that has resulted from agency regulatory actions. The Endangered Species Act in particular has proven to be a regulatory hammer, preventing water conveyance, transfers, and storage, even when water supplies have been plentiful. The Departments of the Interior and Commerce developed new Biological Opinions to protect Delta smelt and salmonid species, respectively. These decisions have resulted in significant restrictions on pumping water out of the Delta. These cuts were in addition to the many previous cuts that had already been imposed, including the Bay Delta Accord, the Central Valley Project Improvement Act and other actions. The combination of the drought and the regulatory drought has resulted in dangerously low reservoirs and a 10 percent water allocation to farmers on California's westside. Over 400,000 acres of some of the world's most productive farmland have been fallowed, resulting in devastating job losses and high unemployment--as much as 40 percent in some cities on the westside. It is crucial that the State of California and the Federal Government build new storage facilities and that we develop a better conveyance and water management system. In the meantime, it is important for the Departments to development programs that allow for flexibility as a means of achieving greater water supply. There are two provisions that Mr. Costa and I added to the House Energy and Water Appropriations bill that do just that. First, the $40 million in CALFED funding provides the Bureau of Reclamation with the flexibility to use these funds to help fund crucial projects, such as the Two Gates Project and the Intertie Project, which will help relieve some of the pressure on the water supply in the San Joaquin Valley of California. More funding is needed for these two projects as well as others, and this report provides a good start on a downpayment toward these projects and others that will help the Bureau, the State Department of Water Resources and our water district to move and transfer water in California to the people and farms that need it the most. Second, I support the clarification of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act of 1992, which clarifies that additional restrictions under the CVPIA on water transfers within certain areas of the Central Valley Project South of Delta are not required. Several years ago, the Bureau of Reclamation changed its interpretation of this statute, and began applying additional and cumbersome requirements to water transfers within the CVP unless they were within the same county. These restrictions on water transfers have prevented the transfer of water from one area to another and have created an impediment to efficient and practical water use. This amendment would clarify that water transfers between Friant and South of Delta agricultural service contractors can occur beyond county boundaries so that water districts within one county can transfer to districts outside the county. Unfortunately, the House version of the Energy and Water Bill which provided for permanent clarification in the law was not included in this report. Instead, this language clarifying the water transfer provision is limited to a 2-year period. Senator Feinstein, Mr. Costa and I will be introducing a bill to make this transfer amendment permanent, and we look forward to bringing something to the floor in a short period of time.

Mr. CARDOZA

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 760 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. General Leave

Mr. CARDOZA. I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 760.

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. House Resolution 760 provides for the consideration of House Resolution 324, the Santa Cruz Valley National Heritage Area Act. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill, except for clause 9 and clause 10 of rule XXI. Mr. Speaker, the rule also provides for the adoption of an amendment printed in the Rules Committee report to clarify that the bill does not in any way modify, alter or amend any border enforcement authority. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Mr. Speaker, the bill before us today, H.R. 324, designates the Santa Cruz Valley region of southern Arizona as a National Heritage Area. The Santa Cruz Valley is one of America's longest inhabited regions, with traces of human occupation extending back more than 12,000 years. The region was at the center of centuries of Native American cultural history. It also served as a corridor of Spanish exploration, colonization, missionary activity, as well as a frontier of Mexican and early American mining, ranching and agriculture. The heritage area includes two national parks, two national historic trails, four State parks, six county parks, four major lakes, two designated scenic highways, and hundreds of miles of back-country trails and urban bikeways. It also includes 32 museums, 28 districts, 102 individual buildings listed on the National Register of Historic Places, as well as dozens of prehistoric and historic archaeological sites. A July 2005 study by the Center for Desert Archaeology, on which the bill is based, examined the many resources in the region. The National Park Service reviewed the study and found that the area meets the 10 criteria for proposed heritage areas. Designating the Santa Cruz Valley as a heritage area allows the Park Service to support the State and local conservation efforts through Federal recognition, seed money and technical assistance. This simply means that local groups will have the resources they need to educate the public about the historic, cultural and natural value of the area. I would like to commend my good friends, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) and the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Giffords), for bringing this legislation to the floor today so that we can ensure that America's history and natural wonderment is protected for future generations. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Speaker, I would like to say in response and in my close that this bill, in fact, does not regulate zoning, as the gentlelady indicated. It does not have any effect on private property rights. In fact, I'm told that the entire State of Tennessee is part of a heritage area, and we would not think of the entire State of Tennessee as being affected with private property rights effects. I would submit to you that we would know, just from that designation alone, that it is similar to this one that we are passing today, that the citizens of Tennessee are not affected in their private property rights with that heritage area designation. This bill is subject to appropriation, a $15 million maximum over 15 years, that would have to be voted on by the Appropriations Committee, then subject to appropriation in both the House and the Senate, subject to signature by the President. Mr. Speaker, National Heritage Area designations have no regulatory consequences whatsoever. This bill specifically says that nothing in it diminishes the authority of the State to regulate fishing, hunting and the management of fish and wildlife. It includes extensive protections for private property owners and prohibits the use of Federal funds received under the act for land acquisition. It would in no way have any impact on border protection and any other law enforcement effort. Additionally, the language was self-executed in the rule which specifically states that nothing in the bill modifies, alters or amends any other border enforcement authority. The gentlelady indicated that the bill failed. The bill failed under a two-thirds requirement. In fact, it got well over 240 votes to 140 votes in the negative. The bill got 100 votes more than a majority. I think this bill has tremendous support on this floor. In fact, it has tremendous support in the State of Arizona. It's a good measure, and I believe it will pass overwhelmingly when it comes back under a rule in this House. Mr. Speaker, I would ask that we support this bill. As I said earlier, this bill is not only important to our Nation's history, it is also important that America's most treasured resources are protected for future generations. It deserves the strong support of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and on the previous question. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution The previous question was ordered.

Mr. CARDOZA

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

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. California community colleges recently announced that their enrollment for the 2008-2009 academic year increased at the system's 110 colleges in California by more than 135,000 students. Extremely high unemployment rates and restrictive admissions at the State's 4- year college systems have led to record numbers of students seeking degrees and certificates. This trend in increasing enrollments is being mirrored across our Nation during these tough economic times. While increased enrollments in higher education programs is to be applauded, there is also some concern about our State's ability to manage the impact of enrolling so many new students. California's community colleges are dealing with nearly $1 billion in cuts as a result of the State's budget crisis this year. The shortfall in funding is placing stress on a system that is already stretched to capacity. H.R. 3221 will provide critical funding opportunities for those very community colleges to better serve their students, filling a funding gap most States are currently unable to meet. Providing access to affordable higher education, especially at the community college level, is going to be essential to the recovery of congressional districts like mine that have extremely high unemployment rates. As I have said many times, this economic crisis has hit my district particularly hard. In July, the Bureau of Labor Statistics ranked the metropolitan area of Merced, California, with the fourth highest unemployment rate in the Nation at 17.6 percent. Two other metropolitan areas in my district, Modesto and Stockton, had unemployment rates of 16.3 and 16.0 respectively. All three areas are well over the national average unemployment rate of 9.7. My amendment to H.R. 3221 simply provides community colleges serving in areas with high unemployment rates, higher than the national average like my district, have priority consideration when applying for this grant money. Investing in our community college system, especially the ones in high unemployment areas above the national average, is a critical part of any economic recovery plan; and it will allow our Nation to emerge from this downturn empowered with both the education and workforce skills needed to succeed in the 21st century. I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this commonsense amendment. I yield to the chairman.