Gerald Connolly

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and support Taiwan's bid for effective participation in the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change (UNFCCC). Taiwan has experienced rapid economic growth and industrialization, and its technological advancement has played a significant role in the global economy. While Taiwan is a major world economy with 23 million residents, it is only recognized as a non-governmental organization (NGO) under the name of ``Industrial Technology Research Institute'' (ITRI) by the UNFCCC. This NGO status only allows Taiwan to partake in UNFCCC side events, which is neither effective nor appropriate. This listing goes against the Convention's spirit and dampens the enthusiasm and expectations of the 23 million people of Taiwan. Taiwan's inability to participate in either the discussions over the post-Kyoto mechanism or the international carbon market has serious consequences affecting the welfare of the people and the development of Taiwan's industries. As a co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on Taiwan, I know the value of the bilateral relationship and hope to increase relations with Taiwan's cooperation and participation in the UNFCCC. I hope that the leadership of the UNFCCC will soon invite Taiwan to participate in an official capacity as the World Health Assembly has invited Taiwan to participate in its activities as an official observer in 2009 and 2010. Taiwan, since the inauguration of President Ma Ying-jeou in 2008, has been a responsible member of the global community and deserves to be invited to the activities of the UNFCCC and other international conventions and organizations. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting Taiwan's participation in the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, the year-long continuing resolution the Republicans in this House passed last month on a straight party-line vote represents misguided values. House Republicans sought to cut an arbitrary amount of funding and did so with a meat ax, indiscriminately attacking worthwhile investments, giving no concern to the tremendously negative impact this irresponsible attack will have on our economy. In the race for ever-increasing and arbitrary cuts, they have demonstrated they know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. Moody's Analytics said that this approach would cost the Nation 700,000 jobs. The Economic Policy Institute said 800,000 jobs. Goldman Sachs said the long-term Republican plan would lower economic growth by 2 percent while increasing unemployment by 1 percent. Even the conservative Club for Growth called it a ``mistake,'' stating that ``cutting spending is important, but economic growth is even more important.'' The need for fiscal discipline, of course, is clear. We must return to a long-term path of fiscal responsibility to reduce deficits, but we must not sacrifice our values and our future all in the name of deficit reduction. Where Americans value health protections, the Republican CR slashes funding for food safety inspection, community health centers, women's health programs, and the National Institutes of Health. Where Americans value national security, the Republican plan eliminates funding for local police officers and firefighters protecting our communities and slashes funding for nuclear nonproliferation, air marshals, and Customs and Border Protection. Where Americans value the sacrifice our men and women in uniform make to protect us, the Republican plan slashes funding to assist homeless veterans. Where Americans value a focus on job creation, the Republican plan slashes funds for job training and dramatically reduces educational support. Where Americans value transportation improvements, the Republican plan slashes funding for infrastructure improvements and eliminates the Federal commitment to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. Where Americans value clean air and water, the Republican plan destroys the Nation's long-fought environment protections. In fact, according to the organization Republicans for Environmental Protection, the Republican plan represents an unprecedented assault on America's environment. The Republican plan defunds the landmark Chesapeake Bay restoration effort, a joint effort of localities, States, and the Federal Government to protect and preserve America's largest estuary. In fact, that plan goes further and repeals longstanding Clean Water Act health protections, such as the ability to enact standards for arsenic pollution, lead pollution, and acid mine drainage in water supplies. The Republican plan also repeals much of the Clean Air Act, including the EPA's ability to protect us from mercury pollution, soot, and greenhouse gases. In fact, the CR even repeals the ability to monitor and track greenhouse gases, presumably because if you are not allowed to verify a potential problem, it must not exist. Where Americans value energy independence, the Republican plan endangers our security. Through the existing Clean Air Act, we are reducing our Nation's dependence on foreign oil through improved fuel efficiency standards. An agreement to improve fuel efficiency by 30 percent by 2016 will result in American car owners saving $3,000 per vehicle and will reduce the Nation's oil dependence by 77 billion gallons of gasoline for vehicles produced from 2012 through 2016. This efficiency improvement will keep $9.9 billion from being sent to OPEC countries like Libya and Iran unless the Republican plan succeeds in overturning those efforts. Mr. Speaker, the continuing resolution passed 2 weeks ago is not responsible. It sacrifices our Nation's values, our health, our security, our economy, our transportation needs, our environmental plans, and hundreds of thousands of jobs. But now we have a chance to work together in a bipartisan fashion-- Republicans and Democrats working with the Senate--to reduce the deficit and in a conscientious manner. Let's work together to reach a compromise on funding the Federal Government that addresses the Nation's debt while preserving American values.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the Reduce Unnecessary Spending Act of 2011. Many decisions made over the past decade on both sides of the aisle contributed to the Nation's untenable debt. The Reduce Unnecessary Spending Act provides another deficit-reduction tool to eliminate unnecessary spending. It grants the President expedited rescission authority to create another opportunity to reduce spending and provides a strong incentive for Congress to work together to trim unnecessary spending and dedicates all spending cuts to deficit reduction. Expedited rescission is a well-known concept with bipartisan support. The Budget Committee's current chairman, Mr. Ryan, introduced expedited rescission in the 110th Congress. Senator John McCain and Senator Thomas Carper have introduced similar legislation this year, with 32 bipartisan cosponsors. Exercising fiscal responsibility requires strong discipline and a commitment to cutting unnecessary spending. Expedited recession provides another layer of spending cuts and another opportunity for deficit reduction. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the legislation.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. I am, in its current form.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, this final amendment, which I submit with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green), who led this battle in committee, protects our men and women in uniform who risk their lives to keep us safe in our homes by protecting theirs. It would continue providing emergency mortgage assistance to servicemembers, veterans, and Gold Star families, amending the underlying bill that would otherwise strip away such vital assistance to homeowners in distress through no fault of their own. Whether it is the result of being laid off or a severe medical condition or emergency, Congress has not turned its back on our Nation's veterans when they are in need, and now is no time to start. As my colleagues are well aware, the foreclosure crisis has affected millions of American families. Sadly, our military families have suffered some of the worst brunt of this impact. Last year, 20,000 active-duty Reservists and veterans lost their homes, the largest number in recent history. Did you know the foreclosure rate around our Nation's military installations is four times higher than the national average? From 2007 to 2008, the rate of foreclosure in towns within 10 miles of a military facility swelled by 217 percent compared with 59 percent in the rest of the country. Right here in our own backyard--in my district, in the community of Woodbridge, Virginia--the foreclosure rate spiked an astounding 414 percent around the Quantico Marine Corps Base. Why is that? Because the unemployment rate for our military heroes who served in Iraq and Afghanistan is 15 percent higher than the national average. We all know how difficult the transition back into civilian life can be, particularly for the disabled as they try to find work. Congress has repeatedly singled out veterans for additional assistance, whether it is workforce training or small business assistance. In fact, the House, itself, initiated a Wounded Warrior Program to place veterans in our Member offices; but even with that assistance, the men and women who so bravely fought on behalf of our Nation find difficulty succeeding back home. That's why we had more than 75,600 homeless veterans in 2009. I know a young man in my district who returned home with a severe disability from a tour of duty in Iraq. Thankfully, the modest financial support he currently receives has enabled him to remain in his home, but barely, and he is only one adverse event away from foreclosure. What if his situation worsens? What if he suffers the loss of unemployment or develops a catastrophic illness? How am I supposed to tell him or his family, not to mention the thousands of others like him in many of our communities, that we are turning our backs on them? Rather than continuing to provide for the needs of our veterans when they need us the most, this legislation patronizes them by calling for yet another study to tell us what we already know: that our military families suffer disproportionately from foreclosures. We don't need a study to tell us the right thing to do. In a sincere attempt to honor their memories, many of my colleagues post pictures outside their offices of local servicemembers who have made the ultimate sacrifice. Those men and women fought and died protecting our homes. How can we now tell their families that we're not going to fight to protect theirs? Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this final amendment and to help preserve the American Dream for those who are out there protecting that dream for each of us. With that, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green).

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, the time to govern is now. The reckless continuing resolution that Republicans passed 2 weeks ago is an abject failure of leadership. In the race for ever-increasing and arbitrary cuts, they demonstrated on a party-line vote that they know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. Moody's Analytics said their approach would cost 700,000 jobs. The Economic Policy Institute said it would cost 800,000 jobs. Goldman Sachs said it would lower economic growth by 2 percent and increase unemployment by 1 percent. Even the conservative Club for Growth called it a mistake, stating, ``Cutting spending is important, but economic growth is even more important.'' Mr. Speaker, I ask that all of us, Republicans and Democrats, negotiate in good faith, in a bipartisan manner to pass a fiscally responsible CR that reduces deficits without sacrificing economic growth, that prioritizes investments in our economy that support American competitiveness without costing jobs. Let's pass a continuing resolution that strengthens the economy and creates jobs for all Americans.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Kathy Ichter, the Director of the Fairfax County Department of Transportation for her long and dedicated service to the residents of Fairfax County, Virginia, and to wish her well in her retirement. Ms. Ichter started with the County in 1984, and spent 27 years working tirelessly to improve regional transportation. She began as a Transportation Planner, served for twelve years as the Division Chief of the Department's Transportation Planning and Operations Division, and was subsequently appointed as Director of the entire Department in 2005. I was a Member of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors at that time, and happily supported Ms. Ichter's appointment. Having worked closely with her on many transportation issues over the years, I developed a profound respect for her abilities and dedication. Ms. Ichter was instrumental in improving all modes of transportation, including roadways, supporting pedestrian and transit opportunities and implementing innovative alternatives such as telework. While no one transportation project will completely eliminate challenges in urbanized areas, Ms. Ichter's wide-ranging focus provided residents with a number of options for their daily commutes. During her time as Director, she facilitated a partnership with the private sector to expand capacity on the Washington Beltway at no cost to taxpayers, oversaw the final planning and start of construction on extending Metrorail to Dulles Airport--one of our region's most significant transportation improvements, and planned redevelopment for the Tysons Corner area to transform the currently gridlocked urban core into a workable community. In addition, she worked diligently with me when I served as Chairman of the Board to enact two Four-Year Transportation Plans, the first such efforts in Fairfax to develop and implement a comprehensive, long-term transportation strategy. Throughout her years of service, Ms. Ichter received a number of awards recognizing her efforts and leadership, including the Les Dorson Public Leadership Award in 2004 and the A. Heath Onthank Award, the highest honor awarded to Fairfax County government employees, in 2005. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in providing further recognition to Kathy Ichter and thanking her for her years of service to the citizens of Fairfax County and her dedication to improving the National Capital region's transportation challenges.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I strongly support the Blumenauer, Lowey, Markey amendment to restore our commitment to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Public broadcasting provides an essential service, providing millions of Americans with educational and cultural programming. In my district, and throughout the entire Washington, DC metropolitan region, we have been admirably served by public broadcasting stations like WETA on television and WAMU on the radio for many years. Support for public broadcasting was first provided in 1967, and has been maintained for more than 40 years--it is an American institution. Whose children have not grown up learning their A,B,Cs from Sesame Street? Who has not enjoyed one of the many rich musical performances or riveting documentaries, including Ken Burns' historic 1990 series on the American Civil War, and a recent series on America's national parks, shown exclusively on PBS? In America, unlike many countries around the world, the media industry always has been a completely commercial enterprise. Public broadcasting was not designed to supplant private media--and given the explosion of private television channels it clearly has not. Instead it merely provides viewers with a broad selection of educational and cultural programs that are available for free in every household in every community. I myself did not subscribe to cable television until just a few years ago and routinely watched PBS using rabbit ears on my old television set. Millions of Americans choose PBS, and they support it with their own money by donating to local stations during pledge drives. This has been a successful partnership, leveraging public investment with private funds for decades. That's why the proposed Republican cut is all the more surprising, given their alleged reverence for respecting the popular will expressed on You Cut. The number of Americans who support public broadcasting with their private contributions exceeds all of the participation in You Cuts by tens of multiples. I recognize the need to control federal spending and reduce the deficit, and I support responsible reductions to that end. However, eviscerating public broadcasting is not responsible budgeting and flaunts any pretense of respect for popular support. While less than twenty percent of its funding comes from the federal government, any reduction in support would result in significant degradation of the educational and cultural programming it provides. Public broadcasting is an extraordinarily cost-effective investment in America's cultural and educational advancement. For more than 40 years, PBS has brought the world to our living rooms, regardless of our financial means or where we lived. A PBS is to broadcasting what the Internet is to the digital revolution, and like the Internet democratizes and makes universal access to information. We must not sever access to such a unifying public resource at the short-sighted altar of fiscal dogma. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Blumenauer, Lowey, Markey amendment. Support the American institution of Public Broadcasting.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I rise to speak against language in the underlying bill that would prevent HUD from spending money on a Sustainable Communities Initiative. The language in the bill would end a very successful HUD program that has helped communities plan for growth and halt a successful partnership between HUD, DOT, and EPA that promotes redevelopment and new transportation infrastructure. Secretaries Donovan, LaHood, and Administrator Jackson and their agencies have spent the last year cutting red tape and coordinating investments to meet multiple economic, environmental, and community objectives. Northern Virginia is already benefitting from these investments, by winning a TIGER grant to expand bus service dramatically, including in the congested I-95 and Route 7 corridors. The Sustainable Communities Initiative actually represents a conservative principle, because it emulates longstanding efforts by developers and local governments around the country. In Northern Virginia, Fairfax and Arlington counties have led the way with Transit Oriented Development years before the Federal Government figured it out. In Northern Virginia, developers led the way with visionary replanning proposals for Tysons Corner Center Mall, Merrifield Town Center, and numerous other Transit-Oriented Development proposals. These grants go to communities all around the country, large and small, urban and rural. The interest in these has been extraordinary. In 2010, when HUD announced their challenge grants, to be awarded jointly with DOT, a total of 630 communities requested $1.2 billion in funding. HUD was able to award 61 grants worth $69 million. HUD's sustainable communities regional planning grants were as popular: 225 regions applied for $450 million, and HUD was able to award 45 regions a total of $98 million. It is high time the Federal Government emulated our local efforts in Northern Virginia, and I therefore strongly oppose Republican efforts to repeal this program and prevent federal support of our local programs.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. I thank my friend from Massachusetts. I was very interested to hear the comments from our friend from Iowa. I couldn't sympathize more with him, and I know I will have his support later in opposing a point of order to an amendment I have to restore Metro funding here in the National Capital region and to offset it with some cuts in certain agricultural subsidies. Mr. Speaker, today we debate the rule on the full year continuing appropriations act for 2011. While I understand and support the need to establish long-term fiscal responsibility, to reduce spending, to reduce the deficit, and to grow the economy, H.R. 1 is not the way. It takes a meat ax to American competitiveness and actually destroys jobs. That's why I introduced the Build America Bonds Now to Create Jobs Act, legislation to extend the successful Build America Bonds program, a jobs bill. Creating jobs grows the economy, encourages American innovation, and positions us to remain the global economic leader. During the past 2 years, $4.4 billion from the Recovery Act leveraged $181 billion worth of projects to construct and repair schools, bridges, roads, and transit systems in more than 2,270 projects in every State of the Union. According to Moody's Analytics chief economist and John McCain's 2008 Presidential campaign adviser, infrastructure investments in the Recovery Act resulted in 8 million new or protected jobs that otherwise would have been lost in 2009 and 2010. By extending the Build America Bonds program, we can do more. I ask my colleagues to oppose this closed rule and to support the amendment to bring the Build America Bonds Now to Create Jobs Act to the floor. Let's create jobs. Let's grow the economy. Let's unleash America competitiveness.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment on behalf of myself, Mr. Hoyer, Mr. Moran, Ms. Edwards, and Mr. Van Hollen. In his final term in Congress, my Republican predecessor Tom Davis helped broker an agreement to boost Metro funding by the Federal, State, and local governments. Under this agreement, the Federal Government would invest $150 million annually, to be matched by Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. This investment is essential for our region, as it has provided WMATA with funding to begin fixing the safety problems identified by the National Transportation Safety Board, which will cost over $1 billion, cumulatively. It also is essential for the Federal Government to function efficiently, even as the Federal Government fails to pay its fair share compared to local and State funding for Metro. Finally, unlike any other transit system in America, our Metro system serves 12 million tourists annually who come to visit their Nation's Capital. The Federal Government relies on a functional Metro system. Mr. Chairman, over half of all Metro stations serve Federal offices, and 40 percent of the entire Federal workforce uses Metro to get to work every day. As Congress, itself, noted when passing the National Capital Region Transportation Act in 1960, ``An improved transportation system of the National Capital Region is essential to the continued and effective performance of the functions of the Government of the United States.'' From September 11 to the blizzards of last year, we have learned through hard experience that Metro is essential to move people both through severe weather and emergencies in our region. President Obama included the $150 million that my Republican predecessor's authorization bill called for in his budget, but the Republican leadership removed it in this continuing resolution. Perhaps my newer colleagues have not yet had a chance to visit northern Virginia, where the Metrorail extension to Dulles Airport is spurring billions of dollars in private investment while providing thousands of jobs for the construction workers building the rail line. If my colleagues had visited this project, they might hesitate to eliminate investments like this, which will be repaid many times over by subsequent private investment. In recognition of the importance of this Metro funding, I introduced an amendment on behalf of my colleagues and myself to restore $150 million in Federal funding which would be matched by State governments. To offset this expense and reduce the deficit, I have proposed offsetting the expense by cutting direct payments to large agribusiness. As we debate this bill, there are people at work building rail to Dulles; and if the Republican majority succeeds in passing appropriations bills such as this, those transportation projects, jobs, and real estate investments will be a thing of the past. One step we can take to reduce the damage done by this CR is to restore this critical Metro funding.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. As I said, Mr. Chairman, I deeply regret the fact that my colleague would cite a point of order on a bill of such importance to the National Capital region.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Oh, I thought I was speaking to the point of order and the points made by our colleagues.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Point of Order

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I deeply regret that my colleague would invoke a point of order. As I said, the Metro funding, in this case, talks about difficult decisions. This zeros out the entire Federal amount of subsidy for capital construction and safety improvements from a system that is over 30 years old, reaching capacity, and serves, first and foremost, the Federal workforce.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Madam Chair, I will not use 5 minutes. The United States imports over 60 percent of all the oil we consume, most of which is used for vehicles. OPEC alone exports 2 billion barrels per year to the United States. At a cost of $90 per barrel, approximate current price, this represents a $180 billion tax that our oil dependence imposes on American consumers. Some OPEC countries that profit from our oil dependence are listed by the State Department as sponsors of terrorism, Madam Chairman. Fortunately, we're using Clean Air Act amendments to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. In April, automakers joined auto workers and President Obama to announce a landmark fuel efficiency standard that will improve auto efficiency 30 percent by 2016. These standards will save Americans $3,000 per vehicle for each car purchased in 2016 or later and reduce our oil dependence by 77 billion gallons over the life of the vehicles produced between 2012 and 2016. This efficiency improvement will keep $9.9 billion from being sent to OPEC countries. In section 1746 of this continuing resolution, the Republicans have proposed cutting off funding for implementation of the Clean Air Act, which is the law that has made these vehicle efficiency investments possible. Americans cannot afford, Madam Chairman, to send more money to Libya and Iran. I urge my colleagues to reject this attack on the Clean Air Act. I yield back.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Pack 1818 and Troop 1818, the Jewish Cub Scout Pack and Boy Scout Troop that are based in my Mantua neighborhood in Fairfax County. Cub Scout Pack 1818 boasts 34 boys ranging from Grade 1 to Grade 5. Chartered by the Olam Tikvah Men's Club since 2000, Pack 1818 provides an opportunity for these boys to take in a variety of sports, crafts, and outdoor activities, like hiking and camping. This year, Tiger Cubs include: Jacob Boyett, Elijah Fischer, Benjamin Golden, Ari Pearlstein, Nathan Rothberg, Isaac Saiger, and Matthew Wurmser. Wolf Cubs include Jacob Book, Nathan Chernys, Ben Engler, Daniel Fertel, Alex Frame, Zach Grossman, Sebastian Jones, Aidan Jupiter, Jacob Hemmerdinger, Rueben Hemmerdinger, Solomon Hutchins, Ben Neifeld, and Zachary Shmargal-Ellison. Bear Cubs include Mitchell Akawie, Samuel Goldberg, Jared Johnson, Michael Krasovsky, Ilan Nabatkhorian, Lars Rosen, and Jacob Rutzick. First year Webelos include Solomon Jones while second year Webelos include Joshua Ackerman, Kenny Book, David Chernys, Daniel Dorlester, Jordan Lamar, and Aaron Shurberg. I am especially pleased to note that these last six boys--the second year Webelos--will transition to Boy Scouts during a ceremony this evening. Each of those boys has earned the Arrow of Light award. Following this ceremony, the number of boys in Troop 1818 will be 18, which in Jewish tradition corresponds to life. Troop 1818, which is only three years old, has emerged as an important force in the lives of these young boys. Troop 1818 provides opportunities to build lifelong skills and values and to make lasting friendships through weekly activities and a variety of outdoor programs. The boys have a chance to earn merit badges in such diverse areas as engineering, camping, orienteering, nuclear science, and first aid. This past year, boys from Troop 1818 got to learn CPR, build and sleep in a snow igloo, and attend the 100th anniversary National Jamboree with Scouts from around the country and world. Troop 1818 currently includes Benjy Ackerman, Max Chernys, Jamie Frame, Josh Hone, Casey Lamar, Ezra Lapidus, Levi Meerovich, Josh Rutzick, Sam Rutzick, Ezra Postelnek, Yosef Postelnek, and Zach Watts. These boys have made significant accomplishments over the past year-- earning merit badges and multiple rank advancements--which they will receive at their semi-annual Court of Honor this weekend. Finally, I'd like to also recognize Robert Book, who founded Troop 1818 and currently serves as Committee Chair for Pack 1818. An Eagle Scout himself, Robert is being recognized this weekend for his accomplishments by being presented with the Shofar Award. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues join me in congratulating these scouts and also in thanking the troop leaders, parents and families for their dedication to our youth.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. I thank my good friend from Florida. Mr. Speaker, we're more than 5 weeks into this Congress and the majority has yet to bring to the floor even a single bill aimed at job creation. Yesterday I asked, Where is the job creation agenda? The American people have said loud and clear job creation should be our top priority, and the Republicans have pledged a ``laser-like focus'' on the issue. Today they're planning 10 hours of meaningless debate to instruct committees to do oversight which they should be doing anyhow. Let me offer an alternative. Today I introduced H.R. 11, legislation to extend the successful Build America Bonds program--a jobs bill. During the last 2 years, $4.4 billion from the Recovery Act leveraged $181 billion in new bonds at the State and local levels. And $181 billion is needed in construction, bridge, and road repairs--$181 billion in job creation. My own State of Virginia issued $3.3 billion of those bonds in 45 distinct projects, and Nationwide, hundreds of thousands of jobs were created. We can create hundreds of thousands more if we extend this program. So I ask my colleagues, if you're serious about job creation, support H.R. 11.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to ask my Republican friends a simple question: Where is the job creation agenda? In the first month of the 112th Congress, this body has not taken up a single piece of legislation that will create jobs and put Americans back to work. Let's look at what we have done: H.R. 2, repeal protections of health insurance reform. Created no jobs. H.R. 359, eliminating public financing for Presidential campaigns. Created no jobs. H.R. 38, establishing a budget with no numbers. Created no jobs. H.R. 519 is on the floor today, to reduce our annual payment to the United Nations and go back into arrears. Again, creates no jobs. Madam Speaker, my Republican friends claimed that job creation was their number one priority. The American people said loud and clear that job creation should be their number one priority. During the previous Congress we made that priority, which is why we are in the midst of 12 consecutive months of private sector job growth. I ask my Republican friends to put aside ideology and join with the Democrats in making job creation their number one priority.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. My colleague could not be more correct. And, of course, as he recalls, not only sound progressive legislation but sound environmental legislation that had broad bipartisan support and was signed into law by a Republican President.

Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. My friend from New York is absolutely right. Let me thank him for his leadership in taking up this Special Order tonight on the all-important preservation of the Clean Air Act. I can't think frankly of a more reckless idea than repeal of all or parts of the Clean Air Act. It would transform the quality of life for all Americans. Our colleague from Illinois' comments about having children who live in Chicago, the number one asthma affected municipality in the United States, really resonates with me. I also have a close relative here in the Nation's capital, I represent the suburbs of Washington, DC, and I can tell you that as a nonattainment region, we have significant health effects from our air pollution. We are a nonattainment region as measured by the Environmental Protection Agency, and cleaning up our air quality is critical to thousands of people and thousands of children whose health depends on the efficacy of the Clean Air Act and making sure it is fully implemented. I wanted just to share with my friend from New York and my colleagues tonight some of the costs of repealing the Clean Air Act, because I think Americans need to focus on that. It's not cost-free to repeal this all-important environmental piece of legislation. Thanks to the Clean Air Act, Americans will see gas consumption of cars reduced by an average of 30 percent, saving the average car owner over $2,000. That would be lost. Repealing the Clean Air Act would increase OPEC imports by 72 million barrels every year by 2020. Repealing the Clean Air Act will force Americans to spend $9.9 billion each year to Libya and Venezuela and other OPEC countries, not all of which have America's best interests at heart. Repealing the Clean Air Act would forgo savings for Americans of 77 billion gallons of fuel over the life of the vehicles sold in those years, representing $240 billion in benefits, including over $182 billion in fuel savings. In addition to undermining national security, repealing the Clean Air Act would cause thousands of premature deaths which my colleagues were referring to. For example, the proposed EPA boiler MACT standard would save from 2,000 to 5,100 lives each year. Those lives would not be saved with repeal of the Clean Air Act. A report released by the American Lung Association recently reported that nearly 60 percent of all Americans live in areas where air pollution has reached unhealthy levels that can and do make people sick, including right here in the Nation's capital. Approximately 171,632 children and 544,013 adults have asthma in my home State of Virginia alone, according to the American Lung Association. Repealing EPA's authority to limit mercury, particulate matter, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide pollution would increase those numbers significantly and would aggravate already existing respiratory conditions. We cannot afford to repeal the Clean Air Act when it would imperil public health, undermine national security, countermand all of our goals in terms of energy independence, and set a dangerous precedent for repealing our most important public health law. I thank my colleague from New York for leading us tonight and highlighting the risks involved, the very serious and real risks involved in this reckless action that is proposed.