John Garamendi

Mr. GARAMENDI

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, article I, section 8 of the United States Constitution is clear: Congress, and Congress alone, shall have the power to declare war. Make no mistake, the current campaign against ISIS is a war. Mr. Speaker, our esteemed colleague from Texas made a very cogent argument about why we need clarity. The inability to have a clear plan is based upon the fact that Congress has not yet articulated an authorization to use force that would lay out the parameters and the extent of what we would expect the President to do. The President says he has the authorization under the 2001 and 2002 authorizations. Ambiguity, clearly, is present. I disagree with the President on those as an authorization. I have argued for more than 10 months that our military operations against ISIS need their own authorization. The President did his part. He submitted a draft to us in February. Since then, we have had a few committee hearings, but no real action. Leadership in both Houses has refused to schedule votes on this issue, either in committee or on the floor. That is unacceptable. We have already run up significant costs, $2.7 billion on operations to continue the fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. We have begun delivering $1.7 billion of weapons. More importantly, we have lost 7 servicemembers already. This has to change. This resolution is to force us, the Congress, to uphold our constitutional duty to debate and vote on the authorization for the use of force in Iraq and Syria. I have no doubt that if this resolution passes, an appropriate authorization to use force will be passed, and we will have clarity as to the scope and conduct of this war. I thank my colleagues for introducing this legislation.

Mr. GARAMENDI

Mr. GARAMENDI. Madam Speaker, for the next hour, we will be talking about an issue that really confronts every American family, an issue that has brought devastation, fear, and sadness to virtually every family in this Nation. We are going to talk about dementia and Alzheimer's. We are going to talk about the way in which it literally tears families apart as their loved one's mind, recollections, and ability to handle their own affairs seems to dissipate. This is an issue that currently confronts around 5 million Americans and their families. This is an issue that will grow exponentially over the next 25 to 30 years to the point where maybe 16 million American families are going to be affected by it. It is also an issue that we can deal with. It is an issue that we can see the cost. Let me put up this chart here, and we will talk about the cost of Alzheimer's quickly. It is a crisis that is growing rapidly, and it is resulting in extraordinary cost increases. If you look at 2015, on Medicare and Medicaid programs, the Federal Government will spend $153 billion on Alzheimer's. In 2020, it will grow to $182 billion. And then it is anticipated--as one of our colleagues spoke during a 1-minute speech-- that by 2050, it will grow to over $1 trillion. This is an issue for the Federal Government. It is an issue for every family. Let me put up another little chart here that really displays what an investment by the American people can do. If you take a look at the reasons why people die most commonly in the United States--breast cancer, prostate cancer, heart disease, stroke, HIV--you will notice that in every one of these, we have seen a decline in the mortality from these illnesses. Breast cancer declining just marginally. Prostate cancer, a significant decline of around 11 percent. Heart disease declined by 14 percent; stroke by 21; and HIV, while still prevalent and still common, the death rate is down by more than 50 percent. This one over here is Alzheimer's disease; a 71 percent increase in the number of deaths due to Alzheimer's. My mother-in-law is in this statistic. She spent the last 2 years of her life living with my wife, Patty, and I in our home. We cared for her at night. We, fortunately, were able to have someone come in to help us during the day. And that is really the story of most Alzheimer's now. You are either in a nursing home or you are cared for in the home. So among those 5 million out there, there are families, like mine, that are caring as best they can in a very difficult situation. Ours, fortunately, was not so difficult. But, nonetheless, after two-plus years, my mother-in-law did die. So what can we do about it? I want to put up one more chart here, and then I want to turn to my colleagues. If you will remember on that chart I just put up, death rates are declining for cancer. There is a reason. And the reason is the annual expenditure for cancer research has been just under $5.5 billion for the last few years. For HIV/AIDS, nearly $3 billion of research annually. Cardiovascular, heart disease, over $2 billion. Alzheimer's, while the death rate climbs, we are spending just over $566 million--not billion, million. So we shouldn't be surprised when we see this: declines in the cancer rates, deaths from cancer, stroke, heart disease, HIV. And then Alzheimer's. Mr. Speaker, $1 trillion will be spent in just 25 years on dealing with Alzheimer's, and some 16 million Americans will have that illness. Now there is good news. The good news just happened today, and I want to commend my Republican colleague Tom Cole from Oklahoma, chairman of the Appropriations Health and Human Services Subcommittee, who moved to increase Alzheimer's research from $566 million to almost $900 million. Go for it, Tom. You are the chairman of that subcommittee, and you are doing the right thing. You are doing the right thing by 5 million Americans who suffer from Alzheimer's today, and you are doing the right thing for their families. And I think House has the opportunity also to stand with Tom Cole and to do the right thing by Americans, and that is, increase this research funding. There are breakthroughs that are coming. If you read the articles, if you read the scientific journals, we are coming to an understanding of this very, very difficult disease for which there is no early detection, for which there is no cure, and for which there is only one exit, and that is death. So we can deal with this. The 535 of us, the Representatives of those 5 million Americans with Alzheimer's and their families, we can do something. We can increase the funding for research. Tonight I am joined by several of my colleagues. I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Maxine Waters) who carried legislation on this for years. She has been the co-chair of the Alzheimer's Caucus. If she will join us and share with us her work and what is happening from her perspective.

Mr. GARAMENDI. I thank the gentlewoman from California who has been a leader in this disease and dealing with the problems of it for many, many years. And your work Ms. Waters is paying off. The work that you have done organizing us, Members of Congress, to petition the subcommittee paid off--a 50 percent increase, a 50 percent increase, and I think it has got a good chance of staying in. This is really really good news and the rest of the legislation piece by piece we are going to get at this. I would like now to turn the time over to our colleague from New York Brian Higgins. We have spoken on this issue before. Mr. Higgins, thank you so very much. If you will share your thoughts with us on this disease and what we might do to deal with it.

Mr. GARAMENDI. Yes, it is.

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Tonko, thank you so very much. Mr. Speaker, I think we will end there and simply say that this is not the last time that we will be speaking on this issue on the floor. I would hope the next time that we speak on this issue that the House of Representatives will have increased the research budget by 50 percent, from $566 million to close to $900 million. That is a big leap. It is not sufficient. It is not what is necessary to really get at this disease, but this is one we can tackle. This is one we have to tackle for the strength of the American Government budget. It is one we have to tackle. This is where you have been with this entire discussion, Mr. Tonko. This is about families. It is about individuals. It is about the suffering, the angst, and the fear that exists out there with this devastating disease. We can do this. We really can. My message to the American people is one that you put out a few moments ago, Mr. Tonko. That is, for anybody who is watching out there, for anybody who is interested in the Federal deficit, for anybody who is interested in the quality of life of their families as they age and even before they age, talk to us. Tell us that you want us to spend your tax money on solving this problem, on the research that will lead to the solution for what is now an unsolvable mystery. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Tonko, thank you for your leadership. Thank you for rounding up 180-plus Members of this House. On any issue that is tough, but then having them sign on to a piece of legislation that would advance the care that individuals receive and the support that families need. The cure for Alzheimer's, all of those pieces of legislation, which Ms. Waters talked about, those are all pieces of the puzzle. And they deal with--I am going to end with just two charts, so it is really where I started. This is a different version of one of the charts that deals with the costs that we are talking about. These are the total cost in the system. If you take a look at it, 2015, you are talking about a quarter of a billion dollars, just under $226 billion, of which the great majority is Medicare and Medicaid, and then out-of-pocket and other payers, or the other insurance companies. It will rise each year until we get to 2050, which is not that far away. Thirty-five years out we will be well over $1 trillion, of which we will bust the bank, the Medicare. There is a lot of discussion around here about the deficit. The real factors in the deficit are this health care issue. That is where we are going to find the budget deficit. But we have already seen through the Affordable Care Act that the projected increases for Medicare have substantially reduced over the last 4 years as the Affordable Care Act is providing early diagnosis of heart disease, diabetes, other kinds of long-term illnesses that are really where most of the expense in Medicare and Medicaid occur. And if we can get a grip on Alzheimer's, if we can find a way of delaying the onset of it, we are going to save tens and, indeed, hundreds of billions of dollars over the passage of time. And the next step is the cure. So they think, the researchers, think they can find a way of delaying the onset. As they do that, they will also find a way of dealing with the disease itself. Then this awesome and horrific expense will be reduced. There is one other chart.

Mr. GARAMENDI. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Tonko, you continually come back to the compassion and caregiving that I think each human being has somewhere in them. For us here in Congress, it is to express that in a meaningful way. That meaningful way is to make sure there is support for those families and individuals who have Alzheimer's, those who are caring for them, to make sure that the medical treatment, such as it is for this illness, is available, and to pursue vigorously the research that could and, I believe, will lead to a complete understanding of the illness. That is our task. Mr. Tonko.

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Tonko, for more than 4 years now, you and I have stood on the floor on Special Order hour to talk about Make It In America, about the manufacturing system and about the jobs that we need to build, transportation infrastructure, and your passion for those subjects was so obvious. Your passion and your determination to deal with Alzheimer's and to find a cure, to find an understanding of what it is and how it affects the brain, and then also to reach out to the families that are caring for their loved ones really exceeds and mirrors the passion that you have for the working men and women of this Nation. I thank you. Mr. Speaker, I also want to thank the Alzheimer's Association. They organized a lobbying group through here very recently. They were wearing their purple ribbons, and they brought to us the stories, the individual stories that were of their families. I know that as I talked to my colleagues here on the floor and over in the Senate, I get the same thing from them: Yes, my mother, my aunt, my sister, my brother, they too have suffered from Alzheimer's, and they recently died, or they are in very serious condition. So we find this illness touching every family. I have yet to find a family that I have talked to about Alzheimer's that didn't nod their head in understanding: Yes, we know what it is. What Americans don't know is the information that you and my colleagues, Maxine Waters and Brian Higgins, brought to the floor today, and that is the facts, not only the impact that Alzheimer's has on the Federal budget--Medicare and Medicaid--the impact that it has on family budgets, on insurance, private insurance, but the impact that it has on families. You have made that clear. I think that the work that has been done by Alzheimer's Association and related organizations--Medicare, Social Security, and support groups all across this Nation--is having an impact. When a budget for any specific program is increased by 50 percent in this era of sequestration, something has had an impact. Mr. Cole, as chairman of that, and Ms. Waters, as the chairperson or the vice chair, co-chair of the Working Group on Alzheimer's, are having an impact. We can find a solution here. We can understand. We can do the early diagnosis. It is pretty clear there are some breakthroughs that are occurring. There are certain drugs out there that seem to work if you can intervene early in the process. What a change that would be. What a change that would be for all families. This is not just an issue of Alzheimer's, this is an issue of the brain. We have got the U.S. military, the Department of Defense, doing significant research on brain injuries, brain trauma, and illnesses resulting from the wars--from traumatic brain syndrome and related. So if we pool together and we actually put into the Defense Authorization Act a paragraph that said: Research done by the Department of Defense on the brain, brain injuries, a way in which the brain works or doesn't work, they need to take that research and couple it with research that is taking place on dementia, on other kinds of neurological diseases, including Alzheimer's, and if we can pool all of these various research programs together and get them to share the information to fertilize each other's research, I think we are going to succeed. That 2025 goal I think is too far out there. I see we are on the cusp of a breakthrough. And if we can push all of the research and focus it and, like a dart, hit the center of the target, I think we are going to be successful. Mr. Tonko, would you like to join in here?

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Higgins, thank you so very much. Your points are absolutely on target. This little chart here points out much of what you and Ms. Waters were talking about, and that is the extraordinary expense. This is 2015. And we expect to spend $153 billion of Federal tax money, Medicare and Medicaid, on treating Alzheimer's. Way over, that little tiny purple spot, is the $566 million of research. It would be a little bigger if we were able to get that 300, but it is still going to pale in comparison to this. This is 261 times more money spent on treatment, which ultimately just enables the passage of time and leads to death because there is no effective treatment today. That is what we are spending on caring for people. That number down there, and the efforts and the bills that have been introduced and the Alzheimer's Foundation and others that are working on this have an opportunity to change this entire dynamic around because we can find the solution to this. I would like now to turn to my colleague, as part of what we often do here, we call it the ``East-West Show,'' my colleague from the great State of New York, Paul Tonko.

Mr. GARAMENDI

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, I first want to echo Chairman Hunter in stating my strong support for H.R. 1987, the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2015, legislation that will tend to the needs of our Nation's fifth military service, the United States Coast Guard. I also want to express my sincere appreciation to Chairman Hunter for his genuine bipartisan collaboration throughout the development of this important legislation. Not only will this bill improve our oversight of the Coast Guard, it also will enhance the capabilities and performance of this indispensable, multi-mission maritime agency. I also want to thank the Chairman of the Transportation Committee, Bill Shuster, and the Ranking Democrat Member, Peter DeFazio, and acknowledge them for their thoughtful contributions. I am particularly pleased that this legislation will provide stability in budget authority for the Coast Guard. Erratic budgets and perpetual continuing resolutions have had a deleterious impact on the Coast Guard. Perhaps most notable, unpredictable and insufficient funding has hampered the Coast Guard's ability to keep pace with its long-term program to recapitalize its offshore fleets of surface and air assets. Some of the Coast Guard's legacy cutters are fifty years old. These vessels are well beyond their estimated service life and have become increasingly unreliable and much more expensive to maintain and repair. We can, and we should, do better by our Coast Guard. The authorized funding levels for the Acquisitions, Construction and Improvement Account in this legislation will allow the Coast Guard to keep this recapitalization initiative on track. I am optimistic that these authorizations will send a strong signal to our colleagues on the Appropriations Committee. I also support provisions in the bill that will require the Coast Guard to initiate long-term capital planning, to require better assessments of mission performance metrics and personnel needs, and to assess and test new communication and vessel management technologies. The bill also contains provisions important to our merchant marine. Provisions that would harmonize the renewal of different mariner credentials and allow mariners greater flexibility in acquiring their medical certifications should improve convenience without sacrificing compliance with fitness and training standards. The bill also further advances my strong interest in using the imminent U.S. LNG export trade as a new economic opportunity for our shipyards and the U.S. flag in our foreign trade. This legislation would direct the Secretary of Transportation to develop guidelines to promote the use of U.S. flag vessels and U.S. seafarers in the transport of LNG. I urge members to support this provision that will create maritime jobs here at home. In closing, Mr. Speaker, this legislation is not perfect, but rarely is that the case. This legislation is, however, a balanced, responsible and forward thinking product that will support our Coast Guard and address important issues raised by maritime stakeholders. I am proud to be an original cosponsor, and I urge members on both sides to support this legislation.

Mr. GARAMENDI

Mr. GARAMENDI. I thank the chairman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, in the legislation today, there is a clause that would cause us to think about what to do in the High Arctic. The Arctic Ocean is melting. There will be a Northwest Passage. We are going to need a new heavy icebreaker to provide the support for the Navy as well as for commercial. Yesterday during a hearing, we hit upon the notion of creating a special fund similar to what exists for the strategic missile submarines. We would like, therefore, to begin the discussion of a national strategic high-latitude icebreaking fund. That discussion could then merge into a way of funding about $1 billion for a new icebreaker, absolutely essential for the U.S. Navy, absolutely essential for the commerce in the Arctic Ocean as well as for providing us with the ability to compete with Russia. I would like to propose that that be discussed and part of the process as we move the NDAA through the committees and the two Houses.

Mr. GARAMENDI

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the service of Sergeant Carl Pilcher, a man who has truly devoted himself to public service. Carl was hired as a Police Officer by the Fairfield Police Department on April 11, 1988 and over the duration of his career worked in various capacities which included: Field Training, Patrol, Special Operations, Special Activity Felony Enforcement (SAFE) Team, and Youth Services. On December 31, 1999 he was promoted to Police Corporal where he served in the Patrol Bureau for two years before being promoted to Police Sergeant on December 28, 2001. As a Police Sergeant, Carl supervised the Youth Services Unit, investigators in the Major Crimes Unit, and several Patrol teams. Most recently, Sergeant Pilcher spent the past four years running the Personnel and Training Unit, where he ensured the Fairfield Police Department upheld the highest standards in the recruitment, hiring and training of the next generation of law enforcement Officers. Sergeant Pilcher is a skilled team leader who has received numerous commendations including an Exceptional Performance Citation for his decisive and exemplary leadership. He has been a valued public servant where his hard work and commitment to the community have made him a model representative of the law enforcement community.

Mr. GARAMENDI

Mr. GARAMENDI. Thank you. Thank you for your leadership on the Highways and Transit Subcommittee, because you are carrying the weight of this particular piece of legislation.

Mr. GARAMENDI. Well, also, the lives of our citizens. I don't have the placards with me, but in previous presentations I have shown pictures of the Interstate 5 bridge that collapsed in Washington State near the Canadian border. It shut down commerce going north. You were not going north on that bridge because it collapsed. And then there was the bridge over the Mississippi River in the Twin Cities, in Minneapolis. That bridge collapsed. I think five people lost their lives there. This is an ongoing issue, one that we need to deal with. The solution is at hand. The solution is at hand. Every community in this Nation has a transportation issue of one sort. It might be a transit, a bus, a train, or a bridge, or a highway, but we all have it. I am going to make one more point, and this will be my last, and then I will let you wrap it up. I am going to go back to what is the discussion of the day here in Washington, the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the TPA, the authorization of the fast track legislation. Ninety- nine percent of our trade goes through the ports, and this is part of the GROW AMERICA Act. It is part of the freight system. I don't think this trade bill should pass, but should it become law, you have to have the infrastructure that goes with it, and you cannot have a robust trade program unless you have a well-built port system. By the way, one of the things that is going to happen is, because of our energy boom, the United States is creating an enormous amount of natural gas. That natural gas is in the process of being transported, shipped overseas in what is known as liquefied natural gas. You supercool, you supercompress the natural gas; you put it into a tanker, a big ship, and you transport it. A new facility will go online in Louisiana, and it is called the Cheniere facility at Sabine Pass. It will take 100 tankers, ships, to handle the volume of that one export facility, and there are five others that are in the permitting process. I am saying, Wait a minute, that is a strategic national asset; that is part of our infrastructure. Why don't we ship that strategic asset on American-built ships with American sailors? If we passed a simple law here, which actually replicates the North Slope oil law back in the 1960s, we could replicate that and simply say: If we are going to export liquefied natural gas, do it on American-built ships with American sailors. We would build over the next two decades more than a hundred ships in American shipyards with American-built equipment and Americans doing the welding and building those ships, probably well over 100,000 jobs; and the seamen, the merchant marine, they would be American. It all fits together. It is part of our transportation infrastructure. It is using our great national assets, improving them, the transportation system, and then using those assets to create American jobs. Buy America, make it in America, transport that natural gas on American-built ships with American mariners, and take what will be your legislation, the GROW AMERICA Act, and build the infrastructure. I am looking forward to the introduction of your legislation. I am looking forward to your leadership in making this happen. We have got to talk about this every single day until we wake up, until America wakes up, and says: Wait a minute, guys, do something for our Nation; build the foundation of economic growth. Thank you so very much for joining us, Delegate. I will let you close.

Mr. GARAMENDI. You have to lay down the marker. You laid down the first proposal, and it is really good. I said 4 years. Actually, it is a 6-year bill--$478 billion--and it covers all of the elements. All of the elements are there. If somebody has got a better idea, we haven't heard it. I am delighted. When you introduce that bill, count me as one of the coauthors of it, and I look forward to working with your leadership to push it along.

Mr. GARAMENDI. It has to be done. We absolutely have to do this with your leadership on the subcommittee in trying to find a path to build the infrastructure and in looking for ways to pay for it. Actually, the administration in the GROW AMERICA Act found a way to pay for it--with the earnings of American corporations that are overseas. Bring those back; tax them; and we would have enough money, together with the existing excise tax, to build our infrastructure over the next 4 to 5 years, so we have got to do it.

Mr. GARAMENDI. Good.

Mr. GARAMENDI. Do you have more you wish to say?

Mr. GARAMENDI. I thought we had completed, but I guess I am not yielding back quite yet.

Mr. GARAMENDI. Well, we have done it over and over again, and the general talk around this building is that we are going to kick the can down the road yet again, probably for another 6 months, just like we extended the last one for 9 months. It is not the way to do it, and the result is bad public policy and an inability to really build the foundation for our economic future. You mentioned the funding, the notion of a joint committee hearing between the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Ways and Means to discuss the funding options that you just described, and so we should talk about what the options are, and then select the one that makes the most sense for this Nation's well- being. We can do that. That is what we were hired to do and what the voters put us here for.

Mr. GARAMENDI. I thank you so very much. I thank you for your leadership. I am looking forward to the introduction of the bill and to push that through. Whether we can do it in 7 days or not--we could. It is possible. All the language is written. You will introduce it. The way of paying for it is known. We have just got work to do. I am just thinking about the greatness of this Nation and the enormous potential that we have, and how we just let that slip away, for lack of solid programs that really build this Nation. I think about Eisenhower and what he did with the great highway system that we have, the Interstate Highway System. There is much to be done. I look forward to your leadership. Mr. Speaker, I notice that our Republican colleagues have been listening to our debate and have decided to come and take the next hour and carry forth to Make It in America, build the infrastructure and the foundation for economic growth. I look forward to hearing the gentlemen. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GARAMENDI. We really must do that. Yesterday, I was in the Central Valley--Modesto, California--for a meeting, and I had to drive to San Francisco for a speech over Interstate 580, the Altamont Pass, and it is so broken up. There is the fast lane on the Altamont Pass, as you go up over the mountain, that actually has about a 6-inch crack in the fast lane. As you drive down, you are driving down on one side of the crack. You have one wheel on one side and the other wheel on the other side of this crack, and you say, ``Whoa, I hope I can make it through here.'' That is a major transportation route with tens of thousands of cars traveling on it every day. So the state of good repair? Not in California. What does it mean? If we were to take the GROW AMERICA Act that you are going to introduce, it would mean that, compared to this year, 2015, we would have $7.6 billion more across the Nation to repair the highways in our Nation. The Altamont Pass, it is downright dangerous--I was shocked--but they don't have any money to fix it. There would be $7.6 billion for all of this Nation to do it. Then the buses, the transit agency in San Francisco. I was parked in San Francisco, waiting for a stoplight. A bus pulls up, and it had to be a 1950 bus. It was rusted out, and I am sure the seats were torn apart. All good credit to San Francisco for trying, but across the Nation, it is the same way--here in Washington, D.C., with the transit agencies, Amtrak. By the way, Amtrak came to Congress. They wanted money--this is some good news--and we actually passed an Amtrak bill out of the House of Representatives a couple of months ago. Yet do you know what they wanted to do? They wanted to get a waiver on the Buy America provisions. They have to build, I think, 28 locomotives and train sets--high-speed--and they didn't want to buy it in America. I am going, no, no way. If we are going to spend American taxpayer money, spend it on American-made equipment, on American jobs. Make It In America. No way are you going to get out of that. I also want to talk about this, but you have got a bridge behind you.

Mr. GARAMENDI. Hello, America. Do you know what is going to happen in just a few days? In 7 legislative days, the United States highway trust fund runs out of money--kaput, it is over--a fund established by President Eisenhower in the 1950s, out of money. What is the House of Representatives doing? What is your Representative and your Senator doing? Well, I suspect debating the Trans-Pacific Partnership--the TPA--when, in fact, this is the big jobs issue. The trade negotiations, you can debate it forever; but if you really want to create jobs in America, pay attention to this, America. Pay attention to the fact that the Federal highway trust fund expires in 7 legislative days. We have got work to do here; we have got a lot of work to do, and it is not happening. I am a Californian. I represent the State of California. We have a pretty high opinion of ourselves in California, maybe deserved or not; but what it means to us when the highway trust fund shuts down, what it means is a lot of jobs. 73,572 jobs will be jeopardized at the end of this month of May. We are looking at 5,692 active highway and transit projects will stop, red light stop, don't go forward. For California, in just 7 legislative days, a very, very important thing happens--actually, far, far more important than the Trans-Pacific Partnership or the trade promotion authority. This is where the big jobs are in America. Building the infrastructure of America is how you create jobs today and on into the future because you lay the foundation for economic growth. If you couple those transportation programs with another long, longstanding American law, which is Buy America, Make It In America, you not only create the foundation, but you also create immediate manufacturing jobs of all kinds. From the bulldozers, to the tractors and the backhoes, to the steel and the concrete, you buy it in America; you build the infrastructure in America, and you create immediate jobs. How many? Well, I think we all know Duke University. It is more than a basketball school. It also happens to be one of the more thoughtful research institutions in the United States. They produced a little book that about 535 of the Representatives of the American people ought to be reading. This ought to be the bedtime reading for the Senators and the Members of Congress: ``Infrastructure Investment Creates American Jobs,'' Duke University Center on Globalization, Governance, and Competitiveness. I am going to read just a few things here just to drive this point home. Old and broken transportation infrastructure makes the United States less competitive than 15 of our major trading partners and makes manufacturers less efficient in getting goods to market. You want to get goods to market, build the infrastructure. Underinvestment costs the United States over 900,000 jobs, including more than 97,000 American manufacturing jobs. You want to Make It In America, build the infrastructure. Maximizing American-made materials when rebuilding infrastructure has the potential to create even more jobs. Relying on American-made inputs can also mitigate safety concerns related to large-scale outsourcing. It is our Make It In America policy. It is the agenda that we have been driving for the last 5 years here. Build the infrastructure, Buy America, Make It In America. Competitiveness, a lot of talk, everybody wants to talk about the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or the TPA. You want to be competitive; you build the American infrastructure--again, Duke University. The United States boasts the world's largest stock of transportation infrastructure as measured by combined bridges, airports, seaports, and miles of road, rail, pipeline, and inland waterways. It is a very good start, foundation. The United States is not well positioned compared to its major trading partners in terms of quality of transportation infrastructure. Global assessments of transportation infrastructure place the United States in 16th place out of 144 nations. You want to improve our competitiveness, you want to create jobs, build the infrastructure. The quality of transportation infrastructure affects the United States' competitiveness, point No. 6, and here is what we can do about it. Instead of the administration's spending all of its energy and all of its time talking about how we are going to deal with international trade that, in all likelihood, will create fewer jobs in America--so much so that they have to put into that Trans-Pacific Partnership a provision that would actually pay American workers who have lost their jobs--why don't they talk about their own GROW AMERICA Act? This is the Department of Transportation. This is the President's program, the GROW AMERICA Act. It is, really, a good piece of legislation. It is not yet introduced, unfortunately, but it calls for $7.6 billion to fix our highway system--this is all annual--$6.8 billion to improve public transportation, $3.4 billion to strengthen our rail systems--Amtrak and other kinds of rail systems--and $1 billion to accelerate our freight support system. If you really want to do international trade, you really have to build the freight management system in this Nation. It has got to go out, not just in, and you can't do it with the antiquated freight systems that we have in the United States. This is $476 billion over a 4-year period of time. It is a good project--it is fully paid for--but we are not even talking about it here. We have got work to do. The purpose of this 1 hour, which will, actually, be significantly less than an hour, is to say, ``Hello, America. Wake up. Ask your Members of Congress: 'What are you doing about transportation? What are you doing in 7 legislative days to fix the transportation system? Are you paying attention? Are you paying attention to your State? to your community that you represent? to the jobs that you are going to see and the highway projects and the transit projects? Are you paying attention?''' In 7 legislative days, at the end of this month, the Federal highway trust fund terminates along with the projects that are supported by it. It is a problem. It is our problem. We need the courage to act, and we need to pay attention to what is really important, which happens to be the transportation infrastructure of this great Nation. We need to rebuild it. Joining me this hour is the gentlewoman representing the Capital of the United States, Washington, D.C., Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, the ranking member of the Highways and Transit Subcommittee of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Delegate Norton, thank you for joining us tonight. I am looking forward to your presentation.