Colleen Hanabusa

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak in support of the Lee amendment. When I was in the Hawaii State legislature, we were the only State that did a Hawaii Medal of Honor. The unfortunate part about it is we gave those medals to the spouses and the families and the friends of those who had fallen in Iraq and Afghanistan, as long as they had some connection to Hawaii, either serving at one of our bases or being from there. When I went through that proceeding, I said, you know, as soon as we can--and I believe the time has come for us--we must safely remove our troops and the civilian personnel because we owe it to them. It is not a matter of whether or not we are abdicating or we are turning our backs on them. They have done what they were sent there to do. Eleven years of fighting; Osama bin Laden is dead. The people of the United States know that, and they are asking us to remove the men and women. Don't continue them in harm's way because we have done what we told them they were sent there to do. That is why I stand in support of the Lee amendment.

Ms. HANABUSA. I thank the gentleman from Connecticut. I rise in opposition to the Bartlett amendment because I think the Bartlett amendment doesn't quite understand the difference between a project labor agreement and a collective bargaining agreement. This amendment targets Executive Order 13502, which encourages the use of PLAs in construction contracts of $25 million or more. And the reason is that it's historically something that we have supported. Ironically, in 1992, there was a Supreme Court decision that defined PLAs, called the Boston Harbor Agreement, which was under President Bush, who had a similar executive order that prohibited the use of PLAs. It was Bush's solicitor Kenneth Starr that argued for the PLAs. And he said the reason why you would use them is because of timely completion, labor peace and stability, labor supply, and for public purpose. This is the reason why you would use PLAs. We know that historically, this has been one of the best ways to do these major construction projects. What the Bartlett amendment does is it will tie the hands of the Department of Defense.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the Coffman amendment. Under the guise of efficiency, this is really an assault on the Federal civilian workforce. The Coffman amendment is based on the misguided belief that private contractors are less costly and more efficient--in other words, outsourcing and privatization should be the way we go--when, in fact, the insourcing of the work has been proven to be more efficient. POGO, the Project on Government Oversight, said that the private contractors get paid about 1.83 times, almost twice, more than the government pays its employees. In fact, government pay is less in all of the 35 categories that they reviewed. The amount spent on civilian personnel grew from fiscal year 2001 to 2010 from about $41 billion to $69 billion. In the same time frame, the private sector grew $73 billion to $181 billion. But, more importantly than that, the Army has said insourcing saves them 16 to 30 percent. So we hear now today that this is what we want to give to the Secretary of Defense. Leon Panetta says he wants to uphold the policy of the total force management; that there is an appropriate mix of civilian, military, and private, and what we need to do is let that continue. So this amendment is not supported by the facts. It's not even supported by the Department of Defense. It is clearly an attempt to just support the private sector on the back of Federal employees, and for that reason, I ask everyone to vote ``no.''

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the Sablan amendment. The reason is that it really is not necessary at this time and, at this period of time when we have budget issues and we have sequestration issues, we don't need to tackle this one as well. What the amendment seeks is to amend 10 USC 7310 subsection A, which basically states U.S. Navy vessels home ported in the United States or Guam may not be overhauled, repaired, or maintained in shipyards outside the United States or Guam, except for voyage repairs. This is being sought to be amended to include CNMI. I'd like to say, first of all, that I understand perfectly well why my good friend and colleague from the Northern Mariana Islands wants to do this. I mean, he's representing his constituents. But the points against it are overwhelming. First of all, the Navy states it has the requirement for a public or private sector ship maintenance facility in CNMI. And also the Navy currently says it can conduct repairs in CNMI, but there is limited pier space and no drydocking capability, and that they can do the work elsewhere for the Navy and for the Military Sealift Command. In addition to that, the shipyard repair capacity in both public and private shipyards exists today in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, Bremerton, Washington, and Guam for both the U.S. Navy and the MSC ships. Now, the Navy has no future requirement for the repair capacity in the Pacific region. And it's been testified to that the buildup on Guam does not create a demand for additional ship repair capacity. So the Navy's current regional ship maintenance work log only minimally supports the current maintenance facilities in Guam, and we don't need any additional facilities. In addition to that, the Navy officials have stated there is not enough U.S. Navy or MSC work in current and future operating plants. It is for these reasons that I regretfully oppose the amendment.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Madam Chairman, first I would like to say that this is a bipartisan amendment. Congressman Young from Alaska has joined in the amendment, as well as Congresswoman Bordallo, Congressman Sablan, and the gentleman from Washington, Congressman Dicks. So, Madam Chairman, this is a very important issue, and it's not asking for much in terms of funding. It's asking for funding to be restored to the fiscal year '12 level. And let's look at what we're talking about here. We're talking about the Marine Debris line, which funds NOAA's Marine Debris Program, which was really established and mandated by the Marine Debris Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act of 2006. As you know, the program works to map, identify, assess, remove, and prohibit marine debris. Marine debris is, of course, the worst pollution that we're dealing with in our oceans, but it has become even more relevant to us after the tsunami, the earthquake, and, of course, Fukushima Daiichi in Japan on March 11, 2011. And we have, I'm sure, all sat there in amazement as reports have been made of a soccer ball being found, I believe, in Alaska and a motorcycle in Canada. Definitely, the debris is hitting North America. I represent Hawaii, and we are on watch as well. All indications are that the debris is making its way. It will hit the northern Hawaiian Islands maybe in the later part of this year. But definitely we expect that the coast will be hit by 2013 as well as Hawaii and other islands. And think about what this means. You are not talking about a ship. You are not talking about things being dropped in the ocean. You are talking about whole cities. I'm sure we can all recall seeing, in Japan, that tsunami coming in and wiping out cities. And think about where that went. I think the problem that we, many of us, have is that we stand there in awe of what happens, but we don't think about what the consequences are. And the consequences here are major. That is floating in the ocean, and it is making its way to us. That is why this amendment has been proposed, and that is why I believe this amendment has the sponsors that it does have, because we are simply asking to be restored to the level of fiscal year 2012. What that will give us--remember, at that point, we were merely monitoring. We didn't have any clear evidence as to what was happening. Now we know. All this does is say restore it to at least that level so that the Marine Debris Program can do its work and map, identify, assess, remove, and prohibit more marine debris from hitting our shores. Think about the consequences for us. Madam Chairman, that is why I ask that we all support this amendment and, on page 13, line 2, increase the amount by $1.6 million, just to the fiscal year 2012 level. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. HANABUSA. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, the Senate is now debating the Stafford loan or the student loan bill--their version. And their version is better because their version pays for it by closing big tax loopholes. It requires us to now look at what the House passed. We paid for a 1- year extension by repealing the preventative health care provisions. What does that mean? It means that women and children will suffer. For my State, Mr. Speaker, it meant that the State preventative grants will be gone, and that's what we need to prevent heart attacks, to address the concerns of, in particular, women and children and those who are in need. But what does it mean when we let this interest rate go up? For me, it is 16,681 students, average loans of $4,000-plus, total amount of loans in the State of $67-plus million. This is going to be an additional $16 million to them. Mr. Speaker, we can do better.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, House Concurrent Resolution 105 authorizes the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center for a celebration on June 24, 2012. This will be the 43rd time that we have celebrated the birthday of King Kamehameha in the Nation's Capitol. Mr. Speaker, Hawaii has a unique history. We are, of course, the 50th State, and we are the only State that comes with a kingdom as part of our history. June 11 is the recognized State holiday. King Kamehameha was born around 1758, and he unified the eight Hawaiian Islands by 1810. He is also known as King Kamehameha I. His birthday has been celebrated for about 140 years in my State, beginning in 1871 by his great-grandson King Kamehameha V. The statue that you see in the Capitol Visitor Center today has also a fascinating history. It was commissioned for the then-kingdom by Thomas Gould, and he finished it in 1880. It was made in Italy. He was an American sculptor. The ship actually sank that was bringing the first Kamehameha statue to Hawaii, and in 1883, the second statue made its way to Hawaii. What stands in Emancipation Hall today is molded from the second statue. That is the official statue that stands in front of what we call Ali'iolani Hale, which is the home of the Hawaii Supreme Court. The first statue was discovered and stands in the Big Island, which is the birthplace of King Kamehameha. As you look at the statue--and I invite everyone to do that--you will see that it stands approximately 8\1/2\ feet tall. He has a helmet and a feather cape, and they are made from very rare bird feathers. His left hand has a spear, and that was his statement that he was ready to defend his kingdom. But his right hand is open in a gesture, and that is to welcome people, and that is what we call the gesture of, of course, aloha. Lei draping is the customary celebration which will also happen on June 24 here, and what you see there is a tradition that has become almost uniquely Hawaii's. Lei is the way that we bond. And the lei draping is symbolic of the bonds that people have in Hawaii, and it is a very close and strong bond. The act of presenting a lei is something that many identify with Hawaii as they come to visit our beautiful islands. As we all know, the President was born in Hawaii, and on June 20, 2010, he issued Proclamation 8534 in honor of the bicentennial of the uniting of the islands by King Kamehameha. This is what the President had to say in that proclamation: On this bicentennial King Kamehameha Day, we celebrate the history and heritage of the Aloha State, which has immeasurably enriched our national life and culture. The Hawaiian narrative is one of both profound triumph and, sadly, deep injustice. It is the story of Native Hawaiians oppressed by crippling disease, aborted treaties, and the eventual conquest of their sovereign kingdom. These grim milestones remind us of an unjust time in our history, as well as the many pitfalls in our Nation's long and difficult journey to perfect itself. Yet, through the peaks and valleys of our American story, Hawaii's steadfast sense of community and mutual support shows the progress that results when we are united in a spirit of limitless possibility. This particular celebration is also very special for the people of Hawaii, and I believe for Members of this House as well. Senator Daniel K. Akaka will be retiring at the end of his term, and as many of you are aware of, he served 14 years in this House and the last 22 in the United States Senate. He is the epitome of aloha. He is the epitome of everything that is good about Hawaii. In honor of him, I would like to read a portion of what he said in the June 2009 Kamehameha Lei Draping Ceremony here because I think he gave a different perspective of King Kamehameha that many of us do not know. He said: As a military leader and statesman, Kamehameha was a brilliant visionary who pursued opportunities for progress. He pioneered military strategies that included unique flanking tactics and the use of cannons on the bow of his canoes. Those revolutionary concepts enabled Kamehameha to succeed in battle and are principles recognized and taught to this day at West Point. Beyond his military accolades, Kamehameha understood that if his people were going to thrive, they must be unified. Through governance, Kamehameha brought Native Hawaiians together and established an environment where they could perpetuate their heritage and way of life. Under his leadership, the government strengthened its autonomy and self-sufficiency. These actions set the kingdom's framework for international commerce and diplomacy that brought peace and prosperity to his people. As we all know, Senator Akaka is the only Native Hawaiian who serves in the Congress of the United States. It is very important for us to know that King Kamehameha was very thoughtful, even in the days that he was uniting the Hawaiian Islands. He is known in Hawaii for the Law of the Splintered Paddle, also called Kanawai Mamalahoe. What he basically said was that we have a responsibility to protect civilians at the time of war, that every human life was precious, and it was wrong for the powerful to mistreat the weak. The context of this story is also very moving. Someone who didn't know who he was actually hit him on the head with a paddle and, of course, it splintered. When they found out that they had hit him, they all thought that their lives would come to an end. But instead, he decreed the Law of the Splintered Paddle. This is the visionary who united the Hawaiian Islands. By this resolution, we honor this great person and also all that makes Hawaii special and unique. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega).

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time. However, I would like to, first of all, thank the gentleman from Mississippi for managing this legislation and bringing it to the floor; Speaker Boehner, Chairman Lungren, and Ranking Member Brady for allowing it to come forward as well; and the Architect of the Capitol, the Capitol Police, and all others who will assist in this matter. And, of course, the people of Hawaii. Mr. Speaker, I hope that we'll pass this measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Madam Speaker, I represent Hawaii, the youngest State in this Union. Many of our people immigrated to our wonderful State within the last hundred-plus years. When they immigrated, they came to work on plantations for the most part, and they knew one thing: for their children to be better, to get ahead, they needed an education. And there has always been a very strong belief that education was the answer. This July, we will see the most popular student loan increase in its interest rate from 3.4 to 6.8 percent. It will affect 7.4 million students and will mean $1,000 a month more for each and every one of them. Think about it, Madam Speaker. We say the students are our future. We need them to be in college so that we will be the great Nation that we once were. Then I ask you: Why is it that we haven't taken up the legislation to again freeze the loan rates? Keep it at 3.4 percent so we can have our future, and we can show these students that we really believe in them and invest in them.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Many of us were back in our districts for 2 weeks. I had town halls, like I'm sure many of my colleagues did, and I'm sure they probably heard what I heard. We call them kupuna in Hawaii. That means our elderly. They're concerned about their Medicare. They're concerned about their safety nets, which we provide. And the reason is because they've done everything on their part to make us the great Nation that we are today. Today's space shuttle flying over the Capitol was a great statement. That shows you what an amazing country that we are. So we should ask ourselves, Why can't we keep our word to our elders? Why can't we keep our promises? Why can't we in our greatness ensure that they will be comforted in their senior years? Why? These are fundamental questions. Just show the compassion and fairness. That should make us the greatest country in the world.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Madam Speaker, I read my local paper this morning and read a reference by Richard Borreca, a reporter who said that the Affordable Care Act is known as ObamaCare. At first I cringed because that's the way Republicans refer to it. But then I thought about it, and you know what? You're absolutely right; Obama cares. That's why we have that law. Think about what he looked at in 2008 and 2009. There were 50 million people who were uninsured at a cost of $116 billion a year. That could bankrupt any family. But with the Affordable Care Act, think about what you have: women no longer have to be worried about being discriminated against as a preexisting condition; seniors don't have to worry, they can have preventative care and the doughnut hole will close; youth can be covered under their parents' plan to the age of 26; and small business can avail themselves of a tax credit. Yes, Madam Speaker, Obama cares, as do the Democrats.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Madam Speaker, it's been about 236 years since we declared independence, but it's only been 92 years since women could vote. We have fought for equality, fighting our way from being second- class citizens. One such battle is the discrimination in health care. For so long, insurance companies have denied coverage for preexisting conditions like pregnancy, breast cancer, C-sections, and domestic abuse. Ninety percent of the best-selling plans charge women more. Some plans require women to even get a pre-authorization before they can seek OB GYN services. From 2014, that will not be the case because of the Affordable Care Act. But just a few months ago, efforts by Republicans were to block contraception. Now the attempts are to repeal the Affordable Care Act. This is the act that's been the great equalizer for women and children. Don't let them turn the clock back. We should not have to do another hundred years of battle for equality.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Gas prices are rising. We'll see an average, some predict, of $5 per gallon by this summer. Some places are already there. Voices are rising, asking us, What are we doing to bring gas prices down? Mr. Speaker, we can agree that we must go beyond short-term fixes and that we must cure ourselves of this Nation's petroleum addiction. Yes, it is an addiction. Our constituents are asking, What's causing it? What's causing these gas prices? We know, when Iran threatens to close the Strait of Hormuz, prices soar. This is because one-fifth of the world's oil supply goes through those straits. Mr. Speaker, America's vision of our energy future must go beyond the next gas pump. We must look at the fundamentals of a new policy. Yes, diplomacy is part of that, but more importantly, it's us. We must join hands to self-sufficiency and truly be committed to renewable resources. The President proudly pointed out to the marines and Navy in the State of the Union: 50 percent sustainability. Let's adopt that policy.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, April 20, 2010, September 19, 2010, those dates may not mean much to a lot of people, but I will tell you, I was not a Member of this body at that time, but I remember when the BP oil spill started, April 20, 2010, and when we all cheered when it was supposed to be capped on September 19, 2010, almost 5 months of watching it daily, even in Hawaii, of the oil and the attempts and cheering and then being disappointed when they couldn't take care of this oil spill that was devastating, clearly, the coast. Now, there was an independent BP spill commission that was appointed, and their conclusions were published. They said that it was preventable. They said that corners were cut, bad decisions were made, and stronger safety standards could have prevented the disaster. It also pointed out that the United States has a fatality rate in terms of offshore drilling that is four times that in Europe. They also found that the problems were systemic to this industry. The amendment that I have before you is a simple one and a very commonsense amendment. It simply states that the Secretary of the Interior shall require, when he does leasing, that each lease must meet the requirements for a third-party certification of safety systems related to well control, such as blowout preventers. It must meet requirements for performance of blowout preventers, including the qualitative risk, as well as subsea testing. It also must meet requirements for an independent third-party certification of well casing and cementing programs and procedures. It must meet requirements for mandatory safety and environmental management system of the operators in the Outer Continental Shelf. And it must meet requirements of procedures and technologies to be used during drilling operations to minimize the risk of igniting an explosion of hydrocarbons. Anyone who remembers the BP oil spill, watching it on television, as I did, every day, watching the news, all of these points are so relevant to what have occurred. So, Mr. Chair, I ask that my colleagues vote along with me to pass this very commonsense amendment as we remember what happened in those 5 months, April 2010 to September 2010. We have the opportunity of being the safest offshore oil industry in the world, and this amendment would help us get there. That's what we owe the people. We owe those people who suffered through this, and we owe the rest of this Nation a sense of being secure and knowing that when we are drilling that we are drilling safely, and we will not see those fatalities again. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chair, it becomes quite troubling when we hear that, from the Republican side, the other side of the aisle, that the Obama administration is doing okay, or they're taking the representations of the Obama administration, when we know continually that that's not the case. So, if anything, this should send up a red flag for everyone to wonder, what is it that's really causing this concession to an agency? The facts are the facts. We had the BP oil spill. It took five months. There's nothing that's been proposed in concrete as to how to prevent that from happening. That's why we're the Congress of the United States. That's why we're asked to pass laws, because it is only with the passage of laws that we can say, you know, you've got to do this. And if they are doing it, and if they can guarantee that, and they can say that these leases are, in fact, in compliance, it's up to them. All that we're doing in the statute is giving a format and a framework to say, hey, make sure that these points are met in these leases. They're the ones who are going to determine whether it's met or not. That's why I think we owe it to the people who died, we owe it to the people who suffered the economic losses, we owe it to everyone in this Nation to make sure that we do not suffer a BP oil spill again. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, we began today's session with a debate on contraception. It seems to pit the availability and access to care, which I believe is a fundamental right, against whether you can legislate the behavior of religious institutions. It seems like an intractable dilemma that we face, but that's not so. Mr. Speaker, look to Hawaii. Since the 1970s, Hawaii has led the way in terms of medical plans and medical provisions. We have had prepaid health care since then, and of course, as you can imagine, we've had this debate. We had this debate in 1999. The way the State resolved it--and I was there--was that there was the religious exemption given for religious organizations broadly defined, but the employee was also entitled to buy coverage from the insurer at no extra cost. What does this mean? This means that it may have been, maybe, an additional $2 or $3 a month. The reality of it is, Mr. Speaker, that they didn't pay anything. The insurers covered it because they knew that it was in their best interests. And guess what? Many of the religious organizations did not opt out. So don't speculate. See the reality. Look at Hawaii.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Madam Speaker, our constituents are saying: Here they go again. Don't they get anything right? What they're talking about is the fact that the payroll tax, the extension of unemployment, and the extension of the SGR, that's all coming up again. Again. After the fiasco of last December, you would have thought we learned our lesson. Look at what the payroll tax means--160 million will risk losing. They'll have about a $1,500 tax increase. For those in Hawaii, 700,000 will suffer a $1,120 a year reduction. What are we doing? The SGR will increase the cost to our elderly, a 27-percent reduction to their doctor. We call it in Hawaii our kapunas, those who are very important to us. Look at what we are risking for them. Instead, the focus seems to be: How do we keep money for the ultrarich, that 1 percent? Think about it. The middle class can use the $1,120 in Hawaii. Let's do it right.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, last week we were in this Chamber listening to the President deliver a State of the Union address, the blueprint for an America built to last. We took away different points from that speech. Many will speak to his initiatives which address American manufacturing, a new and innovative energy source, educating and creating a more skillful workforce. I took away that this blueprint for an America built to last will be successful because of its foundation, the foundation which is the people of this great Nation. The President is putting his faith in the people. He is putting his faith in their values, uniquely American values. He is putting his faith in those values which created and motivated the creation of the middle class, the middle class which is the backbone of this great Nation. That is why we will have an America built to last.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, the President will deliver the State of the Union tonight. I expect to hear his vision of an America built to last. Mr. Speaker, let's listen together. Let's remember together. We must remember how and why we are the greatest Nation in the world. We must remember those American values that built this Nation. We must remember how, in building this Nation, the middle class emerged and how they are our backbone and how they are our foundation. Hard work, pride, and being a just and fair Nation is what makes us great. Let us look to the past. Remember its lessons to build the future.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, as I was home, I was asked to explain the payroll tax extension, and as I did it, it was clear to me. The Republicans in the House are toying with the wellbeing of the working people, the seniors, and our most vulnerable. Everyone will say we support a year's extension; the question is, how do we pay for it? The bipartisan Senate, only 10 voting ``no,'' gave us the 2-month extension to do that negotiation. It is time to pass a year's extension. People are watching this House. They want to be sure that we don't limit unemployment insurance benefits to those who only have a high school diploma because unemployment is an earned benefit for those who are unemployed through no fault of their own, and it would just not be fair. Mr. Speaker, be fair. Do not make our seniors, our most vulnerable, and the middle class pay for the extension because that just would not be fair.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. December 7, 1941, ``a date which will live in infamy,'' are the words of President Roosevelt. I represent Pearl Harbor. On this day, let us not forget the brave people who gave their lives at Pearl Harbor. On this day, let us not forget this act of unprovoked, dastardly aggression which propelled us into a war. On this day, let us not forget how the people of this Nation were unmatched in their evidence of loyalty and patriotism. Let us remember because we need to be that people again to continue our fight to maintain our position as the greatest Nation in the world. Let us remember because we need to show the compassion to those who are in need in these days.