Marcy Kaptur

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California, Representative Janice Hahn.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I appreciate Chairman Frelinghuysen's able and collegial leadership throughout this process and efforts to assemble a bill in an inclusive manner in our subcommittee. I also want to say what a pleasure it was to work with him, and I wish all subcommittees could work as effectively. I want to thank Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Lowey for their efforts to restore a semblance of regular order to this House in consideration of our appropriations bills, and I want to thank all members of our subcommittee for their thoughtful deliberation in considering the best interests of our Nation as they relate to energy and water development and, importantly, America's nuclear security. I appreciate the dedication, hard work, and sound judgment of our committee staff on both sides of the aisle. On the majority committee staff side: Rob Blair, Ben Hammond, Loraine Heckenberg, Angie Giancarlo, Perry Yates, and Adam Borrelli. And on the minority committee staff side: Taunja Berquam; from the Chairman's personal office, Katie Hazlett and Nancy Fox; and finally my staff, Ryan Steyer, Nathan Facey, and Steve Fought. While Chairman Frelinghuysen's worthy efforts are to be commended in the highest way, the allocation imposed on our subcommittee by the Republican leaders of this House, and its Budget Committee, move America backwards in a global economy where our Nation's future is at stake. The Budget Committee's directive to us reminds me of a seafaring expression: ``If you don't know which way your ship is headed, you're bound to run aground or die at sea.'' This bill runs America aground. It says to future generations, we'll risk your lives floating lost at sea. It's simply inadequate to meet the needs of our Nation. America's budget deficit spiked because high unemployment, resulting from Wall Street's abandon and over a decade of war, caused high unemployment that reduced Federal revenues. This bill will not embrace the future, nor create the necessary jobs to reverse that trend and lift up America's working families. Our focus has to be on the future, on creating jobs and opportunity, with every single measure that comes before this House. Foreign energy dependence is our Nation's chief strategic vulnerability. This bill abandons America's quest for energy independence, which has the potential to create millions of new jobs. For every American life lost in pursuit of our Nation's national security, now dependent on energy imports, I dedicate my work on this bill today. And I also dedicate my work on the floor in memory of Judge Francis ``Buddy'' Restivo, a World War II veteran who passed this weekend, and just a phenomenal citizen of our country. This bill not only guts funding for alternative energy research and development, it officially heralds the Republican majority's embrace of sequestration. Sequestration is the most vivid symbol of congressional negligence. With that one dreadful bill, the Republican majority manages not only to turn its back on energy independence, but also to surrender its congressional responsibility to manage the budget of our country responsibly. The majority has waved the white flag. This year, in the Lake Erie region, we are celebrating the heroics of Commodore Oliver Hazard Perry, hero of the pivotal battle of Lake Erie in the War of 1812. Oliver Hazard Perry's motto was ``Don't give up the ship.'' The majority's motto is ``We just give up.'' We give up trying to perform our constitutional responsibilities with respect to fiscal affairs. We give up trying to create the much-needed jobs that will restore our fiscal footing. We give up trying to help America break free of its dependence on imported petroleum. We just give up. Let the mindless sequester be the status quo. It's no mystery why Congress' approval ratings have hit an all-time low. This policy is running our economic ship of state aground when we need full sail ahead. The allocation for the energy and water bill is $30.4 billion, which is $4.1 billion below the administration's request and $2.8 billion below last year's level. There are further allocation cuts beyond even sequestration levels, resulting in deep and severe reductions made to important priorities within the bill. The chairman worked to include resources for many Federal priorities, including the Corps of Engineers, the Advanced Manufacturing Office, nuclear safety and cleanup, and the bill also prioritizes some of the nuclear security programs. But funding these programs came at the expense of others so vital to future energy systems for our Nation, including renewable energy, cut by nearly 60 percent, and advanced energy research at ARPA-E, which received an 81 percent reduction. Shortchanging critical energy and infrastructure investments will slow economic growth and job creation, hindering America's competitiveness. Let us look at the water accounts. We must continue to invest in America. The scope of damage caused by natural disasters like Hurricane Sandy have laid bare the inadequacies of our water infrastructure. The Corps of Engineers budget currently has a backlog of authorized projects in excess of $60 billion from coast to coast. But this bill continues a steady decline in water resources infrastructure, reducing the construction account by $304 million from 2013. Communities across our country will continue to erode as they experience, firsthand, this decreased investment. The risks illustrated by the failure of flood control projects that the American people endured in the wake of Katrina are not gone. Communities across our country are in desperate need of investment, but this bill shortcuts that. Take St. Louis, Missouri, or Sacramento, California, where a levee break could leave residents with as little as 20 minutes to flee before the water gets 1 foot deep, are just two examples of major metropolitan areas where the Corps must work harder and faster toward more comprehensive protection. What sense does cleaning up after natural disasters make when preventive measures could prevent destruction and loss of life? We should be doing more to build infrastructure and create jobs, not less. Investments now will yield future benefits that will far outweigh repayment costs. That is what the Hoover Dam was all about. That is what our Mississippi River lock and dam system is all about. That is what electrifying our Nation, rural and urban, was all about, great visions for a great Nation, not Lilliputian surrender. On future energy systems, this bill would slash funding for applied energy research and development by more than half, even as foreign competition doubles down to develop 21st century technology while undermining our markets through illegal dumping and intellectual property theft. Renewable energy is a vital leg of future energy independence beyond the fossil fuel age. It will achieve cost competitiveness, but the question is, which countries will develop and own those technologies? The United States has spent $2.3 trillion importing foreign petroleum since 2003, representing thousands and thousands of dollars out of the pockets of every hardworking American family. These are dollars diverted not to much-needed American job creation but overseas, assisting our competitors in developing their economies and their energy futures. We are ceding millions of jobs and trillions in income from this country to undemocratic kingdoms far from home. Wake up, America. Wake up, Congress. In 2012, every billion dollars of U.S. exports supported nearly 5,000 jobs here at home. But can you imagine what $2.3 trillion in our energy trade deficit translates into lost jobs in America over the last 10 years? It's a hemorrhage. Our Republic will not compete in this 21st century and beyond if we further reduce investments in this area and cede our energy future to other countries. Predatory foreign competition in energy poses a real security threat to our country. I view it as the chief security threat to our country. I appreciate the chairman's commitment to ensure that technology developed with taxpayer dollars benefits our Nation first. The Department of Energy, however, must do more to ensure that intellectual property supported by Federal dollars furthers the interests of the United States economy. And I'm concerned with the level of funding, but I appreciate the chairman's commitment to American manufacturing in this bill. Manufacturing remains one of the most important job drivers in our economy, and there is little merit in using Federal dollars to foster technological advances or breakthroughs for products that are not ultimately made in America and manufactured domestically. America must do more to reverse the trend of domestic firms shifting production overseas because, to put it simply, domestic manufacturing drives domestic innovation and jobs here in America. Tragically, the science account critical to the competitiveness of our Nation is reduced by 5 percent from 2012. And, with an 81 percent reduction, 81 percent reduction in the new ARPA-E program, this bill would effectively end the most advanced research our Nation can launch. That is not a formula for success. We are beginning to see the initial payment from the ARPA-E, which advances high-potential, high-impact energy technology so advanced it is too early for private sector investment. Return on investment from our publicly-funded research and development ranges from 20 to 67 percent. It's a home run. With this rate of return, Congress should be increasing our investment in science. This bill moves us exactly in the opposite direction. Finally, I remain concerned this bill increases spending for nuclear weapons upgrades at the expense of nuclear nonproliferation and cleanup. I support the funding to maintain our nuclear arsenal at acceptable levels, and I appreciate the efforts to improve program and project management, including the reporting requirement on Life Extension Programs at the National Nuclear Security Administration. However, nonproliferation programs are on the front lines of our defense. They are the most cost-effective way to achieve the urgent goal of securing and reducing the amount of vulnerable bomb-grade material. But this bill cuts these critical efforts by $559 million. What sense does that make? Further, I am concerned that the funding the bill includes for environmental management activities is insufficient to meet the Federal Government's legal obligations to clean up its defense nuclear waste. In sum, this bill should achieve critical investments in our country. It fails to do so. It should promote job creation. It fails to do so. It should ensure national energy security and national security. It fails to do so. It should protect and promote vital infrastructure. It fails to do so. And it should advance American competitiveness, and it fails to do so. Unfortunately, Republicans on the Budget Committee continue to push the outrageous notion that we can balance our budget through cuts to non-defense discretionary spending, which accounts for only 17 percent of Federal spending. In so doing, they harm America's future in a very major way. Again, I commend the chairman's effort, however the allocation for this bill is insufficient and irresponsible and I cannot, in good conscience, support it. It is my firm hope that the committee will be provided a workable path toward the fiscal 2014 appropriation bills, and I look forward to the day we will return allocations to acceptable levels and to working with the chairman to draft a bill worthy of support. Let me, before reserving the balance of my time, read that quote right up there above the Speaker's rostrum. Let us develop the resources of our land, call forth its powers, build up its institutions, promote all its great interests, and see whether we also, in our day and generation, may not perform something worthy to be remembered. That is our charge in this bill, and this bill fails. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), our very able ranking member of the Appropriations Committee.

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California, Representative Bera.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I want to commend both gentlemen for offering this amendment, and also Congresswoman Brownley for being down on the floor on the same subject of nondefense cleanup. As I can't speak for the chairman, I think that we share a concern for cleaning up these sites. I think one of the problems with the amendment is the offsets from departmental administration and the office of the administrator. I think you're calling attention to a very important unaddressed issue in our country. From coast to coast, we have these sites that need to be cleaned up. I think the problem with this amendment is where the money is being taken from, from our standpoint, departmental administration. There have been other nicks to that diminishing account as we've gone through the bill today, and I truly have heard the concerns expressed by the gentleman from New York that we are not adequately investing in cleaning up contaminated sites not just in New York, but in California and Ohio and other places around our country. Without question, the chairman was given an inadequate allocation, and the choices he made on levels of funding were for the most part very thoughtful. I think it's fair to say that overall this bill is truly inadequate in meeting the needs of the Nation. We talked about that earlier today. And these accounts are among those that are terribly underfunded. We keep picking off the bones of this spine, and there aren't sufficient funds to go around. So I'm very torn on the gentleman's amendment, and I am quite concerned about cleaning up these sites. If we could find other offsets, I would probably be very favorably inclined; but I am very concerned about where the Members have identified funding, and I am very constrained to support it because of that. But I do want to thank the gentlemen for offering their amendment, and hopefully we can find a better solution working together in the weeks ahead. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. KAPTUR. While the amendment is a modest one in terms of the funding in the account, which is over $400 million, I cannot support further cuts in this program. The budget already has cut $16 million from the Global Threat Reduction Initiative, and that means nuclear material that exists globally in places that we know we need to remove it. So even though the gentleman's amendment is well intended, I think that we can't predict the consequences of this in terms of what we face globally to remove this material. I think it's very important to recognize that there are some unfriendly actors on the face of this Earth. And we want to remove material as best as possible, working with others around the world, as the program indicates, to reduce global threats that might result from those who shouldn't have this material in the first place. So I don't think that this is moving us in the right direction globally. I don't really think it's necessary. I thank the gentleman for bringing it to the attention of the body, but I think that nonproliferation in general is $600 million below last year's activities when you compare it to past accounts. So I think that this is not in the best interest of the country and not in the best interest of national security. So I oppose the gentleman's amendment and yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Ms. KAPTUR. I would also say to the gentlelady that in many communities that are contaminated around this country and have problems, oftentimes they are in neighborhoods and places where people who are minority, who are tribal, people who are not necessarily represented broadly within the Department live. So I think that we have to be conscious in all parts of the Department, that there should be an inclusivity. So I think that the gentlelady has done a service, as always, by raising our consciousness to all of the activities of the Department and that they be sensitive to all parts of America, including environmental justice. So I would hope that as we move forward, we could find a way to support the gentlelady's concerns. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the gentleman's amendment. I kind of think back to the movie Titanic. There is one scene where the captain--evidently the captain--comes out on the deck just about as the Titanic is going to hit the iceberg. I can remember the blank look on his face and thinking what had he been doing before all this happened. We saw the tragedy that occurred. Sometimes if you don't have captains in the pilot house you can really run aground, you can really have trouble. Already, the majority this evening has cut--I think we are down to $146 million in administration in the Department of Energy, a vast department. That kind of level of cut is going to cause big mistakes. There will be accounting mistakes, there will be contracts that won't be overseen. In a way, you are seeding a very bad future for the management of the funds that we do vote for here tonight. I think the gentleman, perhaps, isn't really familiar with everything the Department does. You can come down here and be kind of cavalier and propose amendments, but in the end, we can't absorb these cuts at the Department because you're going to have problems that are caused by no captains being at the helm. I think that's really a big mistake, because this Department has to manage over $30 billion--billion dollars--of tax dollars on the energy and water front. These are big contracts, they are major projects that are undertaken by this Department, and to act otherwise is to really, I think, perform naively. I think the gentleman has an objective, but I really think that he is going to cause great harm to the Republic by this amendment. Obviously, I oppose it, urge my colleagues to oppose it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. KAPTUR. I yield to my colleague from Illinois (Mr. Quigley).

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Ms. KAPTUR. I would like to yield to the gentlelady from Texas.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I want to thank Congressman Hastings for working with us and obviously participating in these debates for the entire day today. He is such an able and well- intentioned Member. His brilliance continues to inspire all of us on many issues, including this one. I wanted to just say that I agree with the gentleman's intent in offering this amendment. And as I've said many times today, the allocation we were given as a subcommittee is simply insufficient to meet all of the needs that the Nation has certainly in this area of science. The gentleman is correct that there is a $223 million--which is not insignificant--reduction from 2013 levels. So as we look to the future, there is less emphasis on science. I agree with the gentleman's intent. I wish we could restore all those dollars this evening. I would also say that there's a constraint on us because we know that the President very much wants to engage in nuclear weapons reduction talks with other nations around the world, and I think it is important that he be able to negotiate from a position of strength. That is one of the reasons that the chairman and I are working so very hard to allow him to achieve the ultimate objective of nuclear arms reduction. So to take dollars from those accounts at this level really does create a bit of a pressure for us that would cause me to oppose the gentleman's amendment at this time. But I do so very reluctantly and with full understanding of what he is trying to achieve, and I want to thank him very much for waiting the entire day to offer this very, very important amendment that I hope some day to be able to support. I urge my colleagues to consider however they may wish to vote on this. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentlelady for bringing this issue before us during this debate. You know, when I look at the executives that come and appear before our subcommittee from the Department, I would have to say that the gentlelady brings a very important concern to our subcommittee. I would not say that if I look at those who have come, they are completely representative of our country. So I'm not sure that the consciousness exists at the highest level for assuring that all communities in America are engaged in the activities of the Department. I don't know--I heard the chairman, and there is a concern about which accounts have been included in the gentlelady's amendment. I would hope that, as this legislation moves forward, we could find a way to accomplish the gentlelady's objectives in a way that would not raise concerns on the other side. So I think that she has really brought an important proposal before us here, and I would hate to see that it would not be considered simply because a wrong account has been identified, for example. So I would just like to remain open to the gentlelady's proposal in a manner in which it could be considered and ultimately approved.

Ms. KAPTUR. In reclaiming my time, I would like to lend support to the amendment offered by my colleague from Illinois. His amendment would cut funding from the weapons account in the amount that was added to the President's budget request for the B61. In these tight fiscal times, all programs must find efficiencies, and the $23.7 million was the amount that the administration estimated could be achieved for this activity. So I want to thank the gentleman very much for his efforts and for waiting all day. We have to proceed in order. I know it's excruciatingly difficult for such an athlete, like yourself, with all that pent-up energy and drive, to have to wait until this late in the evening, but we thank you for the contribution you have made in many ways, including in offering this amendment tonight. I ask my colleagues to support his efforts, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. KAPTUR. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate Mr. Julius Ciaccia, Executive Director of the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District, on his election as President of the National Association of Clean Water Agencies, NACWA. Mr. Ciaccia is an accomplished leader and committed environmental steward who has played a prominent role in the water industry, exemplifying what it means to be a public servant. He is ideally suited to serve as President of one of the Nation's leading proponents of responsible policies that advance clean water. Mr. Ciaccia has served the people of the Cleveland area for decades, and in this new role, will continue to ensure that the Nation's clean water agencies continue to protect public health and improve the environment. Mr. Ciaccia began his career in public utilities in 1977 when he was appointed as Assistant Director of the Public Utilities Department for the City of Cleveland. In 1979 he joined the leadership of the City's Division of Water where he served as both Deputy Commissioner and Commissioner until 2004. During his over 30 years with the City of Cleveland's Division of Water, Mr. Ciaccia oversaw the management of over $1 billion worth of capital improvement projects and maintained the agency's very favorable financial position. He was appointed Director of the City's Department of Public Utilities in 2004 exercising oversight of the water, sewer collection and public power systems, with a focus on developing comprehensive financial plans and supporting revenue enhancement initiatives. Mr. Ciaccia began his current role at the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District (NEORSD) in 2007. At the Regional Sewer District In his current role at the District, he oversees all aspects of managing one of the nation's largest wastewater management utilities. Under his leadership, the District has received two awards from the Commission on Economic Inclusion including a 2009 award for Supplier Diversity which highlights the success of his initiative to craft and implement a supplier inclusion program. In 2012 the NEORSD was awarded by the Commission for Senior Management Inclusion, recognizing the diversity of senior staff. As the District's Executive Director, Mr. Ciaccia was responsible for confirming their consent decree for a long-term control plan to significantly reduce overflows from combined sewers, as well as the successful development and implementation of a new Regional Stormwater Management Program. Among Mr. Ciaccia's many accomplishments as Executive Director of NEORSD is the transformation of the District's culture to one of transparency and exceptional financial management. As a member of NACWA's Board of Directors, Mr. Ciaccia has served as the Secretary, Treasurer, and Vice President. Mr. Ciaccia has selflessly shared his time, passion, energy and ideas to carry out the objectives of the Clean Water Act. It is my sincere pleasure to congratulate Julius Ciaccia on becoming President of NACWA. I am certain his actions will ensure continued water quality progress for the Cleveland area, the State of Ohio and the Nation.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, as our nation celebrated its liberty and independence last week, a champion of liberty has passed away in our home community of Toledo, Ohio. Judge Francis ``Buddy'' Restivo passed from this life at the age of 91 on July 2, 2013. We extend deepest sympathy, heartfelt prayers, and gratitude from our community to his family for sharing him with us these many years. Truly, he was a generous, kind, and wise ``buddy'' to all who knew him. His gleeful presence never failed to inspire anyone who met him. His smile was infectious, his humor ever-flowing. Judge Restivo came from humble beginnings yet graduated from Toledo's Central Catholic High School and the University of Toledo, earning his law degree. The economic circumstances from which he arose in his early years were not easy and then he served during World War II, where he was a member of the Air Force 136th Radio Intelligence Squadron. He married his wife, Jane, with whom he celebrated 70 years of marriage. Together they built a strong family and raised four children. Buddy Restivo dedicated his life to public service and to our community. He was an assistant Ohio attorney general and assistant Lucas County prosecutor. He served on Toledo City Council in 1957 to 1960, and then served as solicitor for Sylvania, Walbridge, and Northwood. In 1971 Ohio Governor John Gilligan appointed him to the Toledo municipal court. He was elected later that year, and reelected to six-year terms in 1973 and 1979. In 1980, he was elected to a vacancy on Lucas County Common Pleas Court and re-elected in 1982. He retired in 1986 and worked until 2000 as a visiting judge and as a hearing officer for mental health commitment cases for Lucas County Probate Court. Judge Restivo was a fair and compassionate judge with a keen understanding of both people and the law. Lucas County Probate Court Jack Puffenberger said of Judge Restivo, he ``was considerate of everyone in his courtroom. He was an excellent judge. He had good legal knowledge and he knew people and he just knew how to be fair. He was a great mentor . . .'' Toledo lawyer Jerome Phillips perhaps expressed it best when he said, ``I would classify him as a people's judge. He had a wonderful understanding of people and how to try to deal with the problems they had.'' After retirement, though he kept in touch with the lives of colleagues and the law, his focused turned to fishing, family, and University of Toledo basketball. His son explained, ``He went on numerous fishing trips with family members. He was a big UT Rockets fan, especially basketball. He had season tickets probably 40 years.'' If the measure of a man can be counted by the lives he touched, then Judge Restivo was a great man indeed. He has shared his love of life, good heart, and generous spirit as husband, father, grandfather, and great grandfather for his wonderful family, as well as our community and country. He shall be missed by all who knew the pleasure of his company. How fortunate each of us is to have known him, been blessed by his happy spirit, love of life, respect for the ``common man,'' and his even-handed dispensing of the law. His good measure lifted us all. May his family and friends draw strength and comfort from his example of living life to its fullest as he helped countless others along life's way. His life made us all better as people and as a community.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate Mr. Julius Ciaccia, Executive Director of Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District on his election as the new President of the National Association of Clean Water Agencies, NACWA. Mr. Ciaccia is an accomplished leader and committed environmental steward who plays a prominent role in the water industry, exemplifying what it means to be a public servant. He is ideally suited to serve as President of one of the Nation's leading proponents of responsible policies that advance clean water. Mr. Ciaccia has served the people of the Cleveland area for decades, and in his new role, will continue to ensure that Ohio's, and the Nation's clean water agencies continue to improve to protect public health and the environment. Mr. Ciaccia began his career in public utilities in 1977 when he was appointed as Assistant Director of the Public Utilities Department for the City of Cleveland. In 1979 he took on the temporary role of Commissioner of Cleveland Water until 1981 when he assumed the role of Deputy Commissioner of Cleveland Water and eventually appointed Commissioner in 1988. During the 25 years in the Division of Water, Mr. Ciaccia oversaw the management of over $1 billion worth of capital improvement projects and maintained the Division of Water's very favorable financial position. He was appointed Director of the city's Department of Public Utilities in 2004 and began his current role at the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District in November 2007. In his current role at the District, he oversees all aspects of managing one of the nation's largest wastewater management utilities. Under his leadership, the District has received two awards from the Commission on Economic Inclusion including a 2009 award for Supplier Diversity which highlights the success of one of Mr. Ciaccia's initiatives to craft and implement a supplier inclusion program; and a 2012 award for Senior Management Inclusion, recognizing diversity of Senior Staff. As the District's Executive Director, Mr. Ciaccia was also responsible for the recently entered consent order for a long term control plan to significantly reduce combined sewer overflows, as well as the successful development and implementation of a new Regional Stormwater Management Program. Additionally, one of Mr. Ciaccia's many accomplishments as Executive Director has been the transformation of the District's culture to one of transparency and ethical financial practices. As member of NACWA's Board of Directors, Mr. Ciaccia has served as the Secretary, Treasurer, and Vice President. Mr. Ciaccia has selflessly shared his time, passion, energy and ideas to carry out the objectives of the Clean Water Act. It is my sincere pleasure to congratulate Julius Ciaccia on becoming President of NACWA. I am certain his actions will ensure continued water quality progress for the Cleveland area, the State of Ohio and the Nation.

Mr. KAPTUR

Mr. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I would like to thank the majority and minority for accepting my amendment to the farm bill on invasive species en bloc. My amendment requires the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to submit an annual report to Congress on invasive species. The report would include a list of invasive species in the country, their country of origin, how they got into the country, what year they entered the country, rate of entry, cost estimates, and a description of the ongoing research occurring to combat the species. More importantly, the report must include a description of any legal recourse available to people affected by the species. A 2005 study shows that invasive species cost the United States more than $120 billion in damages every year. U.S. agriculture loses $13 billion annually in crops from invasive insects. Every farmer, rancher, local government, non-profit or small business deserves to know what legal avenues are available to compensate them for dealing with an invasive species that was brought into their backyard through no fault of their own. Invasive species are not just harmful to humans or our food supply. They affect our endangered animals. More than 400 of the over 1,300 species currently protected under the Endangered Species Act, and more than 180 candidate species for listing are considered to be at risk at least partly due to displacement by, competition with, or predation by invasive species. My amendment seeks to bring an understanding to the challenge we are facing in combating invasive species. Currently, no single clearinghouse exists to find out how many invasive species there are in the country, where those species came from, and what research is ongoing to combat that particular species. How are we ever going to come up with a national strategy to combat invasive species if we don't know how what we are up against. This information needs to be available to the public so we can begin a national conversation and put our best and brightest to the task of coming up with solutions for combating invasive species. Again, I would like to thank the Members of the Agriculture Committee and I look forward to the remaining 2013 Farm Bill debates.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First, I would like to offer my highest commendation to Congressman Hastings for his work on this vital issue. Let me begin with the words of Congressman Hastings: ``No bees, no food.'' The amendment being offered today will help coordinate the Federal response to the sudden, massive, and frightening decline in our Nation's bee population. Specifically, the amendment would allow the Secretary of Agriculture to work with the Secretary of Interior and Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to ensure the long-term viability of our bee population. The amendment would allow the establishment of a task force on bee health and commercial beekeeping to coordinate Federal efforts in addressing the significant bee population decline. Preliminary results from a survey by the U.S. Department of Agriculture show that over nearly a third of managed honeybee colonies in our country were lost during the 2012-2013 winter. That is an increase of 42 percent in honeybee losses. On average, U.S. beekeepers lost nearly half of their colonies during this past winter. This was an increase nationally of over 78 percent from the previous winter. Traditionally, the average loss had only been about 10 to 15 percent, and there have been significant honeybee losses in 22 different States. This amendment will help coordinate the Federal response to the sudden massive decline of our Nation's bee population. Since 2006, we have lost 10 million beehives, costing beekeepers more than $2 billion. No one knows what is causing these dramatic losses, which was formally referred to as ``colony collapse disorder.'' We don't know if it is a natural phenomenon, we don't know if it is the result of changes in the environment, we don't know if it is due to interactions with genetically modified crops, we don't know if it is due to pesticides. I can tell you one thing it is due to, because I've seen it myself in Ohio. It is due to mites that were shipped in to our nation from foreign countries in imported material. The critters got into these hives as they intermingled with our native hives. The mites came from foreign countries--from China, and from South Africa by way of Brazil-- varroa mites among them--these mites are just crippling these colonies that have pollinated our orchards and our fields for generations. We need to take this seriously because the massive decline in these populations threatens us all. Without sufficient bee pollination we will not be able to meet the demands of U.S. agricultural crops that require pollination to grow. It isn't by magic that all this happens. Not every plant is a self-pollinator. That means if we do not have proper bee pollination, we will not be able to grow the food we need to feed our country. We are already importing too much food, food that could be grown here at home. China, but the way, is now shipping a product they call honey into our country. But it is not honey. It is corn syrup diluted with water. We need better honey labeling. The decline in the bee population has been occurring over a period of time. But listen to these losses. In 1947, when America only had about 146 million people, we had 6 million bee colonies. In 1970, that number dropped to 4 million. And in 1990, the number fell to 3 million. Today, there are only 2.5 million bee colonies in our country. We have a population of 310 million, and it is projected by 2050 we will have a population of 500 million people. These numbers are not moving in the right direction. Bee health is vitally important for our food system, as bee pollination helps produce about a third of what we eat--one-third. This adds $125 billion in global agricultural production value and 20 to $30 billion in United States agricultural production value. Of the 100 crops that provide 90 percent of the world's food, over 70 percent are pollinated by bees. Are we listening? Of the 100 crops that provide 90 percent of the world's food, over 70 are pollinated by bees. That's 70%. In North America, honeybees pollinate nearly 95 different kinds of fruits, including many specialty crops like almonds, avocados, cranberries, oranges, raspberries and apples, and so much more. The current Federal response to this problem is entirely inadequate. People are somnambulant. They think this is nonexistent because the bee is so small it can fly right by you and you don't even see it. In fact, most people don't know the difference between a honeybee and a bumblebee. Well, let me tell you, there is a big difference. It is so bad that one professor was quoted as saying: ``We are one poor weather event or high winter bee loss away from a pollination disaster.'' Why have we let it get to this point where one bad storm could essentially wipe out our bee population? It is clear what we are doing is not working. The amendment is supported by: American Honey Producers Association, American Beekeeping Federation, Pollinator Partnership, American Farm Bureau, Florida Farm Bureau, National Farmers Union, Blue Diamond Growers, Center for Food Safety, National Wildlife Federation. In closing, I hope we can come together on a bipartisan basis to help stem the decline in our Nation's bee populations. I urge adoption of the amendment.