Mark Kennedy

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Madam Chairman, as someone who enjoys recreational activities like fishing, boating and hunting and represents thousands of Minnesotans who do as well, I share a special responsibility to make sure that these opportunities are available for generations to come. Today, many of those activities are threatened by the spread of aquatic invasive species. We have seen a rapid growth of invasive species in recent years, from the Great Lakes, to our coastal waters, to local lakes and streams throughout the country. In my home State of Minnesota, we have increasingly been challenged to find ways to prevent and control disruptive species like European and Asian carp. In many areas, invasive European carp have found their way into Minnesota's wetlands and lakes, while Asian carp has found its way into the Mississippi River as far north as Iowa. If not properly addressed, both of these species threaten to disrupt the ecosystem that many Minnesotans enjoy for fishing and boating. One of the few ways in which Federal, State and local governments collectively combat the threat of aquatic invasive species is through the State Aquatic Nuisance Species Management plans. These plans identify activities to eliminate or reduce the environmental, public health and safety risks associated with aquatic invasive species. These activities are implemented by States through feasible, cost-effective management policies undertaken in an environmentally sound manner. These plans are available to both individual States and affected multi- State regions. In fact, currently 14 States have approved plans, and at least 11 other States have plans under development. Unfortunately, the resources available to effectively implement these plans fall well short of the mark. This is the third year in a row plans to attack invasive species are funded at slightly over $1 million. I very much appreciate the work of the chairman and the committee to try to address this very important issue but would suggest that these limited funds are not enough to counteract the billions of dollars in costs associated with invasive species habitat destruction and lost recreational opportunities. Simply put, we must invest more in these plans if we hope to control the spread of these aquatic pests. I appreciate the chairman's offering to work with me.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I would just ask the Members to vote in favor of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment because I am deeply concerned that the Department is not paying sufficient attention to the northern border of the United States. My amendment today is very simple, and I want to take this opportunity to thank the gentleman from California and his staff for their great work in helping me to draft this amendment. Mr. Chairman, the National Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 contained important provisions dealing with improving border surveillance on the northern border. Congress intended for the Secretary of Homeland Security to carry out a pilot program to test advanced technologies for border security along the northern border. Yet, to date, DHS has not carried out this program. The intelligence reform bill also provided that the Secretary of Homeland Security must develop and submit to Congress and to the President a comprehensive plan for systematic surveillance of the southwest border by remotely piloted aircraft. As I mentioned yesterday when I spoke on this subject, many Members may not realize that the U.S.-Canadian border is over 4,000 miles long, and it consists of more than 430 official and nonofficial points of entry. That is double the length of the U.S.-Mexico border, and even with recent staffing moves, DHS has only 1,000 Border Patrol agents along the northern border, compared to over 10,000 along the smaller southern border. Some might think the southern border is more dangerous, but I would remind my colleagues that terrorists and drug traffickers trying to bring in poison like methamphetamines will try to get to us at the path of least resistance. The lack of substantial resource and staffing along the northern border poses a real security threat. In fact, due to the shortage, DHS has looked for new ways to monitor the Canadian border, such as a new proposed requirement for passports to get back and forth over the border. But for a border as long as ours with Canada, so many unmanned access points, it is simply impractical to think having Border Patrol agents check passports will stop determined terrorists. Do we expect al Qaeda or drug dealers to wait an hour at the border for someone to show up to check their passport? Or will they cross at some unknown spot along this vast border? We need to adopt a more rigorous standard of protecting our northern border that makes wise use of our manpower and employs the same sophisticated technology as we use on our southern border. By requiring the Department to comprehensively study the use of remotely piloted aircraft, AKA unmanned aerial vehicles, on the northern border and by requiring the Secretary to actually perform the pilot program created in the National Intelligence Reform Act, my amendment makes a significant step forward to securing this vast border. Madam Chairman, the time has come to make our northern border just as safe and secure as the southern border. I urge all our Members to support this important amendment. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I rise to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I applaud the great work the chairman and the ranking member are doing on this bill, but also wish to express my deep concerns and ask for a colloquy with the chairman. We are not paying enough attention to the northern border of the United States. Unless they represent the border States like Minnesota, some Members may not realize that the U.S.-Canada border is over 4,000 miles long and consists of over 430 official and unofficial ports of entry. However, even with recent staffing moves, moves that I commend, the Customs and Border Patrol has only 1,000 agents along the northern border. That compares to over 10,000 agents on the border which is half the length of the U.S.-Canada border. This staffing shortage along the northern border poses a real security threat. In fact, due to the shortage, the Department of Homeland Security has looked for new ways to monitor the Canadian border, such as a new proposed requirement for passports to get back and forth across the border. Unfortunately, anyone who has spent time up north knows this will not accomplish much to deter or prevent illegal activities or to secure the border. Simply put, the Canadian border is just too vast for such an approach to work with many unmanned check points in remote areas. I know from personal stories that at some of these unmanned crossings, people have to wait an hour or more before a border patrol agent can come to lift up the gate so they can cross. Mr. Chairman, we do not expect al Qaeda and narcotics traffickers to wait an hour for the border patrol to show up at the check point. We have already recognized in numerous laws that high-tech border surveillance must be integrated into the manpower and resources we have up there to get real control over our borders. In the prior year's Defense Authorization Act, in the prior year's Homeland Security Appropriations Act, and in this year's Intelligence Reform Act, Congress recognized the need to develop high-tech border surveillance. However, what little progress the Department of Homeland Security has made on this front has been entirely confined to the southern border even with the $10 million appropriated in this bill last year. Mr. Chairman, this is unacceptable. We simply are not paying enough attention to the northern border. Some think the southern border is more dangerous, but I remind my colleagues that terrorists will attack us through the path of least resistance. I believe it is critical that the funds allocated to the Customs and Border Patrol accounts used to pay much-needed research and survey technology, including unmanned aerial vehicles, be not solely devoted to the southern border but also to the northern border to stretch the resources our Custom and Border Patrol manpower has. Mr. Chairman, I ask that the gentleman from Kentucky work with me to ensure that there is sufficient resources in the bill and in the conference report to address these issues and that it be applied not just to the southern border but to the northern border as well.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for his commitment on this issue and look forward to working on this supplemental and other issues to ensure that the northern border remains secure.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for that commitment and look forward to working with him on this through the conference report.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Colleen Conway, of Woodbury, Minnesota, as a St. Paul Area Athena Award winner for 2005. She is one of 33 female athletes to receive this award, which stands for character, longevity and durability. It is given for outstanding athletic achievement. Colleen is a three-sport standout at Hill-Murray, a Catholic school she has attended since 7th grade. She plays soccer, hockey and softball, earning 14 varsity letters in total. She was an all-state shortstop as a junior softball player, has been named all-conference twice in softball and led the hockey team in scoring this past year. In soccer, she has played every position and once even played them all in the same game. She has earned a softball scholarship to the University of Minnesota for the fall. A typical summer day would find her playing all three sports, morning until night. Even with all this activity, she maintains a 3.8 grade point average in school. In her spare time, she also helps out at her family-owned bakery in Woodbury. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to represent such a motivated and talented young woman. I join with her family, teachers, coaches and teammates in celebrating Colleen's outstanding accomplishments.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer condolences to the family and friends of Merlin Rosemeier, who passed away April 10, 2005. Merlin was a close family friend and served as best man in my father's wedding. He is survived by his wife, Ramona, nine children, 26 grandchildren, three great-grandchildren and one sister. Merlin was born in Dublin Township in 1928. He attended school in Murdock and at the University of Minnesota. He married Ramona Traxler on August 29, 1953, and settled into the family farm. He was a hard working dairy farmer and in 2002, his family celebrated owning a century farm. He was also a very faithful man. As a member of Sacred Heart Catholic Church, he served as the choir director and I fondly remember him using his deep, rich voice to sing ``Ave Maria,'' at church services. He said Grace before every meal and always added a Hail Mary for the crops. Mr. Speaker, Merlin was a family man whose positive, friendly spirit resonated to those around him. Nothing ever broke his kind and gentle soul. He will be dearly missed by all those that knew and loved him and his memory will live on in their hearts.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I rise to support this amendment. Since coming to Congress, I have been committed to the need to maximize our domestic energy resources. However, I firmly believe that we must pursue domestic energy independence in a manner that protects our natural resources like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Instead of opening up ANWR to oil drilling, I believe that we should look to new sources and new technologies to increase our energy independence. I am proud to say that my State of Minnesota is a leader in the field of renewable energy such as ethanol, biodiesel, and wind energy. Minnesota companies offer innovative technologies to reduce our energy needs. These renewable energy sources and technologies offer a sensible alternative to help reduce our reliance on foreign sources of oil without endangering our environment. That is why I support the Markey- Johnson amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues from Minnesota in expressing my condolences, all of Minnesota's condolences, all of the country's condolences, to the families and loved ones of the victims of the tragic shooting at Red Lake High School. And I too would like to thank the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kline) and the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum) for bringing this to the floor, as well as the leadership, especially the leadership that the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Peterson) has had on this issue in his district. I think all of us would have a difficult time imagining the profound sadness that the families are feeling. But beyond the immeasurable human tragedy of the lives lost that day, this incident has created fear in the minds of parents and teachers and, most importantly, kids, who may no longer view their school as a safe place. Schools must be a place of learning and a place that challenges young minds, not a place where students live in fear. However, in this tragedy we found heroes. Heroes, as the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kline) mentioned, like Derrick Brun, who bravely stood at the entrance to the school and confronted the shooter, giving his partner time to alert school officials. This courage and other courage we saw from others throughout this incident no doubt saved lives. We all honor the memories of all of the victims whose lives were cut tragically short by the needless act of violence. Mr. Speaker, we must all work together to make sure that events like this do not happen again. Our thoughts and prayers go out to everyone who was touched by this tragedy. We are committed to work together, all of us, to find solutions so that no more young lives are cut short. I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, this week is the 25th anniversary of National Crime Victims' Rights Week. When President Reagan first announced National Crime Victims' Rights Week, he said, ``For too long, the victims of crime have been the forgotten persons of our criminal justice system. Each new victim personally represents an instance in which the system has failed, and lack of concern for victims compounds that failure.'' The Crime Victims' Rights constitutional amendment is an important step forward that will empower crime victims by allowing them to confront their assailants in court and alerting them of prisoner releases and allowing victims to seek restitution from their attackers. Last Congress, we passed the PROTECT Act, also known as the Amber Alert bill. The PROTECT Act stiffens penalties for sex offenders, eliminated the statute of limitations for these crimes, and created a national Amber Alert system. We passed the Debbie Smith Act, which funds expanding and improving the quality of crime labs to conduct DNA analyses to catch sex offenders and other criminals, ensuring that the right person is going to jail. But there is more we can do. Last year, Minnesota suffered a great tragedy with Dru Sjodin being abducted. We need to pass Dru's Law this year.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I, too, want to thank my distinguished colleague from Arizona for organizing this time for us to pay our respects to a man who has had a profound impact on our world and a profound impact on the oppressed throughout this world. We feel sad because of our loss, but this is natural. But we should, in fact, rejoice, for I have no doubt that this great son of Poland has ascended into heaven and has been welcomed home by our Lord, whom he did so much to serve with his life that he was given. We should not dwell on our loss, but we should rejoice for all the years we were privileged to know him, to see him, to hear him, and to learn from his example. We should rejoice in the strength he had inspired by his faith and conviction to suffer through Parkinson's for so many years, to survive an assassination attempt, and the unsurpassed Christian spirit to confront his nearly successful assassin and forgive him and pray with him, and to know that he is at peace now with the Heavenly Father he so nobly and humbly served. It is difficult to remember what the world was like before we had the example of our Pope a scant 27 years ago. The year he was chosen, Iranian protests were brewing that would lead to the imminent fall of the Shah, usher in the ayatollahs, and produce an era of war and terror. The Soviet Union was jailing religious dissidents and staging coups such as that which they nurtured in Afghanistan and followed with a full-fledged invasion. Before John Paul II, we did not yet have the vision and the leadership of Ronald Reagan nor of Margaret Thatcher, who, together with them, he would usher in the end to the Cold War. We were told that the West was in irreversible decline, and that the freedom bequeathed to us as an inalienable right, preserved and protected by the wisdom of the people assembled in democratic government, had failed. The peoples of the world were being told that individual dignities should be subjugated to the collective. It seemed that the only religion was that of the state, and that it was to the state that people thought we should direct our worship. A young Pole named Lech Walesa had not yet dreamed that a simple concept like solidarity could overcome the awesome forces of fear and oppression that were the Soviet system; that is, until another son of Poland had ascended to the throne of St. Peter and did what he would do for the rest of his life: He provided the world with a brilliant example of the best of humanity. John Paul II knew better than the conventional wisdom of the intelligentsia, of those who had surrendered their birthright, who had chosen to obey the commands of the state, who had ceased to recognize the demands of the respect for human dignity. He believed that communism would fall and freedom reign, because communism at its core represented a false understanding of human nature. He knew that totalitarianism in all of its forms would fall. He was in a position to know this because of the cruel and harsh experience he gained having seen them both up front and close as a youth, as Poland was plagued by both Nazi fascism and then communism. He saw from an up-close vantage what is possible when authority is perverted to a philosophy contemptuous of life. He wrote to a friend, while a cardinal, that a degradation, indeed a pulverization, of the fundamental uniqueness of each human person was at the heart of the sickness in the human heart that made the tragedies of the 20th century possible; that when this happens, as it did in the totalitarianism ideologies of communism and fascism, the result was the unnatural death of 120 million people in Europe and Asia. This truth is epitomized in an image seared in the collective memory of the world, when the Pope went to the Holy Land, bowed in remembrance over the memorial flame in Yad Vashem, the Jewish Holocaust memorial. The experience of this youth informed his mission as a Pontiff and was made possible because of his indomitable faith in the Creator. He fiercely pursued an agenda that life in all of its forms is sacred because it is created by God, especially human life, which is created in his image. Stalin once derisively remarked that the Pope was a relatively powerless person, a mere figurehead, once famously asking an aide, how many divisions does he have? Stalin never had to come to face John Paul II, but later communist leaders would come to know the danger posed by this man and what he represented on Earth and in heaven. They knew that if the Church led by this man was not dealt with sooner or later, it would destroy them throughout the world where the people would travel to places where people were trapped under communism, and totalitarianism parts of the world that did not dare have hope until they saw John Paul II. The power was understood by those tyrants who feared that John Paul II would come to them, would visit their land and inspire those people. This was understood by the communist masters of Poland, when the newly installed Pope made his first visit there in 1979, returning to the land of his youth, of his first flock as a young priest. The Soviet system knew that it had met its match when one-third of all of the people in Poland turned out to witness the homecoming of their native son. The only thing for the Soviets to do was to tremble, and the trembling that started that day did not end until the Berlin Wall came down 12 years later. The last few outposts of repression that remain in our world today deeply fear the loss of their power by the words and the actions of a simple man who would bring a measure of freedom. It was a simple, yet eternal, message of faith in the almighty. It almost defies our pitiful ability to comprehend just how different the world is today as we celebrate this man's life and mourn our having lost him. On my bookshelf at home I have a well-read book of George Geigel's biography of John Paul II titled, I think appropriately, ``Witness to Hope.'' Billions of people around the world saw this man in that way, whether in the full vigor of his youthful pontificate or in his advanced years. For billions of people around the world, the sight of this man was to see hope. He stood for Catholicism and all of the principles; yet he was appreciated by all people around the world. Here was a man who, while standing for his faith, brought the essence of freedom to everyone unapologetically. His 26-year Papacy saw him take this message to every corner of the world. He was seen by more of his flock than perhaps all of his 263 predecessors combined. He reached out to Jews, Muslims, Protestants, and the Eastern Orthodox Church. He took the time to learn at least a few phrases in over 100 different languages just so that he could communicate his message of hope at every place that he visited. His message of human dignity is understood in every language, and it was understood in every land he saw during the generation he served humanity and God as the bishop of Rome. In one of his many writings, he argued that humanity is right to seed freedom, but only if it is a freedom that is used to do justice. And justice, as he reminded us, is to confer, preserve, protect, prolong, and give meaning and value to life. The spread of freedom will continue unabated in his absence. It will continue to inspire by his example as America leads a providential mission that humanity will only know peace and prosperity when every one of God's children knows the freedom and enjoys the dignity bestowed on them by their heavenly Father. We thank our heavenly Father that we were able to know this man and to benefit by his love for us and the love of God. We will profit and do service to our children if we remember the words of this man who will soon be known across history as John Paul the Great. Freedom has continually to be won; it cannot merely be possessed. It comes as a gift, but can only be kept with a struggle. Gift and struggle are written into pages, hidden yet open.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, since I was a child and to this very day on the floor of the House I have been guided by a fundamental principle that we as men and women, indeed, we as a society will be judged according to how we treat the most vulnerable amongst us. That is the issue we face today. I believe Terri Schiavo's case must be judged in that context. For me the following points are the most important: Terri left no living will or written instructions; Terri's mom and dad, the people that have loved her the longest and have fought so valiantly for her, want responsibility for their daughter. I spoke with her brother who wants his parents to be able to protect his sister. Terri's life has value and worth, and we must do everything we can to protect her rights and those of other disabled people here in America. The law ought not to provide, should not provide, more protection for murderers guilty of terrible crimes than for an innocent woman lying in a Florida hospital bed. So today we must act on behalf of Terri Schiavo. Congress must act on behalf of all of those who cannot speak for themselves and defend themselves. Americans believe in a culture of life, not a culture that tells the weak and vulnerable there is no place for them at the table. There must be a place for them at our table. We make progress towards that culture of life, one life at a time, one heart at a time. Today let us start by helping Terri Schiavo live.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 60th Anniversary of the Battle of Iwo Jima and pay tribute to a fellow Minnesotan and true America hero, Cpl. Charles W. Lindberg. In a manner that is so characteristic of our veterans, Cpl. Lindberg put his life in harm's way so that future generations may live in a world free of the oppressive forces of tyranny. On the morning of the fifth day of this historic battle, six courageous young Marines--Jim Michels, Hank Hansen, Louis Charlo, Boots Thomas, Harold Schrier, and Charles Lindberg--were able to climb atop the slopes of Mt. Suribachi on Iwo Jima, in the thick of intense enemy fire and destroy a Japanese outpost, marking the first plot of native Japanese soil captured by the Americans during World War II. It was here that these five brave soldiers planted the first American flag on Iwo Jima. Later, this scene was recreated by the rising of a second American flag on Iwo Jima, forever to be remembered in our nation's history by Joe Rosenthal's Pulitzer Prize winning photograph and the famous statue in Arlington National Cemetery. Unfortunately, Cpl. Lindberg is the sole remaining survivor of this fearless group of initial Marines. However, as is the case with so many of our veterans, Cpl. Lindberg's dedication to our country did not end after the completion of his military service. Through his involvement in efforts to improve our country and the lives of soldiers, Cpl. Lindberg has and continues to be devoted to veterans, veterans' organizations, and his community. With much admiration, I salute this American patriot for his valiant spirit and actions on and off the battlefield.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This amendment addresses the big issues surrounding this year's road bill. How do we meet expanding capacity? How do we do so without increasing taxes or expanding the deficit? How do we address an over reliance on the gas tax? The degree to which the FAST Act, introduced by myself and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith), attracted strong bipartisan support reflects the success in addressing these issues; by expanding capacity, by removing an outdated prohibition against charging fees on the interstate, and preserving the trust of the driving public by doing so only if the fees are charged on new lanes, so we have new concrete or tar; charge electronically, so there are no toll booths; and the fees go away when construction and maintenance costs have been provided for. The use of these optional lanes would be optional to drivers, and the program is optional for States to use and does not impact their funding allocations. It is estimated that the FAST provisions could provide $50 billion in additional capacity over the road bill period without increasing taxes or expanding the deficit. The FAST Act had 73 bipartisan cosponsors. Both the conservative Heritage Foundation and the new Democrat Progressive Policy Institute have written favorably about it. I appreciate the Chairman's efforts to reflect FAST concepts in H.R. 3. I have been very open with him about my intent to offer this amendment, but the concerns we have with H.R. 3 are that it is drafted so that it limits the ability to increase capacity by limiting its FAST-like section to only three projects and, in that way, gives States far less flexibility than they deserve. It limits the ability to increase capacity by limiting its FAST-lane section to only three projects, as I said; allows tolls to be charged on existing lanes in both 1209, in sections 1603 and 1604; and allows those tolls to be charged indefinitely under those programs. It allows revenues under these programs to be diverted to a variety of nonuser purposes. Long-term FAST-style fee lanes can be a major solution to relieving congestion, but only if we preserve the trust of the driving public. The provisions included in TEA-LU could lead to the same distrust and resistance that has resulted in every recent State referendum on increases in gas tax being defeated. When used with FAST-style protections, it has been accepted by drivers, as witnessed by the Minneapolis, Minnesota Star Tribune poll showing 69 in support of FAST. Frankly, many States around the country are using FAST. This amendment authorizes variable congestion tolls on existing roads and on newly-constructed lanes, and I would just recommend to my colleagues that we adopt this capacity-expanding, State-empowering, maintaining- the-trust-of-the-driving-public amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. When I listen to the gentleman from Oregon, I am always trying to figure out whether we are on the same page or on a different page because I would agree we need to give States more flexibility. First of all, Mr. Poole pulled his name off the letter the gentleman referred to when they saw the actual wording on our amendment. Second, value pricing would have more use, I am convinced, at the end of the 6-year road period under our amendment than under the existing language. We allow value pricing on existing toll roads. We allow value pricing on HOV to HOT conversions under our amendment, different than last year. And we would allow value pricing, congestion pricing on all new FAST lanes which we do not limit to three as the very highly restrictive draft put forth by the committee, but would allow an unlimited amount using value pricing if States so wish because we grant them that flexibility if it meets those simple criteria to honor the trust of the driving public. I appreciate very much the good work that AASHTO does, but I have never really viewed them as a highway-user organization; they are a highway building and constructing organization. Those that are supporting the Kennedy-Smith amendment is the Highway Users Association, is the American Truckers Association which makes this their top priority, is the 108,000 small business owner-operator individual drivers of America, is AAA. All of those are the preeminent highway users, as well as it is supported by those that believe we ought to be fiscally responsible and we ought to honor the trust of the driving public, whether we are talking about Americans for Tax Reform, National Taxpayers Union, Citizens Against Government Waste, and many others. Mr. Chairman, this is pro-capacity, and this is pro-give-States- flexibility, and this is to make sure that we add more construction and add more capacity to our lanes. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I respect the leadership of the chairman and his commitment to work to try to figure out whether we can have tolls be part of the solution in a fiscally responsible way. I would suggest it is not every DOT that is opposing it. Minnesota is supporting it. With regard to Texas, all eight projects in Texas have allowed that they are working on doing this. Our amendment allows more capacity because instead of restricting FAST-type lanes to only three projects around the country, there can be an unlimited number in place around the country. This frankly gives more capacity, not less. Katie Freeway, for example, is one of those that allows. Highway Interstate 69 that they are trying to build is allowed. There may be some misinformation that is being spread on this. I would also like to address some of the information that may have come from the committee suggesting this is an anti-tolling amendment. This is a responsible expansion of fee-type lanes being built and would allow for more than the underlying amendment. This does give, maybe in different ways than the committee drafted, but more flexibility to the States. It also allows more lanes to be built. If the goal is to put tolls on existing lanes, which we restrict further in this amendment, there is ability to put more tolls in existing lanes in the committee draft. But if the question is whether we can put more tolls on new expansion of highway capacity, there is unquestionably greater flexibility offered under this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First of all, there was a statement of opposition from the State of Texas without really seeing our amendment, and so I have a call in and have not yet had a return call from the commissioner in Texas. We would be happy to work with them to make sure they have the flexibility they need. This provides more flexibility. I would agree with the chairman, we want to be having an expansion of construction using these types of lanes, which is what we are for. But a big part of the disagreement is whether we want to put a toll on existing lanes and just make it more painful to drive, or whether we want to actually build and add construction and add capacity and use fee-type revenues to help facilitate that expansion, which this unquestionably would add significantly more of. I encourage support of the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would just respond, I agree with the gentlewoman. We ought to be giving more capacity to the States. Our amendment provides that, estimated by a study done by Mr. Poole, of, I would say, $50 billion. So we are turning away, by opposing this amendment, the $50 billion it could generate. This is really a debate about whether we want to toll existing lanes and just bring in more revenue, or whether we want to add capacity. The Kennedy amendment adds more capacity. In closing, I would just reiterate to try to clarify some of the factual errors that have potentially been espoused on behalf of this amendment. First of all, we do not affect existing tollways in the least. We do not effect the HOV to HOT conversions. We allow the three projects that were currently in law to allow new expansions, conversion of existing lanes to tolls. But beyond that, we put a limit so we stop the further expansion of just putting tolls on existing lanes, and we unquestionably provide far more authority than the underlying bill to add new lanes, new tar, and new concrete because the existing bill only limits it to three projects where there is an unlimited amount of increased projects funded by fees, providing they are new lanes charged electronically so there are no toll booths, and fees go away when it is paid for. Again, I plead with Members to look at the underlying facts of the bill and look at the ones that are supported by highway users across the board and look at the ones supported by those looking for responsible government.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota

Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 150th birthday of Wright County, located in East Central Minnesota. Bordered on the north by the Mississippi River and the east by the Crow River, Wright County was founded on February 20, 1855, 3 years before Minnesota became the 32nd state. The Big Woods, as Wright County was called then, was inhabited by 504 pioneers from across Europe, as well as Native Americans from the Dakota and Winnebago Nations. Wright County was a part of the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. The Homestead Act of 1862 accelerated settlement of the area, and people arrived from across America and Europe. When the pioneers arrived in Wright County, they found the ``Big Woods'' moniker to be an apt description of the territory--a place covered with elm, basswood, sugar maple, ash and red oak. The county grew steadily, but travel was difficult because people could only clear a few acres of trees a year. The construction of the railroad had the biggest impact on the county, as farmers could get their goods to market faster and people could move with greater ease. Today, the county has a population of over 100,000 and is one of the fastest growing areas in the state of Minnesota. Eventually, the Big Woods region came to be called Wright County in honor of Silas Wright, a former Congressman, Senator and Governor from New York State. Buffalo was established as the county seat in 1873. Most of Wright County's early residents were involved in agriculture, and appreciation for the county's vast natural resources carries on today. There are nearly 2800 acres of land devoted to the nearly 30 county parks. Residents also make use of the 298 lakes within the borders of Wright County, swimming and boating in the summer and ice fishing in the winter. Mr. Speaker, as a proud resident of Wright County, I am pleased to honor a place so rich in Minnesota history and culture on the occasion of its 150th birthday.