Steven LaTourette

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of our committee for yielding me time. I support this extension; and I recognize that, by supporting this extension, by the time this extension expires under the able leadership of the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri), we will have a bill produced in the House that will be worthy of our support. There is a great American in Cleveland, Ohio, today speaking in support of the highway bill. It is the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, the former chairman of our committee, Norm Mineta, who I have nothing but respect for. The problem is, he is supporting the wrong bill. He is supporting a bill that proposes to spend over 6 years about $258 billion that does not come close to meeting the needs of America's infrastructure. The chairman and I were in our Republican conference today, and the transportation bill was the subject of some discussion. I have to tell you that if you are looking, not to be partisan, but if you are looking for Republican principles when it comes to highway spending, you can go to Abraham Lincoln, you can go to Dwight Eisenhower, you can go to Richard Nixon, you can go to Ronald Reagan, you can go to George H.W. Bush. All of those presidents recognized that you need to have a strong infrastructure in this country, you need to have a strong infrastructure bill, that the return on infrastructure spending is about six to one back to the government, produces hundreds of thousands, millions of jobs over the six-year life of the bill; and this President should have a bill, too. I hope that those who are sort of trying to do transportation on the cheap and maybe have the ear of the President at the moment recognize that if you want to draw a line in the sand on spending, this is the wrong beach to draw that line on. If we are going to stay competitive with our folks around the world in Asia and in Europe, we need to make this serious investment in our Nation's infrastructure. I just had, at the invitation of the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the opportunity to be in Iraq. There is some discussion in this Chamber about whether or not we should have approved $18 billion for the reconstruction of Iraq. I happen to think it was money well spent. But I will say that if we can spend money building roads in Baghdad, and Tikrit and Um Qasr, we should be able to spend money in this country building roads in Anchorage and up in Duluth and in Portland and in Chicago and in Washington, D.C., and in Cleveland, Ohio. So I hope that when this bill comes to the floor it is closer to the $375 billion than it is the $258 billion that our good friend and former chairman, Secretary Mineta, is talking about in Cleveland, Ohio, today.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), my friend, for yielding me this time; and I also want to thank him and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson) for managing this concurrent resolution. I also, Mr. Speaker, want to thank the chairman of the Committee on House Administration, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), for permitting me to carry this piece of legislation. I have had the pleasure for the last 10 years to be a member of the Holocaust Governing Council, one of the five appointed Members of Congress. During my time in Congress I have seen such giants in this institution as Ben Gilman of New York and recently the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) in bringing this resolution to the floor, and it is an honor for me to have the opportunity to be a part of that today. Mr. Speaker, H. Con. Res. 359 permits the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum to use the Capitol rotunda for the Days of Remembrance observation. This annual event, which takes place in the symbolic heart of our American democracy, honors the victims of the Holocaust and is a reminder to all of us that freedom and liberty have both rights and responsibilities. Since the opening of the museum and the beginning of the Days of Remembrance sponsored by the museum, world events have continued to demonstrate that it is imperative that we remember and study the Holocaust. From the violent breakup of Yugoslavia and the cataclysmic terror in Rwanda, to the rise of anti- semitism around the world that continues today, we live in a time when the great strides in human rights made over the last half century are in danger of losing ground to ignorance and intolerance. That is why the theme of this year's commemoration, ``For Justice and Humanity,'' is so timely. The title comes from a statement made by President Franklin D. Roosevelt who, when he called for the rescue of the Jewish population in Hungary in March of 1944, said, ``In the name of justice and humanity, let all freedom-loving people rally to this righteous undertaking.'' By honoring rescuers along with the victims in this year's commemoration, we are shining a light on the brave acts of individuals and organizations that can teach important lessons today. Of course, we know that it was too late for many Jews in Hungary in 1944. With the war entering its final stages, Nazi and Hungarian authorities deported about 440,000 Jews. At least half of those were murdered in gas chambers immediately upon their arrival at the labor camp Auschwitz. By the time the Nazis and their Hungarian collaborators were driven out of Hungary in April, 1945, nearly four-fifths of the Hungarian Jewish community had been killed. Yet there were some individuals, organizations and countries that asserted the value of human life in the face of the systematic murder of men, women and children. The War Refugee Board, established in January of 1944 by President Roosevelt, had the mandate to take ``all measures to rescue victims of oppression in imminent danger of death.'' Raoul Wallenberg, a Swedish diplomat based in Hungary, led the War Refugee Board's most extensive rescue efforts by distributing protective Swedish passports or travel papers to tens of thousands of Hungarian Jews. Carl Lutz, a Swiss diplomat, issued certificates of emigration, placing nearly 50,000 Jews in Budapest under Swiss protection. Italian businessman Giorgio Perlasca issued forged visas and established safe houses. When Budapest was liberated in February of 1945, more than 100,000 Jews still remained in the city because of the efforts of Wallenberg, Lutz, Perlasca and other diplomats and individuals. The War Refugee Board played a crucial role in the rescue of as many as 200,000 Jews in German-occupied Europe. This year, as we commemorate the lives of the millions of victims of the Holocaust, we also pay tribute to the rescuers for their courageous efforts rallying ``to this righteous undertaking.'' The first visit that I had to the Holocaust Museum following my election in 1994, I was taken around by the son of a Holocaust survivor; and there are two exhibits that I would commend to my colleagues on their next visit. One was a temporary exhibit that detailed the sailing of the steamship St. Louis and how that boat was turned from port to port to port as no one would take the Jews into their country. The second is the failed conference that took place in Avignon, France, where countries from around the world, aware of the ``Jewish problem'' during the Second World War and some of the solutions that Nazi Germany was prepared to undertake, country after country declined to take affirmative action to take Jewish immigrants into its borders, the United States being one of them. As we ponder not only the Days of Remembrance, I hope that we as legislators also learn the lessons of the St. Louis and the conference at Avignon; and I would ask all of my colleagues to join us in supporting House Concurrent Resolution 359.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

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

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Burns), a very valuable new member of our subcommittee and full committee. A lot of Members join the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, but few have understood it as quickly as the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, H.R. 3181, the Predisaster Mitigation Program Reauthorization Act of 2003 reauthorizes the Predisaster Mitigation Program for an additional 3 years and allows the President to offer additional home repair assistance to disaster victims; restores the percentage of Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds to previously authorized levels; and requires the completion of a Congressional Budget Office study on the cost-effectiveness of the program. This program, which was originally authorized as a pilot program as a part of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 was intended to study the effectiveness of mitigation grants in the absence of a disaster, as opposed to solely following a disaster, as is currently the practice. In addition to reauthorizing the Predisaster Mitigation Program, the bill makes two changes to other programs within the Stafford Act. H.R. 3181 authorizes the President to give additional home repair assistance when the initial amount is insignificant, and it also restores the percentage of funding available under the HMGP. In the omnibus appropriation bill that concluded the last Congress, this percentage was modified, and there was compelling testimony before our subcommittee and also brought to the attention of the members of the full Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure by people in emergency management administrations across the country that the previous levels authorized by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure were absolutely essential to the work that they do. The bill also requires the completion of a CBO study on the effectiveness of the PDM. This study is required by December 30, 2006, by which time it is expected that there will be more information on which to study the effectiveness of the PDM. This legislation is the product of a comprehensive and inclusive legislative process. It is, I believe, a balanced approach to disaster mitigation and worthy of our support. I thank the ranking member of our subcommittee, the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), for her invaluable assistance in crafting this legislation, and also the chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) and the distinguished ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar). Madam Speaker, I urge immediate adoption of H.R. 3181. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3181) to amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to reauthorize the predisaster mitigation program, and for other purposes.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I want to thank my friend from Oregon for participating, also my friend from Georgia, again thank all the members of the subcommittee and those in the emergency management field across the country that helped participate and craft this legislation. The very able and capable staff of the committee has reminded me that yesterday we had on the floor a bill dealing with flood insurance which has a mitigation program; and although they have done mighty work, to date they have only secured 938 properties and removed them from further flood damage. This program that we are reauthorizing today has engaged in the purchase of 20,000 properties. Again, the testimony before the subcommittee was stark and it was clear. It is easy to get a community to come together and spend money after a flood, after a hurricane, after a tornado. It is very difficult to get people to make that investment prior to, but the testimony is clear that if you make that investment in seismic upgrading of buildings or other features throughout parts of the country, you can literally save billions of dollars. It is a good program. I urge support.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3181.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I want to first begin by commending the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), for their hard work together with the conferees. I think the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) said earlier that this is the most important piece of legislation to come out of this committee this year, and I agree. I also want to pay special tribute to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley). When we began working in the 106th Congress on identity theft, some people had not heard of it. Today, I think every Member has a horror story about identity theft. In my district it was Maureen Mitchell. She and her husband found out that they owned not one, but two, luxury SUVs in the period of a couple of hours in Chicago, Illinois, that they had not participated in or purchased. I think the conferees have produced a good bill. They have not only produced a good bill; they have produced a bill that does not have a one-size-fits-all remedy, and it still gives the regulators flexibility to deal with the ever-evolving strategies that identify thieves come up with. Lastly, I want to pay tribute to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), the chairman of the subcommittee, because he sat through hours and hours of hearings to make sure that we got it right; and, lastly, the ranking member, the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), I think he had some excellent ideas on bait and switch. I hope we revisit that in the next Congress.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I am going to vote for this conference report, and I will get to why I am going to do it in a minute, but before I do, I want to talk about the process that has gone on. When a bill leaves the House in a certain condition, and the certain condition in this case was the protection of the air traffic control system, and the Senate with the Lautenberg amendment does the same thing and goes a little further. When a bill goes to conference and comes back looking different, we are left on our side with the conclusion that can only come from one place. As a Member of this body, it concerns me that we need to have, and this message is really for my leadership, we are a coequal branch of the United States Government. And if we are just going to accede to what it is that the administration wants to do, I, as a Republican, have difficulty. I listened carefully to this debate, and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) is right, during the Clinton administration the contract tower program was used extensively by the Clinton administration, and under the Bush administration, there have been no privatizations. The executive order that President Clinton issued as he left office, countermanded by President Bush, is why we find ourselves here today. The contract tower program, if run responsibly, does not mean the death of the aviation system in this country. But I would suggest, and again to my leadership, this is not about, and it never was about, the 69 towers. It is about the belief by Members on the other side of the aisle and by Members on this side, today it is 69 small airport towers, tomorrow it is Davis-Bacon, the next day it is the privatization and contracting out of the Federal workforce. There comes a point where enough has to be enough. Mr. Speaker, I am going to vote for the bill. As to why I am going to vote for the bill, I was asked to get the 69 towers out of the bill, and I am not taking credit for that, but I went to my leadership with others, and this recommittal does that. I gave my word to the leadership, and I am going to keep my word and vote for the bill.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, we have had a couple of additional speakers show up here, and I am not sure whether the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia was expecting that. So I would ask unanimous consent that the time that she has yielded back be restored to her in case she wants to make some observations.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Peterson).

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to make a couple of observations. One, to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for his eloquent statement. I think as he recited those communities that have been helped by the EDA, that was the only commercial that we needed for the reauthorization of this valuable program. In the exhaustive hearings that we had on this issue where the gentlewoman from the District and I had the opportunity to listen to economic development experts from around the country, they talked about the fact that the average size of EDA grant is $600,000. So we are not talking about hundreds of millions, we are not talking about billions, but that $600,000 when then translated into the local community and what it meant, as recounted by the gentleman from Pennsylvania, I think was truly remarkable. It really is life-changing and community-changing money, and the work that they do is certainly not only well-spent but it is productive. The second piece, the amendment that was self-executed by the agreement of the House of yesterday, I think, is important in that we have added 12 counties to the Appalachian Regional Commission. Some people expressed concern about that, particularly those communities that are already located within the ARC. I want to highlight and commend the distinguished work of one of our committee members, the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) that was concerned about the fact that that might stress the resources. She made sure that an amendment was included therein that also made sure that there were sufficient funds so that that fine organization could continue its work and continue its work at a fiscally responsible level. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra).

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2535, the Economic Development Administration Reauthorization Act, continues the work of the EDA by reauthorizing the agency for 5 years, updates the statute to reflect a changing economy, promotes the efficient use of resources, eliminates unnecessary and outdated provisions, and gives the Secretary flexibility to assist particularly hard-hit parts of the country. This reauthorization also includes several new provisions that will be important additions to the work of the EDA. This legislation creates a performance-based incentive program in which eligible recipients are eligible for a bonus of up to 10 percent of the project cost by meeting criteria established in regulation; allows for the improved management and operation of revolving loan funds by amending loan areas and consolidating overlapping loans with the operator's consent and by crafting regulations that would allow for the securitization of loans consistent with security laws; and creates a planning performance award that awards up to 5 percent of a grant amount if a recipient meets several mandated criteria. By adding these provisions, EDA can better serve its constituents and do more to improve the economic future of America. This legislation was developed through an intense process of hearings and markups. It was an open process that allowed for the input of all Members and groups with an interest in the legislation. This process has resulted in legislation that has broad bipartisan support, the support of the administration, and the support of such important partners as the National Association of Development Organizations, International Economic Development Council, National League of Cities, National Association of Counties, and the United States Conference of Mayors. This is a well-crafted piece of legislation. I want to thank the chairman of our full committee the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young); the ranking member of the full committee the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar); and my distinguished ranking member on the subcommittee the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) for helping us put this legislation together. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of Monday, October 20, 2003, I call up the bill (H.R. 2535) to reauthorize and improve the program authorized by the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I again thank the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia, who has truly been a wonderful cooperative partner during this first year of the 108th Congress, and I look forward to a good number of legislative successes with her in the coming year.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Beauprez).

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes).

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 2535, as amended.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of the resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 270) supporting the goals and ideals of College Savings Month.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 1883.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 106) recognizing and honoring America's Jewish community on the occasion of its 350th anniversary, supporting the designation of an ``American Jewish History Month,'' and for other purposes.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the concurrent resolution under consideration.