John Larson

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 431, I was detained on legislative business. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.'' Stated against:

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, we are a nation at war, a war the President has said may take years. He has asked for the Nation's patience and perseverance to deal with the perpetrators of terror and bring them to justice. A united nation stands prepared to make the necessary sacrifice and put up with the heightened security that disrupts our daily lives. It is an inconvenience that pales in comparison to the sacrifice of those brave Americans at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the fields of Pennsylvania on September 11. For elder Americans, this is a second day of infamy that they have persevered through, the first being December 7, 1941. These Americans, that Tom Brokaw aptly describes as ``the greatest generation'' know all too well the meaning of sacrifice and resolve. No generation has shouldered more proudly this Nation's rise to world power. No generation has borne such a heavy burden. None stands more committed than they to stand with the Commander in Chief during this struggle. They know intuitively, as did the first President of their generation born in this century, that we must put Nation above self. With all the patriotic fervor and resolve, they stand committed today to face any challenge, conquer any foe and sustain a nation free of terror for their children. Proud veterans know that this is a match that cannot be postponed and comfort the young, in return, with the words of Roosevelt that ``We have nothing to fear but fear itself.'' They are in every sense of the word magnificent citizens and role models. They have given much and asked little in return. They hear all the platitudes and promises. They are celebrated in speech and in books and in the movies. But it is hard, hard to go home and look them in the eye and say there is no prescription drug relief, to say we are exhausting the Social Security surplus not only to fight Osama bin Laden but to provide corporate tax cuts. It is hard to look them in the eye as they travel to Canada for prescription drugs while Congress rolls back the alternative minimum tax. Even amidst what must be hurtful to them, they never waiver. They stand by their Nation, their flag, their beliefs, prepared to sacrifice yet again for the Nation they love. Living out their lives in dignity is all they ask. Platitudes and promises do not heat their homes, put food on their table, or pay for the prescriptions needed to sustain their lives. Their generation believes you should be known by your deeds, not by the words that translate into empty promises. There will be numerous speeches given on Veterans Day exalting the brave men and women of our Nation. Wreaths will be placed at memorials and people will gather in solemn remembrance and in firm resolve. When Members are back in their districts for parades and speeches and memorials, they should take a long look in the eyes of those veterans. We stand on their shoulders, the benefactors of their sacrifice and accomplishments. They are prepared to see this second day of infamy through until justice is served. If only Congress would respond with the same resolve for them, the resolve to see their twilight years lived out in dignity, the resolve to provide them with affordable prescriptions here at home. If only Congress would show the willingness to sacrifice a corporate tax cut to preserve a life, to heat a home, to have a nutritious meal. If only Congress had the resolve to preserve Social Security and Medicare, the programs that have kept our elderly barely above the poverty line. This is an unprecedented opportunity. The Nation stands united behind the President and Congress to root out terrorism.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his insight. Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn to the gentleman from Texas, but before I do, I just wanted to review a little bit more about this bill which will provide a total of $1.5 billion in funding, $1 billion of funding to cities, counties, towns, boroughs, tribes, and other municipal authorities for strategic planning needed to ensure that local emergency responders, including municipal, private, volunteer fire departments, police departments, sheriffs' offices, emergency medical technicians, paramedics and other health professionals, as well as our area hospitals, are fully prepared, equipped, and trained for emergency and security issues that arise from terrorist attacks. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Texas, because of his unbelievable and outstanding and exemplary work with missing children, certainly knows this issue probably better than most. I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson) at this time.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, before I yield back the balance of my time, I again would remind our colleagues that it is H.R. 3161, the Municipal Preparation and Strategic Response Act of 2001. Again, I am proud the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), and I cannot thank him enough for his input and help, is also a cosponsor of this legislation. The value that the Congressional Fire Services Caucus and the Congressional Law Enforcement Caucus have provided us, the insight that we have received from health care professionals, hospitals, the endorsement of municipal leaders of this legislation has all been terrific. But before I leave the podium tonight, I cannot help but mention that I am deeply troubled by the stimulus package that is coming before this body tomorrow, primarily because I have been concerned for some time now about our inability to pay for a lot of the initiatives that we would like to see. Homeland defense in this bill is $1.5 billion. That is not an awful lot of money, but I have a sickening feeling going home to my home district and talking as I have to many groups, most notably to seniors. Tom Brokaw did this Nation a great service in his book ``The Greatest Generation''; and in that book he heralded a unique generation that now has witnessed a second day of infamy. They lived through the Depression; they certainly lived through December 7, 1941; they fought and won and rebuilt the Nation and educated a whole generation of baby boomers. They have now lived through September 11. As we project out, they are the first ones to rise up and say we must root out terrorism, we have to all stand together as a Nation, but it just confounds me that we will tap into Medicare and vanquish the Social Security Trust Fund in an effort to pay for all of this, so they will have sacrificed twice. At no other point in our history when we have gone to war, and make no mistake this is a war, have we asked one generation to sacrifice as much as we are asking them. Mr. Brokaw, if you are listening, I hope you prevail upon the American public and upon the Congress to recognize that this cannot happen. These people deserve to live out their final days in the dignity that Social Security, Medicare and, frankly, prescription drugs should provide them. Mr. Speaker, I just could not leave the podium this evening without addressing that concern. It is heartfelt. I hope that other Members share the same feeling and same concern about how we are going to pay for all of this. We ought to think long and hard about tax cuts; and truthfully, we ought to think about rolling back some of our provisions or at least letting the top 1 percent of this Nation bear some of the sacrifice that we have already asked the greatest generation ever to do.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. I think that that is what makes good legislation, especially when we have the bottom-up response that we have had.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. I thank the gentleman from Texas again for his strong input; and through the gentleman, I thank Mayor Moore as well for his input.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. I had the opportunity to meet with the gentleman's mayor actually in Mystic, Connecticut, where they were gathering at a regional conference and they were talking about the need for regional coordination. One of the things that he pointed out, and I thought it a very important point that he made, is, look, we would very much like to get involved in this not just because of the impact on the local municipality but the need for regional-wide planning and looking at entities where the money can flow to so that it gets dispersed in a manner that addresses the gaps that are occurring within some of the very important policy issues as they relate to responding to potential terrorist attacks. As the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) was pointing out earlier, depending upon the community one lives in and what kind of civil preparedness there is there to deal with natural disasters or what kind of HAZMAT training has taken place because of the location of, we will say a nuclear generating power facility or a petrochemical port, whatever the case may be, we find that there are different levels, some very sophisticated, some nonexistent. Yet, homeland defense has got to make sure that we are incorporating all of our communities, boroughs, municipalities, and make them part of this effort. Mayor Moore's point was we can best do that through regional councils, through regional organizations where they already are meeting on several infrastructure issues, where they are already dealing with these things and often feel that they are the neglected stepchild of the Federal Government or that we bypass them and go directly to the State, and then they do not feel that they get money from us that goes to administration fees and other areas.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Exactly.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Reclaiming my time, I spend a lot of time going out to a number of my public schools in the district, and parochial schools for that matter, and talking about September 11; and as the gentleman points out, clearly firefighters or police officers, emergency medical teams are viewed far differently than they were prior to September 11. And I find it incredibly heartening as well that the youth of our Nation also now are able to distinguish between celebrity and real heroes and perhaps look at their parents like all the parents on September 11 that either got on an airplane or went to work at the World Trade Center or at the Pentagon, and found themselves, ordinary citizens, involved in a heroic effort. All too often in our culture we make icons out of sports and Hollywood and music celebrities; and while it is true that we should celebrate their accomplishments, there is a major distinction between celebrity and heroes that is being picked up by the youth of our Nation. This bill that we have put forward today seeks to recognize those who lost their lives by understanding, as so many people have said more eloquently than I, about those racing up the stairs in the World Trade Center while they were coming down and to memorialize them is to recognize their sacrifice, to put them in the pantheon of heroes that came about that day, but also recognize the need to further train and provide the appropriate equipment and provide for the kind of strategic planning that we are going to need to continue to root out terrorists and to make sure that at home we are safe and secure. That is what homeland defense is all about; and I commend the President and Tom Ridge in their efforts, and it is my sincere hope that our efforts here in coordinating local, State and municipal officials, together along with Tom Ridge's new assignment, that we are going to be able to not build a fortress around America. I do not think anyone believes that that can happen, but to have energized, enlightened, involved, and committed communities to understand that we in Congress recognize their valor, their frontline defense and also all of our collective responsibility no longer to look the other way or to defer responsibility to someone else but actually to be participants in our community, not as necessarily elected officials, but as active, involved, committed citizens who, when they see things that are wrong, no longer turn their head and look the other way but step forward and address that and call upon the local authorities to make sure that we are looking out for one another and for our neighbors and not painting with the broad brush of prejudice the many when we know it is the fanatical few that have caused and perpetrated this unbelievable horror and nightmare on America.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. And to the gentleman's points, one of the things we want to point out with regard to H.R. 3161, The Municipal Presentation and Strategic Response Act of 2001, is that it coordinates a response and procedures with similar emergency response units so that we are not reinventing the wheel here, in neighborhood units and in neighboring units of local government as well as with State and Federal agencies. One of the things that I find instructive in meeting with people, and again I would say that the work of the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) bore this out, that when one prepares an issue report to units of local governments, State legislatures, and Congress that include recommendations for a specific elective action, this is something that we really need to have come from the bottom up; that as we conduct public forums, as we start to look at the contents of strategic response plan, as people learn how to communicate with authorities in the event of emergency, something that perhaps in some States and in some regions we have done better than others because whether it be California having to deal with earthquakes or Florida having to deal with hurricanes. Programs the rest of the Nation can learn from. Also, where to go to find safer public assembly and other emergency shelters and any other appropriated information that needs to be gathered. The silver lining in this: if there can be a lesson from the tragic events of September 11, is, in fact, that we are a Nation that is committed and involved more so than ever before. There has been an outpouring of patriotism. There has been an incredible desire on the part of the public to want to know what they can do to help and also what they have to do to be prepared. Many of them have very solid and sound suggestions to make, and we ought to make sure in Congress that we are providing our local authorities, meaning our State, county, regional, and municipal governments, with the kind of resources that they are going to need to carry off this bottom-up strategic planning that is needed. As my colleague knows, the bill itself provides $250 million. It goes directly into the COPS program, as the gentleman was stating earlier in his remarks, as well as another 250 million that goes to firefighters. Again, I would point out that those come with no strings attached, no matching grants because they need the money now. There is no time for these municipalities to save. Most of their budgets have long since gone to bed, and we have to make sure that we are providing our frontline defenders with the equipment and the training that they are going to need as we send them into harm's way, and ultimately that is the goal. It was not lost on me that with the awful situation that took place in Senator Daschle's office the other day that it was two of our Capitol Police officers that responded and went in there and now are diagnosed. These are the kinds of things. It will not be Federal agencies that are going to be responding first. It will be the local entity that will be out there, and shame on us if we do not provide them both the equipment and the training and then the strategic planning tools that they are going to need in order to address these issues.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. I thank the gentleman from New Jersey and once again recognize the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. If they are not joint with the frontline responders and if they are not part of this process of giving input, then I do not think we have the best in homeland security.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman appropriately says ``our bill'' because it has been the input of so many Members, and the input they have derived by going back out to their respective congressional districts and meeting both locally, regionally, or county-wide with so many first responders. Ultimately, that is what this is all about. It is standing together as we face down terrorism, both in terms of homeland defense and in terms of our resolve as a people to stay together and address this issue. It is oftentimes, I think, missed on the general public when we are down here talking about lofty idealism and bills, and they are really anxious to help themselves; to go back to the gentleman's district, as he has done, and to seek the input of people who in many respects are more knowledgeable or have more pragmatic solutions in talking to a number of the people in my district. I know in our case that what we found is that the concern exists for the overlap, or perhaps the gaps; the term ``commonality of communication'' in terms of responding, and chains of command, whether they be bottom-up or top-down. The interoperability and mobility between local, State, county, and Federal agencies is something that is going to require more planning on our part; and also the identifying of those gaps. This cannot be a decision that is foisted upon local officials from the top down or by some think tank, however productive and good some of those ideas may be.

Mr. LARSON

Mr. LARSON. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak), who heads the COPS program at one of our local press conferences, laid that idea and concept out very clear. Instead of the $8.9 billion that is appropriated to deal with terrorism, only $300 million makes it outside of the Beltway. That is a very telling statistic. As local officials are quick to point out to us, this is very problematic to them, because what they are concerned most with is that the Federal Government will create a mandate upon them that is unfunded. Now, we are all dealing with, and we all know, and I know that the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt) has been in the forefront of promoting educational concepts like the full funding of the IDEA program, where once again there is a lack of a fulfillment of a mandate. But certainly when we are calling upon our front-line defenders to go out there and risk their very lives, we have to make sure that these are not unfunded mandates.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Correct.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, that is something that obviously, with the appointment of Tom Ridge, and again, I commend the President for that appointment. We sent a letter off to Mr. Ridge, knowing that he is obviously getting his arms around this very important task that he has, so it is understandable it may take him some time to reply to us. But the offer is one of assistance and help, and one that, at its very heart in essence says, look, what we are hearing from our constituents is not to foist on us from the top down a Federal mandated solution to this problem, but to work with us from the bottom up so that, both from the standpoint of the knowledge and expertise that we have in dealing with these issues. And then also the plugging the gaps where we are doing things well, but there is a gap in being able to address those specific issues.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, one of the things that should be pointed out as well about this legislation is something that they heard in California and we have heard in Connecticut, and I am sure the gentleman has heard in Texas, as well; that is that because the municipalities and counties are strapped already, what they are saying is that these monies have to come to us ununencumbered. That means that traditionally through a number of programs, we would require a matching grant on the part of the municipality, State, or the county. In this case, because it is now part of homeland defense, and in some instances money is already being expended and appropriated which many of us feel should be included in the $20 billion we have already appropriated for these events; but having said that, clearly, as our legislation does, what we wanted to make sure is that there would be no matching grant required. We heard that loud and clear in Connecticut. I do not know if that is what the gentleman is hearing down in Texas, as well.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for also coauthoring this very important piece of legislation and for his leadership. As the gentleman points out, there are more than 70 Members on a bipartisan basis that have signed on to the bill that really, from a pragmatic standpoint, just makes all the sense in the world. I think intuitively when our first responders, our local officials, our county and State officials hear about the legislation, this is the kind of thing that they are looking for from us.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, that is a point that is consistent with the issues that have been raised, both on the Task Force on Terrorism that has been conducted by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) and others in the caucus, but the concept of commonality of communication and interoperability seem to be two of the most paramount things that we have to accomplish by providing these frontline responders with adequate planning money so that they can, in fact, strategically respond, even though, in many instances, as the gentleman points out is the case in his district and in California, where they are already well prepared in specific areas, but perhaps not to deal with a threat of this nature.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, in the gentleman's discussion with the county and local governments out in California, or in the gentleman's congressional district, do they feel that they are amply prepared to deal with biochemical threats, and what did the gentleman learn from that? Is there something instructive that we can take or that the rest of the Nation can take from California?

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Only $300 million makes it outside of the beltway.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, of $8.9 billion appropriated, only $300 million.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.