Rick Larsen

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the women and men on board the USS Abraham Lincoln. For nearly ten months the sailors on board the Lincoln have been engaged in protecting our homeland. During their deployment--the longest deployment for an aircraft carrier in 30 years--the crew served courageously and selflessly. The brave women and men aboard the Lincoln have been embraced by a thankful nation. Having just returned from the Lincoln's homecoming celebration, I can say without a doubt that the City of Everett and Snohomish County are happy to have the sailors home. While seeing them on national television gave me and our nation hope, seeing them in person with their families was even more inspirational. I want to thank every one of those sailors today for their service, and I also want to thank their families for their service, even though it is a different kind of service. The sailors and their families sacrificed for this country. We owe them a debt of gratitude. While our technology and know-how far surpassed our opponent's, the true success of Operation Iraqi Freedom was due to the women and men who volunteered for this service. Their commitment, dedication, bravery, and willingness to serve are what define our military might. To those who served on this historic sailing of the USS Abraham Lincoln, I say: You have done your job and you have done it well. Our nation thanks you. I am honored to be their Representative in Congress. I thank the Speaker for allowing me to speak on the floor today.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3609. I have a full statement, but I just want to make a quick note about what happened 3 years ago on June 10, 1999, in Bellingham, Washington, and remember why we are here today, to remember 10-year-old Wade King, 10-year-old Stephen Tsiorvas, and 18-year-old Liam Wood, who were killed when nearly 300,000 gallons of gasoline from a nearby pipeline rupture leaked into Whatcom Creek and were ignited and exploded. 1,100 days later, the House of Representatives is on the verge of finally passing strong pipeline safety legislation to respond to this tragedy. On behalf of their families, I want to thank the House for doing so. I want to thank Chairman Young, Chairman Tauzin, Ranking Member Oberstar and Ranking Member Dingell and the staffs from the majority and minority side for all the hard work that they have put into this issue over the last 3 years to make this a reality, to respond to the communities, to respond to their concerns about safety; and again to remember Wade King, Stephen Tsiorvas and Liam Wood for the lives that they lost, but hopefully with action by the House today we are doing our best to prevent losing lives in the future. On June 10, 1999 in Bellingham, Washington, two ten-year old boys, Wade King and Stephen Tsiorvas, and an 18 year-old man, Liam Wood, were killed when nearly 300,000 gallons of gasoline from a nearby pipeline rupture ignited, sending a fireball roaring down Whatcom Creek, and a plume of smoke thousands of feet into the sky. Over 1100 days later, the House of Representatives is on the verge of finally passing pipeline safety legislation to respond to this tragedy. Since I came to this chamber, I have worked to see that the type of tragedy my constituents suffered never happens again by laboring to see that meaningful pipeline safety legislation passes the House of Representatives. Our friends in the Senate have acted three times. It is now time for us to act. The bill before us today is a strong pipeline safety bill. It strengthens pipeline safety by ensuring operators enhance training and evaluation of pipeline employees, requires pipeline inspection programs be adopted and enacted every ten years, with follow-up inspections every seven years, strengthens the oversight role of state governments and citizens, and mandates substantially increased civil penalties. With that said, I think it important to point out that the bill is missing critical community-right-to-know provisions that are vital if we truly intend to improve the safety of the pipelines that weave in and out of our communities. If we do not direct pipeline operators maintain continuous liaison with emergency responders, or require them to provide maps of their pipelines to municipalities, we are not doing all we can to ensure that another tragedy like that in Bellingham or Carlsbad, New Mexico never happens again. As this process moves forward into a Conference Committee, I urge my colleagues in the strongest possible terms to recede to the Senate's community-right-to-know provisions. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, allow me to thank the leadership of the Transportation and Infrastructure and Energy and Commerce Committees. Chairman Young and Tauzin, as well as Ranking Members Oberstar and Dingell have done a good job of shepherding this critical piece of legislation through the House of Representatives. As one who has seen firsthand the danger posed by unsafe pipelines, I thank them, and all Members who have worked on this bill, and urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3983, the Maritime Transportation Anti-terrorism Act. In the wake of September 11th we must ensure that we are showing vigilance on the topic of port security. Any attacks on our ports could cripple the country economically and disrupt our nation's trade. Ports serve our key national interests by facilitating the flow of trade and supporting the mobilization and deployment of U.S. Armed Forces. 95% of overseas international trade enters or exits through our nation's ports. In the next twenty years, the amount of trade going through our ports is expected to double. Ports must continue to update and modernize their facilities, not only to accommodate this growth but to preserve their safety and security. While I do support this legislation, I am concerned that it does not fully address meaningful container security. I believe that H.R. 3893 should mandate that port workers who receive containers inspect the outside seal on each container and that it require mandatory inspection for ``empty'' containers, which regularly move on and off ships each day. I am proud to represent the Ports of Everett and Bellingham, both of which greatly contribute to the economic vitality of my district. Their presence makes port security an especially important issue to my constituents and myself. Again, Madam Speaker, I support H.R. 3983 and look forward to its speedy passage.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this amendment. There are three issues that are really driving my support for this amendment. One is the ag economy in my district is in as much desperation as any other district in this country. Second, one of the issues affecting my farmers is suburban encroachment. They need help to continue farming. The third is the listing on the Endangered Species Act of the Puget Sound Chinook salmon, which is wreaking havoc for my family farms. Having a strong conservation title is important. When I went around my district in April, my farmers asked for three things in a farm bill, a strong trade title, strong research and a strong conservation title. I have learned a lot from the farmers in my district. I have also learned a lot from two people on the committee, the chairman and the ranking member. I want to thank them for the hard work that they have put in to getting the farm bill as far as it has gone. But for my farmers in my district, having a strong conservation title is critically important, which is why I stand today in support of the Kind amendment.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, after a painful and shocking day where we saw the unthinkable become a reality, I returned to my house to embrace my wife, Tiia, and two children. My five-year-old son, Robert, had only one question. He asked it in a way that only a five-year-old could: ``Why did those mean people fly a plane through that building?'' How can you explain to a child the hate that drives individuals to act with utter disregard for human life? What answer can we find to the question, ``Why?'' We may not have that answer soon; however, there are things we do know. These things are as solid and sure as the Cascade Mountains that greet us each morning, and as deep as the Puget Sound waters: the promise and potential that the freedoms we enjoy will never be given up to any terror. The gift of democracy will continue to be exercised no matter what the cost. The values of openness and tolerance, without which we would descend to the level of our new enemies, will continue to stand. Finally, the American spirit which drives us to reach out to help those in need--a spirit we need now more than ever--will continue to triumph. In the wake of this terrible act of terrorism, I am calling upon all of us to take these actions: (1) Please pray for the victims and their families; (2) support President Bush and the Congress in the actions we must take to respond to this tragedy. This is no time for partisan politics; (3) use my office as a resource to answer questions; (4) donate blood if you can; (5) do not let terrorism scare you. The United States will track down those responsible and bring them to justice. We have the strongest democracy in the history of the world and we will get through this shocking attack on our country. Tiia's and my prayers go out to the families of the victims.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I just want to take a few minutes to speak on behalf of H.R. 1937, the Pacific Northwest Feasibility Studies Act of 2001. I first want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert) and the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) on the Republican side, and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall), the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith), and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee) on the Democratic side for their support in shepherding this legislation to the floor today. I just want to point out this bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to conduct water feasibility studies for three Native American tribes in Washington State. I want to speak briefly about one in particular, which is in my district, the Tulalip Indian Tribe. The Tulalip reservation is located outside of Marysville and covers approximately 35 square miles. The permanent population of the reservation is under 7,000 and continues to grow significantly, but during the summer and holidays the reservation population increases by up to 40 percent. Like many American Indian reservations, the Tulalip reservation faces groundwater access barriers due to the presence of glacial sediments, a shallow aquifer system, bordering salt water and limited drainage. Likewise, most of the current drinking water on the reservation is supplied from a patchwork of public and private wells. Continued degradation of the water resources on the reservation will limit the development of the reservation and surrounding areas. The study that this bill authorizes is vital to ensure the long-term safety and accessibility of groundwater on the reservation. So I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, H.R. 1937.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support for the Capps amendment. The Peterson area became one of the first to participate in Project Impact, using a small amount of Federal funding provided by the program to leverage greater local funding, to retrofit schools, homes and small businesses. In the past 10 years FEMA has spent more than $20 billion to help communities repair and rebuild after natural disasters. Project Impact in contrast costs the Federal Government only $25 million. In this instance it likely saved several times that figure in the Seattle area by saving lives and preventing damage. We do not need the promise of a new program; we have a program. It is called Project Impact. Mr. Chairman, I urge this House to pass the Capps amendment.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak in support of this amendment. Grant funding to help communities control sewer overflows was approved and authorized in the last Congress; but in this Congress, in this House, in this budget, no funds have been set aside at all. Congress must follow through and fund this important program. Back home in my district, I can point to the city of Everett, Snohomish, Anacordis, three cities with some of the highest sewer rates in my district. Everett alone has invested in excess of $12 million since 1990 towards reducing and controlling CSOs; and despite the substantial financial commitment, nearly $20 million more is required for the city to reach full compliance with all local, State, and Federal mandates. Federal funding will be crucial to the city's efforts to reach full compliance, so it is my hope that this Congress can step up to help our communities by providing this funding. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of their communities, to vote in favor of this amendment. I commend the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia) for his work on this amendment.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

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

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today we bring to the floor H.R. 691, a bill to extend the child passenger protection education program and preserve our Nation's most precious resource, our children. H.R. 691 authorizes $7.5 million from the general fund for each of the fiscal years 2002 and 2003, to make incentive grants to States to implement child passenger protection programs. Unlike other TEA-21 programs, the child passenger protection education grant program expires at the end of 2001. H.R. 691 extends the program to 2003, consistent with the authorization period for other TEA-21 programs. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 691 does not affect direct spending, therefore, offsetting spending reductions are not required. The objective of the bill and the program it authorizes is to prevent deaths and injuries to children, educate the public concerning the proper installation of proper restraints, and train child passenger safety personnel concerning child restraint use. Every day children sustain injuries or die in motor vehicle crashes. In 1999, more than 1,100 children under the age of 10 were killed in motor vehicle crashes and another 182,000 were injured. Many of these injuries and deaths could have been avoided with the correct use of safety seats and seat belts; however, many adults are unaware they are using safety restraints incorrectly or not at all, thereby placing their child at risk. In the fiscal year 2000, in my own State of Washington, child passenger protection education grant funds were used to train 196 law enforcement and child passenger safety certified technicians and 11 certified instructors, establish 25 law enforcement community child passenger safety teams covering 27 of the 39 counties in the State focusing on Native American and Hispanic populations, and conduct 75 child passenger safety awareness events. In fiscal year 2001, my State of Washington is using its funds to train an additional 100 child passenger safety technicians, conduct additional events and clinics, establish additional community child passenger safety teams, and implement a public education program to promote the Nation's first booster seat law. Mr. Speaker, these types of activities are being reflected in State programs across the Nation, the emphasis being placed on cultural and ethnic minorities, rural and low-income and special needs populations, and documented low-usage areas based upon available surveys and crashing data. The child passenger protection education program is reducing the number of children being killed in traffic crashes across the country and is deserving of our strong support. I strongly support the bill and urge its approval. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Borski). (Mr. BORSKI asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Slaughter/Dicks Amendment and to highlight the importance of NEA and IMLS funding for the small towns in my own district. Last year's NEA funding increase created the Challenge America program, to help smaller communities gain access to the arts. The Arts Council of Snohomish County in my home district was one of the first organizations to receive this grant. This organization offers weekly art classes to juvenile offenders, many of which have no adult role models in their lives, and provides them with opportunities to express creativity and interact in a forum outside of a detention center. Without this grant, the program would have had to cut back drastically or even be eliminated. That would be truly unfortunate, Mr. Chairman, because it is programs like these where the arts can provide hope and opportunity for troubled youth. Challenge America is doing great things for youth in my district, yet this program would not exist if the NEA did not receive increased funding last Congress. I would also like to offer my support for IMLS, which also funds key services in my district. The Museum of Northwest Art in La Conner--a town of 900--received a key grant from the IMLS to help attract more tourists to the Skagit Valley region in my district. Because of the IMLS grant, La Conner brings in many more visitors who come to experience the Skagit Valley, thereby boosting their economy. Unfortunately, other museums in my district do not receive funding because of the lack of IMLS funding. The executive director of the Whatcom Museum contacted me earlier this year to share his frustration that the Whatcom Museum and Bellingham Library were denied important funding, not because of their qualifications, but because of the lack of funding for the IMLS. The Slaughter/Dicks amendment will provide key funding increases for the IMLS, and help small libraries and museums in districts like mine continue to flourish and reach out to the community. Mr. Chairman, let's continue to show our support for the arts, the humanities and our museums and libraries by supporting the Slaughter/ Dicks amendment.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Slaughter/Dicks Amendment and to highlight the importance of NEA and IMLS funding for the smaller towns in my own district. Last year's NEA funding increase created the Challenge America program, to help smaller communities gain access to the arts. The Arts Council of Snohomish Country in my home district was one of the first organizations to receive this grant. This organization offers weekly art classes to juvenile offenders, many of which have no adult role models in their lives, and provides them with opportunities to express creatively and interact in a forum outside of a detention center. Without this grant, the program would have had to cut back drastically or even be eliminated. That would be truly unfortunate, Mr. Chairman, because it is programs like these where the arts can provide hope and opportunity for troubled youth. Challenge America is doing great things for youth in my district, yet this program would not exist if the NEA did not receive increased funding last Congress. I would also like to offer my support for IMLS, which also funds key services in my district. The Museum of Northwest Art in La Conner--a town of 900--received a key grant from the IMLS to help attract more tourists to the Skagit Valley region in my district. Because of the IMLS grant, La Conner brings in many more visitors who come to experience the Skagit Valley, thereby boosting their economy. Unfortunately, other museums in my district do not receive funding because of the lack of IMLS funding. The executive director of the Whatcom Museum contacted me earlier this year to share his frustration that the Whatcom Museum and Bellingham Library were denied important funding, not because of their qualifications, but because of the lack of funding for the IMLS. The Slaughter/Dicks amendment will provide key funding increases for the IMLS, and help small libraries and museums in districts like mine continue to flourish and reach out to the community. Mr. Chairman, let's continue to show our support for the arts, the humanities and our museums and libraries by supporting the Slaughter/ Dicks amendment. Thank you.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride today that I would like to welcome Pastor Paul Allen Stoop to the House floor and to thank him for that moving prayer. Providing dynamic leadership, Pastor Stoot founded the Greater Trinity Missionary Baptist Church in Everett, Washington. In this capacity, Pastor Stoot gives much of himself to Everett and to his community each and every day. Pastor Stoot is not only concerned with those who are presently within the church, but also the well-being of everyone in our community. He does more than preach his faith, he lives it through precept and example. He is always reaching out to those in need, providing spiritual advice and support. When he is not directly serving members of his own church or running Operation Latchkey to help children be averted from dangerous behaviors, he volunteers his time as chaplain for the Everett Police Department for emergency services. His service to people does not end there. He serves the members of our community with dedication and even remembers the many crew members at the Everett Naval Home Port, who call Everett home for only a short period of time. The men and women stationed there know Pastor Stoot as one of the first faces crew members can count on to welcome them to their new home. Everett, Washington is indebted to Pastor Stoot for his services and I am honored to have him here today.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1157. I want to first off thank my colleagues, the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee), on this side of the aisle, for the work they have done on the issue, and my colleagues, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest) and the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson), for the hard work they have done as well on this issue. I am pleased to join them in cosponsoring this important piece of legislation. Having served in local government before being in Congress and having worked with those who are in the trenches on this issue of salmon recovery, I can tell the Members that solutions need to come from the bottom up and not the top down. The funds provided by this bill will empower local communities to deal with salmon recovery efforts at the local level. That is the proper approach, and that is why I support this bill. As an example, the Haskell Slough project along the Skykomish River in my district is considered many a model of what successful salmon recovery can look like throughout the Pacific Northwest. A coalition of private landowners, local governments, businesses, and tribes use Federal dollars to restore a critical piece of freshwater habitat, and the fish have come back by the thousands. Passing this legislation will help fund hundreds of individual projects like the Haskell Slough project, and continue to move us in the right direction on salmon recovery. So again, I want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for this work, for their work on this issue, and urge my colleagues to vote yes on H.R. 1157.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and for bringing this important issue to the attention of Congress. Mr. Chairman, just last month I attended a ceremony, a welcome home ceremony in Oak Harbor, Washington, in my district; a welcome home ceremony for the 24 crew members of the plane that was downed in China. Oak Harbor has been the home of Naval Air Station Whidbey Island for many years, and 7,000 people turned out for this homecoming event, showing the commitment that the town of Oak Harbor has made to the presence of Naval Air Station Whidbey in my district. This amendment today, Mr. Chairman, would express the sense of Congress that the Federal Government must recognize that commitment, must recognize the sacrifice that communities all over our country are making. This sense of Congress amendment would say that the Impact Aid program should have guaranteed funding for districts that so desperately need it. Whether it is Oak Harbor or Marysville, which is the home to the Tulalip Indian Reservation, these communities depend heavily upon funding; and I ask this body to support this amendment.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith) for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, I am here today to talk a little bit about the energy crisis in the West, how it is affecting families and businesses in my home district, the second district of Washington State and what I and other new Democrats are doing to try to provide a balanced comprehensive long-term solution. In many ways we are facing ``The Perfect Storm'' of energy. The energy crisis in Washington State is the result of a number of factors happening, seemingly impossibly, at the same time: a failed deregulation plan in California, an inefficient supply of energy, congested transmission pathways, inaction by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to ensure just and reasonable rates in the Pacific Northwest, and, ironically, for the Pacific Northwest, the lack of rain. Many people refer to this crisis as just a California crisis, but clearly this has not been the case in my district. It is a Washington State energy crisis, an Oregon crisis, Idaho, Montana. Definitely the Northwest and soon to be a national crisis. And the impact of this crisis is being felt all across my district through decreased economic growth, job loss, and unbelievably high energy bills for working families and senior citizens. Across my district consumers and businesses are currently experiencing utility price increases of 35 percent. And as the summer and fall arrive, we will see those rates jump another 40 to 100 percent. At the State level, increased energy costs threaten over 100,000 jobs statewide and over a quarter million jobs region-wide. Clearly, this crisis is immediate, intense, and far reaching. High energy costs will decimate industry and working families in my district. In March of this year, Georgia Pacific, a pulp mill that had been employing hundreds of workers in Bellingham, Washington, since 1926, shut its pulp factory for good due to high energy prices, costing 400 working-wage families in Bellingham, Washington, their jobs. Not only has the city lost revenue and workers lost jobs, but local restaurants have lost business. The port has lost shipping revenue, and the suppliers who supplied materials to GP for years have now lost their top customer, costing thousands of dollars in lost revenues. The plant closure alone will cost the city of Bellingham $235,000 a month in tax revenues and cost the economy in Whatcom County at least $100 million a year. Recently, Intalco, an aluminum company, announced if its energy costs are not reasonable by October, they too will have to close their plant, and that is another 930 jobs threatened in my district. I have with me just a box of about a thousand letters I have received from employees, family members, relatives, and friends of those employees at Intalco. Clearly this energy crisis is having a huge impact. One constituent wrote, ``I'm an employee at Alcoa/Intalco Works in Ferndale and as it looks like right now, my job will vaporize due to the forces beyond my or my company's control; namely, the exorbitant price of power our plant must have to survive. It is a situation that may require me and my family moving from Washington permanently. We don't want to do this, but we have to make a living too. Please come to our aid.'' Another woman from Ferndale wrote, ``My husband has worked at Intalco/Alcoa in Ferndale, Washington, for 22 years. We have three daughters. One will be in college for 2 years, the two others to follow. Don't let one year of drought destroy the aluminum industry. Give them time to come up with solutions.'' Another woman in Bellingham pleaded, ``I would like to know what I can tell my 10-year-old when she asks me what we're going to do when Intalco shuts down. I have worked there for 5 years now, and it has been a good job for my family. But, with the shutdown of this plant, I'll be out of work. And with GP also shut down, there are two less places that will pay a wage you can raise a family on.'' In Sedro Woolley one person wrote, ``My husband Brent works for Intalco. He is scared he will lose his job due to the energy crisis. We are having to give our power, as well as conserve, just to lose our jobs and turn our community into a ghost town. The situation is real, as you well know, and our children see the concern we have for our community and the people around us. Time is running out.'' Small businesses are suffering as well. One business owner wrote, ``I have lived in Whatcom County all of my life. I have owned a home and business for over 20 years, and about one-third of all my customers are in the aluminum or steel industries. Losing any or all of them will have a dramatic impact on my business. Ravaging a prosperous and important community like ours is a terrible and destructive solution for the short-term goal of meeting energy demand.'' Our Nation is badly in need of a national energy policy that is balanced, that is comprehensive, that is visionary, that answers the call that we are hearing from people in my district and people all over this country. The crisis I have commented on tonight in the West threatens to spread throughout this country, and this summer will bring higher utility bills and gasoline prices for far too many Americans. Much of what has been offered so far by the administration is, unfortunately, short on vision and offers no truly long-term solutions to the energy problem. The Vice President recently noted that conservation is simply a virtue and the only real solution is to continue with fossil fuels and consuming them at an unprecedented pace. In fact, he continued to argue, in order to keep up with the demand, we need to build a power plant a week for the next 20 years. I would say only an approach that includes both short- and long-term solutions will truly ensure the energy independence our Nation is calling for and must have. Many of my Democratic colleagues and I believe we do not have to choose between growing our economy and protecting our environment. We can do both. In fact, a growing economy is dependent upon a cleaner, reliable energy source for generations to come. The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith) and others have been talking about a new Democrat approach to our national energy policy; and our approach will expand and diversify our energy supply, providing a balanced vision that does more than simply find and consume fossil fuels. I recognize a comprehensive energy policy requires a combination of traditional fossil fuels and natural gas, but it also requires expanding wind and solar power viability that will not only make for a cleaner energy supply but will also stabilize prices and ensure reliability. In the short-term we can harness the power of technology and modernize our regulations to make existing fossil fuel sources of power cleaner and more efficient. I feel this requires an important incentive for the installation of cogeneration and other technologies and a drive to ensure we continue to utilize these new technologies in years to come. As we seek to expand and diversify our energy supply, we must upgrade our transmission system to ensure that the creation of new forms of energy can be transferred efficiently. We must encourage private and public efforts to greatly increase the investment in building and improving existing transmission lines and pipelines, while ensuring an expansion of infrastructure is both safe and efficient. Conservation and efficiency programs will ensure that our limited supply of fossil fuels last longer. It makes little sense to embrace an energy plan based almost exclusively on a finite resource without also aggressively encouraging the conservation of those resources. And I believe conservation should not just be a personal virtue, it must be our national priority. Empowering consumers to make energy-wise decisions has to be a key component to a fully-functioning energy market. As we seek to develop new forms of environmentally responsible forms of new generation, again we must improve the efficiency of these new forms of generation. I believe this includes public-private sector partnerships to improve extraction methods and encourage cleaner, more efficient generation. This approach must also include an aggressive focus to increase the supply of renewable energy as a component of our national energy portfolio. We must have a substantial increase in funding for research and development into these programs which will encourage energy efficiency and renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, biomass, incremental hydropower, and geothermal. We must also work to provide realistic market incentives to develop and use renewable energy at the residential, commercial, and at the national level. We must push for high-efficiency standards, whether it is for vehicles, buildings, homes, or appliances. Improving efficiency will require mechanisms to encourage Federal, State, and local governments to use and purchase alternative fuel vehicles and make all government buildings energy efficient. We must also provide market incentives, low-interest loans and grants to make capital improvements to increase energy efficiency and encourage the manufacture and purchase of fuel efficient vehicles. And to be specific on one point, we must reauthorize and strengthen the Renewable Energy Production Incentive program as soon as possible, which will help bring an incentive to renewable energy in this country. Finally, we must ensure that no group is left behind by the current crisis, including seniors and low income. I commend the administration for their budget increases in LIHEAP and State weatherization funding, which are key components for empowering local efforts to deal with the effects of this crisis adequately. However, programs within other Federal agencies, like the public housing operating fund with Housing and Urban Development, must be increased to help our local housing authorities to keep rents down for low-income families. In closing, I believe very simply that new Democrats understand that a comprehensive energy plan for the future is critical to our Nation's long-term prosperity. The livelihood of families in my district, in Washington State, and across the country depend upon it. And I want to thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith) for the opportunity to speak on this tonight, and I yield back to him.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Madam Speaker, I rise today to discuss an issue that is a very important issue to my home State, Washington State, and to the people in that State. That issue is health care. As I traveled around my district during the Easter recess meeting with health care consumers, physicians and hospitals, again and again I heard of rising costs, declining reimbursements, and general frustration with our system. First, I would like to address the issue of prescription drugs. I strongly support adding a prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries. Today, many seniors are forced to purchase expensive Medigap policies or join HMOs to try and avoid the high out-of-pocket expenses for prescription drugs. Seniors should not be forced to choose between groceries and their medicines. In this time of government surpluses, I believe some of the surplus must be used to provide a Medicare drug benefit; and using the surplus for a drug benefit within the framework of reducing the national debt, we can provide for a more prosperous and healthy Nation. I also have great concerns about Medicare reimbursement, particularly in my home State. Because of a flawed complex formula, the Federal Government provides fewer Medicare dollars for seniors in Washington State. Medicare reimbursements are based on the region's average cost of living, rather than on an individual's personal income, so Washington State senior citizens receive less Medicare support than most other States. Medicare payments in Washington rank fifth from the bottom nationally; and between 1998 and 1999, Medicare payments in Washington experienced the sixth fastest decline of all States. As a result of the low reimbursement rate in Washington State, many health plans have opted to withdraw from Puget Sound area plans that serve seniors. Last year, as many as 30,000 seniors in Washington State received notice that their health plans would no longer serve them or that they would increase the deductible for the same coverage. That is wrong. I support access and affordability; but, above all, equity for Washington State seniors and will work to rectify this unfair provision. In addition, according to the Washington State Medical Association study, the average medical practice in Washington State lost $95,000 in 1999. Reduced Medicare payments have led to a white-coat flight, with physicians leaving the State or retiring early. This is simply unacceptable. Local hospitals also continue to contact me about their deep financial difficulties related to the cutbacks of the Balanced Budget Act legislation of 1997. As we know, the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 enacted some far-reaching changes in the way Medicare pays health care providers. These changes were intended to both modernize Medicare and save some $115 billion over 5 years. Today we know that the actual savings are much larger than Congress had anticipated and those changes are affecting services. Like many Members, I have been hearing from health care providers in my district regarding these cuts in the BBA and how they are affecting and may affect in the future their ability to provide quality health care to our seniors. I take these concerns very seriously. For instance, Whidbey General Hospital on Whidbey Island has detailed for me their hardship. Approximately 50 cents of every dollar they receive goes to the cost of running their facilities and dealing with insurance plan requirements, not to patient care. These skyrocketing administrative burdens add cost, but little value, to the delivery of health care. Patients must come first. So, Madam Speaker, I have outlined many of the health care concerns that are of the highest priority to patients and providers in Washington State. I plan to work on these issues in a bipartisan fashion in the 107th Congress so that we can get some much needed relief at home in Western Washington for our seniors, for our physicians, for our hospitals, but, most importantly, for patient care.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, today I rise on behalf of the 24 crew members held by the Chinese government. These brave men and women are based at the Naval Air Station Whidbey on Whidbey Island in Oak Harbor in my district in Washington State. I first want to call on Beijing to return our honorable service men and women home. Four days is long enough. No, 4 days is too long. Our service members need to be released immediately. Second, I want to honor the families of these crew members, both around the country and in the Whidbey Island community of Oak Harbor where the Naval Air Station is based. Their concern over the crew members is matched only by their strength and their bravery. So not for my sake and not for the sake of anyone in this Chamber, Mr. Speaker, but for the sake of the mothers and the fathers, the sisters and the brothers, the sons and the daughters and the wives, it is time for the Chinese government to return the crew members to their families. It is time for the Chinese government to return the plane to the United States.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 459.

Mr. LARSEN of Washington

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address one of the most pressing issues facing the Nation and my district, and that is education. Having just been elected to Congress in November, I have spent many months traveling across the second district of Washington State meeting with parents and teachers and local school officials from Everett to Blaine, from Concrete to Coupeville and up in the San Juan Islands as well, and the message from them is clear: they want local control of education. Again and again I hear that people are greatly concerned about public education. They are concerned about the quality of education and preparing our kids today to compete in the job market of tomorrow. They want accountability. If taxpayers support education, they simply want their money to be spent more wisely. Today, therefore, I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of the RRRs bill, the Reinvestment, Reinvention, and Responsibility Act of 2001. This bill is a new approach to Federal education policy, one that refocuses our resources and our resolve on raising academic achievement. The RRRs streamlines the more than 50 Federal education programs into five performance-based grants. It increases the Federal investment in education, but better targets those funds. Most importantly, Mr. Speaker, it increases the accountability for results with Federal tax dollars, focusing these monies on our local school district. The approach of the RRRs plan that we introduced today is simple: invest in reform and insist on results. We want to give States and local school districts the resources that they need to help every student learn at a high level. This bill, Mr. Speaker, does not promote vouchers, but the targeting of Federal dollars to the communities across this Nation and my district that need them the most. In fact, I believe that vouchers are the wrong answer to the right question: What are we going to do to improve our public schools? The RRRs bill, in my opinion, is a key step in improving our public schools. In the new economy, it is a time to take an approach to education in a new way, so I join with my fellow Democrats and colleagues in supporting the RRRs legislation; and I look forward to working in a bipartisan fashion here on the floor of the House with Republicans and with the administration in passing the RRRs here in Congress.