Juanita Millender-McDonald

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I rise, too, in support of this amendment that provides $30 million for the Capital Grants Railroad Relocation and Improvement program. Those of us who are in regions who have ports and who have the propensity to move goods, movement across our State and across the Nation, understand the importance of this particular amendment. I have the elevator corridor. It is 37 percent capacity. We need to expand that because of the freight and the goods movement that is coming in from the ships coming into our ports and across the country. We cannot do that without an infusion of capital to help with the security of that cargo as well as the improvement in the quality of life in our communities. It has been said that when you have rail lines you can help then to increase the quality of life, reduce emissions in the air, provide the type of air quality that is sorely needed, especially in areas like Los Angeles and Long Beach. So I understand why the gentleman has introduced this amendment, and I am part of the cadre of Members who are asking for this to be approved because it is an investment in rail infrastructure and for economic development reasons. It also enhances the quality and safety of our communities. And so I thank the chairman for his comments; however, I would suggest to him that this really moves rail more efficiently and more effectively, and I ask for this amendment to be approved.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer this amendment to the Transportation-Treasury Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2007, to provide more funding for the training of college students to be poll workers. As ranking member on the Committee on House Administration, I am pleased that the Appropriations Committee fully funded the budget request for the Election Assistance Commission, commonly referred to as EAC. I am also pleased that the committee report suggests that $250,000 of the EAC's funding be allocated to the College Worker's Poll Grant Program, authorized by the Help America Vote Act, HAVA. However, Mr. Chairman, I do believe that this funding is not sufficient to meet the critical challenges facing the administration of elections in this country. I am offering this amendment to increase the funding.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. I do recognize that. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. We will miss you sorely on this committee and the work that you have done, along with our distinguished ranking member. Today I do offer this amendment that addresses one of the greatest atrocities of the 21st century, and that is the trafficking of men, women, and children for forced labor and sexual exploitation. The Economic Support Fund operates to provide financial assistance for various developmental programs worldwide, including 266 programs to eradicate human trafficking. These programs are designed to present a multifaceted defense against the various and varied crimes that comprise human trafficking. We know that this year the committee has provided $8 million for the use of this program. That is a start, but it is less than what the President has suggested in the program. Of course, I am proposing a modest increase of $2 million. This amendment offsets the increase by those things that have been outlined in the amendment. It is not enough that we pay lip service to this problem, we actually have to lead the 21st Century Abolitionist Movement against modern day slavery. I am very happy to present this amendment. We know that human trafficking affects an estimated 800,000 persons each year, and 80 percent of those victims are women and children. I am happy that the ranking member joined me on the trip to the United Nations to address these atrocities, and so I am so happy that the chairman and the ranking member have accepted this amendment.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I do appreciate the chairman's working with me on this amendment, along with our ranking member. I thank him for accepting the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. My amendment addresses a critical energy source of our national renewable energy portfolio that needs to be a priority in the energy debate. As we know, the affordable energy situation is far from resolved in our Nation. My amendment provides for the necessary funds to continue the Geothermal Technology Program and to continue our Federal support of cleaner alternative power. This energy is cost- effective and cleaner. Recently, an Associated Press article stated that the Federal Government has a backlog of 230 lease applications to prospect for geothermal energy. This AP article also states that the average age of an application to prospect geothermal sites is 9 years. Recent supply projections from the American Gas Association show that natural gas suppliers will continue to lag behind the demand in the foreseeable future, resulting in continued high prices. The high cost of natural gas affects electricity and home heating costs across the United States. This is why we need to continue to support Federal investment in geothermal energy and to support the Geothermal Technology Program. Now we do know that most of the geothermal power plants were built in the mid-1980s and early 1990s when energy markets were receptive to alternative energy investment. Since then, there has been a significant decline in this investment. The Bush administration has repeatedly championed the need to expand our renewable energy resources and to develop our country's geothermal energy resources. The Department of the Interior and the Department of Energy have jointly stated that commitment to increase our energy security would be by expending the use of indigenous resources on Federal lands, while accelerating protection of the environment. A recent report from the Department of Energy found that California, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah and Washington State have the greatest potential for quick development of geothermal resources. In fact, the study, Mr. Chairman, listed nine ``top pick'' sites in California and ten in Nevada. As we work on improving our affordable energy options, we must support the Geothermal Technology Program. It is also a job creation program. It will ultimately mean about 150 to 200 jobs in a community. The minimal $5 million that I am asking for will be taken from the Hydrogen Technology Program to be placed in the Geothermal Technology Program, and all of this can be attainable. We must not turn our backs on this important source of environmentally friendly energy. I ask my colleagues to support this amendment and to support geothermal technology and, more importantly, to support lower prices for energy. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I would like to enter into a colloquy with the chairman. I would like to thank the gentleman from North Carolina in this colloquy. And, Mr. Chairman, as a resident of Southern California, I have witnessed the impact diesel emissions has had on our air quality. Our constituents are more likely to contract cancer, asthma and other respiratory problems. The emissions from older heavy-duty trucks, in particular, are among the highest contributors of ground level ozone, volatile organic compounds, and particulate pollution in the country. These trucks are the highest polluters among on-road transportation emissions sources. As a primary player in the movement of goods, diesel engines play an important role in keeping our economy strong. While the administration has taken action with the diesel fuel engine regulations to reduce emissions, the EPA estimates that there are 11 million existing engines that still need to be fixed. This is why providing the necessary resources for the important diesel initiatives under the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act should be central to any current national transportation plan. We have worked extremely hard to ensure that Americans may have cleaner air where they work and live. I know, despite the bipartisan support we received for DERA funding, finding the funds for this program was a tough process. Ultimately, while cuts had to be made to DERA's appropriation, I am very proud to have worked with the subcommittee leadership to get the funds that we did receive. However, the fight is not over. While the $26 million will go far in the mission for reducing diesel emission, a great deal more is needed. Despite the fact that today's diesel vehicles are 99 percent cleaner than their 1970 counterparts, each older truck contributes an average of 1 ton of pollutants into the air per year. We must make certain that every effort will be made during conference to increase funding above the $26 million level, or at least to consider keeping it where it is. So, Mr. Chairman, the DERA program is very important to my district. These funds play a critical role in fully integrating today's technological advances with consumer demands and environmental needs in order to provide cleaner air where our constituents live and work. And I would like just to have the chairman respond that we hope that in the conference, at least the money that has been placed there by the administration will be maintained with perhaps increases if we can.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I rise to draw our colleagues' attention to legislation I have introduced (H.R. 5328) to make it easier for talented, experienced employees of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) facing loss of their jobs later this year to find positions elsewhere in the Federal government. The need for this legislation is both apparent and pressing. In September 2005, the CRS, a unit of the Library of Congress, announced to 59 support employees that their positions will be eliminated not later than September 30, 2006, by a reduction-in-force (RIF) if necessary. The CRS Director, Daniel Mulhollan, argues that the 59 positions have become unnecessary due to technological advances that have changed the way CRS fulfills its mission, which is to serve Congress. Several of our colleagues and I share serious concerns about this decision and question the CRS management practices which led to it. Since the announcement, I have personally met with affected employees and others, many of whom suggested, among other things, that CRS has placed insufficient emphasis on training and professional development offering opportunities for advancement. Moreover, given the Library's history in matters involving racial discrimination, many people inside and outside the organization are troubled by the fact that a large majority of the affected employees are women, African-Americans and other minorities. Without debating the merits or demerits of Director Mulhollan's decision, clearly Congress should do everything reasonably possible to help these dedicated CRS employees to continue their careers elsewhere in the Federal government. It is certainly the compassionate and equitable thing to do; most if not all of the employees have never received an unsatisfactory performance review, and many are sole breadwinners who have devoted their entire careers to public service. It is also the smart thing to do, from the standpoint of the taxpayer, who has invested in these employees over the years, and who would lose the value of that investment if the employees were to take positions elsewhere. As a former personnel director, I certainly recognize that for any organization, including the Federal government, to maximize its effectiveness, it needs to attract the most talented people it can, invest in those people, and retain them. It makes sense to enable talented employees to transfer their skills to other agencies, if they wish to remain in Federal service and cannot find suitable positions in the Library or CRS. The legislation which I have introduced would accomplish two things toward that end. First, it would give Library employees who have successfully completed a probationary period in a non-temporary position ``competitive status'' when seeking vacant positions in Executive departments and agencies for which the employees have the required qualifications. Currently, service in the Library, a Legislative-branch agency, does not confer competitive status, leaving Library employees at a disadvantage when competing for vacancies in Executive agencies requiring competitive status. The provision would become effective immediately, and is designed to assist current CRS employees who may wish to apply for positions throughout the government, as well as other CRS or Library employees seeking positions in the future. Second, the legislation would render Library employees (including the Congressional Research Service) eligible for a program, administered by the Office of Personnel Management for displaced employees in the Executive branch, which provides ``special selection priority'' for employees facing a reduction-in-force. Thus, Library employees, including the CRS personnel facing loss of their jobs later this year, would qualify for priority selection to positions across the Executive branch. Mr. Speaker, in 1990 Congress enacted similar legislation granting competitive status to employees of the Judicial branch. It made sense then for employees of the Federal courts, and it makes sense for the employees of the Library of Congress today. Mr. Speaker, my legislation has the support of the Librarian of Congress, Dr. James Billington, and Director Mulhollan, who have assured me that they will do everything possible to identify suitable positions in the Library for the affected employees. I take them at their word and hope their efforts succeed for every employee who wants to continue contributing to the agency's success. This Congress could not discharge its responsibilities without the support of the employees of the Congressional Research Service and the Library of Congress, who provide unbiased, non-partisan, timely, reliable information to its Members every day. As Ranking Member of the Committee on House Administration, which oversees the Library and CRS, I am eager to see this precious asset preserved, and I trust that Library management will do everything within its power to avoid a RIF in 2006 or any other year. In the meantime, H.R. 5328 will make it easier for the CRS employees now facing loss of their jobs to transfer their skills and expertise to other Federal agencies and continue their careers in public service. I urge all Members to join in supporting this urgent legislation.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that this comprehensive analysis is critically needed for our military might, for our strength in doing those things that are asked of us with the airlift cargo; and it is not only fiscally responsible, but it is national security. I ask support for the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the remainder of my time.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to ask support of my colleagues for this amendment that I am offering which calls for the Secretary of Defense to include as part of the 2006 update of the Mobility Capability study, a comprehensive analysis of future air lift and sea lift mobility requirements. This study would examine both the strategic and intratheater mobility requirements with full consideration of all aspects of the national security strategy, and will analyze low, medium, and high risk alternatives. The new analysis will be delivered to Congress by February 4, 2007. One would ask why this study is important. There has not been a study that examines our Nation's air lift requirements since prior to 9/11. Contrary to past mobility studies, the most recent study analyzed only the capabilities of the current programmed airlift fleet, but it did not analyze the Nation's airlift requirements. There is a big difference between studying capabilities and studying requirements when prescribing future airlift force level recommendations. DOD's definition of a military requirement is an established need justifying the timely allocations of resources to achieve a capability to accomplish approved military objectives, missions or tasks, all called operational requirements. Now translated into layman's terms, this means one cannot effectively allocate resources to achieve a given capability, in this case airlift resources, without first knowing what the requirement is. In 2001, our airlift fleet requirements were at 54.5 million ton- miles per day. The question that this study asks and seeks to have answered is, what is the quantitative yardstick that describes the required airlift needs. Is 54.5 million ton-miles per day enough airlift? Do we need more? The mobility capability study alone does not give us this needed information. As we are all aware, there have been significantly more requirements pressed upon our airlift fleet over the past 5 years. The world we live in has changed a great deal. For example, we know our Nation has been attacked by terrorists. We are engaged in an ongoing global war on terrorism. Hurricane Katrina had ravaged the gulf coast region, and we have repeatedly been summoned to help with global humanitarian efforts, particularly natural disasters such as the tsunami and earthquakes. All of these occurrences have called upon our Nation's airlift resources. Furthermore, what concerns me the most is that there does not appear to be a comprehensive approach to addressing our Nation's future airlift demands. Last February, the Pentagon released the Quadrennial Defense Review, QDR, the 20-year blueprint of our Defense Department needs and projections. Specifically, the QDR recommended the ability to swiftly defeat two adversaries in overlapping military campaigns with the option of overthrowing a hostile government in one. However, in the 2001 strategy, the U.S. military was to be capable of conducting operations in four regions abroad, Europe, the Middle East, the Asian littoral and Northeast Asia. But the new plan states that the past 4 years demonstrated the need for U.S. forces to operate around the globe and not only in these four regions. Whatever that scenario is, Mr. Chairman, clearly we need more air cargo planes, and we know this by experience too. Take the C-17, an air cargo plane, for example. This air cargo plane is being flown over 167 percent over the normal hours scheduled to deliver supplies to the war theaters where most planes cannot land, as well as the many humanitarian missions in which our country is engaged. Since 9/11/01, the C-17 has flown 59 percent or about 358,000 additional miles more than was originally scheduled. The C-17 has been on the front line of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Eighty percent of our airlift missions in these battlefronts are done by the C-17. Finally, Mr. Chairman, after only 15 years in commission, the C-17 fleet just recently reached its 1 millionth flying hour. The C-17, though, is just one example, but it is an excellent one and an excellent example of how much our Nation is relying on our airlift fleet. This study will provide a basis for determining the future of our Nation's airlift fleet. This is about providing our military with the tools to succeed, and it is about fiscal responsibility, and most importantly, it is about national security. I ask my colleagues to support this important amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment. The Acting Chairman: The Clerk will designate the amendment.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my dear friend and colleague, Congressman Mike Honda, who is just a great leader, not only for the great State of California, but for this great Nation. He is our chairman of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, and I thank him for convening us here tonight. It is with great pride and pleasure that I rise as a proud member of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, and on behalf of the over 80,000 Asian Pacific Americans who reside in my district in commemoration of the Asian Pacific American Heritage Month. I am so pleased to call him my friend, and all of my Asian friends, and I am here to celebrate with them this great heritage month because they have provided so much to this country. Since the early 1800s, Asian Pacific Americans have played a significant role in the development of our Nation. They have joined hands with the many who came to our shores in search of opportunity, freedom of expression and adventure to make this country what it is today. Their work has made this country a proud country. This year marks the centennial celebration of the first wave of Filipino migrants to the United States. In 1906, Filipino workers came to the United States, particularly to Hawaii, and later California, to work in the fields as laborers. Many Chinese and Japanese laborers who arrived in the mid-19th century were instrumental in the completion of the transcontinental railroad on May 10 of 1869. These workers and those who followed in their footsteps have thrived in various fields of endeavor through their work ethic and ingenuity. They are proud Americans. They have done extremely, extraordinarily well in showing us what work ethic is all about. Today, the U.S. Census reports an estimated 14 million or more U.S. residents classify themselves as Asian Pacific Americans or having Asian Pacific origins, and many of whom have made extraordinary contributions to our Nation. Additionally, the United States Census reports 1.1 million businesses are owned by Asian Pacific Americans; 312,700 military veterans have contributed in protecting our democracy and our democratic ideals around the world. Our Filipino veterans are still waiting for their due benefits, having served in World War II. Furthermore, 46 percent of total Asian Americans and 23 percent of Pacific Islanders' population works in management, professional and related occupations. I am so pleased to know that they are in our legislatures. They are judges. Of course, they are business people. They are teachers. They have made profound progress and extraordinary contributions to this country. The figures show that Asian Pacific Americans have attained high levels of education, employment and high median household incomes. However, Mr. Speaker, many Asian Pacific Americans have yet to achieve their American dream. Twenty-three percent of the Asian Pacific population lives in poverty. Attention needs to be given to Asian Pacific Americans who, because of inadequate skills like my Cambodian constituents, find themselves working just to make ends meet. We must work to provide job training and other community-based programs that will allow all of our citizens to fulfill their potential. Asian Pacific Americans also face significant health disparities. They account for over half of the 1.4 million chronic hepatitis B cases in the United States, and they also suffer from high rates of diabetes, cervical and liver cancers. Furthermore, the incidence of HIV/AIDS is on the rise in Asian Pacific women. The work that I do on my HIV/AIDS and my 5K AIDS Walk with various Asian Pacific organizations seeks to address this. Some progress has been made in addressing Asian Pacific American health issues, the availability of Asian and Pacific Islander cancer education materials; Web tools that provide cancer information materials in Asian and Pacific Islander languages for those with limited English is a good start, but more needs to be done to address access to affordable health care. For example, 50 percent of Asian Pacific Americans are medically underserved since the cost of health insurance is a major barrier to Asian Pacific Americans who are either self-employed or working for small businesses that do not provide employee-sponsored health coverage. As we celebrate May as Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, we must celebrate the legacy, the culture, the rich traditions and achievements of our Asian Pacific Americans, as well as reflect on the challenges faced by their community. This is an excellent opportunity, Mr. Speaker, for all of us here in this House to celebrate these rich cultures, as well as to strive to address the health and education challenges that confront them in our great Nation. My commendation to all Asian Pacific community groups, especially those in my district, that have worked tirelessly to promote, assist and improve the lives of all Asian Pacific Americans and all Americans. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my dear friend, Congressman Mike Honda, for putting together this special order tonight and his outstanding and extraordinary leadership representing Asian American Pacific Islanders across this country and the profound group of people whom I call my sisters and brothers. He is the chairman of our caucus, and I am pleased to be a part that caucus.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, it is great to have my friend who once served so admirably in the southern California area now being a part and parcel of this bill that is just so vital. He knows, as I know, that our California Highway Patrol commissioner is also amenable to this bill as well. Mr. Chairman, truck inspection stations will be a consolidation and coordination of seaports, community and trade corridors, and both local and state representatives are all in favor of this. I am very pleased about this important amendment. I thank all of those, the chairmen and the ranking members, for accepting this. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, at this time let me thank Chairman Lungren, the subcommittee Chair, as well as the full committee Chair, Chairman King, for accepting this amendment and its modification, along with the ranking member, Congressman Bennie Thompson, for his guidance and advice during the process of all of this. I am happy that this bill has language that was in a port security bill that I had for the past 2 years that speaks to the multi-level funding for larger port security projects. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment because I do represent the region that has the largest port complex in the country and the third largest in the world, and it is important that we enhance truck inspection facilities located on trade corridors that lead to port complexes that support a heavy volume of cargo containers. In 2005, 11.4 million containers entered our country and traveled along our interstate highway system. On average, that is an increase of 500,000 containers annually entering our country. In the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, 80 percent of goods that come into this country from the Pacific rim come through these ports, and 45 percent of containerized goods come through these ports. So, Mr. Chairman, it is important that we recognize the vital components in our efforts to secure these ports, our trade corridors and our communities. It is another layer of security. It is about securing the entire supply chain. In our ongoing efforts as a Nation to establish and maintain a security infrastructure, this amendment does make sense. Truck inspection facilities have the potential to integrate new technology that will make our supply lines safer as well as more secure and efficient. In short, truck inspection facilities have the potential to be high-tech weight stations. More importantly, this is another tool in the toolbox in ensuring that our ports and supply chains are secure. Many of you have come out to the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach and seen the Alameda Corridor. When trucks go down that Alameda Corridor, we have to make sure they are secure and that the goods that are being moved from that point to the point of distribution are safe and secure. This is why this amendment is extremely important. I will say that while I cannot go on as a cosponsor at this time, given that I would have wanted to, this particular bill is extraordinarily important for us and I support the bill. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to modify my amendment.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I am not opposing this amendment because of what the amendment does, but because of what the amendment doesn't do. And what the gentleman's amendment doesn't do is apply the same rule to other types of political entities. That is, it doesn't prohibit the conversion of political funds to personal use after such a political entity has concluded its electoral business. It closes a small loophole, but what we should be talking about in closing all loopholes in this lobbying bill. And so the amendment doesn't go far enough. Mr. Chairman, the Republican leadership's restrictive procedures for consideration of this bill has shut out all amendments affecting not only this lobbying bill, but the 527 bill as well. So the gentleman's amendment fixes a loophole, which the Republican leadership thinks needs to be plugged--and that is why they allowed the House to consider this amendment today--but why haven't we applied this same principle to other political entities? No one should be allowed to siphon off political contributions, and convert those contributions to personal use, irrespective of the type of political organization or entity. So, Mr. Chairman, I oppose the gentleman's amendment, not for what it does, but for what it doesn't do in the same manner I oppose the underlying bill, because it doesn't go far enough.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have remaining?

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, contrary to the last speaker, he has a bill that wants to repeal all hard money limits, and this is what this bill is all about, the flow of unregulated amounts of money. This is what the American people do not want, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Zoe Lofgren).

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I yield 20 seconds to respond to the gentleman.