George Miller

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, you said several times ``Middle Eastern.'' The fact of the matter is that any money from any source would be reported; is that correct?

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. We have read the amendment. We don't have a problem with it and we support its passage.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, even though I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time, but I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen).

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes. Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, we offer this motion to instruct, because today, all across America, employees are worried sick about their retirement nest egg. They have seen big airlines like USAir and United cut and run on their obligations to pay the promised pension benefits and are wondering if they are next. They have seen major companies like Verizon, IBM, Motorola, Northwest, Delta, Sears Roebuck Company, Alcoa, Hewlett Packard, Lockheed Martin freeze their plans. We just read that General Motors will close its defined benefit plan to new management hires and give them a 401(k) instead. These are devastating developments that need urgent action by this Congress. Unfortunately, this House bill makes none of these provisions better. In fact, it may make some of them worse. This motion addresses two urgent issues. First, it provides needed help to the airline pension plans hurt by 9/11 and skyrocketing fuel prices from terminating. It would be devastating to hundreds of thousands of workers across this Nation if more airlines were permitted to dump their plans into the PBGC. When this happens, the big losers are the employees. Look at the pilots of United, for example. They had a vested pension benefit cut in half. The average pilot lost $1,270. Here is what you see what happens when an airline or any employer is allowed to simply dump the plan into the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, the government body that is set up to protect pensions. You see here that the pilots, 14,000 pilots, and 6,000 of them were retirees who lost 50 percent of their benefits, they lost $1,370 a month for the rest of their lives, for the rest of their lives. Management, employees and ticket sellers and others; 42,000 of them, 12,000 retirees lost $221 for the rest of their lives as did the machinists and the ground crews, who lost $493. That is because the company made essentially a unilateral decision simply to dump this plan without justification into the PBGC. There are other actions that could be taken. The reason that we are here today is because a number of airlines have said, let us see if we can work with our employees if we can stretch out these plans, if we can keep from terminating them. We can work through these difficult times for the airline industry, that there may be a way to do this and get away from the tragedy that happened to these retirees and to their families. Let us just be very clear about this. These are not 401(k) investments that went wrong in a bad market, these pension plans that were dumped into the PBGC. They were rock solid pension benefits that were stripped away from these employees and retirees for the convenience of United executives and shareholders. While these employees, the pilots, flight attendants, machinists and others, were losing millions of promised benefits, the majority party in this Congress didn't fight for them, didn't lift a finger for them, didn't even offer a fair hearing to the people who were going to be most impacted by the decisions by people like United. This is a national disgrace. This motion accepts the Senate provision that gives these airlines the ability to keep their plans going while stretching out payments. Freezing plans is a lot better than terminating. Go ask the ticket agents, the pilots and the mechanics at United whether they would have rather had their pension plan frozen while the airline worked through its difficulty, or whether they would have it terminated. The motion would also support the Senate provision to provide full Pension Guaranty Corporation retirement protection up to the maximum guaranteed amount, about $47,000, by the Federal Government, for those pilots who are required by the Federal Government to retire at age 60. This was a double hit to these pilots. The Federal law said they had to retire at age 60, and then the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation told them, because you had early retirement at age 60, you are going to lose even more of your pension every year. We should protect those pilots. They had no way to protect themselves. This motion also makes it clear that the bill's onerous funding requirements do not apply to companies that pose no risk of termination or liability to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. Forcing healthy plans out of the system does not make our pension system more secure, it makes it less secure. The House bill as written will give a financial hit to company pension plans that do not face the risk of termination and don't threaten the solvency of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. Finally, this motion supports the commonsense provision that will encourage savings through the savings credit to allow people to deposit a portion of their tax refunds into savings accounts. Let us keep these airline plans going so hundreds of thousands of employees at Delta, Continental, Northwest Airlines are not put in the same position as the employees of United, and I urge the Members to support this motion to instruct. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) of Ways and Means.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy), a member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for speakers. I believe I have the right to close. Is that correct?

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich). (Mr. KUCINICH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), a member of the committee. (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct conferees.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin). (Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, Members, this is a very straightforward proposition. This is about whether or not this House of Representatives will go on record to try and give the airlines the ability, the time, and the means by which they may treat their employees better by holding onto their current pension plans; whether they freeze them or they take some other action in conjunction with their employees so that their employees will not be thrown for the loss that the United employees saw when that company decided that it would use the PBGC, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, just as a convenient tool to discharge in bankruptcy those employees' pension plans that devastated those employees, the United employees, and devastated their families. Why are we doing this on this legislation? Because it is very interesting, through the course of this legislation during the consideration in the committee and on the floor, we could never quite get a vote on airlines. Now we are going into a conference committee, and the Republicans say, oh, everything is going to be just fine. And yet we know that already this conference committee is starting to attract attention, that this may be a vehicle for other measures that are unable to move in this Congress. And so we do not know what is going to be in play. So we wanted to make sure that the Members of the House have the opportunity to say that these airlines ought to be able to try and work this out. The other factor is that time is running against these airlines. They are going to have to declare and make a decision relatively soon. We do not know if this conference is going to be committed. So it is just a question for the Members, do you or do you not want to be able to be on record to suggest that this would be better treatment for these employees, hopefully for these companies, than what happened under the United pension plan. You saw what Mr. Pomeroy said: many, many business executives, people involved in the pension business, have looked at this bill, and they have said that this bill is going to make it more difficult, make it more costly and probably lead to additional terminations. The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, the people that handle this problem when all else fails, told us this is worse than current law. Now, you can ride that animal if you want, but you may also, if you are deeply concerned about the airline employees in your area, you may also want to vote for this motion to instruct so we send a clear message to the House conferees and the committee, have refused to have this vote at any stage of the process, that we be allowed to have a vote, and that we support the effort of having the airlines be able to work this provision out. That is what this motion to instruct does. It is important. It is important to the airlines. It is important to the employees. It is important to their families. It is important to how we look at solving this difficult problem of holding onto people's retirement nest eggs and to the pension plans that they are currently in. This is presented as some great pension reform. It really does little or nothing to forestall the trend that we now see developing in terms of the termination of pension plans and people losing their retirement nest eggs. Mr. Speaker, I would urge the House to support the motion to instruct.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I recognize the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney) for 3 minutes.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, my colleague, Mrs. Tauscher and I, rise to pay tribute to Donald Lawrence Blevins who is retiring from Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 342 after a distinguished career including fifty years as a Steamfitter, four years as an Instructor, ten years as Director of Training, nine years as Business Representative and another eight years as Business Manager/Financial Secretary. Larry Blevins was born April 10, 1937, in Arbuckle, California; two years later, his family relocated to the city of Tormey near the Union 76 oil refinery. It was here in December of 1954 that Larry first embarked on his career as a Steamfitter working as a permit hand for Fluor Maintenance on a two-week turnaround. Realizing his potential, Larry joined the Steamfitters Local 342 Apprentice Program in January of 1956 and four years later graduated from the Laney Tech Trade School in Oakland, California. Upon graduation, Larry's first General Foremen's position came while working Travel Card out of the Chico Local in 1961 and 1962 at a Titan missile base. Larry's elevation to a supervisory position was a rare feat for a Travel Card worker and came as a direct result of his outstanding skill level and ability to learn quickly. Larry was further rewarded for his commitment to Local 342 and elected to the Apprentice Committee in the General Election of Officers on December 10, 1967. In the early 1970's, Larry was encouraged by Brother Vern Gosney to start regularly attending Membership Meetings and become more involved with the organization and operation of the Local. Brothers Les Reed and Tom Irvin also worked closely with Larry and were the first to recommend that he begin teaching. He took all of this advice to heart and began regularly attending meetings and started taking night school classes to learn supervisory techniques and engineering skills. It wasn't long before Larry began instructing the Local 342 Apprenticeship Training Program and subsequently earned a Life Time Services Teaching Credential through the State of California. Starting in 1977, Larry embarked on another career path and undertook the task of running the Training Center as Director of Training. It was during his ten years as Director that the school was expanded to accommodate larger classes of apprentices to help complete the many projects within the Local's jurisdiction. As the need for apprentices grew, Larry also oversaw the expansion of the Journeyman Training classes. These classes were designed to upgrade the skill levels of the Local's journeymen and keep them current with the industry's expanding technological advancements. Larry understood the need to stay on top of the changing industry and worked diligently to keep pace. On December 11, 1988 in the General Election of Officers, Larry won a three-way race for Business Representative over Contra Costa County with more than 53% of the vote. While overseeing Contra Costa County, the Local worked major projects such as: the TKC Rebuild at Chevron in Richmond, the CoGeneration Power Plants throughout the area's refineries, major expansions throughout Chevron, and Clean Fuels projects at Chevron, Shell, Tosco and Unocal. Almost overnight Larry's jurisdiction went from just a couple hundred UA members to more than 2,000. Larry's skills helped ensure that the work was manned with qualified craftsmen and the jurisdiction of the Local was protected. After three terms as Business Representative, Larry put in his bid for nomination to the Local's top position, Business Manager/Financial Secretary. On December 14, 1997, with the largest turnout for any election in Local's history, Larry was elected with 88% of the votes cast. The Membership's confidence in him was high enough in the General Election of Officers in 2000 and again in 2003 that he was reelected unopposed. With Larry's leadership and the assistance of many dedicated members, Local 342 has one of the finest and most progressive training centers in the country. Larry also worked tirelessly as a Boards of Trust member to stabilize the Health and Welfare Plan and amend the Master Labor Agreement to improve the conditions on the work site. Larry negotiated an increase in the Total Package that provides funds for the Pension, the Health and Welfare plan. These advancements have not only helped to significantly improve working conditions; the language and monetary conditions were also greatly increased. Larry has represented Local 342 countless times at conventions of the California State Pipe Trades Council, the United Association, the Western States Pipe Trades Council and the Western States Pipeline Conference. He's also served on the Executive Boards of these associations as well as the Contra Costa and Alameda County Building and Construction Trades Councils. In 2001, Larry was appointed by the UA General President to the prestigious Laws Committee at the UA Convention in Miami Beach, Florida. On October 26, 2001, Larry was honored as Labor Leader of the Year and recognized by the Contra Costa Central Labor Council, the Contra Costa Building and Construction Trades Council and the California State Senate and Assembly for his service to the community and to working men and women. Larry not only worked tirelessly for his brothers and sisters of organized labor, he also cultivated friendships within the community. Some of the community projects he has been a part of include, Camp Okizu, the building of the Shepard's Gate home for battered women, the Mother Wright Foundation and the Northern California Special Olympics. Upon retirement Larry will now have more time to devote to his wife, Debbie, sons Donald and Keith, daughter Dorothy, stepchildren Derrick and Andrea, as well as grandchildren Stephanie, Marshall, Amber and Curtis. As we wish Larry a fond farewell, we can rest assured that he has left Local 342 financially strong, cultivated a strong symbiotic relationship with the Local's contractors, and helped strengthen the ties with Sister Locals and other branches. Larry's honorable toil has helped cement a positive place within the community for the brothers and sisters of Local 342. We are all beneficiaries of his hard work and we salute his efforts. Cheers to a happy and healthy retirement.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to bring to the attention of my colleagues the personal and really tragic story of one soldier's struggle to cope after returning from the war in Iraq. The San Francisco Chronicle recently reported on the life of Blake Miller, whom some Americans came to know through the media as the ``Marlboro Man'' of Iraq for his efforts in the battle of Fallujah, one of the most intense battles of the Iraq War since the invasion itself. As the war continues to rage on and the country continues to debate how to bring it to an end, it is important to stop and look at the consequences of the war on our soldiers. America's soldiers have done everything asked of them. They and their families have endured great hardship, and many, too many in my opinion, have paid the ultimate sacrifice in this war. I believe that we must not neglect the full experience of the soldiers and their families from this war, the trauma and stress that have severe consequences on their post-war lives. Blake Miller, a.k.a. the Marlboro Man, now suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder from his experiences in Iraq, and specifically, his involvement in the siege on Fallujah. He is really struggling, according to this news account that I am enclosing for all of my colleagues to read. As the article describes, he and those who fought with him, will forever be tormented by their experiences in Iraq. Sadly, but not unexpectedly, Blake Miller and his family are not alone. According to an article in the Washington Post on March 1, 2006, soldiers returning from Iraq consistently reported more psychic distress than those returning from other conflicts. More than one in three soldiers and Marines who served in Iraq have sought help for mental health problems, according to Army experts. Mr. Speaker, the President and Congress have chosen to send America's soldiers into battle in Iraq. That was not a decision that I supported because I believed then, as I do now, that the evidence of a real threat to America did not exist. But whether one supported this decision or not, every member of Congress and the President have an obligation to be concerned with the well-being of our troops both in battle and afterward. I hope that Blake Miller's story will help convey to this Congress the human suffering that this war is likely to cause for many years to come and help us to think long and hard about the consequences of the decisions we make in Congress--before we make them. We honor Blake Miller's sacrifice and service to our country by making sure he and his family have every resource available to help them recover from this trauma and to regain a sense of normalcy in their lives and that they are not denied any needed service because of a lack of funding from this Congress or this President for medical care for veterans.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, if the gentlewoman would yield, I thank the gentlewoman for taking this time and for making the remarks that she did. I was in my office working and listening to your presentation, and not only did you lay out a cogent case why this deal with Dubai World Ports makes no sense at all in terms of the security interests of our country, but also the other reasons that you pointed out in terms of their role, in terms of the boycott on Israel and all the other issues of concern there. But as I left my office, you were also talking about the fact that we have a port security system that still has an awful lot of holes in it. The number of containers, we were told by the CIA that the most likely attack on America would be in a dirty bomb or weapon of mass destruction inside of a container. Now, 4 years later, we still find ourselves where we are inspecting those containers once they arrive in Florida or the San Francisco Bay area in my district, which is far too late. So even if you thought it would be a good idea to outsource the ownership of these ports to a foreign entity, you certainly would not do it when you have the kind of port security system that we have in place today with so many, so many flaws in that system. There has been a lot of suggestions about how to get this done. There are ports around the world engaging in very serious screening of these containers, but not all of the ports from which we receive cargo. So I just wanted to join the gentlewoman in her remarks, because I think there are two issues here. One, this is a real bad deal and doesn't make any sense. People in my district were stunned when the President would say one day he was going to veto it and the next day he hadn't been told about it. He was so well informed he was going to veto it, but not well informed enough to discuss it, because he hadn't seen the deal. Then, secondly, they think about the problems that we are having trying to secure this worldwide traffic in containers, and they just think that somebody has lost their mind in terms of starting at this point the outsourcing of these ports to foreign ownerships and then, of course, to a country-owned company that has a lot of questionable activities in its background with respect to terrorism and other items. I just want to thank the gentlewoman for raising these issues. I think it is important, and it is important that they continue to be raised during this 45-day period. Thank you and the other 30-Somethings for doing this.