Candice Miller

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Madam Speaker, three things are certain to occur because of the Democrat's energy bill: First of all, it's going to make cars more expensive, it will force taxes to be raised, and it will cost American jobs. The imposition of higher CAFE standards combined with a regulatory nightmare of the EPA regulating tail pipe emissions and NHTSA regulating fuel economy will force the domestic auto companies to expend billions on regulatory compliance with the cost passed along to consumers, of course. Some estimate that the cost of this will be as much as $85 billion. This means that the cost of an American automobile will rise as much as $5,000 to $10,000 per vehicle. And worst of all, the new mandates will actually force automakers to outsource more vehicle production in an effort to reduce their costs and to remain competitive, which will cost more American jobs. This is simply a terrible deal for American consumers, American taxpayers, and American workers. It will result in a hidden tax on cars, higher taxes on gas, and less jobs in America. Our Nation needs a comprehensive energy policy, but this bill misses the mark badly.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I certainly thank the gentleman for yielding and I appreciate his very hard work on this bill, as well as the chairperson of T & I, who, unfortunately, as has been mentioned, has not been able to be with us today. But we have got great leadership, and to the chairperson of the Water Resources Subcommittee as well. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my incredible disappointment of the President's veto of the Water Resources Development Act because there was an enormous amount of bipartisan work that went into crafting this bill, as was demonstrated actually by the overwhelming support it received in both Chambers for final passage. The President says this bill spends too much. Well, fair enough, until you consider that this bill actually spends nothing; it simply authorizes, and the actual appropriations for every project will have plenty of time for discussion on the merits before approval. The Congress has not passed a WRDA bill since 1999. It is long overdue, and it addresses critical water projects and related infrastructure throughout our Nation that I believe we need to invest in to keep America strong and healthy. Members are talking today about various projects in their part of the country, so let me just mention a few in my area. The great State of Michigan, also known as the Great Lakes State, not just because our magnificent Great Lakes are a huge economic impetus for us or because our quality of life is predicated on them, but, in fact, because they are our very identity. Keep in mind that the Great Lakes actually comprise 20 percent, or one-fifth, of the fresh water supply on the entire planet and that they are facing historic low water levels, that they are being inundated with invasive species, and that they are suffering from chemical spills and billions of gallons of raw sewage that are being dumped into them. This bill authorizes funding for the Lake St. Clair-St. Clair River Management Plan. It authorizes building an electronic barrier at the Chicago Diversionary Canal to keep the Asian carp from coming in to Lake Michigan from the Mississippi River. It authorizes funding to stop the spread of VHS, which is an Ebola-like virus that is infecting some of the fish in the Great Lakes. And it authorizes studies on how water diversions may be contributing to the historic low lake levels. Mr. Speaker, I like to think of myself as a fiscal conservative, but part of that, I believe, means being able to clearly make choices about priority spending. In my mind these types of projects are priorities for our Nation. I urge a ``yes'' vote to override the President's veto.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Madam Speaker, on October 8, 1954, President Dwight Eisenhower signed a proclamation urging all Americans to observe each November 11 as Veterans Day. That proclamation said the following: ``On that day, let us solemnly remember the sacrifices of all those who fought so valiantly, on the seas, in the air, and on foreign shores, to preserve our heritage of freedom . . . '' There is broad bipartisan support for the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill in both Houses of Congress. The President has indicated that he will sign the bill. I call on the leadership of this House to bring that bill to the floor, by itself on its own, this week, so that it can be signed into law before Veterans Day. During this time of war, we need to show our veterans and those on active duty that we honor the service and the sacrifice of those who have answered freedom's call. Please let us rise above the politics and do what is right to honor our veterans.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call the attention of the Congress to a very serious problem that is affecting our magnificent Great Lakes, and that is historic low lake levels. Just as we are seeing low lake and water levels around other parts of the country, the Great Lakes, which, remember, comprise actually one- fifth or fully 20 percent of the fresh water supply of the entire world, are losing water at alarming rates. And these low lake levels are having a significantly negative impact on millions that live in the Great Lakes Basin who make their living on the lakes or simply use them to recreate on. For example, millions of recreational boaters are running aground or they can't keep their boats in marinas. Lake freighters are not being able to load up the way that they need to because the low lake levels are causing untold millions of dollars of losses for the shipping industry, and the very fragile environmental habitats of many species of fish and waterfowl and other species have been negatively impacted as well. Mr. Speaker, much of what is happening to the Great Lakes can be attributed certainly to weather changes. We have had some warmer winters. Therefore, you have less ice cover so evaporation is occurring all year long. As this Congress considers funding for other national environmental treasures, let us remember our magnificent Great Lakes.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I rise today to applaud this weekend's ratification of the contract between the United Auto Workers and Chrysler. The new contract creates a stronger domestic auto industry and modernizes the relationship between the Big Three and labor. The ratification by the rank and file signals a new day for the domestic auto industry that has been struggling for market share with its foreign competitors. And sincere congratulations to President Ron Gettelfinger of the UAW and his entire team on a job well done. The industry still faces many challenges, but this new pact between the UAW and Chrysler and an earlier deal with GM means that both sides have come together to move the industry forward. The good-faith negotiations proved that all of the stakeholders put the future of the domestic auto industry first as they worked towards manufacturing competitiveness. This agreement secures jobs and allows the parties to move forward and to continue to create quality products and compete in the global marketplace. Again, congratulations. Well done.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution celebrating 50 years of America reaching for the stars. Fifty years ago when the Soviets launched Sputnik our Nation was thrown into a panic because we believed we had fallen behind our major adversary. That was true and America responded. Our Nation came together and made it a national priority to advance our technology and challenge the Soviets in the space race. This effort had an impact on my family as my father answered the Nation's call to work at the Redstone Rocket Factory with Werner Von Braun. Those efforts produced the rockets that launched the first satellites, put an American into space, and ultimately landed a man on the moon. The impact of the American space program on our Nation--and the efforts of the hundreds of thousands of people who participated in it-- cannot be understated. Today people from across our Nation and the world can watch these proceedings live due to satellite broadcast. We can communicate via cell phones and e-mail. We can cook our food in microwave ovens. We can access information immediately over the Internet. All of these advancements can trace their roots to the American space program. The fact is that our space program has dramatically changed our Nation and our world for the better. It has always been the case that when America is united toward a difficult challenge we rise to the occasion and succeed. There is no greater example of this fact than the success of the American space program. With all of the incredible developments of the last 50 years one can only wonder what the next 50 will bring. Perhaps a permanent settlement on the moon. Perhaps a manned mission to Mars. One can only imagine what incredible advances such efforts will bring to our society. One thing is certain--that when America reaches for the stars--the sky is the limit to what we can achieve.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution and I want to commend Mr. Bilirakis for drawing attention to this important program. The attacks of 9/11 made every citizen mindful of the need for constant vigilance to protect our country from the threat of terrorism. Keeping America safe requires the efforts of every American. The openness of our Nation's waterways and harbors prevents opportunities for terrorists to exploit. The U.S. Coast Guard works very hard to ensure the safety of these areas, and they do a tremendous job for which we are all very grateful. However, recreational boaters also have an important role to play in this area, and America's Waterway Watch program works hard to teach recreational boaters about what they can do to protect our homeland. Boaters provide critical eyes and ears in watching over our,coasts, our ports, and other important infrastructure like bridges and tunnels. Specifically, participants in the campaign are requested to report: Individuals engaged in irregular activity such as surveillance or unusual boating operations; unattended vessels in strange locations; lights flashing between boats; unusual activity near bridges, overpasses, industrial facilities, or fuel docks. In Michigan this program has been particularly important. My home state has over 3,000 miles of shoreline--more than any other state except Alaska--which presents an incredible challenge for our government agencies to patrol. And of course we share much of this water with Canada which enables people to come across into the United States very easily. And in some places this liquid border is quite narrow--such as the St. Clair or Detroit Rivers. So we really have to rely on our boaters to keep their eyes on things. In Michigan, we have more than 900,000 boats registered in our state, which makes us the number 1 state for per capita boat ownership, and 3rd overall behind Florida and California. Boating is an important part of life in the Great Lakes State. In 2005, state officials began a campaign to notify our state's boaters of this Waterway Watch program. Working with the Coast Guard and the Michigan Boating Industries Association, Michigan sent out a brochure on this program with each watercraft registration renewal notice. Since 2007 was the 3rd year this was done, we have now reached nearly all of our state's boaters with information about the Waterway Watch program. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this program, I strongly support the resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, yesterday in this House, we took a great first step forward, I think, in finding bipartisan common ground on the way forward in Iraq with the passage of H.R. 3087. The issue of our troop presence in Iraq has caused great debate across our country; it has polarized this Congress and our Nation. I believe this first step is a demonstration that a bipartisan way forward can happen. In fact, it must happen for the good of our Nation and our ultimate success in Iraq. We can draw that day closer if we in this Congress and we in America continue to work together to forge consensus instead of resorting to partisan attacks. The report of General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker last month has given us reason for hope that progress is being made and our troops can begin returning home. As our troops so bravely continue their mission, let us continue ours and build upon the momentum that we started yesterday in this House. Let us all hope that the day is coming soon when our troops, who have protected our Nation and exported liberty, freedom and democracy, will come home. We owe them nothing less than our best effort to make this hope a reality.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, the recent contract negotiated by General Motors and the United Auto Workers was really a historic watershed for the domestic auto industry. By tackling the very tough issues of pension reform and job security and, most importantly, health care reform, the industry is now poised to compete and win against foreign competitors. The domestic auto industry has momentum in moving toward a brighter future, a future that will include high-tech alternative fuel vehicles that will help us reduce our dependence on foreign oil. I had the opportunity actually last week to check out one of these vehicles. This was the Ford Edge powered by a lithium ion battery. This is a vehicle that uses no gas and its only emission is actually water. That is the future if we join the cause. This Congress needs to partner with the domestic auto industry and the UAW to ensure that we produce those automobiles right here in America. What we should not do is enact draconian fuel economy standards that will stifle innovation, assist our foreign competitors and kill American jobs. Both management and labor are doing their jobs to strengthen the industry. Now is the time for Congress to step up and do ours. Focus on the future, focus on technology, and focus on American jobs.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. I thank the gentleman for yielding his time. Madam Speaker, I rise today in very strong, strong support of this resolution. You know, it has been said that no battle plan survives first contact with the enemy, and I believe that that is true. That's why our military must constantly plan for every eventuality in warfare, because failure to do so can cost lives. The situation in Iraq is no different. We must prepare for every contingency. The day is coming when our brave men and women in uniform will leave Iraq, hopefully very, very soon. In fact, General Petraeus in his testimony last month spoke of the possibility that some of our troops will leave Iraq very soon, perhaps within weeks. In order to facilitate a very safe and orderly withdrawal, it is important that our military leaders plan appropriately, and they must also consult with the Congress so that we can provide the needed support to ensure that our troops are safe and that our vital national interests are protected. Prudent planning leads to success and provides the ability to react quickly to events on the ground. I believe that this resolution encourages such prudent planning. That's why I supported it when it came before the House Armed Services Committee, when it was debated then, and why I would urge the entire House to support it today. As was just mentioned by the chairman, it was a bipartisan vote and it passed 55-2. The issue of our troop presence in Iraq has caused great debate across our country, has polarized this Congress, and I believe that this resolution is a demonstration that a bipartisan way forward can be achieved, that it can happen. In fact, it must happen for our Nation to move forward. I certainly want to express my appreciation to the sponsors of this bill. I want to express my appreciation and deep regard and respect for the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Mr. Skelton, as well as our ranking member, Duncan Hunter, great American patriots, all of them. Let us hope that the day is coming soon when our troops will come home with honor, with honor, our brave men and women who so proudly and bravely have protected and exported liberty and freedom, democracy.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I went to the Rules Committee to offer an amendment to this bill that would have given the people of Michigan and other Great Lakes States fundamental fairness in the Federal flood insurance program. Unfortunately, the Democrat majority on the Rules Committee did not allow the people of Michigan to have their case heard on the floor of this House. I want to stress what I do understand about this bill; that this is an insurance program and that some will pay more than they take out, and that the idea is to have a broad spectrum of the Nation share the risk of natural disasters. But when it comes to States like Michigan and the Federal flood insurance program, the people of my State are repeatedly being sucked dry by a mandated program that forces so many property owners into floodplains and into the program when they never, or almost never, flood. The net result is that Michigan property owners, by far, pay much, much more than their fair share. Recent hurricanes, of course, have depleted FEMA funds. The Federal Government appropriately has stood up to help these States recover. But now the Federal flood insurance program is looking for even more money. And people in Michigan, where natural disasters are rare, are being forced to kick in more than their fair share. I would say this, if it is the policy of the United States Government to continue to encourage property owners to live in areas that repeatedly suffer from natural disasters by offering heavily subsidized insurance, then we should just set up a fund for that purpose. We should not have property owners, like people that live in my State of Michigan, carry the burden of that policy. In fact, water levels in our magnificent Great Lakes are at historic lows. If you believe in the climate change theory, those levels are going to continue to fall. Yet property owners currently in floodplains are faced with increased premiums, and new maps will force even more homeowners in areas where we have never seen a flood into this plan. One thing about Michigan is that, instead of other States where they actually look up at the water, in Michigan, we look down at the water. I would certainly agree that FEMA needs to do what Congress has asked them to do, to update the maps utilizing satellite and digitized elevation. They need to use the new technology. But we should base elevations on sound science. That is not being done now. Currently, the baseline for the FEMA plan is based on 1986 lake levels, which was at a time of historically high lake levels; 20-year-old data is what they are going to base this on now. I would simply suggest that we wait until the International Joint Commission, the IJC, completes its very extensive and exhaustive study that they are currently doing of the lake levels. I think they are now into the third or fourth year of a 5- year study. Then FEMA will have sound science to use on which to base their floodplain maps. Mr. Speaker, because the Rules Committee would not allow my amendment to be heard, I intend to vote against this rule. I urge all of my colleagues to also oppose the rule. I will also be recommending to our Governor in the great State of Michigan to consider options that are fair to the residents of the State of Michigan, like self-insuring or actually opting out of the Federal flood insurance program.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, Detroit Metropolitan Airport is a prime candidate for both an aerotropolis and participation in this program due to its importance as the Midwest jumping off point to Southeast Asia, as a world-renowned manufacturing center, and as an international highway crossroads. At its peak, the aerotropolis could create up to 60,000 jobs for southeast Michigan. I would also request the support of the chairman in assuring that Wayne County Airport Authority receives priority consideration under section 114, and I thank the gentleman from Michigan, the dean of the House, for the time.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, there has been a great deal of talk over the years that the Big 3 domestic auto companies have been too generous in providing pay and benefits to their workers which has made them less competitive. I think it is wrong that these companies that helped, literally helped, create the American middle class have been attacked in such a way, but detractors of our domestic auto industry fail to understand that blatant cheating by foreign competitors and foreign governments on such matters as currency manipulation and piracy of intellectual property distort the marketplace and give foreign companies a competitive advantage. Detractors now want to expand the attack on our domestic auto industry by imposing draconian fuel economy standards that will benefit foreign companies and cost American jobs. Enough is enough. The American auto companies and the UAW are poised to revolutionize the way health care and other benefits are delivered to autoworkers, retirees, and their family members; and, at the same time, the companies and their incredible scientists are working on new technologies for the vehicles of the future that will significantly reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Now is not the time for increased government regulation that will simply kill American jobs.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Madam Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, at this moment in Detroit the leaders of the UAW and the domestic auto industry, the Big 3, are busy at the negotiating table trying to come to agreement on a new contract. In these negotiations, both sides will be making tremendous concessions in the effort to restore the industry to profitability and to protect jobs. They are dealing with very difficult issues like retiree health care as well as pension reform. I wish them luck, sincere good luck, because the future of my home State of Michigan and of manufacturing in America are at stake as are literally millions of American jobs. We should all support them in their efforts to strengthen this vital industry. What we should not do is pull the rug out from under them by enacting draconian and arbitrary fuel efficiency standards that would kill jobs while doing nothing to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. Both management and labor are making hard choices. They are working together to build a better future and a better industry. And in the same spirit, we here at the Federal Government should partner with our auto industry to help move forward technology that would actually solve the problems and create new jobs. While those involved in negotiations are trying to find common ground to save jobs, Congress should not be working to destroy them.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, it has been six years since September 11, 2001 when radical Islamic terrorists attacked and murdered nearly 3,000 of our fellow Americans. On that horrible day the seriousness of the terrorist's war against us became clear. Because of their hatred of our freedom and liberty-- these deranged individuals would murder innocent men, women and children to make their point. On that day our hearts were broken--and for many who lost friends and loved ones on that fateful day their hearts will never be mended. In the days immediately following 9/11 our nation was unified. Unified in the resolve to strike back against those who murdered our fellow Americans. Unified to do what was necessary to defend our citizens from future attacks. Unified to defend our freedom and to stamp out those who would seek to take it from us. Unfortunately, since that time our unity has faded, but the danger has not. The terrorist's war against us is not about a single American President or ideology. The focus of the terrorist's hatred is every American. On this sixth anniversary of that horrific day every American should reflect upon that day and its place in our nation's history. One thing is certain--freedom is not free. And free people face a constant challenge to preserve that freedom. The terrorist's war against us is a profound test of our ability to preserve the liberty we hold so dear. Our commitment to meet that challenge must rise above petty politics. We must return to the unity of the days following 9/11 because this war is long from over and the danger is real. I have no doubts about the capabilities of our great nation. We threw off tyranny to proclaim our independence behind the idea that all men are created equal. We made that idea a reality by fighting a civil war to bring freedom to every American. We sustained our freedom through two world wars and a cold war. Through it all America has stood tall. America has stood for freedom. And just as we stood together on 9/11 we must stand together today to ensure that the horrors of that day become even more distant memories and the future is a place where every American can enjoy the benefits of our hard won and tenaciously defended freedom.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 815 and rollcall No. 816, I did not vote as a protest of the actions of the majority related to rollcall No. 814. Had I voted, I would have voted nay on rollcall No. 815 and nay on rollcall No. 816.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I don't think you can find a single Member in this House who does not want the war in Iraq to end. We pray every day, every day that the war ends. And we are all so very proud of the brave men and women who serve us in the Armed Forces. We all want them to come home to their families safe and secure. But unfortunately, the terrorists don't really care what we want. Like it or not, the terrorists' war against us is going to continue through the end of this administration and into the next. Whatever you think of George W. Bush, after his time is up, this war will not end. I can understand the consternation that some have for the way the Bush administration has prosecuted this war. I can understand the desire of some who want to tie his hands. But for the life of me, I cannot understand why we would want to tie the hands of the next administration, of the next President, as he, or she, takes on the mantle of responsibility to lead our Armed Forces as Commander in Chief. In fact, I just heard the other day one of the major Democrat Presidential contenders, Senator Obama, who said that as President he might order an invasion into Pakistan. This, of course, would be a major escalation of the war. How would this legislation affect his ability to do that? What impact would it have on our troops, because this legislation only refers to Iraq deployments. Could some troops who just returned from Iraq, could they immediately be deployed to Pakistan by ``President Obama''. I believe it would allow that, regardless of their need for dwell time. All of us need to think through everything we are doing and how our actions affect our troops and their families. Military families should not be given false hope of decreased deployments and longer dwell times, because any President forced to take on the tremendous responsibility of leading our Armed Forces in this war will just utilize the waiver provisions in this bill and make it meaningless. You would think any President would just give their Secretary of Defense a blanket waiver. So really, what is the point of this legislation? Mr. Speaker, in September, General Petraeus will be coming to Congress with his unvarnished assessment in his report on progress in Iraq. Recent reports fortunately have been more positive about the progress being made by our military; although, I will note that the lack of progress by the Iraqi Government on the political front remains a huge problem. The fact that the Iraqi Parliament is taking a recess is cause for great consternation. But let us all pray that real progress is happening which will allow our troops to come home, and complete their mission and come home soon. I would ask my colleagues to wait to hear the assessment from General Petraeus and then make a judgment on how to move forward in Iraq. I don't believe this legislation is fair to our troops. And I also want to make a point that I have very high regard and respect for my colleague, the gentlewoman from California, who brings this to the floor today. I do not question her motives for a moment on this, but I do urge my colleagues to defeat this legislation.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, let's talk just for a moment about what the impact would be if the Democrats' plan to arbitrarily impose draconian fuel standards on our domestic automobile industry were to be enacted. First of all, our cars would get smaller, less safe, more expensive and more likely to be built in foreign countries. Because American automobile companies lose money on every American- built small car, these vehicles would have to be built in low-wage foreign countries like Mexico, China, Korea or Japan. More American automobile workers will lose their jobs. In order to meet the new Federal regulations, experts suggest prices will be going up by more than $6,000 per vehicle. The Democrats' CAFE proposal is nothing more than a stealth tax on American families and businesses. It will put smaller, less safe cars on our roadways, increasing traffic injuries and deaths, and the efforts to reduce our dependence on foreign oil will be outsourced to cheap foreign labor. Does that sound like a good plan to you?

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, my friends on the other side of the aisle are often quick to criticize corporate America for everything from outsourcing jobs to poor health care and retirement benefits for their workers. However, we have some very responsible corporate citizens that we call the Big Three. And over the last century, the Big Three have been the leaders in providing health care benefits and retirement benefits as well for their workers. These efforts were actually crucial in building up the American middle class. GM, for example, spent $3.3 billion last year on health benefits for their 432,000 retirees. In comparison, non-U.S. auto manufacturers spent roughly just $23 million for their 1,200 American workers and American retirees. And one would think that after decades of commitment the Big Three have shown to the American worker that that would earn them the admiration and the sympathy of the Democratic leadership. Unfortunately, that does not seem to be the case. The Democratic leadership that should be holding up the domestic auto industry as models of corporate responsibility are instead trying to ram through increased CAFE standards that will put U.S. auto workers in the unemployment line and likely bankrupt U.S auto companies. I urge my colleagues to reject these policies which will help our foreign competitors, and instead stand up for American jobs.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Madam Speaker, 30 years ago, Congress established CAFE standards to lower our dependence on foreign oil. And the cost? Hundreds of billions of dollars to comply with the regulation, hundreds of thousands of auto jobs lost, and dependence on foreign oil has gone up over 100 percent. CAFE has not worked. It's an antiquated model, and we should be pursuing new technologies instead. But Democratic leaders are pushing even more stringent CAFE. Democrats are telling auto companies to produce more hybrids and other unprofitable vehicles to comply with new regulations. A recent JD Power survey shows consumer demand is dropping for hybrids, forcing costly incentives to move these expensive vehicles. Even Honda is discontinuing its Accord hybrid because of poor sales. If we worked with the domestic auto industry to develop leap-ahead technologies and make them affordable for all consumers instead of overregulating, we could achieve breakthroughs to reach our goals and to protect American jobs, but instead, the Democratic leadership has made a conscious decision to bankrupt Michigan.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 187. Madam Speaker, throughout my career as a public servant, a principal advocacy of mine has always been to improve the quality of our precious Great Lakes, our magnificent Great Lakes, which are actually 20 percent of the fresh water supply of the entire planet. That is one-fifth of all of the fresh water in the entire world. We have seen efforts at the local and State and Federal levels to prevent industrial pollution, to stop water diversion, to eliminate sewage discharges and to fight invasive species so that future generations can enjoy the beauty of our magnificent Great Lakes. In fact, this House has passed many important bills that have helped make those goals a reality. And though we have made tremendous progress, there are still so many challenges facing the Great Lakes. We need to continue to fight to protect the Great Lakes. Unfortunately, Madam Speaker, it seems not everyone shares this vision. As has been discussed, the Indiana Department of Environmental Management recently issued a wastewater permit to a British Petroleum refinery on the coast of Lake Michigan which will actually allow BP to increase the amount of ammonia and total suspended solids discharged into Lake Michigan. This is crazy. This is nuts. This permit flies in the face of everything that we in this body, and numerous individuals in groups outside of this body, have attempted to achieve. Instead of increasing our efforts in creating more stringent regulations, this permit marks a huge step backwards in our efforts to keep our Great Lakes clean. And although BP might argue that they have followed the law in this process to secure their permit, I would say it does not make their actions right. The resolution before us expresses Congress's disapproval of this permit and urges the EPA to reject increased dumping of chemicals and pollutants into our Great Lakes. This Congress must speak up for the Great Lakes. We owe it to our children, to our grandchildren, and for every generation that will follow. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, the Democratic leadership in both this House and the United States Senate have made a conscious decision to bankrupt the domestic United States auto industry by forcing an antiquated CAFE standard on them. And I just want to remind my colleagues what this industry has meant to America. Over 100 years ago, Henry Ford built the Model T, which brought automobiles to the masses, created opportunities that built America's middle class, and fundamentally changed our Nation. During World War II, Michigan was known as the Arsenal of Democracy because we had the manufacturing capability to build the armaments that literally led the world to peace. For 2 years we didn't even build automobiles because we were building tanks and jeeps and B-24 bombers. And as we surrender our manufacturing capabilities to Japan and China, we had better hope that we never need the ability again to build armaments because we will be at the mercy of these foreign countries. After 9/11, when everyone was concerned that our economy would go into a tailspin, the American automobile industry, the domestic auto industry, offered zero interest financing, which, as GM said, has kept America rolling. I will never apologize for defending the domestic auto industry against the Democratic leadership.

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, throughout my career, I have been a strong supporter of workers' rights to bargain collectively with their employers. And while I believe every worker should have the right to bargain collectively, I think there are few who have more earned that right than our Nation's first responders. Historically, Congress has given States and localities wide discretion in determining how to negotiate with their public safety employees. The result of this has been a myriad of different rights for different workers depending on where they serve. Some States have very strong rules to protect collective bargaining. Other States have none at all. Today, the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act gives us an opportunity to ensure that our first responders have a minimum collective bargaining rights no matter what jurisdiction they serve. This bill would ensure that police officers and firefighters have the basic rights to bargain over wages, hours, and working conditions. The bill also provides for a mediation or arbitration process to resolve disputes. This legislation strikes the proper balance by prohibiting strikes and lockouts and does not infringe upon existing collective bargaining agreements. Our Nation's police officers and fire fighters lay their lives on the line every day. At a moment's notice, they are ready to protect us from crime, fire, natural disasters, and, regrettably, from terrorists. And too often they offer their lives in the process. Though we can never properly repay them for the things they do, this bill will ensure that their collective voice is heard at the bargaining table. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.