Harry Mitchell

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to thank our Chairman, James Oberstar, for his dedication to our Nation's highways, and for his willingness to work with me on an issue of great importance to Arizona as H.R. 1195 continues its way through the legislative process. H.R. 1195 makes technical corrections to the law that funds our Nation's highways: the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (``SAFETEA-LU''). Unfortunately, when the law was drafted, Arizona was left out of a key provision. That provision concerns the Federal funding share that is made available for certain highway projects. Under existing law, the Federal Government is supposed to assume a larger share for Federal highway projects in states with large proportions of Federal lands. Currently, SAFETEA-LU identifies 6 such states with large amounts of public land. Unfortunately, Arizona . . . which ranks 3rd in the Nation in public lands . . . was left off that list. I believe this was a mistake, and should be corrected along with all the other mistakes that H.R. 1195 addresses. At the time SAFETEA-LU was initially drafted, no one from Arizona served on the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and thus, there was no one to bring this omission to the Committee's attention. I am now proud to serve on that committee. When we marked up H.R. 1195 earlier this month, I offered an amendment to add Arizona to the list of states with large amounts of public lands which are supposed to receive a higher Federal share. My amendment was budget-neutral. It would have cost nothing. It would not have reduced any other state's highway funding. Rather, it would have merely given our state . . . a state with more public lands than 47 other states . . . the flexibility it needs to allocate its Federal funding between our various highway projects. At the Chairman's request, and in exchange for his commitment to work with me on this issue as H.R. 1195 goes to conference comittee, I withdrew my amendment. I know the Chairman understands how important this is to Arizona, and I am grateful for his assistance. I would also like to publicly thank Senator Jon Kyl, who has been a champion of this issue for years. He has fought hard for this in the Senate, and I know he will do the same again this year. I look forward to working with him as well, for the good of Arizona, when the bill reaches conference committee.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chairman, while I agree with many of the priorities in H. Con. Res. 99, the concurrent budget resolution for FY-08, unfortunately, I cannot support it. I have serious concerns about increasing government spending and cannot support a budget that allows key tax cuts to expire. I am also concerned about the partisanship that I have seen leading up to this vote. Last fall, voters in my district told me they wanted to change the tone in Washington. They wanted Congress to ratchet down the rhetoric, and start working together to find sensible solutions to our common problems. That included our nation's financial mess. The current mess affects us all. Not just Democrats, and not just Republicans. Sadly, listening to this week's budget debate, you would never know it. I refuse to believe we cannot find a third way, a bipartisan way, to incorporate good ideas from both sides of the aisle. It seems to me tax cuts should be a good place to start. Most of us support tax cuts for middle income families. In my view, this should include reduced estate taxes and reduced capital gains. It is true that, once upon a time, stock ownership was the province of the rich. But today, with the proliferation of 401(k)s and mutual funds, nearly half of all Americans own stock. As stock ownership has grown mainstream, it has become increasingly important to keep capital gains low. This and other tax cuts are scheduled to expire in 2010, and despite what some are saying, today's budget does, in fact, maintain them until that time. What today's budget does not do, and what I hope future budgets will do, is find a way to extend these cuts beyond 2010. Obviously, this is easier said than done, especially if we are serious about reducing the deficit. But I believe that, unless we make this a priority now, it will become that much harder to accomplish in the future. I applaud today's budget for its commitment to education, transportation, and veterans. These are critical priorities, which have been short-changed in the recent past, and they deserve our utmost attention. In the rush to make improvements, however, we need to make sure we are getting the most out of what we are already spending. Voters have a right to expect accountability. I encourage all my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, to ask tough questions as they review current Federal programs. Working together, I know we can support our Nation's priorities and get our fiscal house in order.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, just weeks ago an outraged Nation learned about the terrible conditions many of our wounded warriors had to endure as they recovered from battlefield injuries at Walter Reed Medical Center. We have all heard the sad stories of mold and rat droppings at Building 18. Even worse, we have learned that these dilapidated conditions extend beyond Walter Reed to other military facilities and even veterans facilities where troops turned veterans face a long, complicated and confusing process to get the benefits and care they have earned. Conditions like these and miles of bureaucratic red tape rob our troops and veterans of what they deserve the most, dignity, respect and honor. It is absolutely unacceptable, and I am proud that this Congress is taking action. Just last week, the House approved more than $20 million to clean up the mess at Walter Reed. We approved more than $550 million to get rid of the backlog of maintenance requests at veterans facilities. That is a good start. Last month, I introduced the Dignity for Wounded Warriors Act for 2007, which was the first legislation introduced in this House to prevent another episode like that of Walter Reed from ever happening again. I commend the House Armed Services Committee for putting forward this legislation, which also establishes guidelines for how returning soldiers should be treated and measures of accountability. All of our troops, and all of our veterans, are entitled to quality health care and should be treated with the respect and dignity they deserve. These are great first steps, but we still have a long way to go to ensure our troops and veterans are treated properly. They have my commitment that we will continue to take care of them just as they have taken care of us.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, today, I voted for the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health and Iraq Accountability Act because it provides our Nation's returning troops and veterans with the care they need and deserve, and makes our country more secure by setting forth a new, responsible course in Iraq and Afghanistan. The people of my District have told me that after four years and thousands of lives lost, they are looking to Congress to ensure that our commitment in Iraq is not open-ended, that there is not a blank check on American lives, and that the Iraqi government will be held accountable. While I have serious concerns about some aspects of this legislation, and, in general, do not support an absolute, Congressionally-mandated timetable in Iraq, I believe that, on balance, this legislation does more good than harm. Ideally, I would have preferred a more bipartisan approach, especially on an issue of this magnitude. I am deeply disappointed in my Party's leadership for insisting on a timetable instead of working with our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. I am also disappointed that leadership saw fit to include millions of dollars for unrelated spending projects for shrimp farmers and peanut storage facilities. I will be working with my colleagues to remove these provisions as this bill goes to conference. Our sons and daughters are in harm's way, however, and I cannot in good conscience withhold the resources they need while we continue what is likely to be a lengthy debate in Washington. I also believe that as the Chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation, I have a unique responsibility to our veterans. I am working hard to make caring for our veterans a national priority, and this legislation is a good start. It secures a much- needed $1.7 billion for veterans' health care, including $550 million to get rid of the maintenance backlog that will help ensure veterans' facilities are clean and well-maintained. This bill provides $20 million to clean up the mess at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. These funds, combined with the Dignity for Wounded Warriors Act of 2007--which I introduced last month--are an important first step. By voting this emergency supplemental down, Congress would send a distressing and insulting message to our injured soldiers, veterans and their loved ones that its years of neglectful under-funding and failed oversight of Walter Reed would go on and on. This bill also makes our country more secure. It provides our troops with the resources they need to fight al Qaeda and other terrorists in an increasingly hostile situation in Afghanistan. For too long, the situation in Afghanistan has gone under the radar while al Qaeda and elements of the Taliban have grown stronger. In Iraq, we are setting forth a new, responsible course that demands that the Iraqis take responsibility for their own security and stability. That requires the Iraqi government to meet its own benchmarks. This is precisely the type of plan the bipartisan Iraq Study Group outlined just a few months ago. The distinguished members of that panel, including James Baker, Lee Hamilton and Arizona's own Sandra Day O'Connor, believed, as I do, that benchmarks are an appropriate way to chart the Iraqi government's progress, or lack thereof. Among these benchmarks are quelling sectarian violence, disarming sectarian militias and developing a plan to share oil revenues equitably among all Iraqis. Holding the Iraqi government accountable is imperative because they have not always lived up to their promises.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Madam Speaker, on rollcall Nos. 157, 158, 159, I missed due to airline mixup and malfunction. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, due to the fact that my flight reservation was inadvertently canceled and I had to take a later flight, I missed three rollcall votes. Had I been present, I would have voted in favor of H. Res. 138, which passed 399-0 on rollcall vote No. 157, H.R. 658, which passed 390-10 on rollcall vote No. 158, and H.R. 839, which passed 394-1 on rollcall vote No. 159.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of the Water Quality Financing Act of 2007 because it restores much-needed funding for our Nation's wastewater infrastructure, and establishes a mechanism to finally bring Arizona its fair share of Federal funds. For nearly three decades, the Federal Government has short-changed Arizona on wastewater infrastructure. Instead of allocating funds based on needs it has inequitably and inexplicably continued to use 1970 Census data as a part of its allocation formula. Since 1970, our State has more than tripled in population. As a result, we have become the victims of an alarming disparity. Arizona currently ranks 10th in need, and 20th in population, but only 38th in receipt of Federal funding for Clean Water State Revolving Funds. On a per capita basis, Arizona ranks 53rd. We are dead-last. Even the territories do better then we do. This is unfair, and needs to change. Fortunately, H.R. 720 will begin that process. It lays the groundwork for a transition away from the current, inequitable, allocation formula, and toward a new formula based on need. Of course, the House is not the last word on this. The Senate will have its say as well. Fortunately, our state has a great champion in our distinguished Senator Jon Kyl. He has been a leader on this issue, and many other water issues, and I know he will fight to ensure that Arizona gets what it deserves as this bill works its way through the Senate. And when, I hope, this bill goes to conference, I look forward to working with Senator Kyl, for the good of our State. Before I conclude, I want to express my gratitude to our chairman, James Oberstar. His mastery of transportation issues is exceeded only by his fairness, his willingness to listen, and his incredible ability to bring people together. It has been an honor to work with him on this bill, and I look forward to working with him as it continues its way through Congress. With that, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 720, and yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Thank you very much, and I appreciate that. What has been discussed here are the conditions at these hospitals, other hospitals and the ones that you have mentioned over here; and it is absolutely unacceptable for any official to have had knowledge of the dilapidated conditions at Walter Reed, only to stay silent and do nothing. They must be held accountable. This Congress went for years without conducting any oversight whatsoever. And the American people sent us here to do a job. The American people sent us here to get to the bottom of this. That means asking the tough questions and leaving no stone unturned to make sure that this never happens again. The problems at Walter Reed cannot be fixed with new drywall and paint. Inadequate outpatient care and confusing, time-consuming bureaucracy can impact soldiers throughout their entire life. We owe it to our soldiers and veterans to understand how this systemic failure could increase their needs in the future. One of the things we are finding out is that the problems in the military medical system extend far beyond dilapidated buildings. Too many soldiers are finding an endless stream of red tape as they try and secure the benefits they have earned in the VA system. One of the things that you have mentioned, that we are holding hearings on this, and tomorrow we are having a hearing on Walter Reed and how it impacts other veterans' facilities. We are holding these hearings to investigate this problem, and we are going to do something about it. I think the people are sick and tired of seeing the way that our troops are being treated, and I really welcome this discussion and the discussions we are going to have with these investigations and oversight hearings.

Mr. MITCHELL. Can I add one other thing? And I think this is very important. We just introduced this last week the Dignity for Wounded Warriors Act; and this is to look at the long-term effect, not just of what is happening right now. The Dignity for Wounded Warriors Act of 2007, we introduced this to ensure that injured soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan receive the care they deserve. It sets the standard of care for our wounded. It sets the standard for military medical facilities, and it cuts through the red tape our wounded and their families have to navigate through. So we are looking at not just now but, as you said, this is a long term, and I think we are going to address that with this Dignity for Wounded Warriors Act. I am very excited about that, and I think when you see this come to the floor this will have overwhelming support.

Mr. MITCHELL. Absolutely. And I think that the changes that you mentioned are ones that can be done immediately. But this has been a problem that has been overlooked for so many years. And I believe, because I have heard from other people, that there are other buildings out there besides building 18. That is not the only one. I think this is just symbolic of a health care system that is not only part of the Department of Defense but also I think it probably, and this is what we need to look into, may spill over into veterans' care, the Veterans' Administration. What we need to do is to make sure that there is a seamless transition from those in the military to the Veterans' Administration. That is one of the things that we are looking into now to make sure that all of those tests and all of the applications that people went through and all the paperwork and red tape and bureaucracy they went through when they were at Walter Reed or any other military facility, they don't have to repeat it when they go on to the veterans' hospital. We don't want that to happen. And it has been estimated that there is going to be over 700,000 veterans of the global war on terror. And when this is over, it is going to flood the VA system. And we have got to make sure that because we take care of these new veterans that we don't forget, as you have said, the older veterans, those from Vietnam, those from Korea, and the few that are still around from World War II and beyond. We have got to make sure that we have the resources available, not only people but money, to take care of the new veterans that are coming on, and we need to plan for that. And I think there has been a real lack of planning for what is going to happen with the huge number of soldiers that are coming here. Recently it was reported that, in World War II, for every soldier that was killed, there were two wounded. Today, and I think this is important, when we try to measure what is going on in Iraq and we talk about the number of fatalities, for every fatality, there are 16 that are wounded. This is going to put an extreme pressure on the military medical facility as well as the veterans. That is what we have got to be prepared for, and that is what we have to be looking for in terms of the future.

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, just one last thing. We looked at the conditions, the physical conditions of these facilities that have brought this to light. Maybe it is good that these problems are coming to light, so we can take a look at not only the military facilities, but also the veterans facilities. But I think what we found is that the problems in the military medical system, and probably the veterans as well, go far beyond dilapidated facilities, and I think you are going to find as you talk to these soldiers and their families that one of the things that is important is that the endless stream of red tape and trying to secure benefits, this has been a strain, not only on these individual soldiers, but the whole family. So one of the things we are looking at, and I think that is so important with the Dignity for Wounded Warriors Act, is we are not only taking a look at the standard of care and the medical facilities themselves, but also how important it is to look at the red tape.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I think it is safe to say that regardless of any differences of opinion over military strategy in Iraq, we all agree that the outcome in Iraq will affect our national security and the security and stability of the Middle East for generations to come. I was not a Member of this distinguished body in October of 2002 when many of my colleagues were faced with the decision of whether to authorize the President to go to war in Iraq. But 4 years later, I was elected by the people of my district who asked me and this Congress to set a new course in Iraq because it is clear to them that the administration's course is not working. That is not to say there has not been some success. Our troops have performed bravely and succeeded in their mission to end Saddam Hussein's brutal regime. The Iraqi people exercised their new-found right to vote, and those who murdered innocent Iraqis have been given fair trials and justice has been served. But since the initial military victory, political, diplomatic, and economic failure has become widespread. Today, sectarian violence is at an all-time high, and American troops are now caught in the middle of a civil war. Now the administration is engaging in a military escalation of the war. They tried this strategy before and it didn't work. It didn't work because we need more than a military strategy. We need political and economic solutions too. We need a strategy that employs all of the elements of national power to ultimately put the Iraqis in charge of their own security and stability. So far a military strategy has not solved the problems we have in Iraq. So far a military strategy has not brought Sunnis and Shiites together to maintain a unified government and a peaceful political environment. We know that a military strategy alone cannot create commerce and jobs for the Iraqi people. A military strategy alone cannot rebuild the basic infrastructure that has been destroyed over the past 4 years. A military strategy must be combined with sufficient political, diplomatic, and economic components. But that is not happening here. I disagree with many of my colleagues in this Chamber who support the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops. We have heard from too many generals, including those who have spoken out against this escalation, about the dangers of even more violence and instability in the Middle East if we simply withdraw. I do believe American troops have a role in Iraq, a supporting role. They should continue to train Iraqi soldiers, and their mission must ultimately be to put the Iraqis in charge of their own security and stability. But let me be clear: American troops have no place in the middle of a civil war. This resolution reaffirms this body's support for the men and women of the United States military. Many of our troops have given their lives or suffered serious injury so that one day the people of Iraq may enjoy the same freedoms we have here in the United States. Their service and their sacrifice make me even more proud to be an American. I hope and pray that we can have all of our brave men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan return safely to their families. But while they are in harm's way, we must honor their service by ensuring that the burden of success or failure is not left to them alone. We have a responsibility to utilize every political, diplomatic, and economic tool at our disposal to ensure success in Iraq.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be cosponsor of H.R. 6, the CLEAN Energy Act, because it is time for Congress to do more than talk when it comes to investing in clean and renewable energy sources. During this last election, the American people asked to repeal billions of dollars in indefensible tax giveaways to big oil and invest in new, clean energy technologies that will reduce our dependence on foreign sources of fuel, and this is what we are doing today. We are keeping our promise to the American people and we are meeting our obligation to our grandchildren and future generations of Americans by improving our national security and protecting our environment. But there is another important benefit we are talking about today, and this is an important step in growing the American economy and creating good, high paying jobs. By investing in research and development for solar, wind and other sources of clean energy, we will be tapping the potential of our Nation's most innovative minds and best engineers. I am particularly excited about investing in solar energy because I believe my State of Arizona can one day be the Middle East of solar energy, and instead of importing energy we can export it around the world. This bill puts us on the right path.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman. Mr. Speaker, just a few months ago, the American people sent a clear message to Washington: It is time to expand our investment in embryonic stem cell research. I heard that message loud and clear from my constituents in Arizona who believe as I do that the best way we can honor life is to use science and ethical research to discover treatments for the millions of Americans who suffer from diseases such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, Lou Gehrig's and Huntington's disease. The people of my district understand that we have a moral obligation to invest in embryonic stem cell research because it provides the best hope for a cure for these diseases and many others. Last year, I met a fellow Arizonan who helped me understand just how important this fight for cures is to so many people and so many families. His name is Phil Hardt, and he suffers from Huntington's disease. Huntington's disease results from the genetically programmed degeneration of brain cells that causes uncontrolled movements, loss of intellectual faculties and emotional disturbances. It is a terrible and agonizing disease that has no cure. But with the promise of embryonic stem cell research, there is hope for a cure. But, Mr. Speaker, today Phil and people like him all over the country need more than hope. They need action. They need action from this Congress, for us to once again pass this important legislation. And they need action from the President. Mr. Speaker, I am asking you to urge the President that he has in his hands the opportunity to improve the lives of so many people and help so many families. The American people support ethical embryonic stem cell research, and so does a vast bipartisan majority in Congress. When this legislation reaches the President, I hope he does the right thing, to honor life by signing this legislation into law.