James Oberstar

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I introduce H. Res. 313, supporting the goals and ideals of National Public Works Week, and for other purposes. National Public Works Week is celebrated for a full week each May to celebrate our public works professionals and the important work that they do to keep our country running smoothly. May 17 through May 23, 2009 will recognize the many duties that public works professionals--those who design, build, operate, maintain and protect transportation systems, water supply infrastructure, sewage and refuse disposal systems, public buildings, and other structures and facilities--perform to enhance communities and our nation. Public works keep our society functioning: providing buildings that house vital government offices, and giving our country rail, highways, airports, and public transit to move goods and passengers. Similarly, public works help maintain public health: providing systems for waste and sewage disposal, while supplying us with crucial water for our homes, businesses, and agriculture. Pipelines safely transport natural gas and hazardous liquids through 2,300,000 miles of pipelines throughout the country. Many people take for granted our public works, recognizing their importance only when problems are encountered. When water supply is not efficient, when infrastructure crumbles, and when accidents in moving transportation occur, we are then forced to reflect on what needs to be invested in the larger public works sector of our economy. The ``2006 Status of the Nation's Highways, Bridges, and Transit: Conditions and Performance'' report by the Department of Transportation confirms that investment in the Nation's highway, bridge, and transit infrastructure has not kept up with the growing demands of the system. The 111th Congress has worked to aggressively address our critical transportation and infrastructure needs. In February, Congress enacted the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5) (``Recovery Act''), which provides $64.1 billion of infrastructure investment to enhance the safety, security, and efficiency of our highway, transit, rail, aviation, environmental, inland waterways, public buildings, and maritime transportation infrastructure. The $64.1 billion of Federal transportation and infrastructure investment will create or sustain more than 1.8 million jobs and $323 billion of economic activity. In addition, in March, the House passed H.R. 1262, the ``Water Quality Investment Act of 2009''. H.R. 1262 significantly increases funding for capitalization grants to States for state water pollution control revolving funds, grants for alternative water source projects to meet critical water supply needs, grants to municipalities and States to control combined sewer overflows and sanitary sewer overflows, and grants for projects to remediate contaminated sediment in the Great Lakes areas of concern. The bill also provides a uniform, national standard for monitoring, reporting, and public notification of municipal combined sewer overflows and sanitary sewer overflows. I strongly support investment in our Nation's infrastructure, as well as the men and women who keep our public works, quite simply, working.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I rise today to highlight the 10th annual National Work Zone Awareness Week, which is taking place next week. During National Work Zone Awareness Week, almost every State across the country will be holding some type of educational event to highlight the importance of work zone safety on our nation's roadways. Over the past decade, more than 10,500 fatalities were reported in work zones. In 2007, 835 traffic-related fatalities were reported and over 39,000 people were injured in accidents that took place in work zones across the country. Most disturbingly, 305 of the fatalities in 2007 involved workers being struck by moving vehicles while on the job. These statistics are alarming and illustrate the dangers posed to the men and women charged with rebuilding America. We can help to reduce this number dramatically by taking a number of important steps including: encouraging responsible driving and greater understanding of the dangers involved with work zones, enhancing enforcement of speed limits and laws that protect workers, and installation of protective devices and equipment. As a result of the nation's aging highway infrastructure, the country is faced with unprecedented levels of reconstruction and maintenance projects. And these levels will only increase in the near future. With the influx of ready-to-go projects getting underway this summer as a result of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, every Member of Congress must make a greater effort to educate their constituents about the need to obey traffic signs, speed limits, and construction workers themselves while traveling through work zones. As the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure begins to develop the next surface transportation authorization, our top priority will be improving the safety of our nation's roadways to reduce the astounding number of traffic-related fatalities and injuries that we, as a nation, endure year after year. Providing a greater commitment to increasing work zone safety will be a central aspect of this effort. I look forward to working with national, state, and local organizations in reducing work zone and roadway deaths and injuries. Events such as Work Zone Awareness Week serve as an important first step in this endeavor. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to actively participate in promoting the goals and ideals of National Work Zone Awareness Week throughout their districts.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I rise today to report that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is getting construction workers off the bench and back on the job. The Recovery Act provides $64.1 billion for transportation and infrastructure investments within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Nearly $40 billion of those funds have been distributed to States by existing highway, transit, and clean water statutory formulas. Of the $27 billion provided for highway infrastructure formula funds, in the past three weeks, 33 States have submitted and received approval for nearly 800 projects totaling $2.9 billion, more than 10 percent of the Recovery Act highway funds. Construction is underway across the country: Silver Spring, Maryland: $2.1 million project to resurface and improve safety along a 1.1-mile section of New Hampshire Avenue; Syracuse, Utah: $15 million project to widen State Highway 108; and Richmond, Vermont: $1.7 million project to rehabilitate a bridge over the Winooski River. In addition, the Federal Transit Administration has awarded grants to the Kentucky, Missouri, and Maine State DOTs to purchase more than 500 vehicles, including trolleys, buses, vans, and ferries and construct almost 50 bus shelters. Amtrak has approved $938 million of capital improvement projects: including $105 million project to replace a moveable bridge over the Niantic River; and $82 million to rehabilitate 68 passenger cars. The Federal Aviation Administration has identified $913 million of the $1.1 billion of airport projects, including runway, taxiway, apron, and terminal improvements. All across America, the Recovery Act is creating good, family-wage jobs to restore our nation's infrastructure and economy.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1746, the ``Pre-Disaster Mitigation Act of 2009'', a bill to reauthorize the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (``FEMA'') Pre- Disaster Mitigation (``PDM'') program, a program to help communities across the nation protect against natural disasters and other hazards. I thank Ranking Member Mica, and the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart), Chair and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management, for joining me in sponsoring this bill. The Pre-Disaster Mitigation program provides technical and financial assistance to state and local governments to reduce injuries, loss of life, and damage to property caused by natural hazards. Examples of mitigation activities include the seismic strengthening of buildings, acquiring repetitively flooded homes, installing shutters and shatter- resistant windows in hurricane-prone areas, and building ``safe rooms'' in houses and buildings to protect people from high winds. Action on this bill today is crucial because, under current law, the Pre-Disaster Mitigation program will sunset on September 30, 2009. Therefore, Congress must take quick action to continue this vital program. In 1988, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure authorized FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. This effective program provides grants to communities to mitigate hazards, but only provides grants to ``build better'' after a disaster. At the time, no program existed to help communities mitigate risks from all hazards before disaster strikes. In the 1990s, under the leadership of FEMA Administrator James Lee Witt, FEMA developed a pre-disaster mitigation pilot program known as ``Project Impact''. Congress appropriated funds for Project Impact in each of fiscal years 1997 through 2001. The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure first authorized the current Pre-Disaster Mitigation program in the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The PDM program reduces the risk of natural hazards, which is where the preponderance of risk is in our country. The devastating ice storms that struck the middle of the United States (including Missouri, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Kentucky) earlier this year and the floods currently on the Red River in the Midwest are examples of the tragic, real impact of natural disasters that occur in our nation every year. Over the last decade, natural disasters have cost our nation an average of nearly $30 billion per year. Mitigation has been proven to save money. Studies by the Congressional Budget Office and National Institute of Building Sciences show that for every dollar spent on pre-disaster mitigation projects, future losses are reduced by three to four dollars. In 2005, the Mutihazard Mitigation Council, an advisory body of the National Institute of Building Sciences, found ``that a dollar spent on mitigation saves society an average of $4.'' The Council found that flood mitigation measures yield even greater savings. According to a September 2007 CBO report on the reduction in Federal disaster assistance that is likely to result from the PDM program, ``on average, future losses are reduced by about $3 (measured in discounted present value) for each $1 spent on those projects, including both federal and nonfederal spending.'' While empirical data is critical, perhaps more telling are real-life mitigation ``success stories''. One of the best examples of mitigation is the town of Valmeyer, Illinois. The town was devastated by the great flood of 1993. With $45 million in Federal, state, and local funding, the town relocated to bluffs 400 feet above the site of the former town. When faced with floods last year, the residents of that town were out of harm's way, as the Chicago Tribune reported in a story aptly titled ``Valmeyer Illinois--Soaked in '93, Town now High and Dry''. The June 19, 2008 story quotes an 86-year old resident named Elenora Anderson. Her home was destroyed by the 1993 flood but as she said, ``I'm sure glad I don't have to worry now that we're high enough here on the hill.'' This month, we have seen the communities of North Dakota and my home state of Minnesota damaged by floods. Many of these same communities were devastated by floods in 1997. However, because of mitigation after the 1997 floods, the communities face far less risk. Even before this year's floods, mitigation investments had paid off. For example, in Grand Forks, after the 1997 floods, FEMA spent $23 million to acquire vulnerable homes in the flood plain. In 2006, a flood came within two feet of the 1997 flood level, and according to FEMA, the 1997 mitigation investment saved $24.6 million. That investment represents a return of 107 percent after just one flood. Another success story comes from Story County, Iowa. There, six homes that had been flooded in 1990, 1993, and 1996 were bought out with $549,662 in FEMA mitigation grants. In 1998 when a flood struck again, FEMA estimates that $541,900 in damages to the homes was avoided. This mitigation project paid for itself in just one flood, and the estimated savings do not include the costs of warning, rescue, or evacuation. Mitigation is an investment. It is an investment that not only benefits the Federal Government, but state and local governments as well. Projects funded by the PDM program reduce the damage that would be paid for by the Federal Government and state and local governments in a Major Disaster under the Stafford Act. However, mitigation also reduces the risks from smaller, more frequent, events that state and local governments face every day, as not every storm, fire, or flood warrants the assistance of the Federal Government. The Pre-Disaster Mitigation program, through property improvements, takes citizens out of harm's way, by elevating a house, or making sure a hospital can survive a hurricane or earthquake. In doing so, it allows first responders to focus on what is unpredictable in a disaster rather than on what is foreseeable and predictable. H.R. 1746 reauthorizes the PDM program for three years, at a level of $250 million for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2012. The bill increases the minimum amount that each State can receive under the program from $500,000 to $575,000, and codifies the competitive selection process of the program as currently administered by FEMA. The bill also eliminates the existing sunset in the program. As the evidence clearly shows, this program works well and is cost effective. It should no longer be treated as a pilot program with a sunset. Rather, state and local governments should have the certainly of knowing this program will be available in the future so they can conduct vital longer-term mitigation planning. Last year, the House passed a virtually identical bill, H.R. 6109, but the other body did not take action on this bill. While a one-year extension was included in the Department of Homeland Security Fiscal Year 2009 Appropriations Act to keep this vital program alive, Congress must act. If we do not, this worthy program will sunset on September 30, 2009. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1746, the ``Pre- Disaster Mitigation Act of 2009''.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, the Budget Resolution, as ordered reported last night by the House Committee on the Budget, provides a solid foundation for the surface transportation authorization act. I thank Chairman Spratt and the Committee on the Budget for their leadership and vigorous support for transportation and infrastructure programs. If the Budget Resolution is applied over the six-year period from fiscal years 2010 to 2015, the Resolution assumes a base allocation of $324 billion for highway, highway safety, and transit programs, including $312 billion of contract authority. Importantly, this allocation restores $82 billion over the six-year period of highway contract authority that had been cut from the Congressional Budget Office baseline, which assumed fiscal year 2009 rescissions would recur in all future years. In addition, the Resolution establishes a Reserve Fund to allow this base allocation of $324 billion to be adjusted upward as necessary to accommodate higher funding levels to the extent they can be supported by the Highway Trust Fund. The Resolution also assumes the Airport Improvement Program is funded at $4.0 billion in FY 2010, $4.1 billion in FY 2011, and $4.2 billion in FY 2012, consistent with H.R. 915, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009, as ordered reported by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on March 5, 2009. This is an increase of $840 million over the baseline funding level for this program over the three-year period from FY 2010-2012. The Resolution rejects the Office of Management and Budget's proposal to change how programs funded by contract authority are treated for budget scoring purposes. This proposal, had it been adopted, would have converted the mandatory contract authority that currently funds our highway, highway safety, transit and airport grant programs to a simple authorization of appropriations for budget scoring purposes. I am pleased that the Budget Resolution continues to recognize the unique nature of trust-funded programs by rejecting this ill-advised proposal.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I today introduce H.R. 1747, the ``Great Lakes Icebreaker Replacement Act''. U.S. industries in the heartland of the United States are totally dependent on Great Lakes icebreakers to keep them supplied with raw materials during the winter months. Without them, steel mills would shut down for want of iron ore and electrical generation would halt for want of the coal necessary to power generators. People could not just lose their jobs--but their lives. During the 2006-2007 winter season, transportation of 10,400,000 tons of iron ore on the Great Lakes supported 100,000 jobs at Minnesota and Michigan iron ore mines and lower Lakes steel mills and 300,000 jobs at supplier industries. That same winter, 6,400,000 tons of coal were shipped on the Great Lakes to keep the region supplied with electricity. However, we don't have the icebreaking capacity on the Great Lakes that we have had historically. During the spring of 2008, U.S.-flag vessels operating on the Great Lakes suffered more than $1.3 million in damages to their hulls because the Coast Guard did not have sufficient assets to keep the shipping lanes open. People who are not from the Great Lakes region probably do not realize that there is ice on the Lakes and their interconnecting channels from early December until April. Some years, the Coast Guard has been breaking ice in the St. Mary's river until mid-May. Think of these icebreakers as the snow plows for Great Lakes shipping. It is the Federal Government's responsibility to keep these marine highways open so the needs of the public can be met. In 2006, the Coast Guard took delivery of the new icebreaker MACKINAW. Unlike the old MACKINAW, this vessel is a combined buoytender-icebreaker so that it can execute Coast Guard missions year- round. Five of the Coast Guard's icebreakers on the Lakes are close to the end of their useful lives. Further, the buoytenders on the Lakes are having difficulty breaking ice of the thickness that is commonly found on the Lakes. The $153 million authorized in H.R. 1747 authorizes the funding to build a sister ship to the MACKINAW. The design of the MACKINAW is proven and the vessel has shown that is it up to the job of breaking ice on the Lakes during the winter and tending buoys during the spring, summer and fall months. Not only will this funding ensure that our nation's vital industries are supplied during the winter--construction of this icebreaker will create jobs at U.S. shipyards and the related supplier industries at a time when job creation is so vital to an economy losing some 600,000 jobs per month. For all of these reasons, it is critically important that we provide the Coast Guard with the resources necessary to build a replacement icebreaker for the Great Lakes region.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 520, a bill to designate the United States Courthouse under construction at 327 South Church Street in Rockford, Illinois, as the Stanley J. Roszkowski United States Courthouse. Stanley Roszkowski was born on January 22, 1923, and was raised in Royalton, Illinois. He was one of 15 children. He served a decorated tour in World War II as a nose gunner on a B26 bomber. After his discharge from the United States Air Force, he enrolled at the University of Illinois where he received his B.S. in 1949, and his J.D. in 1954. He then opened up a successful law practice in Rockford. Stanley Roszkowski was appointed judge for the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on October 11, 1977. He took senior status on January 9, 1991, and retired in January of 1998 after serving for more than 20 years. Judge Roszkowski was instrumental in having the courthouse constructed in Rockford, Illinois, and this designation is a tribute to his years of service to the court and community. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting S. 520.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, the Ways and Means Committee under Chairman Rangel was so efficient, they completed action on the extension bill for the FAA authorization before I could reach the House floor from a hearing the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure is holding on the next-generation aviation technology for FAA, and I wanted to be here to thank the chairman, Chairman Rangel, and the ranking Republican for moving the bill quickly and without dispute or without a recorded vote. But I want to supplement those comments by observing that the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has done its work. In the last Congress, we reported the 4-year authorization for FAA, but the other body didn't act on it. So we quickly moved our bill with bipartisan support through committee March 5, just earlier this month, to extend, with a great many improvements and upgrades in the operations of FAA, and provide authority for the next-generation technology. Again, the other body is not prepared to act. Now, the reason we need an extension through the end of this fiscal year is to avoid disruption in the Airport Improvement Program. If we have a stop-and-go, 3-month extension and another 3-month extension, then the funding for the airport grants for increasing capacity on the air side of airports would stop and go as well. That's not good public investment strategy. But I regret that we have to do this. The other body simply is not ready to move ahead with full consideration of the bill. We should be able to do that in a matter of days. Unfortunately, they are not ready to do that. And I just want to make it clear that the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, in partnership with the Committee on Ways and Means, is ready to do the job of the House in moving the agenda forward and continuing the modernization of the Air Traffic Control System, rebuilding the air traffic control workforce, and investing in the hard side of airports, and we will continue to do that. We stand ready. Although our patience is running out, we await the administration's proposals for the future revenue stream for the FAA and the Air Traffic Control System.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chair, though I do not oppose the amendment, I ask unanimous consent to take the time in opposition.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Thank you. I support the amendment of the gentleman, and I also want to note that all amendments requested by Republican members of the Rules Committee have been made in order, though not all Democratic requests were made in order. I just want to make that little observation to ensure that our committee is being fair and open and, more importantly, inclusive. The gentleman's amendment is extremely important, as was the offering by the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Kratovil, along with Ms. Markey. The Chesapeake Bay is not just a Virginia- Maryland resource, it is a national and international treasure. It is an estuary. The estuaries of the world are the places where the meeting of fresh water and salt water creates new forms of life. They are resources for the future. They are a window on the past. And the Chesapeake Bay, perhaps the greatest of all estuaries in the world, has been deteriorating at an alarming pace. There was a time when the oysters of the Chesapeake Bay turned over that water once every 24 hours. There were millions of oysters. They are down to 1 percent of their number. Shad are down; rockfish are coming back; crabs are down. Why? It's not the watermen who are taking too much, although they are taking more than they probably should be, under these deteriorating, declining conditions of fish and shellfish in the Bay. But it's the waters from as far as New York, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, as well as Maryland and Virginia, that come in the Rappahannock and the Shenandoah and others that discharge into the Bay, along with the Potomac and the Anacostia, that are bringing pollutant loads and toxic materials into the Bay that are killing the fish and the shellfish and the life of this Bay. I was very pleased when President Obama designated Lisa Jackson to be administrator of EPA. I had a conversation with her before her confirmation. And after her confirmation she said, ``I will make the Chesapeake Bay a priority consideration during my service.'' And she has already designated a special advisor to deal with the needs of the Chesapeake Bay and the Anacostia River. I want to assure the gentleman and all of our colleagues that the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure will consider reauthorization of legislation governing the quality of waters of the Chesapeake Bay, but we are going to do this in due course after extensive review and consideration of nonpoint source pollution. And the recommendations from the OMB from the gentleman's amendment will be important in making sure that we take the right policy choices to bring back this Bay, to restore this quintessential estuary and protect future forms of life that can be created in this great meeting place. I thank the gentleman for his amendment, and I urge its support. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman). This amendment requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to submit to Congress a financial report containing an interagency crosscut budget for restoration activities that protect, conserve, or restore water quality in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. It also directs the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to make management decisions on an adaptive and ongoing basis. I commend Congressman Wittman for making a good and initial step on addressing the ongoing, water quality problems in the Chesapeake Bay. I appreciate his raising this issue at this time. This magnificent estuary has occupied a central place in our nation's history. The English explorer, John Smith, established the first permanent English settlement in North America, Jamestown, on the shores of the Chesapeake. And while the Chesapeake Bay watershed transcends only six states, it is the collective context of its history, its vast recreational outlets, and its important fisheries that sum to add to our economy and culture as a whole. Therefore, the degradation of the Chesapeake Bay must be perceived as a national problem--and not simply a regional one. For example, many of the Bay's fish and shellfish populations are below historic levels. Just this past year, both Maryland and Virginia announced stringent catch limitations on blue crabs due to significant declines in populations. Oysters are at less than one percent of historic levels, and the abundance of shad is only at 22 percent of the targeted recovery goal. It is only through a renewed Federal and congressional commitment to the Bay that we will be able to make the necessary changes to address its varied problems. To this end, the Obama administration has already begun moving in the right direction. The EPA Administrator has already selected a special advisor who will focus on rehabilitation of the Chesapeake Bay and the Anacostia River and the Administrator's appointment signals the agency's commitment to this special region. The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure will consider reauthorization of the Chesapeake Bay Program in this Congress and the OMB analysis of a crosscut budget will help ensure that we make the right policy choices to rehabilitate the Chesapeake Bay. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield the gentleman another 1 minute.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. The bill pending before us has been so well described in the discussion of the rule that it seems superfluous to repeat the major items of the pending legislation. At the Rules Committee yesterday, I said, and our floor manager for the Rules Committee restated, that we bring to the House bills that passed the House in the 110th Congress individually. The gentleman from Colorado read off the votes, which were overwhelming, well over 300- plus votes in favor of each of those bills; just bipartisanship, nonpartisanship, overwhelming support for these measures. Unfortunately, they went to the other body, never to be heard of again. So we thought it would be a better approach this year to combine those all into one bill, and maybe the other body can do one bill instead of five, we are hoping. The commitment to clean water, though, cannot be taken so slightly, cannot be just subject to ``hotline holds'' by the other body, cannot be subject to undisclosed holds, cannot be subject to indifference to action. The agenda for clean water is ours. It's for the next generation. It's to hand on to the next generation water in better condition than we received it from the previous generation. I have been on the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure from the time it was the Committee on Public Works. I started my career in this House in January of 1963 as Clerk of the Subcommittee on Rivers and Harbors, the oldest committee of the House, the first committee of the House. Our work has evolved over many years to encompass a wide range of issues related to investment in the Nation's well-being, but none more fundamental, more important, than water. All the water we ever had on this Earth, or ever will have, is with us today. We aren't going to create new water from any technological source. No comet is likely to come into our orbit and deposit new ice to form water. Our responsibility is to care for the water we have. Every day, 42 trillion gallons of moisture passes over the continental United States. Ten percent of that falls as moisture, 4.2 trillion gallons. Of that, some .4 trillion gallons is absorbed by the soil or evaporates. The rest, some 680 billion gallons, goes into surface waters of the United States. That is all we have every day, 680-some billion gallons. We have to manage it well, make sure that we use it properly, that we return to the streams and lakes and estuaries of the Nation water in clean condition. This legislation will move us in that direction. The centerpiece of this $18.7 billion package of bills is restoration of and reauthorization of the State Revolving Fund from which funds are borrowed by municipalities to build wastewater treatment facilities, sewer lines, interceptor sewers, separate storm and combine storm and sanitary sewers. But for a dozen years, until the 110th Congress, that legislation had expired and had not been reauthorized. The funding was continued, but at lower levels of appropriation, for each of those 12 years until the 110th Congress. That leveled off, because the authorization legislation could never make its way to the House floor, even though our committee was prepared to do that. We had bipartisan support within the committee, but could never get it to the House floor. Well, we brought it to the floor in the 110th and passed it overwhelmingly, as I said earlier. It went to the Senate, and that has not moved. The stimulus legislation provides funding of $4.6 billion, half in loans and half in grant funds to the State Revolving Funds to create jobs and to deal with the backlog of need in State wastewater treatment programs and sewer upgrades. Hardly a week goes by that I don't read of a matter main break or a sewer line break somewhere in this country. It is commentary on the aging wastewater structure of this country and the need to rebuild it, need to upgrade our sewage treatment plant facilities built in the 1970s and some in the 1980s that are beyond their capacities or that are in need of new technology upgrades. This legislation will move us in the direction of dealing with those needs. House of Representatives, Washington, DC, March 9, 2009. Hon. James L. Oberstar, Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: I write to you regarding H.R. 1262, ``the Water Quality Investment Act of 2009.'' Section 1501 of H.R. 1262, as ordered reported, increases vessel tonnage duties. This provision falls within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means. In addition, H.R. 1262 violates clause 5(a) of Rule XXI, which restricts bills and amendments from carrying taxes and tariffs not reported by the Ways and Means Committee. I recognize and appreciate your desire to bring this legislation before the House in an expeditious manner and, accordingly, I will not seek a sequential referral of the bill and will not oppose H.R. 1262 being given a waiver of Rule XXI. However, I agree to waive consideration of this bill with the understanding that this does not in any way prejudice the Committee on Ways and Means or its jurisdictional prerogatives on H.R. 1262 or similar legislation. Further, the Ways and Means Committee reserves the right to seek the appointment of conferees during any House-Senate conference convened on this legislation on provisions of the bill that are within the Committee's jurisdiction. I ask for your commitment to support any request by the Committee on Ways and Means for the appointment of conferees on H.R. 1262 or similar legislation. I also ask that a copy of this letter and your response be placed in the Committee report on H.R. 1262 and in the Congressional Record during consideration of this bill by the House. I look forward to working with you as we prepare to pass this important legislation. Sincerely, Charles B. Rangel, Chairman.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished Chair of the Water Resources Subcommittee, Ms. Johnson of Texas, and yield myself 5 seconds to compliment her on the splendid work she has done in chairing this subcommittee in the 110th and in this Congress, and the groundwork she has laid to bring this legislation to the floor.

Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield 1 additional minute.

Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield 2 minutes to a hardworking member of the committee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop).

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan, defender of the Great Lakes water, Mr. Stupak.

Mr. OBERSTAR. How much time remains on both sides?

Mr. OBERSTAR. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield myself 1 minute to express my great appreciation to Mr. Mica for the splendid cooperation we have had and the bipartisan spirit in which we approached combining these bills into one package, one piece of legislation for the House floor; Ms. Johnson, for her splendid leadership as chair of the subcommittee; Mr. Boozman as the ranking member, who has done splendid service to the Nation in his championship of water; and Mr. Ehlers. If it were up to me, I would rename this the Vern Ehlers Great Lakes Legacy Act. At some point in time, I think we will come to do that. We do have a President from the Great Lakes region who has increased funding for the Great Lakes in the budget, but the details are yet to come. The overall dollar amount is increased, I'd say, Mr. Chairman. And I hope to work closely with the gentleman from Michigan as the details of the budget come out to designate the appropriate amount of funding for the Great Lakes Legacy Act. I yield 2 minutes to a refugee from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, but still an advocate for our programs, particularly for clean water, the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).

Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), a former member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, an adjunct member of the committee.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 1262 and include extraneous materials in the Record.