James Oberstar

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I would inquire of the gentleman from Florida if he has other speakers. We are waiting for one speaker on our side.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I will continue to reserve my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes. One of the items in our technical corrections bill that I mentioned at the outset was clarifying language to help the Federal Transit Administration to properly interpret section 3011 of SAFETEA-LU on New Start and Small Start project justifications. The reason for that language was that in the consideration of the bill in the House and Senate, and then during conference on SAFETEA-LU, it was clear the Federal Transit Administration was trying to, by administrative action, change existing law. So we, the lawmakers, gave specific direction to FTA that rather than rely so heavily on their own fabricated cost-effectiveness index in determining authorization or approval of New Start and Small Start projects, they are giving inadequate consideration to other factors, economic development and environmental benefits among them, the investments that private sector interests make at transit stops on major projects, such as Dallas Area Rapid Transit, such as the Washington Area Metro project, where over $20 billion in private sector capital investments have been made along the stops. In Dallas, it is over $1 billion. FTA was not taking into consideration those additional benefits that flow from the investment in a transit project. Similarly, they were not taking those factors into consideration in evaluating the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project extension out to Wiehle Avenue, which is otherwise known as the Dulles Metro Extension. Well, I am delighted that even before we moved this bill through to final enactment, the Federal Transit Administration announced this morning that it intends ``to approve entry into final design for the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project,'' one of the most important transit projects in the entire United States. This is a vital decision. It is very important to move ahead with this project, so, frankly, we don't look like a third world country when it comes to moving people and goods in our economy. I would also like to take this opportunity to note that one of the technical corrections that was so important for us to make in this legislation is for the authority to move ahead with MAGLEV development. Magnetic levitation technology was initiated in the United States going back even before ISTEA in 1991 under an amendment that I advanced with the support of the Congressional Steel Caucus to perfect magnetic levitation technology.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield myself an additional 2 minutes. While we continued to study it and develop it in university research centers and in contracts with the private sector, Germany and Japan moved ahead with test track MAGLEV technology projects. One of those, the German technology version, has already been implemented in Shanghai, China, while we continue to lag behind because we have not moved ahead with sufficient authority. Well, we have provided that authority in SAFETEA-LU, but the language wasn't precise enough to satisfy the Federal Transit Administration to move ahead. So we have corrected that ambiguity, if you will, or at least what the Department of Transportation considered to be an ambiguity, with the following language. ``Fifty percent of the funds will be allocated to the Nevada Department of Transportation, who shall cooperate with the California-Nevada Super Speed Train Commission for the MAGLEV project between Las Vegas and Primm.'' In addition, the other 50 percent of the funds shall be allocated ``for existing MAGLEV projects located east of the Mississippi River, using such criteria as the Secretary deems appropriate.'' In the accompanying report, section 102 language on MAGLEV, we further specify how those funds are to be used, specifically, the 50 percent allocated to the California-Nevada Super Speed Train Commission for Las Vegas-Primm and the other 50 percent for projects east of the Mississippi. The intent of this clarification is to limit the eligible projects to three existing projects east of the Mississippi River; Pittsburgh, Baltimore-Washington and Atlanta-Chattanooga, in a competition to be determined by and evaluated and resolved by the Secretary of Transportation.

Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield myself an additional minute. I earnestly hope now that after two decades of studying, evaluating and developing in very limited test modes, MAGLEV technology will now be able to move ahead with passenger MAGLEV technology. I also note for the record that the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher) and I have been working with the Port Authority of Los Angeles-Long Beach and the California Transportation Department, and Mr. Rohrabacher with the Governor's office in California, on a MAGLEV circular route, loop route, from the Port of Los Angeles to Riverside, California, to carry container cargo that can actually pay its own way to the interior of California and avoid the grade crossings and actually haul paying passenger containers.

Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield myself 1 additional minute. I think these opportunities for advancing the state of the art of this very exciting magnetic levitation technology will now come to fruition with the final language in this legislation on these two projects, plus the initiative in the Port of Long Beach-Los Angeles. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. How much remains?

Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield myself the balance of my time again to express my great appreciation to the gentleman from Florida for the splendid cooperation, bipartisan participation, for the efforts made here in this body and with the other body on moving them along to bring the technical corrections to a conclusion. I also want to note for the record the gentleman from Florida joined with me in the appeal, in fact, he initiated the request to the Secretary of Transportation, Ms. Peters, last October, for a meeting in our committee offices with the Governor of Virginia, the Commissioner of Transportation for Virginia, the Northern Virginia bipartisan Republican and Democratic House delegation, with Senator Warner's staff and FTA Administrator Simpson to discuss this Dulles Metrorail project, to bring to the attention of the administration that this is a bipartisan initiative, that we are together on supporting it, and to move it ahead. Now we are there. I thank the gentleman for his consistency and constancy on that initiative. I concur also with the gentleman's remarks. These are technical corrections. There are 485 of them. Some of them, a good many of them, are just misspellings that needed to be technically corrected. There was some wording that the Federal Highway Administration wanted clarification on, that the Federal Transit Administration asked us to provide clarifying language on, and we do that in this legislation. There were other projects where Members found that a project had been designated and was not exactly what their constituents were anticipating, they wanted to change it, dollar for dollar, no increasing, no additional spending. It is appropriate. As former Chairman Bud Shuster was fond of saying: We Members of Congress are not potted plants. We are not there to just stand and look on benignly while the executive branch implements the legislation that we vote for. We are the ones who are accountable to raise the revenues; we are the ones who are accountable to put the policies in place, and we have a say in how they are carried out. And that is what we do with these Member high-priority projects. So I urge all Members to support this legislation as an affirmation of the role of the people's body in setting transportation policy.

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

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Concurrent Resolution 308, authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the 27th National Peace Officers' Memorial Service. More than 150 Federal, State, and local law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty in 2007 will be honored at this Memorial Service. According to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, 181 officers died in the line of duty in 2007. Five officers were women. Forty States and the District of Columbia experienced officer fatalities in 2007. Thirteen States had five or more fatalities. In 1962, President John F. Kennedy signed a proclamation which designated May 15th as Peace Officers Memorial Day, and the week in which that date falls as ``Police Week''. The first official memorial service took place on May 15, 1982, at which 91 law enforcement officers were honored. Over the past 27 years, the Memorial Service has honored more than 3,000 law enforcement officers from around our nation. Today, the National Peace Officers' Memorial Service on Capitol Hill has become one in a series of well attended events during Police Week. Activities on the Capitol Grounds conducted under H. Con. Res. 308 will be coordinated with the Architect of the Capitol, will be free, and open to the public. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H. Con. Res. 308.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Resolution 444. H. Res. 444 highlights the House of Representatives' support for the May 24 National Aviation Maintenance Technician Day to honor Charles Edward Taylor, the first aviation maintenance technician who created and maintained the engine used to power the Wright brothers' aircraft, and the men and women who followed in his footsteps as aviation maintenance technicians. This resolution celebrates the life and achievements of one of the fathers of aviation while also recognizing the indispensable role aviation maintenance technicians play by ensuring the safety of civil and military aircraft and infrastructure as well as the American people. In 1901, Charles Edward Taylor left his job making 25 cents an hour at the Dayton Electric Company to make 30 cents an hour in the Wright brothers' bicycle shop. Within a year of starting, Taylor helped them build a wind tunnel to test the Wrights' theories on winds and control surfaces. When, in 1903, the Wright brothers' tasked Taylor with creating an 8- horsepower engine to power the Flyer, his only prior experience was an attempt to repair a gasoline automobile engine in 1901. He designed and built an aluminum, water-cooled, 12-horsepower engine. He built the engine from scratch in only 6 weeks, and without drawings, using a drill press, metal lathe, and hand tools. Taylor said, ``[I] always wanted to learn to fly, but I never did. The Wrights refused to teach me and tried to discourage the idea. They said they needed me in the shop and to service their machines, and if I learned to fly, I'd be gadding about the country and maybe become an exhibition pilot, and then they'd never see me again.'' After assisting the Wright brothers, Taylor went on to a pioneering aviation maintenance career spanning more than 60 years including a job as the chief mechanic for the first transcontinental flight in 1911 by Calbraith Perry Rodgers. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H. Res. 444, honoring the first aviation maintenance technician, Charles Edward Taylor, and every aviation maintenance technician who has or will follow in his footsteps.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution, H. Res. 964, which seeks to promote the safe operation of 15-passenger vans and highlights an important safety issue. I thank the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) for bringing this important issue to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the House. This resolution encourages all organizations owning or operating a 15-passenger van not to allow inexperienced drivers to operate these vehicles without proper training and education regarding the safe operation of these vehicles. The design and handling characteristics of 15-passenger vans make them different to drive than other passenger vehicles. The operators of these vehicles must understand the special driving skills necessary for their safe operation due to the larger size and higher centers of gravity. These characteristics make 15-passenger vans less stable than vehicles such as cars. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, from 1997 through 2006, there were 1,090 fatalities of van occupants resulting from crashes involving 15-passenger vans, of which 534 fatalities resulted from largely preventable single-vehicle rollover crashes of such vans. Furthermore, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, in 2005, 59 percent of the fatalities in 15-passenger van crashes occurred in single-vehicle rollover crashes, which is higher than the rollover fatality rates for any other passenger vehicle type. The threat of rollover in these vehicles becomes even greater when operators place heavy loads on the roofs of the vans, such as luggage. Mr. Speaker, safety belts dramatically increase the chances of survival during a rollover crash. Nearly 80 percent of those who died in 15-passenger van rollovers nationwide between 1990 and 2003 were not buckled up. These striking statistics paint a very clear portrait of the dangers associated with 15-passenger vans, and that the operation of these vans by inexperienced drivers raises significant safety concerns for operators and passengers in these vehicles. In the last federal surface transportation act, we made progress on this issue. However, more must be done to bring public awareness to this critical issue impacting the public safety on our nation's roadways. As we embark on the initial stages of our next surface transportation authorization bill, we must include the concerns raised by H. Res. 964 in our discussions and ensure that the safety problems associated with 15-passenger vans are addressed. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H. Res. 964.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. I invite the gentleman to pursue this colloquy.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Just briefly to clarify that point. We do not transfer ALJs from the Coast Guard. We leave those in place, just transfer the venue, and we will provide both in this bill and in the subsequent NTSB authorization funding for additional ALJs at the NTSB, as we did in aviation.

Mr. OBERSTAR. I just tell the gentleman that is the case.

Mr. OBERSTAR. I just wanted to reaffirm for my colleague in the Hip Replacement Caucus from California that when we transferred authority from the FAA to the NTSB for aviation appeals, we provided authority, funding, and we went to the Appropriations Committee to seek additional moneys, and were successful in doing that. We are committed to doing the same in the case of the Coast Guard. Again, we will provide in the NTSB authorization additional ALJ personnel for these appeals.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition, though I do not intend to oppose the amendment.

Mr. OBERSTAR. I ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition to the amendment, though I do not oppose it.

Mr. OBERSTAR. I object.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I enormously respect the distinguished and amiable gentleman from Ohio, the weight-lifting champ of the House gym. When he walks on the floor, the weights quiver and shake in awe of his appearance. He has been an advocate for the Delta Queen even back to last fall when I was in the Bethesda Naval Hospital for an operation to correct a long-standing injury to my neck. He sent a sheet cake with the Delta Queen emblazoned upon it to remind me of his diligence and of his enthusiasm for the Delta Queen. I could only eat one slice of it, but I assured him that the staff at the hospital, who had no idea what the Delta Queen was all about, appreciated this sheet cake from the very distinguished and caring gentleman from the State of Ohio. But labor has nothing to do with this issue. I haven't heard from a single person in any labor union about this matter. The Delta Queen was built in 1926 and carried 174 passengers, 88 state rooms. It has extensive wood superstructure. It has extensive wood interior and furniture, and for those reasons, the Coast Guard will not certify this vessel. Opposition is clear. The combustible construction of the vessel presents an unacceptable fire risk that cannot be mitigated by the addition of fire-suppression measures, says the Coast Guard. As such, the Coast Guard's position remains unchanged. The Delta Queen should be prohibited from operating with overnight passengers. Since May 28, 1936, the United States has required that passenger vessels be constructed essentially of fire retardant material. In the interest of maritime safety, the Coast Guard, continuing their quote, has consistently opposed legislation to prolong the service of the Delta Queen. A vessel constructed of wood operating in the overnight passenger trade presents an unacceptable fire risk to its passengers and crew. It goes on at great length. The Delta Queen can operate in daytime but not at night. In the operation of the trade on the Mississippi River, the worst disaster in history occurred, fire onboard a paddle wheeler. Yes, in the 19th century, but 1,700 people died 100 yards from shore. On March 22 of this year, of this year, the Delta Queen had a fire in the generating room requiring the use of their fixed C02 extinguishing system. Fortunately, no one was injured. The generator shorted, caused flames to shoot out the generator end. Earlier this month, the Queen of the West, this April, a similar paddle wheel operated by the very same company that owns and operates the Delta Queen had a fire in the engine room, required evacuation of 177 passengers and crew. Three crew members were treated for smoke inhalation. Last year, in May, the Empress of the North, another excursion vessel operated by the same company owning the Delta Queen, ran aground in southeast Alaska, evacuating over 200 passengers and crew; fourth grounding of that vessel in less than 4 years. Now I can understand those who live along the Mississippi River, which starts nearly in my district all the way down to the Gulf, but friends, we would never stand for limiting safety on a 747 aircraft. And over a decade ago, a foreign airline was trying to remove over- wing exits from a 747. Congressman Bill Clinger, Pennsylvania's ranking Republican on the Committee on Aviation with me, we stopped them from doing that. We stopped the FAA from allowing that risk to safety. We should stop this risk to safety here. Fire at night is terrifying. Oppose the amendment.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Again, it is not just the Great Lakes, it's the saltwater ports as well. Our colleagues on the west coast for many years, I remember in the seventies and eighties, were saying, what are you worried about invasive species for? Then curious creatures began to appear in the waters of the ports on the west coast from ballast water discharged in those ports from vessels leaving the Pacific Rim, from Japan to Korea to the South China Sea. So this is a unified effort here.