James Oberstar

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This is the so-called traditional manager's amendment that we have worked on for weeks in a bipartisan manner across the aisle within the committee to work out technical changes and modifications to the bill that came to the attention of the committee after consideration of the bill in March. A project of this magnitude always has some issues that we need to resolve, and we have done that quite well in this manager's amendment. Among some of the highlights are a provision that is of great importance to the 35 million people who live along the Great Lakes. There is a provision to direct the Secretary of the Army, along with directors of other agencies and entities, to carry out an emergency project to control and prevent spreading a viral hemorrhagic septicemia (VHS) virus in the Great Lakes and the connecting channels. I alluded to this issue at the outset of my remarks at the beginning of the legislation. It is an infectious viral disease of fish and has caused fish kills throughout the lakes. It has been a problem in Europe, it is a problem in Japan, and now we have confirmed presence in Lake Ontario, Lake St. Clair, Erie, St. Lawrence River. It was discovered in Lake Huron. It is migrating up the lakes, killing fish in its wake caused by ballast water that is infected on vessels plying the Great Lakes. It spreads rapidly. We don't really know how it spreads, but we need to attack this issue now. There is a multibillion dollar fishery industry throughout the Great Lakes, sport fish and commercial fishery, and this provision will help us deal with and hopefully find a way to contain this devastating virus. We also have authorizations for new projects in water and wastewater- related infrastructure. For years, these were traditionally practices of the Environmental Protection Agency, but they have run out of money, frankly. Even though we have passed the State Revolving Loan fund bill in this committee to deal with the matter, there still are huge needs. No one better than the Corps of Engineers is equipped to deal with the needs of environmental infrastructure. So in cooperation with the Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service program, the State Revolving Loan fund of the EPA, Corps of Engineers will help communities rebuild their infrastructure and provide for public health and economic vitality of our towns all across America. The needs of communities have not gone away; the ability to deal with them has simply diminished. The Corps can do this work; they have proven they can. And we have a very vigorous and I think constructive environmental infrastructure program in the manager's amendment. Mr. Chairman, I would yield such time as she may wish to the gentlewoman from Texas.

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

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, we have labored mightily to comply with the new rules of the House, to cut every one of the projects back with each of the Members, each of 300 Members who had a project in the last Congress that carried over to this Congress. We have worked very diligently to serve as a filter for Members, to filter out problems that they had, projects that really might not comply, that should not be considered at this stage. We bring forward to you a bill that has been on the Internet, that is fully vetted, and should pass with overwhelming support.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent, though I am not in opposition to the amendment, to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment offered by the gentleman from Iowa. We have had a bipartisan agreement on this. I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana.

Mr. OBERSTAR. The gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell) and our former colleague from Iowa, Mr. Leach, have long worked with the committee on this issue of Rathbun Lake. It is as much a tribute to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell) as to our former colleague, Mr. Leach. The gentleman has described the issue very well. In initial consideration of this legislation, there was a PAYGO issue, and the gentleman from Iowa has worked with us on both sides of the aisle to resolve the matter. We no longer have an impact on direct Federal spending in the amendment. Therefore, it passes our committee standards. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the amendment and appreciate the support of the gentleman from Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I will yield time to the gentleman, of course.

Mr. OBERSTAR. In the preceding Congress, this amendment was offered on the floor during consideration of the WRDA bill, and it passed by voice vote; WRDA passed by 406 votes. It requires adequate budgeting by the administration for maintenance of small, low-use harbors. These are relatively smaller harbors; they may not handle thousands of containers or millions of tons of bulk commodities shipped on the Great Lakes, as we do in the Harbor of Duluth, but they are important projects and facilities that place lives and livelihoods at risk on the fierce storms of the Great Lakes, because these are also harbors of refuge. So I strongly support it. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra).

Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman from Michigan for his statement. I just wanted to point out that the Great Lakes have gone through 15 years, in the 1960s, into the 1970s, into the 1980s, nearly a 20-year period of abnormally high level. Now we are going through a seventh year of low water drought in the watershed of the Great Lakes. The Corps of Engineers has avoided dredging costs all during those two decades of high water on the Great Lakes. It is time now to recoup, to do the dredging that is needed, especially for these small harbors, harbors of refuge, small commercial harbors. And the gentleman's amendment will ensure that this issue stays on the agenda of this and future administrations. So I urge support of the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I appreciate the concerns of the distinguished ranking member of the subcommittee about time and cost. We certainly don't want to add any more time than Corps projects already take to evolve, nor do we want to foist additional costs on local governments. The language of the amendment of the gentleman, though, is simply to take current practice that the Corps has in its principles and guidelines, but to make those principles and guidelines into current law. I have talked with the Corps representatives in the chief's office, and they say, well, we're looking for direction from Congress. This language will not add time, will not create costs that are not already being incurred under our existing practice, and in that spirit, I think the amendment should be accepted.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition, though I am not in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. OBERSTAR. And I do so to speak deliberately, carefully and thoughtfully so that the Speaker pro tempore can reach the House floor in order that the committee may rise and report the bill to the House with sundry amendments and that we can conclude action on the bill. I mean, let's be honest about what we're doing here in the spirit of transparency. But the gentleman from Illinois speaks for himself and also the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Bean) who shares this river with him and also our former Speaker, Mr. Hastert, whom I saw on the House floor just prior to consideration of the legislation. So he thought this would be a good idea because he would be able to do some walleye fishing on the river, and we are all for fishing walleyes, and the gentleman has had a very, very clear and narrowly drawn objective. I am glad we have been able to work this out in a manner that suits his concerns and allays the fears and concerns of those in the Western States that thought this was going to be a major hindrance to hydroelectric projects. So I thank the gentleman for tailoring the language of the amendment to the needs at hand and to allay the broader concerns. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may require to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker).

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

Mr. OBERSTAR. How much time do I have, Mr. Chairman?

Mr. OBERSTAR. I want to use this opportunity to thank the Chair of the Subcommittee on Water Resources, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson), for the superb work she has done shaping the bill and bringing us to this point; and to the ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. Baker of Louisiana, whom I previously eulogized for his work in the gulf; and our full committee ranking member, Mr. Mica. This has truly been an effort bringing this bill forward, and essential to this team have been the staff. I am always grateful for the staff because that is where I started in this body 44 years ago, as clerk of the Subcommittee on Rivers and Harbors, the predecessor of the Committee on Public Works. It was the first committee of the Congress in the first Congress in 1789. I want to thank Ryan Seiger of the majority staff; Ted Ilston, Beth Goldstein, Mike Brain, Rod Hall of Congresswoman Johnson's staff; Dave Heymsfeld of the full committee; John Anderson, a distinguished long- time professional on the minority side; Geoff Bowman, Tim Lundquist, Jim Coon of the full committee staff; and Charlie Ziegler, whom I have known for so many years, a friend of long-standing. I don't have old friends anymore, friends of long standing, when you get to my age. In the Legislative Counsel's Office, Curt Haensel and the ever- talented Dave Mendelsohn. All have worked together, pitched in to help us bring this bill to this point. We are ready now to conclude action on the amendment of the gentleman from Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I object.

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

Mr. OBERSTAR. First of all, we had a very clear agreement within the committee on the Democratic and Republican side not to take new items that were not in the 109th Congress Water Resources Development Act. We have vigorously adhered to that, kept a great many projects out. This proposal is not only new, but it is massive, it is huge, it is not a study of potential effects. It has very clear declarative language: the Secretary shall inventory, develop and maintain all lands, properties, projects, meaning hydroelectric projects. The language at the very outset prohibits any action that may be proposed, as is being considered along the Snake River, to remove dams for environmental purposes, and by directing the Secretary to undertake this action, creates a PAYGO issue. There is a clear budgetary consequence in that language. This motion goes well beyond the intent of the Water Resources Development Act. It goes beyond the bipartisan agreement we have in bringing this bill to the floor. It authorizes unlimited projects without consideration of environmental impacts or consideration of taxpayer expense. It impacts legislation that we already have in this bill. It goes far beyond the scope that we intended in WRDA. We can consider the gentleman's proposal in future authorizations of WRDA and in hearings that we will undertake, but this amendment has no place during floor consideration of this bill at this late hour when it clearly brings into play items well beyond the scope of the agreement between the Democrats and Republicans on the bill and well beyond the scope of the purpose of the legislation. It imposes vast, potential new expenditures and requirements upon the Secretary, some of which are not even well understood at this point. So I oppose the motion, and I urge a ``no'' vote.

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

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 1495 and include extraneous material in the Record on that legislation which will be considered by the House presently.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I am proud to be an original co-sponsor of the ``Safe American Roads Act of 2007,'' introduced today by the gentlewoman from Kansas (Mrs. Boyda). This legislation ensures the safety of the traveling public on America's roads as our Nation seeks to honor its commitments under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Since 1995, the opening of the border between the United States and Mexico to cross-border motor vehicle traffic has been delayed due to concerns over whether opening the border would adversely impact safety on U.S. roads. While the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) has made considerable progress over the last decade, several unanswered questions remain about whether the necessary systems are in place today to hold Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to the same strict Federal standards that govern U.S. commercial truck operations. It is because of these unanswered questions that we must introduce this bill. In 2001, Congress passed the FY 2002 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act (Public Law 107- 87), which prohibited DOT from using funds to grant long-haul operating authority to Mexico-domiciled motor carriers until 22 safety requirements had been met. Section 350 of this Act set forth a comprehensive list of vehicle, driver, and safety management requirements, including drug and alcohol testing, hours of service, driver qualifications, vehicle specifications and maintenance, and safety management practices. The DOT Inspector General (IG) was required to review whether the Department was prepared to comply with several of these provisions. This audit was completed, as well as several follow-up audits. However, independent certification of actual compliance with all of the conditions set forth in Section 350 was not required, and has not occurred. It is well established that Mexican law does not require many fundamental elements of highway safety that are required for U.S. drivers. Mexican drivers are not subject to hours-of-service restrictions comparable to those governing U.S. drivers. Anecdotal evidence suggests that working hours for truck drivers in Mexico go far beyond anyone's estimate of a safe, reasonable limit. Drug and alcohol testing is also an area of concern, because Mexico does not have certified drug testing labs. To comply with U.S. regulations, drug test collection facilities in Mexico send specimens to labs in the United States for processing. Chain-of-custody issues make compliance with U.S. drug and alcohol requirements very difficult to gauge. Further, many challenges remain in implementing the requirement established in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU)(Public Law 109-59), that all Mexican drivers be subjected to the same rigorous criminal and security background checks that U.S. drivers undergo in order to be permitted to transport hazardous materials. Despite these concerns, DOT has announced plans for a pilot program to grant 100 Mexico-domiciled trucking companies the authority to conduct long-haul operations in the United States. If foreign carriers do not comply fully with all U.S. motor carrier safety laws, the safety of the American traveling public is placed in jeopardy. This pilot program is the first test of whether the provisions of Section 350, as well as other safety measures, exist in the real world, and are not just satisfied on paper. H.R. __, the Safe American Roads Act of 2007, will restore accountability and fairness to the process of opening the border, and ensure that the U.S. proceeds with caution while outstanding safety issues are verified. The Act prohibits DOT from granting authority to Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to operate beyond the commercial zones on the U.S.-Mexico border, except under a pilot program that meets the requirements set out in the bill. The bill also requires the following: The pilot program must meet all 22 requirements of Section 350 (Public Law 107-87) and all requirements set forth under Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21)(Public Law 105-85) relating to pilot programs; DOT must provide, prior to initiation of the pilot program, an opportunity for public comment on the details of a pilot program, including the measures in place to protect the health and safety of the public, enforcement measures, penalties for non-compliance, and safety metrics to evaluate the pilot; a pilot program to grant long-haul operating authority to Mexico-domiciled motor carriers must be terminated after one year of enactment of this Act; the IG must review the pilot program to determine whether Mexico-domiciled motor carriers participating in the pilot program are in full compliance with U.S. motor carrier safety laws, including the provisions detailed in Section 350, and report his findings to Congress within 90 days of completion of the pilot program; and DOT must report to Congress on the results of the pilot program within 60 days of completion of the pilot program. This bill also prohibits the Secretary from initiating a pilot program until U.S. motor carriers are allowed to begin comparable operations in Mexico. DOT has received nearly 900 applications from Mexican carriers seeking operating authority in the U.S. Under the pilot program, 100 U.S. companies are to receive reciprocal authority to operate in Mexico, yet to date DOT has received very few applications from U.S. firms. DOT estimates that the Mexican government will not be ready to process the applications of U.S. carriers for at least six months. This bill will ensure that the United States is not placed at a competitive disadvantage with Mexico under a cross-border pilot program. In 1999, Congress passed the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act (Public Law 106-159). In this Act, Congress mandated that in carrying out its duties, the Administration ``shall consider the assignment and maintenance of safety as the highest priority.'' We must continue to use this as our guiding principle in the oversight of motor carrier transportation. Each year, more than 5,000 people are killed in large truck crashes on our Nation's roads, and more than 100,000 are seriously injured. These statistics are already far too high. We cannot afford to take a step backward in terms of safety.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, there have been many giants in the transportation history of this Nation. During his time as a Postmaster General, which included service both before and after American independence, Ben Franklin surveyed, rerouted, and marked post roads in the 18th century. In the 19th century, great companies with names like Baltimore and Ohio, Union Pacific, and Burlington Northern networked a growing industrial America from coast-to-coast with railroads. DeWitt Clinton helped bring the Erie Canal into existence. In the 20th century, new transportation visionaries like the Wright brothers led the Nation to unprecedented mobility and economic growth. Many transportation experts have toiled quietly behind the scenes in the 230 years of the United States to maintain and build on these legacies and utter necessities of American prosperity. Kenneth House, of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure staff, has been one of those individuals for more than a quarter century. Madam Speaker, I rise today in tribute to and gratitude for Ken House's service to this great institution and the American people. Ironically, Ken House is indeed a giant physically. At 6 feet 5 inches tall, Ken's first success was not on the roads but on the courts. His high school basketball prowess in Baltimore led to a scholarship and distinction at New Jersey's Seton Hall University. How good was Ken back then? Decades later, Ken remains Seton Hall's third- highest rebounder and its ninth-highest basketball player in points scored. While in graduate school, Ken worked as assistant basketball coach at Seton Hall. He continued coaching and mentoring young people even after he completed his master's degree. Had he chosen to turn pro, NBA history might have been changed as transportation history certainly was transformed--and for the better--with Ken's help. In 1977, Ken worked on the National Transportation Policy Study Commission to examine the transportation needs in the United States. The Commission had been created in the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1976. After the Commission's report was submitted to Congress in 1979, Ken went to work in the Carter Administration. Ken was a congressional relations officer for the Department of Transportation, DOT, advocating the President's transportation policies and responding to congressional inquires--such as mine--about those policies and other DOT programs. In 1981, Ken came to the House of Representatives and began his long professional career in what was the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation of the Committee on Public Works and Transportation. He is now recognized by his colleagues in the transportation field as an encyclopedia of knowledge on transportation issues. Ken is warmly regarded by all as a professional in every sense. Soft- spoken and always approachable, Ken is a walking storehouse of transportation history, programs, principles, and impacts. It is virtually impossible to ask him a question on any highway or transit issue to which he will fail to provide an objective, well-reasoned, and insightful answer. His only agenda: public service. After three decades of public service in both the executive and legislative branches of the Federal Government, Ken has retired. Many tried to change his mind, but his decision was as all others: well- reasoned. As was true on the basketball court for Seton Hall, for Ken, it was simply time to pass the ball to a colleague. Thus, Madam Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I rise today, but I do so gladly. I do so to recognize a rare individual among us. The long, selfless, dedicated, and faithful service of Ken House to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to the House of Representatives, and to the United States, has been replete with countless sacrifices during his distinguished career. It is now our turn for the sacrifice as we miss his counsel and friendship. All of us in the transportation community wish Ken and his family all the best in the years ahead.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, when you accepted the gavel, you pledged that the House under your Leadership would waste no time in addressing the pressing needs facing our nation. Your legislative initiative for the first 100 hours of the new Congress proved that you meant what you said. In those first 100 hours, the House passed six major bills, including legislation to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, raise the minimum wage, and help older Americans afford prescription drugs, and help their grandchildren obtain student loans. It also adopted Rules to help restore the people's trust in this Chamber. In those hours, Madam Speaker, you showed America that you were going to waste no time in getting important things done for this country. I thank you and the Majority Leader, Mr. Hoyer, for your tireless efforts. In that spirit, I would like to call your attention the accomplishments of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, which I am honored to chair. Since the Committee held its organizational meeting January 17, our Committee has met 34 times in full or Subcommittee session. We have held 28 hearings, including two field hearings. In the first three months of 2007, we have met for nearly 80 hours, and gathered testimony from 165 witnesses. The Committee has initiated a series of hearings on reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration, which must be completed this year, and begun the hard work of considering the myriad issues of reauthorizing the highway, transit, and highway safety programs in 2009. We have begun to restore vigorous oversight to the programs, policies, and agencies in the jurisdiction of our Committee that is critical to ensuring that our transportation and infrastructure laws implemented effectively and efficiently. The Committee has held seven markups, including three Subcommittee markups and four Full Committee markups. The Committee has acted on 29 bills, including 24 bills that have passed the House--each with an overwhelming bipartisan majority. Among the many Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure bills, the House has passed: H.R. 720, a bill to authorize $14 billion for the Clean Water State Revolving Funds and provide the necessary resources to help States address their critical wastewater infrastructure needs; H.R. 569, a bill to authorize $1.7 billion for States and communities to control combined sewer overflows and sanitary sewer overflows to address public health and safety and environmental concerns with such overflows; H.R. 802, a bill to reduce air emissions from maritime vessels and implement Annex VI of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships; H.R. 1195, a bill to make technical corrections to the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users; and H.R. 798, a bill to direct the Administrator of General Services to install a photovoltaic system on the headquarters of the U.S. Department of Energy. The Senate has passed four of the 24 House-passed Committee bills and the President has signed each one. Madam Speaker, such success cannot be accomplished without incredible effort and I thank each of our Committee Members, particularly Ranking Member Mica and the Subcommittee Chairs and Ranking Members, for their enormous bipartisan efforts to carry out the agenda of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. It also cannot be accomplished without a talented, dedicated staff, and I would like to recognize each one by name: Staff Director David Heymsfeld, Chief Counsel Ward McCarragher, and Administrator Dara Schlieker. Also in the front office: Jimmy Miller, Sharon Barkeloo, Helena Zyblikewycz, Jennifer Walsh, Erik Hansen, Keelin Haddix, Elisa Yi, and Mike Obrock. Our Communications staff: Jim Berard, Mary Kerr, and Julie Carpenter Lotz. On the staff of our Subcommittee on Aviation: Stacie Soumbeniotis, Giles Giovinazzi, Jana Denning, Christa Fomarotto, and Pam Keller. The Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation: John Cullather, Richard Hiscock, Lucinda Lessley, and lanta Summers. The Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management: Susan Brita, Mike Herman, Elliot Doomes, and Alexis Barrios. The Subcommittee on Highways and Transit: Jim Kolb, Art Chan, Amy Scarton, Jackie Schmitz, Kathy Dedrick, and Peter Gould. The Oversight and Investigations staff: Trinita Brown, Clay Foushee, Leila Kahn, and Laurie Bertenthal. The Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials: Jennifer Esposito, John Drake, Niels Knutson, Nick Martinelli, and Rose Hamlin. The Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment: Ryan Seiger, Ted Illston, Ben Webster, Beth Goldstein, Rod Hall, and Mike Brain. The Editorial staff: Tracy Mosebey and Gilda Shirley; and our Information Systems team: Keven Sard and Scott Putz. Madam Speaker, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has a history of bipartisan cooperation, and our Committee staff on the other side of the aisle share in our success this year. I thank Chief of Staff Jim Coon, Counsel Charles Ziegler, Policy Director Fraser Verrusio, and the rest of the Minority staff for their hard work and cooperation. The Committee has no plans to slow down. We are hopeful that the House will consider H.R. 1495, the ``Water Resources Development Act of 2007'', in the coming weeks. We have scheduled 11 hearings and 2 markups for late April and early May. We are just hitting stride. Madam Speaker, in the words of Vaudeville entertainer Al Jolson, ``You ain't seen nothin' yet!''