James Oberstar

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5546, as amended, a bill to designate the United States Courthouse located in Greenville, South Carolina, as the Carroll A. Campbell, Jr. United States Courthouse. This bill, introduced by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Inglis), has the bipartisan support of the South Carolina delegation. Carroll Campbell was born in 1940 in Greenville, South Carolina. He attended public schools in Greenville, and graduated from the University of South Carolina. From 1970 to 1974, he served in the South Carolina House of Representatives. In 1976, Governor Campbell was elected to the State Senate and, in 1978, he was elected to the 96th Congress, as a Republican from South Carolina. He served for three succeeding Congresses. In 1987, he ran for Governor of South Carolina and served as Governor from 1987 to 1995. As Governor, Campbell was personally involved in bringing a BMW plant to upstate South Carolina. Carroll Campbell passed away in December 2005. Perhaps Campbell's greatest challenge as Governor was dealing with Hurricane Hugo in 1989. He joined forces with Charleston Mayor Joe Riley and methodically planned how to deal with the storm. He was a decision leader and his decisions to prepare and evacuate doubtlessly saved lives. Governor Campbell served the citizens of South Carolina with devotion and boundless energy. It is fitting and proper to honor his civic contributions with this designation. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 5546, as amended.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5606 is a bill to designate the Federal building and U.S. courthouse located at 221 West Ferguson St. in Tyler, TX as the William M. Steger Federal Building and United States Courthouse. Judge William Steger was born in 1920 in Dallas, TX. He attended local schools and Baylor University. He enlisted in the U.S. Army in 1942. After training as a pilot, he served in Northern Africa and flew 56 missions over North Africa and Italy in Spitfires, the famous British fighter plane. In the 1950s, President Eisenhower appointed him to serve as the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Texas. In 1960, Judge Steger was the Republican nominee in the Texas governor race in 1960. In 1970, President Nixon appointed him to the Federal bench, beginning his long and distinguished Federal judicial career. Judge Steger passed away this past June. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5606.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5026, a bill to designate the Food and Drug Administration, FDA, Building located at 466 Fernandez Juncos Avenue in San Juan, Puerto Rico as the Andres Toro Building. Andres Toro, a Federal employee who recently passed away, was highly regarded by his co-workers and members of the pharmaceutical industry in Puerto Rico. He was the Director of the Office of Investigations for the Food and Drug Administration in the Puerto Rico District. Andres Toro was a veteran of the Vietnam war and was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, and the Vietnam Service Medal. After attending Catholic University in Puerto Rico he joined the FDA in San Juan in 1977. He was the recipient of the Secretary's award for Distinguished Service and the Outstanding Service Award. It is both fitting and proper to honor Andres Toro and his extraordinary public career with this designation. I support H.R. 5026 and urge my colleagues to join me in support of this bill.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6051, as amended, a bill to designate the federal building located at 2 South Main St. in Akron, OH, as the John F. Seiberling Federal Building and United States Courthouse. Congressman John Seiberling was born in 1918. He attended public school in Akron and Staunton Military Academy in Virginia. After graduating from the military academy, he attended Harvard and received his law degree from Columbia Law School. In the 1950s, Congressman Seiberling engaged in private practice and also volunteered with the New York Legal Aid Society. He was elected to the 92nd Congress and served for seven succeeding Congresses from 1971 to 1987. He was an ardent environmentalist long before it was a trendy word. He comes from a long line of conservationists. His grandfather donated land in Akron for the city's first metropolitan park. As a junior Member of Congress, Seiberling authored legislation to establish the Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area. He then went on to shepherd through Congress an additional 62 park related bills, including legislation that tripled the size of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Congressman Seiberling also sponsored legislation to establish an American Conservation Corps. Although the legislation was vetoed by President Reagan, the ideals and concepts outlined in the bill were later adopted as part of the AmeriCorps authorization legislation signed by President Clinton. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 6051. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1556, a bill to designate the land located on the site of the Thomas F. Eagleton United States Courthouse in St. Louis, MO, as the Clyde S. Cahill Memorial Park. This parcel of land is bounded by South 10th Street, Clark Avenue, South 9th Street, and Walnut Avenue in St. Louis. Judge Cahill, a native Missourian, was born in St. Louis in April 1923. He attended local elementary schools and Vashon High School. After graduating from high school, he joined the U.S. Army Air Corps and served in World War II from 1942 until 1946. When he returned from the war he continued his education at the University of St. Louis. He graduated from St. Louis University Law School in 1951. After graduation, Judge Cahill engaged in private practice until 1954 when he joined the staff of the circuit attorney of the city of St. Louis. From 1958 to 1965, he served as the chief legal advisor to the Missouri NAACP and filed the first lawsuit in Missouri to implement the Supreme Court's decision in Brown v. Board of Education. From 1975 until 1980, Judge Cahill served as a circuit judge on the 22nd Judicial Circuit of the State of Missouri in St. Louis. With his appointment to the Federal court by President Carter on May 23, 1980, Judge Cahill became the first African-American to be appointed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. Judge Cahill was known for being both compassionate and courteous. However, he frequently challenged the flaws in the judicial system and was critical of Federal sentencing guidelines, which he believed were sometimes inappropriately severe. He served as a role model for many young lawyers and civil servants. Judge Cahill died peacefully in 2004. Due to his lifetime of judicial excellence, it is both fitting and just that the park area located at the Thomas Eagleton U.S. Courthouse be designated in his honor. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1556.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2322, a bill to designate the Federal building located at 320 North Main Street in McAllen, Texas, as the E. ``Kika'' de la Garza Federal Building. E. Kika de la Garza's long and productive career spanned 30 years of public service to his constituents in Texas. He was elected to the Texas House of Representatives in 1953. In 1964, Kika was elected to Congress and served 16 years. Congressman de la Garza was the first Hispanic American to become Chairman of a standing committee, the Committee on Agriculture. In the 103rd Congress, Kika led the initiative to enact legislation to revamp and streamline the U.S. Department of Agriculture. He also became one of the founding Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, which he chaired from 1989-1991. His numerous legislative accomplishments included creating the Texas Water Commission and the Reagan/de la Garza coastal wetlands. He was also a driving force behind legislation creating the Nation's first state-run system of English language instruction for pre-school age children. Kika de la Garza was one of Congress' leading experts on U.S.-Mexican relations and worked to improve relations between the two countries. He served as Chairman of the Mexican-U.S. Interparliamentary Group, which promotes dialogue between the two countries. In Congress, Kika was known, on both sides of the aisle, as a gentleman who fostered cooperation and bipartisanship. He was devoted to his constituents and their needs. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 2322.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 362, the Marine Debris Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act. This bill has been developed in a very bipartisan manner. The purpose of this legislation is to help fill in the gaps between existing maritime pollution laws such as the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships. Our oceans are becoming the garbage pit for the world. Each year, tons of marine debris, such as plastics and garbage from vessels, is discarded into the oceans. It's killing the animals in our oceans and with it the oceans themselves. The coastlines of islands in the middle of the Pacific Ocean are littered with debris that washes up including massive fishing nets that are lost each year. S. 362, introduced by Senator Inouye, will help address these problems. This legislation requires the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to map debris fields, to assess the impact of this debris on the living marine resources and navigational safety, and to develop strategies to prevent and remove marine debris from the navigable waters of the United States and our 200-mile exclusive economic zone. S. 362 also requires the Commandant of the Coast Guard to take actions to reduce violations of and improve implementation of MARPOL Annex V and the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships. Under the bill, the Coast Guard will also have to develop and implement a plan to improve ship-board waste management and to make sure that U.S. ports and terminals maintain and monitor the adequacy of receptacles for the disposal of plastics and other garbage that are brought into our ports each year on ships. The oceans are our lifelines. We cannot let human activity kill them. S. 362 will help to prevent thousands of tons of debris from entering the ocean each year from vessels. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting S. 362, the Marine Debris Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act.

Mr. OBERSTAR

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

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, it is refreshing in a time of perception of contentiousness in the legislative bodies that we can consider a matter of this nature and have such thoughtful, constructive, civilized dialogue on a matter that touches the heart of so many of our fellow citizens. And how fitting to have a survivor of the Holocaust whose whole life and career has been concerned with saving people from tragedy, to lend his voice and his stature, his character and dignity to saving the lives of pets. And to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays), who has been associated so much with the process of campaign finance reform and other similar matters, to lend his support and his concern, his character, to a matter of this kind and to partner with the gentleman from California, both coasts joining to support something greater than all of us. As others have said, my wife and I watched the horror of Hurricane Katrina. Jean's home is New Orleans. Her family were there. Two brothers both had property losses, severe property loss. She knew as the cameras moved around the city from one street to the next, I walked that street, I know the people in that house. They have a pet. That dog is up in the attic and they are not going to leave because they cannot rescue the pet. We will now make it possible to avoid such dire choices in the future by putting in place a structure by which we can accommodate the needs of people and the lives they lead and the pets they have that are important to their living. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. Do I understand, Chairman Shuster, that if we pass this bill tonight, it goes directly to the President for his signature? I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the leader on our side, an advocate for this legislation, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Tennessee.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I love the Appalachian Regional Commission. I love what it has accomplished. I have followed the work of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Jr., when he was designated by John F. Kennedy to travel throughout the 13 States of the Appalachian region and report back to him on his findings and suggestions of what to do and how to rebuild the economies of those 13 States. Out of that came the Appalachian Regional Commission. I was staff director on the Committee on Public Works then at the time and participated in the drafting of the ARC bill, and separately the writing of the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965. I have one of the pens that Lyndon Johnson used to sign the EDA bill into law. Years later, when it became my opportunity to be a Member of Congress and to chair the Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee, and the Economic Development Subcommittee prior to that, it was at a time when President Reagan had just been elected and submitted his budget to the Congress, the Budget Reconciliation Act. It called for abolishing the Appalachian Regional Commission and the Economic Development Administration. I said that is not right. We are not going to stand and let that happen. The gentleman's predecessor, his father Bud Shuster, stood with us as we stood up to the Reagan administration, to Budget Director Stockman, and we traveled throughout the Appalachian region holding hearings. We heard such wonderful testimony as before the Appalachian Regional Commission. The way up for people in this region was a bus ticket north to Detroit and Chicago and Cleveland. But the economy for 100 years was characterized by 80 acres and a mule. We went to Duff, Tennessee, and heard from Tilda Kemplen, director of a child development center, who said at the conclusion of her testimony, ``Gentleman,'' and the gentleman there at the hearing were myself and Mr. Clinger of Pennsylvania, the ranking Republican on the subcommittee, she said, ``Gentleman, when you go back to Washington and look at the dollar, try to look over the top of the dollar, not to see George Washington, but to see a child.'' And when we went into West Virginia, we stayed with the previous speaker. The mayor of the little town at which we held our hearing took us around the town to see what it had looked like and what it was coming to be with the investments from ARC. And as I stood in the store which the mayor owned and operated, behind the cash register on the wall was a little sign that said, ``God never put nobody in a place too small to grow.'' That is the spirit of Appalachia. Over the years, those investments of the ARC have taken this region, which was at 45 percent of per capita income, and boosted it up to 75 percent of national capita income. That is an extraordinary accomplishment. The Backbone Highway System that has opened the region up to trade and growth and opportunity has been critical to the growth of this region. But in 1982, the administration said, no, we don't want to continue this program. But the Congress said yes. We reported a bill from the Committee on Public Works, brought it to the House floor, passed 382 to something. But the Senate wouldn't act on it; it was a Republican majority in the Senate. They were working with the administration, and they said no. But because the House had spoken, the House Appropriations Committee, they said the House has spoken on this, and we will appropriate the funds and the authorization with it, and for 16 years that is the way it went. In appropriations we would in every Congress pass the reauthorization of ARC. The administration would oppose it, Reagan one and two and Bush one, and the House would speak in the appropriations, and the authorization would pass, until Chairman Shuster. In 1998, we finally got an authorization bill through the House and through the Senate by the same 380-plus margins. But what has happened since then is the funding authorization numbers have not been matched by the appropriation numbers. A phenomenon has occurred in the last 2 fiscal years, the Appropriations Committee substituting its judgment for the judgment of the grassroots people in the Appalachian region. This is a unique process by which people come to approval of projects. It starts at the county level, starts with the regional development commission, starts with the mayor, council. The business people meet, decide what their needs are, make recommendations. It is approved by the development district organization. It then goes to the State and then goes to the Commission, and the Commission then approves the projects and then the budget comes to the Congress. Then the Appropriations Committee, in the last 2 years, has said, oh, you know, forget about that; we have our own priorities and we are going to designate money. But their designations dilute the funding for the other States. There are three States. Ohio doubled its share, 113 percent increase of ARC funding; West Virginia, 31 percent increase; North Carolina increase, 14 percent. What does that mean for the rest of the States? That means Alabama is down 20 percent, Georgia is down 19.6, Kentucky is down a percent and a half; Maryland is down 20 percent. I will put these all in the Record at this point and not go through every one of them because we are dealing with a closed circle. To pay for these earmarks, most of the other 10 ARC States' formula funds are cut by 20 percent: Alabama, -20.4 percent; Georgia, -19.6 percent; Kentucky, -1.5 percent; Maryland, -20.3 percent; Mississippi, -21.1 percent; New York, -19.5 percent; Pennsylvania, -20.0 percent; South Carolina, -20.5 percent; Tennessee, -20.5 percent; and Virginia, -19.1 percent. What does that mean to those who participate and believe in the grassroots process, that government starts from the bottom up, not from the top down? It means we disrespect your judgment. We are substituting our judgment just because we, one or another person, happens to be in an Appropriations Committee that can substitute its judgment for the grassroots. It has been discouraging. I have talked to the development districts, and so when we fashioned our bill in the House, and in our committee, to reauthorize ARC, page 10 of the bill that was introduced in July, July 17, that the gentleman from Pennsylvania cosponsored, Chairman Young cosponsored, I will not go through all the others, section 4, subsection (b), allocation of funds: Funds approved by the Commission for a project in an Appalachian State pursuant to congressional direction shall be derived from such State's portion of the Commission's allocation of appropriated amounts among the States. That is the anti-earmarking. That respects the grassroots process. That is the bill that we introduced but it was not reported from committee. It should have been. We could have done this in July. We could have had a bill pass through the House practically on unanimous consent, or had a recorded vote that had been 400-plus to zero, but instead we waited for the Senate to pass a bill. The Senate dropped that language. In the suspension process, we do not have an opportunity to offer to reinstate the House language, to stand up for the House position. That is why I come with a heavy heart to oppose this bill because it is the wrong process, because it guts the House provision, because it takes away the opportunity for all States to participate equally. Now, the chairman of the subcommittee, I have to respectfully disagree, the program is not going to run out in 10 days. The Appropriations Committee has included in its appropriation a continuation of the authorization, as we have done for 16 years, and will continue the authorization through the appropriation process, but it will not be as valuable as if we include the House language to stop the raid on the other States within the Appalachian region. We are not talking hundreds of millions of dollars, or billions, as we are in the transportation bill. We are talking $65 million for fiscal year 2006 and $26 million in formula funds for the coming fiscal year and $35 million total. So out of that $26 million in formula funds, $9.3 million have been earmarked. That means other States get proportionally less money than those who are fortunate to have someone on the Appropriations Committee take care of them. That is not right. What is this, a week ago this body passed an anti-earmarking bill as rules for the House. We did even better. We are not saying list who they are for. We are saying do not do it in this particular program. That is what offends me. Process means respect for the system. Process guarantees, or should, integrity. I am saying we ought to restore integrity. We ought to send this bill back to the Senate and have a real negotiation and do the right thing for the rest of the Appalachian States. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to just add to the discussion that I do not think government will come to a halt in 10 days. The House will pass a continuing resolution so that we can get through October, come back after election on November 13, and take up these appropriation bills. The Appalachian Regional Commission will continue. Quite right, the gentleman has stood firmly against earmarking in the authorization process, but it is in the appropriation. It is where the money is delivered where the evil occurs, if you will, and in this context, this is not a bill to be tinkering with with earmarks when there is so clearly a grassroots process that is fair and equitable and has input from the people whose lives and livelihoods are affected. It goes all the way up through the top, and when it gets up here say, oh, sorry, you do not count; your judgment is not of value. To take nearly a third of the money, a limited amount of funds in the appropriation process, and designate it for projects and thereby diminish the amount the other States get, that is not right. It is just simply not right. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from California and the gentleman from Pennsylvania have fully explained the provisions of this bill and the need for the project. It needs no further elaboration. This project moves us further in the direction of advancing the cause of transit in our national transportation intermodal system. Transit is the fastest growing sector of the transportation in America. We are adding 1 million new transit riders a day last year, for 375 million new transit trips, for 10.5 billion transit trips in America. At a time in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, New York accounted for over 60 percent of all transit trips in America. No longer. New York's share is down somewhere around 39 percent because the rest of the Nation is catching up and accelerating its use of transit. In fact, if we could, as is done in Europe, have a mode shift of 10 percent of all trips taken for all purposes by transit, in America we would save 550 million barrels of oil a year, and that is the amount we import from Saudi Arabia. The move to transit is inexorable; it is a necessary part of our overall balanced transportation system in America, and in this intensely populated area of Los Angeles, the San Fernando Metro Rail Project will make an enormous contribution to mobility and to savings in fuel consumption in America. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the passage of H.R. 4653, to repeal a prohibition on the use of Federal transit funds for tunneling in certain areas for the construction of the San Fernando Valley Metro Rail project in Southern California. More than 20 years ago, an explosion caused by the ignition of methane gas that had been accumulating along the Third Street corridor in the Wilshire-Fairfax District of Los Angeles rocked the area. The resulting explosion severely damaged a building structure and injured 22 people. A preliminary investigation into the cause of the explosion pointed to ignition of underground pockets of pressurized gas. This incident raised safety concerns related to the proposed tunneling in the area to build the planned Metro Rail subway system. To address the safety concerns, the Los Angeles City Council created a Task Force to investigate the explosion to determine the cause of the accident and to make recommendations to avoid future incidents. The results of the investigation identified two methane risk zones. To ensure that the safety concerns related to construction of the Metro Rail subway system were fully addressed prior to the use of Federal transit funds for the construction of the project, a provision was included in the fiscal year 1986 Transportation and Related Appropriations Act prohibiting the use of Federal funds for the project until certain safety concerns has been properly addressed. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to report that the initial concerns related to possible methane gas explosions associated with the construction of the project have been resolved through extensive reviews and studies. In October 2005, a peer review panel of engineering experts was convened at the request of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Board to conduct an independent evaluation of gas-related safety issues associated with the proposed tunneling of the extension of the Metro Rail Line subway along Wilshire Boulevard. Based on the findings, the five-member panel of experts reported that tunneling along the Wilshire Boulevard corridor can be done safely using proper procedures and appropriate techniques. In response to the findings of the peer review panel of experts, the City of Los Angeles and the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) who represents areas along the proposed Metro Rail subway system corridor have joined together to support the enactment of H.R. 4653. The passage of H.R. 4653 will help advance badly needed transit projects throughout the Los Angeles to San Fernando Valley region. Mr. Speaker, I urge the passage of H.R. 4653 to remove the funding prohibition for the Los Angeles to San Fernando Valley Metro Rail Project. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds to say that the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), with whom I entered Congress together in 1975, has been a champion of this project, but with a watchful eye on the way in which it was crafted and carried forward. And it has been his inspiration that has brought this project to the point where it is now, an agreed-upon initiative and financially sustainable and operationally successful. I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support this motion, offered by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Melancon), to instruct the House conferees to support the maximum level of hurricane and storm damage protection for the communities of coastal Louisiana and Mississippi. Two weeks ago, this nation honored the 1 year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, and the devastating impact this storm had on the Gulf Coast communities. Over the past year, we have had the ability to reflect on the lives and livelihoods that were forever changed by Hurricane Katrina, as well as on efforts to restore some sense of normalcy to the families and communities impacted by the storm. Few national efforts have been more important than those to rebuild the City of New Orleans, and the surrounding communities of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. Not surprisingly, in the days immediately following Katrina's devastation, the Federal government spoke with one voice to support the rebuilding of Gulf Coast communities. President Bush assured the residents of New Orleans and the outlying parishes, including St. Bernard and Plaquemine parishes, that ``people are paying attention to them,'' and it was the Federal government's duty to ``help the good folks of this part of the world to get back on their feet.'' A few days later, the President stood in Jackson Square, New Orleans, and made a commitment to rebuild Gulf Coast communities ``better and stronger than before the storm.'' Recognizing the importance of flood protection of the Gulf Coast communities, the President assured its citizens that the ``Corps of Engineers will work at [the side of state and local officials] to make the flood protection system stronger than it has ever been before.'' Unfortunately, in the time that has elapsed since the President proclaimed these words from the heart of New Orleans, the administration's commitment to the Gulf Coast communities has wavered, and his pledge to rebuild all of the affected communities ``better and stronger than before the storm'' has fallen by the wayside--promises that have fallen victim to politics, and a renewed interest in fiscal conservatism. While the administration may waiver in its commitment to help the families affected by Hurricane Katrina, I support this motion to instruct the conferees to renew Congressional commitment to adequately protect the entire Gulf Coast region. Mr. Speaker, I find it ironic that this administration, which has gone on the offensive criticizing any individual who would question U.S. policy in Iraq as ``cutting and running'' would feel comfortable walking away from the plight of its own citizenry in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. On Monday night, marking the fifth anniversary of the September 11th attacks, President Bush, speaking of Iraq, proclaimed to the American people that ``We would not leave until the work is done.'' However, it would appear that the message to the residents of in many Gulf coast communities is that the U.S. government will leave before the work has even commenced--and you may be on your own in rebuilding your lives. That is unconscionable. Mr. Speaker, one of the lessons learned from experiences of Hurricane Katrina is the importance of well designed, and properly maintained flood control structures in protecting lives and livelihoods in the coastal areas of Louisiana and Mississippi. These structures literally define the areas considered safe for homes and businesses to locate, and without which, communities, such as the City of New Orleans, could not exist. While Hurricane Katrina did not destroy all of the more than 350 miles of flood control structures protecting southeast Louisiana, it did expose the weaknesses in a system vital to the more than one million residents of the region. Katrina was also a stark reminder of the importance of proper planning, construction, and maintenance of flood protection projects, because these projects literally protect the lives of families living behind these structures. Mr. Speaker, this motion to instruct the conferees on H.R. 2864, the Water Resources Development Act of 2005, is important for two reasons. First, it renews the commitment of Congress to provide the maximum level of flood protection for areas impacted by Hurricane Katrina to help its citizens restore their lives and livelihoods. Without adequate flood protection, many citizens of the Gulf Coast simply cannot start the process of trying to rebuild their lives, because, without protection against flood and storm surge, they may be unable to obtain affordable flood insurance, mortgages, or other financial arrangements necessary to begin the process of rebuilding. This fact is especially true for the residents of St. Bernard Parish, which I inspected on foot this past April, and Lower Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana--the communities that bore the initial force of Hurricane Katrina. In Plaquemines Parish, close to one-half of all residents experienced some flooding or structural damage to their homes, and in St. Bernard Parish and the Lower 9th Ward, this number is close to 100 percent of homes. It is inconceivable that this administration would walk away from communities that experienced such a traumatic devastation, especially after reassuring citizens that the government would help rebuild their communities ``better and stronger than before the storm,'' We, in Congress, need to stand with one voice in support of rebuilding all of the communities affected by this storm. The second reason for supporting this motion is that it draws attention to the fact that hurricanes are more than just high wind events, but also carry the threat of massive storm surges. It is these ``walls of water'' that caused the greatest extent of the damage from Hurricane Katrina. Those most affected by the hurricane are well aware of the impact of storm surges, and the headaches that have ensued in the aftermath trying to rebuild these communities. I have heard numerous stories of the difficulty in convincing insurance companies that hurricane damage can take the form both of wind damage and flooding damage. Any Member of Congress that has visited this region has heard that insurance companies are balking at settling claims for water damage, arguing that these damages are not covered by storm policies, because they are not wind damage. However, a storm surge is the direct result of wind-driven water. As Hurricane Katrina moved into the Gulf of Mexico, it pushed water in front of the storm, and caused the sea to rise by as much as 25 feet in areas of coastal Mississippi. But for the hurricane, there would have been no storm surge. As we move forward with efforts to protect communities along the Gulf Coast, we must be mindful of the impact both from a hurricane's winds, but also of the impact that such massive storms can cause from wind- driven waters. In authorizing new or restored flood protection projects to protect the communities of the Gulf region, the Corps must ensure that projects are designed and constructed to protect against both the dangers of hurricane force winds, but also the threat of massive storm- driven waters resulting from these storms. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this motion to instruct, and to renew the Congressional commitment to restore the lives and livelihoods of all residents impacted by Hurricane Katrina.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, at times, invention is born from tragic circumstances, and, as the saying goes, out of necessity. In the summer of 2002, a Kansas man named Roger Kemp experienced a brutally searing loss. His daughter Ali, 19, was attacked and killed at her place of work. She had just finished her freshman year at Kansas State University--with a bright future--and was working at the neighborhood pool in Leawood, Kansas. Her father, Roger, found her body in the pump room at the pool. Determined to find the person who killed his daughter, Mr. Kemp came up with an idea while driving to work: display ``wanted'' information on a billboard. When Roger Kemp described his idea to Lamar Advertising Company, the company declined to take his money, but agreed to help by donating billboard space. ``Wanted'' billboards featured a composite sketch of a suspect, along with a phone number for anonymous tips to police. It took nearly 2 years, but a tip in response to the billboards helped police apprehend the man (in 2004) accused of killing Ali Kemp. With encouragement from Roger Kemp, police in the Kansas City area began using billboards to resolve other murder cases. To date, at least 8 murder suspects have been apprehended from tips prompted by ``wanted'' billboards, donated as a public service. The success of billboards in Kansas City drew the attention of John Walsh and his TV program, ``America's Most Wanted.'' Since May of 2005, John Walsh has been using donated billboards to help police find fugitives, in conjunction with his TV show, Internet site, and radio program. John Walsh, who knows a great deal about capturing fugitives, says billboards are effective as a crime-fighting tool because they are ever-present and generate quality anonymous tips. Meanwhile, the concept that Roger Kemp pioneered in Kansas City is spreading across America, to communities large and small. After a jail break in Yakima County, WA, on November 25, 2005, several inmates were caught quickly. Two who remained on the run were shown on a billboard and were in custody the next month. In Tennessee, an accused child molester fled in February of this year after cutting off the electronic monitoring device on his ankle. For the first time, Nashville Metro Police used billboards to help find a fugitive; the suspect was arrested on July 19. Two of the five ``wanted'' billboards in Nashville were innovative digital billboards, featuring a static computer-generated image. In July, an outdoor advertising company donated billboards in the Phoenix area as part of the effort to help police stop serial crimes; authorities arrested a suspect in the ``Baseline Killer'' case very recently. In a sense, ``wanted'' posters are part of American history, from the days of Jesse James to the ``wanted'' pictures I saw at the Post Office growing up in Chisholm, MN. The success story of ``wanted'' billboards serves to remind us that billboards are a significant medium of communication. We know that billboards promote brands, sell products, and direct motorists to roadway services. But outdoor advertising is also an important forum for non-commercial speech, helping law enforcement and non-profit groups such as the American Red Cross. We are just a year past the 40th anniversary of the Highway Beautification Act--an appropriate occasion to make note of the evolving contribution of billboards, now adding community service: supporting public safety and security by reviving a proven, effective idea from our past: the ``wanted'' poster.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Kathryn Swanson, a dedicated public servant whose passionate commitment to highway safety has guided her throughout her career. Kathy has been a leading, influential figure in highway safety for more than 25 years, working tirelessly to save lives and prevent injuries on our Nation's roads. Since 1998, Kathy has served as director of Minnesota's Office of Traffic Safety in the state's Department of Public Safety. Prior to being director, she served as deputy director, safety program coordinator, and as a research analyst. As one of the longest tenured members of the state highway safety community, Kathy's counsel is frequently sought by other states and organizations around the country. In her role as director, Kathy administers the state and community highway safety grant programs in Minnesota. During her tenure, the state has achieved significant progress including an 83.9 percent seat belt usage rate, which is above the national average. The state also achieved its lowest fatality rate ever during Kathy's tenure. Kathy has also worked tirelessly with her counterparts in the Minnesota Department of Transportation in a true partnership aimed at significantly reducing traffic fatalities in Minnesota. Today the Towards Zero Death program is the keystone of Minnesota's safety agenda, affecting the work of various state and local agencies and private sector partners. Kathy's success in Minnesota, her strong commitment to highway safety and the respect and support of her state peers led to her election as Vice Chair of the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA) in September 2002. GHSA is the nonprofit association representing the highway safety program managers of the states and the territories. Following a leadership change in March of 2003, Kathy was elevated to Chair of GHSA, a position in which she served until the fall of 2004. Under Kathy's leadership, GHSA developed its positions on the reauthorization of our nation's surface transportation bill, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy For Users (SAFETEA-LU). As Immediate Past Chair, Kathy continues her involvement in GHSA. In 2005, she represented the Association at a listening session for the White House Conference on Aging where she discussed the role of the state highway safety offices in enhancing the safety of older drivers. She also represented GHSA at the 2005 launch of the Ford/GHSA Driving Skills for Life teen driving safety program. Kathy's work has no doubt prevented countless traffic fatalities and injuries in Minnesota and across the Nation. I am proud and honored to share with my colleagues this deserved tribute to Kathy Swanson, who gives so much of herself to enrich the lives of others and to serve her community and her country.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 980, which formally expresses Congress' condolences to the families and friends of the 49 passengers who perished in the August 27, 2006 crash of Conair Flight 5191 at the Blue Grass Airport in Lexington, Kentucky. H. Res. 980 not only expresses the condolences for the lives lost, but also honors those rescue workers and personnel at the crash site, as well as the Federal, State and local officials who worked together to respond to the unfolding tragedy. While we will not know the probable cause of the Conair crash until the National Transportation Safety Board, NTSB, completes its investigation, serious questions have been raised regarding the Federal Aviation Administration's, FAA, air traffic control staffing policies. The FAA confirmed that the air traffic control tower at the Blue Grass Airport was understaffed at the time of the accident. Mr. Speaker, air traffic controllers are essential to the safe operation of our nation's air traffic system, and the effectiveness of controllers requires proper staffing levels at each facility. Inadequate staffing during periods of low traffic is not a new problem. It was reported that in November 2005, an overloaded controller at the Raleigh, North Carolina airport directed two planes too close to one another, and this close call prompted the FAA to issue guidance forbidding air traffic controllers with certain responsibilities from working alone. After the Lexington accident, the FAA stated that some air traffic control towers responsible for surface traffic also separate airborne aircraft using radar equipment, contrary to FAA guidance to provide individual controllers for the radar and control tower functions. It is not clear whether this guidance is written or verbal. The FAA statement further indicates that this guidance was not followed at the Lexington tower where the manager decided to have one controller handle both functions during the overnight shift. Moreover, further investigation has revealed that the Lexington tower was not an anomaly; other tower managers across the country routinely chose not to staff their towers adequately, and the FAA was either unaware of these deviations or unwilling to crack down until after the Lexington tragedy. The FAA's inconsistency in applying its own controller staffing policy is very troubling. That is why Representatives Costello, Chandler and I have requested that the Department of Transportation's Inspector General, IG, investigate how widely the staffing experience at the Blue Grass Airport is practiced at other air traffic control facilities across the Nation and determine the extent to which the towers covered by the guidance are complying with it. Importantly, we have requested that the IG investigate the steps that FAA undertook after the Raleigh incident to review staffing at its facilities to determine if the facilities were complying with the guidance, and to require compliance if they were not. While it will be some time before the NTSB completes its investigation into the probable causes of the Conair Flight 5191 crash, we should waste no time in ensuring that the FAA consistently applies its controller staffing policies across our Nation's air traffic control towers. Finally, and most importantly, Mr. Speaker, I want to express my condolences to the families and friends of the Flight 5191 passengers, and I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman for yielding. As the chairman of the Ways and Means committee said earlier, he did say that the pension system is broken. I wouldn't say it is quite broken, but it does have some cracks. We forget that when ERISA was enacted in 1973, it was hailed in particular in my district by my predecessor for whom I was administrative assistant as the great salvation for iron ore mines that were about to go into bankruptcy and for workers whose pension plans would have been lost without PBGC set up under ERISA. We find now that there are some oversights that should have been plugged over the years and failings that should have been corrected. But they weren't done. And now we are at a situation where there is an opportunity to make an adjustment and that is in the airline sector. If the steel industry had been as responsible as I submit Northwest Airlines has been and Delta in working with their employees to protect the pensions, freeze the pensions, require the company to pay in over a period of time, we wouldn't have billions of dollars in unfunded liabilities for the steel industry in the PBGC, and we would have more steel industry still operating and more workers getting their fair pensions. Now, the plan that Northwest has set before its workers was negotiated with the pilots, the flight attendants and the machinists, and they said, We'll freeze the plan, but we'll continue to pay into it so that you get the full amount you're entitled to and then we'll substitute a defined contribution plan. Now, two other carriers, American and Continental, say that is unfair to them. But what is unfair to them would be if we do nothing tonight, defeat this bill, and then Northwest simply turns over in the month of August their pension plan to the PBGC and thousands of employees from both Northwest and Delta are out of luck, they lose huge amounts of money over the balance of their retirement years, and then American and Continental have a real disparity in competition because those companies don't have that burden of liability to pay. So pass this bill and give those carriers an opportunity to do the right thing.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5074, the Railroad Retirement Technical Improvement Act of 2006. This legislation, requested by the Railroad Retirement Board (Board), amends the Railroad Retirement Act to provide for continued payment of railroad retirement annuities by the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Although the Railroad Retirement Board could use a private, nongovernmental disbursing agent for payment of railroad retirements benefits, as outlined in the Railroad Retirement and Survivors' Improvement Act of 2001, the Board has determined that utilizing a private disbursing agent would cost considerably more than continuing to have the Treasury Department make the payments. The annual cost of paying railroad retirement benefits through the Department of Treasury is about $800,000. In contrast, initial procurement inquiries have indicated that the first-year costs of paying railroad retirement benefits under contract with a private disbursing agent would be more than $3 million and, approximately $2.3 million in each subsequent year. These substantial costs would be borne by the railroad retirement trust funds, which were established to support the disability, retirement and survivor benefit programs provided for railroad workers and their families under the Railroad Retirement Act. The Board believes that using a nongovernmental disbursing agent would diminish service to its railroad worker beneficiaries. Finally, the Railroad Retirement Board and the Board's Inspector General believe that using a nongovernmental disbursing agent would make it more difficult to collect incorrect payments and other Federal debts because the agent would not have the considerable debt collection tools of the Treasury Department. For all of these reasons, the Railroad Retirement Board has sought and received deferrals of the private disbursing agent requirement via annual appropriations acts in prior years. This legislation amends the underlying statute to authorize the continued use of the Department of the Treasury for such disbursements. At the time of consideration of the Railroad Retirement and Survivors' Improvement Act in 2001, I had reservations about the claims that a private disbursing agent would save money. The Board's estimates that the private sector would cost millions of dollars more per year have confirmed my suspicions. In this case, as in many others, despite claims of ``the private sector can do it better and cheaper'', the facts show that the government is able to do the job most efficiently, effectively, and cheaply. I am pleased that we are able to revisit this issue today. I strongly support the bill and urge my colleagues to support it.