James Oberstar

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 1285, a bill to designate a Federal building in Detroit, Michigan, as the ``Rosa Parks Federal Building'' and to designate the annex of the Prettyman Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse in Washington, D.C., as the ``William B. Bryant Annex''. Rosa Parks is known as the ``mother of the civil rights movement''. With one single act of defiance--when she refused to give up her seat on the Cleveland Avenue bus in Montgomery, Alabama--she galvanized a Nation and changed the course of history. On December 1, 1955, Mrs. Parks was sitting in the middle row of the bus with three other black riders. The bus driver demanded that all four give up their seats so that a single white man could sit. Three of the riders complied. Mrs. Parks remained seated. It is important to keep in mind that what is often remembered as a quiet act of civil disobedience took tremendous personal courage. Blacks at that time had been arrested, and even beaten or killed, for refusing to follow the orders of bus drivers. Rosa Parks was arrested, jailed, and fined $14. As Mrs. Parks herself has said in the years following that pivotal moment, she hadn't planned on taking a stand that day. She hadn't planned on becoming the face of the injustices of segregation. She had simply had enough. She was tired of being treated like a second-class citizen. She had had enough. Mrs. Parks' act of courage sparked the civil rights movement. A boycott of the public buses was organized for Monday, December 5, the day of Mrs. Parks' trial. The Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., then a young preacher who was only 26 years old, organized the boycott. The boycott lasted 381 days, ending only after the Supreme Court outlawed segregation on buses. It captured the attention of the Nation and forced people to confront the inequalities that were then commonplace. The civil rights movement ultimately led to the passage of the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, which banned racial discrimination in public accommodations, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Rosa Parks is an American icon. By refusing to give up her seat on that Montgomery bus, she changed the course of history. This honor is long overdue. Mr. Speaker, Rosa Parks was 92 when she died. Her funeral was today. I'm only sorry that we could not have passed this bill while Mrs. Parks was still alive. Although she suffered from dementia in her later years, I believe that she would have understood and appreciated such recognition from the United States Congress. The strength and presence of a Federal building perfectly captures the character and personality of this icon of the civil rights movement. It is fitting and just that her life and public accomplishments are acknowledged with this designation. Mr. Speaker, I also support the provision of this bill to designate the annex to the Prettyman Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse in Washington, D.C., as the ``William B. Bryant Annex''. I thank the Gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), Ranking Democratic Member of the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management, for her steadfastness and support for naming the annex for Judge Bryant. In the last Congress, Ms. Norton was instrumental in House consideration of H.R. 4294, a bill to name the annex for Judge Bryant. Unfortunately, the Senate did not consider the bill. In this Congress, Ms. Norton introduced H.R. 1015 to continue her effort to honor this distinguished jurist. Judge Bryant is 94 years old, and is legendary in District legal circles. He practiced law in the 1940's and 1950's when the city was segregated. He could not join the D.C. Bar Association or use its facilities. Yet, he has achieved great stature as a trial lawyer and enjoys an enviable reputation. Judge Bryant is a lifelong D.C. resident who attended D.C. public schools and Howard University Law School, where he graduated first in his class. He began his legal career in private practice in the District with the legendary African American law firm of Houston, Bryant and Gardner. In 1965, he was nominated by President Johnson to the federal bench and confirmed by the Senate later that year. Judge Bryant is the first African American to hold the post of Chief Judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. During his long, productive legal career Judge Bryant also served as the first African American Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, and taught at Howard University Law School. The judges of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia unanimously agreed to name the annex in honor of Judge Bryant and approached Congresswoman Norton and Senator John Warner for their help. For the past several years, Ms. Norton and Senator Warner have worked to overcome Senate objections to naming the annex in honor of Judge Bryant because he continues to serve in active, senior status. It is an extraordinary testament to Rosa Parks that, even in her death, her work is not done. The bill to honor her became the unstoppable legislative vehicle to ensure that Judge Bryant, this extraordinary African American jurist, be honored with this designation while he is still living. I strongly support S. 1285 and urge my colleagues to join me in honoring these legendary American heroes.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) for yielding, and I join in her commendation and great appreciation to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) for championing this legislation over so many weeks and months. I join in their regret that we could not have done this in time for Rosa Parks to know that the Nation had recognized her service to equality by naming a Federal courthouse, a Federal building, in her honor. A headline in The Washington Post today summed it up, in words that Ms. Kilpatrick used herself, summed up the contribution of Rosa Parks: she sat down and we stood up. America did stand up, proud and tall, after this act of righteousness in defiance of a hateful symbol of division in America, segregation on America's buses. The discussion that the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia had on the NewsHour just last night, with the Reverend Joseph Lowery of the Southern Christian Leadership Council, recalling their association with Rosa Parks, and their great respect for this woman, told of the humility and simplicity but steadfastness of this extraordinary woman. I recall it rightly, and the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia will verify, it was Reverend Lowery who told the story of Rosa Parks making a wedding gift to his daughter, a check, then of a considerable amount, $25. Three years later, Reverend Lowery's daughter met Rosa Parks, who said to her, why did you not cash my check? You have messed up my accounting. The daughter replied, oh, I would never cash that check. I framed it. This is a treasure. She said no, young lady, you cash that check. She did not want to be acknowledged and recognized and bowed to as an icon, which she certainly is. She continued a very simple, direct life- style. That is the kind of person that we should respect and honor. It is hard for many of us in northern tier States who have not experience firsthand the pain of segregation, to understand not only the symbolic significance, but the real courage it took to do this, to stand against this kind of discrimination. I did not understand it fully until I traveled to New Orleans with my wife, who is from New Orleans, rode on the St. Charles street car line, the oldest public transit system in America. She showed me the place on the street cars where the sign was placed, ``no colored ahead of this line.'' No colored ahead of this line. The holder is still in place. She told me how appalled she was as a child to see white people come and move that device just a little further back so there could be more room for white people, how hateful it was. That no longer exists. But this vestige of the past remains, hopefully as a reminder to us that it should never occur again in America. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2967, a bill to designate the Federal building located at 333 Mt. Elliott Street, in Detroit, Michigan, as the ``Rosa Parks Federal Building.'' Rosa Parks is known as the ``mother of the civil rights movement.'' With one single act of defiance--when she refused to give up her seat on the Cleveland Avenue bus in Montgomery, Alabama--she galvanized a Nation and changed the course of history. On December 1, 1955, Mrs. Parks was sitting in the middle rows of the bus with three other black riders. The bus driver demanded that all four give up their seats so that a single white man could sit. Three of the riders complied. Mrs. Parks remained seated. It is important to keep in mind that what is often remembered as a quiet act of civil disobedience took tremendous personal courage. Blacks at that time had been arrested, and even beaten or killed, for refusing to follow the orders of bus drivers. Rosa Parks was arrested, jailed, and fined $14. As Mrs. Parks herself has said in the years following that pivotal moment, she hadn't planned on taking a stand that day. She hadn't planned on becoming the face of the injustices of segregation. She had simply had enough. She was tired of being treated like a second-class citizen. She had had enough. Mrs. Parks' act of courage sparked the civil rights movement. A boycott of the public buses was organized for Monday, December 5, the day of Mrs. Parks' trial. The Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., then a young preacher who was only 26 years old, organized the boycott. The boycott lasted 381 days, ending only after the Supreme Court outlawed segregation on buses. It captured the attention of the Nation and forced people to confront the inequalities that were then commonplace. The civil rights movement ultimately led to the passage of the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, which banned racial discrimination in public accommodations, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Rosa Parks is an American icon. By refusing to give up her seat on that Montgomery bus, she changed the course of history. This honor is long overdue. Mr. Speaker, Rosa Parks died on Monday. She was 92. I'm only sorry that we could not have passed this bill while Mrs. Parks was still alive. Although she suffered from dementia in her later years, I believe that she would have understood and appreciated such recognition from the United States Congress. The strength and presence of a Federal building perfectly captures the character and personality of this icon of the civil rights movement. It is fitting and just that her life and public accomplishments are acknowledged with this designation. I strongly support H.R. 2967 and urge its passage.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, under my reservation, I ask the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker) to explain the substance of the bill.

Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right to object, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) for her observations. I am happy to yield further to the gentleman should he wish.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for his observation. Again, I wish other Members had been present to hear his discussion and presentation of the State of affairs of the pre- and post-Katrina effects in Louisiana and throughout the gulf. The gentleman has certainly become a scholar of the issue. Mr. Speaker, I include for the record at this point a compilation of the expenditures by FEMA and insured losses for fiscal year 1980 through 2000.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Further reserving the right to object, I appreciate the gentleman's predicament and position, but I am also quite certain that within our committee, we will revisit this issue. I certainly intend to take the first opportunity to do so to correct what I think is an imbalance. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Melancon) under my reservation.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Further reserving the right to object, and I thank the gentleman for that explanation. Earlier this week, under the leadership of our chairman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan), 10 House Members traveled to the three principally affected Gulf States to see firsthand the effects of Hurricane Katrina. We met with officials in Baton Rouge at the Joint Operation Center for New Orleans and then on through Mississippi and Alabama, during which session the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker) made, I thought, a superb, a superlative presentation of the history of the storm and the disastrous affects of Katrina and the consequences on the people and the businesses and the need for reconstruction. Citizens of the Gulf States are doing everything they can to pick up where the storm left off and rebuild their lives. As we saw, nearly a month after the storm, they are still hurting. After 5 weeks of debris removal, the debris remaining is overwhelming. Local governments' tax base is gone. In our meeting with Mayor Nagin, the mayor of New Orleans, he pointed out that the city of New Orleans accounts for 35 percent of the total economy of the State of Louisiana. Of course, we also know very well that New Orleans is the world's most important grain export facility. Yet grain is backed up all along the Mississippi, the soybean crop coming in that will not be able to move until New Orleans is able to operate. In the course of our meeting, Mayor Nagin said, with a heavy heart, with candor, that he had to leave that meeting and go to another news conference to announce layoff of half of the municipal workforce of New Orleans because the city has no revenue coming in and no ability to pay its workforce. But it was not just New Orleans. We heard that in Bay St. Louis, we heard it in Biloxi, we heard it in Mobile. We saw the pain. This legislation is desperately needed. I support the transfer of $750 million already appropriated in the emergency supplemental of September 8, transferring that money to FEMA, to the community disaster loan program. I support waiver of the current $5 million cap, but I think it is hard to swallow the insistence by the Office of Management and Budget that the loan forgiveness provision is discontinued. I look back over the major hurricanes of the last decade and a half: 1889, Hurricane Hugo, Virgin Islands, $50 million forgiven; 1992, Hurricane Andrew, Homestead, Florida, $10 million forgiven; Kauai in Hawaii, 1992, $50 million, Hurricane Iniki, forgiven; Virgin Islands, 1995, Hurricane Marilyn, $127 million, forgiven. Every penny, principal and interest, forgiven. They needed it. It was desperate for those communities. They needed the loan forgiveness. The damage from Katrina as we have seen is unprecedented. It is heart-breaking, it is devastating. It has affected the gentleman from Louisiana personally, his family, his constituents. It has affected my own family. My wife's brothers still live in New Orleans. One completely lost his home and a second home in Pass Christian. The situation in Slidell, Louisiana, they would be eligible for a loan of $5 million. But if they do not recover within 3 years, the loan and interest under current law must be forgiven. Under the bill pending, Slidell will have to repay. If they have not rebuilt their economy, if they have not reconstructed, how are they going to repay? Now, I am sure that colleagues in the committee will say, welcome back, we will fix this at a later time. Now is the time to fix it. I understand, we are not going to stand in the way of the administration's policy priority here. I think we all accept that with great reluctance and heavy heart. We need to resolve to come back and address this at a later time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Further reserving the right to object, I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member, my good friend and leader from Minnesota for many years. Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that the conferees included a provision that would protect from liability airports that choose to opt out of the Federal screening program, as well as protection from negligent acts committed by private security screeners. The Aviation and Transportation Security Act, which was the fundamental law, allows airports to opt out of the Federal program and replace Federal employee screeners with screeners employed by a private company under contract with TSA; but the language of that provision was written very carefully to ensure that we would have one level of security for all airports. A small number of airport operators believe that they will have greater control over security if they opt out of the Federal program, but the Aviation Security Law requires that private screening companies contract directly with TSA and be supervised by TSA to ensure that our Nation's security remains one level and a Federal Government function. The liability provisions of this conference report should not be interpreted to change the reality that the Federal Government has direct responsibility for airport security. Furthermore, in my reading of the language, this provision does not relieve an airport operator of liability in a case involving a breach of security for any act or failure to act by the airport operator or its employees which constitutes negligence, gross negligence, or intentional wrongdoing. In a situation where the airport or airport employees knew that a screening company was not doing an adequate job, but failed to take action to notify TSA, or if an airport employee were part of a scheme to commit a terrorist act, then my interpretation of the language in this conference report is that the airport, nonetheless, would be liable. Since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the Federal Government has spent billions on aviation security, and little on transit and rail security, even though five times as many people take trains as planes every day. Over 9.6 billion transit trips are taken annually on all modes of transit service, with people using public transportation vehicles over 32 million times each weekday. Since September 11th, the transit industry has invested more than $2 billion of its own funds for enhanced security measures. Railroads have also strengthened security. Amtrak has added police and dog units and removed large fixtures from their platforms, but the railroads and the transit industry can't do it alone. Even with the investments made by transit agencies, the documented transit security needs total more than $6 billion, far more than the $150 million provided in the conference report for rail and transit security grants (the same amount provided in FY2005). Amtrak alone has requested $100 million in security upgrades and nearly $600 million for fire and life-safety improvements to tunnels on the Northeast Corridor in New York, Maryland, and Washington, D.C. Transit agencies have requested $2 billion from Congress, yet the conference report provides only $10 million for intercity bus security grants. Securing our Nation's transit and rail facilities is a formidable task, but Congress must get it done. The London bombings and the terrorist train bombing in Madrid, Spain in 2004, which killed 191 people and wounded more than 1,800 others, show that there is a clear need--more than ever before--to strengthen transit and rail security. The London and Madrid bombings were just the latest in a series of attacks on trains worldwide. Between 1998 and 2003, there were 181 attacks worldwide on trains and rail-related targets such as depots, ticket stations, and rail bridges, resulting in an estimated 431 deaths and several thousand injuries. It is clear that Federal leadership and Federal resources are required to address the needs of a reliable, safe, secure, mass transit network, just as has been used in establishing a secure Federal aviation network. But despite recent attacks, Congress is again shortchanging our transit and rail industries. One hundred and fifty million dollars for such a vast network isn't enough. It's not enough to protect passengers. It's not enough to secure our most vulnerable infrastructure. The American people deserve better.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 1413, a bill to designate a staff housing facility located in Kingston, Jamaica as the Colin L. Powell Residential Plaza. The facility currently houses Department of State employees. Colin Luther Powell was born on April 5, 1937, in Harlem, New York. His parents, Jamaican immigrants to the United States, infused in their son a high work ethic and stressed the importance of education. He attended local public schools in the Bronx, and attended the City College of New York and studied geology. While at City College, Secretary Powell joined the Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC) and, by his own account, claimed he had found his calling. When he graduated in 1958 he was at the top of his ROTC class, with the rank of cadet colonel, the highest rank in the Corps. Colin Powell served two tours of duty in Vietnam. During his first tour in 1963 he was wounded and awarded the Purple Heart and the Bronze Star. During his second tour in Vietnam between 1968 and 1969 he was injured in a helicopter crash but managed to rescue his comrades for which he was awarded the Soldier's Medal. In all, he has received 11 decorations including the Legion of Merit. After the war, Secretary Powell attended George Washington University here in the District of Columbia earning an MBA. He was awarded a White House fellowship and was assigned to the Office of Management and Budget, where he worked for both Department of Defense Secretaries Caspar Weinberger and Frank Carlucci. Following his term as a White House fellow, Powell served in Korea. In 1976, he joined the Carter Administration as assistant to the Deputy Secretary of Defense. At the end of the Carter Administration, he assisted Secretary Carlucci during the transition to the Reagan Administration. In 1986, Secretary Powell left Washington to serve as military commander in Frankfurt Germany. He was recalled to Washington by Frank Carlucci to serve as his deputy national security adviser. In 1991, as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Powell became a national figure during the successful Desert Shield and Desert Storm operations. In 2001, President Bush appointed Powell as Secretary of State, the first African American to hold this office. As Secretary of State, he took a leading role in rallying America's allies and the United Nations in the war against terrorism. Since his retirement in 2004, Colin Powell has written a best selling autobiography, My American Journey. He has pursued a career as a public speaker and has remained involved in his work with the Alliance for Youth. Colin Powell is a true American success story. He is an incomparable public servant, a born leader, able administrator, and exceptional diplomat. He is America's premier Soldier-Statesman. It is fitting and proper that we honor the outstanding contributions of Colin Powell with this designation. I support this bill and urge its passage.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, H. Con. Res. 161 authorizes use of the Capitol Grounds for an event to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the Million Man March which took place on October 16, 1995. The first Million Man March was one of the largest events to be held on the mall. The 1995 event themes were unity, atonement, and brotherhood. The anniversary event will rededicate participants to the goals and ideals of the original event. A few of the themes of this year's event include unity, spiritual values, education, and economic development. Like all events that use the Capitol Grounds, this event is free and open to the public. The event sponsors will work with the Architect of the Capitol to resolve all issues of event preparation. This far reaching national program will include a march on October 15th and religious services on Sunday, October 16. I support the resolution and urge its passage.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1786, which authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to make emergency airport improvement project grants-in-aid under title 49, for repairs and costs related to damage from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Madam Speaker, S. 1786 permits the Secretary of Transportation to make project grants from the Federal Aviation Administration's, FAA, Airport Improvement Program, AIP, fiscal year 2006 funds for capital costs to repair or replace public use facilities damaged as a result of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which were incurred by a public use airport in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas that is listed in the FAA's National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems. The bill also permits AlP grant funding to cover emergency operating costs incurred by these airports as a result of the Hurricanes. According to the FAA, airports located in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas sustained structural damage costing over $162 million. Importantly, S. 1786 provides FAA with the flexibility to fund repairs to airport structures, such as terminals and hangars, which would otherwise not be eligible for grants under the AlP program. The bill also requires the Federal Government to cover 100 percent of the allowable project costs, thereby waiving State and local government match requirements. Earlier this week, I joined several of my Committee on Transportation colleagues on a trip to the gulf coast to see the devastation of Hurricane Katrina first hand. Flying over New Orleans, Bay St. Louis, Biloxi, and Mobile, we witnessed destruction unlike anything we had ever seen. We also had the opportunity to meet with airport officials at the Louis Armstrong Airport in New Orleans. The bill addresses the direct emergency capital and operating costs to address the structural damage to the New Orleans and other affected airports as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In addition, the New Orleans and other affected airports face long- term revenue challenges. Although the New Orleans airport has reopened, it is operating at a significantly diminished capacity, which is directly affecting airport revenues. The airport, which served as a major origin-and-destination airport with almost 10 million passengers per year prior to Hurricane Katrina, expects it to take several years to recover from this disaster. Passenger traffic in the coming year is expected to equal only 10-15 percent of pre-disaster levels and equal only 70 percent within 3 years. As a result of this lost revenue, the airport faces a potential deficit of approximately $90 million by the end of 2007. This legislation will enable the FAA to provide additional emergency capital and operating grants for the structural damage of the New Orleans and other affected airports in the region. I strongly support the bill and urge my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and for a very impassioned statement. Rarely have I seen my colleague so intense on something as he has been here, which shows the depth of his conviction and the seriousness of this issue. Mr. Speaker, 20 years ago there was another reorganization plan for FEMA proposed by the Reagan administration. It would have drastically altered the way FEMA conducts its business. It would have dramatically reduced the Federal share of covering the cost of disaster assistance. It elicited an outpouring of anger and animosity from local preparedness agencies and from Members of Congress. I chaired the investigations and Oversight Subcommittee of our Committee on Public Works and Transportation at the time. My colleague from Pennsylvania, Bill Clinger, the ranking Republican, and I launched a series of hearings on those proposals. Principal among the opponents of the plan was another Republican Member from Pennsylvania, Tom Ridge, who vigorously opposed the administration's plan. Together, we developed legislation to correct the administration's proposal, reshape FEMA, and insert in its mission preparedness. That has been a constant. That has been a fundamental role of FEMA. And as the gentleman from Minnesota said, to coordinate, we envisioned that 20 years ago. This is the national response plan developed in December of 2004. In its mission statement by then-Congressman Tom Ridge, the mission states: ``The approach is unique and far reaching. It eliminates critical seams, ties together a complete spectrum of incident management activities to include the prevention of, preparedness for, response to, and recovery from terrorism, natural disasters, and other major emergencies.'' This is the Secretary, who, as a Member of Congress, understood the important role of FEMA in coordinating, in preparing for, responding to disasters. The motion of the gentleman from Minnesota would require FEMA and the Department to link disaster preparedness and response. The Chertoff plan would sever what is a vital link between disaster preparedness and response. It would move disaster preparedness out of FEMA. It would strip FEMA of that responsibility and leave it only with the ability to respond. That is not what local agencies want. That is not what they need in the gulf States, out on the west coast when there is an earthquake, in the Midwest when there are tornadoes. I will not say blizzards because we do pretty well handling blizzards in the upper Midwest. But to cut this critical linkage between preparedness and response is madness, in my view, from having had a very long experience, well over 20 years, looking over this critical agency, which I said, when we created the Department of Homeland Security, do not put FEMA in it. All they need is a link to Homeland Security to be a part of the team in response to whatever, weapons of mass destruction or other terrorist actions; but leave FEMA in its role to provide funding for predisaster mitigation, for preparedness, for coordination, and for response to disasters. That is its role, and that is the role that would be restored, protected, enhanced by the motion of the gentleman from Minnesota. We saw that tragedy of failure to coordinate, failure to prepare. The lessons of September 11 simply were not learned and applied in advance of Hurricane Katrina. On September 11 we knew that there were failures of communication between fire and police, among police units, among fire departments; and it was a recommendation of the September 11 Commission that FEMA reorganize itself and fix those problems of communication so that we have an interoperability of communication systems among all the responders. We take this plan that Secretary Chertoff is going to go forward with and we will disintegrate that recommendation for interoperability, coordination, and preparedness and effective response. When I opposed the inclusion of FEMA in the Department of Homeland Security, I said imagine the situation the Department of Homeland Security has created. The floodwaters are rising up to the eaves of our house, we are sitting on the rooftop with a cell phone and a white handkerchief calling for FEMA's help, and we get an answer that they are out looking for terrorists. How many people have the Members seen sitting on the rooftops of their homes in the tragedy of Katrina? I said that in July, 2002. I said it on this floor on July 25, 2002. Do not put FEMA in this Department. Do not emasculate this agency. Five hundred people have been transferred out of this agency, $250 million cut from its budget; and the result was evident on our screens, television screens, all across America. Do not make that mistake again. Support the motion of the gentleman from Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to instruct conferees to H.R. 2360, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations bill, to stop DHS from implementing one element of its pending reorganization plan because it will further weaken Federal Emergency Management Agency preparedness programs. The Administration's proposal is the sixth reorganization of DHS in two and a half years. This summer, as part of his new reorganization plan of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Secretary Chertoff proposed a new Preparedness Directorate--further stripping FEMA of duties and resources and severing the critical linkage between disaster preparedness and response. This plan was proposed by Secretary Chertoff before Hurricane Katrina struck and yet, in light of all of the problems, questions, and concerns with FEMA's and DHS' preparation for and response to Hurricane Katrina, the Administration seems determined to go forward with the plan, disregarding any lesson that can be learned from the Katrina response. In his request, Secretary Chertoff ignores FEMA's critical ``all- hazards'' approach to preparedness and response. He states: ``. . . Federal preparedness efforts need to be targeted toward addressing gaps in our terrorism and homeland security capabilities.'' I have long believed that Federal preparedness must also address the critical gaps in our natural disaster preparedness capabilities. Hurricane Katrina tragically illustrated those critical gaps. Since the creation of the DHS, FEMA has been systematically weakened, programs and personnel transferred from one Directorate to another. This new plan would take away two more preparedness programs from FEMA--shifting them to the new Preparedness Directorate. It is critical that disaster preparedness and response be linked. Secretary Chertoff's plan calls for severing the vital link between disaster preparedness and response--moving disaster preparedness out of FEMA and leaving FEMA with only disaster response. This would be a mistake. The first responder community has told us that disaster preparedness and response go hand-in-hand. By joint planning and training, we best learn how to respond in a real crisis. Our response in a disaster is based on all of the preparedness that has been done in advance. Finally, this is not the time to be further weakening FEMA--we must take the time to learn from the mistakes of the response to Katrina. I urge my colleagues to support the motion to instruct conferees.

Mr. OBERSTAR

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

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the intent and purpose of the gentlewoman's amendment and her deep conviction in offering it, her concern that the Coast Guard undertake these evaluations and which the Coast Guard does as a matter of routine. But I think this will put a spotlight on this function of the Coast Guard and give a new urgency, especially in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, in these new homeland security responsibilities to which the gentlewoman has referred, to do a more thorough and current evaluation of the Coast Guard active duty personnel strengths and impacts on their homeland security missions, as well as the traditional historic function of the Coast Guard. I appreciate the gentlewoman's amendment.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, before the gentleman makes that request, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, for myself, and I know I speak for the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young), we are happy to accommodate the gentleman's concern. I am particularly an aficionado of lighthouses. I think they have played an extraordinary role in the navigation maritime history of America, but lighthouses also played an extraordinary and important role in the development of commercial navigation, air navigation in the United States. In the early days of aviation, the lighthouse service set up lighthouses on land with million-candle-powered lights with an arrow pointing to the next lighthouse where the nighttime flyer could chart his course and fly safely to a destination. Lighthouses really made maritime navigation safe, but they made aviation navigation safe as well. So preserving such a piece of history is really important, and I am really glad the gentleman has brought it to the attention of the committee.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Under the agreement that we have in committee, we do not support amendments that one or the other side disagrees with; and I support the committee position. I do want to observe, however, that this amendment is relatively benign. Had it been drafted differently, I think it easily could have been accepted. The Coast Guard does have largely this authority. And while the chairman of the subcommittee has expressed a concern about the Coast Guard being drawn afield from its normal mission in looking into on- land facilities, actually if the Coast Guard felt there were a problem with their existing authority they could do what the gentleman's amendment proposes to direct them to do, they could say, look, we think this is a security problem or a safety problem and inspect it. And, in fact, any contractor with an ounce of sense would invite the Coast Guard in and say look at it before we go ahead. I do want to observe, however, there is new technology that may make such facilities unnecessary in the short term and long term. During this storm of Katrina in the gulf, an LNG facility offloaded 3 billion cubic feet of natural gas 100 miles offshore because the tanker had on board the new regassification technology that allows it to make the conversion necessary to discharge from the ship; and with 8-foot seas, they were able to discharge 3 billion cubic feet of natural gas. With the rate at which natural gas prices are rising, I think we need more of that capability. I certainly sympathize with my colleagues in Massachusetts along Fall River who do not want to see one of these LNG ports in their river, close to human population, with all of the potential, but this is not the appropriate place to make that fix.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that the majority is going to accept the amendment. We have previously agreed on the outcome. Voyage data recorders are as important as they are in aviation. The flight data recorder, the voice data recorder in the cockpit helps us to understand outcomes of accidents or causes of accidents in investigating the tragedies in aviation. The Coast Guard is working with the IMO to amend the Safety of Life At Sea Convention to require voyage data recorders for ships in the international service. But doing so for newly built ships, those that are under construction is one thing. The cost can be absorbed in the construction of the vessels. But older vessels that do not have automated engine rooms, do not have automated sensors are going to result in a huge cost, as much as $300,000 I have heard from vessel owners to retro-fit vessels. So in accepting the gentleman's amendment, we must also have language when we get through conference, in the conference report, about somehow alleviating the cost on older vessels just as we do in aviation. There are ways of phasing in newer technology in aviation, the flight data recorder that records up to 150 parameters of operations of an aircraft, for example. We give airlines time and manufacturers time to incorporated the new technology into newer general aircraft. I just raise this as a caution because I know the chairman has great concern for the financial effects on maritime navigation of actions we take in committee.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr).

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