James Oberstar

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to support S. 378, a bill to honor our former House and Senate colleague, Paul Simon. Paul Simon and I were both elected to the House in the same year-- 1974. He came to the House after a distinguished career in the Illinois State Legislature. Mr. Simon was elected to the Illinois House of Representatives in 1954 and then to the Illinois Senate in 1962. During his 14 years in the State legislature, he won the Independent Voters of Illinois ``Best Legislator Award'' in every session. In 1968, Mr. Simon was elected as Illinois' Lieutenant Governor. After teaching at Sangamon State University in Springfield, Illinois, and the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, he returned to public service in 1974 with his election to the House. While we served in the House together, I was consistently impressed by Mr. Simon's energy and creativity. He was not only an effective legislator, but was also a prolific author. One of his books, The Tongue Tied American, which he wrote while serving in the House, explored the lack of foreign language skills in this country and its detrimental impact on foreign affairs. It was an issue that he and I joined forces on to stimulate the study of foreign languages and international affairs in U.S. colleges and universities. In 1984, Paul Simon upset Senator Percy to win a seat in the U.S. Senate. In 1990, he won re-election to the Senate by defeating his opponent with 65 percent of the vote and by nearly a million votes--the largest plurality of any contested candidate for senator of either party that year. While in the Senate, he become the champion of new, direct college loan programs, and was the chief democratic sponsor of the balanced budget amendment. He was active in addressing violence in television programming, and a primary author of the National Literacy Act, the Job Training partnership amendments, and several provisions of the 1994 Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Most recently, Senator Simon has returned to teaching and currently teaches political science and journalism at Southern Illinois University--Carbondale campus. Paul Simon is a true gentleman, thoughtful and courteous. The people of Illinois and the American public benefited greatly from his service both in the House and Senate. Paul Simon's contributions, particularly in the area of education and job training, set a standard for us all. The designation of the job corps center in Chicago in his honor is a fitting tribute to his exemplary public service. I urge my colleagues to support S. 378.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4006, which designates the new federal courthouse in Central Islip, New York in honor of former New York Senator Alfonse D'Amato. Senator D'Amato's career in public service spanned nearly three decades, starting in 1965 with his service as administrator of Nassau County, New York. In 1980, he was elected to the first of three terms in the United States Senate. While in the Senate, Mr. D'Amato served as Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and was a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee and Senate Appropriations Committee. A life-long New Yorker, Mr. D'Amato was born in Brooklyn, New York in 1937, and attended New York public schools on Long Island. He graduated from Chaminade High School before working his way through Syracuse University. He attended Syracuse Law School and was admitted to the bar in 1962. I first came to know Alphonse D'Amato in 1989 when we were both appointed to serve on the Presidential Commission on Aviation Security and Terrorism, commonly known as the Pan Am 103 Commission. Senator D'Amato was a strong advocate for rigorous aviation security laws and we worked hard on the Commission to ensure that we investigated the cause of not only the Pan Am tragedy, but of other aviation incidents as well. We made recommendations to significantly toughen our aviation security policies and when it came time to pass legislation to implement our commission's recommendations, Mr. D'Amato took a leading role in the United States Senate. Senator D'Amato was also a tireless advocate for transit issues, specifically, for ensuring that the people of New York had access to a safe and effective public transportation system. We worked very closely together to ensure that transit received its fair share in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (``TEA 21''). As a result, transit funding has grown from $4.3 billion in fiscal year 1997 to an expected $7.2 billion this year--a 67 percent increase! Senator D'Amato was a vocal advocate for inner cities, particularly economically distressed and underserved areas. He was also a forceful advocate for human rights and an unwavering supporter of Israel. I am pleased that we are honoring Senator D'Amato with this designation of the new, state-of-the-art, federal courthouse in New York. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4006.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in tribute to a man who devoted his life to social justice. Today we say goodbye to Monsignor George G. Higgins, who headed the Social Action Department of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops for 35 years. Msgr. Higgins died May 1, and was buried today in his home town of LaGrange, Illinois. He was 86 years old. Msgr. Higgins fought for the rights of workers, whether they were auto workers in Detroit, farm workers in California or steelworkers on the Iron Range of Minnesota. He wrote nearly 3,000 columns on social issues for Catholic newspapers across the country from 1945 until September 2001, when he could no longer continue because of failing eyesight. Msgr. Higgins held a doctorate in economics and political science from Catholic University of America. He was awarded the University of Notre Dame's highest honor, the Laetare Medal, and the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Last year he was honored as one of the great pioneers in promoting dialogue between Catholics and Jews by the International Catholic-Jewish Liaison Committee. Msgr. Higgins made a lasting imprint on the Church's approach to social policy in America: feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, clothing the poor. As columnist E.J. Dionne wrote in today's Washington Post, ``It is one of the highest callings of spiritual leaders to force those who live happy and comfortable lives to consider their obligations to those heavily burdened by injustice and deprivation.'' Msgr. Higgins answered that calling. Mr. Speaker, at a time when a dark cloud of scandal hangs over the Catholic Church, it is important to note that the priesthood is full of good men doing God's work. Msgr. Higgins was such a priest. All of us who believe in the fair treatment of working men and women, compassion for the poorest among us, and brotherhood with those of other faiths, will miss him deeply. Mr. Speaker, I ask to submit the full text of E.J. Dionne's column for the Record. [Washingtonpost.com, May 7, 2002] The Great Monsignor (By E. J. Dionne, Jr.) There is no such thing as a timely death. But just when you thought all the stories on American priests were destined to be about evil committed and covered up, one of the truly great priests was called to his eternal reward. Monsignor George G. Higgins was the sort of Catholic clergyman regularly cast as a hero in movies of the 1940s and '50s. He was an uncompromising pro-labor priest who walked picket lines, fought anti-Semitism, supported civil rights and wrote and wrote and wrote in the hope that some of his arguments about social justice might penetrate somewhere. He got attached to causes before they became fashionable, and stuck with them after the fashionable people moved on. Cesar Chavez once said that no one had done more for American farm workers than Monsignor Higgins. In the 1980s, he traveled regularly to Poland in support of Solidarity's struggle against communism and became an important link between American union leaders and their Polish brethren. As it happens, even the day of Monsignor Higgins's death, at the age of 86, was appropriate. He passed from this world on May 1, the day that many countries set aside to honor labor and that the Catholic Church designates as the Feast of St. Joseph the Worker. If Higgins had been there when that famous carpenter was looking for a place to spend the night with his pregnant wife, the monsignor would certainly have taken the family in. He would also have handed Joseph a union card, told him he deserved better pay and benefits, and insisted that no working person should ever have to beg for shelter. Yes, Higgins sounds so old-fashioned--and in every good sense he was--that you might wonder about his relevance to our moment. Let us count the ways. One of the most astonishing and disturbing aspects of the Catholic Church's current scandal is the profound disjunction--that's a charitable word--between what the church preaches about sexuality and compassion toward the young and how its leaders reacted to the flagrant violation of these norms by priests. Higgins, who spent decades as the Catholic Church's point man on labor and social justice issues, hated the idea of preachers' exhorting people to do one thing and then doing the opposite. And so he made himself into a true pain for any administrator of any Catholic institution who resisted the demands of workers for fair pay and union representation. ``These men and women mop the floors of Catholic schools, work in Catholic hospital kitchens and perform other sometimes menial tasks in various institutions,'' he once wrote. ``They have not volunteered to serve the church for less than proportionate compensation.'' ``The church has a long history of speaking out on justice and peace issues,'' he said. ``Yet only in more recent times has the church made it clear that these teachings apply as well to the workings of its own institutions.'' Where some religious leaders complain that they get caught up in scandal because they are unfairly held to higher standards, Higgins believed that higher standards were exactly the calling of those who claim the authority to tell others what to do. It bothered Higgins to the end of his life that the cause of trade unionism had become so unfashionable, especially among well-educated and well-paid elites. For 56 years, he wrote a column for the Catholic press, and he returned to union issues so often that he once felt obligated to headline one of his offerings: ``Why There's So Much Ado About Labor in My Column.'' His answer was simple: ``I am convinced that we are not likely to have a fully free or democratic society over the long haul without a strong and effective labor movement.'' To those who saw collective bargaining as outdated in a new economy involving choice, mobility and entrepreneurship, Higgins would thunder back about the rights of those for whom such a glittering world was still, at best, a distant possibility: hospital workers, farm workers, fast-food workers and others who need higher wages to help their children reach their dreams. He could not abide well-paid intellectuals who regularly derided unions as dinosaurs, and he told them so, over and over. It is one of the highest callings of spiritual leaders to force those who live happy and comfortable lives to consider their obligations to those heavily burdened by injustice and deprivation. It is a great loss when such prophetic voices are stilled by scandal and the cynicism it breeds. Fortunately, that never happened to Higgins. He never had to shut up about injustice and, God bless him, he never did.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) for yielding me the time, and I will be brief, but the University of Minnesota-Duluth women's hockey team is in my Congressional district, and I have visited with the team members on many occasions and especially with Chancellor Kathryn Martin, who is the first woman to hold the position of chancellor of the University of Minnesota-Duluth. It was under her leadership that the women's hockey program was nurtured and developed to the national prominence it has achieved. If any person who is looking for a display of pure hockey as it should be played with skill, with passing precision and respect for players on each side of the rink, they should have followed the women's NCAA frozen four championship rounds because there one saw the display of hockey at its very best, without the body slams, without the sticks in the face, but with skill, precision passing, skill of skating and speed and superb demonstration of goalie skill on both sides of the rink. All the teams that participated credited themselves remarkably by their display of sportsmanship and skill, but there is only one team that wins and 2-years in a row it has been the University of Minnesota- Duluth women's hockey team, and this year they were joined by their brothers, the men's hockey team. UMD was there before them. They won back-to-back championships. And this year, the men's hockey team won as well. As my colleague, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht) noted, the men's wrestling team won as well. I might add a footnote to all this pride in hockey. The University of Minnesota Duluth Theater Troop has, for the fifth time in the 34 years of the competition, won the Kennedy Center National Collegiate Theater Competition. And for the second time in 3 years, drama is also a part of the human spirit. To Kathryn Martin's credit, she has nurtured the drama program; herself a theater and drama professor and coach, she has nurtured this program. And to the great credit of UMD, the theater troop, for the second time in 3 years, was one of the four final winners of the Kennedy Center Theater Performance. University of Minnesota on the athletic side as well as on the intellectual and spiritual side of lifting the human spirit has contributed enormously to the northland. And to all the scholar athletes and scholar theater performers who have participated and won national honors, as the gentleman said, our buttons indeed are bursting a bit. It is appropriate for us to offer this recognition on the House floor. I thank the gentleman for the time, and I congratulate the University of Minnesota Duluth and the University of Minnesota main campus on their achievements.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 347 and urge my colleagues to join me in support of this important resolution, which authorizes the use of the Capitol Grounds for the National Peace Officers' Memorial Service on May 15, 2002. President Kennedy proclaimed May 15th as National Peace Officers' Memorial Day. Each year on this date we, as a Nation, have an opportunity to honor the dedication and devotion of our Nation's peace officers. This May will mark the 21st anniversary of the Memorial Service on the Capitol Grounds. The tragic events of September 11 have reminded us of the great personal sacrifices that our Nation's peace officers make in order to serve the public. Their selflessness has become a model of American strength and courage. There are approximately 700,000 sworn law enforcement officers serving the American public today. During 2001, more than 230 peace officers were killed in the line of duty, of those killed, eleven were women. The average age of those killed in the line of duty was 38 years. The youngest officer killed was 21; the oldest was 78. It is most fitting and proper to honor the lives, sacrifices, and public service of our brave peace officers. I urge support for H. Con. Res. 347.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, this afternoon I greatly enjoyed the opportunity to visit with high school students from Becker, Minnesota who are participating in the Close-Up program. As a result of our visit, I was unable to record my vote during the consideration of the misguided tax legislation that will undermine Social Security. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall 103, for I strongly opposed last year's irresponsible tax bill, and I certainly do not support making these tax law changes permanent. If enacted, this fiscally reckless plan would spend $400 billion on tax cuts for the wealthy, every penny of which comes directly out of Social Security.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2804 is a bill to designate the courthouse located at 95 Seventh Street in San Francisco, California, as the ``James R. Browning United States Courthouse''. I commend our colleague, Congresswoman Pelosi, for her diligence and hard work in bringing this bill through the Committee. I also thank Subcommittee Chairman LaTourette, Ranking Member Costello, and Committee Chairman Young for working with me to ensure that the bill received expeditious consideration. Judge Browning is a tireless and effective advocate for the Ninth Circuit, where he served as a U.S. District Court Judge for nearly 40 years. In 1976, the year Judge Browning became the circuit's Chief Judge, there was no guarantee of a speedy disposition of litigation. Substantial delays were commonplace, and the volume of cases far exceeded the capacity of the courts. Judge Browning convinced Congress and advocacy groups that reducing the size of the Ninth Circuit was not the answer. He then undertook a series of administrative reforms to ensure the prompt, effective administration of justice, and other circuits subsequently adopted many of these ideas. This bill honors his dedication to pubic service and his innovative reshaping of the procedures in the largest and busiest circuit in the country. Judge Browning introduced new methods of case processing and control. He established an executive committee to facilitate administative decisions, and the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel to hear bankruptcy appeals. He reduced the size of the Judicial Council and thus made decision-making more effective. He also decentralized the procurement and budgeting systems, and was instrumental in establishing the Western Justice Center Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to improving the legal system by encouraging collaborative work and research. Judge Browning is a native of Montana, and a decorated veteran of World War II. Prior to joining the Federal Court in 1961, he worked at the U.S. Department of Justice and served as a law clerk at the Supreme Court. Judge Browning is known for his collegiality, courtesy, and support and mentoring of younger judges and court employees. He is a beloved member of the Ninth Circuit. It is fitting and proper to honor Judge Browning's distinguished career with this designation. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 2804.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3986, a bill to extend the period of availability of disaster unemployment assistance under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act in the case of victims of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The bill extends the unemployment assistance period from 26 weeks to 39 weeks. The Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA) program provides unemployment benefits to individuals who have become unemployed because of a Presidentially declared disaster. The Department of Labor has been delegated the authority to administer the program for which the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is responsible under Section 410 of the Disaster Assistance Act. It is important to note that DUA will not be paid to someone who receives regular unemployment compensation or private income protection insurance compensation unless that person's other program eligibility expires and weeks of unemployment continue in the disaster assistance period. DUA will then be paid to those individuals at the same weekly benefit rate that they were receiving under the other compensation program. These requirements ensure that there is no duplication of benefits. Extending the DUA program is particularly important because it covers the self-employed, low-wage earners, and those who fall between the cracks of our regular unemployment insurance programs. Since the program is available only in the wake of such terrible disasters as we experienced on September 11, the help that it provides is especially vital in helping families get back on their feet. The Stafford Act originally provided for up to 52 weeks of disaster unemployment assistance, but during the Reagan Administration, the FEMA programs were subject to many budgets cuts and disaster unemployment assistance was reduced to 26 weeks. Many Members of Congress opposed these cuts at the time. Last December, after months of work by Senator Clinton and Senator Schumer, the other body passed a bill, S. 1622, to extend the disaster unemployment assistance period from 26 weeks to 52 weeks. The Gentleman from New York, Mr. Nadler, had already introduced a companion House bill and he made every effort to have the House consider S. 1622 on the final day of the First Session of the 107th Congress. Regrettably, the House Leadership did not clear the bill for consideration before we adjourned. The Gentleman from New York has continued to actively work the issue almost everyday since the Other Body passed the bill. He shepherded the Senate bill through our Committee, and with the strong support of Chairman Young, Subcommittee Chairman LaTourette, and Subcommittee Democratic Ranking Member Costello, we reported that bill unanimously, in an effort to speed the bill to the President's desk and avoid causing the disaster victims to suffer a lapse in benefits. Although I wish we were simply sending the Senate-passed bill, S. 1622, to the President, it is imperative that we move this new bill, H.R. 3986, forward today, even though it only extends the benefits by 13 weeks. Unfortunately, time is of the essence now. It has been three months since the Other Body acted and the benefits for disaster unemployment insurance are now running out. The disaster unemployment insurance benefits for victims of the World Trade Center attack ended last Sunday, March 17. Similarly, the benefits for victims of the Pentagon will end on March 21. There are so many tragic stories that could be told to help illustrate why this extension of disaster unemployment assistance is so critical at this time. For example, Mr. John Ortiz worked at the Marriott Hotel at the World Trade Center. He is not eligible for regular unemployment assistance and he has been receiving disaster unemployment assistance since mid-October. He has also been helped by two charities, Safe Horizon and the Red Cross, with the money covering needed expenses such as rent. He has looked for other work within the hotel industry, but has not been able to find a new job. The hotel industry has been so dramatically affected by the events of September 11, that there are very few available jobs, if any at all. Mr. Ortiz feels lucky that he does not have children to support, but says there are many, many families who do have children and are in desperate need of help. He is but one of the approximately 2,500 people who will benefit from this legislation. All of these people are trying their best to help themselves by searching each day to find a job, develop new skills, find assistance from charitable programs, pay their rent, and simply survive. I commend the gentleman from New York, Mr. Quinn, for recrafting this legislation to ensure its House passage. I also thank Mr. Nadler for his efforts--he is a champion for all of the victims of September 11th, and I commend him for his stalwart dedication. I am hopeful that the Other Body will be able to quickly consider this legislation and clear it for the President's consideration. Mr. Speaker, these victims of the September 11th terrorist attacks have struggled enough; as Americans, we must help them in their time of need. I urge all Members to support H.R. 3986.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to undertake a sad, yet heart-warming mission--to honor a most cherished staff member, Mrs. Joy Bryson, on her retirement from the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Joy has been serving for the past eight years as Administrator to the Minority. Previously, she served for nine years as Chief Clerk to the then majority--a position she devoutly wished to reclaim. Throughout all of these years she served all of the Members of the Committee and to staff with grace, uncommon ability, and a cheerfulness that always bespoke her name--with joy. Prior to joining the Committee, Joy served as Office Manager for our late distinguished Chairman, Jim Howard. More importantly, Joy served for 14 years the people of the Third Congressional District of New Jersey as if they were her own family, in the process earning their gratitude and affection. In recognition of her abilities, Chairman Howard asked Joy to take on the important position of Committee Administrator. She continued in this position under the following three Chairmen, Glenn Anderson, Bob Roe, and Norm Mineta, and filled a similar position when we became the minority in 1994. I know that Chairman Roe and Secretary Mineta share my gratitude for Joy's many important contributions to the effective operation of the Committee and its staff. Joy has been the Committee's expert on the intricacies of the rules governing the Congressional Administrative process; such as our internal budget rules, and our rules on travel, ethics, and retirement. As a former congressional staffer I know well the complexities involved. When someone knows the rules and procedures as well as Joy does, she can anticipate and solve problems of which Members and staff may be blissfully unaware. I know of many occasions when Joy's expertise saved Members and staff much time and effort, and ensured that administrative actions were done right, the first time. Although Joy knows all the rules and procedures, she is anything but a ``green eyeshade'' type of public servant. Her professional talents include considerable literacy skills. She has a graceful writing style and a good sense for the telling ancedote--told with a special Southern charm. Joy's talents were particularly well displayed when she helped Members prepare speeches, letters and extensions of remarks, expressing our appreciation for distinguished public service, or our thanks for assistance we received. Joy was also an excellent recruiter for the Committee. Through her efforts, the Committee consistently attracted an exceptional group of staff assistants, who were highly competent, enthusiastic team players; invaluable for the successful functioning of the Committee. Joy's greatest contribution to the Committee flowed from her personal qualities--her cheerfulness, her interest in her colleagues, and her maturity and common sense. Joy worked with a number of Staff Directors most of whom had little supervisory experience. She took it upon herself to carry out the sometimes thankless task of breaking them in to the human side of the job, their responsibilities in dealing with personal and work problems of the staff. Joy's dedication to this task, her empathy for the perspective of the administrative staff, and here charm and perceptiveness, gave her great influence, and made the Committee a much better place to work. Supplementing her public service, Joy has been an active volunteer in community service. I particularly appreciate her dedicated service on behalf of the Jo Oberstar Memorial Lecture Series on Breast Cancer Awareness, sponsored by the George Washington University Hospital Breast Care Center in memory of my late wife. Joy played a major role in organizing last year's highly successful lecture and fundraiser. Mr. Speaker, at this time we are in the midst of an Olympic season. If medals were bestowed in the halls of Congress to those staffers who most deserve the title of ``champion'', Joy Bryson would be one of those on the dais with a medal of gold. As Joy returns to her beloved family, her husband Lit and her children, Chris and Jeni, she carries with her out gratitude for her service, and our prayers for her well being and, most of all, for her happiness.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, on May 4-6, 2002, more than 1200 students from across the United States will visit Washington, D.C. to compete in the national finals of the We the People . . . The Citizen and the Constitution program, the most extensive educational program in the country developed specifically to educate young people about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I am proud to announce that the class from Duluth Central High School from Duluth will represent the state of Minnesota in this national event. These young scholars have worked diligently to reach the national finals and through their experience have gained a deep knowledge and understanding of the fundamental principles and values of our constitutional democracy. The three-day national competition is modeled after hearings in the United States Congress. The hearings consist of oral presentations by high school students before a panel of adult judges on constitutional topics. The students' testimony is followed by a period of questioning by the judges who probe their depth of understanding and ability to apply their constitutional knowledge. Administered by the Center for Civic Education, the We the People . . . program has provided curricular materials at upper elementary, middle, and high school levels for more than 26.5 million students nationwide. The program provides students with a working knowledge of our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the principles of democratic government. Members of Congress and their staff enhance the program by discussing current constitutional issues with students and teachers and by participating in other educational activities. It is inspiring to see these young people advocate the fundamental ideals of principles of our government in the aftermath of the tragedy on September 11. These are ideas that identify us as a people and bind us together as a nation. It is important for our next generation to understand these values and principles which we hold as standards in our endeavor to preserve and realize the promise of our constitutional democracy. The class from Duluth Central High School is currently conducting research and preparing for their upcoming participation in the national competition in Washington, D.C. I wish these young ``constitutional experts'' the best of luck at the We the People . . . national finals. They represent the future leaders of our nation.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution to commend the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for sponsoring National Child Passenger Safety Week. I also want to commend the sponsor of the legislation, Mr. Camp, the Ranking Democratic Member of the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, Mr. Borski, the Chairman of the Subcommittee, Mr. Petri, and the Chairman of the full Committee, Mr. Young, for their support of the legislation. In 2000, motor vehicle crashes killed more than 2,300 children under the age of 15 and injured another 291,000. Six out of ten children killed in these crashes were completely unrestrained. In 2000, only nine percent of all children under the age of five rode unrestrained, but they accounted for more than one half of all child occupant fatalities. This is not acceptable. To increase seat belt use nationwide, the previous Administration established goals to reduce the number of child occupant fatalities 15 percent by 2000 and 25 percent by 2005. Education programs, such as TEA 21's Child Passenger Protection Education Grant program, and other programs, played important roles in helping the Department meet the first of these goals. In each of fiscal years 2000, 2001, and 2002, Congress provided $7.5 million to finance the Child Passenger Protection Education Grant program in the Transportation Appropriations Act and pursuant to TEA 21. Forty-eight states, the District of Columbia, and the Territories have received grants under this program. Since 1997, the number of child fatalities resulting from traffic crashes has declined 17 percent, exceeding the previous Administration's goal of a 15 percent decline by the end of 2000. Restraint use for infants has risen to 95 percent from 85 percent in 1996, and has climbed to 91 percent for children aged one to four, up from 60 percent in 1996. The proper use of child restraint systems can save lives, Mr. Speaker. It is essential that we continue to remind parents that all children should use restraint systems properly and to continue providing funding for grant programs to ensure that we continue to make progress in preventing deaths and injuries to children on our Nation's highways. These efforts will help us achieve our goal of a 25-percent reduction in child occupant fatalities by 2005. Again, I want to commend the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and its Administrator, Dr. Jeff Runge, for sponsoring National Child Passenger Safety Week. I strongly support the concurrent resolution and urge its approval.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, the so-called economic stimulus legislation presented to the House is like that old story of throwing an eight-foot rope to a person who's drowning ten feet from shore: it just doesn't get there; there isn't enough rope. Well, there isn't enough help in this initiative the Majority has set before the House and the nation. Extension of unemployment compensation is important, but 13 weeks isn't enough. Offering the unemployed an individual tax credit to buy health insurance on the open market isn't enough: average monthly premiums for COBRA range from $220 for an individual to $580 for a family; the standard unemployment benefits don't even begin to provide workers with the financial assistance they need to carry on their existing health insurance or buy new coverage in the private health insurance marketplace. The rope is just too short. The people in my district who are out of work--and I don't think they are much different from people elsewhere in America--would far rather be paid for working at a useful job than being paid for not working. What they want most is a full time job paying a living wage with decent benefits, such as health insurance, and others that are provided in most collective bargaining agreements in the work place. We ought to be considering legislation that will invest in the nation's infrastructure and create those living wage, productive jobs instead of this mirage of a stimulus bill. At the depths of the Great Depression, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt established the Works Progress Administration, the Civil Conservation Corps and the National Youth Administration which together created jobs for over six million Americans, giving people real hope, lifting the nation out of depression and putting in place permanent improvements that elevated the quality of life throughout America. In 1962, President John F. Kennedy signed into law the Accelerated Public Works Act, which invested over $1 billion in community facilities, putting over 900,000 previously unemployed persons back to work by building water and sewer lines and sewage treatment plants, municipal buildings, fire halls, police stations, street lighting systems, sidewalks, streets, roads and bridges throughout the country. In 1976, President Ford signed the Local Public Works Act and President Carter signed LPW 2, which invested a cumulative $2 billion in similar works throughout the country, creating jobs for over 1.5 million unemployed workers. Today, we should do no less. The Democrats on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee have developed and introduced a bill to authorize $50 billion for infrastructure investments to enhance the security of the nation's rail, environmental, highway, transit, aviation, maritime, water resources, and public buildings infrastructure. With leveraging features included in this legislation, the ten-year cost to the U.S. treasury would be less than $32 billion. The $50 billion of investment initiated by our proposal would create more than 1.5 million jobs and generate $90 billion of total economic activity. Under the Democratic measure, H.R. 3166, preference would be given to infrastructure investments that provide enhanced security for the nation's transportation and environmental systems. Our bill specifically requires that the states, cities, transit authorities, airport authorities, etc., who would receive these funds, commit their investment to meeting security needs of their infrastructure systems and that the funds will be invested in ready-to-go projects to which those funds can be obligated within two years. These investments create the private-sector jobs that build America, that provide the decent wages to buy homes, big-ticket household appliance, automobiles, and the other consumer goods that are the engines of growth for our economy, and which create permanent improvement for our cities and towns, for urban and rural America and improve the quality of life for all of our fellow citizens. Yes, we ought to provide an extension of unemployment compensation and interim health insurance coverage for the nation's unemployed until they can get back to work; but we must create those jobs through enactment of the Rebuild America First Act to finance infrastructure renewal and security for the nation's transportation systems.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2869, the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act. This important bipartisan, bicameral brownfields redevelopment legislation, a long time in coming, will help significantly in the redevelopment of many abandoned and long-forgotten properties dotting our nation's city and community centers. Mr. Speaker, back in the early 1990's, several members of the Democratic caucus began talking about the problems faced in many of our urban centers. Many of our members had spoken with their mayors and other interested constituents about the great number of former commercial and industrial sites left underutilized or abandoned--with no real prospects of redevelopment. These ``brownfields'', which once housed the machinery and the manpower that helped this country grow throughout the last century, were vacant--generating little tax revenue for the cities, and serving as breeding grounds for crime, vandalism, and a poor quality-of-life for neighboring communities. In 1992, members of the Democratic caucus proposed the idea of using the power of the Federal government to help rejuvenate these brownfields properties--cleaning up the legacy of the industrial age, and returning these forgotten properties to productive use. Unfortunately, these efforts were blocked for a variety of reasons--both substantive and political. Now, almost a decade later, I am pleased that we finally have reached agreement on a package that will achieve those original goals. Mr. Speaker, this is not, in my opinion, the best bill that we could offer. In fact, few here today can say that they support everything in this legislation. This bill represents a compromise in the constructive sense of that word--almost exactly the same as one that achieved a vote of 99-0 in the other body, and one that will proceed expeditiously to the President's desk for his signature. Very briefly, this legislation is divided into two titles. The first title contains the text of the Small Business Liability Protection Act that passed the House back in May by a vote of 419-0. This bipartisan legislation seeks to protect small businesses from being sued by overzealous polluters at Superfund sites, as well as protects homeowners and charitable organizations that simply put out the trash. The second title contains, almost verbatim, the text of S. 350, the Senate brownfields legislation that passed the other body last April. This proposal carves out limited Superfund liability exemptions for innocent landowners, prospective purchasers of contaminated properties, and contiguous property owners--the individuals who should never be subject to Superfund liability for these properties. The bill also preserves the vital federal safety net that allows the Environmental Protection Agency to require additional cleanup of properties when there is a threat to human health or the environment following a cleanup under a state program. This provision will ensure that local residents will be protected should a cleanup plan fail to protect human health or the environment. Finally, this legislation will provide much needed funding for brownfields site assessment and cleanup to move brownfields properties into productive reuse as quickly as possible. The bill will make Federal monies available for brownfields site assessment and remediation by amending section 104 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)--the only change in legislative text from S. 350. By placing the legislative funding authority directly in section 104 of CERCLA, this legislation aims to take advantage of Environmental Protection Agency's experiences gained through its current brownfields program, and attempts to build upon these successes through explicit legislative brownfields authority, increased authorizations, and greater flexibility in the case of Federal dollars. Accordingly, we expect EPA to closely model its implementation of this legislation on the Agency's existing brownfields program, and to get these desperately needed funds out the door and directly to the cities and communities as soon as possible. Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, I am pleased to support this important brownfields revitalization legislation. While it has been a long time coming, I believe that this legislation will greatly assist in the redevelopment of brownfields properties that have troubled our nation for too long. I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of H.R. 2595, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Army to transfer land to Chatham County, GA, to enhance recreation opportunities in that locale. The land transfer authorized under this bill is similar to transfers that our committee often approves as part of the Water Resources Development Acts. However, the sponsor of this bill, Mr. Kingston, has indicate that swift action is necessary in advance of next year's Water Resources Development Act so that this project may proceed in a timely manner. The amended bill considered by the House today conforms the bill to the typical terms and conditions associated with land transfers. The revised language ensures that the transfer occurs at no cost to the Federal taxpayer and at no loss to the U.S. Treasury. In addition, the land will be maintained in public ownership for public benefit. If this particular parcel of land is transferred by the county, the transfer must be for lands or equal value, further protecting the interest of the taxpayer. Finally, if the lands are put to use other than as authorized by this bill, ownership of the lands will revert to the United States. As is always done, the land transfer preserves for the United States any easement or rights-of-way necessary to operate and maintain the existing Federal project. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``aye'' on H.R. 2595.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the legislation before us to establish a Presidential commission to develop a plan of action for the establishment and maintenance of the national museum of African American history and culture in Washington, D.C. It is a great tribute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) that he has worked so diligently and vigorously, in a bipartisan fashion with the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Watts), to bring this bill to the House floor. For over a decade, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) has been a persistent and a persuasive advocate for the establishment of a national African American museum, support for which is well established and has already been advocated for quite some time going back to the early 1990s by the Smithsonian Institution, which vigorously endorsed the concept of such a museum. This commission that we are authorizing will supply significant information and data to support the size, the appropriate size of the building, the location, the budget, the extent and type of collection and displays to be managed there. Some of the ideas for the museum include exhibits on the reconstruction era, the Harlem Renaissance, and the Civil Rights movement. We also anticipate that the commission and the museum to be established will work collaboratively with academic institutions to research and study African American life, history, art, and culture, as well as the abominable era of slave trade, which the gentlewoman from Texas alluded to so powerfully in her remarks. As a part of the initiative we launch today, the Presidential commission will convene a national conference to consider and to include the views and opinions of learned persons who are dedicated to the advancement of African American life. This initiative is long overdue; and I strongly urge not only its support in this House, but swift enactment into law and establishment so that the progress can get quickly underway.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3282, a bill to designate the federal building and United States Courthouse in Butte, Montana, in honor of Senator Mike Mansfield, who died in October of this year at the remarkable age of 98. Senator Mansfield was born in New York City on March 16, 1903. His family moved to Cascade County, Montana, in 1906 where he attended local public schools until he dropped out at age 14. At that time, he lied about his age and enlisted in the United States Navy to serve his country during World War I. Mike must have liked the military life, because when he left the Navy, he first joined the Army for two years, and then the marines for two years, finishing his military service in 1922. When he returned to Montana, Senator Mansfield went to work in a copper mine near Butte. While still working the mines, he enrolled in the Montana School of Mines, where he met this future wife, Maureen Hays, a schoolteacher. She persuaded him to complete his high school education by taking correspondence courses. In 1930, he enrolled at the University of Montana, where he received his undergraduate degree, and a master's degree in 1934. From 1933 until 1943, Mike Mansfield was a professor of history and political science at Montana State. In 1943, he was elected to the United States House of representatives, where he served for ten years. Later, he was elected to the U.S. Senate where he launched an illustrious career, serving as Committee Chairman, Democratic Whip, and Majority Leader. Some of our Nation's most turbulent times occurred during his tenure as Senate Majority Leader: assassination of one President and the resignation of another; the assassinations of a civil rights activist and a presidential hopeful; student and political unrest; Vietnam and Watergate. He was at the helm when the Civil rights Act and the Voting Rights Act became laws. He also led the Senate to pass sweeping legislation on health, education, and anti-poverty programs. Senator Mansfield was going to retire from public life when he decided to leave the Senate in 1976. However, President Jimmy Carter urged Senator Mansfield to remain in public service as our Ambassador to Japan, which he agreed to do--and served with distinction. Mike Mansfield was so successful and so well respected at home and in Japan, that President Reagan prevailed upon him to remain in the post throughout the Reagan presidency. Mike Mansfield managed to impress the Japanese as well; so much so, in fact, that when he returned to the U.S. after eleven years as Ambassador, the Japanese Ambassador to this country said Mansfield ``could have run for prime minister and won.'' He was also Montana's ``favorite son'' for a very good reason. He was revered in his home State, and highly respected by his colleagues in the Congress. He was known as a terrific teacher, a great leader, and a wonderful human beng. He was devoted to Maureen, his wife of 68 years, and to their daughter, Anne. His humble and straightforward characteristics made him equally at home in either royal courts or the local coffee shops in rural Montana. His word and his integrity were without question and his reputation as a ``straight shooter'' was well deserved. He combined keen intellect with good judgment to produce astonishing wisdom. His toughest assignment came during the Vietnam years. Although he personally opposed the war, he felt obliged as majority leader, to carry the President's message to the Senate. In many ways the federal building and courthouse in Butte, Montana, accurately reflect who Mike Mansfield was--it is a wonderful, solidly built, grandly situated building, open to the public and dedicated to public service. It is strong without being intimidating; it provides justice and comfort to all who enter. Mr. Speaker, Mike Mansfield was a modest man, but a giant in American politics. To have a federal building and U.S. courthouse bear his name is an honor he earned, and I strongly urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, our long struggle to improve the lot of the Nation's 250,000 railroad workers and 700,000 retirees and to provide relief for our Nation's financially ailing railroad industry is finally coming to an end. The Senate is to be congratulated for expeditiously considering the railroad retirement reform legislation and for passing it overwhelmingly, 90-9. The Senate-passed bill, H.R. 10, is identical to H.R. 1140, enacted by the House on July 31, 2001, by an equally strong vote of 384-33. This bill is the product of an historic agreement reached by railroad labor and management following two years of often-difficult negotiations. The benefit improvements and tax cuts are made possible by changing the current law that limits the investment of Railroad Retirement Trust Fund assets to government securities. The proposed changes in the law governing how Railroad Retirement Trust Fund assets can be invested will not affect the solvency of the Railroad Retirement system. The Tier I portion of the program, which provides Social Security level benefits, will continue to be invested only in government securities. Only Tier II funds, the part of the system that provides pension plan type benefits above Social Security benefit levels, will be eligible for investment in assets other than government securities. The projected increases in trust fund income from these changes are based on fairly conservative forecasts of the rates of return that could be earned from such a diversified portfolio--about two percentage points above the return on government securities. Most importantly, if the investments fail to perform as well as expected, workers' pensions are further protected as this legislation requires that the railroads absorb any future tax increases that might be necessary to keep the system solvent. Ultimately, the Federal government continues to be responsible for the security of the Railroad Retirement System. The proposed legislation provides the first major benefit improvements in railroad retirement in more than 25 years. The primary benefit improvement are: (1) The age at which employees can retire with full benefits is reduced from 62 years to 60 years with 30 years of service as it was before changes made in 1983. (2) The number of years required for vesting in the Railroad Retirement System is reduced from ten years to five years similar to most other pension plans. (3) The benefits of widows and widowers are improved so that a surviving spouse's annuity would be guaranteed to be no less than the amount the retiree was receiving in the month before his or her death, and (4) If the retirement plan becomes overfunded, benefits are automatically improved. H.R. 4844 also reduces significantly the payroll taxes paid by the railroads. By the third year following passage of this bill, the railroads stand to gain nearly $400 million annually for lower payroll taxes. All of these savings go directly to the railroads' bottom lines and can be used to make investments needed in the railroad infrastructure and to improve the wages and working conditions of railway workers. It is important to note that nothing in this legislation alters the fundamental nature of the program. Railroad retirement benefits will continue to be guaranteed, in the final analysis, by the United States Government. Last year, the House passed this bill overwhelmingly, but the Senate failed to act before the 106th Congress ended. This year the House, once again passed this important measure by an overwhelming margin--and this time the Senate has acted. Only the bill number is different from what the House has already passed. This is a good bill. It is good for workers, it is good for retirees and their survivors, it is good for the railroads, and it is good for the country. I urge all Members to support it today so we can get it to the President before the holiday seasons.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman for those kind words and for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted the leadership of the committee has moved quickly to bring this bill to the House floor. I strongly support the initiative to create a new position of Under Secretary for Transportation Policy. It will help this Department to carry out its very significant and far-reaching responsibilities to develop integrated domestic and international transportation policies. I have had the good fortune of being present at the creation of the Department of Transportation in 1966 when I was administrative assistant to my predecessor in Congress, John Blatnik, who then was chairman of the Executive and Legislative Reorganization Subcommittee of the House Committee on Government Operations. He was asked by then President Lyndon Johnson to manage and bring to the House floor legislation to create a Department of Transportation, out of recognition that what we had was a fragmentation, a great diversity of modes of transportation, each with their own stovepipe means of operation but without a single overarching transportation policy. It was President Johnson's objective to bring all these entities together in one new department that would be able to deal with transportation as an entity. We did that. It took quite some effort to bring together modal administrations that for years had operated on auto pilot, without any coordination, without interaction among them. The first Secretary of Transportation, Alan Boyd, took to the task with great vigor and enthusiasm and his successors have done the same. It has taken well over 30 years to craft a spirit of transportation within the Department. In the passage of ISTEA, we brought this concept of a Department of Transportation with a culture of transportation to its, I think, logical conclusion. The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act really culminated years of effort of creating a transportation spirit and policy and need for intermodal communication within the Department, culminated all in one piece of legislation. It was an extraordinary step forward in the history of transportation in America. The new Under Secretary will be the third-ranking official in the Department. He will manage all Department-wide offices dealing with policy and with intermodal transportation to develop comprehensive, sound and interrelated transportation policies. I might say that 16 years ago I introduced the first legislation to create a position of under secretary for intermodalism in the Department of Transportation, and it is now coming to be. Both because the position has been created and because of the person who has been nominated to fill that position, Jeffrey N. Shane, I would say that never in the 35-year history of the Department has a person been named for a position at DOT with better or more appropriate credentials than Jeff Shane, with the sole exception of the current Secretary of Transportation, Norm Mineta. Jeff comes to this position with the sweep of intellect, with the personal and professional integrity, and with more than 3 decades of professional experience in the Department of State and the Department of Transportation on international aviation trade and policy matters, qualities that will enable him to take command of the duties of the office on which he is about to enter with clarity of purpose, with alacrity and, best of all, without a learning curve. My experience with Jeff Shane dates back to well over a decade and a half, to his service at State and DOT in both the Ronald Reagan and George H. Bush administrations. I worked with him extensively on international aviation passenger and cargo trade matters, as well as domestic aviation matters, in my capacity then as chairman of the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight and Aviation authorizing subcommittee. I found Jeff Shane always to be the very model of intellectual integrity; thoroughly knowledgeable on a wide range of issues on which he was called to testify before our committee, well-informed, and, very importantly, a consistently vigilant, vigorous advocate for U.S. aviation interests and a skillful negotiator. Jeff was the architect of our government's original Open Skies policy to promote competition in our bilateral aviation trade agreements. Under this policy, a great many competitive agreements were negotiated during the first Bush administration, and the Clinton administration continued the policy with great success. The result has been that aviation trade markets in passenger and cargo, in which we once had 30 percent of market share, we now have 60 to 70 percent of market share and are the dominant aviation trade partner. Jeff Shane's experience extends well beyond aviation to other modes of transportation, as exemplified by a discussion he and I had shortly after the enactment of ISTEA in 1991. Jeff said, ``This is one of the most extraordinary, innovative transportation measures ever enacted. It has had the exceptionally beneficial effect of causing all of us at the Assistant Secretary-Policy level to come together, share our thoughts, understand each other's mode of transportation better and to begin thinking, as well as acting, intermodally, something we have long needed to do in this department.'' That is an extraordinary observation and admission to make on the part of a policy person in any department, and that reflects the candor with which Jeff approaches his service in the public sector. Secretary Mineta has said to me several times that he would like Jeff Shane to work to upgrade the department's policy office, and, as he put it, make it a ``world-class think tank.'' We need that. We need that kind of support at the policy level of the Department of Transportation. Two years ago, I met with Jeff Shane and Charlie Hunnicutt, who had held the Assistant Secretary position during the Clinton Administration, to explore means of upgrading the Department's aviation policy staff, a staff that deals with the most important issues in the department in negotiating international aviation rights for our airlines, providing expert advice to the Department of Justice when the department is considering airline mergers, and carrying out the department's regulatory responsibilities, including predatory practices, computer reservation systems and adequate competition in Internet ticket sales. It is deplorable that over the past 15 years, the DOT aviation staff has been eroded by budget cutting decisions. The staff has decreased from 166 at the time of the Civil Aeronautics Board sunset in 1985, to fewer than 100 today. Furthermore, as many as half of the staff could well retire in the next few years. It was a great tribute to Jeff Shane that in his career outside of government, he was concerned about the quality of government service among those who continued in the department. He and I took many opportunities over the past few years to raise awareness on the Hill and within the aviation community of the critical importance of this unique staff, and it is so encouraging to me that Secretary Mineta has recognized the problem and is giving Jeff Shane a mandate to correct it. I can think of no one better to do this, no one better qualified to attract the staff, to inspire that staff and to keep them interested and motivated, than Jeff Shane. In these perilous post-September 11 times and in the aftermath of enactment of our most recent aviation and transportation security law, DOT needs at the policy level a person with Jeff Shane's experience, intellectual capacity, honesty and openness to new ideas, as well as energy to pursue and implement innovation. Jeff Shane's reentry into public service will produce better transportation policy decisions, to the great benefit of the Nation's economy and to all who use our transportation systems, as well as to the benefit of the Department of Transportation. This new position is long overdue, much needed, and will serve our country and our transportation policy well. After all, transportation does represent 11 percent of our Nation's gross domestic product. That is $1.1 trillion, an impact that we must nurture and strengthen, and this legislation will help do that.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I join my Transportation and Infrastructure Committee colleagues in introducing the Over-the-Road Bus Security and Safety Act of 2001. Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, over-the-road bus drivers and passengers in the United States have been the targets of many serious assaults, including one assault killing seven passengers and another assault injuring 33 passengers. In addition, there have been at least three other serious over-the-road bus security breaches. Recent terrorist acts on Israeli buses and in bus stations further heighten the need for stronger bus security measures in the United States. The intercity bus industry serves more than 4,000 destinations in the United States, and making intercity bus facilities secure is indeed a formidable task. Federal financial support is needed for passenger and baggage screening in terminals; implementation of a ticket identification system; emergency communications systems linked to police and emergency personnel; enhanced driver compartment security; increased security training; development and maintenance of information and communications systems with law enforcement; installing cameras and video surveillance equipment; and other measures to make buses, terminals, and garages more secure. The Over-the-Road Bus Security and Safety Act of 2001 authorizes the funding and requires the planning necessary to make these critical bus security improvements. The legislation authorizes $200 million in fiscal year 2002 to allow the Secretary of Transportation to make grants to private bus operators for system-wide security improvements to their operations. The bill imposes a 25-cent passenger surcharge in fiscal years 2002, 2003, and 2004 on tickets over $5. The proceeds of the fee will be used by the Secretary for security grants in 2003 and future years. Over-the-road buses, which transport approximately 774 million passengers annually, are the only viable means of transportation for many people throughout the country. They serve thousands of communities that have no other form of intercity public transportation and provide the only affordable means of transportation for millions in urban areas. Just as passage of aviation security legislation is vital to encouraging passengers to fly, again, intercity bus security legislation is needed to restore confidence in our intercity bus system. The bill is not a handout. Since September 11, the intercity bus industry has spent millions on enhanced security measures. The funds provided by the bill will supplement measures already undertaken by the industry to increase the security of the bus system and restore the public's confidence in traveling by bus. I urge my colleagues, all of whom have communities in their districts served by intercity buses, to support this legislation. Although I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill, I strongly encourage the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure to take the next step and develop a comprehensive infrastructure security package. Recently, Congress enacted the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, the most important aviation security legislation of the last three decades. Although the Act creates a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) for all transportation security functions, we have much work left to do. We have enormous security needs among all of our modes of transportation--from passenger and freight railroads, transit systems, and pipelines, to bridges, ports, and tunnels--and other infrastructure facilities, including public buildings, locks and dams, and wastewater and drinking water facilities. For instance, I am very concerned about securing the railways that carry more than 40 percent of the nation's freight traffic and millions of passengers--both commuters and intercity travelers. Amtrak continues to play a vital role in the nation's transportation network. For example, even before the terrorist attacks, Amtrak carried more passengers between New York City and Washington, D.C. than either of the air shuttles. In cities and their surrounding areas throughout the nation, millions rely on commuter trains to get to work each day. New York's Penn Station handles nearly 400,000 Amtrak, rail commuter, and rail transit passengers every day. Yet the infrastructure--the bridges, tunnels, track, stations, yards, and other facilities--that supports all of these movements is not secure from sabotage or other terrorist acts. At the same time, the Nation's freight railroads carry tremendous volumes of hazardous materials--more than one million tons daily of hazardous chemicals, 15 percent of the nation's total. In addition, the railroads are major transporters of coal, agricultural commodities, the products of mines and quarries, and manufactured goods, especially automobiles. If the railroads were shut down due to a terrorist action, the national economy would quickly grind to a halt. A relatively small number of key bridges and rail transportation nodes are vital to the smooth and continuous flow of traffic. Likewise, a number of major tunnels handle significant volumes of freight and passenger traffic. A terrorist attack on any one of these facilities could have devastating consequences in terms of lives lost or economic disruption. However, one of the outgrowths of the September 11 tragedies has been a thorough and ongoing assessment of our transportation infrastructure vulnerabilities. We have begun to determine what will be needed to ensure the safety and security of those who ride the nation's railroads and what must be done to ensure the uninterrupted flow of rail freight traffic. Some of these estimates are preliminary, but they do provide a good initial reading of the needs. On the passenger side, Amtrak estimates that infrastructure protection will require $417.1 million, ensuring equipment security will cost $37.4 million, and providing the necessary manpower will cost $60.6 million. Amtrak will nearly double the number of track inspectors so that they can pay closer attention to ensuring the security of the rights-of-way. In addition, Amtrak requires $1 billion to make necessary life safety improvements in the tunnels feeding New York's Penn station and to rehabilitate tunnels in Washington, D.C. and Baltimore. An additional $254 million is needed to increase the accessibility of Penn Station for safety and emergency responders, to renovate critical bridges in Connecticut, and provide for enhanced radio communications in high-speed territory. On the freight side, the costs of rerouting, increased switching, and express movement of hazardous materials along with increased manpower costs guarding and securing critical nodes, increasing car inspections, and providing employee awareness training has been estimated to be about $100 million annually. Developing a new railroad operations center to provide continuous links to Federal intelligence agencies and upgrading the security at nearly 100 data and computer centers will require $200 million in capital costs. Hardening the bridges, tunnels, fuel facilities, hump yards, and other infrastructure assets that have been identified as being critical to the national defense will require $750 million in up front capital costs. In addition, we face enormous port security needs. Earlier today, the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation had a hearing on port security at which Department of Transportation Secretary Norm Mineta and U.S. Coast Guard Commandant Jim Loy testified that approximately 95 percent of the tonnage of our Nation's international trade moves by water. Six million loaded containers, 156 million tons of hazardous materials, and nearly one billion tons of petroleum products enter our ports each year. During a major military deployment, 90 percent of our military materials move through our Nation's seaports. We need to better protect port facilities and critical bridges by developing a comprehensive security plan, improving security coordination and planning, deploying sea marshals, and establishing new penalties for criminal acts against vessels and maritime facilities. I am hopeful that we can work together, on a bipartisan basis, to develop a comprehensive infrastructure security bill that includes this over-the-road bus bill and security for all of our critical infrastructure.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 232, which formally expresses the sentiment of Congress in honoring the crew and passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 93. On September 11, 2001, four aircraft were hijacked and then simultaneously used as weapons of mass destruction against the United States. Through the selfless acts of the crew and passengers, one of those aircraft, United Airlines Flight 93, fell far short of its intended target--Washington, D.C. I have no doubt that it is because of the heroic actions taken by the crew and passengers of Flight 93, that the Washington D.C. area did not sustain more damage. We owe them our eternal gratitude. Like the Pan Am 103 terrorist attack in December 1988, the events of September 11th have challenged us as a nation, and have forced this Congress and this Administration to re-evaluate the state of security for domestic and international commercial air service. On November 19, 2001, President Bush signed into law the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (P.L. 107-71). This Act completely overhauls our nation's aviation security system. In addition to integrating all security functions within a new Transportation Security Administration, the Act also federalizes the screening workforce to greatly improve the quality of the screening process. Further, the Act mandates 100 percent checked-baggage screening, strengthens cockpit security, expands the Federal Air Marshal program, and ensures that all crewmembers receive proper training to deal with terrorist attacks. These changes will go far to close loopholes in aviation security. Equally important, however, is to ensure that our intelligence gathering keeps pace with these new threats. Credible, potential threat information must be readily synthesized and disseminated to prevent a future tragedy such as that befalling Flight 93. Eleven years ago, the President's Commission on Aviation Security and Terrorism, on which I served as a Commissioner, recommended that we become more aggressive in our intelligence gathering, evaluation, and dissemination. Quoting from the report, The Commission also recommends greater emphasis within the intelligence community on developing a specific union whose principle function will be long-term strategic thinking and planning on terrorism. The objective is to be better able to anticipate future terrorist strategies and tactics, rather than simply to react to incidents as they occur. This is the most challenging aspect of our aviation security network. It is difficult to penetrate these highly-secretive organizations that operate on a war-like footing. The Aviation and Transportation Security Act requires the coordination and sharing and dissemination of intelligence information among federal agencies, including the new Transportation Security Administration. Counter-terrorism also requires renewed higher-level coordination through Interpol, with our allies, and with other nations like Russia and China, as the PanAm Commission recommended eleven years ago. The skills of terrorists have stepped up several levels since the Commission's 1990 report. We must ensure that our counter-intelligence rises to meet that threat. With the appropriate counter-intelligence efforts and security implemented to the fullest extent, we can ensure that the legacy of the crew and passengers of Flight 93 is world-class aviation and inter- modal security system. Our citizens can forever enjoy the freedom of travel that this great nation provides to the envy of the rest of the world. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciate the work of the Appropriations Committee in ensuring the safety of our highways, particularly the Conference Report's provisions to ensure that we have adequate safety standards with regard to Mexican carriers operating in the United States beyond the border commercial zones. The requirements are quite simple--we require that Mexican carriers operating in the United States, including both their drivers and trucks, meet U.S. safety standards before they are given authority to operate throughout the country. All carriers and vehicles are inspected and, until a carrier has been operating in the U.S. for three consecutive years, we require the California system of mandated CVSA inspections every 90 days. We ensure that the Mexican carrier has proof of insurance. We confirm that the drivers have valid Commercial Driver's Licenses. We ensure that Federal and State inspectors are actually in place at the border crossings to inspect trucks. We ensure that the border facilities have the capacity to actually inspect trucks and have scales to actually weigh vehicles and enforce U.S. truck size and weight laws. We require the Department of Transportation Inspector General to do a comprehensive review of each of these requirements and that the Secretary of Transportation certify, in a manner addressing the IG's findings, that the opening of the border does not pose an unacceptable safety risk to the American public. Although all of this would seem common sense, it has been extremely difficult to achieve. The Administration proposed asking the Mexican carriers to fill out a paper application, letting the trucks in, and possibly inspecting them later. Congress, with the leadership of members of both the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the Appropriations Committees, particularly Ranking Member Sabo and Chairman Rogers, and Senators Murray and Shelby, have stood firm in the face of constant assaults from the highest levels in this Administration that these common sense requirements were ``anti- Hispanic'' and ``discriminatory''. Today, the Administration embraces and welcomes the Conference Report with its very strong provisions requiring substantially improved safety for Mexican trucks operating in the United States. In what I would modestly call an abrupt reversal of the Administration's ad hominem attacks of our colleagues, the Administration has abandoned its unfounded and misguided position on this important truck safety issue. The Conference Report adopts the necessary public policy to ensure that safety is the highest priority for Mexican trucks operating on American roadways. Given that highway fatalities are the leading cause of death for persons in the United States of every age from 6 to 33 years old, the American people thank the Gentleman from Minnesota, Mr. Sabo, the Gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Rogers, and other House and Senate colleagues who stood firm in conference to save more of the Nation's children from unneeded deaths on our highways.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Sabo) for yielding me the time and compliment my colleague and dear friend for his leadership on all of the issues in this appropriation bill on transportation and to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) for whom I have worked with for many years on Appalachia and economic development matters and the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), for the excellent product that they have brought back to the House. I do want to observe, though, that the manager's report contains a listing of over 100 airport projects that managers want to see funded out of FAA discretionary funds. In the past, there have been listings of projects for specific airports but without specific dollar amounts and with less prescriptive language than is included in this manager's report. The law governing aviation discretionary funds requires the FAA to establish a priority system under which decisions are made about those projects that will receive these very limited dollars. Highest priority goes to projects that will bring airports into compliance with safety and with security standards, and next are projects that are subject to letters of intent. Others are for phased projects and for preservation of existing infrastructure. Many of the projects listed here may be of fine quality in and of themselves to qualify for funding under FAA established standards. But the aviation system is not like highways. An improvement to a highway project in Boston does not necessarily or in any direct way benefit highway travel in California, but improvement to an airport in Boston makes a great difference to the entire U.S. aviation system. I want to make it clear that the language in a conference report cannot override a priority system established under existing governing law. A decision of the Comptroller General found that Congress cannot require the Navy to select a particular aircraft the language in the committee report wanted the Navy to require. When I chaired the Subcommittee on Aviation over numerous years there were innumerable requests for Members to include designation of their particular airport projects, and I steadfastly refused to do that in our authorization. We should not impose the will of the Congress in specific ways in the aviation system, and as ranking member of the full committee, I continued to resist such designation in the last two FAA authorization bills. Again, I regret that this language has been included.

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, not exactly. Those dollars are committed to acquisition of air traffic control technologies, as the chairman well knows. The operations account is to pay for the air traffic controllers and for the professional systems repair personnel, and were not intended to pay for sky marshals.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Not exactly.

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