John Olver

Mr. OLVER

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report on H.R. 3074. Before I explain the contents of the conference report, however, I would like to thank my ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan, Joe Knollenberg, for his great help in crafting a well-balanced Transportation and Housing bill. Joe and I have put together a strong bipartisan bill that will help address the Nation's important transportation and housing needs. I think Joe and I have been a good team and I look forward to working closely with him again next year. I would also like to thank the staff on both sides of the aisle for all of their hard work. On the minority side, Dena Baron and Dave Gibbons and Jeff Goff. And on the majority side, Kate Hallahan, our clerk; Cheryle Tucker; David Napoliello; Laura Hogshead; Alex Gillen; Mark Fedor and Bob Letteney. They performed well under stress and trying circumstances, and without their dedication we would not be here today debating this bill. Mr. Speaker, Members can and should be proud of this bill because it provides critical investments in our Nation's transportation and housing infrastructure, and does so within a fiscally sound manner and within our conference allocation. Unlike some other issues we debate in Congress, transportation and housing have a long history of bipartisanship, and I hope we can continue in that spirit of bipartisanship today. At their core, both transportation and housing have a direct impact on the people we represent. All of us are affected by congestion on our roads, travel delays in our airports, and the lack of dependable public transportation. We also all benefit from community development investments and the availability of affordable housing in our communities. This bill in so many ways affects each and every one of us. Let me briefly explain some of the highlights of the conference report. For the first time in 13 years, our bill includes $75 million for the Veterans Affairs Supported Housing program, commonly known as VASH, to provide roughly 10,000 housing vouchers and supportive services to homeless veterans. While we do not know the exact number of homeless veterans, the Veterans Administration has estimated that there were as many as 196,000 during a point-in-time count just last year. Surely we can all agree that 10,000 homeless veterans are 10,000 too many homeless veterans. Even one homeless veteran is a homeless veteran too many. We have also included $30 million for about 4,000 new housing vouchers for the disabled, the first new housing vouchers for the disabled in 5 years. The need for housing for the disabled has been well documented, with average housing rents rising much faster than a disabled person's monthly supplemental security income, SSI. Secondly, the bill provides $250 million to help with the current foreclosure crisis. We have included $200 million over the President's request for the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, a recognized national intermediary between lenders and homeowners, to help individuals and families forestall foreclosure and keep their homes. A separate $50 million is provided for HUD's housing counseling program to help new potential home buyers avoid future foreclosures. According to the Mortgage Bankers Association, the second quarter of this year saw the highest percentage of mortgages go into foreclosure since 1972. Many of those foreclosures and delinquencies are due to the proliferation of subprime and other adjustable-rate loans. With 2 million subprime mortgages expected to reset over the next 18 months, the number of homeowners facing delinquency is staggering in many parts of the country. The funds included in this bill for foreclosure counseling is the first major Federal investment into this growing crisis. The President has stated on a number of occasions that he wants to help solve this problem. If he is serious, he would sign this bill into law and help many tens of thousands of families receive the help they need to manage their finances and the refinancing of their mortgage so they can keep their homes. In addition, the bill also makes significant investment in our transportation infrastructure. The Minnesota bridge tragedy put a national spotlight in the State, on the state of America's transportation infrastructure, especially with the number of lives lost in that tragedy. More than 20,000 out of some 100,000-plus bridges on the national highway system are characterized as ``structurally deficient'' or ``functionally obsolete.'' Traffic on these bridges is over 190 million trips per day. The conference report includes an additional billion dollars over the President's request for the bridge program as a downpayment to help States fix their long list of substandard bridges; $195 million is specifically included for the I-35 bridge in Minnesota, which alone carried 140,000 passenger vehicles per day. And that sum will make Minnesota whole for the full replacement of that Interstate 35 bridge in Minneapolis. Those are the new initiatives, but there are numerous other positive transportation and housing investments in this bill. The bill honors the highway guarantees which were set in the authorization bill in 2005, the SAFETEA-LU authorizing bill which was brought forward by the now minority just 2 years ago. That guarantee provides a record level of investment in transit as well. This funding will improve the Nation's transportation and infrastructure and is expected to create close to 80,000 new jobs between highways and transit. The bill also provides $1.375 billion for Amtrak, plus an additional $75 million for a new intercity passenger rail program to create a faster, safer, and more reliable intercity passenger rail system. That $75 million was requested by the President. We have included $3.5 billion for the Airport Improvement Program, the same as last year, for critical airport safety capacity and security upgrades. We have also provided almost $3.8 billion for Community Development Block Grants, the extremely popular CDBG program, which is $100 million above fiscal year 2007 but still $400 million below the fiscal year 2001 level. It is estimated that every dollar of community block grant funding leverages $3 in private investment for critical community and economic development priorities in over a thousand localities around the country. The bill restores housing for the elderly and disabled to last year's level. And finally, we have provided enough funding to ensure that no one that has a section 8 tenant or project-based housing voucher will lose that voucher in this fiscal 2008 year. Mr. Speaker, transportation and housing is not a Republican, not a Democratic issue. A broad consensus exists affirming the great needs for transportation and infrastructure investment and affordable housing nationwide. As such, this budget should be above partisan politics and should be passed and signed into law. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to adopt the conference report. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 817, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 3074) making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes.

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the conference report to accompany H.R. 3074.

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Speaker, I yield at this time 3 minutes to the vice chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Pastor from Arizona. (Mr. PASTOR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio, Marcy Kaptur, a senior member of our subcommittee and someone who has been very much involved in planning for communities over the years.

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) who has been very helpful with thoughts and suggestions about how transportation and housing should fit together in the planning of communities.

Mr. OLVER

Mr. OLVER. I thank the gentleman from Michigan for his motion. Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman from Michigan has already said, the provisions that are in the legislation on the House side, section 416 and 417, are two provisions that relate to illegal immigration. The first of those provisions is one which states that no funds in this act can be used to provide homeownership assistance for illegal immigrants. The second, section 417, says that no funds may be used to employ workers who are illegal immigrants. The first of these sections applies to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the second one applies to the Department of Transportation and relates to people who might otherwise be employed in construction under the Department of Transportation. As the gentleman from Michigan has pointed out, those were adopted unanimously by voice vote here in the House during the passage of this legislation. So they are before the conference and, because they were adopted earlier, I am willing to adopt them now and adopt the motion as is. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 1 of rule XXII and by direction of the Committee on Appropriations, I move to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 3074) making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, disagree to the Senate amendment, and agree to the conference asked by the Senate.

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

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the comments by the gentleman from California, but just point out that that is a very complicated issue, not a part of the conference that we are involved in, and will take a bit more time, probably more than we can resolve today. I am ready to yield back if the gentleman from Michigan has no other speakers.

Mr. OLVER

Mr. OLVER. I thank the gentleman from West Virginia for yielding time and for his dedicated leadership of the Resources Committee. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1483, but I will address my specific comments to subtitle D of title II which authorizes the Freedom's Way National Heritage Area. New England provided four of our original 13 States and has been long associated with our Nation's formative years, our major social and intellectual movements and, of course, great natural beauty. The area that comprises the proposed Freedom's Way National Heritage Area, which is included in this bill, has provided the backdrop for many other events and movements that shaped America. Freedom's Way includes 37 communities in Massachusetts and eight in New Hampshire that are historically rich. Freedom's Way chronicles and celebrates the Revolutionary War stories of Lexington and Concord. Additionally, the free religious expression and social movements of the Shakers and Transcendentalists had their roots in the region. The area also hosted the social justice and the social criticism development found in the writings of Emerson, Hawthorne, Alcott, Fuller and Thoreau. And finally, the movements for the abolition of slavery, women's rights and environmental conservation all have roots within the boundary of Freedom's Way. The proposed initiative embodies the National Park Service's criteria for national heritage areas. It will conserve historic, cultural, scenic and natural resources for the benefit of current and future generations. The idea has received widespread support from local residents and has the support from every Member of the House whose district includes a portion of the proposed area. With this designation, the communities included will benefit from better resources to create a cohesive learning experience, using the natural setting and historical and cultural artifacts to tell the story of American democracy. I urge all my colleagues to support H.R. 1483.

Mr. OLVER

Mr. OLVER. Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the contributions and achievements of Massachusetts Governor Jane Swift, a woman whose record of leadership in our State is matched by few. When Jane Swift became Chief Executive of Massachusetts in April 2001, she became the first woman Governor of the Bay State, one of only five women Governors at the time, and one of only 19 women Governors in history. These numbers are far too low, and Governor Swift deserves credit for being a trailblazer and an inspiration to what hopefully will turn out to be many more women chief executives in the future. During her tenure, Governor Swift oversaw a budget that had reached the $23 billion mark, directed 13 cabinet agencies and executive divisions, and enacted numerous reforms. In policymaking as well as in example, she established herself as an advocate for women and families. Her efforts on behalf of foster children and working parents garnered praise across the political spectrum. And, when Governor Swift delivered twin girls while in office, she achieved yet another remarkable first. Also while in office, Governor Swift continued her work as a strong supporter of the cultural development of our State, which included championing the Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art. Her efforts to bolster Mass MoCA continue to be greatly appreciated by everyone who cares about the economic development of the north Berkshires. Governor Swift counts 12 total years of official public service in her career. Elected to the Massachusetts State Senate at age 25, she was the youngest-ever woman member of the legislature. She also has spent many more years personally working in her community to create opportunity and improve the quality of life for local residents. Today, Governor Swift serves on a number of key boards and steering committees, including the board of the Williamstown Elementary School Endowment and the Community Outreach Board of Mass MoCA. She remains active in politics and is engaged in a wide variety of public policy issues. Drawing on her diverse experiences, Governor Swift shares her perspectives as a sought-after public speaker, imparting wisdom to and inspiring the next generation of women and men leaders. It is my honor to commend her years of public service and pay tribute to Governor Swift's enduring leadership. National Women's Business Week is an important occasion to celebrate women leaders, and Governor Swift has been a groundbreaker since the beginning of her career. She is, indeed, a ``Woman of Achievement,'' and I join the Northern Berkshire Business and Professional Women in honoring her this month.

Mr. OLVER

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I would ask the gentleman if he would withdraw his amendment, and I would be happy to work with him, as I am sure the ranking member would as well, though I would lead him to comment, to work with him in conference to address this issue. Otherwise, I rise in reluctant opposition to the gentleman's amendment. I believe the need, as he has indicated, for housing counseling is strong. But what his offset does in this instance is to take the funding for the Inspector General for HUD back to the level of the budget request for the year 2007, where we had increased in the supplemental budget the appropriation for the IG to $88.2 million, in the supplemental budget had been added to the IG to do its work, and have recommended in this bill a less than 2 percent increase. So that, compared with the 2007 appropriation for the IG, the amendment would represent a 5 or 6 percent decrease in the amount of funding available for the IG. We simply are not in a position to be able to increase this account because of the deep holes that the President handed to us in the HUD budget. We froze the account at the FY07 level, with the supplemental amount there, which is the best that we could do without harming other HUD programs. Now, taking the funding from the Inspector General to increase this account is counterproductive to the gentleman's amendment. Should we reduce the oversight in order to increase the housing counseling? They're both vital programs. We feel that we have struck the correct balance here for this pair of needs. I commend the gentleman's passion on the issue, and I would be happy to work with him in the future on the issue related to housing counseling. And I do recognize that we are likely to have some, in the secondary lending market, problems later this year, continuing problems, as we have been having, but I would urge the gentleman to withdraw the amendment at this time and we would try to work it out in conference.

Mr. OLVER. I would be happy to yield.

Mr. OLVER. It will not be spent probably until the very end of the 2008 fiscal year, is when finally the RFPs will go out for possible granting.

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

Mr. OLVER

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

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

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I too am concerned about the environmental impact of aviation. Noise is a very serious issue and impossible to solve to the satisfaction of all. Although new technologies and planes and air space redesign will assist in the noise problem with the number of passengers projected in the near future, noise will continue to be a problem. I commend the gentlewoman for bringing this issue to our attention, as she has time after time. As I say, it will continue to be a problem. I am willing to accept the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OLVER. I just wanted to respond to the gentleman who had just spoken. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Minnesota has mentioned twice in the comments that he has made, at least twice in the comments, that, again, the idea that this budget that we are dealing with has somehow inherent in it the largest tax increase in American history, twice he has made that comment. Well, the budget that we are dealing with has no increase in taxes whatsoever related to it. I think the gentleman understands that. In fact, even the budget resolution that guides the budgeting this year for all of our bills, all of our discretionary budget legislation, that budget resolution does not have any tax increase in it either. I think the gentleman understands that as well. We are making messages here that are really not correct. They are simply not accurate. They are simply not true. I want to make a couple of points. I want to remind the gentleman and others from the other side who have spoken that since President Bush took office, the national debt has increased by over $3 trillion, $3 trillion, over 3, it's closer to $3.3 trillion. That's 3 with 12 zeros behind it. Some people have a difficult time understanding a three with six zeros behind it. That's $1 million. But $3 trillion, with 12 zeros behind it is $1 million, million dollars. That debt increase of $3 trillion that has occurred in the 6 years that President Bush has been in power in the Presidency, that ends up costing us, the American people, us as a Nation, $100 billion each and every year in additional deficit, which is what has happened, an additional deficit, every year $100 billion each year, which is some 200 times the amount of money that is being suggested ought to be cut from this one little budget that we are talking about that provides money for a whole series of very important initiatives that serve the American people. To close, I could go on substantially on the debt, but the $500 million that has been suggested that should be cut from this budget, this one simple budget that funds housing and transportation programs of the government, this one budget, if one compares the $500 million, that two pieces of the budget, the $500 million is essentially the same money that we had to put back in the budget because Amtrak would have shut down. $500 million is about the same amount of money as was put into that. It is about one half of the money that was put back in to make certain that not a single family, low-income family, people who are living with incomes of under 30 percent of the adjusted median income in their areas, one half of the amount of money that would allow all of those people who had vouchers and who are getting rental assistance, in that very low-income category, to maintain their vouchers for the next year. It is also a sum of money which is somewhat less than the amount that we had to put back into the budget to bring it up to these levels, to the 2007 enacted level at $700 million, or the Community Development Block Grant program, which provides money to virtually every community in the country, larger cities, by direct distribution from the Federal Government through Housing and Urban Development, but also to many smaller cities and communities, even quite small communities, through the money that's distributed to the States who then give it back to those communities in order to build affordable housing and build public facilities in their communities. It is very close to the amount of money that is included in this budget and provides for the construction of elder housing, housing for the disabled and housing for distressed public housing as well. So that is what is involved in $500 million at this point. I hope the amendment is defeated.

Mr. OLVER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I just want to say to the gentlewoman from North Carolina that the absolute platinum standard for fiscal irresponsibility lies squarely on the shoulders of her party and the Presidents of her party. The national debt for this country when President Carter left office in 1981 was less than $1 trillion. The national debt 12 years later, in the case of President Carter, that represents the debt that had been reached over 180 years of American history. Twelve years later, the national debt when the first President Bush left office was $4.3 trillion, more than four times as much, more than quadrupling the total national debt. That is the gold standard of fiscal irresponsibility. And then we had 8 years of President Clinton, and the national debt went up another $1.2 trillion, about a 25 percent increase in the national debt in the 8 years that he was President. But then, under the present President Bush and the Congress of his party in control during those years, the national debt has gone up $3.3 trillion more, a total of about two-thirds more, 67 or 68 percent more in debt. That is the platinum standard in debt increase and in fiscal irresponsibility.

Mr. OLVER

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

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

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.