John Olver

Mr. OLVER

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

Mr. OLVER. I yield myself 1 minute. I assure the gentleman from Iowa that we will work together with the Federal Rail Administration to implement the 2008 Authorization Act.

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) for a colloquy.

Mr. OLVER. The gentleman is correct. Section 412 will help to ensure compliance with the Buy American Act. Because the intention is not to apply the Buy American Act to new entities, it is consistent with our international obligations.

Mr. OLVER. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. Let me make a few remarks about the general process and then about this amendment, and then maybe I will even have a little bit more time. As indicated in the report to this bill, the funding for earmarks on the Transportation and HUD appropriations bill in 2010 has been cut to 50 percent of the 2006 levels. I would remind the gentleman that in the 2006 budget there was both a Republican majority in both branches and the President of the United States as well. Also, this year, Chairman Obey introduced new requirements to continue our effort to ensure that the appropriations process is open, transparent and worthy of the public's trust. As part of that, the committee vetted each request with the agency under whose jurisdiction an earmark would fall. Also, each request has been publicly disclosed on Members' Web sites so everyone can know exactly what has been asked by every Member and what ones are being funded. I oppose the particular amendment here because the funds here, the $2 million of funds, are being used to replace Doyle Drive with a new parkway connecting the Golden Gate Bridge and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. Federal funds would be used for project design work and the right-of-way acquisition. Doyle Drive is the only link between the San Francisco peninsula and Northern California counties, and is, therefore, designated as a postdisaster recovery route. Doyle Drive was built the year I was born and is reaching the end of its useful life. The lack of shoulders and the absence of a dividing median create dangerous operating conditions and often result in serious accidents. The drive is ranked as the fifth-worst bridge in the Nation and the worst in California on the measure of structural insufficiency. 100,000 drivers, 18,000 transit riders use that Doyle Drive every day. So for those reasons I think this is a very important earmark. Then I would like to comment, and I oppose, again, the amendment. I would like then to use the rest of my time to point out something that I did a little bit earlier, which was to point out that at the end of the Carter administration there was $1 trillion of national debt. That took us from the Presidency of President Washington all the way 190 years to 1980 to get $1 trillion of national debt. Twelve years later, the national debt was over $4 trillion, more than four times, more than quadrupled in that 12 years. That's the 12 years of the greatest debt increase in the history of the country by any percentage-wise. In the Presidency of President Clinton, the debt went up another one- third, 33 percent, in that 8 years which is quite modest compared to what it then went up during the previous administration, the years from 2001 through 2009. The debt during that period went up from $5.3 trillion--I think maybe I said 5.4 the last time I made this, hadn't quite gone down that much--but in any case, it's gone up over $10 trillion by the end of the Bush administration. So that's another doubling, the largest actual number of dollars of debt increase in trillions of any kind but not the largest percentage. This was only a doubling there. And where the gentleman gets the idea that the debt will be a tripling under the present President, I cannot imagine. It will take at least seven more years for us to have any idea what the level of the debt will be at the end of that time. He might be surprised, we might all be surprised that it will be a good deal more modest than the kinds of numbers that the gentleman is using today.

Mr. OLVER. I appreciate the gentleman's attention to this issue. I understand that the House authorizing committee is examining this in the context of their multiyear surface transportation reauthorization bill. In the meantime, I will be happy to work with the gentleman from Oklahoma to address this issue as we move forward in this process and conference this bill with the Senate.

Mr. OLVER. I thank the gentleman from Iowa for his kindness and for his hard work and I certainly, again, join him in thanking the very fine staff who worked together very well in crafting this legislation. It is a good bill. I believe it is a bill that deserves the support of the vast majority of the Members of the Congress.

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and hopefully that will be less than 5 minutes. Mr. Chairman, it is my privilege and pleasure to present the fiscal year 2010 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill to the House. This bill is the product of many hours of hearings and briefings, always with bipartisan input and excellent subcommittee member participation. I especially would like to recognize the important contributions of my ranking member, Tom Latham, in putting this bill together. And as with any healthy relationship, we do not always agree, but I greatly appreciate his partnership, and his input has made the bill better. I also want to take a moment to recognize the hard work of staff, specifically on the minority side, Dena Baron, David Gibbons, Allison Fox and Doug Bobbitt; and on the majority side, Kate Hallahan, Laura Hogshead, Dave Napoliello, Lisa Pena, Alex Gillen, Janine Scianna, Andrew Burton and Blair Anderson. They have spent many late nights putting this bill together, and we would not be here today without their dedication. There has been close communication and coordination between the minority and the majority staffs throughout this process, and the bill is better for that input. Recognizing that today may be long, my remarks will be brief. This is a nonpartisan bill, as bills related to transportation and housing should be. It invests in our Nation's infrastructure during a transformational period for both the Department of Transportation and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The bill provides $123.1 billion in total budgetary resources, $48 million below the President's budget request. Within Housing and Urban Development, this bill recognizes that foreclosure rates remain high and the current economic climate and weak job market have increased demand for affordable housing. To that extent, this bill provides $47.1 billion for HUD and targets most of the $1.6 billion increase over the President's budget to programs that the previous administration repeatedly attempted to reduce or zero out and thus have not kept up with the need. In contrast, Transportation is a budget in flux, largely covering programs that are in transition with major surface and aviation authorizations pending. The authorizing committees of jurisdiction in both the House and Senate have either passed or begun marking up multi- year legislation to reform and extend these important infrastructure programs. In that regard, the bill includes $75.8 billion in transportation infrastructure investments. That is $1.66 billion below the President's request. Last, I want to note that in supporting the transformations taking place at each Department, this bill has emphasized investments in five key areas: one, building healthy communities with environmentally sustainable solutions; two, maintaining services in rural communities; three, supporting vulnerable populations; four, investing in the national infrastructure; and, five, ensuring transportation safety. In conclusion, we worked hard to balance many competing needs to produce a bill that reflects the bipartisan needs of transportation and housing. I'm pleased with the product, and I urge Members to support it. [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY09.101 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY09.102 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY09.103 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY09.104 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY09.105 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY09.106 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY09.107 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY09.108 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY09.109 I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OLVER. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

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

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard) for a colloquy.

Mr. OLVER. I thank the Congresswoman from California, and I share her concern about the terrible accident in Los Angeles, as well as her resolve to help prevent further accidents. It is, in fact, my intention that the funding provided for railroad research and development be available for positive train control research and demonstration projects. I believe PTC is a necessary addition to our national railroad system, and I thank the Congresswoman for her leadership on this issue and keeping it in our attention.

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Mr. OLVER. Furthermore, I would just simply say, of the $47 billion, more than $21 billion has been obligated. Those expenditures are going on. That's more than the amount that was intended to be obligated by the end of the 2009 fiscal year. We're already obligating the money into 2010, so it's getting out there pretty quickly. Though, I do have great sympathy for the position that you're taking in that it takes far too long, and I hope the authorizing will take care of that in a new event.

Mr. OLVER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. To finish this and to allow him to respond in some kind of way, I would give the gentleman additional time, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to say that I can remember--and probably, if you think about it a little bit, you can remember, too, because my memory is probably a lot poorer than yours--times when this bill was brought to the floor, and point of order after point of order to the level of practically stripping half the bill away were made by your committee. Well, maybe you weren't the chairman at that particular time, but a few years ago, that sort of thing did happen.

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) for a colloquy.

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Oklahoma is correct. Section 164 of this bill allows that.

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

Mr. OLVER. I do not. I withdraw my point of order.

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman has just made an argument and continues to make an argument about the level of debt. In 1980, when President Carter left office, the national debt of the country was about $1 trillion. Twelve years later, the debt of the country had reached $4 trillion. It had quadrupled. It had quadrupled in those 12 years. In the following 8 years, the debt went up again by another $1.4 trillion, so that at the end of President Clinton's term, the debt had gone up about one-third more, just slightly more than one- third more. Then during the Presidency of the previous President, we saw the debt go from $5.4 trillion to $10.5 trillion as he left office. Then it went up almost double in just an 8-year period. Now there is concern since we have been in a recession for more than a year now, the first five quarters of which were clearly in the previous administration with the housing crisis, a deep recession with severe losses of jobs throughout the last year. They're continuing. This is a deep recession, but this is not a time to be cutting our most vulnerable people through this sort of action. This action is the wrong action to take. We will grow out of this over time. I urge defeat of the amendment. I yield back my time.

Mr. OLVER. I would be happy to yield.

Mr. OLVER

Mr. OLVER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include tabular and extraneous material on H.R. 3288.

Mr. OLVER

Mr. OLVER. I am not familiar with the day-to-day progress of the collection of those construction funds.

Mr. OLVER. I continue to reserve. I think I have the right to close, do I not?