Don Young

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Highways, Transit and Pipelines.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman).

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran), my good friend.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In closing, I would like to thank all the Members who have spoken in favor of this bill. There is no one who spoke against the bill. There will be approximately 11 more amendments offered. I believe this bill is properly structured. And I have to say this. I again want to stress one thing. I came to this House 31 years ago. I came to this House to work to achieve legislation, and I believe we can only do that by working together. It is something I believe very strongly in. And I know there are those who do not agree with me, who do not want to achieve, but to bicker; and I do not think this is what this House is all about. So I again congratulate the other side, the minority, at this time for their willingness to work with me and I to work with them to achieve a goal. And I think we have partially reached it in this legislation. Because of certain media reports about the 375, I have to remind those that might be listening to this or are watching that the 375 that I chose 2\1/2\ years ago with the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) was not an artificial number. It was not a ``wanna'' number. This is a number that came from this administration just to maintain and improve a little bit. There was only one way we could have gotten there, and that was by, in fact, increasing user fees. And of course that has run into tremendous opposition from different people, everybody knows who. But I hope they understand what we are really trying to do in this legislation; and what we should have been doing with the 375 is the future of this Nation because at this period of time before elections, we hear a lot of people talking about Social Security, Medicare, education, border patrol, homeland security, prescription drugs; and they are all good and they are all needed. But there is only one way we can have the financial revenue to get those achievements done, and that is to have a good infrastructure system in place for the future. Without a good infrastructure system, we do not have the economic capability of doing those things everybody wants us to do. This is not a new idea. Eisenhower saw it and built the interstate system 50 years ago and made this the greatest Nation not just for security purposes, but to be able to move goods and products and people to and from and establish industries because of that infrastructure system put in place 50 years ago. Now we have competition internationally. We have nations that recognize this. We did not win the Cold War because of our military might. In fact, we did not even win the Second World War because of our military might. We won it because we could deliver troops, products, food, and people across this Nation to the manufacturing points. China, as said in my opening statement, now recognizes that. And we hear a lot of China, about outsourcing. We hear a lot about China and their economic growth; but they recognize why we were great, and I stress that word ``were,'' because they are going to build in 15 years the same amount of highways that it took us 60 years to build in the United States to tie their provinces together, like we tied our States together, so there would be no more warlords. They will have a united China with 4.5 billion people to be able to produce and compete with anyone in this world and probably beat them on all forms of products, especially when Russia is right next door with all the natural resources that they use to do that production. And the foresight, I believe, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and I have had to see that challenge and try to rise to that occasion to make sure this Nation has the ability to compete internationally, that is what this bill is about and what it should be as more. And that is why in this bill I have a reopener, and I have people objecting to that, because I believe our economy is coming back, but our needs to move people is also increasing at a dramatic rate, and I want to have my grandkids and my great grandkids and my great, great grandkids to have the advantages and ability to compete globally because of the infrastructure system that we will put in place. I have told my adversaries that are against my 375 that I will be back. I will continue this fight because I believe in it so strongly for this Nation. I believe this House has a responsibility to leave a proper legacy behind for the future generations of this great Nation. I hope everybody that listens to the debate as far as the amendments go understands that we are going to listen to them. We will vote some down; we will accept them, but when it is all said and done that we step forth with this bill tomorrow I hope in the near hours to start the process to leave a legacy behind for this great Nation.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be modified in the form at the desk.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, we have reviewed this amendment, and I believe, with consultation, we have agreed to the amendment.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, we have not seen the language yet as far as the amendment. It is my indication I do not think we are going to object, but I would like to be able to read the language first. I do not think we have any objections to it.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I will say that to the gentleman I do think the amendment has some merit; but as the gentleman mentioned, now with the shortage of dollars, et cetera, I would suggest that we continue to work with the gentlewoman as we go through this process and see if we cannot reach a solution to it. And I think that can be achieved. But at this time I would oppose the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I reluctantly rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, the amendment under consideration would make improvements to H.R. 3550 as well as to make some technical corrections. More specifically, it would require more oversight of the use of Federal funds for transportation projects. It allows funds to be used for additional planning activities under a pilot program. It would allow new activities under the Federal lands highway program to improve how projects are developed in conjunction with wildlife along the highways. It would allow the Secretary to let States assume the responsibility of the Secretary for transportation enhancements, recreational trails and ITS projects. It would require the Secretary to conduct a rulemaking to ensure that States are repairing or replacing damaged features on the National Highway System with highway features that have been tested, evaluated, and found to be acceptable under certain guidelines. It makes a technical change to ensure that only new interstate facilities are eligible under the interstate system for construction of toll pilot programs. It designates new highways for high-priority corridors on the National Highway System. It would require the Secretary to conduct a pavement-marking system evaluation study to improve safety on the highways. It creates a national clearinghouse for the purpose of assembling and disassembling information relating to improvement of roadway work-zone safety. It makes procedural improvements to the planning requirements for metropolitan areas in States regarding the Clean Air Act. It directs the Secretary to create a model statute for the States to use when developing drunk-driving detection, prevention, and enforcement programs. The budget title sets discretionary spending limits on outlays for the highway and mass transit budget categories and for new budget authority for the mass transit category and continues the budgetary fire walls for highway and transit programs. It would improve the calculation of revenue-aligned budget authority, or RABA, to provide more accurate information of revenue to the Highway Trust Fund. Finally, it sets the annual obligation limitations for the highway and transit programs for the fiscal years 2004 to 2009. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I also rise in opposition. I understand what the gentleman from Arizona is trying to do, and I want to compliment the gentleman. He is one of the few people in this body who did not ask me for any earmarks. I do thank him for that. I understand what he is trying to say. But I have to remind everybody about earmarks in this legislation. It is, in fact, a request from Members, and it is the one time they might have an opportunity to represent their district. That is very true. I have some Members in this body that get no money out of DOT in their district because they are sparsely populated and all the money goes to the large urban areas. This is one time there is a fairness doctrine. Every nickel that is earmarked in this bill goes to a form of transportation. No dollars go outside that for any other purpose, regardless of what you might read. It goes to a form of transportation. I know what the gentleman is trying to do. He is right about what the appropriators have done in the past and will probably continue to do. This is an amendment that has good thought but does not have great merit. Because I do think it, in fact, will impede those States that have had projects of national significance or projects of high priority. They will be penalized from getting those projects accomplished. I thank the gentleman for his presentation. I understand what the gentleman from Arizona is trying to do, but I do believe that the amendment is inappropriate at this time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I introduced the Save the Summers Act of 2004, which will temporarily increase the cap on the number of skilled overseas workers allowed into the United States. For the first time and without advance warning, the Department of Homeland Security announced that the cap of 66,000 H-2B visas had been reached just six months into the current year--leaving summer employers stranded. This one-year emergency fix will increase the number of H-2B visas by 40,000 for fiscal year 2004 only. This bill will also require that the Department of Homeland Security provide Congress with quarterly reports on the number of H-2B visas issued and an annual report providing a statistical analysis of the program. The H-2B visa program allows foreign workers to come to the U.S. for short periods of time (up to 10 months) to fill seasonal or temporary jobs. The fishing industry in Alaska, tourist and resort industry along much of the East Coast, the Upper Midwest, and the Rockies, swimming pool management companies across America, catfish, timber and sugar industries in Louisiana, crab processors in North Carolina, and the shrimp industry in Texas are just a few that depend on the H2-B program to bring in needed workers. Fishing in Alaska supports nearly 20,000 jobs, and is estimated to be a billion dollar-a-year industry with nearly 700 million dollars-a- year in exports. The processors and vessel owners rely on these temporary workers who are Japanese technicians specifically trained to the standards required for Alaska Ikuro products to be sold in the Japanese market. Their skills are not otherwise available in the Alaska or U.S. labor pool and they are not taking work from U.S. workers. My state relies on these workers and I believe the H-2B visa program is vital to the survival and economic growth of the fishing industry in Alaska. The potential for lost revenue in Alaska is extremely high if the industry does not have these skilled technicians to aid with the processing. This is a serious matter that requires immediate legislative action. I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives for their support and urge them to swiftly pass this emergency legislation, which directly affects the economy in many of our districts.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure have until midnight, Monday, March 29, 2004, to file a report to accompany the bill, H.R. 3550, to authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety programs, and transit programs, and for other purposes.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3850.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, the Committee on Ways and Means, the Committee on Science, and the Committee on Resources be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 3850) to provide an extension of highway, highway safety, motor carrier safety, transit, and other programs funded out of the Highway Trust Fund pending enactment of a law reauthorizing the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. That is correct.