The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“FAA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2018” mentioning the Department of Interior was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H3710-H3722 on April 27, 2018.
The Department oversees more than 500 million acres of land. Downsizing the Federal Government, a project aimed at lowering taxes and boosting federal efficiency, said the department has contributed to a growing water crisis and holds many lands which could be better managed.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
FAA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2018
General Leave
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 4.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania). Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 839 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, H.R. 4.
Will the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Johnson) kindly take the chair.
{time} 0911
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill (H.R. 4) to reauthorize programs of the Federal Aviation Administration, and for other purposes, with Mr. Johnson of Louisiana
(Acting Chair) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Thursday, April 26, 2018, amendment No. 87 printed in House Report 115-650, offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch), had been disposed of.
Amendments En Bloc No. 4 Offered by Mr. Shuster of Pennsylvania
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 839, I offer amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 4 consisting of amendment Nos. 102, 103, 105, 106, 109, 111, 113, and 116 printed in part A of House Report 115-650, offered by Mr. Shuster of Pennsylvania:
Amendment No. 102 Offered by mr. thompson of california
Page 270, line 21, strike ``and'' at the end.
Page 271, line 2, strike the quotation marks and both periods and insert a semicolon.
Page 271, after line 2, insert the following:
``(13) removing standing burned trees; and
``(14) replacing water systems that have been burned and have caused contamination.''.
Amendment No. 103 Offered by mr. keating of massachusetts
Page 273, line 12, strike ``; and'' and insert a semicolon.
Page 273, line 16, strike the period and insert ``; and''.
Page 273, after line 16, insert the following:
(3) how State, Tribal, and local governments, first responders, utility companies, hospitals, nursing homes, and other long-term care facilities should develop a strategy to coordinate emergency response plans, including the activation of emergency response plans, in anticipation of a major disaster, including severe weather events.
Amendment No. 105 Offered by mr. meadows of north carolina
Page 297, line 12, insert ``the Disaster Assistance Working Group of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency,'' after ``Development,''.
Page 297, line 22, insert ``the Disaster Assistance Working Group of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency,'' after ``Development,''.
Amendment No. 106 Offered by mr. blumenauer of oregon
Add at the end of title VI:
SEC. 637. ELIGIBILITY FOR CODE IMPLEMENTATION AND
ENFORCEMENT.
Section 402 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170a) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (4);
(2) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (6); and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:
``(5) provide assistance to State and local governments for building code and floodplain management ordinance administration and enforcement, including inspections for substantial damage compliance.''.
Amendment No. 109 Offered by ms. jackson lee of texas
At the end of title VI, insert the following:
SEC. ___. GAO REPORT ON LONG-TERM RECOVERY EFFORTS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 240 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report on long-term recovery efforts following Hurricane Andrew, the attacks of September 11, 2001, Hurricane Katrina, Hurricane Ike, and Hurricane Sandy.
(b) Content of Report.--The report shall contain the following:
(1) Information on defining a long-term recovery, the stages of a long-term recovery, and the transition from Federal Government management of long-term recovery efforts to State and local leadership.
(2) An assessment of the personnel needed, and the types of expertise or certifications required to accomplish the administration and management of recovery efforts for each of the disasters described in subsection (a).
(3) An analysis of the success and efficiency of the long-term disaster recovery, and best practices learned that may be applied to future long-term disaster recovery plans.
(4) Recommendations of the Comptroller General for what should be defined as a long-term disaster recovery project using existing authority and responsibility of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to advise and make recommendations to the President regarding Presidential Disaster Declarations.
(5) Recommendations of FEMA on the capacity and competence of FEMA to manage multiple major Presidential Disaster Declarations simultaneously of the magnitude of 3, 4, or all 5 of the disasters described in subsection (a) occurring within weeks of each other.
Amendment No. 111 Offered by mr. keating of massachusetts
At the end of title VI (page 322, after line 24), add the following new section:
SEC. 637. GUIDANCE AND TRAINING BY FEMA ON COORDINATION OF
EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANS.
(a) Training Requirement.--The Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall provide guidance and training on an annual basis to State, local, and Tribal governments, first responders, and facilities that store hazardous materials on coordination of emergency response plans in the event of a major disaster or emergency, including severe weather events. The guidance and training shall include the following:
(1) Providing a list of equipment required in the event a hazardous substance is released into the environment.
(2) Outlining the health risks associated with exposure to hazardous substances to improve treatment response.
(3) Publishing best practices for mitigating further danger to communities from hazardous substances.
(b) Implementation.--The requirement of subsection (a) shall be implemented not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
Amendment No. 113 Offered by mr. cartwright of pennsylvania
Add at the end of the bill the following:
TITLE IX--PREPAREDNESS AND RISK MANAGEMENT FOR EXTREME WEATHER PATTERNS
ASSURING RESILIENCE AND EFFECTIVENESS
SEC. 901. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Preparedness and Risk Management for Extreme Weather Patterns Assuring Resilience and Effectiveness Act of 2018'' or the ``PREPARE Act of 2018''.
SEC. 902. INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON EXTREME WEATHER RESILIENCE,
PREPAREDNESS, AND RISK IDENTIFICATION AND
MANAGEMENT.
(a) Establishment.--There is hereby established a council to be known as the ``Interagency Council on Extreme Weather Resilience, Preparedness, and Risk Identification and Management''.
(b) Membership.--The Interagency Council shall be composed of the following:
(1) Senior officials, to be appointed by the President, including representation from the following:
(A) The Council on Environmental Quality.
(B) The Office of Science and Technology Policy.
(C) The National Security Council.
(D) The Office of Management and Budget.
(E) The Department of Transportation.
(F) The Environmental Protection Agency.
(G) The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
(H) The Department of Energy.
(I) The Department of Homeland Security.
(J) The Federal Emergency Management Agency.
(K) The Department of Defense.
(L) The National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
(M) The Department of Agriculture.
(N) The Department of Housing and Urban Development.
(O) The Department of Justice.
(2) Senior officials, to be appointed by the President, who have relevant policy expertise and policy responsibilities, including in the following areas:
(A) Economic policy and risk analysis.
(B) Foreign affairs.
(C) Defense and intelligence.
(D) Homeland security.
(E) Energy.
(F) Environmental protection.
(G) Natural resources.
(H) Coasts, oceans, rivers, and floodplains.
(I) Agriculture.
(J) Health.
(K) Transportation and infrastructure.
(L) Housing.
(M) Education.
(N) Extreme weather data analysis or meteorological science.
(O) Social science.
(P) Strategic planning.
(Q) Urban and land use planning.
(R) Other areas the President determines appropriate.
(c) Co-Chairpersons.--
(1) In general.--The Interagency Council shall be co-chaired by the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and the Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget. The President may appoint one or more additional members as co-chairs, as appropriate.
(2) Duties.--The co-chairpersons shall--
(A) oversee the Interagency Council's response to the Government Accountability Office's recommendations under subsection (f)(5);
(B) use the evaluation framework and performance metrics developed pursuant to subsection (f)(6) to evaluate agency progress in meeting the goals and implementing the priorities described in subsection (f)(1)(A); and
(C) work to ensure that sufficient resources are available for agencies to--
(i) meet the goals and implement the priorities described in subsection (f)(1)(A); and
(ii) implement the recommendations developed under subsection (f)(2).
(d) Administration.--The co-chairpersons of the Interagency Council (or staff designed by the co-chairpersons) shall provide administrative support and additional resources, as appropriate, to the Interagency Council to the extent permitted by law and within existing appropriations. The Interagency Council co-chairpersons shall determine the amount of funding and personnel necessary for the Interagency Council to carry out its duties and the amount of funding and personnel each agency represented on the Interagency Council should contribute in order for the Interagency Council to carry out such duties. Agencies shall, upon the request of the co-chairpersons of the Interagency Council, make available personnel, administrative support services, and information to the Interagency Council.
(e) Structure.--
(1) Steering committee.--The co-chairpersons of the Interagency Council shall designate a subset of members of the Interagency Council to serve on a steering committee. Such steering committee shall assist the Interagency Council in determining its priorities and its strategic direction.
(2) Working groups.--The co-chairpersons of the Interagency Council and its steering committee may establish working groups as needed.
(f) Duties of the Interagency Council.--
(1) Goals and priorities.--
(A) In general.--The Interagency Council shall establish Governmentwide goals and priorities for extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management. In establishing such goals and priorities, the Interagency Council shall consider the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, agency continuity of operations plans, the National Preparedness Goal, the National Preparedness Report, the National Global Change Research Plan, the Mitigation Framework Leadership Group's National Mitigation Investment Strategy (if available), State and local mitigation plans, and all relevant provisions of the Government Accountability Office's High-Risk Series.
(B) Coordination.--In executing the duties pursuant to this subsection, the Interagency Council shall coordinate with other groups in the Federal Government focused on extreme weather mitigation and recovery (including the Mitigation Framework Leadership Group, the Recovery Support Functions Leaders Group, and the Emergency Support Functions Leaders Group), to avoid duplication among Federal activities to the extent practicable.
(C) Incorporation into agency activities.--In carrying out subparagraph (A), the Interagency Council shall, in order to ensure that information relating to extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management is incorporated into everyday agency activities--
(i) work with agencies to assist such agencies in considering the goals and priorities described in subparagraph (A) in agency strategic, programmatic, and budget planning;
(ii) identify details to be included in agency extreme weather plans; and
(iii) work to identify and communicate localized extreme weather and natural hazard risk to the extent possible using the best available information regarding risk, and encourage the development of thorough, updated maps, models, and tools to measure and evaluate risk.
(2) Priority interagency federal actions.--The Interagency Council shall develop, recommend, coordinate, and track implementation of priority interagency Federal Government actions related to extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management.
(3) Support regional, state, and local actions.--The Interagency Council shall support regional, State, and local action to assess extreme weather-related vulnerabilities and cost effectively increase extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management of communities, critical economic sectors, natural and built infrastructure, and natural resources, including by--
(A) conducting inventories under section 906;
(B) convening meetings under section 907;
(C) providing guidance to agencies to produce tools and products that enhance extreme weather resilience planning, risk knowledge, and actions for use in all levels of government, including guidance on how to prioritize funding in order to produce such tools and products; and
(D) reviewing State and local mitigation plans.
(4) Meteorological and extreme weather science.--The Interagency Council shall facilitate the integration of meteorological and extreme weather science, in addition to other scientific disciplines such as physical, natural, and social science that the Council determines to be appropriate, in the policies risk evaluation and communication, and planning of agencies and the private sector, including by--
(A) promoting the development of innovative, actionable, and accessible Federal extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management-related information, data, tools, and examples of successful actions at appropriate scales for decisionmakers; and
(B) providing such information, data, tools, and examples to the agency or agencies designated under section 904 to include on the website established and maintained or designated pursuant to such section.
(5) High-risk report recommendations.--The Interagency Council shall assess the specific recommendations relating to extreme weather in all relevant provisions of the Government Accountability Office's High-Risk Series, identify the feasibility of revising Federal programs to implement such recommendations, and develop a plan to address such recommendations when feasible that does not duplicate the National Preparedness Goal.
(6) Framework and performance metrics.--The Interagency Council shall use existing and emerging science to develop or adopt--
(A) a framework for evaluating the progress and success of extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management-related efforts that is complementary to and not duplicative of any local or national indicator system developed as part of the National Preparedness Goal; and
(B) performance metrics that allow tracking of the actions taken and progress made toward meeting the goals and implementing the priorities described in paragraph (1)(A).
(7) Recommendations for the ceq and omb.--The Interagency Council shall provide to the Council on Environmental Quality, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Department of Homeland Security recommendations on how agencies should--
(A) develop or update agency extreme weather plans;
(B) remove barriers to State and local extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management, in agency regulations, guidance, and policies; and
(C) avoid duplication among Federal activities to the extent practicable.
(8) Public input and comment.--The Interagency Council shall solicit and incorporate public input and comment as appropriate into the decisions of the Interagency Council.
(9) Inventory and meetings.--The Interagency Council shall conduct inventories under section 906 and convene meetings under section 907.
(10) Definition of extreme weather.--The Interagency Council shall consider and may update, not less frequently than every two years, in consultation with appropriate scientific bodies, the definition of ``extreme weather'' and what other weather events (in addition to those described in section 909(3)) qualify as extreme weather for purposes of this title. The definition of ``extreme weather'' shall be published and updated, as necessary, on the website of the Council and in the Federal Register.
(11) Other duties.--The Interagency Council shall carry out any other duties the co-chairpersons of the Interagency Council determine appropriate.
(12) Public information.--The Interagency Council shall--
(A) make information available online--
(i) for tracking implementation of agency extreme weather plans and Governmentwide goals and priorities described in paragraph (1)(A);
(ii) on recommendations relating to extreme weather in all relevant provisions of the Government Accountability Office's High-Risk Series; and
(iii) on the results of the Council's efforts to identify nationwide and localized risks (including updated mapping efforts); and
(B) make such High-Risk Series and the reports submitted under paragraph (13) available as the Council determines appropriate.
(13) Annual report.--Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter
(concurrently with the United States Global Change Research Program Annual Report and the National Preparedness Report), the Interagency Council shall submit to Congress, and make available to the United States Global Change Research Program and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, a report that--
(A) describes how the goals and priorities described in paragraph (1)(A) are being met and implemented using--
(i) the performance metrics developed under paragraph
(6)(B); and
(ii) information on--
(I) agency expenditures, broken down by program activity level if practicable, that are directly related to extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management, including extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management of Federal facilities; and
(II) the effectiveness of such expenditures, along with associated financial impacts and community, infrastructure, and environmental benefits, to the extent such data are available;
(B) provides recommendations to enhance the effectiveness of such implementation and sets benchmarks to meet;
(C) describes the progress of the regional coordination efforts described in sections 906, 907, and 908; and
(D) includes a summary of public comments solicited under paragraph (8) and any action the Interagency Council took to respond to such comments.
(g) Consultation.--In carrying out paragraphs (2) through
(12) of subsection (f), the Interagency Council shall consult with agencies, State and local governments, academic and research institutions, and the private and nonprofit sectors.
(h) OMB Guidance.--The Director of the Office of Management and Budget, taking into consideration the recommendations provided by the Interagency Council under subsection (f)(7), shall issue guidance to agencies on--
(1) developing agency extreme weather plans, which shall incorporate existing agency reports, where appropriate, to prevent duplication and reduce overlap; and
(2) developing agency regulations, guidance, and policies to remove barriers to State and local extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management.
SEC. 903. AGENCY PLANNING FOR EXTREME WEATHER-RELATED RISKS.
(a) Agency Extreme Weather Resilience, Preparedness, and Risk Identification and Management Plans.--
(1) Agency submission.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every 2 years thereafter, the head of each agency, in coordination with the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to avoid duplication with the National Planning Frameworks, shall submit to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and to the Interagency Council a comprehensive plan that integrates consideration of extreme weather into such agency's operations and overall mission objectives
(hereinafter referred to as an ``agency extreme weather plan'').
(2) Hearing.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every 2 years thereafter, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall convene an interagency budget crosscut and policy hearing to review and integrate all the agency extreme weather plans and to ensure that such extreme weather plans and the activities of agencies align with the goals and priorities established under section 902(f)(1)(A).
(3) OMB submission.--The Director of the Office of Management and Budget, upon receipt of all agency extreme weather plans in a given year, shall consolidate and submit to Congress such plans.
(b) Inclusions.--Each agency extreme weather plan shall include--
(1) identification and assessment of extreme weather-related impacts on, and risks to--
(A) the agency's ability to accomplish its missions, operations, and programs over time periods to be designated by the Interagency Council; and
(B) State and local entities;
(2) identification and assessment of barriers posed by Federal programs the agency administers to State and local extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management efforts;
(3) a description of programs, policies, and plans the agency has already put in place, as well as additional actions the agency will take, to manage extreme weather risks in the near term and build resilience in the short and long term;
(4) a description of how the agency will consider the need to improve extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management, including the costs and benefits of such improvement, with respect to agency suppliers, supply chain, real property investments, and capital equipment purchases, including by updating agency policies for leasing, building upgrades, relocation of existing facilities and equipment, and construction of new facilities;
(5) a description of how the agency will support any ongoing or future public-private partnership to improve extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management, including the cost and benefits of technology and methodology improvements, hardening, or rapid restoration;
(6) a description of how the agency will contribute to coordinated interagency efforts to support extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management at all levels of government, including collaborative work across agencies' regional offices and hubs, and through coordinated development of information, data, and tools, consistent with sections 906, 907, and 908; and
(7) any other details identified by the Interagency Council under section 902(f)(1)(B)(ii).
SEC. 904. WEBSITE.
(a) In General.--The Interagency Council shall designate an agency or agencies to establish, maintain, or designate a website that provides timely, actionable, and accessible information, data, and tools on current and future risks related to extreme weather, preparedness, resilience, and risk identification and management, to support Federal, regional, State, local, private sector, and other decisionmakers.
(b) Interagency Progress.--The website described under subsection (a), shall identify interagency progress, and propose the next interagency steps, towards responding to threats posed by extreme weather.
(c) Best Practices.--The website described under subsection
(a) shall provide best practices and examples from Federal, regional, State, and local decisionmakers in the public and private sectors about how to use extreme weather-related information in planning and decisionmaking.
(d) Interagency Council Information and Tools.--The website described under subsection (a) shall include the information, data, tools, and examples provided by the Interagency Council pursuant to section 902(f)(4).
(e) Best Available Meteorological Science.--The website described under subsection (a) shall identify best available meteorological science relating to extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management.
(f) Public Outreach and Education.--The Interagency Council shall designate one or more agencies to conduct outreach and educational activities to inform the public and regional, State, and local decisionmakers about the tools and information available on the website described under subsection (a).
SEC. 905. PROVIDING ADEQUATE RESOURCES AND SUPPORT.
The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall ensure that each agency provides adequate resources to the Interagency Council, including administrative services and personnel support, as appropriate--
(1) for the website described under section 904; and
(2) to otherwise carry out this title.
SEC. 906. INVENTORY.
(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every 2 years thereafter, the Interagency Council, or a working group of such Interagency Council established by the co-chairpersons thereof, shall conduct and publish an inventory of all regional offices, centers, and programs of agencies that are assisting with extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management efforts at the State or local level, including--
(1) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's regional programs;
(2) the Department of the Interior's Fish and Wildlife Service Landscape Conservation Cooperatives;
(3) the United States Geological Survey's Climate Science Centers;
(4) the Department of Agriculture's Climate Hubs;
(5) the regional offices of--
(A) the Environmental Protection Agency;
(B) the Federal Emergency Management Agency;
(C) the Department of Transportation; and
(D) the Forest Service;
(6) the division offices of the Army Corps of Engineers; and
(7) such other offices, centers, and programs or other agency efforts as determined appropriate by the Interagency Council.
(b) Assistance Described.--An inventory conducted and published under subsection (a) shall include a description of the assistance each agency office, center, or program is providing to assist with extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management efforts at the State or local level.
SEC. 907. MEETINGS.
Not later than 6 months after the publication of each inventory under section 906, the Interagency Council shall convene a meeting of representatives of the offices, centers, and programs included in such inventory and invite other local and regional stakeholders to participate and develop plans to coordinate the efforts of such offices, centers, and programs and facilitate efficient services to stakeholders. At such meetings, such representatives shall--
(1) share information regarding their office, center, or program's extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management efforts;
(2) identify opportunities for collaboration and coordination of research agendas, extreme weather assessment activities, vulnerability assessments, data collection and analysis, and planning and implementing extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management projects;
(3) identify extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management information needs, research gaps, and decision support needs that are not met by any of the offices, centers, or programs included in the inventory under section 906 and make available such identification for purposes of information to be submitted to the Interagency Council under section 907;
(4) identify common and complementary goals for extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management within each region to be prioritized for the coming year and beyond;
(5) identify barriers to regional extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management planning and implementation that can be overcome or minimized through Federal action and specific suggestions for improvement;
(6) evaluate progress and jointly develop a strategy for realizing extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management-related goals, including clearly identified responsibilities by each collaborating regional office, center, or program; and
(7) share experiences and best practices in stakeholder engagement and communication, decision support, and science-practice interactions that support the realization of identified extreme weather resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management goals.
SEC. 908. PROGRESS UPDATES.
Not later than 90 days after each meeting under section 907, each agency that participates in such meeting shall submit to the Interagency Council, and make available to the United States Global Change Research Program and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, information describing progress in regional coordination and collaboration in aligning Federal resilience, preparedness, and risk identification and management efforts at the State and local level, and the benefits of such regional coordination and collaboration.
SEC. 909. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) Agency.--The term ``agency'' has the meaning given the term ``Executive agency'' under section 105 of title 5, but does not include the Government Accountability Office.
(2) Agency extreme weather plan.--The term ``agency extreme weather plan'' means a plan required under section 903(a).
(3) Extreme weather.--The term ``extreme weather'' includes observed or anticipated severe and unseasonable atmospheric conditions, including drought, wildfire, heavy precipitation, wave, high water, snowstorm, landslide, mudslide, hurricanes, tornadoes and other windstorms (including derechos), extreme heat, extreme cold, sustained temperatures or precipitation that deviate from historical averages, and any other weather event that the Interagency Council determines qualifies as extreme weather pursuant to section 902(f)(10).
(4) Interagency council.--The term ``Interagency Council'' means the Interagency Council on Extreme Weather Resilience, Preparedness, and Risk Identification and Management established under section 902(a).
(5) Mitigation plan.--The term ``mitigation plan'' means the mitigation plan required under section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5165).
(6) National global change research plan.--The term
``National Global Change Research Plan'' means the National Global Change Research Plan developed under section 104 of the Global Change Research Act of 1990 (15 U.S.C. 2934), or any revision thereof.
(7) National oil and hazardous substances pollution contingency plan.--The term ``National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan'' means the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan described under part 300 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, or any revision thereof.
(8) National preparedness goal.--The term ``National Preparedness Goal'' means the national preparedness goal developed under section 643 of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 (6 U.S.C. 743).
(9) National preparedness report.--The term ``National Preparedness Report'' means the report required by section 652(a) of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 (6 U.S.C. 752(a); Public Law 109-295).
(10) Preparedness.--The term ``preparedness'' means actions taken to plan, organize, equip, train, and exercise to build, apply, and sustain the capabilities necessary to prevent, protect against, ameliorate the effects of, respond to, and recover from extreme weather related damages to life, health, property, livelihoods, ecosystems, and national security.
(11) Resilience.--The term ``resilience'' means the ability to anticipate, prepare for, and adapt to changing conditions and withstand, respond to, and recover rapidly from disruptions.
(12) Senior official.--The term ``senior official'' means a Deputy Secretary (or an equivalent officer) of an agency.
(13) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several States, the District of Columbia, each commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States, and each federally recognized Indian Tribe.
(14) United states global change research program.--The term ``United States Global Change Research Program'' means the United States Global Change Research Program established under section 103 of the Global Change Research Act of 1990
(15 U.S.C. 2933).
(15) United states global change research program annual report.--The term ``United States Global Change Research Program Annual Report'' means the report required by section 102(e)(7) of the Global Change Research Act of 1990 (15 U.S.C. 2932(e)(7)).
SEC. 910. REQUIREMENT TO INCLUDE AGENCY EXTREME WEATHER PLAN
IN AGENCY PERFORMANCE PLAN.
A description of the most recent agency extreme weather plan, as required under section 903, shall be included in the performance plan of an agency (as defined in section 909) required pursuant to section 1115(b) of title 31, United States Code.
SEC. 911. SUNSET AND REPEAL.
This title ceases to be effective and is repealed on the date that is 5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Amendment No. 116 Offered by mrs. comstock of virginia
Beginning on page 331, strike line 13 and all that follows through page 332, line 1 (and redesignate any subsequent subsections accordingly).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 839, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I support considering these amendments en bloc, all of which have been approved by both the majority and minority. These Members put forward thoughtful amendments, and I am pleased to be able to support moving them en bloc.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I support the adoption of the amendments en bloc and recommend them to my colleagues, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise to speak in support of the Jackson Lee Amendment to H.R. 4, FAA Reauthorization and Disaster Recovery Reform Act, which is included in En Bloc Amendment Number Four.
I.thank the Chair and Ranking Member of the House Committee on Rules for making this Jackson Lee Amendment in order.
I thank Chairman Shuster and Ranking Member DeFazio for their leadership in bringing the FAA Reauthorization and Disaster Recovery Reform Act to the House Floor for consideration.
I am disappointed that the other Jackson Lee Amendments to H.R. 4, the ``FAA Reauthorization and Disaster Recovery Reform Act that addressed disaster recovery reform and offered improvements to commercial air transportation, were not made in order.
I offered Jackson Lee Amendment No. 609 because of my experience with Hurricane Harvey.
Over the years, Members of Congress, develop an extensive network of people we work with and those who may have need of legislative assistance.
The storm and the catastrophic flooding that resulted from Hurricane Harvey put at risk thousands of people who needed help.
The 911 emergency call centers serving the disaster area were inundated with thousands of calls for rescues.
I am pleased to say that my office managed dozens of calls, which came to me and my staff from Houston residents seeking rescue or medical assistance.
FEMA, the City of Houston and the State of Texas did exceptional work in the disaster response for Hurricane Harvey.
There is no blame or fault, but valuable lessons that can be learned.
There was no way to pre-prepare for Hurricane Harvey or Maria or Irma or any of the other major disaster events in 2017.
What we can do is learn as much as possible and apply those lessons to future disaster response and recovery efforts.
When there is an event, like Hurricane Harvey there are important and valuable lessons that can help us to meet future challenges.
Harvey's significance is the size of the impact zone and the level of flooding experienced.
The nine-county Houston metro area impacted by Hurricane Harvey covers 9,444 square miles, an area larger than five states, including New Hampshire, New Jersey and Connecticut.
Harris County covers 1,778 square miles, enough space to fit New York City, Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, Seattle, Austin and Dallas, with room still to spare.
There was over 41,500 square miles of land mass impacted by Hurricane Harvey and the subsequent flooding that covered an area larger than the States of Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont combined.
Hurricane Harvey dropped 21 trillion gallons of rainfall on Texas and Louisiana, most of it on the Houston Metroplex.
Harvey dropped 51.88 inches of rain near Cedar Bayou, in the City of Houston, and 52 inches in Nederland and nearby Groves Texas making this the highest rain totals ever recorded for a single U.S. weather event.
At its peak on September 1, 2017, one-third of Houston was underwater.
At the peak on August 31, there were 34,575 evacuees in shelters across Texas.
Hurricane Harvey is the largest housing disaster to strike the U.S. in our nation's history.
Hurricane Harvey damaged 203,000 homes, of which 12,700 were destroyed.
On April 17, 2018, 2,585 families are still in hotel rooms in hotels because of Hurricane Harvey.
Thousands of others with severe damage to their homes continue to live with family or friends.
889,425 people have registered for assistance with the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
There are families including small children and the elderly living in mold infested or gutted-out homes.
The Jackson Lee Amendment made in order for consideration of H.R. 4, provides for a GAO report 240 days following enactment on long-term recovery efforts following Hurricane Andrew, September 11, 2001, Hurricane Katrina, Hurricane Ike, and Hurricane Sandy to better inform the Congress when catastrophic events occur that may require long-term recovery planning.
My amendment is the first step to determine how best to stress test FEMA for capacity and competence to respond to several major disaster at the same time.
Disasters like Harvey, Maria, Jose, Sandy, Ike, and September 11, 2018 are exemplars of the most challenging and catastrophic events in our nation's modern history.
These disasters will or have taken years to recovery from, which classifies them as long term recovery events.
We need to learn from our past to better secure our future should our nation face similar challenges.
This Jackson Lee Amendment would ensure that we learn and benefit from these tragic events so that we might be better prepared for future challenges.
The amendment will provide GAO report that will: define a federal disaster long-term recovery, define the stages of a long-term recovery, and report on the competence and capacity of FEMA to manage 2 or more major disasters of the magnitude exemplified--simultaneously.
Further, the GAO will report on lessons that may be applied to future long-term disaster recovery efforts.
The GAO will also report on what existing authority granted to FEMA to advise and make recommendations to the President regarding Presidential Disaster Declarations which may be instructive regarding a Presidential long-term recovery disaster declaration.
Another Jackson Lee Amendment to the Disaster Recovery Reform component of the bill, but which was not made in order would have made permanent the FEMA Office of Response and Recovery, which currently exists but is not codified by law.
In 2017, starting on August 25, when Hurricane Harvey struck Texas, on September 6, when Hurricane Irma lashed the U.S. Virgin Islands, on September 9, when Hurricane Jose smashed into Puerto Rico, and Hurricane Irma moved over the Florida Keys, and on September 20, when Hurricane Maria took aim at Puerto Rico; FEMA had to respond to each disaster and engage in sustained recovery efforts that will in the cases of Texas and Puerto Rico last for years.
Hurricane Harvey broke a rainfall record for a single tropical storm with more than 4 feet of rain.
Puerto Rico is still mired in attempting to recover from the longest blackout in U.S. history after Hurricane Maria struck many months ago.
More than 1,000 are estimated to have died in Puerto Rico due to Hurricane Maria and its aftermath.
Following the hurricanes came California's most destructive and largest wildfire season ever.
The Tubbs Fire in Northern California killed 22 people and damaged more than 5,600 structures.
Last year was also the third-hottest year on record.
San Francisco reported its highest temperature ever, 106 degrees Fahrenheit, while other parts of the country set records for high-
temperature streaks.
For states like Arizona and South Carolina, 2017 was the warmest year ever.
14 places across Oklahoma, Missouri, and Arkansas reported record-
high water levels during floods in April and May.
In 2017, requests for federal disaster aid jumped tenfold compared to 2016, with 4.7 million people registering with the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Last year will go down in the record books for many reasons, destructive hurricanes, wildfires, mudslides, and droughts struck leaving death and destruction.
Every place in this nation has one or more vulnerability to floods, damaging storms, wildfires, earthquakes, volcanic activity, or earth movement--such as mudslides.
FEMA is the nation's premier organization that must respond to catastrophes at a moment's notice.
This Jackson Lee Amendment will allow Congress to develop better situational awareness on FEMA's role in disaster response especially when there may be multiple disasters putting demand on limited agency resources that require long-term recovery planning.
Thank you for this opportunity to explain my amendment and I ask for bipartisan support for this Jackson Lee Amendment included in En Bloc Four.
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment which helps to ensure that communities ravaged by wildfires, including the recent October fires, get the help they need to recover.
Last year, we saw the worst fire season in California history. The October fires alone included 21 major fires that were fought by 11,000 firefighters burning nearly 245,000 acres. Those fires forced 100,000 people to evacuate and destroyed 8,900 homes and structures. Tragically, 44 people lost their lives.
The City of Santa Rosa is located in my district and was hit especially hard by the October fires with over 3,000 homes and businesses destroyed. In the Fountaingrove neighborhood, north of downtown, the contamination in the water system that resulted directly from the fire melting the plastic water lines and appurtenances servicing 350 homes, must be replaced due to ongoing contamination of benzene, a toxic organic chemical.
As our communities move forward on the long road to recovery, we are finding that the needs of suburban and urban communities impacted by devastating wildfires don't always fit neatly into some of FEMA's current rules and regulations, which seem geared towards hurricane and flooding response and mitigation.
Issues as simple as whether or not FEMA should cover the costs of removing standing burned trees or replacing water systems, like the one in Fountaingrove that was contaminated as a result of the October fires, are not so simple.
My amendment provides FEMA with the capability and authority to mitigate these issues by explicitly stating that FEMA hazard mitigation funding can be used to remove standing, burned trees and replacing water systems damaged and/or contaminated by wildfires.
I appreciate House leadership working with my office to include this amendment in the en bloc so that we advance this issue and I look forward to continuing to work with them to ensure that my district's fire recovery needs are being met.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.
Amendment No. 104 Offered by Mr. Graves of Louisiana
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 104 printed in part A of House Report 115-650.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 294, strike lines 5 through 8, and insert the following:
SEC. 618. RIGHT OF ARBITRATION.
Section 423 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5189a) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Right of Arbitration.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding this section, an applicant for assistance under this title may request arbitration to dispute the eligibility for assistance or repayment of assistance provided for a project of more than
$100,000 for any disaster that occurred after January 1, 2016. Such arbitration shall be conducted de novo by the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals and the decision of such Board shall be binding.
``(2) Eligibility.--To participate in arbitration under this subsection, an applicant--
``(A) shall submit the dispute to the arbitration process established under the authority granted under section 601 of Public Law 111-5; and
``(B) may submit a request for arbitration in lieu of an appeal under subsection (a) at any time before the Administrator of FEMA has issued a final agency determination.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 839, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, in the aftermath of disasters, billions and billions of dollars in claims are often worked out between local governments, State governments, and FEMA.
In many cases, because disasters are inherently unpredictable, volatile, and folks are doing what they need to do to help their communities recover and address these urgent needs, in some cases, not every i is dotted, not every t is crossed. These minor issues often become obstacles to these communities being reimbursed and their ability to recover.
FEMA has an appeals process, Mr. Chairman. In that appeals process, you basically have FEMA reviewing FEMA. I don't think that that is the appropriate approach.
Section 618 of the underlying bill has an arbitration process, but that arbitration process has other Homeland Security officials reviewing the work of Homeland Security.
There was a better model that was used after the 2005 disasters whereby an outside board that exists, the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, which is an independent body, was brought in to help review some of these appeals that local and State governments brought forth to the Corps of Engineers.
{time} 0915
It was a better approach. It provided for more thorough evaluation and, again, the independence of having an outside entity review this. Our amendment simply improves upon the existing arbitration process in section 618 of the bill.
I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their work on this legislation. I think it is very important, and I urge adoption of the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Obviously, the gentleman has had significant experience with these problems in his part of the world that I think are somewhat unique, and I can also understand we want to expedite the review of people's claims. The major concerns we have are, one, that it appears, under the wording, that there would be no timeframe. So 20, 30 years after a disaster, someone could come in and file for arbitration. And secondly, by lowering the cost to any project that is $100,000, we have no idea what the scope of that would be or how many appeals that might generate. But I think the general idea about using the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals does have merit to expedite citizens' claims against the government agency.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Cartwright).
Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member, and I would like to thank the committee also for including the PREPARE Act in the en bloc package. I would also like to thank Congressman Lance for being my partner on the PREPARE Act for the past two Congresses and Congressmen Webster, Sanford, and Meadows for being cosponsors and supporters of my amendment, the PREPARE Act. I would also like to thank the over 50 outside organizations, companies, and think tanks that have supported the PREPARE Act. Finally, I thank Chairman Shuster and Congressman Gowdy for passing the PREPARE Act out of the T&I and OGR committees, respectively.
Extreme weather is expensive. Last year the public and private sector saw a combined $300 billion in damages from major extreme weather events. Congress had to spend an extra $120 billion in disaster supplemental appropriations so we could get our disaster-ravaged communities back on their feet. And from our infrastructure to our defense, our public buildings to our supply chains, the Federal Government itself has an enormous amount of assets that are vulnerable to extreme weather events.
I have been working for 5 years to build upon commonsense GAO recommendations to help our Federal Government and our Nation better prepare for extreme weather events. This amendment will save lives and will save money by helping get our government coordinated, improve planning, and facilitate a better working relationship with State and local officials.
We know extreme weather events are happening more frequently, and they are causing more damage. We owe our citizens better planning, better engagement, and a better response. In passing the PREPARE Act, the House of Representatives is taking a responsible, important step in that direction.
I thank the gentleman again for including this amendment in the en bloc package.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I just want to make note that I do appreciate my friend from Oregon's comments, and I appreciate his sensitivity to timelines. But that is what this amendment addresses: timelines. In many cases, our local government simply cannot continue to carry these debts and not get reimbursed.
In regard to the amount of money, perhaps $100,000 is not a lot of money to the city of Portland, but I am going to guess to the city of Coos Bay it may be important.
In regard to the details of the amendment, Mr. Chairman, I am from Louisiana. If the gentleman from Oregon can help us make this even better, then I would be happy to work with him on that. But I think this is very, very important. Access to due process is important. The existing process does not allow supplemental material to be considered to respond to concerns that were raised by agency officials. This is a good model. It has proven effective in the past, and I urge its adoption.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remainder of my time.
I will say to the gentleman that my staff tells me they did contact his staff, they did express concerns. They said: Thank you for your concerns. And then, next thing we knew, the amendments were filed. And then she still said: We'd be happy to work with you. And we get no response.
I think there may be kind of a staff issue going on here. Again, I have some concerns about, particularly, the unlimited time to apply and other details, perhaps.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 107 Offered by Mr. Graves of Louisiana
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 107 printed in part A of House Report 115-650.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title VI, insert the following:
SEC. 6__. REIMBURSEMENT.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) shall retroactively reimburse State and local units of government
(for a period of 3 years after the declaration of a major disaster under section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170)) upon determination that a locally-implemented housing solution, implemented by State or local units of government, costs 50 percent of comparable FEMA solution or whatever the locally-implemented solution costs, whichever is lower.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 839, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, this amendment, once again, is a bipartisan amendment. My good friends Congressman Cedric Richmond, Congressman Gene Green, Congressman Ralph Abraham, Congressman Clay Higgins, and Congressman Brian Babin are all supporters of this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, this is a very simple amendment. Following our August 2016 floods in south Louisiana, FEMA came in and provided housing solutions. The solutions included the utilization of trailers. Because FEMA needs an acronym for everything, they were called MHUs, mobile housing units. When you added up the cost to purchase, transport, store, and set up these things, FEMA was in the hole anywhere from
$120,000 to $170,000 per pop.
Mr. Chairman, you could buy these same units right there in the vicinity of the flood from local trailer dealers for anywhere from
$28,000 to I think the highest cost we saw was about $40,000, including setup. It doesn't take a rocket scientist, Mr. Chairman, to realize that you could get it faster and you are helping to revive the local economy by using local solutions, as opposed to the case when FEMA is doing this, when it took months and months and months to give people even a single housing option in some cases.
So what this amendment does is it simply says that, if a local entity, a local government entity, if a State entity, can provide a housing solution for 50 percent of the cost, or less, as compared to the alternative that FEMA provides, then they can be reimbursed. Mr. Chairman, this is faster. It saves taxpayer dollars. It stops this fleecing of American taxpayers that is occurring in the aftermath of disasters.
Specifically, Mr. Chairman, in Livingston Parish, Sheriff Jason Ard: his deputies were flooded. Literally, families didn't have anywhere to go. They had looting in the parish. The sheriff stepped up, established mobile housing units, trailers, for his deputies to live in so they didn't have to worry about their families anymore, so they could get back to doing what they were supposed to be doing: enforcing law in these destroyed communities. And FEMA is rejecting them.
We have tried to work through the administrative process. I will say it again: the only way they are reimbursed is if the cost of their solution was 50 percent or less than that of the Federal Government alternative, in regard to the mobile housing units.
Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Again, as I look at the drafting--and, again, my staff says they did reach out to your staff--I am confused when you get to the 50 percent part, whether it would have to be exactly 50 percent or otherwise. I agree, and I think that it would be good to push for more flexibility.
For instance, I have a manufacturer of yurts in my district which are used in many places around the world as temporary housing. The military uses them, and others. I was approached by someone representing Airbnb about vacant houses they had, vacation homes in Puerto Rico, that could have been used when they were saying there was absolutely no housing for any emergency workers anywhere. And certainly there could be lower cost alternatives.
I still remember when FEMA, I think it was under the Bush administration, bought a bunch of trailers that couldn't be used because they had some of that crappy Chinese formaldehyde-exuding wallboard in them, and they were not habitable. We are still importing that junk from China, by the way. So I agree they could be much more flexible.
I think this amendment, again, as written, is problematic, but I certainly agree with the intent of the amendment to look at other lower cost alternatives. However, they should meet at least some minimal standards for sanitary facilities and other things. So I, again, have concerns about the drafting.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished ranking member and the manager of this fourth en bloc and rise to support the Jackson Lee amendment that has been included in the en bloc legislation. And I am thankful to Mr. DeFazio and the chairman for that.
My amendment, made in order, deals with a GAO report of 240 days following any disaster, a long-term recovery efforts plan. These disasters are examples of the most challenging and catastrophic events in our Nation.
And I am reminded of August 2018 in Houston, Texas. Hurricane Harvey has been defined as the singular most catastrophic incident and natural disaster in the continental United States. We are still suffering. People are still in hotels, still without their homes. So to the list of long-term recovery experiences, this GAO study would have us learn a lot. We need to learn from our past to do better to secure our future.
This GAO report would define the Federal disaster long-term recovery, define the stages of a long-term recovery, and report on the competence and capacity of FEMA to manage two or more disasters of the magnitude that happened at the same time.
I do want to take note of the fact that my amendment that did not authorize the FEMA Office of Response and Recovery was not made in order. I look forward to introducing legislation that would respond to that.
I am also concerned that two amendments dealing with the endangered species the Rules Committee did not make in order. In this time, I believe it is time to stand up to protect our endangered species. One of my amendments had to do with trophy products coming across on international airways; and the other was, as airports are built--and many are built in wetlands--for those who are building those airports to collaborate with a number of agencies to address the question of protecting the endangered species.
We live on this Earth with the wonderment of this Earth, and those include our wonderful animals, many of them endangered. And I believe the episode with Cecil the lion recognizes that we must protect our endangered species. I would hope going forward I would have the opportunity, at some time, to debate on the floor of the House the value of protecting our endangered species.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I am sure the gentlewoman from Texas would be supportive of this, representing many of the flood victims from Hurricane Harvey. It is important to keep in mind, Mr. Chairman, that, in many cases, these flood victims don't have other options. So you may have a trailer from your local trailer dealership; you may have a tent. In many cases, that is very attractive compared to being homeless.
I would love to work with the gentleman from Oregon and see if we can work together to perfect this amendment to address any concerns that he may have. In regard to the Chinese formaldehyde, I agree with you. If we can get good old American formaldehyde in our trailers, let's do that. I am kidding.
But I urge adoption of the amendment. I think this is very important. We should be commending leaders like Sheriff Ard for stepping up and providing efficient solutions for disaster survivors.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I look forward to working with the gentleman. Just on the issue of the formaldehyde: we have laws and standards in this country still, despite Mr. Pruitt, that regulate the amount of formaldehyde that can be put into plywood. I have many people in my district who make plywood without using formaldehyde glues, and the Chinese put in massive amounts of formaldehyde glue, do not meet our standards, but we don't enforce or prohibit the importation, though we are about to file a case on that issue to prohibit them poisoning the American people. So that is another subject for another day.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 0930
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 108 Offered by Mr. Graves of Louisiana
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 108 printed in part A of House Report 115-650.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title VI, insert the following:
SEC. 6__ FLOOD INSURANCE.
Section 406(d)(1) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5172(d)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``This section shall not apply to more than one building of a multi-structure educational, law enforcement, correctional, fire, or medical campus, effective January 1, 2016.''
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 839, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I want to state, in response to the formaldehyde issue, let me be very clear, formaldehyde was a major issue after Hurricane Katrina in the trailers. We certainly learned from that, and we absolutely don't need anyone exposed to it.
So I absolutely agree with the gentleman on that. But I think there have been better standards, and certainly lessons learned, from what we experienced with Hurricane Katrina when folks were in these trailers for long periods of time, and they weren't designed for that purpose, so I do agree with the gentleman there.
But on this amendment, Mr. Chairman, let me be clear, this is, once again, a bipartisan amendment. We have the gentleman from Louisiana
(Mr. Richmond), the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Higgins), the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Abraham), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crist), and other cosponsors, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Babin), all supporting this amendment because it is common sense and it responds to true on-the-
ground problems that were seen in the aftermath of disasters.
What happens is the current law in the Stafford Act says that any time you have a flood, if you have a facility like a school, that FEMA may deduct $500,000 from the recovery for rebuilding that school. Well, what FEMA has done is they have taken the law that Congress established where it said ``per facility,'' and they have taken it and they have abused it. They have now determined that a facility is an individual building.
So, Mr. Chairman, you may have a classroom building, you may have a cafeteria, you may have another classroom building, you may have a gymnasium, you may have a storage room, you may have a concession stand--in that case, FEMA is applying $500,000 to each individual building. Now, what adds insult to injury or makes this situation untenable is the fact that these schools generate the revenue oftentimes from property taxes in the destroyed community. So they are losing property taxes, FEMA is hitting them with bills, in some cases, in Ascension, Livingston, and East Baton Rouge Parishes, that are tens of millions of dollars each. What this does is it victimizes the survivors' children. So the kids can't get back in schools because the schools can't afford to reestablish their facilities.
So, look, bottom line is, this is all about preserving congressional intent. Congress spoke on this. FEMA has trashed the interpretation, and this is all about preserving congressional intent and getting our kids back in schools to where they can have the education or opportunities that they need to have, and they should no longer be further victimized by FEMA's flawed interpretation of the law.
I urge adoption of the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I have to say, I have read the amendment, and I can't quite follow it, my staff can't quite follow it, the gentleman's staff couldn't quite explain it. The gentleman has explained it in a way that this language may or may not reflect.
FEMA has said they don't understand it. They may well be doing something regarding public facilities that is not following the intent of the law, but again, I am not certain about this as the solution.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, once again, I am more than happy to work with my friend from Oregon to address any concerns that he may have to ensure that we have the best solution on this moving forward.
I will tell you that Republicans and Democrats in Florida, in Texas, in Puerto Rico, in the Virgin Islands, all across these disaster areas that we have experienced in the last 2 years are running into this exact same problem.
And let me just reiterate, Mr. Chairman, what this interpretation, this flawed interpretation is doing. It is putting an unaffordable bill before a community that has been destroyed, and it is only victimizing children because they can't get back in their schools, they can't resume their education. It is disrupting the resumption of their normal lives and just further affecting them, and delaying restoration and recovery of these communities.
Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 110 Offered by Mr. Babin
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 110 printed in part A of House Report 115-650.
Mr. BABIN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title VI, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTAIN RECOUPMENT PROHIBITED.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall deem any covered disaster assistance to have been properly procured, provided, and utilized, and shall restore any funding of covered disaster assistance previously provided but subsequently withdrawn or deobligated.
(b) Covered Disaster Assistance Defined.--In this section, the term ``covered disaster assistance'' means assistance--
(1) provided to a local government pursuant to section 403, 406, or 407 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170b, 5172, or 5173); and
(2) with respect to which, the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security has determined, after an audit, that--
(A) the Federal Emergency Management Agency deployed to the local government a Technical Assistance Contractor to review field operations, provide eligibility advice, and assist with day-to-day decisions;
(B) the Technical Assistance Contractor provided inaccurate information to the local government; and
(C) the local government relied on the inaccurate information to determine that relevant contracts were eligible, reasonable, and reimbursable.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 839, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Babin) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. BABIN. Mr. Chairman, this amendment has bipartisan support, the support of my colleagues from Louisiana, who have also been hit hard by hurricanes, Mr. Richmond and Mr. Graves, and I am from Texas.
Your word is your bond in the State of Texas, and I would hope that everyone here in Congress or across this great country would want to say the same thing about their own State. Credibility, trust, and keeping your promise is always important, but especially in times of disaster and crisis. And when Federal agencies like FEMA are called in to help communities ravaged by a natural disaster, we should expect nothing less.
Anyone who has ever experienced a federally declared disaster knows that after ensuring the immediate health and safety needs of those who are affected, the top priority is to get the hazardous and dangerous storm damage cleaned up.
As long as tree limbs, trash, and other debris remain in the streets, things cannot get back to normal, and they are a health and safety hazard. Kids cannot go back to schools, restaurants and shops can't open for business, the economy is at a standstill. And so when a FEMA employee, like a technical assistance contractor, or TAC, lays out a path for a mayor, a county judge, a county commissioner, or any other State or local official to get the federally funded debris removal process under way, they can and should be counted on to honor their commitment and their responsibility.
My amendment will ensure that that will be the case by holding FEMA accountable to the promises made and the contracts authorized by its own employees. Under my amendment, if a local government entity can show and the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General can certify that a local government was acting at the direction and the consultation of a FEMA technical assistance contractor regarding disaster relief efforts, government bureaucrats here in Washington cannot simply change their minds a few years down the road and decide to foot the locals with the bill.
So while this amendment is certainly about fairness, equity, and certainty for local governments, it is also about accountability for Federal officials. FEMA officials will know that the advice and the recommendations that they offer actually matter. Local officials will rest assured knowing that the contracts and work that they are doing is valid and reimbursable. This means getting disaster-damaged municipalities up and running sooner, shortening the timeframe that their citizens and businesses need Federal assistance, and save taxpayer money.
I urge all of my colleagues to help ensure that our government can be trusted to do what they say it will by supporting this bipartisan amendment and the underlying bill.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Amodei). The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I have in my district office something called the ``casework staff.'' We do have disasters in Oregon, particularly floods. And we have had instances, apparently like the one that this legislation is trying to address, where we have gotten these improper decisions reversed and my communities reimbursed, handled by my casework staff.
Here, we are going to legislate. Now, apparently, there was a problem in the gentleman's district. Too bad his casework staff didn't take care of it. But the way this is written, here is the language:
``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, FEMA shall deem any covered disaster assistance to have been properly procured, provided, and utilized, and shall restore any funding of covered disaster assistance previously provided but subsequently withdrawn or deobligated.''
It isn't specific to the gentleman's problem. This would be any community, anybody anywhere who might have legitimately misspent some disaster assistance, gets it back. This is so global. We might as well just not have a process to review disaster assistance and see whether it was properly spent, because this says, if you have got it and you spent it, that is all proper. I mean, it is deemed--deemed that every expenditure is legitimate, even if the money was diverted somehow.
So, again, I am not certain who the other side is using for drafting assistance, but I recommend leg counsel.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BABIN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from Oregon's opinion, but, remember that this is an inspector general's. They have to pass on this. This is not just a mistake. All the T's were crossed. All the I's were dotted. The Babin amendment protects our communities because it requires FEMA to keep its word.
Under current practice, a local community can follow all of the FEMA rules and restore your community after a disaster, but then, years later, FEMA can come back and say: Oops, we know we told you to do it that way and we personally approved and reimbursed you for every bill that you sent to FEMA; oh, but we did it wrong. We know that you did exactly what we told you to do; however, we should have told you something differently. Please pay us $3 million.
I think that this is not just pertinent to District 36 in the State of Texas that was hit by a hurricane years ago. This is pertinent to every district across this country that will be suffering from a disaster sooner or later.
Anyone who has a FEMA disaster this year or next, will no doubt be here on the floor in the future to offer this very same amendment. Please join me today in passing our amendment, and let's make FEMA keep its word.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Babin).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 112 Offered by Mr. McClintock
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 112 printed in part A of House Report 115-650.
Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Strike section 451.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 839, the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I have offered this amendment whenever the opportunity presents itself because it tests whether there is any program in the Federal budget that Congress can bear to cut.
Essential Air Service is perhaps the least essential program in the entire government. It is a direct subsidy paid to airline companies to fly empty and near empty planes from small airports to regional hubs nearby. There was supposed to be a temporary program to allow local communities and airports to readjust to airline deregulation in 1978. Instead, it has grown to include 173 communities and a program that has doubled in cost in the last decade.
I want to emphasize, this program has nothing to do with emergency medical evacuations. It solely subsidizes regular scheduled commercial service that is so seldom used that it cannot support itself.
And why can't it support itself? In many cases, the small airports in the program are less than an hour's drive from regional airports. Essential Air Service flights are flown out of Merced Airport near my district in the Sierra Nevada of California; yet, Merced is less than an hour's drive from Fresno Regional Airport, offering regular scheduled commercial air service.
Subsidized service is available from Lancaster, Pennsylvania, just 31 miles from Harrisburg International Airport. Subsidized flights from Pueblo, Colorado, are just a 45-minute drive from Colorado Springs Regional Airport, and I could go on and on.
There are supposed to be subsidy caps of $200 per passenger and a minimum of 10 passengers per day, and yet, every request to waive these requirements has been granted--every one--for passenger subsidies that can go as high as nearly $1,000 per passenger. Now, by comparison, you can charter a small plane for around $150 to $200 an hour.
{time} 0945
Over the next 5 years, this program will cost taxpayers nearly $1 billion in direct appropriations, which this amendment would cease. The program also gets another $100 million a year from overflight fees that would otherwise be available to fund high priorities in the aviation system, like 21st century air traffic control technology.
The argument for abolishing this program is simple: if a route cannot generate enough passengers to support its costs, that means that passengers themselves are telling us that it is not worth the money to them.
Perhaps we should listen.
Our country is drowning in debt. It now costs us $475 billion a year just to pay interest costs on the $21 trillion that we have already borrowed. Debt and taxes are driven by one thing: spending.
In the last 10 years, inflation and population combined have grown 26 percent. Revenues have more than kept pace, growing 29 percent in the same period; but spending has grown 46 percent, and it has doubled under this program. If we don't get control of spending soon, our Nation could enter a debt spiral that threatens our very future; and the Orwellian-named Essential Air Service is a prime example of nonessential programs that we just can't afford.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman pointed out, Essential Air Service, to ensure that all Americans have access to something that is critical to economic development and, basically, livability for many smaller isolated communities, is paid for out of the trust fund. The trust fund is composed of fees paid by the airlines, by passengers, and by foreign airlines overflying the United States of America.
This doesn't add to the debt, unlike this tax bill we passed. I know that the six largest banks in America saw a $4 billion windfall in tax cuts in one-quarter. It is projected they will have a $20 billion windfall by the end of the year.
We are going to borrow $20 billion to give to profitable banks, including Wells Fargo, that just paid a $1 billion fine. Now they are getting the money back because we gave them a tax break.
But he is concerned about the debt and the deficit, so we have got to screw the small communities in America and take away their air service. I think there are better ways to deal with our debt and deficit, and this doesn't add to it because it is paid for out of the trust fund.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Shuster), the chairman of the committee.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's attempts and work to try to decrease the deficits and the debt in this country, but Essential Air Service is just that. He named a few communities, and they are close to--I guess I can't make a great argument about those, but there are places like Alaska, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, or Iowa. These folks are living miles and miles, hours and hours away--
several hours, in many cases--from the nearest airport. As Mr. DeFazio pointed out, this connects those communities for economic development.
The other thing, he makes a point, as a conservative, when you pay user fees into a trust fund and it goes to that intended purpose--in this case, a small piece of that goes to Essential Air Service--that is what we should be doing in America: people that use something are contributing to that service or whatever that government agency is providing them.
Again, under the bill, in 2012, we put reforms in to reform Essential Air Service; and, this bill, the underlying bill, directs the GAO to study and find out the effects of those reforms.
So, again, while I support and applaud the gentleman's efforts to help get the debt under control, this is not the place to start.
Mr. Chairman, I urge rejection of this amendment.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. O'Halleran).
Mr. O'HALLERAN. Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose this amendment.
I am acutely attuned to concerns about fiscal responsibility. While Congress has struggled with fiscal concerns, the consistent attacks on the critical EAS program demonstrate a complete lack of concern for the realities of life across rural America.
Supporters of this amendment claim that, in many cases, an alternative airport is a short drive away. This incorrectly assumes that point-to-point miles on a map are the same as road miles.
The truth is that EAS is a vital economic engine that remains just as important today as when it was created. It supports economic development in small and rural communities by connecting businesses to larger markets.
Page, Arizona, in my district, is just one example of the need for this type of critical infrastructure. The challenges are real, but so is the promise in Page. Taking away vital EAS dollars at a time when Page and places like it all over the country are trying to attract business and capital would be devastating and undermine the critical work being done.
Let's work to support these communities, not exasperate the stark economic disparities in rural America. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to reject this shortsighted amendment.
Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, three points:
First, these amendments don't cut the fee support, only the $1 billion in direct taxpayer subsidies that would be paid into this program over the next 5 years. Under the so-called reforms referenced by the chairman, this program has doubled in cost over the past decade, and all Americans do not benefit from this program.
Let's take the remote communities, like those in Alaska. This program subsidizes 61 small communities in a State with 259 airports. That means there are roughly 200 airports and 350 local communities in Alaska, alone, that seem to do just fine without Essential Air Service.
If Alaska or any State believes that air service should be subsidized within their State, they certainly have the ability to do it themselves. So do individual towns. The States choose not to pay for the service; the local communities choose not to pay for the service; and, most importantly, the passengers, themselves, choose not to pay the actual cost of the service. Perhaps as we approach $1 trillion annual deficit, we should consider choosing not to pay for it either.
We hear that it helps prop up small airports and small airlines that service them. Well, sure, if you hand somebody wads of cash, that person does very well. The problem is that the people you took that cash from do very poorly to exactly the same extent.
A $275 million program out of a $4 trillion Federal budget seems like a drop in the bucket, and I agree we are not going to balance a $1 trillion annual deficit just by cutting programs like this. But if we can't cut a 40-year-old temporary program that has doubled in cost over the last 10 years--this is the kindest and easiest cut of all--then I fear that we will never summon the courage to get our budget back to balance before we bankrupt our country.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson).
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
We have been down this road before, and yet, again, we are witnessing attempts to remove rural America's connectivity to the national air transportation system. Those who would look to scrap the Essential Air Service program often fail to acknowledge reforms that have been put in place to modernize and streamline the program. This reauthorization does the same.
Mr. Chairman, for too long, rural America has received the scraps of our suburban and urban counterparts. Last year, the Airport Improvement Program, another program, not the Essential Air Service, issued more than $264 million in grants to 95 airports in 31 States.
Among them, $2 million was issued for Sacramento International Airport in Sacramento, California, to purchase five zero-emission electric shuttle buses to take passengers between the airport parking lots and the terminal buildings. Mr. Chairman, these types of projects are nice, but the fact is that $2 million is about equal to the amount a small rural airport requires for commercial service for 2 years.
Let's get serious here. Striking the Essential Air Service program is bad for rural America. It is time to stop the witch hunt on rural America.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California will be postponed.
Amendment No. 114 Offered by Mr. Duncan of Tennessee
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 114 printed in part A of House Report 115-650.
Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 267, after line 10, insert the following:
SEC. __. NATIONAL HIRING STANDARD OF CARE.
(a) In General.--An entity hiring a federally licensed motor carrier shall be deemed to have made the selection of the motor carrier in a reasonable and prudent manner if before tendering a shipment, but not more than 45 days before the pickup of the shipment by the hired motor carrier, that entity verified that the motor carrier, at the time of such verification--
(1) is registered with and authorized by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to operate as a motor carrier or household goods motor carrier, if applicable;
(2) has the minimum insurance coverage required by Federal law; and
(3)(A) before the safety fitness determination regulations are issued, does not have an unsatisfactory safety fitness determination issued by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration in force at the time of such verification; or
(B) beginning on the date that revised safety fitness determination regulations are implemented, does not have a safety fitness rating issued by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration under such regulations that would place a motor carrier out-of-service.
(b) Guidelines.--Not later than 30 days after the implementation of the safety fitness determination referenced in subsection (a)(3), the Secretary shall issue guidelines that specifically outline how a motor carrier's operating authority and registration number could be revoked and subsequently placing them out-of-service.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 839, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, this is a very simple amendment to establish a national standard of care for hiring freight shippers. This is purely and simply about highway safety, and everything carried on planes, of course, goes to and from on our highways.
Currently, there is no law that requires freight brokers or others to have any sort of standard when hiring a carrier for a shipment. Under this amendment, a broker or other entity would be deemed to have acted in a reasonable and prudent manner if they made sure the carrier met these three requirements:
One, authorization to operate by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration;
Two, the minimum insurance coverage required by Federal law; and
Three, that the carrier had no current Federal unsatisfactory safety fitness determination.
This amendment does not prohibit or limit in any way any type of lawsuit, and, in fact, a lawyer could show that a broker or a company had acted in an unreasonable manner if they did not comply with this hiring standard. This amendment would actually help trial lawyers by giving them stronger grounds to sue brokers who did not comply with this standard and tried to get cheaper rates by using unsafe or uninsured carriers.
This amendment would also make it less likely that a person or a company that hired a safe, legal motor carrier would be held liable for an accident that happened through no fault of their own.
This amendment also will help make it far less likely that unregistered, uninsured, unsafe freight carriers get any business in this country in the future.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, there is a problem here, and the problem actually is the Department of Transportation. They launched a new carrier monitoring system known as CSA to make data available, but they have yet to establish a test and apply that data.
So even though the data is available, the Republicans have adopted amendments--other Republicans who are here today--that prohibit DOT from finalizing a safety fitness determination rule. So there is data out there, but there is no bright line test.
The best relief that we could provide would be to force DOT, in the very near future, to issue a safety fitness ruling as soon as possible and also raise the minimum insurance requirement--$750,000, it has been that since 1980. It doesn't cover much in a truck accident.
We want to have people be able to get legal recourse and compensation, but we also don't want to give the brokers an impossible task, which is what they have now: How do they choose someone who meets the safety fitness requirements that the administration has yet to promulgate and Congress is preventing them from promulgating?
Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Cartwright).
Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, on June 1, 2011, Sal and Helen Sparich were sitting in traffic in Tamaqua in northeastern Pennsylvania when, suddenly, without warning, a loaded tractor-trailer rammed into them from behind, cutting their car in half, killing Helen instantly and debilitating and giving horrible, severe, grievous injuries to Sal Sparich. He ended up spending the next 15 months in the hospital, and then he died. He left
$1 million in medical bills, which Medicare had to pay for.
What we know about this accident is that the driver of the tractor-
trailer had a horrible driving record. The company, the fly-by-night independent contractor trucking company that he worked for, had an insanely bad safety record, and it was one that anybody could have discovered by going on the safety website because there were flashing yellow icons next to the name of that company.
{time} 1000
But the broker and the shipper in this case didn't care, Mr. Chair. They didn't check. They can't care about the safety record, about the driving record. The only thing they checked was who had the lowest price. The only thing they cared about was who had the lowest price.
Mr. Chair, we Americans care about personal responsibility and accountability. It is something we teach our children.
This is an amendment that would take away accountability and responsibility for the brokers and shippers.
This is a longstanding, time-honored part of American law that brokers and shippers are responsible and accountable for picking safe companies and safe drivers.
This amendment would take that away, it would make American roadways much more dangerous because of this exact type of situation.
Mr. Chair, I oppose the amendment. I urge a ``no'' vote on it.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chair, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin).
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Chair, Americans really shouldn't care that much about this Duncan amendment if they don't go on the highway; but if you go on the highway, like hundreds of millions of Americans do, you better watch out, because this amendment makes it far more likely that there will be reckless and negligent truckers on the road and that you won't be able to sue for your damages if they smash up your car.
Take the shocking case of a 19-year-old man whose car was totaled by a truck driver who was high on crystal meth. He was left injured and blinded for the rest of his life.
Now, the truck company never drug tested or road tested its employees, but that didn't stop the shipper from hiring that trucking company to do business with.
Now, the Duncan amendment would reward the shipper by immunizing it from any liability for hiring a low-road trucker that doesn't drug test its employees, or even knowingly hires employees who are high on crystal meth or who have a drug problem.
This would give the shippers even greater incentive to hire reckless and negligent truckers, making our roads and highways all the more dangerous.
In ``Born to Run'', Bruce Springsteen talks about cars that are suicide machines and a deathtrap.
Mr. Chair, this amendment would make that vision of our highways the law.
There is no way that the American people support excusing shippers from liability for their decision to hire low-road truckers, low-road trucking companies that do not drug test or do background screening on their employees.
Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), the chairman of the committee.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chair, I appreciate the gentleman's amendment. It does remove the confusion with the industry stakeholders, but the hysteria that the other side is proclaiming, that roadways are going to become a slaughterhouse because if this goes away or it is clarified, truckers are just going to be out there running into people left or right, I mean, it is ridiculous.
It is not a good business model for any company to want to have an incentive, which the other side has, I think, said, to hire unsafe drivers. That is not a good business model. In fact, you will go out of business, most likely, if you go out there and hire drivers who are bad drivers, dangerous drivers. The facts don't bear that out.
Of the auto accidents that include trucks in it, over 75 percent of them are not the trucker's fault, it is the person in the car's fault.
Truckers are professionals, and to have impugned this whole class of people, this whole group of people that go out on these roadways and work hard every day and try to do it as safely as they can, is just plain wrong.
Again, as I said, truckers are professionals. Seventy-five percent of those accidents that truckers are involved in, it is not their fault.
We continue to hype up and to put these things out there for, again, another class of worker out there, and that is the trial lawyers. They make millions and millions of dollars going out there and suing these people that, again, do their best every day to try to be safe on the roadways.
So, again, this is a sensible amendment, this clarifies it, and it helps to make our roadways safer, not more dangerous.
Mr. Chair, I urge adoption, and I thank the gentleman again for yielding.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr. Chair, I will simply say this: neither of the cases cited by the opposition would be stopped under this amendment. In fact, this amendment would make it more likely that freight brokers would be required to hire safe, insured carriers for their shipments, so it would make the highways safer.
Mr. Chair, I urge support for my amendment. It is an amendment about fairness and justice, because all lawyers--I was a plaintiff's lawyer before I came to Congress, and I have supported the trial lawyers in every way possible in my 30 years here, but I can tell you, no lawyers want people sued who have done nothing whatsoever wrong in a case.
Mr. Chair, I urge passage of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Bacon). The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Tennessee will be postponed.
The Chair understands that amendment No. 115 will not be offered.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Duncan of Tennessee) having assumed the chair, Mr. Bacon, Acting Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4) to reauthorize programs of the Federal Aviation Administration, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.
____________________
