DELAURO ON THE NEED FOR HIGH-SPEED RAIL

Washington, DC— Congresswoman Rosa L. DeLauro (CT-3), Ranking Member on the Labor, Education, Health, and Human Services Appropriations Subcommittee, made the following remarks on the Floor of the United States House of Representatives today during the debate on the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act.

As Prepared for Delivery

Included amongst the multitude of misguided policies in this bill, the Republican majority has on the floor today is the rescinding of high speed rail funds that would otherwise create good middle class jobs, strengthen our economy, and allow us to build a 21st century infrastructure that we need to compete with the other economic power centers around the world.

Over six months in the majority and my Republican colleagues have proved very capable of ending Medicare, rolling back health care reforms, namely for women, and choosing to reduce the deficit on the backs of working middle class families and the most vulnerable. One thing they have chosen to do is to zero out job creation. By cutting funding for high speed rail projects in this bill, the majority is threatening as many as 60,000 jobs. This is the majority's answer to the last week's extremely disappointing jobs report that showed that we are mired in unacceptably high unemployment after adding only 18,000 jobs in June, with a construction sector that has 16.3% of its workers unemployed. This is the majority's answer to the 14 million unemployed in this country. These are real people, real families looking to make their way through this crisis.

In Connecticut, the majority's decision to rescind a $30 million investment in the New Haven-Hartford-Springfield line will seriously limit the ability to expand one of the best intercity passenger rail networks in the country. The line represents a critical component of a larger regional plan for passenger rail to integrate the New England rail system, connect it to New York, the Middle Atlantic States and to Canada. The improvements that would be made with the investment my colleagues on the other side are seeking to eliminate are essential to meeting the needs of the entire region and achieving the benefits of the federal and state investments that have already been made there.

High speed rail is desperately needed in Connecticut. This is the most heavily trafficked commuter region in the country. New England's traffic has increased two to three times faster than its population since 1990 and 80% of Connecticut commuters drive to work alone. When it is completed, the line is expected to reduce the number of vehicles on the road by approximately 4,000 cars a day, saving one billion gallons of fossil fuel a year and reducing carbon emissions over that time by 10,000 tons.

Just as importantly, the line has been a high priority for Connecticut, for its representatives on both sides of the aisle, for many years. It means opportunities for economic development and expansion throughout our state. But expanding the economy and creating jobs is simply not a priority for the majority. They appear perfectly content to allow us to fall behind our global competitors like China, with its plan to invest $1 trillion in high speed rail, highways, and other infrastructure in five years.

And their shortsightedness is further exemplified by what has been put forward in the recently introduced, $230 billion, six-year surface transportation bill that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce calls "unacceptable" as the "cuts will destroy – rather than support — existing jobs" which would "be devastating to construction and related industries" leading to "a less competitive economy and a drag on GDP due to underperforming infrastructure."

I want to say to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that I have a great appreciation for disaster assistance, and a great appreciation for the commercial value of the Mississippi River. I have been there for disaster assistance. Now, if you do not want to do an emergency declaration then let me tell you where you can get some of the money from in order to do this: $40 billion to the oil industry every year in a tax subsidy. Nobody here believes that they are suffering. Ask the farmers in our country who are suffering. They do not need money for the levees, they do not need any money at all but, no, the other side doesn't want to take any money from that $40 billion. To do something about those who are suffering in these states due to natural disasters.

Or what about the $8 billion we provide to multinational corporations to take their jobs overseas? Let's take that money and use it for the people of this great nation who are in difficult straits, difficult times, and their jobs and their levees need to be dredged. Let's get that money to the Army Corps of Engineers. And finally, we support Brazilian cotton farmers— we give them $147 million every single year. I suggest we take that money from the Brazilian cotton farmers and spend it on the people in our country who are in desperate need. Do not take it from high speed rail. Do not commit us to planned obsolescence.