[House Hearing, 110 Congress] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office] THE SOUTHEAST CRESCENT AUTHORITY, THE NORTHERN BORDER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, AND SOUTHWEST REGIONAL BORDER AUTHORITY ======================================================================= (110-36) HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION __________ MAY 3, 2007 __________ Printed for the use of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 35-918 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2007 --------------------------------------------------------------------- For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800 DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001 COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota, Chairman NICK J. RAHALL, II, West Virginia JOHN L. MICA, Florida PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon DON YOUNG, Alaska JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina Columbia JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee JERROLD NADLER, New York WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland CORRINE BROWN, Florida VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan BOB FILNER, California STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas RICHARD H. BAKER, Louisiana GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland JERRY MORAN, Kansas ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California GARY G. MILLER, California LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania HENRY E. BROWN, Jr., South BRIAN BAIRD, Washington Carolina RICK LARSEN, Washington TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania JULIA CARSON, Indiana SAM GRAVES, Missouri TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas BRIAN HIGGINS, New York SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri Virginia JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania DORIS O. MATSUI, California TED POE, Texas NICK LAMPSON, Texas DAVID G. REICHERT, Washington ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio CONNIE MACK, Florida MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii JOHN R. `RANDY' KUHL, Jr., New BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa York JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania LYNN A WESTMORELAND, Georgia TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota CHARLES W. BOUSTANY, Jr., HEATH SHULER, North Carolina Louisiana MICHAEL A. ACURI, New York JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania THELMA D. DRAKE, Virginia JOHN J. HALL, New York MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin VERN BUCHANAN, Florida STEVE COHEN, Tennessee JERRY McNERNEY, California VACANCY (ii) Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of Columbia, Chairwoman MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine SAM GRAVES, Missouri JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania MICHAEL A. ARCURI, New York SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania Virginia TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania STEVE COHEN, Tennessee JOHN R. `RANDY' KUHL, Jr., New JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota York (Ex Officio) JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio) (iii) CONTENTS Page Summary of Subject Matter........................................ vi TESTIMONY Butterfield, Hon. G.K., a Representative in Congress from the State of North Carolina........................................ 12 Cuellar, Hon. Henry, a Representative in Congress from the State of Texas....................................................... 21 Dole, Hon. Elizabeth, Senator from the State of North Carolina in the United States Senate....................................... 12 Filner, Hon. Bob, a Representative in Congress from the State of California..................................................... 21 Hayes, Hon. Robin, a Representative in Congress from the State of North Carolina................................................. 12 Hinojosa, Hon. Ruben, a Representative in Congress from the State of Texas....................................................... 21 Hodes, Hon. Paul W., a Representative in Congress from the State of New Hampshire............................................... 5 McIntyre, Hon. Mike, a Representative in Congress from the State of North Carolina.............................................. 12 Reyes, Hon. Silvestre, a Representative in Congress from the State of Texas................................................. 21 Rodriguez, Hon. Ciro D., a Representative in Congress from the State of Texas................................................. 21 Welch, Hon. Peter, a Representative in Congress from the State of Vermont........................................................ 5 PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS Altmire, Hon. Jason, of Pennsylvania............................. 30 Arcuri, Hon. Michael A., of New York............................. 31 Butterfield, Hon. G.K., of North Carolina........................ 37 Cohen, Hon. Steve, of Tennessee.................................. 33 Cuellar, Hon. Henry, of Texas.................................... 39 Dole, Senator Elizabeth, of North Carolina....................... 40 Hayes, Hon. Robin, of North Carolina............................. 43 Hinojosa, Hon. Ruben, of Texas................................... 44 Hodes, Hon. Paul, of New Hampshire............................... 46 McHugh, Hon. John M., of New York................................ 60 McIntyre, Hon. Mike, of North Carolina........................... 63 Michaud, Hon. Michael H., of Maine............................... 34 Reyes, Hon. Silvestre, of Texas.................................. 66 Rodriguez, Hon. Ciro D., of Texas................................ 68 Welch, Hon. Peter, of Vermont.................................... 70 SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD Hodes, Hon. Paul W., a Representative in Congress from the State of New Hampshire, letter from the Northern Forest Center....... 51 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] HEARING ON THE SOUTHEAST CRESCENT AUTHORITY, THE NORTHERN BORDER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, AND THE SOUTHWEST REGIONAL BORDER AUTHORITY ---------- Thursday, May 3, 2007 House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:13 a.m., in Room 2167, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable Eleanor Holmes Norton [chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding. Ms. Norton. I want to welcome today's witnesses and say good morning to all of you. It is my privilege to welcome Members of Congress to testify before the Subcommittee this morning on economic development and the elimination of poverty. I have only brief opening remarks because the Subcommittee appreciates and values the additional information and the very valuable time of the Members who will provide testimony following our own hearing on this very issue in July, 2006, concerning regional economic development initiatives. I especially want to acknowledge the efforts of Mr. Michaud, Mr. Hodes, and Mr. McIntyre and to commend you for your perseverance and dedication to pursue legislation you believe is vital and necessary for your region. We appreciate the time and energy you have invested in efforts to address poverty in your regions. For the Members new to the effort, we welcome your participation and will draw on your insights to help move these initiatives forward. In these times of severe budget constraints, we are mindful of the need to avoid redundancy and duplication in programs, and of the importance of targeting scarce resources in areas that will bring the highest investment return. We are very interested in hearing from Members about how your initiative fits into these concerns as well. We thank each of you for coming this morning, and we offer a special welcome to Senator Elizabeth Dole, who we believe will join us later. We look forward to hearing testimony from all of today's witnesses. I am pleased to say to the Ranking Member, everybody take note, the Ranking Member has been totally feminized here, we appreciate that Mrs. Capito has come in for Mr. Graves, whose grandmother died. I know he would have wanted to be here to hear the Members. We very much appreciate her coming in his stead. Mrs. Capito. Mrs. Capito. Thank you, Madam Chair. I wish to extend my condolences to Mr. Graves on the death of his grandmother. I know that he wishes he could be here today to hear the testimony. I just briefly want to thank you for holding the hearing. And I also want to thank the distinguished panels of witnesses for taking the time out of their very busy schedules today. You will be providing testimony on the proposed regional economic development initiatives for the southeast, southwest, and northern border. Areas in these regions have high unemployment, low per capita income, and lack necessary infrastructure. Over the past couple of years, there has been increasing interest in creating regional economic development authorities to spur economic development in these areas. As a Member of Congress from West Virginia, I have great experience with one such commission, that being the Appalachian Regional Commission, which covers all 55 counties of my State of West Virginia. Interestingly enough, during the past five years, three counties of my 18 counties have been removed from the ARC's list of economically distressed counties, and one has jumped to the competitive category. I have seen first-hand what the ARC has done in my district, what it has done for the region, and it has had a long-standing history of success and great help for local economic development authorities. So I am very familiar with that. I look forward to everybody's testimony. I thank the gentlemen for coming today. Thank you. Ms. Norton. Other members who have statements to make? Mr. Michaud. Mr. Michaud. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman. I want to thank both you and the Ranking Member for holding this hearing. Chairwoman Norton, you have been an incredible advocate for economic development and for helping regions that are struggling, and on behalf of one such region, I want to thank you very much. I also want to recognize our colleagues here today. Mr. Hodes, Mr. Welch, and Mr. McHugh, who will not be able to make it today but I would ask, Madam Chair, that we ask unanimous consent that Mr. McHugh's testimony be inserted in the record. Ms. Norton. Without objection, so ordered. Mr. Michaud. The work of these colleagues and the work of their staffs has been invaluable in developing this legislation. They are truly dedicated to helping improve the economy in our region. I first lead a group of bipartisan cosponsors three years ago in developing this bill, and I especially want to commend Mr. Hodes, who has shown extraordinary leadership in heading up our group on this legislation in this Congress, as well as Mr. Welch. Madam Chairwoman, for 40 years the ARC has shown us an effective way to address regional economic distress. A small Federal investment in that region is going a long way towards creating jobs, infrastructure, business opportunities, and hope for the future. In the northern border region, we have seen a clear, persistent pattern of economic distress, with a lost of natural resource-based industries, the loss of jobs, and aging and crumbling infrastructure. If you look at the 28 counties in this bill that lie on the border or right next to the border between Maine and New York, you will find poverty above the national average, median household income that is $7500 below the national average, persistent unemployment that is consistently higher than the rest of the country, and most striking of all, a loss of almost 1 percent of the population between 1990 and 2000, compared to 13 percent growth nationally over the same period. Clearly, this region has a compelling need for new investment. As we have heard in testimony before in this Subcommittee, most recently on January 23rd of this year, the regional commissions are an extremely valuable tool for promoting economic development. They can help us address the unique challenges of different regions without duplicating other Federal programs. I think the testimony we will hear today, and that we did hear on July 10th of last year, will show that the northern border region has a real need and that a regional commission can help us tremendously. A regional commission can help us invest in transportation, health care, agriculture, broadband, and alternative energy. It can help us create jobs for the long term. Our region has all of the ingredients we need to face our challenges head-on and make ourselves an economic engine. A regional commission would bring us the resources and leadership we need to make a fundamental change in our future. In closing, Madame Chairwoman, I can say from personal experience that this commission is sorely needed. Like my father and my grandfather before me, I worked at Great Northern Paper Company in East Millinocket. Two days after I was elected and sworn in to Congress, the mill filed bankruptcy and closed its doors. It devastated the community. The story that I tell is not unfamiliar to other areas in the State of Maine that have had this happen to them as well. That is why this bill has the strong bipartisan support of our group of cosponsors. It also has the united support of economic development district directors, local NGOs, and major conservation groups. We need the kind of leadership and investment that a regional commission can bring, to make sure that instead of more mills closing, we can get onto a path of new jobs, new industry, where young people can stay, build, and live in the region where they were born. I look forward to hearing the testimony of the witnesses and to moving forward with this legislation to improve the lives of the people who live in the northern border region. With that, I yield back, Madam Chairwoman. Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Michaud. Are there any other opening statements? Mr. Arcuri. Mr. Arcuri. Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to thank the Chairwoman and the Ranking Member for holding this hearing. Also, Mr. Hodes, Mr. Welch, thank you very much for your leadership, and Mr. Michaud, thank you very much for your leadership on this bill as well. It is a very important piece of legislation that I think will greatly benefit the region. I am proud to join the chorus of supporters here today as an original cosponsor of H.R. 1548, the Northern Border Economic Development Commission Act of 2007. This bipartisan legislation would be incredibly beneficial to the region by assessing and addressing the very specific needs, assets, and challenges of the region as a whole. The commission would create a Federal-State partnership where local development districts and other non-profits bring projects, ideas, and priorities to the commission from the local level to promote economic development through the planning, technical assistance, and funding of projects aimed at encouraging economic prosperity, specifically by providing grants for local transportation, infrastructure projects, broadband development, alternative energy projects, agricultural development, and health care facilities. Most importantly, this legislation is modeled after the very successful Appalachian Regional Commission approach, an idea conceived by the distinguished full Committee Chair, Mr. Oberstar, when he was a staffer on this very Committee over 40 years ago. Simply put, the numbers speak for themselves. Since its creation, the ARC has reduced the number of distressed counties in its region from 210 to 100, cut the poverty rate from 31 percent to 15 percent, and helped 1,400 businesses create 2,600 new jobs. Speaking from personal experience, six counties in my upstate New York district have experienced similar success. The Village of Sherburne, New York, in Chenango County is a great example of how a small ARC award granted to them was extremely helpful in leveraging additional funds from State, local, and private sources for economic development initiatives that create jobs. A $200,000 grant from ARC for the enhancement of aging water infrastructure in Sherburne, a problem that is plaguing many of the States in the northeast, was able to leverage close to $4 million dollars in State, local, community investment. By providing enhanced infrastructure capabilities, Sherburne, New York, has become a home for a number of new businesses in the area and continues to attract new investment. The Northern Border Economic Development Commission not only will extend similar benefits to economically distressed counties in Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont, but will also allow upstate New York counties like Oneida, Herkimer, Cayuga, and Seneca to enjoy the same benefits their neighboring counties in the southern tier of New York enjoy under the Appalachian Regional Commission. Over the last several decades, upstate New York has had a consistent pattern of economic distress as a result of substantial losses in the manufacturing sector coupled with the aging infrastructure and lack of opportunities for a skilled workforce. My district alone has seen a staggering loss of more than 14,000 manufacturing jobs between 2000 and 2005. This has been devastating to our local communities. However, this is not an anomaly, it is extremely characteristic of several States in the northeast. A targeted regional approach like the one created by this bill can help bring economic vitality to a region in dire need. Madam Chair, I look forward to working together with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to expedite the consideration of this bill before the Subcommittee and the full Committee. I thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. Norton. I want to thank both of these members. Your remarks I think have been tantamount to testimony that helps the Committee to understand why this bill and these regions are so important because of the kind of approach we have taken through this effort. We are fortunate to have with us the architect of all of this. I am very pleased that the Chairman of the Committee has joined us and would ask him if he would say a few words of opening remarks at this time. Mr. Oberstar. Madam Chair, your opening statement is right on target. You have framed the issue. We need to proceed with this hearing. We need to proceed with this legislation. It has broad bipartisan support. This is legislation that is in the best tradition of what we do on this Committee, and that is provide jobs, growth, mobility, economic development. But as we enter this hearing and move toward reporting this legislation from Committee in the near future, I am reminded of the report of the Chair and Co-Chair of the Appalachian Regional Commission about 20 years ago. It said, ``Halfway home and a long way to go.'' You cannot overturn 100 years of decline in 5, 10, 15, or 20 years. It takes long-term investment and partnerships, and that is what this legislation creates the opportunity to do, as we have done with the Appalachian Regional Commission, to deal with the underpinnings--the need for infrastructure investment, the backbone road system, water and sewer and sewage treatment facilities, and then move to the vocational education centers, and then to the health clinics, and then to the industrial parks, and then the airports, the rail sidings. All that are needed to create the underpinnings for growth. ``If the public sector does its part,'' as Adam Smith said 200 years ago, ``then the private sector can do its part.'' Thank you. Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am very pleased to welcome the first two Members who will testify. Representative Paul Hodes of New Hampshire's District 2, and Representative Peter Welch, a Vermont Member at Large. Which of you would like to proceed first? Mr. Hodes. I am happy to begin, Madam Chair. Ms. Norton. Are you both new Members of Congress? Mr. Hodes. We are both. Ms. Norton. See, I will not even ask you about seniority. No, I knew you were both new. Please go ahead, Mr. Hodes. TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE PAUL W. HODES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE; THE HONORABLE PETER WELCH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VERMONT Mr. Hodes. Madam Chairwoman and Ranking Member Capito, I want to thank you for giving my colleague Peter Welch and me the opportunity to present testimony before the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management today. I also thank the distinguished panel for attending. And I join with you in expressing condolences to the Ranking Member, Mr. Graves. As you know, I am Paul Hodes. I represent New Hampshire's 2nd congressional district. I come before you today to offer my strong support for H.R. 1548, the Northern Border Economic Development Commission Act of 2007. My home State of New Hampshire is a unique State, blessed with incredible beauty, an abundance of natural resources, and a citizenry that values hard work, community, and fiscal restraint. But we are also facing our share of significant challenges. Parts of our State, specifically the northern region, have taken an economic beating are struggling to recover. A staggering number of jobs, and especially manufacturing jobs, have been lost. New Hampshire, and especially northern New Hampshire, has seen plants close and young people disappear to places that offer more opportunity. Parts of New Hampshire are economically stricken and for the people there it is getting harder and harder to get by. While running for office, I spent a lot of time in the North country and I spoke with countless people who had great pride of place, pride in their community, they had the drive to work hard and to improve their neighborhoods, but they felt their communities had been ignored for years, and especially by the Federal Government. Despite this neglect, there is a compelling case for coordinated Federal investment in northern New Hampshire. In fact, for the entire northern border region, which you can see here on the chart we have brought, which includes the northernmost counties of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and New York, that region has higher unemployment, a higher percentage of people living in poverty, and lower household income than the rest of the Nation.k In northern New Hampshire, as I was campaigning, I will just point out one example that comes to mind, campaigning in the city of Berlin, the largest metropolitan area, if you will call it that, in my State north of Franconia Notch, is a city that was built on paper. Generations of people worked in the paper mills--fathers, sons, members of families. And entire culture was built on paper. As I campaigned this past summer in Berlin, while the paper mill had been bought and there were jobs there, the pulp mill had been closed down--300 jobs lost, moved out of the county. People were walking the streets at the annual summer festival for the first time in their lives without jobs, without prospects, ready to work but without the infrastructure and the help to do it. When I was first elected to serve in Congress this past November, I was very proud to work closely with other Members of Congress, along with my staff, and especially Mr. Michaud, from the border region to put together a plan to bring much needed economic development to the area. The Northern Border Economic Development Commission Act will help create jobs and kick-start local economies in northern New Hampshire and in the entire northern border region. The commission enforces the notion that if you are willing to work hard and play by the rules, we are here to help you get ahead. The people in the area this bill targets deserve a Government that works for them and with them. The Northern Border Economic Development Commission is an important step towards providing good paying jobs and economic opportunity in an area that needs and deserves it. The commission this bill would create would be charged with investing Federal resources for economic development and job creation in the most distressed counties of the northern border region. I am proud to say that a number of Representatives from both sides of the aisle have signed on as cosponsors to show their support. Among them is my colleague from New Hampshire, Carol Shay Porter, Maine Representatives Michael Michaud, who is with the panel today, and Tom Allen; New York Representatives John McHugh and Michael Arcuri, who is on this panel today; and my colleague, At Large Representative Peter Welch of Vermont, who you will hear from. By design and purpose, this bill follows the innovative Appalachian Regional Commission model drafted by Chairman Oberstar, who is also with us today, and I thank him for his extraordinary leadership in fashioning the notion and implementing commissions that show the great results that can be achieved. Based on this model, the commission we propose today would create a unique Federal-State partnership charged with promoting developing through regional planning, technical assistance, and funding of projects aimed at encouraging economic prosperity. Community development groups and other non-profits are encouraged to bring project ideas and priorities to the commission from the local level. This is very important in New Hampshire because we value public-private partnerships and grassroots initiatives. In fact, I am already working with local groups to prioritize funding needs. This bottom-up approach ensures that actions reflect both local needs and regional economic development goals. It also ensures that States have a deciding voice in what investment is made within their borders. I would like to bring to the Committee's attention the Northern Forest Center, which has submitted a letter of support which, with the Chair's permission, I would submit for the record. Ms. Norton. So ordered. Mr. Hodes. Thank you very much. This letter you will see points to a 2006 sustainable economic initiative in the northern border region which will work in close harmony I think with the commission we create. With its proposed budget of $40 million per year, the Northern Border Economic Development Commission can help meet a range of local needs. Whether the need is agricultural development, land and forestry conservation to maintain productive traditional uses, investment in transportation infrastructure, cyber infrastructure, alternative and renewable energy, or health care, this commission will play a key role in investing in the Nation's economy. If this bill is passed, it will provide a much-needed boost for our northern communities. The people who live in this region that might be called the ``ice belt'' are hard-working, taxpaying, caring citizens. Their plight deserves our consideration. Working together, we can improve life in these distressed communities and build a better future not only for the region but for our entire country. I thank you for your time. Thank you for allowing me to testify before this distinguished Subcommittee. I look forward to working with you as we move ahead. Thank you very much. Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mr. Hodes. Mr. Welch. Mr. Welch. Thank you very much. I have a certain amount of modesty appearing before this Committee because the Members who have already given opening statements and have long experience have forgotten more about this than I will ever know. But I want to say, Mr. Michaud, you have laid out what is the challenge for these economically depressed areas, and that is what this is all about. Across the northern tier in New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine, we have those challenges. The idea here, Mrs. Capito, you have described exactly what the model is. I gather it is not a bad idea to do again, follow a model that has worked successfully in one place and transport it to another. That is essentially what it is that we are doing. I think Mr. Arcuri, Mr. Hodes, and I are very grateful that there is this model that has been successful, and we are grateful to you, Mr. Michaud, that you have encouraged us to come forward and try to provide this in a cooperative way to the northern tier. Vermont, in Franklin County, Orleans County, and Essex County, are all on the northern tier and have many of the problems that my colleague Mr. Hodes described and you did as well. This would have a very significant impact on that region of Vermont. These counties share similar struggles-- infrastructure, high unemployment, youth who are leaving for better opportunities elsewhere. The northern border regions of Vermont, New York, and New Hampshire share those similar challenges. And what I think is great about this commission is it allows us as a region to work together and to try to leverage our assets into opportunity across that entire tier. Many community and economic development organizations work in this region in Vermont to promote higher quality of life and good paying jobs, I was very alarmed when I learned that there is no single economic development entity that is focused on the overall needs of the northeast border region as a whole. We do believe that we have to partner with our fellow States in order to best provide for the future opportunities for our citizens. I invite any of you here to come up sometime to Franklin County or the northeast kingdom. It is great biking, Mr. Chairman, some hills, if you can handle that. But if you did come, you would find some wonderful people--entrepreneurial, hard-working, and incredible natural resources, wonderful towns, but high unemployment, low wages, $10,000 below the national median. People are struggling and doing their best to get from here to there and pay their bills. They would like to be able to do what all of us would like to be able to do, and that is live in the communities we grew up in. The creation of this commission is going to give us a chance to face and tackle the challenges of rural economic development together. I thank this Committee for inviting us, and for your work and for your commitment to helping all of us across this country. Thank you. Ms. Norton. I thank you both for your insights and this testimony. Let me just ask a couple of questions. We had a hearing on economic development and the Economic Development Act and the important advances that have been made in other regions, leveraging a very small amount of funds, drawing in industry in quite extraordinary ways, many times Federal investment. We began with areas where poverty had been endemic despite the industrial revolution, despite all that has happened to make this country an economic powerhouse. Now we are to the point where we better watch out about stereotyping where such needs are because the global economy has shuffled the deck. You, of course, come from New England and this was the strong manufacturing sector. People are moving from New England in part because it is cold and in part because of the loss of that manufacturing job base. In the testimony that we had before us previously, people have often focused on the difference between the investments made in the early years of the Act in traditional public works and toward new investments in technology, the information highway, if you will, instead of the concrete highway. I do not know that this is the only wave of the future, but any insights you could give us on whether or not that or other entirely new kinds of activities--you mentioned some of them--would take easily in the New England area where this has now become an endemic problem? Mr. Hodes. Sure. Let us focus for a moment on the existing natural resources. In the norther border region there is an abundance of wood. This country faces a crisis in our energy policy, for example. The possibility of a new vision for the northern border region where the natural resources are used as biomass alternative fuels to create new industries, new jobs out of existing facilities and using the workforce in place is a great opportunity. For instance, there is a possibility, I talked about the pulp mill in Berlin that is now closed, there is a great opportunity to transform that potentially into an alternative fuel electricity-generating facility. We then would have the need for infrastructure in terms of moving that alternative energy out of the region into the grid. So that involves the basic infrastructure of electric transmission lines and other transportation facilities. So along with other initiatives, there is the possibility I think of a transformation and a new vision for the northern border region which this commission can play a key part in helping to create, first, with the appropriate studies, then with the appropriate investments that I think would transform the region. I see the possibility, being parochial for a moment, that New England and the northern border region can lead this Nation towards a new 21st century energy policy that will not only transform the lives of the people here, but throughout the country, and then we can lead the world in alternative energy. That is just one example of the way this commission could work to create a new kind of infrastructure than that which traditionally was focused on with other commissions. Ms. Norton. Mr. Welch? Mr. Welch. Madam Chair, it is a great question, but in Vermont we are creating jobs mainly from small companies. Oftentimes it is folks who live in urban areas, have an idea, and they prefer the lifestyle, and some of you from urban areas may not believe this, but there are actually folks who like living in the country and they want to come up and live there, they think it is a great place to raise their kids. They need infrastructure and they need a trained workforce. We are creating jobs in some of these northern areas but they are literally because somebody has an idea, they have a company, but they need an infrastructure and they need a workforce. Broadband is a big deal. We do not have it everywhere in Vermont. What has happened where there have been successful partnerships is we have had these development agencies that want to get to yes, what are the practical problems that a new business faces in order to get started. There is a location that these entrepreneurs can go to and get practical answers to there questions of people who want to help them succeed. We have got to have jobs, we know that, but we really need them in these poorer, lower income areas of Vermont. Ms. Norton. I would like to ask the Ranking Member, Mrs. Capito, if she has any questions for these witnesses. Mrs. Capito. I do not really have a question. I would like to make a comment just as a person who lives in the ARC and has enjoyed the benefits I spoke about earlier. And thank you to Chairman Oberstar for his leadership those many years ago. We still have a lot of work to do and we are going to continue to do that, and he knows that. My comment is really centered on resources. The ARC, every year we fight to get the funding into the budget to be able to keep viable projects within the ARC. Certainly, as you create new regional commissions, it becomes again a question of resources. So I would hope if this is the direction that we go that we would all join together and make sure that to provide resources for a commission such as this and maintain our ARC resources it is not divide by half, it is multiply by two. With that, I yield back my time. Ms. Norton. I would like to ask the Chairman if he has any questions to these witnesses? Mr. Oberstar. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I thank Mrs. Capito. I have been in West Virginia on numerous occasions, going back to the very origins of the ARC. Mr. Hodes, your predecessor some years removed, a member of this Committee, Congressman Jim Cleveland did not vote for much in the way of social programs funded by the Federal Government. The things he did support, the Federal Aid Highway Program, the Appalachian Regional Commission, and the Federal Economic Development Administration programs. He was a strong, articulate, and persistent advocate. And because he had such staunch views on other issues, when he spoke favorably on EDA and ARC people on his side of the aisle listened. We had a great partnership. He served with my predecessor and then I served with him. Creating this kind of regional economic development crosses over; it is not Democratic or Republican, it is people, it is needs. And we see this all throughout the country where resource-dependent areas have been depleted. The need to create new economic opportunities that are not natural resource-based is a huge, steep challenge. New England was the birthplace of industrial revolution in America. But it was also the first to be hurt by long-term economic decline. First, the leather goods industry moved out, and then the needle trades moved out, and then wood fiber moved out as the lowly southern yellow pine was perfected for scientists to find a way to take the resin out and cure it to create straight two-by-fours instead of curvy ones and use that wood chip in pulp production, as I am sure Mr. Michaud very painfully knows. This is competition within the United States, however. So, creating an entity for economic development, but regional economic development. We know that problems do not start or stop at political boundaries, they cross over. I want to see more of an emphasis on regional initiatives in the legislation. As I have read through this, I think there are some refinements that I would suggest to my colleagues on shaping this and the other commissions to prioritize projects that truly are regional. I had an experience with the Upper Great Lakes Regional Commission in my district where all too often projects masqueraded under the name of regional but they were intensely local. You have to build coalitions across borders. I would suggest one of the priorities to be development of a natural resource research center. We established such an entity in Duluth for northern Minnesota, northern Wisconsin, it benefits the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. We do not have a regional commission any longer, it was dissolved many years ago, and I also want to take the lessons of failure of that commission to benefit the new commissions that we are creating here. But the establishment of a natural resource research institute that does some of the basic research on new product development. For example, they initiated hybrid poplar that grows to an eight inch, ten inch round wood in eight years. They harvest it just like any other crop on a farm. It can grow on those lands that we have taken out of production of corn or wheat or other grains, and you do not need the fertilizer or the limestone or the other to mend the soil. Those are the kinds of initiatives that really cross over boundaries, cross jurisdictions, and come back to the resource base of the area to benefit and create new job opportunities. So I encourage you to stimulate the regionality of your approach. And there are many others, we need not go into all of the parameters. But for that, and the southeast, and the other commissions that are created, those are the kinds of initiatives I think create justification for regional commission development, including backbone highway development where we can accelerate the movement of goods as well as people, both for travel and tourism and for goods movement. Thank you, Madam Chair. I thank our colleagues for their comments. Mr. Hodes. Madam Chair, may I just briefly respond? Ms. Norton. By all means, Mr. Hodes. Mr. Hodes. Thank you, Mr. Oberstar, for those insightful comments. It is very helpful for you to focus the work of this commission regionally. I hesitate of course to speak for Mr. Cleveland, but I recognize his good work in this area and it is because he recognized the I think genius in these commissions of the bottom-up grassroots approach and the public-private partnership. I would commend to you, Mr. Oberstar, the letter from the Northern Forest Center which I think addresses your thoughts very directly, because it talks about the cooperation here between New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, New York, and the governors of those States. This letter has appended to it a list of all the members of the Sustainable Economic Initiative. I think you will see that this work that has begun lays the kind of foundation you suggest is important and that this commission would then be instrumental in working with this initiative that has begun to focus regionally in exactly the way you suggest. I have submitted this for the record, as the Chairwoman has allowed me to do, but I commend it to your attention. Thank you very much. Ms. Norton. I am going to move on because we have Senator Dole here and we have promised her that we would take her right away because she has such a narrow window. So we are finished with this panel. We very much appreciate their testimony, very appropriate testimony to open this hearing. Ms. Norton. We appreciate that Senator Dole has walked all the way across from the other side to be with us. I am told that our Members from North Carolina will appear on the same panel with Senator Dole. Therefore, I am pleased to welcome Representative Mike McIntyre, Representative Robin Hayes, and Representative G.K. Butterfield as well to this panel. Thank you very much. Senator Dole, you may proceed. TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE ELIZABETH DOLE, SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE; THE HONORABLE MIKE MCINTYRE, MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; THE HONORABLE ROBIN HAYES, MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; THE HONORABLE G.K. BUTTERFIELD, A MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA Senator Dole. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Norton, Congresswoman Capito, members. I thank you very much for holding this hearing today and I welcome the opportunity to address the SouthEast Crescent Authority Act, SECA. This important legislation, which is identical to a companion bill I introduced in the Senate, would improve the lives of people in economically distressed communities across the southeastern United States. I sincerely appreciate the hard work of my friend Congressman Mike McIntyre on this issue, and I am grateful for the work that Congressmen Hayes and Butterfield are doing to help get this legislation passed by the House of Representatives. Broadly speaking, economically distressed hardly seems to describe my home State of North Carolina. Our statewide unemployment rate is a low 4.5 percent. Our economy is growing and adding new jobs. In fact, it was reported last month that 7,600 new tech jobs have been filled in just one year. North Carolina is home to 25 of the Fortune 500 companies, many of which are in Charlotte, the second largest financial center in the United States. But if you travel beyond the glittering skyline of the queen city, the thriving research and university campuses of the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill triangle, the bustling main streets and commerce centers of the Piedmont triad and our other cities, and the picturesque storefronts of our small towns, or if you just head down the road from the sprawling ocean front and mountainside vacation homes, you find a vastly different North Carolina. It is largely rural and it is significantly poorer. It is in these parts of North Carolina where educational attainment tends to be lower, unemployment rates tend to be higher. The challenges of globalization have landed smack on the shoulders of the region's textile mill towns, tobacco producing areas, and furniture manufacturing communities. It is also in these parts of North Carolina where the rates of health problems such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and obesity are well above average. Just consider this. If the region east of Interstate 95 in North Carolina were its own State, it would rank fiftieth in terms of premature mortality. Madam Chairwoman, my aim is certainly not to paint a depressing picture of rural North Carolina. Rather, I describe this all too often overlooked part of my State so that this Subcommittee understands the tremendous opportunity that SECA holds for certain areas in North Carolina and across the southeast, areas that while distressed still hold great promise. SECA would provide the assistance to enable communities to leverage existing resources, update infrastructure, improve educational opportunities, and attract economic development. Proof positive is what the Appalachian Regional Commission, on which SECA is modelled, has done for parts of western North Carolina. According to the ARC, the percentage of Appalachian adults with a high school education has doubled over the past 30 years--doubled. Many residents now have access to adequate health care for the first time. And more than 840,000 Appalachian adults now have clean water and sanitation facilities. While 29 of our counties in western North Carolina have benefitted from the Appalachian Regional Commission, there is no Federal partnership to help our 71 counties to the east, counties that could desperately use a helping hand. For example, one community that would greatly benefit from SECA is located in rural Washington County. Approximately 30 families there live in serious poverty, 8 miles away from the closest public sewer system. Because these families do not have indoor plumbing, they are forced to rely on wellwater and outhouses. This is totally unacceptable in this day and age. Washington County has a modest operating budget of only $13 million per year, and three-quarters of these funds are allocated to State and federally-mandated programs such as health care, social services, and public safety. The county is financially unable to provide public sewer service to these families due to the lack of available programs at the State and Federal levels. This is just one example of where SECA could be a tremendous help. Another place that would benefit from SECA is the town of Ahoskie, a small community of approximately 4,500 residents in rural Hertford County. Hertford County is classified as Tier I; meaning, it is among North Carolina's most economically deprived communities. According to the National Association of Development Organizations, Ahoskie's wastewater treatment plant has reached full capacity, placing a tremendous burden on the town's ability to grow and prosper. Under current estimates, the Town of Ahoskie must finance a $15.9 million project to expand the treatment plant. But it has only been able to secure $6.5 million in grant funding. In order to make up the over $9 million difference, the town will have to raise average sewer rates from $19 to $58 per household. This more than 200 percent rate increase will result in Ahoskie, one of the most economically depressed towns in the State, having the highest sewer fees in North Carolina. Last year my friend Al Delia, the former director of Federal Relations at East Carolina University, testified before this Subcommittee about SECA. In his testimony, Al mentioned a conversation he had with former Appalachian Regional Commission national chair, who said, and I will quote Al: ``ARC rarely puts in the most money to a project, but it often puts the first or the last money into a project. In effect, the ARC money is the glue that holds projects together.'' Let me underscore, communities across North Carolina and throughout the southeast need this glue. These areas are hurting. And we have seen with ARC and similar development commissions that SECA would make that positive difference. I am proud to support this legislation because SECA is not just about trying to provide opportunity, SECA is about not missing out on the tremendous opportunity that is just within the region's grasp. Thank you very much for this opportunity to share my views this morning. Ms. Norton. Thank you, Senator Dole. The way I am going to proceed is I am going to ask one question of Senator, and I am going to ask the three Members to go vote and then come back. Before I ask Senator Dole a question, I am going to ask any of those Members who are privileged to vote on the House floor whether they have a question first for the Senator because you now have a vote. Mr. Oberstar? Mr. Oberstar. Madam Chair, may I join you in welcoming Senator Dole. Senator Dole. Thank you very much. Mr. Oberstar. It is wonderful to have our colleagues from the other body make the long journey. [Laughter.] Senator Dole. Thank you. I appreciate that. Mr. Oberstar. When Members from this side try to make the journey to the other side, there are more whitened bones along the 200 meters than along the old Chisholm Trail. But when they come from the other side over here, it is wonderful. We have a partnership and we intend to work together, and we have a great delegation in your State with strong advocates on both sides of the aisle. And I said earlier, I am a strong advocate of regional economic development initiatives and probably have one of the pens that Lyndon Johnson used to sign into law the Economic Development Act of 1965 and the Appalachian Regional Commission Act. I was on the staff with my predecessor over there in the corner, John Blotnik, when that legislation was created and drafted much of the language and the Committee Report on the bill. So all those years I have followed ARC and supported other regional economic development initiatives. But I will say to this panel as I said to the previous one, in looking in over the draft and the proposed bill, I want to see more emphasis on regionality of projects. I also seek to develop kind of an umbrella entity for the regional commissions so that regionality really means something. We had some very unfortunate experiences in the Upper Great Lakes Regional Commission of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan that caused its collapse and I want to avoid such failures for other commissions going forward. I think an important way to do that is to ensure that in the mix you have projects that are truly regional in nature, that cross over boundaries, because geography determines your economics, not the political boundaries. And whether it is development of roadways, regional rail systems, or emphasis on wood fiber resource development, and I need not go any further than that, we should stimulate and provide incentives for and increased grant support for projects that truly are regional in nature. Senator Dole. Thank you very much. I appreciate those comments. And as we move forward together, we will certainly be looking at all aspects of this and understand exactly the message that you are conveying. Thank you very much. Mr. Oberstar. Thank you, Senator. Ms. Norton. Before I ask my question, let me ask again if any member has a question? Mr. Coble, we are pleased to have you. I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Coble be welcomed to sit on the panel. He is not a member of the Subcommittee. Hearing no objection, Mr. Coble, you may speak. Mr. Coble. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to welcome my friends, particularly Senator Dole, to this side of the Hill. I may have to stay on the floor, Madam Chairman, and may not get to come back. But I am fully supportive. My six counties probably will not directly benefit but certainly will indirectly benefit, as will the entire State. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Ms. Norton. Yes, indeed. The members should go to vote. I just have one question for the Senator--the bell does not toll for her, at least over here--and that is, I think people might be surprised to hear you talk about wellwater and outhouses in a part of North Carolina which we now associate with the New South and all that sort of thing and the Research Triangle. Again, the Chairman talked about how geography determines this. One side of the State is ``in the Appalachian Region'' because of where the Appalachian Mountains flow, and the other side equally poor and does not have the same benefit. Do you think that the focus should be first on clean water and sewer treatment with some Federal money leveraging state money to make the area seem like an area where businesses of various kinds would want to locate? Senator Dole. Certainly, that is a very important aspect. But I think there are many issues--education, economic opportunity, health care access, infrastructure. All of these are aspects where grants would be provided. So many parts of the rural south just fall below the national average with regard to these areas. And I think that, you know, as I have said, east of I-95, yes, it is almost like two different States in terms of these areas that are economically depressed that really have no economic base off which they can build. So we have got to provide the basics, and certainly infrastructure is very important. The Town of Ahoskie cannot grow, it cannot prosper when the treatment plant is at full capacity. And to think that a town, one of the most depressed economically, people suffering in Ahoskie from this situation, that their water rates would go from $19 to $58 and they would be paying the highest sewer rates of any town in North Carolina, and yet they are one of the most economically depressed. So I think we are on target to try to make the difference, to work this through carefully. I look forward to working with my colleagues to get this done in this session of Congress because it will make a tremendous difference to these areas of North Carolina and other parts of the southeast. Ms. Norton. I very much appreciate your coming, Senator Dole. And I want to say, one of the first things we say is if we did anything will the Senate reciprocate. So I am very pleased to have you here and to note your interest. I am now going to call a recess until---- Mr. Butterfield. Madam Chairman. Ms. Norton. Yes, sir? Mr. Butterfield. May I ask unanimous consent to enter my strong statement of support into the record in case I cannot get back? Ms. Norton. Indeed, sir. Sorry for this bell, but I know I have held you already. Senator Dole. Thank you again for the opportunity to work together to get this done. Thank you. Ms. Norton. Thank you, Senator. We will resume in about 20 minutes. [Recess.] Ms. Norton. Mr. McIntyre, rather than hold you, and I am not sure if the other members are coming back, I understand Mr. Hayes has indicated that he wanted his remarks in the record, I would be happy to receive your testimony at this time. Mr. McIntyre. Thank you so much, Madam Chairman. And you are correct, Representative Hayes told me he was doubtful he would be able to make it back. So I am happy to proceed. Thank you for your kindness. Madam Chairwoman, many thanks to you for agreeing to hold this important hearing on legislation that I have introduced, H.R. 66, a bill to create the SouthEast Crescent Authority. And thanks also to Chairman Oberstar, who I know was here earlier, and to all the Subcommittee members. This is a measure that I have introduced, as you may recall, every Congress since the 107th Congress. It has continued to receive bipartisan support and cosponsorship from Members from States throughout the Union, including several southern States. I want to also thank Senator Dole and my colleagues Representatives Hayes and Butterfield, who are appearing on this panel as well today and for their presence earlier this morning. In fact, the first time this bill was introduced, the first time, back in the 107th Congress, and subsequently, we have not only been warmly received, but the first time it received unanimous bipartisan support. My hope is that this Subcommittee will once again endorse this bill and perhaps this legislative session we can move it to full Committee and hopefully ultimately to the floor. A Chapel Hill, North Carolina think tank that has studied changes in the south for almost 40 years, including in its State of the South Report for the year 2007, had information and statistics that examine the job and population growth, education systems, racial gaps, and economy of all the southern States. This report states: ``As a result of the national economic slowdown of the early part of this decade, job growth stagnated in much of the south between the years 2000 and 2004.'' The report continues to state: ``The slowdown illuminated the restructuring of the south's economy.'' I can tell you well, as many of my friends in my neighborhood, my church, friends I grew up with in school, friends of our family, jobs in the textiles in our area and in furniture-making factories in other areas of North Carolina, those jobs are gone, they have fled, while jobs in services, retail, and the professions have come in. And as a Member that represents a district from one of these southern States, the 7th District of North Carolina, as discussed in this 2007 report, I understand the conventional wisdom that low-wage manufacturing jobs are being exchanged for even lower-wage service and retail jobs. However, this conventional wisdom only goes so far. And it is apparent that, as the 2007 report states, ``A more high-tech, globally competitive economy has introduced new employment opportunities for southerners but,'' it says, ``it has also destroyed jobs held by mature adults who have had prospects, very few, for shifting into jobs with comparable pay.'' I know factories in my own hometown of Lumberton and in Robeson County and in adjoining counties particularly in southeast North Carolina where folks who had worked at factory jobs for the last 25 to 35 years, went straight out of high school, they got off the tobacco farms, were told that your future will not be in the tobacco farms, it will be in the factories, go work in the factories, then those children grew up, many of whom are my age now, and have been working in those factories literally for the last 25 to 35 years and now find themselves without a job and having to go back for worker retraining or trying to find the kind of opportunity at community colleges and other places so that they can find other jobs that may have somewhere that they hope they can get comparable pay. Madam Chairman, the time is now in this situation and this atmosphere to work to change this pattern and ensure those individuals, whether they worked in textiles, tobacco, or manufacturing, and those communities that have been affected are not left behind. I am confident that the SouthEast Crescent Authority will do just that. The southeastern portion of our country, encompassing the States of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida, is an area that has seen poverty rates well above the national average, unfortunately coupled with record unemployment. In fact, the Census Bureau found that in the calculation of poverty rates for 2003 to 2005 ten southern States exceeded the national average poverty rate of 12.6. And unfortunately, the educational gaps contribute to the economic gap, causing southerners to have even a harder time finding work that pays an above average wage that does not require education beyond high school. The seven States in the SouthEastern Crescent Region also experience natural disasters at a rate two to three times greater than any other region of the U.S. I can tell you during my first four years in office we had six hurricanes alone strike North Carolina in our district. We know of the other tragedies and unfortunate situations with storms, floods, the effect of nor'easters and hurricanes, as mentioned, tornadoes, that the south is affected at a rate two to three times greater than other regions and this vulnerability to natural disasters only further exacerbates the ability to recover from economic distress. This legislation is modeled primarily after the successful Appalachian Regional Commission, to which Mr. Oberstar referred earlier when Ms. Dole was testifying. It puts together a local- Federal-State partnership to lift our citizens out of poverty and to create jobs. Unfortunately, we have been hit by the double whammy with the high record levels of unemployment and poverty, the highest in the Nation over several of these years. We want to help. And that is what SECA would do, with infrastructure, education and job training, an emphasis on health care, entrepreneurship, small business development, and leadership development. The communities with the greatest need would be targeted and grants would be made according to the degree of distress. Madam Chairwoman, the southeastern United States is one of the last vast areas of our country not to have a Federal focus on dealing with economic development and ending poverty and strengthening these communities. We know that the other various economic commissions all serve great areas, but the south has had no such entity. We have many projects, as I am sure we could discuss for a long time, where Federal funding like SECA could help make those projects a reality and help leverage the Federal funds into much greater return. This is just the final component that is missing to help the south truly have a chance to move ahead. Madam Chairwoman, thank you for this opportunity to testify. SECA will be a valuable tool to assist local and county officials to work with regional officials. I know the Chairman, Mr. Oberstar, raised that issue with Ms. Dole earlier. We are focusing on working with councils of governments, which by definition serve regions that have a multi-county area, that can focus on those pockets of economic distress and that could leverage additional funds to allow our citizens to reach their economic potential. I am pleased we will have the opportunity to continue to hear from others from the affected region. We all share the same excitement to help this area of our country that, unfortunately, has been too often overlooked. This will be that opportunity to bring those new resources. This will be that final chance we have to access Federal monies to help clean up the distress left in the wake of unemployment, poverty, drop-outs, and poor health care delivery. Thank you so much for your willingness to hold this hearing. I look forward to working with you, Madam Chairwoman, the members of the Subcommittee, and, Lord willing, the full Committee so that we can move this to the floor. It is the least we can do to act now and to help the least of these who have suffered enough to help bolster economic progress and help them, indeed, fulfill their opportunity for the American dream. Thank you so much, and may God bless you as you consider this and deliberate upon it. Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mr. McIntyre. This is very interesting testimony. You indicated that the region, the SouthEast Crescent Region, those three, four, five States---- Mr. McIntyre. Seven States. Ms. Norton. Seven States. Mr. McIntyre. Yes, ma'am. Ms. Norton. That region has had flat or only a slight increase in job creation. You know, what happened to the New South? What is the biggest impediment? Why has job growth, which in past decades spurted in this area, are slowed? Mr. McIntyre. Thank you for asking that. That is why I would be happy to provide to the Committee in much more detail that State of the South Report, to which I referred, that has all the demographics and statistics. But let me say in more general terms, yes, there have been great opportunities, as Mrs. Dole indicated in her testimony. We know that banking and commerce are tremendous particularly in the Charlotte area, that runs right up to the South Carolina line from North Carolina. We know that the Research Triangle Park has been the cutting edge in terms of high-tech opportunity in the Raleigh- Durham-Chapel Hill-Cary area. We know Atlanta has taken off. And there are other certain areas that we can point to as beacons of progress, thankfully. But move beyond those areas and we are in great distress. Madam Chairwoman, I can tell you as the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Rural Development over on the Agriculture Committee, we just had testimony two days ago on rural broadband access and the great distress that is suffered now because a lot of these areas do not even have broadband access to telemedicine, health care delivery, business opportunity, educational opportunity. In the Subcommittee that I Chair on Rural Development, this was a very vicious problem in terms of allowing any economic progress. For instance, in North Carolina 85 our 100 counties, which makes the math easy, therefore 85 percent of our counties in North Carolina are considered by definition rural. So, yes, we have 15 counties we are very proud of and that you regularly hear about as part of the New South, the other 85, including nearly all the ones except for one that I represent, are all involved in a dire situation with regard to poverty, with regard to high school drop-outs, with regard to worker retraining. Let me say also another reason is, I mentioned earlier I grew up and I live on tobacco road, we all know the changes that have occurred with regard to tobacco production. It was the last, and a lot of people still do not realize this, when we did the tobacco buy-out, that I helped co-author a couple of sessions ago, that was the last Federal farm program in America from the Depression Era that the farmers were still living under in eastern North Carolina and South Carolina and Virginia, down into Georgia and northern Florida. They are just coming out of that, just from the last two to three years, of living under a Depression Era federally-mandated farm program. And as they make the transition out of the tobacco economy, then we are hit with the whammy of the textile mills closing, which was to support farm families. Those are gone now with some the trade agreements that have occurred, that are a matter of record, and that has affected textiles and furniture, particularly in North Carolina. I remember when President Clinton used to talk about how the trade agreements would positively affect America. We have had some positive benefits, as we know, but he also would say there would be pockets of distress. And yes, that is what this is targeted at is those pockets of distress, to use President Clinton's phrase, the economically distressed counties that are still way far behind the curve and that are still suffering from high unemployment levels because of the economic downturn they have suffered. Ms. Norton. Mr. Capito, do you have any questions for Mr. McIntyre? Mrs. Capito. I want to thank the gentleman for his testimony. I appreciate the analysis that you made. Mr. McIntyre. Thank you. Mrs. Capito. I just have one quick question. Senator Dole in her comments mentioned that parts of North Carolina are part of the Appalachian Regional Commission. Mr. McIntyre. Right. Mrs. Capito. And I guess parts of the SouthEast Crescent Authority are also part of the Delta Regional Commission. Is that correct? Mr. McIntyre. Not exactly. What we have tried to do, and Dr. Al Delia, who was with East Carolina University, and we have a representative from ECU today that is here on their behalf, did was to make sure there is no overlap. This covers counties that have not been helped. For instance, in North Carolina, yes, we have some counties way up in the western part of the State in the mountains that are part of the, thankfully, very successful Appalachian Regional Commission. I live five hours from the mountains because I am down from I-95, which I am sure you all are familiar with, and East to the coast. And it is that eastern part of I-95, as Senator Dole mentioned, that is the most severely affected by poverty and drop-outs and economic downturn. We live on Tobacco Road, as I referred to earlier, and where the textile mills have closed. This is where we have some of the most impoverished counties actually in America, and these counties are not covered now at all in our State because we are so far East away from the mountains. This legislation covers eastern and central Virginia, the Carolinas, down to Georgia, northern Florida and over. This does not touch anywhere near the mountain areas, barely runs into the piedmont areas, which are the rolling hills between the mountains and the coastal plain. Mrs. Capito. I thank you. I was just wondering about any kind of duplication. I know a lot of the coordination has to go through the governors' offices. They are on the commissions and they do a lot of the detail work and the research work. I am sure it could be worked out. Anyway, thank you very much. Mr. McIntyre. Thank you. In fact, if anything, the governor's office, for instance, could use ARC in the western part of our State, they would not have to reinvent the wheel, they could use it as an example for the counties down East, as we say, who are literally five hours away, 250 miles East of the mountains, that are still in this unfortunate poverty cycle that we are in. Mrs. Capito. Thank you. I yield back. Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mrs. Capito. And I very much thank you, Mr. McIntyre, for coming and offering us this very helpful testimony. Mr. McIntyre. Thank you, Ms. Norton. I appreciate your consideration. God bless you all in your work. Ms. Norton. I would like to ask what looks like a Texas delegation to come forward now. Mr. Cuellar, Mr. Reyes, Mr. Filner from California, Mr. Hinojosa, and Mr. Rodriguez, from Texas as well. Mr. Cuellar, we will have begin. You said you had to be out of here by a time certain. TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE HENRY CUELLAR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS; THE HONORABLE SILVESTRE REYES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS; THE HONORABLE BOB FILNER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; THE HONORABLE RUBEN HINOJOSA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS; THE HONORABLE CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS Mr. Cuellar. Thank you, Madam Chair. [Remarks made off mic.] First of all I want to thank Chairman Reyes. The Chairman is the elite sponsor and I want to thank Chairman Reyes for the leadership that he has taken. I am honored to join Congressman Reyes as one of the cosponsors of H.R. 2068, the Southwest Regional Border Authority Act. This legislation strives to reverse the economic hardship facing our communities along the border. What I want to focus on, Madam Chair and members of the Committee, is the hundreds of thousands of citizens that live in the unique communities called colonias. I think Congressman Filner and Congressman Rodriguez know about the colonias. These are unincorporated communities that are composed of families with very low income and usually lack the basic services. They do not have water, they do not have sewage, they do not have sewer systems, they do not have the basic utilities that we take for granted. As a former Texas Secretary of State, I can tell you that there are about 400,000 people living in more than 2,000 colonias in Texas alone. When you look, for example, at my congressional district, the average household income is about $28,866, which is about 31.3 percent below the national average. When you look at the people who live in the colonias, their average income is usually around $10,800 a year. So you are talking about people who have incomes of $10,800 a year, you are talking about people who do not have water and sewers, you are talking about people that do not have the roads, and it affects them in so many ways. It is not only the physical infrastructure that is not available for them, but it is also what I call the social infrastructure, because they do not have access to health care and the other things that we take for granted. I am in support of this legislation because it is one way that the Federal Government can join the States along the southwest border. I know in the State of Texas as a former legislator, and I believe I passed probably the landmark legislation that we had in Texas at the State level dealing with colonias, but also as a former Secretary of State, I can tell you that when you talk about 400,000 people that live in the colonias just in Texas, and Mr. Filner can talk about California also, you are talking about 2,000 colonias that are basically ``people that live in Third World conditions.'' I certainly would invite you all to come in. I think once you walk out of one of the colonias you will see that we are not exaggerating. We are talking about people that really are living in very difficult areas. I will close at this time, Madam Chair. I want to thank you. I have to go introduce the Tejano, I think means Texan, of the Year for the Speaker; I think the Members are going to join me. But I want to thank you, and I certainly want to thank Chairman Reyes, Mr. Filner, and Mr. Rodriguez, but especially Mr. Reyes for taking the lead on this. Thank you. Ms. Norton. Thank you. Obviously, the notion of such primitive conditions should make us understand there is a lot of work to be done on this issue. We appreciate your testimony. Thank you very much for coming. Mr. Reyes. Mr. Reyes. Good morning, Madam Chair and Ranking Member Capito. Thank you very much for holding this hearing and for allowing me to testify on H.R. 2068, the Southwest Regional Border Authority Act. I would also like to thank Chairman Oberstar for his vision in helping me with this issue, and also to thank all my colleagues here from the U.S.-Mexico border region for their support in creation of this very important piece of legislation. Members of the Subcommittee, I am here today to talk about the conditions that exist in many places along the border and to give you I think a better understanding of the great need for the creation of a regional economic development authority for the southwest border region of the United States. It was because of this need in places like my congressional district of El Paso, Texas, that I introduced H.R. 2068. I just want the members to understand that I have introduced this particular legislation for the past three congresses. I would greatly appreciate your support to move this legislation very important to our border region in this the 110th Congress. The southwest border region, as defined in H.R. 2068, includes all counties within 150 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border. This region contains 11 counties in New Mexico, 65 counties in Texas, 10 counties in Arizona, and 7 counties in California, for a combined population of approximately 29 million people. According to research compiled by the Interagency Task Force on Economic Development of the Southwest Border, 20 percent of the residents in this region of the Nation live below the poverty level. Unemployment rates often reach as high as five times the national unemployment rate. And a lack of adequate access to capital has created economic disparities and has made it very difficulty for businesses to start up and to remain in business in this border region. Border communities have long endured a depressed economy and very low paying jobs. Our economic challenges partly stem from our position as a border community. Economic development in border communities is difficult to stimulate without assistance from the Government, private sector, and community non-profits. H.R. 2068 would help foster planning to encourage infrastructure development, technology development, and deployment of that technology, education and workforce development, and community development through entrepreneurship. Modeled in part after the Appalachian Regional Commission, the Southwest Border Region Authority would be successful because of four guiding principles: First, the Authority would fund proposals designed at the local level, followed by approval at the State level, in order to meet regional economic development goals. Second, these projects would lead to the creation of a diversified regional economy to be prioritized. Currently, States and counties often are forced to compete against each other for the very limited funding that is available. Third, the Authority would be an independent agency. Having the Authority set up in this manner would keep it from having to attempt to satisfy another Federal agency's mission requirements when determining which projects are to be funded. And finally, the Authority would be comprised of one Senate confirmed Federal representative and the governors of the States of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. The proposed structure would allow equal representation by each State and a liaison back to the Federal agencies. For too long, Madam Chair, the needs of the southwest border region have been either ignored or overlooked and certainly underfunded. We need to recognize all of the challenges facing this potentially vibrant border and to help the region make the most of its many, many assets. One important part of that effort would be to establish a new economic development opportunity in the southwest through an authority created by H.R. 2068, the Southwest Border Regional Authority Act. Madam Chair, I want to thank you and Ranking Member for allowing me to speak on behalf of this very important legislation. I would be glad to answer any questions you might have. Thank you very much. Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Representative Reyes, for this testimony on this terrible poverty in the southwest region. Again, that is not what people think of when they think of Texas. And so you have brought to light an important problem somehow or the other we are going to have to deal with. Mr. Filner. Mr. Filner. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for holding this hearing. We thank Mr. Reyes for the legislation. And I accept your apology for lumping me in with the Texans. [Laughter.] Ms. Norton. Well, I do not know what rich California is doing here in the first place. [Laughter.] Mr. Filner. Well let me tell you. I represent the entire Mexico-California border. The issue I think for us is that because of the border, which impacts every aspect of life in our community, what happens there is a result of national policy and yet the local communities are expected to bear the brunt of that. And I just want to give you a few examples. Interestingly enough, Madam Chair, 300,000 people per day go back and forth across the border in my district, legally, 300,000 a day. That is an incredible movement. That is a major city going back and forth. When we built the border crossings which handle this incredible volume of traffic, the local infrastructure was not considered. When NAFTA, for example, lead to an increase of trucks from, say, 1500 to 3000 a day, there was no road envisioned, planned, or built to take that traffic to the Interstate Highway System. Local roads had to handle it. Those roads are now the most dangerous roads in America because of this heavy international truck traffic. Yet the Federal Government, whose policy resulted in the traffic, did nothing to help ameliorate it. I am probably the only Congressman in America who can say that 50 million gallons of raw sewage flows daily through my district. That is because the rivers that come from south of the border in Tijuana and other parts of Baja flow north, the Tijuana River in one part of my district, the New River and Alamo River in another part, flow through my district, one of them into the Pacific Ocean. Because Tijuana has no sewage facilities for more than half of its population of two or three million, that raw sewage, which gets dumped in back gullies and flows into a river, comes through my district. It is an international problem. The local community cannot afford to build a waste treatment plant to cover that. It took us two decades to finally get one built at the border and it was obsolete the day it opened. That took two decades to get Federal funding for that infrastructure. And everybody in America is entitled to waste treatment, and yet we at the border did not have that. Mexico could not handle it. We had to do it to protect the health of our own citizens, and yet the local community has to bear the brunt. One of my counties at the border is a nonattainment area for a particulate matter. The Mexican city of Mexicali in fact produces much of the pollution that U.S. citizens have to deal with. And yet we are required under the law to mitigate that pollution. It is not pollution coming from our Nation, and so how can our communities be burdened with the expense of that. We can go on and on. Local hospitals have closed in my area because of the impact of having to provide medical care for poor and also undocumented workers. In every aspect, whether you talk about health, transportation, environmental protection, highways, other means of infrastructure, the border impacts the local communities. The mechanism that Mr. Reyes envisions in this bill will help us get support for doing the work that has to be done just for the quality of life that everybody else in America enjoys but because of the border pressures we cannot afford. So we are looking forward to the passage of this bill and to these mechanisms to help us deal with these very crucial problems. Thank you, Madam Chair. Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mr. Filner. Mr. Rodriguez. Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you very much for allowing us this opportunity to present to you some of our concerns and ask for your support on this important legislation. Let me also take this opportunity to thank Congressman Silvestre Reyes for introducing this legislation that is drastically needed. Let me also indicate to you that there is a real serious situation on the border and the Southwest Regional Border Authority Act provides the opportunity for many communities along the border to receive the assistance and resources they have long needed in order for them to develop their infrastructure and economic prosperity. Madam Chair, I represent an extensive district that spans from El Paso County, far West Texas, to Dimmit County, close to 700 miles along the Mexican border, and also up 150 miles to San Antonio. This district encompasses one of the largest stretches of border of any other that is contiguous in the United States. I have represented this district for the last five months. But as I have travelled through the 20 counties which I represent in the 23rd Congressional District, I have seen some of the poorest counties in the entire country. The Southwest Regional Border Authority Act brings the Federal Government to the border and this particular legislation can help enhance that community. I would like to share with the Committee a situation in a community in my district that we are facing. They are a small rural community that was in great need of a wastewater treatment plant, and I have several that fit this description. The current wastewater plant was built years ago on a flood plain, and with the annual rains came the overflow of waste. The State environmental agency had threatened to fine this particular community. The community applied and received approval from the USDA Rural Development Loan Grant Program. They were approved and the award was granted, an 80 percent loan, 20 percent grant. This posed a significant problem for this particular community. They have very little resources and could not afford the payment on the loan to be able to make that happen. These rural communities have a very small tax base and most of the individuals go at this time of year to the north to work in the fields, then come back to the community. These are communities that as they go they build their own homes, without any insurance, and have very little resources. The community ended up accepting the award, but other communities have not always been that fortunate. Now they find themselves having to double and in some cases triple the amount that they charge for water in order to pay for that loan. The Southwest Regional Border Authority Act could help in future situations such as this. It includes a section intended to supplement Federal grant programs. Section 206 of this bill provides opportunities for the communities who are unable to take advantage of current Federal grant programs because they do not have the required State or local match funds that are needed in order for them to be able to access those loans. Madam Chair, this is just one example of the situation that we find ourselves in along the border. As I traveled through all of the 20 of my counties, what I heard over and over again was Congressman, please help us help ourselves. I believe this bill does that. Let me also share one thing that is seldom understood. Every single community, and I will mention Eagle Pass, Texas, that just got hit with a tornado, a very small community, about 34,000, 35,000, 7 people were killed, and finally after seven days the Administration is there to help out--but the Mexican border side has over 300,000 people. Each community, when you look at El Paso, Juarez is approximately, what, over a million people, 2 million people. As Congressman Filner indicated, the communities on the other side are usually ten times larger than our communities, they continually come and use our infrastructure, they use our access to health care, they use all of our facilities, and those burdens usually have to be carried by the local individuals there, such as law enforcement and other facilities. That is one of the areas that is often overlooked and not understood, that individuals come over and purchase on our side and go back, but they use our infrastructure. So we ask for your help and your assistance. I will close by sharing with you. I have had this district for just five months. I went to one of the communities when I was campaigning and afterwards they asked me for an all-weather road so the Border Patrol could go through there for checking. And I felt like telling them, my God, you need an all-weather road on all your existing roads. We have some communities that are on the U.S. side and they almost look like, this sounds very bad, but it looks like we are in a Third World country in some of those communities, and I am talking about on the U.S. side. So I would ask for your help and your assistance in this area. It is an area that, as we look at trade with NAFTA, these are the areas that need infrastructure in order to allow those 18-wheelers to go up north to Chicago through Eagle Pass, and Del Rio, and some of my communities, Presidio. So I ask for your help and your assistance in making this happen. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Ms. Norton. I thank all three of you for your testimony. I think most Americans have no idea about the grinding poverty you are talking about. That is just not the image we have of our country. And as to California and Texas, you appear to share more than a border. And, yes, importantly, your Southwest Border Regional Authority would cross State lines. These appear to be all border towns. They are the first towns that would receive immigration, legal and illegal. It is as if when emigrants came in the 19th century, the very first place they settled, they settled right in New York, New Jersey, in the first places they hit. Of course, the difference was that they came because there was an overwhelming need for work. So nobody would have thought you needed some kind of economic development. They needed jobs and that was the economic development. The conditions were not the best, but then we rectified that. I would like to know, would your Southwest Border Authority bill set up the first network for working together in these two States on the impact of immigration from a poorer country to our country? Is there any existing network, or would you in effect be creating it? Mr. Reyes. Our legislation, as I said, models the legislation from Appalachia. What we are trying to do with this legislation is provide an economic development engine for border counties. We are not only America's first line of defense, we are also America's best economic opportunity, because trade and commerce, since the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement, comes through all of our respective communities. There are four major trade routes coming into the United States from Mexico, and by extension from Latin America. They come through these four States. So this is an opportunity to provide one authority that would take into account all four States. It would be working under a coordinated effort, also in conjunction with the State governments, the governor would have an appointee on this board. So we feel that it does three very important things: first, it is a coordinated effort; secondly, it addresses the biggest problem in terms of the economies of our border region, and that is giving our communities an economic development engine; and third, it also provides under this coordinated effort an opportunity for States to work together. But more than that, it provides a vehicle where we hope we can use it as a springboard to bring Mexico into the equation. In other words, everything on our border we feel strongly, I am not speaking for the other Members, but having heard them speak before, we all feel very strongly that Mexico needs to be looked at as a partner. Whether it is dealing with issues in border enforcement, economic opportunity, trade, commerce, tourism, our communities are interlaced or interlocked. And this authority would give us a great springboard for that. Mr. Filner. Ms. Norton, if I may add. Ms. Norton. Yes, Mr. Filner. Mr. Filner. You hit upon a very good question. There is no institutional mechanism that unites us. This would be the first. We have informal alliances. We have a border caucus in Congress; the governors have a border governors conference; and the counties have a border counties caucus. So we have these attempts to work together informally, but there is no institutionalized mechanism and this would be a credible step forward. Ms. Norton. Yes, Mr. Rodriguez? Mr. Rodriguez. Let me just reinforce the fact that this is essential and critical. I have always said that this would be a good way for us also to communicate with each other. I have always felt real strongly that in order to protect our country, we also need to be well aware in terms of what is happening in Mexico and for us to have good relationships. And what better way than to be working on projects together. I think this legislation allows that to begin to occur. So I ask for your serious consideration. Ms. Norton. Well thank you very much. Formalizing this border relationship across States will be very important. If one State works by itself on reducing poverty and economic development, you just simply end up exchanging poor people. Well, poor people will go to where the economic development appears and where there are jobs, and you do not get anywhere that way. This is one value of being the United States; we can work across borders. I must say what is most intriguing to me about your testimony is this opportunity for the several States to work together now not only on border protection issues, which obviously is already occurring, that is a Federal issue, but on issues on which we are deeply implicated but issues of poverty which come to you because of where you happen to be located. I am going to ask the Ranking Member, Mrs. Capito, if she has any questions for the panel. Mrs. Capito. Thank you Madam Chair. I do not really have a question. Well, I guess I do have a question. Since your region is so vastly different than my region, which is a part of the Appalachian Regional Commission, and I mentioned to the panel before this that we are always struggling to fund the ARC and have been for decades now to keep the funding source and stream going. But in realizing that, the monies there are monies that are supplemental to what you are already doing in Texas and in California to help I am sure alleviate some of the problems that you have described. I am kind of curious to know how a commission created by States would be able to interact with Mexico. I am sure that is something that could be worked out and I am certain that it is necessary as you move through the process. But I am just interested to know, in each of your two States, what kind of efforts the States are doing right now to try to alleviate this. And how do you think a commission like this would come in, as an overseer, or as a supplementer, or as a replacement? Mr. Reyes. Thank you for that question. It is a great question and gives us an opportunity to let the Committee know that there are already organizations such as the Border Health Commission that takes that into account. Because when we look at the border region, as my colleague Mr. Filner mentioned, there is no way to keep out pollution from Mexico, or vice versa. Although the international boundary exists, it is an imaginary line. So issues of pollution, contamination, as Mr. Filner said, the problems that they have with sewer treatment, affect both sides of the border. We have the Border Health Commission, the Border Economic Commission, and we have the Pan American Health Organization. There are a number of organizations that have been in place already that serve as models for what we think will spring from this authority, and that is to help address the number one issue of the border region in terms of poverty, unemployment and even underemployment, because underemployment is a huge issue along the border region. So we would be very happy to provide you additional information because in this short period of time it is impossible to really fully cover it but I think it would be worthwhile for the Committee to consider. Mr. Filner. Just briefly. You raise a really important issue. Obviously, the Federal governments have the policy and the authority at the border areas, and yet both Washington and Mexico City do not really understand the border. The relationships have been built around local relationships. I mean, it is a truly binational community--families, jobs, education, everybody going back and forth all the time. Families have relationships, mayors have relationships, the governors have tried in recent years, but the Federal governments do not come as an integrative force from either country. Obviously, the policies affect what is going on but there is no attempt at the federal level to really integrate with the things at that local level. So we need this kind of organization, we need others. Right now we try to survive with local relationships when it is the two Federal governments that have the power and have not used that power to really aid our border communities in a realistic way. Mrs. Capito. Thank you. I yield back. Mr. Rodriguez. I just want to add. Our problem right now, and I would say especially with Mexico but also probably with Canada, we need new institutions that allow us to begin to dialogue together, and this allows that and it allows an opportunity to create those new institutions. I am sure there are others that are needed and that are lacking there. To give an example, the tornado hit and I went and visited both Piedras Negras and they got hit harder. They are very different the way they operate. They cut to the chase, they were out there cleaning up. After five days they were offering help to us. I told the county judge there, go in and take it, and so they came over and started helping us. I went across and the reason I went across is because during Katrina we had 20,000 people in San Antonio, the Mexican army came into San Antonio and they just came in and set up and they did not ask for anything, they just started to feed people, and they fed people there for about 20 days or so. And so I went over there to pay my respects and because they also had lost three lives with the tornado, we lost seven. And so I think this will allow us to begin to create those institutions that might be needed. Maybe later on there might be some changes that we might have to make. But I think this is an essential institution that would help us dialogue together and make some things happen that are positive for both side. Ms. Norton. Again, I want to thank all three of you from the now California/Texas delegation for coming to testify here. It has been very, very informative and very helpful to us as we try to see if we can find some way to be of assistance to you. Again, thank you very much for your testimony this morning. Mr. Reyes. Thank you, Madam Chair. We will provide that additional information for the record. Ms. Norton. Thank you very much. The hearing is now adjourned. [Whereupon, at 12:25 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]