BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to speak in opposition to the gentleman's amendment, section 1709; however, I want to state for the record I am completely supportive of the program that he spoke of today.
This particular amendment, however, seeks to eliminate funding for the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act, a vital public health, environment and infrastructure program that was reauthorized with huge bipartisan support that Representative Calvert referred to, through a bill I authored last year. That is the purpose of my standing, because I was an author of that bill this year.
DERA is a proven program that improves air quality by reducing diesel emissions. It has strong bipartisan support in both the House and Senate and from a diverse coalition of transportation, health, and environmental organizations.
I thank Congressman Moran, and I applaud his leadership efforts to protect and preserve our environment and natural resources. He has been a stalwart advocate in the struggle to reduce harmful emissions from antiquated coal-fired power plants and protect green space and green infrastructure. However, today is a rare moment that he and I do not agree.
DERA is a voluntary national and State-level grant and loan program that reduces the diesel emissions by upgrading and modernizing older diesel engines and equipment. For someone like me and my district, this is important. It's the lives of my constituents. By design, it looks to reduce the emissions from 20 million existing diesel engines in use today by as much as 90 percent.
The $50 million designated for DERA is but half of the authorized level and already a 20 percent cut in the program from last year's funding. Although I would say, for the record, that it has not been terminated, it is merely a recommendation by the President at this time.
Eliminating funding entirely would be a huge mistake and cause substantial detriment to the economic health and environmental interests, particularly of communities that are along port areas.
Since DERA funding began in 2007, more than 3,000 projects nationwide have benefited from this program, creating considerable employment opportunities in the area of manufacturing, installation and servicing of emissions-related technology. The bill I authored this last year, which passed in December, will actually amplify job creation further by expanding the program and increasing the number of eligible beneficiaries.
Additionally, DERA is widely considered one of the most cost-effective Federal programs in the Nation. The EPA has estimated that in California alone the program averages more than $13 in health and economic benefits for every $1 that it receives in funding. Projections estimate that nearly 2,000 lives will be saved by 2017 in direct relation to DERA's impact on air quality.
In my district, the positive benefits of DERA are far reaching, home to the two busiest container ports in the United States, the Port of Los Angeles and the Port of Long Beach. On average, 35,000 trucks commute to and from these ports daily. By the year 2030, this number will be expected to triple. Just imagine for a moment the pollution caused by these vehicles in a single day.
Now, think of those Americans who live along those freight corridors and are exposed to the pollutants on a daily basis. Would you want that for you and your family? In my district, these folks already suffer from asthma and cancer rates far above the national average, and it's documented. Air quality improvements and reductions in emissions are vital to the quality of life and health of these families and countless others throughout the Nation.
I would also like to add that DERA is often mentioned in association with the trucking industry and freight movement. There is another important area where diesel engines are most frequently utilized and where DERA will create a substantial necessary improvement in our public transportation and our school bus system.
These vehicles are vital to the millions of Americans who rely upon them every day to get to work or school. Many of these folks include young children whose lungs and immune systems are still developing and who are especially susceptible to health problems. We owe it to these young people and their families to give the DERA program our full support and see its funding maintained.
DERA has been endorsed by a large coalition of leading environmental health and transportation organizations who also believe in its effectiveness at protecting and creating jobs, promoting healthy economies and healthier citizens. At a time when our future is so heavily dependent upon economic growth, infrastructure investment, and improving the quality of life of average Americans, it seems counterintuitive to cut funding for a program that provides us with so many benefits.
For these reasons, I urge opposition to the amendment, but I seek to work with my colleagues to support other funding to support the program laid out.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT