Click here for video of the speech. "Col. Davis's candid testimony reinforced my own conviction that there is no military solution to the conflict in Afghanistan, only the prospect of continued shedding of American blood in a war that is not ours to fight"

WASHINGTON, DC – Today the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that 2.5 million young adults, aged 19 to 25, now have health coverage thanks to the Patient's Bill of Rights, which is part of the health care reform law. Congressman John Garamendi (D-Fairfield, CA), California's Insurance Commissioner for eight years, was proud to help lead the fight for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which includes a provision that allows young adults under the age of 26 to join their parents' health insurance plan. Because of the Affordable Care Act, the percentage of young adults with health insurance rose from 64% to 73%.

"The Affordable Care Act is creating a healthier America, as 2.5 million young adults can now attest," Congressman Garamendi said. "Allowing young adults to join their parents' health plan is also a great relief for loving moms and dads. I should know. My daughter is one of the 2.5 million young adults now insured through this important policy change."

"Earlier this year, my Republican colleagues voted to repeal the Patient's Bill of Rights," added Garamendi. "Just so we're clear, if the Tea Party has their way, these 2.5 million young adults would lose their health care coverage. 2.5 million sons and daughters, possibly your own, would once again be one broken arm, one infection away from bankruptcy, delayed treatment, or worse. So long as I'm in Congress, I will fight to prevent that injustice from happening."

"The Patient’s Bill of Rights is making quality health coverage more affordable for millions of seniors, with significant prescription drug savings and free preventative health screenings," Congressman Garamendi said. "This is good new for every American who hopes to retire with dignity, and it’s only possible because President Obama and Democrats in Congress were willing to take the tough votes necessary to improve our health care system."

"As a former Insurance Commissioner, I was proud to help lead the charge to pass the Patient’s Bill of Rights, because I’ve seen what happens when the insurance industry sharks are allowed to run amok without proper oversight," added Congressman Garamendi. "While we were able to improve Medicare, my Republican colleagues are determined to destroy it. They voted to replace Medicare with an underfunded coupon system. As long as I’m in Congress, I’ll do all I can to protect Medicare benefits and stop this assault on seniors’ retirement security."

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman John Garamendi (D-Fairfield, CA), a former Member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, today applauded Transportation Committee Ranking Member Nick Rahall (D-West Virginia) for introducing H.R. 3533, the Invest in American Jobs Act, a bill that strengthens 'Buy American' requirements for federally funded infrastructure projects. The legislation is similar to Congressman Garamendi's H.R. 613, the Airports, Highways, High-Speed Rail, Trains and Transit: Make it in America Act, which was introduced in 2010 and again in 2011.

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, six Members of Congress sent a bipartisan letter authored by Congressmen John Garamendi (D-Fairfield, CA) and Mike Thompson (D-St. Helena, CA) to the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, commonly referred to as the "Super Committee," urging them to "maintain the current revenue sharing for counties as it pertains to geothermal receipts."

Members joining in the call to preserve geothermal energy revenue sharing include Representatives Mark Amodei (R-Carson City, NV), Lynn Woolsey (D-Petaluma, CA), Shelley Berkley (D-Las Vegas, NV), and Bob Filner (D-San Diego, CA).

The Representatives joined in the call to promote energy independence and preserve this vital source of revenue for the counties that produce geothermal energy. A copy of the letter is linked here and included below.

"Geothermal energy is a crucial clean resource for creating jobs and securing our energy independence," said Congressman Garamendi. "It is in our economic and national security interests to make our energy in America, which is why it’s critical for the federal government to continue cultivating an environment for geothermal development."

"The geothermal energy produced in California’s counties is not only good for our environment, it reduces our dependence on foreign oil and helps our economy by spurring green job creation," said Congressman Thompson. "The best way to reduce the deficit is by creating jobs because more jobs means greater revenues and less need for government assistance.  If a community invests in developing geothermal energy they deserve to get their fair share in returns. I am strongly against cutting counties’ share of geothermal revenue because that means cutting jobs, crippling future green job growth, and stifling our economic recovery – all of which will only make our deficit larger."

"Geothermal royalties are extremely important to Lake County and it is absolutely essential that the federal government continue allocating a portion of these revenues to counties in order to help mitigate the local impacts of geothermal development," said Kelly Cox, Lake County Administrative Officer. "Congressman Thompson's leadership on this issue has been outstanding. He and Congressman Garamendi completely understand why it would be wrong to take these revenues away from counties. Their continuing efforts to protect our community's interests are very much appreciated."

"Geothermal energy brings jobs and growth to Nevada with 20 plants in operation providing clean, reliable electrical capacity to the grid and significant additional capacity under development," said Congressman Amodei. "Given the important role of the counties in the development of this domestic energy source, it's only proper that they should share in the revenue of the federal receipts." 

"These geothermal receipts provide an important source of income for Imperial County, in my district. By promoting geothermal development and investing in renewable energy, we can create jobs for Americans!" said Congressman Filner.

"Geothermal not only provides vital clean energy to power homes and businesses, it also creates good jobs in Nevada and I strongly support the continued expansion of this industry.  At a time when counties in my home State are struggling to fund schools, public safety and other essential services for families, we must protect revenues from geothermal production that are now shared with local communities.  Repealing the provision that provides these critical local dollars from geothermal royalties will only hurt county governments -- whether in Nevada or other states -- by limiting the resources they have available for economic development to create more jobs and to provide for the needs of those who call the towns and cities in these areas home," said Congresswoman Berkley.

"Geothermal energy is exactly the kind of renewable resource we should be investing in to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and point the way toward a sustainable future," Congresswoman Woolsey said. "I join my colleagues in urging the Super Committee to preserve these subsidies, which support green jobs and help localities continue delivering vital services."

---

The Honorable Patty Murray
Co-Chair, Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction
448 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

The Honorable Jeb Hensarling
Co-Chair, Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction
129 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Chairwoman Murray and Chairman Hensarling:

We are writing to request that the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction maintain the current revenue sharing for counties as it pertains to geothermal receipts.  

In the bipartisan Energy Policy Act of 2005, Congress decided that because of the high burdens geothermal production places on the counties where geothermal development is located, these counties should share in the revenue of the federal receipts.   In turn, counties have used these revenues to pay for critical governmental services, such as road maintenance, public safety and law enforcement, and conservation easements.  This revenue sharing has also made counties vested partners, and ultimately champions, in the continued development of geothermal energy—a clean, renewable, and domestic energy source.

There have been numerous proposals to discontinue geothermal revenue sharing for counties, including a provision in the President’s Plan for Economic Growth and Deficit Reduction. We are strongly opposed to this provision.  Ending the geothermal revenue sharing plan would have a significant negative impact on our districts, while the overall effect on our nation’s fiscal well-being would be miniscule.  Many of the counties that receive revenue from geothermal receipts are small, rural counties facing precarious budget situations.  The loss of such revenue for these counties could result in the elimination or reduction of essential services. As such, we urge you not to include the repeal of geothermal revenue sharing with counties in any final agreement you may reach.

We appreciate your attention to this issue and look forward to working with you as you prepare your deficit reduction plan.

Sincerely,
 

On the House floor today, Congressman Garamendi explained how President Obama’s American Jobs Act would help employers hire veterans.
 

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman John Garamendi (D-Fairfield), a Member of the House Armed Services Committee, today stood with veterans by voting for the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2011, S. 894. The bill would increase compensation payments for disabled veterans and their families by 3.6 percent. The bill now heads to the White House for the President’s signature.

Congressman Garamendi said the following:

"Every day, veterans who have fought valiantly for our country overseas return home and have to fight for a job and a home to live in.

"This bill, which increases the rates of disability compensation for veterans, comes as much needed relief for many veterans who are struggling to get by during these trying times.

"While this bill is welcomed, we can do better in fulfilling our obligation to these brave men and women. Over 877,000 American veterans are unemployed, through no fault of their own. I call on my colleagues in Congress to do more. President Obama’s American Jobs Act offers companies smart incentives to hire veterans, and it deserves passage right now."
 

The American Jobs Act includes a new Returning Heroes Tax Credit of up to $5,600 for firms that hire out-of-work veterans and a Wounded Warriors Tax Credit of up to $9,600 for firms that hire veterans with service-related disabilities.

Leading up to Veterans Day on November 11, Congressman John Garamendi will host a Veterans Resources Fair on Thursday, November 10 at Dixon High School, 555 College Way in Dixon, Calif. The Congressman hopes that all veterans and their family members will attend to learn about additional services for which they may be eligible. View more information on the Veterans Resources Fair here.

Resources for service members, veterans, and their families are available here: http://garamendi.house.gov/resources/veterans.shtml.
 

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman John Garamendi (D-Fairfield, CA), a former University of California Regent and California State University Trustee, today praised President Obama for announcing a landmark executive order easing the burden of student loan debt on students. The plan expands on Congressional Democrats’ student loan reform plan passed last year.

Under the plan, some students will be able to consolidate their loans into a single government loan, pay less per month based on income, and have loans forgiven earlier. The initiative is part of the President’s "We Can’t Wait" plan, following nearly a year of Republican obstructionism in Congress.

"I’ve spoken to dozens of recent graduates in my district, and they all say the same thing: there are very few jobs available for them, and the ones that exist aren’t paying well," Congressman Garamendi said. "Our country is weakened when we have an entire generation of graduates saddled with debts they can’t afford to pay back. President Obama is wise to offer relief to Americans with excessive student loan debt."

"Ask most business owners in America what they need most right now, and they’ll tell you they need customers," Garamendi continued. "This initiative will help boost demand in our economy precisely when we need it. Instead of paying off interest that goes into the banking ether, thousands of young adults will have more money available to make purchases that will help small businesses grow and hire new workers."

The President’s "Pay As You Earn" plan to cap monthly payments will allow 1.6 million students to:

• Pay no more than 10 percent of their income toward student loans, instead of the current 15 percent. This policy was scheduled to go into effect in 2014 following passage of the Democratic student loan reform bill last year, but President Obama is accelerating the program to 2012; and
• Have student loans forgiven after 20 years, compared with the current 25-year-limit.

Approximately 5.8 million borrowers have both a Direct Loan (DL) and a Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) that require separate payments, making the borrowers more likely to default. By allowing these students and recent graduates to consolidate their loans, borrowers could see up to a 0.5 percent reduction in their interest rates.

Student loan debt is expected to surpass $1 trillion this year. On average, students who graduated this year left with about $27,000 of debt.
 

Thursday, November 10
4:00 – 8:00 PM
Dixon Unified High School
555 College Way
Dixon

WASHINGTON, DC – At Thursday's House Armed Services Committee hearing on "The Future of National Defense and the U.S. Military Ten Years After 9/11," Committee Member Congressman John Garamendi (D-Fairfield, CA) mentioned a matrix his office compiled of proposed Defense savings offered by experts across the political spectrum. Today Congressman Garamendi released the list to the public at the request of both Republican and Democratic Members of Congress and staff.

"Congress will have some tough choices to make in the weeks ahead, and clearly Defense spending is on the table. This matrix of possible Defense Department savings is compiled from proposals made by Think Tanks ranging from the far right to the center and the far left. It can help us find responsible defense savings to reduce the deficit while ensuring America's national security," Congressman Garamendi said.

Garamendi added, "Safeguarding the sustainability of our nation's prosperity and security, while remaining true to the values that characterize us as Americans, calls for a focused, disciplined, and agile military.  It also requires a strong and unshakeable economy and a well-informed and supportive citizenry."

"We in Congress have a responsibility to be good stewards of the public trust, treasury, and national defense," Garamendi continued. "I am not suggesting I support all these proposals. I do, however, want to make sure we use the best available information to make strategic budget choices that will strengthen our nation's prosperity and security."

The matrix is available here. Recommendations analyzed include reports from the Sustainable Defense Task Force, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK)'s Back in Black Plan, the Center for American Progress, the CATO Institute’s A Strategy of Restraint, the Simpson-Bowles Deficit Reduction Commission, and The Center for a New American Security.

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman John Garamendi (D-Fairfield, CA), California's Insurance Commissioner for eight years, today is happy to report that one year after the Patient's Bill of Rights in the Affordable Care Act went into effect, millions of Americans are benefiting from the improved coverage and lower costs provided by the Act.  

The Patient's Bill of Rights became effective for all new plans beginning September 23, 2010. Now, one year later, all Americans with private health plans are receiving the protections of the Patient's Bill of Rights.

"As California's Insurance Commissioner for eight years, I've seen firsthand how, if left unchecked, the rapacious greed of insurance companies can destroy lives and bankrupt families. Two million Americans every year suffer from bankruptcies caused by our profit driven health care system. That's why in one of my first acts as a Member of Congress, I was proud to vote for the Patient's Bill of Rights," Congressman Garamendi said. 

"While there is always room for improvement, let there be no doubt: Americans, including seniors, young adults, women, and small business owners, today have access to much better and more affordable health coverage because of the Affordable Care Act."

Under the Patient's Bill of Rights, if you are one of the 165 million Americans with private insurance, you are now receiving the following protections:  

• You can no longer be arbitrarily dropped from coverage by your insurance company simply because you get sick or become pregnant.

• Your insurance company can no longer place a lifetime limit on your coverage.

• Your insurance company can no longer place low annual limits on your coverage.

• If you are under age 65 and in a new plan, you are now receiving free key preventive services.

In addition, because of the Patient’s Bill of Rights: 

• If you are a young adult, you can now stay on your parents' health plan until your 26th birthday, if you do not have coverage of your own.  Because of this provision, one million additional young people have gained coverage over the last year.

• If you have a child under age 19, they can no longer be denied coverage by an insurance company for having a "pre-existing condition."  Up to 17 million children with pre-existing conditions are now protected from discrimination.

In addition to the Patient's Bill of Rights, the Affordable Care Act also provided new Medicare benefits for America's seniors, which became effective on January 1, 2011.  These new Medicare benefits include the following:

• Seniors are now receiving a 50 percent discount on brand-name drugs when they are in the Medicare Part D 'donut hole' coverage gap.  Nearly 1.3 million seniors have already received the discount.

• Seniors are now receiving free key preventive health services, such as mammograms and colonoscopies, under Medicare.  Nearly 19 million seniors have already received one or more free preventive services.

• Seniors are now receiving a free Annual Wellness Visit under Medicare.  1.3 million seniors have already taken advantage of the new free Annual Wellness Visit.

Garamendi has consistently held the line on retirement security and student aid, and he is satisfied the legislation protects Social Security, Medicaid, and Pell Grants and avoids cuts to Medicare benefits. He is disturbed that Congressional Republicans insisted on deep cuts to environmental protections, food safety, and some services to help struggling families – cuts Garamendi believes will impede America’s recovery.

"This debt limit deal is not great policy, but it avoids default and protects Social Security, Medicaid, and Pell Grants," Garamendi said. "It also protects Medicare benefits. At least now seniors in my district will still get their Social Security checks, and Medicare and Medicaid are secure."

"America is less than a week away from easily preventable default – leading to recession, hundreds of thousands of lost jobs, and an interest rate spike – and House Republicans are playing brinkmanship with legislation that has zero chance of becoming law," said Congressman Garamendi. "If the President and this Congress were delusional enough to support this radical legislation, we would be right back here in six months with an even worse default crisis in an even more polarized political environment. Congressional Republicans need to stop playing games and start walking back from the abyss."

"This legislation even includes a proposal that gives a mere third of Members of Congress veto power over all revenues. Under this bill, it would be easier to eliminate Medicare than to end subsidies for Big Oil. Minority rule has cost California thousands of jobs and led to painful and pointless cuts to In Home Supportive Services and nursing homes for seniors, drastic increases in tuition, and significant reductions in teachers, police, and firefighters," Garamendi added. "Congressional Republicans now want to spread the pain nationally. This plan would destroy Medicare and gut Social Security and Medicaid/MediCal, and I will not stand for it."

Congressman Garamendi supports ongoing negotiations to pass a debt limit solution that includes smart revenues and targeted cuts. Garamendi would also support a clean debt limit vote to avoid catastrophic default. If a resolution cannot be reached with fringe Republicans, Congressman Garamendi would support President Obama if he chose to use the 14th Amendment to honor the full faith and credit of the United States.

"We need to Make It In America, not Destroy It In America. It’s time we moved on from this GOP-manufactured crisis and developed a short term strategy to put people back to work and a strategy over the coming decade to responsibly reduce the deficit. Let's reach a reasonable bipartisan compromise or pass a clean debt limit bill as has been done dozens of times before," Garamendi continued.

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman John Garamendi (D-Walnut Creek, CA), today voted against one of the most ideologically extreme pieces of legislation ever introduced in Congress – legislation that brings America dangerously closer to defaulting on its obligations. H. R. 2560 seriously threatens the ability of the federal government to honor the full faith and credit of the United States by requiring Congressional passage of a so-called “Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment” as a prerequisite to raising the debt ceiling, even though we are only weeks away from reaching the debt limit.

"I’ve been in public service since the 1970s, and I’ve seen some really bad bills, but H.R. 2560 is probably the most radical legislation I have ever seen introduced with the support of a party’s leadership," said Congressman Garamendi, who previously served as California’s State Senate Majority Leader. "This legislation is designed to create an easily preventable and Republican-orchestrated crisis with the debt limit – taking the full faith and credit of the United States hostage – as an excuse to destroy Medicare, Medicaid, WIC, food safety, and every federal service that helps strengthen seniors, students, and the middle class."

H.R. 2560 creates a false choice between the federal government defaulting on its obligations now or ending the government’s commitment to protecting Medicare, Medicaid/MediCal, Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) food program, financial aid, and energy and transportation investments. The radical Republican legislation also makes it essentially impossible for the federal government to ever raise revenues, even to close loopholes or reduce oil subsidies.

"This bill requires a two-thirds supermajority in both the House and Senate to ever increase revenues, making it much easier to destroy Medicare than to end subsidies for Big Oil. Giving one-third of the legislature veto power over the treasury has paralyzed California, and now Republicans want to spread the damage nationally," added Garamendi. "This undemocratic and inflexibly dogmatic posture by the Republican leadership in Congress would be comical if the consequences weren’t so catastrophic. In a few months, this job-killing bill would eliminate 700,000 American jobs at a time when almost one-in-ten Americans are out of work through no fault of their own."

The only budget that comes close to meeting the requirements of the constitutional amendments under consideration in this legislation is the Republican Study Committee budget. That plan would eliminate 70 percent of non-defense discretionary funding by 2021, contain deeper Medicare cuts than the budget authored by Republican Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, and eviscerate Medicaid/MediCal. It also would slash food assistance and Supplemental Security Income for the elderly and disabled poor in half by the end of the decade while raising the Social Security retirement age to 70.

H.R. 2560 requires that both the House and Senate must pass a radical GOP constitutional amendment and send it to the states for ratification before the debt limit can be raised. Since passage will never happen, these provisions recklessly bring the country closer to default. Defaulting on U.S. debt would destroy hundreds of thousands of dollars, add nearly $20,000 to the average mortgage, cause interest rates to drastically spike, and lead other countries to begin abandoning the U.S. dollar as their reserve currency of choice.
 

"These NLRB rules would help ensure that both employers and employees have a seat at the negotiating table," said Garamendi. "By averting lawsuits and misunderstandings, these commonsense reforms provide certainty at the workplace and improve labor-management relations. By strengthening the ability of America's industrious workers to freely decide on whether to join a union, this rule strengthens our middle class and helps us to, once again, Make It In America."

If finally adopted after a public notice-and-comment process, the proposed amendments would:

• Allow for electronic filing of election petitions and other documents.
• Ensure that employees, employers and unions receive and exchange timely information they need to understand and participate in the representation case process.
• Standardize timeframes for parties to resolve or litigate issues before and after elections.
• Require parties to identify issues and describe evidence soon after an election petition is filed to facilitate resolution and eliminate unnecessary litigation.
• Defer litigation of most voter eligibility issues until after the election.
• Require employers to provide a final voter list in electronic form soon after the scheduling of an election, including voters' telephone numbers and email addresses when available.
• Consolidate all election-related appeals to the Board into a single post-election appeals process and thereby eliminate delay in holding elections currently attributable to the possibility of pre-election appeals.
• Make Board review of post-election decisions discretionary rather than mandatory.

Congressman Garamendi on importance of ARPA-E
in preparing America for future energy needs.
 

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman John Garamendi (D-Walnut Creek, CA), a Member of the House Natural Resources Committee, today introduced an amendment to H.R. 2354, the radical Republican Energy and Water appropriations bill. House Republicans propose slashing more than 80 percent from President Obama’s Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy (ARPA-E) appropriations request, endangering invaluable game-changing energy research. Garamendi’s revenue-neutral amendment would have taken money out of a fossil fuel research account instead, but it was defeated by a 145-276 vote.

"Ostriches are supposed to stick their heads in the sand; responsible lawmakers are supposed to help their country compete in a tough global economy. Vital game-changing energy research should be above politics, but today, the Republican majority’s pattern of actively dismantling anything that hints at American-made clean technology continued," said Garamendi, who as a state legislator in the 1970s authored the first alternative energy state tax credit in America. "We need to Make It In America, especially advanced clean energy, but we won’t get there without basic building block research first. Today, a majority of Members in Congress failed the American people."

Proposed by the National Academies in 2006, ARPA-E, modeled after the acclaimed Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) program that created the Internet, focuses “on creative ‘out-of-the-box’ transformational energy research that industry by itself cannot or will not support due to its high risk but where success would provide dramatic benefits for the nation.”

Garamendi added, "Because of DARPA, we have the Internet and the millions of jobs it supports. ARPA-E is modeled after DARPA and is working to revolutionize energy production, but they can’t power the world, clean our air, create good jobs, and direct our country away from foreign oil when their budget is practically zeroed out. While America dawdles, our competitors in Asia and Europe continue to invest billions in energy research."

ARPA-E focuses exclusively on high risk, high payoff concepts – technologies promising genuine transformation in the ways we generate, store and utilize energy. While the Department of Energy invests in conventional energy research, ARPA-E is not intended to augment these efforts. If just a fraction of the projects funded by ARPA-E are successful in reaching the marketplace, the U.S. will benefit greatly by creating new industries and jobs, making energy technologies substantially more cost-saving and profitable, and accelerating the timeframe for achieving energy and climate goals.

Six ARPA-E projects, amounting to $26 million in federal investment, have already attracted over $100 million in private investment. With its small non-bureaucratic structure, and its high-caliber personnel hired for limited terms from the private sector, ARPA-E is a model of efficiency, speed, and innovation within government. They have reduced standard contracting time by roughly 75 percent. The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology has highlighted ARPA-E as the new gold standard for hiring talent, reviewing proposals, and contracting.

The panel selected Seo Hyung Lee of Moraga as the overall-winner. Ms. Lee received a free trip to Washington, D.C. to attend an awards ceremony on June 22. Her poster color painting, titled "Escape," will hang in the U.S. Capitol for an entire year.

"Thank you to all participants in this year's competition," said Congressman Garamendi. "This event demonstrates, once again, the remarkable intellectual and creative spirit of the students in our district. Congratulations to Tyler Oliver, Clay Sanders, and Seo Hyung Lee on placing in the competition. I wish to give a special congratulations to Ms. Lee, who has earned her spot in the nation's capital."

1st Place
"Escape"
Seo Hyung Lee
Campolindo High School
Moraga

2nd Place
"The Howler"
Clay Sanders
Campolindo High School
Moraga

3rd Place
"Hand in Hand"
Tyler Oliver
Las Lomas High School
Walnut Creek

Each spring, the Congressional Institute sponsors a nationwide high school visual art competition to recognize and encourage artistic talent in the nation. Since it began in 1982, more than 650,000 high school students have participated.

To learn about last year's Art Competition and to view the winning entries, please visit http://garamendi.house.gov/highschoolart2010.shtml. 

"As a Returned Peace Corps Volunteer, I take our country’s responsibility to protect innocent men, women, and children very seriously. Nearly seven decades ago, the international community made a pledge: never again will we stand idly by and witness the wholesale slaughter of an innocent people. We haven’t always lived up to this standard, as the people of Rwanda can attest, but it is at the bedrock of American values to lend a helping hand where we can when we can. Our limited engagement in Kosovo, where we ultimately prevented a large scale genocide, shows us a way forward.

"In Libya, Colonel Qaddafi pledged to hunt down Libyan dissenters like ‘rats and cockroaches,’ after they demanded a transition to a more representative form of government. Without the limited intervention of a broad coalition of international forces – including the United States, UN, NATO, the Gulf Cooperation Council, and the Arab League – he would have succeeded. Indeed, the UN Security Council resolution authorizing limited force cited the international community’s ‘responsibility to protect’ the Libyan people.

"President Obama stopped genocide, and in his rush to prevent mass slaughter, his consultation with Congress was limited. Today I voted to grant President Obama the one-year authority he requested to continue our limited operation in Libya.

"To my friends on the left and the right opposed to our action in Libya, I say this: in terms of the human toll, financial burden, and impact on our relations with allies and adversaries throughout the world, Libya pales in comparison to the war in Afghanistan. In Libya, the United States is engaged in a humanitarian mission that received broad international support – with the Arab League supporting for the first time ever an intervention in an Arab country. This conflict has yet to cost us a single American life, and god willing it will stay that way.

"Meanwhile, the conflict in Afghanistan continues to cost America more than $2 billion a week, and this spring was the deadliest spring for American troops since we entered that country nearly a decade ago. Let’s focus on the big picture: targeting Al Qaeda wherever they take root, keeping our troops safe, and where and when we can, preventing genocide and assisting our fellow world citizens as they aspire to form governments that are more representative and more just. I have my disagreements with President Obama on the war in Afghanistan, but I stand with him in the prevention of the massacre of a Libyan people yearning to breathe free."

"When our brave men and women risk so much for our country by fighting overseas, we cannot abandon them once they come back home. It is our duty to provide them with the all the care and resources available so that they can successfully transition to a prosperous civilian life." Garamendi said.
 
Over the past several years, Congressman Garamendi and his Democratic colleagues have supported numerous bills increasing funding and modernizing the way the VA is run in order to provide proper help to veterans. Since January 2007, the Congress will have provided a 70 percent increase in funding for veterans’ health care and benefits which has dramatically increased the VA’s ability to process claims, and open hundreds of new clinics and centers that serve Veterans.

"As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I am especially concerned with the work and safety of our service members, but as we ensure that none are left behind at the battlefield, we must remember to care for all veterans once they return," Garamendi continued. "It is a relief to me that on this occasion, Congress was able to put our differences behind to assist the honorable men and women who served in uniform. They deserve our respect and help, which we delivered that with this vote."

H.R. 2055 will provide $58.3 billion in discretionary funding, an increase of $1.8 billion over the FY 2011 level. It also provides $14 billion for military construction programs, as well as it continues advance appropriations for VA health care by including $52 billion for FY 2013.

"Greedy Wall Street bankers helped to cripple the American economy during the Great Recession, and now their powerful allies in Congress want to weaken the consumer protections that Congress enacted last year in the Wall Street reform bill," said Congressman Garamendi. "Elizabeth Warren has had the temerity to fight back on behalf of consumers, and for this, she's become a target. She is eminently qualified to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and she's been instrumental in getting the Bureau up and running. For the sake of every American who has ever been ripped off by a financial institution, it's time for the President to appoint Warren to the Director's post."

The letter was organized by House Financial Service Committee Members Representatives Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Brad Miller (D-NC), and Keith Ellison (D-MN), while citizen groups Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) and CREDO Action submitted the signatures of 250,000 people supportive of Warren's appointment.

The CFPB was created under the Wall Street reform bill (Dodd-Frank) last year, operating with a single director from within the Federal Reserve System. The CFPB will make sure consumers have the full, clear and complete information they need to choose the financial products and services—including credit cards, student loans, and mortgages—that are best for them. Elizabeth Warren first proposed a financial protection body for consumers in this article in 2007. 

"Those who are blocking Elizabeth Warren from even being nominated are members of 'The Financial Crisis Never Happened Caucus'," Rep. Maloney said. "In her role as Assistant to the President since September creating the CFPB, Mrs. Warren has shown her unique skills in traveling across the country and meeting with everyone to be affected by the new body: from bank executives to those with troubled mortgages. She's demonstrated that a regulator must reach out, listen to all sides and decide issues in the public interest. It's time for the President to appoint her to the Director's job—regardless of her misguided Senate opponents."

Rep. Miller said, "This isn't just about Elizabeth Warren. Senate Republicans' threat to filibuster any nominee to head the CFPB is an abuse of their confirmation powers. They had to choose between their constitutional duties and the demands of the financial industry. Their constitutional duties never had a chance."

"Elizabeth Warren has proved to be an effective fighter who puts America first by working to protect the middle-class. Professor Warren knows that our future prosperity depends upon working for the economic interests of the overwhelming majority of our citizens.  Elizabeth Warren needs to be confirmed without further delay," said Rep. Ellison. 

"These members of Congress have seen a quarter-million signatures and received thousands of supportive phone calls from their constituents, asking them to send this message to the White House: Elizabeth Warren is the best qualified candidate to lead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and it's time for President Obama to announce his intention to appoint her," said Stephanie Taylor, PCCC co-founder.

Letter on Elizabeth Warren

June 2, 2011

Dear Mr. President,

We appreciate your leadership last year in supporting the strong financial reforms in the Dodd-Frank bill that responded to the financial meltdown on Wall Street that led to the worst recession since the Depression.  

A key element of that effort was the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with the goals of making prices clear, risks clear, making financial markets work for families and particularly protecting service members and their families from abusive financial practices. Since you appointed Professor Warren to "stand up" the bureau, she has laid the foundation as a strong advocate for consumers—something that seems to strike fear among those who are opposed to reform.

Regretfully, Republicans in the Senate have now made it clear that they oppose reform.  They have vowed that they will not allow consideration of any nominee to head the CFPB until the bureau is weakened. They would rather hold your appointment hostage and obstruct the process than make sure consumers have a strong advocate on their side.

Since Republican Senators have said that no one is acceptable unless the law is weakened, we would urge you to nominate Professor Warren as the CFPB's first Director anyway. If Republicans in the Senate indeed refuse to consider her, we request that you use your constitutional authority to make her a recess appointment.  We can think of no better person to be the first Director of this incredibly important consumer financial protection regulator.

Sincerely,

Maloney,         Carolyn

Frank,              Barney

Miller,              Brad

Ellison,            Keith

Bass,                Karen

Blumenauer,    Earl

Capps,             Lois

Capuano,         Michael

Carson,            Andre

Chu,                Judy

Cicilline,          David

Cohen,             Steve

Conyers,          John

Cummings,      Elijah

Davis,              Danny

Davis,              Susan

DeFazio,          Peter

DeLauro,         Rosa

Deutch,           Ted

Doggett,          Lloyd

Doyle,             Michael

Edwards,         Donna

Engel,              Eliot

Eshoo,             Anna

Farr,                 Sam

Fattah,             Chaka

Filner,              Bob

Frank,              Barney

Fudge,             Marcia

Garamendi,     John

Grijalva,          Raul

Gutierrez,        Luis

Hanabusa,       Colleen

Hinchey,          Maurice

Hirono,            Mazie

Holt,                Rush

Honda,            Michael

Jackson,           Jesse

Jackson Lee,    Sheila

Johnson,          Eddie

Johnson,          Hank

Kaptur,            Marcy

Kildee,            Dale

Kucinich,         Dennis

Langevin,        Jim

Larson,            John

Lee,                 Barbara

Lofgren,          Zoe

Lowey,            Nita

Luján,              Ben Ray

Lynch,             Steve

Matsui,            Doris

McCollum,      Betty

McDermott,    Jim

McGovern,      James

Miller,              George

Moran,             James

Murphy,          Christopher

Nadler,            Jerrold

Napolitano,     Grace

Norton,            Eleanor

Olver,              John

Pascrell,           Bill

Pingree,           Chellie

Price,               David

Rangel,            Charles

Richardson,     Laura

Roybal-Allard, Lucille

Ryan,               Tim

Sarbanes,         John

Schakowsky,   Janice

Schiff,             Adam

Sherman,         Brad

Slaughter,        Louise

Speier,             Jackie

Stark,               Pete

Thompson,      Mike

Tierney,           John

Tonko,             Paul

Towns,            Edolphus

Tsongas,          Niki

Van Hollen,     Chris

Waters,            Maxine

Waxman,         Henry

Welch,             Peter

Wilson,            Frederica

Woolsey,         Lynn

Wu,                 David

Garamendi joined a bipartisan coalition of Members of Congress, including Representatives Justin Amash (R-MI), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Ron Paul (R-TX), John Conyers (D-MI), Walter Jones (R-NC), Jerry Nadler (D-NY), and Tom McClintock (R-CA) in leading the opposition against Section 1034. Their amendment to strip the AUMF language from the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) failed by a 187-234 vote.

"Today Congress voted to grant the President limitless authority to declare war without Congressional approval – authority President Obama said he does not need or want. I am saddened that 234 of my colleagues have signed a blank check for any war anywhere," said Congressman Garamendi. "I’m cautiously optimistic that the U.S. Senate has a better understanding of the intent of our Constitution."

Garamendi also supported two amendments related to Afghanistan. One amendment introduced by Representatives Peter Welch (D-VT) and Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), which was based on language Garamendi introduced at the Armed Services Committee two weeks ago, would have removed all troops from Afghanistan not responsible for counter-terrorism. That amendment failed by a 123-294 vote. The other amendment, introduced by Representatives Jim McGovern (D-MA) and Walter Jones (R-CA), would have required the President to provide Congress with a plan and timeframe for negotiations leading to political reconciliation in Afghanistan. That amendment failed by a 204-215 vote.

"With Bin Laden dead, Al Qaeda’s training camps in Afghanistan destroyed, and fewer than 100 Al Qaeda operatives left in Afghanistan, we have largely completed our mission in Afghanistan. Spending $120 billion a year to maintain 100,000 troops fighting in Afghanistan’s internal civil war on behalf of the corrupt Karzai government is not the way to keep America safe," said Congressman Garamendi. "I voted today to enhance our national security by insisting we refocus our efforts toward targeting Al Qaeda and other terrorists like a laser wherever they take root."

"While there was much in the NDAA worthy of support, including funding for the noble work being done at Travis Air Force Base and the Livermore national labs, I cannot in good conscience vote for any bill that continues unnecessary warfare," added Garamendi, who was the sole dissenter to the NDAA at the Armed Services Committee hearing earlier in the month. "The people of the 10th Congressional District and the majority of Americans want us to bring the troops home from the longest war in American history, and I do too. I will not – I cannot – back down from my solemn promise to do all I can to end the war in Afghanistan."

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman John Garamendi (D-Walnut Creek, CA), a Member of the House Armed Services Committee, today will present his Afghanistan amendment to the House Rules Committee. Garamendi’s amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) calls for a substantial drawdown in U.S. forces in Afghanistan by 2013, with remaining troops shifting away from costly nation-building and toward a targeted counter-terrorism strategy.

Last week, Garamendi introduced a similar amendment at the House Armed Services Committee hearing, where the NDAA was approved by a 60-1 vote, with Garamendi the sole dissenter. Garamendi said at the time that he cannot "in good conscience" vote for any bill that extends the ten-year counter-insurgency strategy in Afghanistan and needlessly puts the lives of service members at Travis Air Force Base and beyond at risk.

"In the face of an ongoing international terrorist threat and economic challenges at home, it is time to shift from a broad counterinsurgency campaign in Afghanistan to a laser-like focus on combating terrorists wherever they exist," Congressman Garamendi said. "Maintaining 100,000 troops in a country the size of Texas, at a cost of $10 billion a month, is simply not an effective way to fight a global and decentralized enemy, and drains our resources when we need them most."

"Instead, we must maintain a laser-like focus on Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations, tracking them down wherever they try to establish roots, and we must redirect our resources toward building up our own nation, investing in the kinds of programs that will sustain our leadership in the global economy," Garamendi added. "After nearly a decade of war, costing substantial blood and treasure, the U.S. public is ready for this shift. Members of Congress need to be as well."

A complete transcript of Garamendi’s prepared remarks is below.

I want to take five minutes to talk about why we need a policy shift in Afghanistan. I have proposed an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would limit our focus in Afghanistan to counterterrorism as opposed to counterinsurgency, calling for a swift and significant drawdown of troops that is consistent with this narrowing of our mission. Other Members are proposing similar amendments. Whichever of these comes to the Floor, the message sent from Congress should be clear: we need to pivot away from this costly nation building strategy and to start bringing our troops home. 

In the face of an ongoing international terrorist threat and economic challenges at home, it is time to shift from a broad counterinsurgency campaign in Afghanistan to a laser-like focus on combating terrorists wherever they exist. Maintaining 100,000 troops in a country the size of Texas, at a cost of $10 billion a month, is simply not an effective way to fight a global and decentralized enemy, and drains our resources when we need them most. Instead, we must maintain a laser-like focus on Al Qaeda and other terrorists, tracking them down wherever they try to establish roots, and we must redirect our resources toward building up our own nation, investing in the kinds of programs that will sustain our leadership in the global economy. After nearly a decade of war, costing substantial blood and treasure, the U.S. public is ready for this shift. Members of Congress need to be as well.

The killing of Osama Bin Laden marks a critical juncture in our ongoing fight against terrorism, and an appropriate moment for re-evaluating our policy. In the wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks, Congress authorized the use of military force in Afghanistan to eliminate Al Qaeda and to bring to justice those who would maim and kill innocent civilians. Our troops fought bravely and now only 100 Al Qaeda members are estimated to remain in Afghanistan. But this initial military action has turned into the longest war in our nation’s history, while Al Qaeda now expands into places like Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, and even the United States. 

Keeping America safe is Congress’s most sacred responsibility, and as a member of the Armed Services Committee I take that responsibility particularly seriously. So we must ask ourselves: Does it advance America’s security to maintain 100,000 troops fighting against the Taliban in Afghanistan while Al Qaeda expands throughout the globe? Does it advance America’s security to spend $120 billion a year trying to build a democratic state in Afghanistan while we run up our deficit and cut fundamental programs in our own country? Does it advance America’s security to pour resources into backing the Karzai government in Afghanistan’s civil war while we reduce funding for local law enforcement at home—even when our own CIA has determined that the most likely terrorist threats may be homegrown? The answer to these questions is definitively “no.”

At this turning point in our long struggle against terrorism, it is time to realign our strategy with our goals. Shifting our mission from counterinsurgency to counterterrorism and accelerating the drawdown of U.S. forces from Afghanistan would allow us to achieve the dual objectives of pursuing terrorists wherever they might emerge, and of rebuilding our domestic economy. Both are absolutely fundamental to our national security.  Ultimately, America’s strength depends as much on our economic vitality as on our military might, and spending billions of dollars a week in Afghanistan, not to mention the long-term costs of things like caring for our veterans and servicing our debt, is a form of economic suicide.

This is a pivotal moment in our nation’s history, and a time when decisions by Congress and the Administration will have a major impact on our national security, now and into the future. Defense Secretary Gates recently stated, “Any future defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should ‘have his head examined’.” We need to get our big American land army out of Afghanistan. We owe it to our troops, and we owe it to the citizens we represent, to ensure that not one extra dollar is spent, and not one new life is lost, in an open-ended war that is not critical to our core national security interests.
 

"Roughly two-thirds of Medicaid funding goes to the frail-elderly who have exhausted their assets and are forced to turn to Medicaid to pay for nursing homes," Garamendi and the delegation explained. "The Republican budget that passed the House of Representatives on April 15th (Roll No. 277) turns Medicaid into a block grant system. Under a block grant system, Medicaid will no longer be able to support the elderly. Where will the elderly in nursing homes go? We hope that during your negotiations you will continue to fight against block granting or cutting funding for Medicaid."

"While we agree on the need to address the nation’s long-term deficits, shifting the costs of Medicaid expenditures such as nursing facilities and hospice care onto individuals not only creates excessive hardship on families with aging relatives, it does little to alleviate rising health care costs," they continued. "According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, Medicaid spending grew significantly slower (4.6 percent) per capita than private insurance premiums (7.7 percent) over the past decade."

The complete letter is here and below. A letter from the California State Association of Counties’ Executive Director on the importance of Medicaid funding was also sent to the President.

Delegation Letter

Dear President Obama:

We are writing to highlight how important Medicaid is for seniors in nursing homes.  Roughly two-thirds of Medicaid funding goes to the frail-elderly who have exhausted their assets and are forced to turn to Medicaid to pay for nursing homes.  The Republican budget that passed the House of Representatives on April 15th (Roll No. 277) turns Medicaid into a block grant system.  Under a block grant system, Medicaid will no longer be able to support the elderly.  Where will the elderly in nursing homes go?  We hope that during your negotiations you will continue to fight against block granting or cutting funding for Medicaid.  We have also enclosed a letter from the California State Association of Counties that echoes our concerns.

The Medicaid program has been an effective partnership between state and federal governments for our most vulnerable by providing services at the most affordable rate.  Although children and parents make up about 75 percent of Medicaid enrollees, they account for less than a third of the spending.  In contrast, the elderly and individuals with disabilities make up about 25 percent of enrollees but about two-thirds of spending.  This translates in California, according to a recent Families USA report, to helping fund nearly 69,000 seniors in nursing homes and providing nearly 517,000 seniors and persons with disabilities with Medicaid home and community service support.  Additionally, the report showed that 23% of seniors and 50% of persons with disabilities in the state of California receive Medicaid funding.

By converting the current Medicaid system into a block grant indexed to inflation and population growth, Congress would shift the burdens of rising health care costs and an aging population onto the states. Within a decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office, federal contributions to Medicaid would decrease by nearly 35 percent under a block grant system.  According to a recent Kaiser Family Foundation report, this would lead to a loss of nearly $122 billion in federal Medicaid funds in California, leading to cuts in benefits and more restrictive eligibility requirements. 

If you sign any such legislation into law, California could see nearly 5 million more uninsured residents by the end of the decade. While we agree on the need to address the nation’s long-term deficits, shifting the costs of Medicaid expenditures such as nursing facilities and hospice care onto individuals not only creates excessive hardship on families with aging relatives, it does little to alleviate rising health care costs. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, Medicaid spending grew significantly slower (4.6 percent) per capita than private insurance premiums (7.7 percent) over the past decade.

Additionally, changing the Medicaid program now could have negative effects on implementation of health care reform as California counties have been leading the effort in California.  In fact, the waiver they received recently from the Administration should not only expand outpatient care and reduce hospital readmissions, but also produce major savings in Medicaid over time due to changes in how health care is provided.  

We look forward to working with you as we continue to address our long-term deficit issues and preserve our social safety net for those who need it the most.

Sincerely,
Joe Baca
Karen Bass
Xavier Becerra
Howard Berman
Lois Capps
Dennis Cardoza
Jim Costa
Judy Chu
Susan Davis
Anna Eshoo
Sam Farr
Bob Filner
John Garamendi
Mike Honda
Barbara Lee
Zoe Lofgren
Doris Matsui
Jerry McNerney
George Miller
Grace Napolitano
Laura Richardson
Lucille Roybal-Allard
Linda Sanchez
Loretta Sanchez
Adam Schiff
Brad Sherman
Jackie Speier
Pete Stark
Mike Thompson
Maxine Waters
Henry Waxman
Lynn Woolsey

Afghanistan

"The Armed Services Committee voted to continue the war in Afghanistan, the longest war in U.S. history. Because I wholeheartedly support our soldiers and their families, I cannot in good conscience vote to extend a war without an endgame," Garamendi said. "To continue to risk the lives of 100,000 American troops in support of the corrupt Karzai government in Afghanistan’s internal civil war is not in the long-term national interest of the United States."

Congressman Garamendi introduced an amendment to the bill that calls for a substantial reduction in U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan by the end of 2013, with remaining troops focused exclusively on counter-terrorism. The amendment was withdrawn, but it is anticipated to be reintroduced on the House floor.

Garamendi added, "With Bin Laden dead, Al Qaeda’s training camps in Afghanistan destroyed, and fewer than 100 known Al Qaeda members left in Afghanistan, we’ve completed most of our mission critical goals in Afghanistan. It’s time we brought an end to the war in Afghanistan and targeted Al Qaeda like a laser wherever it takes root."

Local Needs

"If my vote furthers the national debate on the war to the point where even one soldier from Travis can stay home with his family instead of fighting in Afghanistan, I will know that I’ve done what the people of the 10th Congressional District sent me to Washington to do," said Congressman Garamendi. "The brave men and women at Travis Air Force Base and the researchers at the Livermore labs work every day to keep America safe and to create a more peaceful and just world. It is unfortunate I did not have the opportunity to vote for their worthy work in a standalone bill."

Don’t Ask Don’t Tell

"The Republican Majority insisted on inserting divisive language in the NDAA delaying the ability of gay and lesbian soldiers to serve openly and without fear of retribution," Garamendi added. "Anyone brave enough to don the uniform and risk their life for our country deserves better than to be used as a piñata for cheap partisan points. Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is a discriminatory policy inconsistent with American values of tolerance, fairness, and equality under the law. When DADT is permanently dumped in the dustbin of history, we will be a better nation for it."

Wasteful Spending

"There are many American priorities reliant on limited resources. Republicans in this Congress have voted to slash Pell Grants, decimate job-creating transportation investments, and destroy Medicare, all under the pretext of paying down the deficit. Al Qaeda has made it clear they intend to strike the United States again, yet this Congress even voted to remove thousands of police, firefighters, and first responders from our streets," Garamendi added. "If we’re going to talk about ‘shared sacrifice’, bloated military contracts need to be on the table. This defense bill includes millions in wasteful Pentagon spending that even the Pentagon doesn’t want. It is immoral to balance the budget on the backs of families struggling to get by while simultaneously letting the special interests with the best lobbyists continue with business as usual."

"Nearly a decade ago we entered Afghanistan to kill Al Qaeda operatives and eradicate their training camps. With Osama Bin Laden dead, the training camps destroyed, and fewer than 100 Al Qaeda left in Afghanistan, we’ve achieved most of our mission critical goals," said Congressman Garamendi. "It’s time we shifted away from fighting an internal civil war and toward focusing on Al Qaeda like a laser wherever it takes root."

Yesterday Garamendi joined eight bipartisan Members of Congress in a letter to the President asking for an end to the war.

Garamendi’s amendment calls for a reduction of 90 percent of troops in Afghanistan by the end of 2013. The remaining soldiers would be focused exclusively on counter-terrorism and training Afghan soldiers and police. Text of the amendment and text of Congressman Garamendi’s prepared statement for the record are below.

Amendment:

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 1540 OFFERED BY MR. GARAMENDI OF CALIFORNIA
At the end of subtitle B of title XII of division A of the bill, add the following:

SEC. 12xx. LIMITATION ON FUNDS FOR MILITARY OPERATIONS IN AFGHANISTAN AND RELATED PROVISIONS.
(a) LIMITATION ON FUNDS.—Amounts made available to carry out this Act for military operations in Afghanistan may be used only for purposes of counter-terrorism operations, including—
(1) locating and destroying terrorist cells within Afghanistan and the region; and
(2) providing for the continued training of the Afghan national police and military forces.
(b) REDEPLOYMENT OF U.S. ARMED FORCES.—The Secretary of Defense shall redeploy the United States Armed Forces from Afghanistan so that—
(1) not more than 25,000 members of the Armed Forces are deployed in Afghanistan by December 31, 2012; and
(2) not more than 10,000 members of the Armed Forces are deployed in Afghanistan by December 31, 2013.

Prepared Statement for the Record:

I rise to propose an amendment that would accelerate the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan. At this pivotal point in our ongoing mission to eliminate terrorism and combat extremism, it is appropriate for this committee to re-evaluate our policy in Afghanistan and our broader strategy for keeping America safe and secure in the face of an ongoing terrorist threat and a struggling domestic economy.

The killing of Osama Bin Laden marks a critical juncture in a mission we began almost ten years ago. In the wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks, we vowed to eliminate Al Qaeda and to bring to justice those who would maim and kill innocent civilians. Congress authorized the President to deploy the forces necessary to achieve this goal, and we channeled the best of our intelligence, military and diplomatic capacities toward this end. As the site of Al Qaeda training operations, Afghanistan was initially identified as critical territory in what we already knew even then would be a global struggle.  Our troops fought bravely to dismantle Al Qaeda training camps and eliminate their leaders, and now fewer than 100 Al Qaeda members are estimated to remain in Afghanistan.

But this limited, targeted and justified military action in Afghanistan has turned into the longest war in our nation’s history, draining our resources at a time of domestic economic hardship and financial instability, and costing thousands of U.S. lives.  To date, we have spent 722 billion U.S. taxpayer dollars on the war in Afghanistan, and that price tag increases by 10 billion dollars each month we stay. When we calculate the long-term costs of the war, including servicing our debt and caring for our veterans, the dollar figures are almost inconceivable. And the human costs of this war are immeasurable when we consider the circles of grief that surround each of the more than 10,000 Americans who have been killed or wounded.

It is Congress’s job to advance policies that are in the best interest of our constituents, and the most important of those interests is security. So we must ask ourselves: Does it advance America’s security to maintain 100,000 troops fighting against the Taliban in Afghanistan while Al Qaeda establishes new roots in other countries such as Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, and even the U.S.? Does it advance America’s security to spend $120 billion a year trying to build and defend a democratic state in Afghanistan while we run up our deficit and cut fundamental programs in our own country? Does it advance America’s security to pour resources into fighting a civil war against the Taliban in Afghanistan while we reduce funding for local law enforcement at home, even when our own CIA has determined that the most likely terrorist threats may be homegrown?

I conclude that the answer to these questions is definitively “no,” and polls suggest that most members of the American public agree.

This is a pivotal moment in our nation’s history, and a time when decisions by Congress and the Administration will have a major impact on our national security, now and into the future. As civilian leadership, and particularly as members of the Armed Services Committee, it is our duty to only authorize funding for those military actions which keep America safe. We owe it to our troops, and we owe it to the constituents we serve, to ensure that not one extra dollar is spent, and not one new life is lost, in a war that is not critical to our core national security interests.
Eliminating Al Qaeda is a crucial national security concern, and we must maintain a laser-like focus on this international terrorist network, capitalizing on our military, intelligence, and diplomatic advantages to track them down wherever they try to establish roots--cutting off their funding, taking out their leaders, and intercepting their operations. The recent operation against Osama Bin Laden epitomizes the kind of precise and coordinated strategy that is effective against an agile and decentralized enemy. 

We must also redirect our resources toward building up our own nation, moving toward a more balanced budget in the short run and investing in the kinds of programs that will ensure our economic productivity and leadership in the global economy over the long run.  Ultimately, America’s strength depends as much on our economic vitality and financial stability as on our military might.

Withdrawing a significant number of our troops does not mean abandoning Afghanistan. With a reduced military and civilian presence, we can maintain programs that support their economic and social development, and continue training Afghan national police and security forces. We should also push for a negotiated political settlement to the current conflict that engages elements of the Taliban and ensures some degree of stability.

Withdrawing most of our troops also does not mean allowing Afghanistan to devolve into a terrorist haven. It was and is an error to equate Taliban return with Al Qaeda’s return.  Limited numbers of U.S. troops can continue to carry out counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan, and if there is some renewed terrorist activity, we can and should respond to it much as we have been doing in other countries such as Yemen and Somalia.

At this turning point in our long struggle against terrorism and extremism, it is time to realign our strategy with our goals. The amendment I offer would reduce troop levels to 25,000 by the end of 2012 and to 10,000 by the end of 2013. Shifting from a counterinsurgency campaign to a limited counterinsurgency operation allows us to achieve the dual objectives of pursuing those terrorists who would do us harm, wherever they might emerge, and of rebuilding our domestic economy. Both are absolutely fundamental to our national security.  I ask you to join me in support of this amendment that I firmly believe offers the best way forward for keeping our country safe, secure, and prosperous.

In the letter sent to President Obama Monday, eight members of Congress called for a shift from the expensive nation building strategy currently underway in Afghanistan to one modeled after the successful mission that located and killed Osama bin Laden. Signers of the letter include Democrats Garamendi, Peter Welch (D-VT), Rush Holt (D-NJ), and John Tierney (D-MA), and Republicans Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), Walter Jones (R-NC), John Campbell (R-CA), and John Duncan (R-TN).

"The success of this mission does not change the reality that America still faces a determined and violent adversary," they wrote. "It does, however, require us to reexamine our policy of nation building in Afghanistan. We believe it is no longer the best way to defend America against terror attacks, and we urge you to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan that are not crucial to the immediate national security objective of combating al Qaeda. … The killing of Osama bin Laden was made possible by a strong intelligence operation and well-trained Special Forces units. In combating extremism, the combination of actionable intelligence and highly mobile Special Forces has proven most effective against an enemy that is not limited to a single geographic location."

The full text of the letter is copied below. A pdf of the letter is available here.

Dear Mr. President:

The success of bringing Osama bin Laden to justice is a tribute to the sustained commitment of our armed forces, our intelligence agencies, and our Special Forces.  We share your pride in their courage and competence.

The success of this mission does not change the reality that America still faces a determined and violent adversary.  It does, however, require us to reexamine our policy of nation building in Afghanistan.  We believe it is no longer the best way to defend America against terror attacks, and we urge you to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan that are not crucial to the immediate national security objective of combating al Qaeda.

The cost to taxpayers of this war is immense – $2 billion weekly and $386 billion already spent, while billions more in legacy costs await us.  Every dollar spent is added to America’s deficit.

The burden on our overstretched military is likewise immense.  There are 99,800 American troops on the ground as we write this letter engaged in this nearly 10 year old war, the longest in America’s history.

Also, our success depends on the cooperation of the Karzai government whose capacity or willingness to curb rampant corruption has evaporated.

Finally, we know the terror threat is dispersed and decentralized, not concentrated in a nation state.  Consequently, a nation-building strategy has little efficacy.

The killing of Osama bin Laden was made possible by a strong intelligence operation and well-trained Special Forces units. In combating extremism, the combination of actionable intelligence and highly mobile Special Forces has proven most effective against an enemy that is not limited to a single geographic location.

As our national debt grows, the borrowing and importing from our competitors continues, and the drug-related violence on our borders increases, we must evaluate the best use of our resources.  The time has come to acknowledge that the threat posed by Afghanistan no longer justifies 100,000-plus troops on the ground.

Sunday’s events in Pakistan underscore the need for an emphasis on intelligence gathering and highly mobile Special Forces units.  We can no longer fight this war by the old rules.  This battle requires a nimble and agile force with a capacity for rapid response anywhere in the world.  It requires integration and cooperation between intelligence-gathering entities.  The CIA, NSA, NGIA and JSOC’s new Targeting and Analysis Center were all instrumental in finding and tracking Osama bin Laden.  Such operations can transform the way intelligence is gathered, analyzed, and acted upon.

After fighting the longest war in the history of the United States of America, it’s time to redeploy our resources to address our most pressing threats.  It’s time to bring the formal war in Afghanistan to an end as we adapt to the changing demands of a different kind of war.

Sincerely,

Peter Welch
Jason Chaffetz
John Garamendi
Walter Jones
Rush Holt
John Campbell
John Tierney
John Duncan

1. Part 1
2. Part 2
3. Part 1 + Part 2 Playlist
4. Complete Exchange

I guess I don’t understand. I don’t understand what our Republican colleagues want to accomplish here. They talk about free market; they talk about the opportunity have options and opportunities. I think that’s exactly what an exchange does. So I don’t quite understand what this is all about.

I was Insurance Commissioner, the elected Insurance Commissioner, in 1991, and we set up an exchange. Unfortunately, Governor Wilson vetoed it, otherwise we’d have had this exchange years ago.

And a year ago, the California legislature with the signature of a Republican Governor, Schwarzenegger, created an exchange, based upon the Affordable Care Act. And they want to put it in effect.

The Republican proposal on the floor here would make it impossible for California to do what it wants to do. That is set up a marketplace where people have access to insurance. The notion being that by creating the exchange, you spread the risk across many populations, so that, like a huge corporation, you have an opportunity as an individual purchaser or small business to participate in a large pool and accept the lower rate of insurance.

So what’s this all about? What are you trying to accomplish here? Is it some ideology that you just simply can’t stand the Affordable Care Act, and you want to rip it apart piece by piece. Apparently so. And you don’t want to just stop there.

You’re going after Medicare, a program that has been in effect for 42 years. That provides a universal insurance policy to anyone over 65. You’re going to terminate Medicare. What’s that all about? And give it to an insurance company and not have an exchange?

So what’s an individual going to do when they’re 65 and possessing all kinds of preexisting conditions? Go without insurance? Be at the mercy of the insurance companies? And by the way, you want to repeal all the insurance reforms. All of the protections that individuals have in the Affordable Care Act.

This doesn’t make much sense to me. I don’t understand what your goal is here, except to maybe have some political scorecard. You can say, ‘Yeah, we repealed the Affordable Care Act. Good for us.’

But what effect to the population of America?

No exchanges. They’re gone.

No opportunity for small businesses to enjoy a large market, a large pool, in which they can have a lower price. They’re gone.

Oh I see, you’re going to have an association health plan. I spent eight years of my life chasing after association health plans that were frauds. They were out and out frauds sold across state lines. Is that what you want? Apparently so. I don’t get it. I don’t understand what the goal is here.

The Affordable Care Act establishes an exchange allowing individuals and small businesses to be part of a large pool to have four different options on their insurance, and you want to do away with it. I don’t get it.

You want to do away with clinics at schools so kids can have access to health care. I don’t understand.

You cut all the money out from the community clinics so that people have to go to the emergency rooms in a more expensive situation. What’s this all about? I don’t understand what the goal is that our Republican colleagues have in mind.

The exchanges make sense. They created a marketplace for small businesses. The exchanges create a market, gentlemen and ladies, they create a market! It’s a market-driven program, in which competition occurs, competition between the insurance companies who have to offer quality and price. You got a problem with competition? Apparently so.

You want to do away with the exchange. Apparently what you really want to do is hand over the entire game to the insurance companies, removing all of the controls, removing all of the necessity for them to compete, and apparently create some sort of association plan so the public can be ripped off.

…

Let’s be very clear about this. The Republican proposal, the Republican budget proposal that is before this Congress, terminates Medicare as we have had it since 1965. For those young men and women who are not yet 55, they will never see Medicare. It’s over.

And instead of having Medicare, which is a guaranteed health insurance program, when they retire at the age of 65, they will be given a voucher that will be worth a percentage of what the insurance will cost.

They will be thrown into the market at an age where they have preexisting conditions, and under the Republican proposal, there are no ways they are going to be protected from the insurance companies, who we know have one motive, and that’s profits before people. (Will you yield?)
Profit before people [Will the gentlemen yield?] has been the way it has been for the insurance companies from the get go, and that’s precisely what the Republicans want to give us. We will not have it. [Will the gentleman yield?]

And while they’re at it, they want to take those reductions in your expenditures and continue giving money to the most wealthy people in America. [Will the gentleman yield?] I will not yield. So that the most wealthy people in America can continue to enjoy ever more wealth while the middle class enjoys ever more poverty. It is an abomination and there is no way this nation should abandon a proven program that for 42 years has provided quality medical care to the seniors.

Now if you want to go after the cost of medicine, then let’s go after the overall cost of medicine – not denying tomorrow’s seniors the benefit of Medicare. It is time to understand precisely what the Republican budget does. It terminates Medicare while giving benefits to the most wealthy Americans. It should not happen. I yield back my time.

"President Obama and heroes in the American military and intelligence communities have sent a message to the international terrorist organization Al Qaeda and others who seek to harm American citizens. We have demonstrated the unwavering resolve of the U.S. to pursue international terrorists wherever they may hide and proven the strength of our coordinated efforts to eradicate terrorist networks and bring those who would kill innocent civilians to justice.

"Nothing will ever bring back the thousands of Americans tragically lost on September 11, 2001, taken from our world too soon by Osama Bin Laden and his gang of cold blooded murderers. We should also remember that Al Qaeda’s trail of death spans the globe. Indeed, since September 11, Al Qaeda has ruthlessly murdered thousands of Muslims. For grieving families from Arlington and New York City to Islamabad and Cairo, bitter justice has been served and tepid solace can hopefully be reached.

"The tragedy on September 11 brought the American people together in a spontaneous display of unity as a nation, and I’m glad to see that unity emerging again. No matter what divides us, we all share the experience of being Americans, and in a very real sense, we were all attacked that fateful day.

"Following the September 11 terrorist attack, I joined most Americans in supporting the eradication of Al Qaeda’s training camps in Afghanistan. We were savagely attacked, and it was appropriate to dismantle the terrorist group responsible.

"Today, in 2011, it is estimated that fewer than 100 members of Al Qaeda remain in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda’s network is spreading its roots throughout the globe, in places like Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, and even the United States. We must focus on Al Qaeda like a laser wherever they reside. This operation against Bin Laden, through a targeted strike involving cooperation between special forces and intelligence, is a perfect example and suggests that a more focused strategy can be successful.

"The biggest security threat to America isn’t one person or one country, but rather the ideologies and conditions that fuel extremism and terrorism. Our influence throughout the world is determined not just by the strength of our military but also the vitality of our economy and the values of our great democracy. Ultimately our national security is much more dependent on ending desperate poverty, funding good schools, and empowering women in the developing world while eradicating international terrorist networks like Al Qaeda. With Bin Laden dead and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan largely extinguished, it’s time we revisited the wisdom of continuing the war in Afghanistan.

"We must remain vigilant, keeping America and our troops serving overseas safe and secure. Bin Laden’s death does not end Al Qaeda or the serious threat it poses to America and our allies."

"This Transportation Department grant to CalTrans is a gift that will keep on giving,” said Congressman John Garamendi. "Transportation Secretary LaHood and Federal Railroad Administrator Szabo are wisely harnessing grant money, so that we Make It In America and create jobs now. Also, by connecting people and markets, these expanded rail lines will provide a boost to California's economy."

According to the Congressional Budget office, every $1 invested in infrastructure adds $1.57 to the economy.

Congressman Garamendi continued, "By facilitating more riders to take the Pacific Surfliner and San Joaquin corridors, we will relieve congestion on highways and curb our contribution to climate change. In Congress, I will continue to promote a Make It In America agenda for jobs, improved transportation for California, and a transition towards clean energy."

During the 111th Congress, Congressman Garamendi was the only Northern California Member on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. While the Committee no longer has a Representative from Northern California, the Congressman continues to advocates for the region's transportation needs. Congressman Garamendi authored The Airports, Highways, High-Speed Rail, Trains and Transit: Make It In America Act (H.R. 613), which creates American jobs by setting stronger standards for goods and equipment purchased with federal dollars for infrastructure projects.

"This Republican hearing seeks to reignite the water wars of the past and pit Californians against each other for short-term gain," said Congressman John Garamendi (CA-10). "There is a more constructive way forward for our community. We must focus on responsible science-based water management, with conservation, storage, and recycling playing a prominent role – balancing our water needs and creating jobs across the Golden State."
 
"Water is a shared resource all of us Californians rely on: farmers, communities, homeowners, manufacturers and fishermen all need our water supply to be protected," said Rep. Grace F. Napolitano (CA-38), ranking member on the Subcommittee on Water and Power. "Instead of promoting special interests that pit us against each other, we should be promoting a balanced approach that helps all of California. We have examined this topic at more than fifteen hearings since 2003, and it is time for attention to be paid to the water needs of the entire state."

Last year, the State of California reported that the closure of salmon fishing in California had cost the state’s economy at least $250 million. Recent studies have estimated that nearly 2,000 salmon fishermen have been unable to work due to lack of salmon over the last three years, job loss figures comparable to the number of farm workers who could not work due to pumping restrictions during the drought.  This season will be the first time since 2008 that California salmon fishermen will be able to work a commercial fishing season, after pumping restrictions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta allowed the salmon population to bounce back.

"The worst thing we could do is dismantle the smart water policies that are protecting our fishing jobs," said Rep. Mike Thompson (CA-01). "We have to take sustainable action that will benefit our farmers and fishers for years to come. Federal protections aren't the enemy - they're a crucial tool in developing responsible water policies."

Proponents of increased water flows from the Delta to agricultural users have cited pumping restrictions as the cause of Central Valley water curtailments. However, this year no water has been withheld on account of the Delta smelt or Chinook salmon. As of last week, the Central Valley Water Project had a water allotment of 75% of requested for agricultural users south of the Delta.

"Drought cycles are a fact of life," Napolitano said. "We have been fortunate enough to receive a great quantity of rain this year, but now is not the time to stop preparing for the next drought. We need to continue with the techniques that have worked in the past: more conservation, storage, education, desalination, recycling, and infrastructure."

Background:

• Unemployment in the Central Valley has been a chronic issue even in wet water years.  Recent job losses since 2008 have been mainly caused by the collapse of the construction and housing sector after the financial crisis.  By July of 2009, Stockton, Merced, Modesto, and Bakersfield were among the top 10 cities in the U.S. for foreclosures, affecting thousands of construction-related jobs.
• In 2009, an influential study on pumping restrictions overstated job losses claimed to be due to environmental pumping restrictions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. While this data was ultimately proven false, for a time it was widely disseminated in the media. Professors Richard Howitt of UC Davis and Dr. Jeffrey Michael of University of the Pacific later revised their early numbers from the tens of thousands down to 1,400-3,000 jobs lost – within the same range as the number of California salmon fisherman who lost their jobs when the salmon population declined from Delta pumping.
• Pumping restrictions have proven critical in helping the salmon population recover, as they allow young salmon to make it past the pumps and out to sea unharmed. This year, salmon fishermen will be able to return to sea for the first time since 2008.
• Even at the height of the financial crisis and drought, California farmers were able to post record sales for agriculture. The state’s agricultural sales for 2009 were the third highest recorded, behind only 2008 and 2007.
• On March 30, 2011, Governor Jerry Brown declared the drought to be officially over.  Democrats welcomed the short-term boost to the state’s water supply, but called for long-term improvements to prepare for the next drought.
• On April 8, 2011, the Bureau of Reclamation updated its Central Valley water supply allotments, with 75% for agricultural water service contractors and 100% for most other water contractors. More details: http://www.usbr.gov/newsroom/newsrelease/detail.cfm?RecordID=35843 

Congressman Garamendi issued the following statement:

"The pollutants emitted by power plants endanger the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the food we eat. I’m glad President Obama and the EPA have established a national standard for emissions.

"Air pollution does not respect state lines. When some jurisdictions permit virtually no regulation of power plant emissions, they become bad neighbors, exposing the rest of us to dangerous and sometimes lethal ailments, including cancer and childhood asthma. Thousands of premature deaths will be averted by this policy.

"Where personal greed threatens the health of millions of Americans, it is appropriate for federal agencies to step in. By requiring power plants to reduce 187 known toxic air pollutants, including mercury, arsenic, and chromium, the EPA is telling power companies and their powerful allies to clean up their act to clean up our air. This is a good policy for every American who values their health and the health of their loved ones."
 

"I support repealing the new 1099 reporting requirements. They are an onerous and unnecessary burden on small businesses. My Republican colleagues could have crafted a workable bipartisan bill with almost unanimous support.

"Instead, House Republicans forced Congress to make a poisonous choice today: vote No and maintain the paperwork burden on small businesses or vote Yes and increase taxes on small businesses and working men and women. I voted No and urged my Republican colleagues to rewrite the bill.

"Last July, I joined my Democratic colleagues in supporting a repeal of the 1099 provision. Our proposal would have offset the costs by eliminating billions of dollars in tax incentives that reward companies for shipping jobs overseas, restricting the ability of wealthy families to avoid paying gift taxes, closing loopholes that allow paper mills to claim a tax credit for a byproduct known as “crude tall oil”, and increasing penalties for failing to file tax returns. I thought this was a reasonable and balanced approach favorable to America’s small businesses AND middle class families.

"Unfortunately, House Republicans have decided to pit small business owners against middle class families. The Republican 1099 bill states that once a family of four’s income goes between 400 and 500 percent of the poverty level, between $88,000 to $110,000, they would have to pay the IRS the entire value of their health premium tax credits. The average payment would go up by $3,000 to $6,000 on a family of four, leading to a projected increase of 226,000 uninsured Americans.

"I will not support legislation that punishes middle class families and small businesses. I voted against a bill that would result in middle class families paying higher taxes simply because they are receiving insurance. We still have time to do this right. The 1099 provision does not come into effect until 2012. I urge my Republican colleagues to work with Democrats to find a bipartisan solution that helps small businesses, middle class families, and the American economy."

"Ultimately, these reckless proposals would harm California. Jeopardizing the restoration of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, stopping implementation of the San Joaquin River settlement, disrupting the Klamath River agreements and attempting to delay the Bureau of Reclamation’s water efficiency efforts is not in the interest of California and its people," Congressman Garamendi said in his statement.

Congressman Garamendi’s complete statement is below:

"Dear Members of the California State Assembly Committee on Water, Parks and Wildlife:

"As a member of the United States House of Representatives Committee on Natural Resources, and former Deputy Secretary of the United States Department of the Interior, I believe H.R. 1, the House Republican Continuing Resolution, would jeopardize the restoration of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, stop implementation of the San Joaquin River settlement, disrupt the Klamath River agreements and attempt to delay the Bureau of Reclamation’s water efficiency efforts.

"Developing California water policy requires sound science, careful planning and study, and reasoned debate.

"However, H.R. 1 can have severe impacts on the California economy and harm the state's ability to determine its water future.

"Section 1475, authored by Congressman Devin Nunes, of H.R. 1 defunds the critical biological opinions set forth in the 1986 Coordinate Operations Agreement, which are important elements of the plan to provide California with a balanced water strategy.

"Section 1475 would disrupt the legal process and could once again force judicial action related to the Endangered Species Act and fish in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, halting statewide water distribution and imperiling thousands of California jobs, including in the agricultural and fishing industries dependent on reliable access to water.

"Moreover, Section 1475 also disregards eighteen years of litigation that successfully brought an end to a longer conflict over water rights at the San Joaquin River. A settlement was reached that is agreed to by almost everyone, including local officials, fisherpersons, farmers, environmental leaders, and water districts.

"Amendment #296, authored by Congressman Tom McClintock, to H.R. 1 would prohibit funds from being made available to implement the Klamath Dam Removal and Sedimentation Study. This would disrupt agreements among dozens of stakeholders to ensure salmon restoration and ensure water and power availability to farmers in the region.

"Related, amendments #286 and #289 also written by Congressman McClintock would have defunded the ability of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to implement Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program and WaterSMART grant program. Both of these programs are essential to more efficiently using our limited water supplies in California and throughout the Western United States.

"Ultimately, these reckless proposals would harm California. Jeopardizing the restoration of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, stopping implementation of the San Joaquin River settlement, disrupting the Klamath River agreements and attempting to delay the Bureau of Reclamation’s water efficiency efforts is not in the interest of California and its people.

"Thank you for your attention to this critical issue. Californians must be made aware of the drastic, disturbing, and far reaching consequences of H.R. 1 on our state’s natural resources, economy and way of life.

"Sincerely,
JOHN GARAMENDI
Member of Congress"

"Developing California water policy requires careful planning and reasoned debate. The language authored by Rep. Nunes instead throws into complete chaos a compromise developed after nearly two decades of litigation," said Congressman Garamendi. "This reckless proposal, buried in an omnibus spending bill, would harm the fragile Delta and potentially disrupt the water supply of farmers and communities throughout California."

Section 1475 of the Continuing Resolution will harm the California economy and harm the state's ability to determine its own water future. Section 1475 disregards 18 years of litigation that successfully brought an end to a longer conflict over water rights at the San Joaquin River. A settlement was reached that is agreed to by almost everyone, including local officials, fisherpersons, farmers, environmental leaders, and water districts.

The Continuing Resolution also defunds critical biological opinions that are important elements of the plan to provide California with a balanced water strategy. To disrupt the legal process now could once again force judicial action related to the Endangered Species Act and fish in the Delta, halting statewide water distribution and imperiling thousands of California jobs, including agriculture jobs, dependent on reliable access to water.

Garamendi added, "The people of California have great expectations for their leaders and expect them to govern, not to unleash chaos and uncertainty. I will do all I can to stop this dangerous plan."

Congressman Garamendi, with original co-sponsors Reps. George Miller (D-Martinez, CA), Doris Matsui (D-Sacramento, CA), Jerry McNerney (D-Pleasanton, CA), and Mike Thompson (D-St. Helena, CA), have introduced the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area Establishment Act H.R. 486 to protect the culture, history, and economy of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta estuary. Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer have introduced companion legislation in the Senate. To learn more about this historic legislation, please visit: http://garamendi.house.gov/legislation/delta-national-heritage-area.shtml.