Dear Friend,

It is both a privilege and an honor to represent you in the United States Congress and I will continue my outreach efforts by informing you of my legislative actions.

I welcome your advice. Government “by the people” is the cornerstone of my legislative philosophy.

Below, please find an outline of how I have recently served you in Washington and in the district.

Finally, to better serve you closer to home, I invite you to visit or contact any of my three district offices, conveniently located in Baltimore City, Catonsville, and Ellicott City.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Elijah E. Cummings
Member of Congress

Contents:
Announcements
Actions in Washington
 

 Announcements and Upcoming Events

Passport Services: Do you have travel plans for this summer?  Effective January 23, 2007, ALL persons, including U.S. citizens, traveling by air between the United States and Canada, Mexico, Central and South America, the Caribbean, and Bermuda will be required to present a valid passport, Air NEXUS card, U.S. Coast Guard Merchant Mariner Document, or an Alien Registration Card, Form I-551, if applicable.

Expedited Passports: If a constituent is traveling within 14 days and does not have a valid passport, my Catonsville Office can issue an Expedited Passport Request. The request is a letter addressed to the Special Issuance Agency, asking that the constituent be issued a same-day passport. The constituent must take this letter to the Special Issuance Agency located at 1111 19th Street, Second Floor, Washington, D.C. 20036 to receive a passport. For further information on passport services, please call (410) 719-8777 or visit http://travel.state.gov/passport/passport_1738.html

Actions in Washington

Ensuring Your Tax Dollars Are Wisely Spent  - Subcommittee on Coast Guard Examines Deepwater Acquisition Program

When I became Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, I made a commitment to fully examine whether the tax dollars you pay are being effectively used by the government agencies under the jurisdiction of my Subcommittee.

One of these efforts includes examining the Coast Guard’s $24 billion Deepwater acquisition program. This is a procurement effort through which the Coast Guard is acquiring 91 cutters, more than 100 small surface craft, and 244 new or converted aircraft, including helicopters and fixed-wing airplanes.

American taxpayers trust the Coast Guard to protect us from emerging threats approaching our homeland from the sea.  We also expect the Coast Guard to rescue us when we are in danger and to protect the natural resources of our marine environments. 

Further, we need to know that when a multi-billion contract is signed, the parties to that contract will accomplish its objectives to the best of their abilities.

As such, our expectations for the Deepwater program are not unreasonable.  We expect it to produce boats that float, planes that fly, and information technology systems that work.

Sadly, investigations conducted by the Transportation Committee indicate that these expectations have not been met.  In particular, one program under the Deepwater procurement intended to extend 110-foot patrol boats to 123-feet has produced boats that are no longer seaworthy and that are now tied up in Baltimore, waiting to be sent to the scrap heap.

So on Wednesday, April 18, I joined the full House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James L. Oberstar (D-MN) in conducting an investigative hearing on this troubled Deepwater program.

Titled the “Compliance with Requirements of the Coast Guard’s Deepwater Contract,” our Subcommittee brought in top officials from Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, the Coast Guard, Bollinger Shipyards, and the U.S. Navy to discuss the decisions that had been made regarding this program.  We also wanted to better understand why these decisions had been made.

At the hearing, we examined concerns surrounding the Coast Guard’s decision to utilize a flawed design to extend the 110s and we examined instances in which the contractors working on Deepwater failed to meet the requirements of the contract and installed faulty equipment on the 123s.

As I stated at the hearing, it is unconscionable that the simple and straightforward expectations of Congress and, more importantly, the American taxpayers, have not been met because of a combination of poor oversight by the Coast Guard and poor performance by two of the world’s largest defense contractors, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. Additionally, our Subcommittee will demand accountability from all parties to this effort.

However, I am encouraged by the recent actions taken by Admiral Thad Allen, the Commandant of the Coast Guard, to begin to correct what has become a floundering acquisition effort veering far off course.  I believe that his decisive leadership will put this program on a path to success.

As Subcommittee Chairman, I will continue leading the Subcommittee in conducting diligent oversight over Deepwater.  Right now, the Coast Guard is working to establish the systems that we can trust to ensure that Deepwater is a success.  Until these systems, along with professional acquisitions and financial management personnel are in place, the Coast Guard will not be equipped to succeed.

* * *

Liquefied Natural Gas Terminal Should Not Be Placed in Baltimore

On April 23, in my capacity as the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, I convened a Subcommittee field hearing in Baltimore to examine the safety and security of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) terminals and their impact on port operations.  Liquefied natural gas is gas cooled to a temperature of less than 260 degrees Fahrenheit, making it a liquid.  Natural gas is transported in ships in this form.

The hearing also examined the proposed development of an LNG terminal at Sparrow’s Point in the Port of Baltimore.  

Witnesses at the hearing included Senator Barbara A. Mikulski, Governor Martin O’Malley, Baltimore County Executive James T. Smith, as well as representatives of the United States Coast Guard, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), and the AES Sparrow’s Point project, as well as two residents of the Sparrow’s Point neighborhood.

My Subcommittee examined this issue because no single federal agency is more affected by the decision about the sitings of new terminals than the U.S. Coast Guard, which is responsible for conducting the waterway suitability assessments before permits for new terminals are issued.  The Coast Guard is also responsible for providing waterside security around LNG terminals once they are built and for ensuring the security and safety of LNG tankers as they move past local communities on their way to the terminals.

As our nation builds new terminals, the Coast Guard is increasingly being called on to balance homeland security responsibilities with traditional search and rescue and environmental protection missions. Our April 23rd hearing explored the widening gaps between the Coast Guard’s expanded duties and the resources currently available to fund these missions.  For example, at Maryland’s Cove Point LNG terminal, the Coast Guard is apparently calling upon local law enforcement to provide some waterside security when LNG tankers are moored at that facility. 

While I have tremendous respect for the job done by local law enforcement in protecting our communities, they do not have the level of training or legal authority that the Coast Guard has to conduct water-based security missions regarding LNG tankers and terminals.

Given the Coast Guard’s efforts to shift some security responsibilities to the operators of LNG terminals, I was particularly troubled by the Coast Guard’s lack of clarity regarding the degree to which local law enforcement in Baltimore County may be called upon to provide security for the proposed Sparrow’s Point project.  As noted by the testimony of Baltimore County Executive James T. Smith at the hearing, the County is not adequately prepared to play such a role.

As such, I do not believe that Baltimore is the most suitable location for a new LNG terminal.  There is no reason to place these terminals – which are obvious terror targets – in highly populated areas. 

I disagreed in 2005 with the actions taken by the Republican-controlled Congress and the Bush Administration to limit the role of state and local governments in regulating LNG terminal sitings – and with this proposed project, we see the consequences of those actions.

Further, the compelling testimony of witnesses from the local Sparrow’s Point community also forcefully conveyed the concerns about environmental justice that the choice of this location must raise. The citizens of Sparrow’s Point and of the entire city of Baltimore are the people who will have to live with what this facility brings to our community long after FERC has moved on to the next project. 

All parties involved in evaluating Sparrow’s Point must adhere strictly to all applicable laws and regulations.  FERC, the Coast Guard, and the other cooperating agencies in this process must be held accountable not only by Congress but by the local community.

To follow up on this issue, I will convene another hearing of the Subcommittee on May 7.  At this hearing, we will examine a proposed LNG terminal in Long Island Sound.  I will also look forward to the release of the Waterway Suitability Report regarding the Sparrow’s Point project to learn the specific security measures that will be put in place there – and whether the Coast Guard can meet all of the security needs of that proposed terminal.


* * *

At the April 23rd hearing on liquefied natural gas (LNG), my colleagues and I listened to testimony from both experts and the community.  On the right is my colleague Rep. Steven C. LaTourette (R-Ohio), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee.  On the left is Rep. C.A. "Dutch" Ruppersberger (D-Maryland).  Photo courtesy of University of Maryland, Baltimore.

Maryland's senior U.S. Senator, Barbara A. Mikulski and I have a brief discussion before the LNG hearing, where the Senator testified.  Photo courtesy of the University of Maryland, Baltimore.

Introduction of Bill to Give Local and State Governments the Right to Veto LNG Plants   

Following the hearing I convened on April 23, I joined Reps. Congressmen C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger and John P. Sarbanes in introducing legislation that will give local and state governments the right to veto the location of a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) facility, H.R. 2042. The bill would strike a provision in the Energy Act of 2005 that gave the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) the authority to preempt local and state concerns about the location, construction, and operation of an LNG facility.  Senators Barbara Mikulski and Ben Cardin have introduced companion legislation to this bill in the Senate.

* * *

Reintroduction of the “Minority Entrepreneurship Development Act”

As a Member of the Joint Economic Committee, I consistently seek to expand economic opportunities for my constituents.

On April 20th, I reintroduced the Minority Entrepreneurship Development Act of 2007 (H.R. 1985), which would foster business development and entrepreneurship in minority communities. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) has introduced companion legislation to this bill, S. 98, in the Senate.

The legislation would establish a $15 million, three-year pilot program to promote small business development in colleges and universities that serve African American, Native American and Latino American communities. 

The programs would be similar to the Entrepreneurial Development & Assistance Center (EDAC) at Morgan State University here in Baltimore.

Through grants of up to $1 million, the respective institutions would provide students who are not business majors with the tools necessary to use their area of expertise to become entrepreneurs.  The bill would also allow institutions to set up Small Business Development Centers to conduct research and provide training, counseling, capacity building and niche market development services to start-up entrepreneurs.

The statistics alone explain why this legislation is necessary. 

Strikingly, the average income for African Americans is only equal to 62 percent of that earned by whites.  More than 40 years after the last Jim Crow laws were repealed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the economic value of Blacks is still about three-fifths that of Whites.  The average incomes of Native Americans and Latino Americans are similarly unbalanced, with the income in those communities respectively equaling 65 and 74 percent of the income earned by whites.  This race-based ‘wealth gap’ is simply unacceptable.

All Americans deserve the right to share in the American Dream, regardless of their race or ethnicity. We know that small business development has provided great opportunities for minority communities. Minority-owned businesses promote personal economic growth, provide employment opportunities, and support local economies. Everyone wins when minority-owned businesses thrive.

In the previous Congress, this legislation garnered the support of 42 House Members.  In addition, it had the support of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium, the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education, and the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities. 

I again look forward to the support of these groups and hope to work with them to implement this important piece of legislation during the 110th Congress.

* * *

House Passes Bill That Would Give DC Residents a Vote in House of Representatives

Our neighbors in the District of Columbia have been denied full representation in Congress for over 200 years.  Although they have a delegate (currently Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton) representing them in the House of Representatives, she cannot cast a vote on the House floor.  

This disenfranchisement impacts more than 550,000 people who live in the District, pay federal taxes, and fight for their country in war.  I find it unfortunate that we are spending billions of dollars to export democracy to the capital of Iraq while our fellow American citizens are denied the very cornerstone of democracy, the right to vote. 

Sadly, this lack of representation of the District of Columbia disproportionately impacts the African American community, which makes up 57 percent of the population in the District.  No other state in the union has a larger percentage of Black residents. However, this is an issue that surpasses race: it is about basic equality. 
For that reason, I was proud to join in the passage of the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007, H.R. 1905, on April 19.  This bill gives the residents of Washington, D.C. a vote in the House of Representatives.  The legislation also: 

• Increases the size of the House by two seats, from 435 to 437 seats.  One of the seats will go to the District of Columbia and the other seat will go to Utah, the next state in line to get a congressional seat. 
• Prevents partisan gerrymandering by creating the new seat for Utah as an at-large seat and ensures that Utah does not redistrict its other congressional seats until apportionment is conducted following the 2010 Census.
• Contains a non-severability clause, providing that if a court holds a section of this bill invalid or unenforceable, all other sections will be invalid or unenforceable. 

* * *

House Passes Water Resources Development Act

On April 19, I joined my colleagues in passing the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, H.R. 1495, which authorizes specified water resources development and conservation projects.  The bill contains a provision I introduced which reauthorizes the Baltimore Harbor and Channels 50-foot Project. This project authorizes the 50-foot channel in the Bay to be widened in four places to accommodate the continued growth in vessel size seen in the maritime industry.

The critical projects authorized in this bill make significant investments in our nation’s economy by ensuring the viable navigation corridors for the movement of goods and services, providing vital flood control to protect our lives and livelihoods, and authorizing valuable ecosystem restoration projects to improve the health of our nation’s environment. This is especially significant for the Baltimore Harbor. The legislation, which is now expected to be considered by the Senate also does the following:

• Authorizes 51 projects relating to flood damage reduction, navigation, hurricane and storm damage reduction, and environmental restoration, including the navigation and ecosystem restoration project for the Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway system, an Everglades restoration project, and the program for protecting, conserving, and restoring the Louisiana Coastal area; and,
• Authorizes the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to conduct water resource studies and undertake specified projects and programs for flood control, inland navigation, shoreline protection, and environmental restoration.

* * *

Stopping Predatory Lending Practices in the Subprime Mortgage Industry

As a Member of the Joint Economic Committee and the Baltimore Home Ownership Preservation Coalition, I recently led my colleagues in speaking out on the House floor against predatory lending practices in the subprime mortgage industry.  In addition, I introduced a resolution expressing the sense of Congress that issues related to the subprime market must be addressed.  

Specifically, the legislation identifies the following goals for reform:
• Strengthening federal regulations on predatory lending in the subprime mortgage industry;
• Banning unfair and deceptive practices;
• Requiring lenders to establish a borrower’s ability to pay;
• Increasing disclosure of alternative mortgage products;
• Reducing or eliminating the prepayment penalty;
• Identifying brokers and lenders with high rates of foreclosure; and
• Mandating pre-loan counseling.

Every American family deserves the benefits of homeownership. 

However, based on recent reports, predatory lending practices in the subprime mortgage industry have caused a surge in the number of foreclosures.

According to RealtyTrac, a real estate research firm, foreclosures increased by 42 percent from 2005 to 2006, to 1.2 million.  That translates into one foreclosure for every 92 households.

In addition, the subprime mortgage industry has grown from less than 8 percent of the total mortgage market in 2001 to approximately 20 percent of the market today.  Subprime mortgages, which target borrowers with low credit scores, often cost more than prime mortgages and include terms that allow payments to “balloon,” or grow exponentially over time.  Further, predatory lending practices are common in the subprime mortgage industry, where borrowers are more likely to either have limited options available to them or to be unaware of their options.  

Much has been made of the impact that these foreclosures will have on Wall Street; however, I am equally concerned with the impact they will have on the hundreds of thousands of Americans who are losing their homes. 

Disturbingly, African Americans and Latinos are more likely to get higher-rate subprime loans than white borrowers with the same qualifications, and borrowers over the age of 65 have five times the odds of receiving a subprime loan than younger borrowers.  This trend is prevalent here in the 7th Congressional District.

It is simply unconscionable that some dishonest individuals and companies are profiting from vulnerable families who are losing their homes. For those of us who remember redlining, this is simply more of the same.  We must end discriminatory lending practices now.

***