Recognizing the University of Pittsburgh, Dr. Jonas Salk, the University of Michigan, and Dr. Thomas Frances, Jr., on the fiftieth anniversary of the discovery and the declaration that the Salk vaccine was potent, virtually eliminating the disease and its harmful effects.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 208) recognizing the University of Pittsburgh and Dr. Jonas Salk on the fiftieth anniversary of the milestone discovery of the Salk polio vaccine, which has virtually eliminated the disease and its harmful effects, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution currently under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on a resolution that I have introduced with my colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Doyle), and the honorable ranking member of the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), to recognize the 50th anniversary of the discovery of the Salk polio vaccine and the efforts of the University of Pittsburgh, Dr. Salk, the University of Michigan, Dr. Thomas Francis, Jr., which has virtually eliminated the disease and its devastating effects.

Polio is a disease that can attack the motor nerves and the spinal cord leaving one paralyzed. In the most severe cases, the muscle of the respiratory system and throat are affected, impairing speech, swallowing and breathing which can lead to paralysis or even death.

While polio is still present in varying degrees in at least six countries, the discovery of the Salk polio vaccine was a monumental achievement in reducing the effects of the disease and preventing any significant reemergence of the disease in the Western Hemisphere.

Prior to moving to the University of Pittsburgh, Dr. Jonas Salk, who was the first member of his family to attend college, served in an appointment at the University of Michigan for 5\1/2\ years during World War II, where he became known for his expertise on the immunology of influenza.

In 1947, Dr. William McEllroy, dean of the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine at the time, recruited Dr. Salk to develop a virus research program at the University of Pittsburgh where Dr. Salk set up a research laboratory in a municipal hospital for contagious diseases, now Salk Hall at the University of Pittsburgh.

In 1952, a marked increase in polio saw tens of thousands confined to iron lungs unable to breathe. Others were confined to wheelchairs and could only walk with the assistance of steel braces and crutches. Along with the spreading disease each summer, there was an increasing spreading fear in many parents and also within communities to close down theatres, public swimming pools, and other public places in hopes of reducing this disease.

During this time, Dr. Salk's research continued. And in 1953 human trials of the developing Salk polio vaccine were extended to include almost 500 children and adults, the majority of whom were residents of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania.

It was not until 1955 that Dr. Salk and his researchers discovered the actual polio vaccine at the University of Pittsburgh. That same year at the University of Michigan's Rachkam Auditorium, Dr. Salk's mentor, Dr. Francis, announced the results of the most comprehensive field trial ever conducted in the history of public health, involving 1,830,000 children in 217 areas of the United States, Canada and Finland, indicating the vaccine was safe and effective.

As a result of Dr. Salk's innovative vaccine, the incidence of polio in the United States fell by 85 to 90 percent during the first 3 years of vaccination use. Some 450 million dosages were administered worldwide. And the effectiveness of this vaccine is responsible for not only international immunization but also for the suppression of polio in most of the world, even by 1962.

Dr. Salk's team brought under control an escalating health problem and a dreaded virus, which is why the Salk polio vaccine is considered one of the most significant medical achievements of the 20th century, and has effectively safeguarded the world from the menacing virus for 50 years.

The March of Dimes has raised millions of dollars for research of polio. In addition, Rotary International initially pledged 125 million back in 1985 to fund the Polio Plus program to immunize the world. But the money the Rotary has contributed so far exceeds 600 million.

These models of public-private partnership to eradicate polio worldwide, Polio Plus and the March of Dimes, have delivered vaccine across the globe on camel, helicopter, and motor bike.

Arguably, the Salk polio vaccine and the public-private efforts in the eradication of polio rank among the greatest public health achievements in the history of humankind.

As we celebrate this 50th anniversary, I am particularly pleased that I remain an adjutant associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine and the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health. I am particularly proud of the role my alma mater has played in this great public health achievement, and we in Congress join in this celebration.

I would also like to express my high esteem and appreciation to the chairman of the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton); and the ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), for agreeing to consider this important resolution to recognize Dr. Salk, Dr. Francis, the University of Pittsburgh, the University of Michigan on the 50th anniversary of the discovery of the Salk polio vaccine.

In addition, I would like to thank my colleagues for their support in helping to bring this resolution to the House floor to recognize this medical breakthrough that has protected, prevented, and saved countless numbers of lives from the ravages of polio.

I encourage my colleagues to adopt the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on a resolution that I have introduced with my colleague from Pennsylvania, Congressman Michael Doyle, and the Honorable Ranking Member of the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee, Congressman John Dingell of Michigan, to recognize the 50th anniversary of the discovery of the Salk polio vaccine and the efforts of the University of Pittsburgh, Dr. Jonas Salk, the University of Michigan, and Dr. Thomas Francis, Jr., which has virtually eliminated the disease and its devastating effects.

Polio is a disease that can attack the motor nerves in the spinal cord, leaving one paralyzed. In the most severe cases, the muscles of the respiratory system and throat are affected, impairing speech, swallowing and breathing, which can lead to paralysis or even death. While polio is still present in varying degrees, the discovery of the Salk polio vaccine was a monumental achievement in reducing the effects of the disease and preventing any significant reemergence of the disease in the western hemisphere.

Prior to moving to the University of Pittsburgh, Dr. Jonas Salk, who was the first member of his family to attend college, served in an appointment at the University of Michigan for 5\1/2\ years during World War II, where he became known for his expertise on the immunology of influenza.

In 1947, Dr. William S. McEllroy, Dean of the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, recruited Dr. Salk to develop a virus research program at the University of Pittsburgh where Dr. Salk set up a research laboratory in the Municipal Hospital for Contagious Diseases, now Salk Hall at the University of Pittsburgh.

Others were confined to wheelchairs or could only walk with the assistance of steel braces and crutches. Along with the disease fear spread in many parents which led communities to close down theaters, public swimming pools and other public places. In 1952, a marked increase in polio saw tens of thousands confined to iron lungs to be able to breathe.

During this time, Dr. Salk's research continued. In 1953, human trials of the developing Salk polio vaccine were extended to include almost 500 children and adults, the majority of whom were residents of Allegheny County, PA.

It was not until 1955 that Dr. Salk and his researchers discovered the actual polio vaccine at the University of Pittsburgh. That same year, at the University of Michigan's Rachkam Auditorium, Dr. Salk's mentor, Dr. Francis, announced the results of the most comprehensive field trial ever conducted in the history of public health, involving 1,830,000 children in 217 areas of the United States, Canada, and Finland, indicating the vaccine was safe and effective.

As a result of Dr. Salk's innovative vaccine, the incidence of polio in the United States fell by 85-90 percent during the first 3 years of vaccination use. Some 450 million doses were administered worldwide.

The effectiveness of this vaccine is responsible for not only international immunization, but also for the suppression of polio in most of the world in 1962. Dr. Salk's team brought under control an escalating health problem and a dreaded virus, which is why the Salk polio vaccine is considered one of the most significant medical achievements of the twentieth century and has effectively safeguarded the world from the menacing virus for 50 years.

The March of Dimes raised millions for research and treatment of Polio. In addition, Rotary International pledged $120 million in 1985 to fund the Polio Plus program to immunize the world. The money the Rotary has contributed so far exceeds $600 million. A model of public- private partnership to eradicate polio worldwide, Polio Plus delivered vaccine across the globe on camel, by helicopter and motorbike.

Arguably, the Salk Polio vaccine and the public-private efforts to eradicate polio are among the greatest public health achievements in the history of the world. I am particularly proud of the role my alma mater has played in this great public health achievement and we in Congress join in this celebration.

I would also like to express my high esteem and appreciation to the Chairman of the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee, the gentleman from Texas Mr. Joe Barton (R-TX) and the Ranking Member, the gentlemen from Michigan Mr. John Dingell (D-MI), for agreeing to consider this important resolution to recognize Dr. Salk, Dr. Francis, the University of Pittsburgh and the University of Michigan on the fiftieth anniversary of the discovery of the Salk polio vaccine.

In addition, I would also like to thank my colleagues for their support in helping to bring this resolution to the House floor to recognize this medical breakthrough that has protected, prevented and saved countless numbers of lives from the ravages of polio.

I encourage my colleagues to adopt the resolution, and Mr. Speaker, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 426 on the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, I make a point of order against consideration of the rule, H. Res. 219.

Page 1, line 7, through page 2, line 1, of H. Res. 219 states, ``All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived.'' The rule makes in order H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which contains a large unfunded mandate on State and local governments in violation of Section 425 of the Budget Act. Section 426 of the Budget Act specifically states that the Committee on Rules may not waive Section 425, and therefore this rule violates section 426.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, back in 1995, my Republican colleagues, the so-called champions of States' rights, led the fight to pass the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, a bill they claimed would stop the Federal Government from imposing the costs of federally mandated programs on States and localities.

Well, here we are 10 years later and the tables have turned. My Republican colleagues are bringing a bill to the floor that imposes a multibillion dollar unfunded mandate on communities around the country whose water supplies have been tainted by the fuel additive MTBE. This additive, a known brown water contaminant used by oil companies for nearly two decades, has seeped into our Nation's water supply. In all, MTBE has been detected in over 1,800 water systems, which serve 45 million Americans. This is the water that our constituents, our communities and our families use, and it has been contaminated with a potential human carcinogen.

Despite knowing all of this, the Republican leadership has no reservations about shielding oil companies from any liability to the damages caused by MTBE. And then if that were not bad enough, they have included a nearly $2 billion bailout for these same companies. So while communities will be left to cover the overwhelming costs of cleanup, not only will these oil companies get a free pass, but they will also get another kickback at the expense of taxpayers.

Here the Republican leadership is once again weighing the interests of big oil above the health and safety of our communities.

Specifically, Section 1502 of the energy bill we are talking about today creates a safe harbor for MTBE manufacturers against lawsuits that attempt to hold them accountable for the damage their product has wrought on the water supplies of communities all over the country.

As the letter the Congressional Budget Office sent to the gentleman from California (Chairman Dreier) yesterday explains, while the bill creates a safe harbor for the MTBE manufacturers, it sticks our State and local governments with a bill that could be as large as $29 billion.

During these bad economic times, how many States and local communities can afford that?

By blocking the claims of local governments against the MTBE manufacturers, this bill will force communities to come up with hundreds of millions of dollars to clean up their water. CBO concludes that the annual cost of this mandate over the next 5 years is likely to exceed $62 million, which accordingly triggers the unfunded mandate law Republicans so proudly backed in 1995.

The fact is that the rule waives all points of order against the bill. The Budget Act specifically says that the Committee on Rules cannot waive points of order against unfunded mandates, yet the Republican leadership blatantly ignores this.

Mr. Speaker, the House can either choose to consider this bill in spite of the bill's unfunded mandate, or it can send this bill back to committee and strike the MTBE section from the bill, eliminating the violation of this point of order. At the end of this debate, therefore, I will call for a vote on a motion to continue consideration or fix this problem.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

(Mr. McGOVERN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.)

Mr. Speaker, let me respond to my colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), and simply say this is an unfunded mandate. The CBO says so. Here is the letter we received yesterday, and it says very clearly that this is an unfunded mandate.

I know my colleagues all have great confidence in the CBO. My colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), made the following statement on CBO just a few months ago. He said, the Congressional Budget Office is a professional organization that assists the United States Congress in knowing in a nonpartisan way those impacts on the laws that we pass.

Well, here it is in black and white. CBO says this is an unfunded mandate, and people need to understand that if they do not vote for what we are saying here today, they are supporting an unfunded mandate.

U.S. Congress,

Congressional Budget Office,

Washington, DC, April 19, 2005.

Hon. David Dreier,

Chairman, Committee on Rules, House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: Based on a preliminary review of H.R. 6,

the Energy Policy Act of 2005, as introduced in the House of

Representatives on April 18, 2005, CBO estimates that

enacting this legislation would reduce direct spending by

$1.1 billion over the 2006-2010 period and by $0.4 billion

over the 2006-2015 period. CBO and the Joint Committee on

Taxation estimate that the legislation would reduce revenues

by $4.0 billion over the 2006-2010 period and by $7.9 billion

over the 2006-2015 period. The estimated direct spending and

revenue effects are summarized below. A table with additional

details is attached.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--

May I ask the gentleman from Texas how many other speakers he has.

Mr. Speaker, I yield my remaining time of 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller).

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 219 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) bringing this issue up. In fact, the issue about the MTBE liability safe harbor is part of the bill. We believe that we are responsibly dealing with a problem that exists, has existed for quite some time.

Years ago the EPA made a very clear decision about not only MTBE, they understood some of the effects of MTBE, they understood some of the

problems of MTBE, but they also understood MTBE cleans the air. It does a very effective job of making sure that the smog which we had seen in our cities, in our airways all across the United States was a huge problem and one that needed to be dealt with not only from a health perspective, but also from a perspective of the ability that we have of what we were creating as a result of emissions.

So the EPA made a decision to ensure that MTBE would be a product that would be available in gasoline, and in many instances and in many States there was a provision that required companies to put MTBE in as additives in gasoline.

We are aware that there are problems. We are aware that not because of MTBE but just as a result of storage tanks, underground storage tanks that do leak, that MTBE has been a part of that that has leaked into our underground water sources.

Parties that are responsible for those tanks have paid almost 95 percent of the underground storage tank cleanup according to the EPA. And we recognize that there are many other sites where this is still a problem, where cleanup is needed, where cleanup would be involved.

Today what we are asking is part of this wonderful energy bill. We are asking to make sure that we will limit the liability, a safe harbor for those people who have been a part of this so that we can clean up these storage tanks and we can move on.

There is more than $850 million in what is called a LUST Fund that has been set aside in this bill that will help communities to clean up, to work with those people who own those storage tanks, to clean up the groundwater, to clean up the contaminants and to clean up the problem.

But the fact of the matter is that MTBE by itself is simply not necessarily a problem. And under the Federal Rules of Evidence and under the many statutes that are being claimed in lawsuits, they are calling this a defective product. MTBE is not a defective product. We knew from the EPA and we understood what MTBE was, the problems that were associated with it; and the EPA has never labeled it as a carcinogenic. It is still being utilized today because it does a great job of cleaning up smog.

So what we are attempting to do in this bill is to make sure that we move forward with the problem, provide money, but let us move on with this country in going straight to the cleanup.

We support, I support what is in the energy bill. I appreciate all of my colleagues voting in support of this, not only the MTBE provision, but also the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), the chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, who is an expert on this issue.

(Mr. BARTON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, yes. I appreciate the gentleman asking. I will be closing, so if the gentleman would please proceed.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, we have already heard the chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce tell us how this trust fund, the LUST Trust Fund, has $2 billion that has been set aside, that is waiting for this issue, for cleanup of MTBE. We heard very clearly that some almost $1 billion more will be added to the bill to make sure that we address this issue.

MTBE is not a defective product. MTBE does a very good job at what it is supposed to do, and that is clean the air.

Today and tomorrow this House will be considering the energy bill. I think it is time for us to move forward. I urge each of my colleagues to vote ``yes,'' that we will continue the debate on the rule today.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, of all the things to come on the floor of the House of Representatives and claim with a straight face that we should have a debate about, claiming that what is in the bill with regards to the MTBE is an unfunded mandate, is one of the biggest whoppers I can imagine, with all due respect.

I want to read some of the language of the bill, and I have to put my reading classes on to do it.

We specifically authorize in the bill additional funding, $50 million, to avoid the creation of unfunded mandates. It is in the bill, a specific allocation of $50 million to avoid the creation of unfunded mandates.

The Leaking Underground Storage Trust fund has a balance right now of $2 billion. The bill before us dedicates some of that balance specifically to go out and inspect existing underground storage tanks, to enforce if those inspections find that there is a leak, and to fund improvements in the operation of these underground storage tank programs. It is in the bill. That is not an unfunded mandate. If anything, it is a specific allocation in the bill to enforce the program that we have, to put additional funds into it and to make sure that we prevent the problem. That is funded. That is not unfunded.

Now, the real debate is not whether it is an unfunded mandate or not. The real debate is what we should do about MTBE; and as my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), has already pointed out, we can have a legitimate policy debate about that. The bill allows States that want to ban MTBE to do it. That is not mandating the States. That is telling the States, you want to use MTBE in your gasoline supply to get cleaner air, fine. You do not want to use it, that is fine, too.

The bill also has a provision in it that over the course of the next, I think, 10 years, depending on some scientific studies and various things, there could be a point in time that we have a Federal ban on MTBE. It may not, it may, but it could happen.

People forget in the 1991 Clean Air amendments we required an oxygen amendment to make the gasoline burn cleaner in nonattainment areas. There were two ways to do that at the time: use ethanol or use MTBE. There was not a mandate to use MTBE, but there was a requirement in nonattainment areas you had to do something in terms

of putting more oxygen in the gasoline to make it burn cleaner. Most of the market went to MTBE.

We then found out, and we knew before the fact actually, that if the gasoline that had MTBE leaked out into the environment that the MTBE would disassociate a little bit quicker because it was more missable, and it would get into the water supply, or water table, and it causes an odor. So there have been a number of lawsuits. The gentlewoman mentioned two of them, in Lake Tahoe, one in California, where there have been out-of-court settlements for several millions of dollars because of that odor. That did not establish that MTBE is a defective product.

This bill does have a safe harbor, not just for MTBE but also for ethanol, that by definition of the product, the chemical composition, that it is not defective; but if you use it negligently, you can be sued upon it. If the right warnings are not with it, you can be sued. There are all kinds of reasons. You can sue and win, as has been shown; but that does not mean that it in and of itself is defective.

Interestingly enough, in one of the cases the gentlewoman from California quoted, the amount of the settlement was less than the legal fees that the law firm representing the community in California claimed. So that community is now suing their law firm, saying you ripped us off, you are asking for more money to settle the suit than we got to clean the water up.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for raising this point of order. I believe that it goes right to the heart of the problem with the MTBE provisions in this bill. They pass on huge costly problems to other parties.

In this case, H.R. 6 would shift the costs of cleaning up MTBE groundwater contamination on to the towns, the cities, and the water districts around this country. In other words, it would shift these cleanup costs from the oil companies responsible for the mess to our constituents, who have to live with the mess.

Mr. Speaker, MTBE has caused damage to the groundwater across our Nation. It is found in 1,861 different water systems, 29 different States, serving 45 million people. Cleanup costs are estimated at around 29, maybe $30 billion. I might point out to my colleagues that there are about $2 billion in the LUST fund, and it is to cover all kinds of leakage, not just MTBE.

This is a huge problem, and it is not going away. It is the fault of the MTBE industry, and they should have to fix it.

Mr. Speaker, the MTBE industry says it was forced to put MTBE in gasoline by the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990. There is no MTBE mandate in that law. Even the chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce has acknowledged that.

Industry representatives have testified before Congress that MTBE has been widely used since 1979. This is an ARCO circular from around the 1980s urging refiners to add MTBE. By the time of the 1990 Clean Air amendments, the industry had already added 120 million barrels of MTBE to gasoline.

Even more damning are the documents unearthed in recent court cases proving conclusively that the industry knew as early as the 1980s about the dangers MTBE posed to groundwater. It still went on adding it to gasoline. The special protection for MTBE manufacturers is in this bill because they are finally being taken to task for the damages they knowingly caused.

Recent court cases regarding responsibility for MTBE groundwater contamination have come down on the side of local water companies and cities. These cases have forced manufacturers to pay to clean up or replace MTBE-contaminated water supplies. The most celebrated has been the $60 million settlement for south Lake Tahoe and the nearly $400 million for Santa Monica.

In my district, the tiny little coastal town of Cambria had one of its two drinking water sources permanently damaged by MTBE. After it sued, Cambria was able to get Chevron to pay a $9 million settlement to help the town to build a desalinization plant; but under this bill, the taxpayers of Cambria, and of hundreds of towns, large and small, across this country would be forced to pay for the MTBE cleanup on their own.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) is right to raise this point of order. We should support the point of order and take this terrible provision out, which is going to force our constituents to shoulder the burden of cleanup on to the constituents.