Green Energy Education Act of 2007

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) for the time; and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

As we all know, Mr. Speaker, after the defeat of the Soviet Army in Afghanistan, the brutal Taliban took over the country. The Taliban ruled that country through terror, through systematic assassination, torture, intimidation. They denied Afghans all personal freedoms and made women fifth-class citizens. They also provided safe harbor to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda. It is from that safe harbor that al Qaeda was able to plan and train for the horrendous attack of September 11, 2001, against the United States of America.

Following the fall of the Taliban, due in large part to the heroic assistance of the United States Armed Forces and coalition forces from many, many countries throughout the world, the international community worked together under the auspices of the Bonn Compact to make possible what was really a wonderful, historic accomplishment, a democratically elected government in Afghanistan.

In 2004, Afghanistan adopted a new constitution and held successful presidential elections. Parliamentary elections followed in 2005. Factions that once fought on the battlefield now, after decades of violence, debate and resolve their differences in parliament with ballots instead of bullets.

However, Mr. Speaker, there are remnants of the former Taliban regime, along with al Qaeda, that are intent on overthrowing the democratically elected government of Afghanistan. The Taliban is using suicide bombings against U.S. and NATO troops, against Afghan officials, against civilians, both international and Afghan humanitarian workers, assistance workers.

Opium poppy cultivation and drug trafficking have become significant negative factors in Afghanistan's fragile political and economic order. Afghanistan currently accounts, unfortunately, for a majority of the world's illicit opium production.

As the democratically elected government faces grave challenges, we must not turn our backs on that young democracy. We must continue our support as that country moves from a brutal dictatorship to a consolidated democracy.

In 2002, this Congress passed the Afghanistan Freedom Support Act. That law provided both economic and military aid to the young Afghan democracy.

This legislation will reauthorize the Afghanistan Freedom Support Act through the year 2010. The programs reauthorized in this bill focus on countering narcotics production and boost security efforts to protect United States and NATO forces as well as Afghan officials and international assistance workers. This legislation calls for the President to set out a detailed strategy for Afghanistan and provide reports on progress there.

The Afghanistan Freedom and Security Support Act of 2007, this legislation that we bring to the floor today, builds on congressional initiatives enacted in 2002 and 2004; and I again congratulate the leaders, who in those Congresses back in 2002 and 2004, worked so hard to ensure that these initiatives that are being reauthorized today were passed. And these initiatives now are, as I say, reauthorized in this legislation, H.R. 2466, that will be before the House today.

Among those initiatives passed in 2002, 2004 are the creation of multiple programs, but this legislation calls for the creation of a coordinator role for the development of a coherent, consistent counter- narcotics strategy, and to strengthen the fight against the drug trade's links to totalitarian Islamic terrorism.

We also insured in this legislation that initiatives passed in 2002 and 2004 continued, such as prohibition on assistance to Afghan officials who are

found to be supporting criminal activities such as narcotics trafficking.

This bill, good legislation, Mr. Speaker. This bill reaffirms the commitment of the United States to support Afghanistan in its transition to a stable, representative democracy.

This bill, good legislation, Mr. Speaker, that we bring to the floor today, authorizes the appropriation of $1.7 billion annually for humanitarian and economic assistance and $320 million annually for military assistance during fiscal 2008 to 2010.

This is important legislation. It's important legislation for the fight against the international drug trade and totalitarian Islamists, dangerous remnants of the defeated Taliban, the Taliban who were overthrown, thank God.

Remnants of the Taliban are festering, and they use deadly tactics against United States and NATO forces, as well as Afghans and humanitarian workers. Those people have no scruples, and we only have to remember, Mr. Speaker what they did to the Afghan people when they were in power. So they use horrendous tactics, brutal tactics without limits against our troops and other international forces that are in Afghanistan pursuant to the request of the democratically elected government to secure the peace.

And, furthermore, Mr. Speaker, poppy cultivation and opium production continue to directly support insurgents, militias and terrorist groups. In the face of these very difficult challenges, we cannot allow that fledgling democracy, that budding democracy striving to be a stable society, to fail.

With regard to process, our friends on the other side of the aisle, again, the majority had another opportunity yesterday in the Rules Committee to open the process and comfort with an open rule. They voted down an amendment by our ranking member of the Committee on Rules to bring this legislation forth under an open rule. Yes, they made in order all of the amendments that were presented before the committee, and that's commendable. But why not come forth with an open rule? I think that was disappointing.

Let's not fail to see, however, Mr. Speaker, that this is, this underlying legislation that's being brought forward is extremely important. It's a very important piece of legislation.

And by the way, with regard, again, to process, precisely since it's such an important project that as a Nation we're working on and there's great national consensus on the need to do everything we can to consolidate, to help consolidate the representative democracy and the peace in Afghanistan, precisely I think there would have been no harm in allowing, as this debate proceeds, to allow any Member who's hearing the debate who has an idea for an amendment to bring it forth. That's why an open rule is appropriate.

I'd like to thank, Mr. Speaker, the chairman, the distinguished chairman of the International Relations Committee, Mr. Lantos, for his hard work on this important facet of our foreign policy and the legislation that's being brought forth today, as also the distinguished ranking member, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, who's also worked very hard on this legislation, and other members of the International Relations Committee. I want to thank them for their hard work on this important issue, which constitutes, as I said, a project where the American people, in consensus fashion, are moving forward and doing everything possible so that our friends and allies in Afghanistan can survive and defeat the brutal Taliban and al Qaeda.

This legislation brought forward today is an important bill. It is of the utmost importance to our national security and obviously to the region where Afghanistan is and, of course, to the people, to the noble people of Afghanistan, as they continue their efforts to consolidate their representative democracy and achieve peace and prosperity in their great country.

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

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

I appreciate the gentleman from Massachusetts' kind words. What I had been referring to before with regard to the process is that I don't believe that any harm would have been done if the majority would have kept its promise of open rules. It is the majority that promised during the campaign that they were going to bring a significant amount, as many as possible, of bills to the floor under open rules. And this is a noncontroversial bill, and, yes, they made the amendments in order by the Members who went to the Rules Committee, and that is appreciated.

So what harm would it have caused if this legislation would have been brought forth under an open rule, as was proposed, in amendment form, by the ranking member of Rules? That is what my point was. No harm would have been done.

And, simply, I would like to remind the majority of the promises that the majority made during the campaign of bringing forth legislation under open rules. So I don't believe that any harm would have accrued if they would have kept their promise. That's all.

But with regard to the apology, I certainly appreciate the gentleman from Massachusetts' kind words, Mr. Speaker.

And, again, with regard to this underlying legislation, which is of extreme importance, there is a national consensus in the United States that we not only have an obligation, but we must do everything in our power so that the democratically elected government in Afghanistan survives, and that is what this legislation is about. We will have other continuing debates on nearby countries and what our obligations are or what is, rather, in our national interest with regard to the stability in neighboring countries of Afghanistan as well and in trying to prevent neighboring countries from becoming basically safe harbors for international terrorism.

Those are legitimate debates.

Today, the legislation being brought forth, Mr. Speaker, is one where there is a national consensus in the United States, thank God, fortunately, and that is that with regard to that country that was for so long oppressed by the brutal Taliban and that had given sanctuary to the terrorists that carried out the mass murders of September 11, 2001, against the United States of America, that we certainly have an obligation to do everything we can to make certain that the people of Afghanistan have as much ability, that they have the wherewithal to proceed along a path towards a consolidated, representative democracy in peace and with prosperity.

That is why we agree that this legislation is very important; and it reauthorizes critical programs, programs of critical importance with regard to our assistance to Afghanistan that were authorized initially and appropriated by the Congress of the United States in 2002 and 2004.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 453 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman

from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart). All time yielded during consideration of this rule is for debate only.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 453.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 453 provides for consideration of H.R. 2446, the Afghanistan Freedom and Security Support Act of 2007 under a structured rule that makes in order all of the amendments that were submitted to the Rules Committee, except for those withdrawn by their sponsors.

I want to acknowledge and express my respect for the work of Chairman Lantos and Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen for bringing such a fine example of bipartisan cooperation and collaboration before the House for consideration.

Following the ouster of the Taliban regime in late 2001, the United States, the United Nations and the international community embarked on what they hoped would be a comprehensive assistance program to help the new Afghan president, of President Hamid Karzai, establish a new democracy, rebuild the Afghan economy and provide for the general well- being of the Afghan people.

Regrettably, after a most promising start, progress has slowed in most parts of the country. Remnants of the Taliban continue to resist the new government and are reorganizing and strengthening their networks from neighboring countries. Instability has increased, including the introduction of suicide bombings against U.S. soldiers, NATO troops, Afghan officials, and civilians and international and Afghan humanitarian aid workers.

Narcotics production threatens to overwhelm the country. According to UN studies, a large percentage of Afghans, including farmers, laborers, traffickers, war lords, insurgents, and officials participate in and benefit from illegal poppy trade.

Congress first addressed the issue aiding Afghanistan by passing the Afghanistan Freedom Support Act of 2002, which established a reconstruction program, mandated a relief coordinator, provided support to the NATO-led international security forces, and gave new security assistance authority to our President.

In addition to food aid, refugee relief and other forms of emergency disaster assistance, the United States implemented a wide-ranging assistance program for Afghanistan, including aid for schools, hospitals and farms, and support to reestablish the participation of women and girls in society, education and the workplace.

The legislation the House will take up today, H.R. 2446, reauthorizes programs created by the original Afghanistan Freedom Support Act, creates a new focus on counternarcotics efforts, and provides for stronger and more enhanced oversight of U.S. strategic goals and performance in Afghanistan.

Overall, H.R. 2446 provides modest increases in authorized levels for humanitarian, development, democracy building and security assistance. I cannot stress enough how important it is that Afghanistan succeed in establishing and consolidating a representative government and rebuilding the country's economy and civil society.

When we overthrew the Taliban regime, we made promises to the Afghan people with the full backing of the international community. We cannot renege on those promises. We cannot fail the people of Afghanistan who came together in support of a common vision for the future.

I am very, very concerned that many of the difficulties confronting Afghanistan today, especially in the areas of security, are due in large part to taking our eye off the ball in Afghanistan and exhausting our economic and military resources in Iraq. We had the chance to make Afghanistan secure. We failed to do so because we chose not to invest the necessary resources in Afghanistan, but, rather, to transfer our attention and our resources to Iraq. We are now playing catch up in Afghanistan as the situation there is deteriorating.

I applaud the chairman and members of the Foreign Affairs Committee for this timely reauthorization.

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

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

Let me just say that, again, the underlying legislation is incredibly important. We do have an obligation, a moral obligation, to the people of Afghanistan. And, quite frankly, from a national security perspective, that is where our attention should be and where our attention should have been. It is regrettable, it is regrettable that the President of the United States and his administration and many in this Chamber have chosen to take their eye off what our responsibility is in Afghanistan over these last several years, and instead, we find ourselves bogged down in a quagmire in Iraq.

Those who are responsible for September 11, those who are responsible for the murder of so many of our citizens, they were in Afghanistan. That is where al Qaeda was. And instead of holding al Qaeda accountable in Afghanistan, instead of making sure that our resources go to promoting democracy and stability in Afghanistan, instead of focusing on this ever-growing drug problem in Afghanistan, we have spent over half a trillion dollars in Iraq. And that is regrettable. And, quite frankly, when history looks back on how these last few years were conducted, they are going to take note of the fact that we missed important opportunities to better protect our country by taking our eye off of what our responsibility was in Afghanistan.

And let me just say about the rule, I will apologize to my colleague from Florida for a rule that we bring to the floor today that makes every single amendment that was offered in the Rules Committee and not withdrawn by its author in order. Every Republican amendment, every Democratic amendment. And I know that that is different from the way things used to be when the Republicans were in charge of the Rules Committee. They had a tendency to just shut us all out routinely. But things are different now, and under the Democratic administration here in the Congress, we are trying to make sure that all points of view have an opportunity to be heard on the floor.

So I am happy that we have this rule, and, again, I apologize to the gentleman that it is not like what they used to do.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Vermont, a member of the Rules Committee (Mr. Welch).

Mr. Speaker, again, I regret that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are not pleased with the rule that makes all of the amendments that were offered in order, but I think that that is the way we should do business around here. It is in sharp contrast to the way they used to do business when the Republicans were in the majority, where there was a tendency to shut everything down, to close everything up, to not allow Members of the minority to be able to have amendments. But we're different, and I'm glad we are different.

On the underlying legislation, there should be unanimity in this House about the importance of passing this legislation. It is important that we keep our commitment to the people of Afghanistan. It is important that we keep our commitment to the people of the United States, who after September 11 we said, in the Congress and in the White House, that we are going to do everything we can do bring to justice, to hold to account those who are responsible for September 11.

Unfortunately, today, we are not anywhere near where we should be in Afghanistan; and the reason for that is because we have diverted our resources, we have diverted our soldiers and our political capital to a never-ending war in Iraq. We have put our soldiers in the middle of a civil war in Iraq. We have spent over half a trillion dollars in Iraq; and, as a result, those resources have not been sent to Afghanistan; and I think that is regrettable.

But we need to pass this bill today. I hope it passes with a unanimous vote. I urge my colleagues to support the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1716) to authorize higher education curriculum development and graduate training in advanced energy and green building technologies, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 1716, the bill now under consideration.

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

Today, I rise in support of H.R. 1716, the Green Energy Education Act of 2007. I'd like to thank Mr. McCaul and Mr. Hill for their leadership on this important legislation.

This bill authorizes the Department of Energy to contribute funds to the National Science Foundation's successful Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship program, known as IGERT. IGERT awards prepare doctoral students by integrating research and education in innovative ways that are tailored to the unique requirement of newly emerging interdisciplinary fields and new career options.

Many future green energy technologies, such as thin film solar technologies, will require interdisciplinary teams of scientists and engineers such as those trained under the IGERT program.

This bill also authorizes the Department of Energy's high- performance-building technology programs to contribute to the National Science Foundation's ongoing curriculum development activities with the goal of improving the ability of engineers and architects to design and construct high-performance buildings.

Innovative technologies, coupled with a whole-buildings approach that optimizes interactions among building systems and components, enable buildings to use considerably less energy, while also helping to meet national goals for sustainable development, environmental protection and energy security.

The high-performance, or green, building movement is growing rapidly, but it is still a very small slice of the multibillion dollar building industry; and there's a real gap in university level education and training for the next generation of green building professionals. This bill helps address that gap.

In summary, this bill addresses a critical need to provide resources to universities to update their curricula and research efforts in alternative energy and high-performance buildings, and it improves coordination between the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation in achieving this goal.

I'm pleased to support H.R. 1716, the Green Energy Education Act of 2007. Again, I want to commend Mr. McCaul and Mr. Hill for this important legislation; and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1716.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, this is another great effort that we are making, another important step in helping to reduce our energy consumption in this country. It's critical for national security, our economic security and to combat global climate change, and certainly energy efficient buildings, great work is being done in this, and much more work needs to be done.

I have seen at the Department of Energy lab the work that is being done on some of this. I think much more needs to be done. This bill will help to provide these opportunities for more students, more people to learn about what it takes to make our buildings more energy efficient.

Again, I commend Mr. McCaul and Mr. Hill for this bill, and I urge my colleagues to pass this legislation.

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

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

I want to first thank Mr. Lipinski and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their strong support of this bill, which I introduced in the last Congress; and I'm pleased to see it get to the House floor in this Congress.

The National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report echoed the call of many in the academic and business community for greater need to recruit and develop scientific and engineering talent to work on solving problems of national need.

Like many Members of Congress, I'm concerned about America's dependence on foreign sources of energy. Our reliance on imported energy only serves to increase our vulnerability to both external events and the actions of regimes that are, in many cases, openly hostile to the interests of the United States. One of the ways we can reduce the need for energy imports is to use our energy more efficiently.

Buildings consume more energy than any other sector of the economy, including industry and transportation. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, American buildings consume 39 percent of our Nation's primary energy and 70 percent of electricity. However, energy efficient building practices are not being fully utilized, in

part because of a lack of awareness about energy efficient technologies and design practices among building professionals.

That is why I introduced the Green Energy Education Act. This legislation authorizes the Department of Energy to partner with the National Science Foundation to support graduate education and curriculum development to advance DOE's broad energy technology development mission. Working through NSF, DOE will help develop the next generation of engineers and architects to produce buildings incorporating the latest in energy efficient technologies.

In order to reduce the likelihood of duplicative and wasteful programs, this bill also allows the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation to combine their efforts to find workable solutions to the issues surrounding building efficiency that then can be transferred to the marketplace.

Specifically, H.R. 1716 will authorize DOE's Office of Science and applied energy technology programs to contribute funds to the NSF's successful Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship program, which is already doing great work in this area.

This bill also authorizes the DOE to contribute to NSF's curriculum development activities in order to improve the ability of engineers and architects to design and construct more efficient and durable buildings.

I urge my colleagues to support this important step towards increasing America's energy independence.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, in April, I had the opportunity to join five of my colleagues on a delegation trip to Afghanistan. And our six-member delegation, three Democrats and three Republicans, spent 2 days in Iraq, 2 days in Afghanistan. And we had an opportunity to speak with American, Iraqi, Afghani soldiers; military leaders; security forces; government leaders; and civil servants. And at every turn in our trip, we encountered these extraordinary men and women from our country that are doing incredible work in very dangerous and trying circumstances. And I had the opportunity to meet troops from my State as my colleagues met troops from their States, and all of us were incredibly proud at the selflessness of these troops who are performing the missions that we have assigned to them.

But the circumstances in each country and each war are very different. Iraq is in a full-blown civil war. The British, our last remaining significant ally in Iraq, will soon withdraw, and American forces are now viewed as occupiers. The situation is much different in Afghanistan. And I came away, as did my colleagues, with the clear impression that there is will on the part of Afghani leaders to step up and to take control of their future.

In Afghanistan, we have 37 allied nations joining with us to help the Afghanis drive out the Taliban and to restore order and to create a future for that country.

In fact, the differences between these two situations in Iraq and Afghanistan was best summed up by three soldiers I spoke to who had completed full tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. And I asked, What is the difference in your experience? And the soldiers said, In Iraq it seems as though everyone is interested in fighting each other and us. In Afghanistan everyone is interested in fighting for their future.

What this legislation recognizes is that we have partners, 37 other nations, working with us in Afghanistan, and we have a partner, the government and people of Afghanistan, in our effort to restore order and to create a future for that country.

H.R. 2446, the Afghanistan Freedom and Security Support Act, reinforces the United States' long-term commitment to support Afghanistan in its efforts to confront its challenges and to complete its transformation into a secure and prosperous future.

This bill enhances the narcotics operations. More importantly, it provides incentives to encourage greater participation from our NATO allies in the International Security and Assistance Force. If we have learned anything, it is that we have got to work together and not alone.