America's Beautiful National Parks Quarter Dollar Coin Act of 2008

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6184) to provide for a program for circulating quarter dollar coins that are emblematic of a national park or other national site in each State, the District of Columbia, and each territory of the United States, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent all that Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and insert any extraneous material as they so wish.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6184, America's Beautiful National Parks Quarter Dollar Coin Act, introduced by my good friend and colleague from Delaware, Congressman Castle.

I have had the great pleasure to work with Mr. Castle on several coin bills of this nature in the past, the very successful State quarters and most recently the Presidential dollars. I am proud to be the Democratic lead sponsor of this bill, and I am happy to report that it has strong bipartisan support, as shown by the fact that it passed out of the Financial Services Committee on a unanimous vote in support.

I want to thank Congressman Castle for all of his hard work on this legislation, as well as Chairman Frank for his support, and the support of the staff of the Financial Services Committee and our individual staffs for their hard work on this bill. Of course, all of us love our national parks, and especially those of our home State, which will be honored on each of these coins.

Beginning in 2010, new quarters will bear a design representing a national park or site in each State and the District of Columbia at the rate of 5 new designs a year. The sites will be selected at the beginning of the process by the Secretary of the Treasury in consultation with the States, and the coins will be minted in the order in which the sites selected were established as national sites, which I think is a very clever touch.

As a former teacher and educator, I am always excited about the new designs on everyday coins because they encourage more Americans of all ages to pay attention to the coins in your pockets and learn a few facts about what is depicted. I can say of the very successful State quarter program, it became a very popular teaching tool. Many teachers devised lesson plans around the quarters, and many of my constituents collected these coins. My own daughter had a book with each of the quarters in it; and many people would ask me, when is the next quarter coming out? And because it was so successful, the 50 State quarter program raised $6.2 billion over the past 10 years of its life span which is just ending this year. And we can hope that we will have similar results from this series of coins.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this legislation. It is an education tool. It also will generate needed revenues for our Treasury.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to my dear friend and colleague on the other side of the aisle who has attacked the Speaker of this House really unfairly and with false statements.

The point is and the reality is that we have two oil men in the White House and their policies are the ones that have benefited Big Oil and hurt the American consumer. Now under the leadership of the Democratic Speaker and the New Direction Congress, we have been passing solutions for the first time to help American consumers and to help this country move into the 21st century with policies that are important for conserving energy, renewable energy, efficient technologies, and reducing energy prices for the long run.

No, I will not yield. I have my time; you had yours.

First of all what, the New Direction Congress passed was the first new vehicle fuel-efficiency standards in 32 years. We also passed an historic commitment to affordable American-grown biofuels. If the other side of the aisle was interested in moving us into the 21st century and conserving energy, why in the world didn't they pass new vehicle fuel- efficiency standards? We passed it. This Congress passed it. The Democrats passed it, and are forcing the car builders and others to move in with fuel-efficient standards.

We also took action to lower gas prices by suspending oil purchasing for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. These are very important initiatives.

Now the gentleman on the other side of the aisle, my very good friend, talked about the need to build new refineries. Well, ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP and Shell have publicly stated that they have no plans to build new refineries; instead, they prefer to expand existing facilities. These are their statements. Shell and BP all testified that they were unaware of any environmental regulations preventing them from building new refineries or expanding old ones. They can do that now.

Internal memos from oil companies make it very clear that oil companies decided that they needed to reduce refinery capacity to drive up their profits. And the New Direction Congress is

continuing to bring real relief to those feeling the pinch of the high gas and diesel prices, and ensuring the needs of families and businesses are put before the interests of Big Oil companies.

Now my dear friend on the other side of the aisle talks about drilling, drilling, drilling, drilling, as if we could drill ourselves out of the challenges we face.

The fact is that there are over 68 million acres on shore and offshore in the United States of America that are currently leased by oil companies and they are open to drilling and actually under a lease to do so but are not developed. Now we are talking about leases on 68 million acres of land that is owned by the American people. Now what Chairman Rahall says is use it or lose it, and I think he is absolutely correct. I support his bill, to say that you either drill on those 68 million acres or you give up your lease and let someone else drill there. That's what the Democrats are saying. We are not going to hand out more leases to the oil companies on public land that is owned by the public and is the land and the reserves of this country. We are saying to them if you have a lease, you use that lease. You drill. You're not going to get another one. And if you're not going to drill, then let's put it out for competitive bid and let someone else come forward and drill on that land.

The fact is that 80 percent of the oil available on the Outer Continental Shelf is in regions that are already open to leasing, but the oil companies haven't decided if it is worth their time to drill there. The fact is that drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge wouldn't yield any oil for 10 years, and then would only save the customer, the consumer, 1.8 cents per gallon in 2025. The fact is that America uses a quarter of the world's oil consumption every day, but only 1.6 percent of the world's supply, so there is simply no way to drill ourselves to a solution.

I repeat, while my colleagues were running this body, where were their solutions? I didn't see any. I didn't see them raising the mile per gallon of gas, I didn't see them conserving. I didn't see them investing in biofuels or moving forward with innovative energy solutions, as this new Democratic leadership has been doing. They have just held onto the failed policies of the past which have gotten us to where we are. As I repeat, we have two oil men in the White House that have been behind these policies.

So I would say that the Democratic leadership has done a great deal to help the American consumer. They are facing many challenges. Their wages are stagnant. The price of gasoline is now over $4 a gallon. The price of milk is over $4 a gallon. So they are facing really inflation and many, many challenges.

The Democratic leadership has come forward with a stimulus package to help the American taxpayer, the American citizen. We have come forward with a fuel-efficiency standard. We have come forward with many hearings today on the possible manipulation of oil in the futures market so that we can curb those abuses if they are documented. We are for drilling on the 68 million acres that are currently under contract and should be drilled on.

So this Congress, I congratulate the leadership of Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats and the relevant committees. We have passed legislation, the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act. We have passed the Gas Price Relief for Consumers Act. We have passed the Energy Price Gouging Prevention Act which will provide consumer relief by giving the Federal Trade Commission the authority to investigate and punish those who artificially inflate energy prices. President Bush has threatened a veto of this very commonsense consumer protection measure.

So I say with all due respect to my wonderful colleagues and friends on the other side of the aisle, where were your ideas when you could pass them? Where are your ideas now? The ones that we are passing that helps the consumer and moves this country into the 21st century, and that makes a profitable use of land that is owned by the American people instead of giving more, and in many cases in a no-bid process to oil companies who are just sitting on it and not doing anything to help the American consumer.

So I would say you brought it up, so I am just responding to some of your allegations.

I feel this is such an important issue that I would like to yield 2 minutes to my distinguished colleague from the great State of New York, Congressman Serrano, on H.R. 6184, and I thank him for his leadership on this important bill.

Announcement By the Speaker Pro Tempore

I thank the gentleman for his statement. He has been a strong advocate for the Territories. He raises and highlights an important point that the Territories are included, and I appreciate his recognizing the many contributions from the citizens of Puerto Rico and other Territories to our great country.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time and urge my colleagues to support this creative bill that is before us. I hope that it passes unanimously and moves to the Senate with swift passage.

Parliamentary Inquiry

I do object. We have a system. We have gone through it, and I feel we should move to a vote.

If the gentleman feels so strongly about it, he has worked so hard on this bill, it's a successful bill, and we hope to have another successful bill, so I will allow the gentleman to reclaim his time.

I would inquire how much time remains on both sides, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I ask for reciprocity. If he is reclaiming his time, then I would like to reclaim my time.

I do ask unanimous consent to reclaim my time.

The gentlewoman has no further speakers, but I wonder if the gentleman on the other side of the aisle yields back his time.

Just to respond to my dear friend and colleague on the other side of the aisle, I'm very appreciative that you're supportive of the bill before us, but I want to point out that there is nothing in this bill that would in any way prevent drilling. In fact, they can drill now on 68 million acres of land on which they have a lease.

And we did have a vote, and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle did not support the vote that would compel the oil industry to start drilling or lose permits on this 68 million acres of undeveloped Federal oil reserves which they are currently warehousing and keeping domestic supply lower and prices higher. I believe that's a very balanced premarket approach. Use it or lose it. Let someone else drill there.

And industry is only using a fraction of its leases now. And refining is not an issue. Refineries are running below capacity.

But we have enacted in law, past laws, that are laws now, the Energy Independence and Security Act. This historic Act would increase vehicle fuel efficiency to 35 miles per gallon, and this is the first congressional increase in more than three decades. And this would be very helpful.

And I'd like to place into the Record an entire list of laws that have been enacted by this Democratic leadership, laws that are coming up to be considered, including cracking down on price gouging, and legislation that the House has passed and we're waiting for the Senate to act on: the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act, the Gas Price Relief for Consumers Act, the Energy Price Gouging Prevention Act. These are all important concrete steps, not rhetoric, but concrete steps to help consumers.

New Direction Legislation

Enacted into Law

Energy Independence and Security Act in 2007--Historic

energy legislation with provisions to combat oil market

manipulation, increase vehicle fuel efficiency to 35 miles

per gallon in 2020--the first Congressional increase in more

than three decades--and promote the use of American biofuels.

Signed into law, December 19, 2007.

Strategic Petroleum Reserve Fill Suspension and Consumer

Protection Act--Temporarily suspends the filling of the SPR,

starting June 30th, to put more oil on the market to help

drive down gasoline prices. Signed into law, May 19, 2008.

Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008--The new Farm

Bill makes an historic commitment to more affordable American

biofuels and increases Commodity Futures Trading Commission

(CFTC) oversight authority to detect and prevent manipulation

of energy prices. President Bush vetoed this bill, but the

Congress overrode that veto.

Recent and Upcoming Legislation

Reducing Transit Fares (H.R. 6052)--Gives grants to mass

transit authorities to lower fares for commuters pinched at

the pump and expand transit services.

Cracking Down on Price Gouging (H.R. 6346)--Gives

enforcement authority to the Federal Trade Commission to

investigate and punish those who artificially inflate fuel

prices.

``Use It Or Lose It'' for Oil Companies Holding Permits and

Not Drilling--Compels the oil industry to start drilling or

lose permits on the 68 million acres of undeveloped federal

oil reserves which they are currently warehousing, keeping

domestic supply lower and prices higher.

Further Close the ``Enron Loophole'' for Petroleum

Markets--Takes steps to curb excessive speculation in the

energy futures markets, which experts have noted is driving

up the price of a barrel of oil.

Legislation that the house has passed

Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act--Extends and expands

tax incentives for renewable energy (including incentives for

plug-in vehicles), retains and creates hundreds of thousands

of green jobs, spurs American innovation and business

investment, and cuts taxes for millions of Americans. The

President has threatened a veto.

The Gas Price Relief for Consumers Act--Combats record gas

prices by authorizing lawsuits against oil cartel members for

price fixing, and creating an Antitrust Task Force to crack

down on anticompetitive behavior or market manipulation.

President Bush has threatened a veto.

Energy Price Gouging Prevention Act--This bill will provide

consumer relief by giving the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

the authority to investigate and punish those who

artificially inflate energy prices. President Bush has

threatened a veto.

I'd like to remind my dear colleagues on the other side of the aisle that when President Bush came to office he had a $5 trillion projected surplus. We now

have a series of records that have been given to us by the Republican leadership, only they are the wrong kinds of records.

We have record debt that is galloping towards $9 trillion. Each and every American owes over $30,000 to this debt. We have the largest trade deficit in the history of this country, over $900 billion, and we have the largest deficit in the history of this country. We have lost more jobs in the first half of this year than have been lost since the Great Depression, and if we continue at this rate, we will lose over 1 million jobs in this year.

Now, that is the record of the Republican leadership. But what is before us is a very important bill, one that I support, one that I urge my colleagues to support. And I urge my colleagues to support consideration of H.R. 6184, and I hope that we will have a bipartisan commitment to passing this legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5811, the Electronic Message Preservation Act of 2008, and I want to thank Representatives Clay and Hodes for their commitment to oversight and accountability and for their hard work on this bill.

The Electronic Message Preservation Act amends both the Federal Records Act and the Presidential Records Act to ensure the preservation of e-mail records.

In recent years, e-mail has become an essential form of communication and a key source of information about Federal decision-making. Despite the importance of these records, serious deficiencies exist in the way e-mails are preserved both by the White House and Federal agencies. The preservation of these records must be improved if historians are to have access to a complete record of government decision-making and if Congress is to perform needed oversight.

Under President Bush, the White House has allowed senior officials to use nongovernmental e-mail accounts maintained by the Republican National Committee for official business. An investigation by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform found that many of these e-mails have been destroyed. Other e-mails have been lost because the White House relied for 5 years on an e-mail archiving system described as ``primitive'' by a former White House information technology officer.

While the problems have been particularly acute under the Bush administration, other administrations, including President Clinton, have also encountered problems preserving e-mail records.

To ensure that these Presidential records are appropriately preserved, H.R. 5811 directs the Archivist to establish standards for the capture, maintenance and preservation of e-mail records and to certify that the White House is meeting these standards.

Committee investigations have also revealed that Federal agencies are inconsistent in the management of e-mail records. Most agencies still rely on an unreliable ``print and file'' process to preserve e-mail records rather than preserving them electronically.

GAO, in a report released yesterday, found that senior agency officials are not compliant with key e-mail preservation requirements. GAO reviewed the practices of senior agency officials and determined that the e-mails were not retained in adequate record keeping systems, making the e-mail records easier to lose or delete and harder to find and use.

This bill would modernize agency record keeping. The bill directs the Archivist to issue regulations mandating that within 4 years of the enactment of this legislation, all Federal agencies manage and preserve their e-mail records electronically.

Mr. Speaker, some have said that this bill is about preserving history. And it is. But it also is about our constitutional responsibility for oversight and for holding this and any administration accountable. Access to Presidential and Federal records helps us do our job. I urge all Members to support this bill.

Thank you very much for yielding.

The issue of energy is very much related to this question of e-mails and the preservation of the records. Now, why do we have our energy problems in this country? Suddenly Republicans are saying, notwithstanding the fact that they have run this government for 7\1/2\ years, the Democrats, the Democrats are at fault.

Well, let me point out that as soon as President Bush came into office, he asked Vice President Cheney to chair an energy task force, and they operated in secrecy. We don't know exactly who they heard from or what they were asked to do, but we know that the legislation that the administration requested from the Congress was for billions of dollars to be given to the oil, gas, coal, and nuclear industries, industries that are making record profits.

Now, at that same time, those of us from California were having a very difficult situation because energy wholesalers, including Enron, were holding back supplies in order to drive up the price, and we all met with Vice President Cheney. And you know what he said to us, The reason you're having high prices of electricity is because of environmental laws. And we said, No, it's because we're being taken to the cleaners by Enron and other energy wholesalers. And he said, No, it's not true. Well, when we did our investigations on Enron, we found out it was exactly what was happening.

Now, the point I want to make is we don't know what went on with this administration's deliberations for energy policy. We know that they've all failed. We wouldn't have the high price of gas today if they had done their job of getting us off our reliance on oil because we're so dependent now on bringing in oil from overseas. Even if we drill every possibility in the United States, we'd still be importing oil from places that are very vulnerable and are very hostile to us.

But this energy task force, and this administration, proposed benefits for the oil companies and no policies to help us get out of that dependence on foreign oil and domestic oil, to look for alternatives, to look for conservation, to do something other than drill, drill, drill, and make the oil companies more profitable.

And when we tried to find out what went on, we couldn't get the e- mails. We couldn't look at the e-mails. And why? Well, do you know why? Because they weren't using e-mails from the government of the United States while they were doing government business.

They were using the e-mails of the Republican National Committee. Are they doing Party business or are they doing government business?

That's one of the reasons we need this bill, and we need to get away from this partisanship on the question of high oil prices.

I object.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to speak on the motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out to everyone who is listening to this debate that fundamentally this bill is about accountability and preventing cover-up. On the Oversight Committee, we have seen firsthand how destruction of e-mails frustrates accountability and allows officials to hide wrongdoing.

We investigated Jack Abramoff's contacts with the White House. We saw

that Abramoff told his colleagues that he used the Republican National Committee e-mail accounts when he was dealing with White House officials so that his communications would remain secret. This bill shuts down that loophole. It says Jack Abramoff can't send secret e- mails to White House officials.

We tried to investigate the false intelligence that led to the war in Iraq, but this investigation did not have access to Karl Rove's e-mails because they were destroyed. This bill says that Karl Rove's e-mails have to be preserved and not destroyed.

We tried to investigate the Cheney Energy Task Force, which gave us the energy policy this Nation has followed under President Bush for the last 7\1/2\ years, which I believe has led to these incredible high prices for energy. But once again we needed access to the e-mails to understand what deals were cut with the special interests, including at that time Enron, which played a very active role on Vice President Cheney's Energy Task Force.

A vote for this bill will make sure that the White House cannot hide its abuses. What we need is for this bill to pass so we can have honest and open and accountable government. That's why this legislation is before us today.

Of course, we don't know what the motion to recommit is until the very last minute; so we have to prepare for whatever may come. This is not a motion to recommit that would destroy the bill, and I appreciate that fact. It's a motion to recommit that, by and large, I think makes sense, and why it wasn't offered as an amendment leaves me perplexed. I do have some minor concerns about the motion to recommit, but that can be worked out in conference. This should have been brought up as an amendment to the bill. But, in effect, a motion to recommit is a motion to amend the bill. And since I do not oppose, in effect, the amendment that's being offered, I will join in support of this motion to recommit because this bill is too important. I know it was minimized a lot in the debate where people said why are we talking about e-mail preservation when we should be talking about drilling in Alaska and off the coast of the United States? Well, they are related because had we been able to have the Energy Task Force, chaired by Cheney, Vice President Cheney, we could have found out how we had this policy decided, and now that we're saddled with it, we could have done something about it 7\1/2\ years ago.

I will join in support of this motion to recommit, and I will urge my colleagues to vote for it so we can get the bill passed with this amendment that's being offered to it. I urge a vote for the motion.

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

I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank him for his leadership on this issue, the national parks quarter bill. We have in

my district the Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area, which is under the National Park Service, the longest linear park in the Nation, 48-mile linear park, and so I am pleased to support this bill.

The concern that I have, however, about the national parks is that, Mr. Speaker, more and more Americans aren't able to get to them, and they aren't able to get to them because of the price of gasoline. And so what we ought to be doing here as the House of Representatives, in addition to recognizing the wonderful work of the National Park Service, is to do all that we can to make certain that the number one issue of Americans across this Nation is addressed. That issue is energy policy and gas prices. So I come to the well today to lend my support to those who are trying to move forward in a positive way as it relates to energy policy for our Nation.

We have, Mr. Speaker, as you know, a number of bills that aren't being brought to the floor because the Speaker doesn't want them to come to the floor, is not interested in increasing supply of oil for Americans, American energy for Americans. There are a number of discharge petitions, which is the only avenue that Members of the House have when their bills are bottled up when they can't get to the floor. We have four of them that are available right now.

One is the No More Excuses Energy Act that would increase the ability of new refineries to be brought on line in the United States. Mr. Speaker, we haven't had a new refinery built in this Nation in over 30 years, and the problem with that is that we can't get product to the retail market. We cannot increase the supply if you don't have increase in refineries. That is H.R. 3089.

Mr. Speaker, there is another one, H.R. 2279, which would expand the refining capacity on closed military installations, one of those that allows for increasing refining capacity on land that is currently not even being used, Federal land that is not being used. And this is important as it relates to national parks, because again, Mr. Speaker, my constituents are having trouble getting to the national parks because of the price of gasoline. And this House is not acting because the leadership, the Speaker and her leadership, are not interested in bringing forward bills that increase supply.

Another one is H.R. 5656, which would repeal the ban on acquiring alternative fuels. Mr. Speaker, we were home last week, and one of the things I heard from my constituents as I know folks heard all across this Nation is: You have got to solve the energy problems. You have got to solve the gas price problem.

One of the ways to do that is to conserve. Yes, there is no doubt about it. Another way is to increase supply. We have talked a lot about that. Another way in the long run is to make certain that we have got the kind of technology available to provide for alternative fuel.

This is a bill, H.R. 5656, that would allow for increasing accessibility to mechanisms to bring alternative fuels on line, diverse sources of fuels like oil shale and tar sands and coal-to-liquid technology.

I was surprised to learn, Mr. Speaker, as I know you were that the United States has one of the largest resources of oil shale in the world. In the world. So much so that the estimate is that we could get over 2 trillion barrels of oil out of the oil shale, oil sands that is American resource. American resource.

Now, 2 trillion is a big number. It has got a lot of zeroes after it. What does it really mean, 2 trillion barrels of oil? Well, just to put it in perspective, Mr. Speaker, the world has used 1 trillion barrels of oil since 1875. Mr. Speaker, the world has used 1 trillion barrels of oil since 1875. We Americans possess, our natural resources, the ability to gain 2 trillion barrels of oil without any influence from a foreign source, without utilizing any foreign source or any foreign technology. We could do that right now if we were able to have this House and Senate act.

So this is remarkable, remarkable information. It is important that the Members of the House know this. It is important that all Americans know this. Because we have within our capacity the ability to become not just less reliant on foreign oil but self-sufficient on American oil. American energy for Americans. That is what it is all about. That is what we hear when we go home.

So why, Mr. Speaker, why will this House not be allowed to vote on H.R. 5656? Or H.R. 2279? Or H.R. 3089? Or the one that has brought a discharge petition this week H.R. 2208, which is the Coal to Liquid Fuel Act, which would reduce the price of gasoline by encouraging the use of clean coal technology?

Mr. Speaker, as you also know, we in the United States possess the world's largest reserves of coal, and technology has changed so drastically over the past 20 to 30 years, that now it is possible in an environmentally sensitive and sound way, and responsible way, to gain natural gas, to gain gasoline from liquid coal, from coal-to-liquid technology, energy for Americans, American energy for Americans.

But what is happening here in the House of Representatives when it comes to energy policy? Nothing, Mr. Speaker. Nothing. And so when I went home last week, I know I heard what all of our colleagues did, and that is the House has got to act. The House has got to act. The frustration level of the American people is huge. And it ought to be. Their anger is huge, and it ought to be.

I encourage my colleagues to communicate to the Speaker's office, to let the Speaker know that we want to vote on these bills. I don't know how the vote will turn out, but I do know that the constituents of my district and the constituents of districts all across this Nation want to know how their Member will vote on these bills. It is imperative, American energy for Americans.

Once again, I want to thank my good friend from Delaware for providing me this time, and getting to the issue of the national parks in a little side way manner, but I think it is important. I think it is important because our constituents, I know, want us to solve the issue of energy so they can visit the national parks, the beautiful national parks all across this Nation.

Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on our side?

I thank the Speaker.

I thank my good friend from Delaware for allowing me to comment on a few of the comments that have been made by the gentlelady from New York and try to set the record straight a little bit.

The issue of the 68 million acres of leased land, of Federal land to gain access to oil reserves under Federal land of the United States isn't whether or not all of those have been used, it's whether or not there is any oil underneath them. And the fact of the matter, Mr. Speaker, as you well know is that in much of those areas, there is no oil underneath them, and you don't need to drill in every single acre to confirm there's no oil in adjacent acres. The technology is incredible today. So the fact that all haven't been drilled doesn't mean that the resources that are under those 68 million haven't been utilized, because they have. In fact, Mr. Speaker, 95 percent of the land that ought to be available for leasing has not been leased.

My good friend asked what happened on our watch. What happened when the Republicans were in charge. Well, Mr. Speaker, as you know, we passed the vast majority of these and they got held up in the Senate. They got held up because it requires 60 votes to move anything through the Senate. My suspicion though, Mr. Speaker, is that now there aren't 40 individuals who would stop these bills from moving forward, that the holdup is here in the House of Representatives.

My good friend from New York talks about all of the bills that have already been passed. Well, Mr. Speaker, the problem with that is that none of them, not one of them deals with increasing supply. They call it a law of supply and demand because it's a law. It's a law. If you increase the supply, you will decrease the cost at the pump. Americans know that.

Americans want a vote on supply. Mr. Speaker, give us a vote on supply. American energy for Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Delaware and congratulate him and our colleague from New York on this legislation and just advise the body that Oregon, once again, is in the lead when it comes to recognizing national parks as our quarter. The design for the back of it for our State was processed through a very public effort. They picked Crater Lake National Park as the park to recognize on the back of the quarter. And so we're already in the lead, and it's a wonderful national park; and as my colleague from Georgia talked about earlier, it's also one you have to drive a great distance to get to.

When I was in my home county this last week, diesel was $5.08 a gallon. Gasoline was $4.39 a gallon. And if this is the result of the new Democratic direction for the Congress and for the country, then I hope we're at about the end of this new direction because it's taken us to a dead-end.

Now, I just wanted to point out a clarification, I guess, in terms of these leases we've heard so much about. My understanding is that when the Democrats were last in charge, they actually voted a law to extend the length of those leases that the oil companies had. And I would like to see them, the oil companies, process these leases and move forward with development because that's what I think America needs, more energy, more American energy. And yet this Congress has refused to even allow a vote, afraid to even allow a vote on accessing the 85 percent of the offshore resource that is not available. It's not available. And if the argument is that we would be better off by accessing the leases already there, then the argument really is adding to supply matters and that adding to supply will result in lower gas and lower diesel costs.

So then it seems logical to presume that accessing America's great reserves, the Outer Continental Shelf, would not only create new oil and gas supplies for America and American consumers, it would also generate royalty dollars for government services.

I have been working on legislation that would deal with the twin issues of energy policy for America that creates new gas, new diesel, new access to oil, as well as fund the biggest investment in renewable energy this Congress has seen and help those lowest income among us with their home heating bills and take care of the neglected challenge this Congress has refused to take up and pass, and that is help for our counties that are dominated by Federal lands.

So we would pay for 5 years in county timber payments. We would fully fund the commitment to rural counties for payment in lieu of taxes. We would put $1 billion into LIHEAP and $3.1 billion into developing renewable energy.

Now, my colleague from New York said, What did Republicans do when they were in charge? Well, we passed bill after bill after bill that raised conservation standards on appliances. We invested in the newest and futuristic technology trying to drive the basic science in hydrogen fuel cell development. We supported efforts to extend successfully, I might add, the tax credits for wind energy and geothermal and solar and the things that I think will give us a great future in renewable energy.

But we have a here-and-today problem that this Congress and its leadership fails to address. I don't know where my colleagues on the other side of the aisle were over the Fourth of July, but I was home with real people. They're hurting. There are truckers who are losing their jobs. There are farmers who tell me it costs hundreds of dollars to fill a tank in their tractor, and fertilizer has doubled in cost. There are families who can't go to their kids' summer games because it costs $87 to fill the Voyager van. If this is the new direction that the Democrats in this Congress have for America, I've got to tell you it's a dead-end direction and it needs to change.

Why not give us at least the opportunity in this great House, this great place where Americans come together to debate issues, to at least allow a vote to access the energy reserves we know are out there on Federal land or in the Outer Continental Shelf, up in Alaska? And if it fails, it fails. The Congress will have spoken in the House. But so far we have gone through, as a result of the Democrat leadership, the most incredible--this reminds me of the game of Twister. We are so convoluted and upside down and twisted to avoid any vote that it is reprehensible.

So, Mr. Speaker, I both support not only the act before us today, but I call for this House to at least allow a vote that I think would not only be bipartisan, as it was in 2006 when we passed, in this House, overwhelmingly with 40 Democrats supporting our efforts to get at our offshore oil resource. It would be an overwhelming bipartisan vote. And isn't that what democracy is really all about? You put an issue up on the table, you allow a vote, and we live with the outcome.

So I ask for that opportunity, Mr. Speaker, just as we're voting today on this wonderful bill to allow national parks to have a coin. As I said, Oregon has been at the forefront on that issue just as we are on renewable energy. Let's have a vote. Let's not have a vote like we had when we passed the Energy Act of 2007 that said if another country is making oil from tar sands, don't let the American military use it. Or like was stuffed in that bill a provision that said if you could take woody biomass and turn it into an ethanol-like fuel, don't count that against the ethanol fuel standard. Why is that in there?

Why can't you use the great resource of our American forests, convert them into ethanol using cellulosic technology, which Republicans and Democrats both agree need to happen? But then to say, Oh, but if you succeed at that, it doesn't count towards this out-of-control ethanol standard because we wouldn't want to count woody biomass off of Federal forests or unless it's specifically grown for that purpose, as ethanol, it can be used for a fuel standard in America. No. We would rather rely on corn, I guess. And that hasn't helped us a lot.

So I think we have invested in new technologies when Republicans were in control. We invested in new science.

We also tried to expedite access to America's great reserves. Every other country on the planet that has an ocean exercises its right to its own reserves, and yeah, it might take 10 years, but if Bill Clinton, former President, hadn't vetoed access into Alaska's reserves, we would be pumping a million to a million and a half barrels out a day. America uses, I think, what is it, 20 million barrels a day? We produce 5. Where would we be if President Clinton hadn't vetoed that? We would be a lot better off, folks, because the world produces about 85 million barrels a day and consumes 86, or thereabouts.

This has a lot of things around it: certainly money supply, value of the dollar, inflation, speculators, who knows what. But at its core, until we bridge to the next generation of fuel for our vehicles, we have a here-and-now problem at the gas pump, at the diesel pump, and at the American budget.

The families in this country are hurting, hurting; and if you're not hearing that on the other side of the aisle, you're not going home and listening. You can't hide forever on the ability to access America's resources. You can't stop the country from demanding a vote. Just one vote. Give us a vote, up-or-down, clean, simple, the way democracy is supposed to work here in this House. But no.

The appropriations process ground to a halt. There might be a vote on energy. Every other bill that might have anything to do with energy ground to a halt. Heck, even declaring a wild and scenic river in Massachusetts had to be pulled because it dealt with LNG. Ground to a halt.

This country is grinding to a halt. It's time for a change in how this Congress acts.

I thank my distinguished colleague, Mr. Clay, for his leadership along with Mr. Waxman on this bill.

I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5811, the Electronic Message Preservation Act. My colleague from Virginia has said that the Archivist suggests that the requirement for certification under this bill is unprecedented. Well, this bill is filed, in part, as a response to White House practices that have been unprecedented and show clearly the need for this legislation. The documents, which include e-mails, correspondence, memos produced by an administration belong not to the President but to the people of the United States.

This bill will help ensure that these records are preserved properly for our future generations, and more importantly, this bill will help lift the veil of secrecy that has fallen over our government under this administration.

Every day the President and his staff generate thousands of documents on the issues confronting our Nation. These documents contain important insights into the way that our government is making decisions that affect our lives. Why are those decisions being made? Who benefits? Who gets to influence our government leaders?

We have serious concerns about the way the White House is preserving these documents, or not preserving them, and whether the true purpose of not preserving them is to hide the dealings from the American people. Through the investigations by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, we have learned that the White House lost hundreds of days of e-mail records between the years 2003 and 2005. Additionally, it appears that senior officials in the White House have been found to be skirting the historical record laws by using an e-mail system provided by the Republican National Committee for most of their e-mail correspondence.

For example, Karl Rove, former Deputy Chief of Staff, is said to have used the RNC system for 95 percent of his e-mail correspondence to which the American people will never have access. Under the Presidential Records Act, the President has the sole authority to manage his records during his time in office. The General Accountability Office found that this administration did not keep records as it was required to.

So the question becomes: What were they trying to hide? It is no surprise that the administration that leaked Valerie Plame's covert identity and organized propaganda to promote a war in Iraq is evading record-keeping practices to hide information from the American people. This is arguably partisan politics at its worse, and the only remedy is more accountability and more sunshine. The Electronic Message Preservation Act will help to make sure that these important records are kept and help shine light on what our government is doing and why.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to enter for the Record a letter supporting this legislation that brings accountability back to the White House. The letter was signed by a number of groups that advocate for an open, transparent government, including the Government Accountability Project and openthegovernment.org.

Mr. Speaker, the Bush administration has been one of the most secretive and least transparent and most closed in American history. We still don't know what was said in closed-door meetings with Big Oil executives to set our energy policy, and today, we suffer from record- high gas prices. The secrecy in the White House has prevented officials in the White House from being held accountable to the American people.

The Electronic Message Preservation Act will reform White House record keeping and allow the American people to have confidence that future administrations will not be able to hide the truth from the people of this country or from history.

July 9, 2008.

Hon. Henry Waxman

Chair, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Waxman: We are writing to support the passage

of H.R. 5811, the Electronic Message Preservation Act.

Investigations and reports by your Committee and by several

nonprofits document the significant deficiencies in the

preservation of e-mail by the federal government. H.R. 5811

directs the Archivist of the United States to establish

standards for the capture, management, and preservation of

White House e-mails and other electronic communications and

to issue regulations requiring agencies to preserve

electronic communications in an electronic format. This

legislation demonstrates that Congress is paying attention to

this serious issue, and taking steps to begin addressing the

systemic problems with electronic records in general and

electronic communications records that the federal agencies

and the White House have failed for too long to address.

Thank you for your leadership on this critical aspect of

government management and accountability. We look forward to

working with you on this and other issues in the future.

Sincerely,

American Association of Law Libraries, American Library

Association, Association of Research Libraries, Common

Cause, Essential Information, Freedom of Information,

Oklahoma, Government Accountability Project (GAP),

iSolon.org, Liberty Coalition, National Coalition

Against Censorship, National Coalition for History,

Mine Safety and Health News, and Minnesota Coalition on

Government Information.

Mississippi Center for Freedom of Information, National

Freedom of Information Coalition, National Security

Archives, National Press Club, 9/11 Research Project,

Open TheGovernment.org, Peacefire, People For the

American Way, Project on Government Oversight (POGO),

ReadtheBill.org Foundation, Society of Professional

Journalists, and Washington Coalition for Open

Government.