REFRESH Act

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a significant bill to improve energy efficiency in this Nation and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The bill I am introducing will promote the development of additional forms of renewable energy and also pave the way for improved fuel consumption by vehicles. I rise to introduce the Renewable Energy, Fuel Reduction, and Economic Stabilization and Enhancement Act of 2007, or the REFRESH Act, for short.

I consider this a balanced measure, a companion to a bill introduced recently by Alaska's Senior Senator Ted Stevens who proposed to raise the fuel efficiency of automobiles to 40 miles per gallon within a decade, a bill I am proud to be a cosponsor of. This bill will promote alternative energy by providing grants and tax credits to promote development of geothermal power, all forms of ocean energy and small hydro electric development.

The bill also seeks to reduce American fossil fuel consumption by nearly 5 million barrels of oil a day by 2025 by not only supporting an increase in the Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency Standard, CAFE, for automobiles, as

proposed by Senator Stevens, but by also requiring a study of whether to mandate that a CAFE standard to be imposed on commercial trucks. The bill also requires an improvement in the efficiency of replacement tires for all passenger cars, provides grants to States and local communities to encourage a reduction in traffic congestion by helping States to set up telecommuting and flexible-work programs to keep motorists off roadways during rush hours, and extends and removes a cap on tax credits to encourage the purchase of hybrid and advanced fuel efficient lean-burn vehicles. The bill also authorizes $100 million in additional research assistance for plug-in hybrid and battery storage technology development.

The bill also includes a truth in advertising provision requiring that the CAFE standards for vehicles be based on the actual fuel economy that the vehicles will achieve under real-world driving conditions, where acceleration, the use of air conditioning and stop and go driving is considered rather than on a three-decades old testing formula.

The bill will reduce carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel usage by about 530 million metric tons in the United States by 2025--a 7 percent cut over what emissions otherwise are predicted to be that year. Coming from Alaska where there is no question but that warming temperatures have been in place in recent years, it only makes sense that we take common sense steps now to improve fuel efficiency, to promote the development of a wider range of alternative energy technologies and to encourage Americans to buy more fuel efficient vehicles, as long as their ability to drive safe and affordable vehicles of their own choosing is protected.

This bill is a careful balance of steps we can take to reduce fuel usage and thus greenhouse gas emissions, but also of provisions that are economic for Americans to undertake, and will pay for themselves in reduced fuel costs, sometimes in very short order. It will be good insurance for the environment, but also good for the pocketbooks of Americans.

Americans understand that we are in a current warming trend. Just this week, our government reported that 2006 was the warmest year worldwide in over a century. There are dozens of examples of the effects on the environment that the warming climate of the past three decades has caused. While I believe the ultimate cause of the climate change we are seeing is not yet certain, it is our responsibility to take affordable steps now to reduce fuel consumption, increase the use of alternative, non-fossil-fuel technologies, and to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions.

This bill, paired with previous legislation by my colleague Senator Ted Stevens that specifically raises the CAFE standard by 2017, S. 183, will require automobile makers, if it is technologically feasible, to improve fuel efficiency. I am proud to be a supporter of that measure. The two bills will have a host of policy and economic advantages. They will make us less dependent on imported oil, improving our national security and reducing the money we spend overseas to buy imported crude oil. And they will produce more jobs in America through the development of new alternative-fuel industries.

The bill I introduce today, for example, will require all tire manufacturers to make and sell only low, rolling, resistance tires for replacement tire purposes within five years--the same tires found on new cars today. The tires, while they will add on average $20 to the cost of a set of two replacement tires, will improve fuel efficiency by 1.5 to 4.5 percent. Thus if the price of gasoline is only $2 a gallon, drivers will save from $87 to $260 a year in fuel costs per year, the change saving the typical driver money within the first year, according to estimates by the National Commission on Energy Policy that recommended the change in a 2005 report.

The bill also will require the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to study the savings that would result and the costs of imposing a CAFE standard on commercial trucks, a key requirement before Congress can actually impose such a standard. Commercial trucks consume between 1.5 and 2 million barrels of oil a day in fuel. According to estimates by the Department of Energy's 21st Century Truck Program and by Argonne National Laboratory, fuel economy for tractor-trailers should be able to improve by 30 to 60 percent by 2015 through use of a CAFE standard. While such improvements might increase the cost of a tractor-trailer by $7,000 at time of purchase, it would save some $11,000 in fuel costs over the life of the vehicle, achieving payback for the typical truck owner in less than three years. Imposing such a CAFE on trucks was proposed by the Energy Security Leadership Council in a report just last month.

The $50 million in grants to reduce traffic congestion could pay for themselves nearly immediately, since the National Commission on Energy Policy estimated that American motorists consume between 65,000 and 260,000 barrels of oil a day in wasted fuel because of urban traffic congestion, costing the Nation up to $13 million a day at current fuel prices.

And the tax credit provisions, making all forms of ocean energy: wave, current, tidal and thermal, and small hydro electric power qualified to receive the Federal Production Tax Credit that currently reduces the cost of wind, solar and biomass energy by 1.9 cents per kilowatt hour generated, would help to increase renewable energy production nationwide. Geothermal energy is already covered by the PTC, as are wind, solar and biomass projects.

Congress two years ago in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which I helped formulate, provided both grant and the tax assistance to encourage the development of wind, solar and biomass energy. But when you consider that large portions of the country, including 70 percent of Alaska, may contain geothermal resources, that there are thousands of lakes and small rivers and creeks that can power small-scale hydro electric development without requiring dams or affecting fisheries or the environment in the least, and that thousands of miles of U.S. coastlines and river systems can generate electricity from emerging ocean energy systems, it only makes sense to expand the scope of Federal assistance to encourage wider development and use of these other renewable technologies.

The Electric Power Research Institute has estimated that wave energy off U.S. coasts alone could conservatively generate 252 million megawatt hours of electricity, 6.5 percent of all energy now produced in America. Alaska has nearly 80 coastal and river communities that could benefit greatly by development of ocean energy systems. To facilitate ocean and geothermal development, the bill authorizes $100 million in Federal research and development grant assistance to both types of development.

This bill is not a cure all for all of our energy woes. I recently co-sponsored legislation by Senators Jim Bunning and Barack Obama that will provide additional incentives to develop fuel from coal and that will encourage the sequestration of carbon from coal processed in fuel- to-liquid plants. I will support additional assistance to promote wind, solar and biomass alternative energy development. I have supported and will continue to support development of the next generation of nuclear power that can produce energy without any greenhouse gas emissions. And I will continue to support research and development of biofuels, such as ethanol, especially celluosic ethanol, and of development of hydrogen-fueled vehicles and fuel distribution systems for the new fuels.

I also will support production of more domestic energy from conventional sources, whether it be more oil and natural gas from the ground onshore and from under some of our seas offshore where it can be done in an environmentally friendly way, or more novel forms of fossil fuels, be they from oil shales, oil sands, coal or from gas hydrate deposits. In my view we need to do everything we can to find economic forms of the energy we will need during the remainder of the 21st Century.

This bill only represents one piece of a balanced plan to improve this Nation's energy outlook. But it is an important piece. This bill has the ability to restore and refresh our environment

by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It will encourage development of more renewable energy. We can't afford not to find the funds to pay for its provisions.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a significant bill to improve energy efficiency in this Nation and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The bill I am introducing will promote the development of additional forms of renewable energy and also pave the way for improved fuel consumption by vehicles. I rise to introduce the Renewable Energy, Fuel Reduction, and Economic Stabilization and Enhancement Act of 2007, or the REFRESH Act, for short.

I consider this a balanced measure, a companion to a bill introduced recently by Alaska's Senior Senator Ted Stevens who proposed to raise the fuel efficiency of automobiles to 40 miles per gallon within a decade, a bill I am proud to be a cosponsor of. This bill will promote alternative energy by providing grants and tax credits to promote development of geothermal power, all forms of ocean energy and small hydro electric development.

The bill also seeks to reduce American fossil fuel consumption by nearly 5 million barrels of oil a day by 2025 by not only supporting an increase in the Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency Standard, CAFE, for automobiles, as

proposed by Senator Stevens, but by also requiring a study of whether to mandate that a CAFE standard to be imposed on commercial trucks. The bill also requires an improvement in the efficiency of replacement tires for all passenger cars, provides grants to States and local communities to encourage a reduction in traffic congestion by helping States to set up telecommuting and flexible-work programs to keep motorists off roadways during rush hours, and extends and removes a cap on tax credits to encourage the purchase of hybrid and advanced fuel efficient lean-burn vehicles. The bill also authorizes $100 million in additional research assistance for plug-in hybrid and battery storage technology development.

The bill also includes a truth in advertising provision requiring that the CAFE standards for vehicles be based on the actual fuel economy that the vehicles will achieve under real-world driving conditions, where acceleration, the use of air conditioning and stop and go driving is considered rather than on a three-decades old testing formula.

The bill will reduce carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel usage by about 530 million metric tons in the United States by 2025--a 7 percent cut over what emissions otherwise are predicted to be that year. Coming from Alaska where there is no question but that warming temperatures have been in place in recent years, it only makes sense that we take common sense steps now to improve fuel efficiency, to promote the development of a wider range of alternative energy technologies and to encourage Americans to buy more fuel efficient vehicles, as long as their ability to drive safe and affordable vehicles of their own choosing is protected.

This bill is a careful balance of steps we can take to reduce fuel usage and thus greenhouse gas emissions, but also of provisions that are economic for Americans to undertake, and will pay for themselves in reduced fuel costs, sometimes in very short order. It will be good insurance for the environment, but also good for the pocketbooks of Americans.

Americans understand that we are in a current warming trend. Just this week, our government reported that 2006 was the warmest year worldwide in over a century. There are dozens of examples of the effects on the environment that the warming climate of the past three decades has caused. While I believe the ultimate cause of the climate change we are seeing is not yet certain, it is our responsibility to take affordable steps now to reduce fuel consumption, increase the use of alternative, non-fossil-fuel technologies, and to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions.

This bill, paired with previous legislation by my colleague Senator Ted Stevens that specifically raises the CAFE standard by 2017, S. 183, will require automobile makers, if it is technologically feasible, to improve fuel efficiency. I am proud to be a supporter of that measure. The two bills will have a host of policy and economic advantages. They will make us less dependent on imported oil, improving our national security and reducing the money we spend overseas to buy imported crude oil. And they will produce more jobs in America through the development of new alternative-fuel industries.

The bill I introduce today, for example, will require all tire manufacturers to make and sell only low, rolling, resistance tires for replacement tire purposes within five years--the same tires found on new cars today. The tires, while they will add on average $20 to the cost of a set of two replacement tires, will improve fuel efficiency by 1.5 to 4.5 percent. Thus if the price of gasoline is only $2 a gallon, drivers will save from $87 to $260 a year in fuel costs per year, the change saving the typical driver money within the first year, according to estimates by the National Commission on Energy Policy that recommended the change in a 2005 report.

The bill also will require the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to study the savings that would result and the costs of imposing a CAFE standard on commercial trucks, a key requirement before Congress can actually impose such a standard. Commercial trucks consume between 1.5 and 2 million barrels of oil a day in fuel. According to estimates by the Department of Energy's 21st Century Truck Program and by Argonne National Laboratory, fuel economy for tractor-trailers should be able to improve by 30 to 60 percent by 2015 through use of a CAFE standard. While such improvements might increase the cost of a tractor-trailer by $7,000 at time of purchase, it would save some $11,000 in fuel costs over the life of the vehicle, achieving payback for the typical truck owner in less than three years. Imposing such a CAFE on trucks was proposed by the Energy Security Leadership Council in a report just last month.

The $50 million in grants to reduce traffic congestion could pay for themselves nearly immediately, since the National Commission on Energy Policy estimated that American motorists consume between 65,000 and 260,000 barrels of oil a day in wasted fuel because of urban traffic congestion, costing the Nation up to $13 million a day at current fuel prices.

And the tax credit provisions, making all forms of ocean energy: wave, current, tidal and thermal, and small hydro electric power qualified to receive the Federal Production Tax Credit that currently reduces the cost of wind, solar and biomass energy by 1.9 cents per kilowatt hour generated, would help to increase renewable energy production nationwide. Geothermal energy is already covered by the PTC, as are wind, solar and biomass projects.

Congress two years ago in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which I helped formulate, provided both grant and the tax assistance to encourage the development of wind, solar and biomass energy. But when you consider that large portions of the country, including 70 percent of Alaska, may contain geothermal resources, that there are thousands of lakes and small rivers and creeks that can power small-scale hydro electric development without requiring dams or affecting fisheries or the environment in the least, and that thousands of miles of U.S. coastlines and river systems can generate electricity from emerging ocean energy systems, it only makes sense to expand the scope of Federal assistance to encourage wider development and use of these other renewable technologies.

The Electric Power Research Institute has estimated that wave energy off U.S. coasts alone could conservatively generate 252 million megawatt hours of electricity, 6.5 percent of all energy now produced in America. Alaska has nearly 80 coastal and river communities that could benefit greatly by development of ocean energy systems. To facilitate ocean and geothermal development, the bill authorizes $100 million in Federal research and development grant assistance to both types of development.

This bill is not a cure all for all of our energy woes. I recently co-sponsored legislation by Senators Jim Bunning and Barack Obama that will provide additional incentives to develop fuel from coal and that will encourage the sequestration of carbon from coal processed in fuel- to-liquid plants. I will support additional assistance to promote wind, solar and biomass alternative energy development. I have supported and will continue to support development of the next generation of nuclear power that can produce energy without any greenhouse gas emissions. And I will continue to support research and development of biofuels, such as ethanol, especially celluosic ethanol, and of development of hydrogen-fueled vehicles and fuel distribution systems for the new fuels.

I also will support production of more domestic energy from conventional sources, whether it be more oil and natural gas from the ground onshore and from under some of our seas offshore where it can be done in an environmentally friendly way, or more novel forms of fossil fuels, be they from oil shales, oil sands, coal or from gas hydrate deposits. In my view we need to do everything we can to find economic forms of the energy we will need during the remainder of the 21st Century.

This bill only represents one piece of a balanced plan to improve this Nation's energy outlook. But it is an important piece. This bill has the ability to restore and refresh our environment

by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It will encourage development of more renewable energy. We can't afford not to find the funds to pay for its provisions.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act of 2007. There are many critically important issues that we face, including education, health care, the growing and inexcusable economic inequality in this country, and the situation in Iraq. Among these issues has to be the threat faced by the earth itself due to global warming and that is why this legislation is the first bill that I am introducing as a U.S. Senator.

The Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act, the full text of which I ask be included in the Record following my remarks, was initially introduced last year by the Senator whose seat I currently hold, Senator Jim Jeffords. Jim's leadership in offering a forwardthinking global warming bill is known by all in this chamber and I am honored to continue his efforts by introducing this tremendously-important legislation today.

This bill, is being cosponsored by many of my esteemed colleagues and I would like to recognize them this morning: Senator Boxer, chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee; the Senior Senator from the great state of Vermont, Mr. Leahy; both Senators from New Jersey, Mr. Lautenberg and Mr. Menendez; Senators Reed and Whitehouse, both from Rhode Island; the Senate delegation from the State of Hawaii, Senators Inouye and Akaka; and Senator Feingold of Wisconsin and Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. I appreciate the support of these colleagues in focusing attention on the most important environmental issue of our time and urge my other colleagues to join in this effort.

I am also proud that the Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act has the support of numerous national groups, including the Earth Day Network, Earthjustice, Environmental Defense, Environmental & Energy Study Institute, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, League of Conservation Voters, National Audubon Society, National Environmental Trust, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Public Citizen, Sierra Club, Union of Concerned Scientists, and US PIRG.

The Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act is based on the scientific evidence and consensus that global warming poses a significant threat to the United States and the world. In fact, with our national security, our economy, our public health and welfare, and our global environment at stake, we must do nothing short of taking bold action. To that end, I am proud that last week the Vermont state legislature began 3 weeks of hearings on global warming. Like Americans across the country, they want action to fight global warming and they wish their Federal Government would step up and provide leadership commensurate with the magnitude of the threat. Well, Mr President this bill answers those pleas for leadership.

Grassroots support for action on global warming is clear. Over 300 mayors have committed their cities to meeting the standards described in the Kyoto Protocol. In fact, with over 54 million citizens represented, the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement provides clear evidence that everyday citizens--unlike some large corporations who have continually misrepresented the science of global warming--want to see movement on this issue. Additionally, a group of northeast States, including Maine, Connecticut, Delaware, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, and Vermont, have already implemented a regional effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other northeastern States, such as Maryland and Massachusetts, are likely to join this group soon. And, we all know that the State of California has recognized the need to act on global warming and is moving forward with a tremendous program.

Despite the increasing calls for action, for years, the Bush administration has turned a deaf ear as the scientific community warned us of the problem of global warming and the disastrous impact it will have on our planet. Sadly, many of these predictions are now becoming a reality.

Global concentrations of greenhouse gases are incredibly high. In fact, the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases has risen to 378 parts per million--a level unseen during anytime over the past 400,000 years. Additionally, on a global scale, 8 of the 10 years between 1996 and the end of 2005 are among the warmest 10 years on record and experts at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have just logged 2006 as the hottest year on record for the U.S. Also, the National Center for Atmospheric Research suggests that the majority of the ice caps of the Arctic Ocean will melt by the summer of 2040--decades earlier than previously expected. And, the situation has become so dramatic that the Department of the Interior recently suggested listing polar bears on the endangered species list because their habitat is quite literally disappearing. We are also told to expect changes in agriculture and water systems, new threats to our health, and more extreme weather patterns including more intense hurricanes. All of this is due to global warming caused by the carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that are released into our atmosphere when we burn fossil fuels.

The good news is that we know how to stop continued global warming-- we simply need the political will to make it happen. The time is now for bold action that will move our country away from fossil fuels such as coal, gas, and oil towards efficient, sustainable energy sources like wind, solar, bio-mass and hydrogen. The bill I introduce today recognizes the urgency of our circumstances and sets targets for reduction of U.S. emissions to help stabilize global atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases below 450 parts per million, a critical level as recognized by leading climate scientists. More specifically, this legislation calls for an 80 percent decrease-- compared to 1990 levels--in global warming pollutants by 2050 by enacting a combination of mandatory reduction targets and incentives that will help develop clean alternative energies.

The concept is simple. By putting our minds to it, we can usher in a new era of nonpolluting, renewable energy sources. And, what makes this proposal even more exciting is its potential to reshape our economy and make the United States a leader in clean and efficient energy technologies--creating millions of good paying jobs in the process.

In fact, it is a lack of bold vision that will financially cost us. In October of 2006, Sir Nicholas Stern, a former chief economist of the World Bank, turned the old economic arguments against taking action on climate change on their head. In a report to the British government, he writes that bold action to combat the threat of global warming will in fact save industrial nations money and that inaction could cost between 5 to 20 percent of global gross domestic product. Speaking to the issue in no uncertain terms, the report states, ``If no action is taken we will be faced with the kind of downturn that has not been seen since the great depression and the two world wars.''

To be quite frank, the time for talk is over. It is time for action and introduction of this bill signals my commitment to pushing for such action.

While I ask unanimous consent that Senator Jeffords' full statement from last year on this important bill be included following my remarks, I want to read two excerpts from those remarks:

Global warming is real and it is already happening. Its

effects are being felt across the globe and the longer we

delay, the more severe these effects will be.

He went on to say,

In my final year in the Senate, I have often asked myself,

``What lasting actions can I take to make the world a better

place?'' I hope that by proposing real action on climate

change, and passing the torch to a new generation of those

committed to protecting the environment, that I can help make

a difference for us all.

I couldn't be more honored to carry on Senator Jeffords' vision on behalf of Vermonters and all Americans.

In closing, a country that represents only 6 percent of the world's population but produces 25 percent of its

greenhouse gas emissions, the United States has a moral obligation to lead the way toward reducing these emissions. For the sake of our children and grandchildren, we must meet that obligation. This legislation will put us on the right path to do so.

I ask unanimous consent that the material be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, a fiscal crisis looms on the horizon. As the Nation's demographic tide begins to shift, a fiscal tidal wave threatens to overwhelm our economy if we do not act now. Our irresponsible fiscal policies have created a grave situation that more and more people--Republicans and Democrats--are coming to recognize. We can no longer sit back and hope things will work themselves out. A potential national disaster threatens to devastate our way of life, and we have a moral responsibility to do something about it.

In the simplest of terms, the Federal Government continues to spend more than it brings in. But, running the credit card for today's needs and leaving the bill for future generations should not be the policy of this Congress.

An historical perspective helps to highlight the gravity of our current situation.

The Fiscal Year 2006 budget deficit was $248 billion--the seventh largest deficit in our Nation's history. However, if we don't include the money we're borrowing from the Social Security Trust Fund, the Fiscal Year 2006 budget deficit was $434 billion.

I arrived in Washington in 1999, and in the 8 short years since, our national debt has increased by over 50 percent from $5.6 trillion to a staggering $8.6 trillion. It represents 67 percent of the GDP--the worst number in 50 years. This means that each man, woman, and child in the United States owes $29,000 of the Federal Government's debt.

And yet, these numbers pale in comparison with the budget problems looming in our future as the Baby Boom generation begins to retire less than a year from now, on January 1, 2008. Our long-term fiscal imbalance is $50 trillion. That's hard to even grasp, but it translates into $440,000 of future government debt for every American household-- up from a mere $175,000 per household just 6 years ago.

If we do not sharply curb entitlement spending, the continual growth of these programs--especially in healthcare--will crowd out all our other spending obligations and collide with historic, long-term level of taxes. To put it in perspective, balancing the budget without reforming entitlement programs will require raising taxes to European levels. And, that would cripple our ingenuity and economy.

So, what must be done?

Congress must view our tax code, entitlement programs, and budget process as the three components--or pillars--of the nation's fiscal foundation, and not as separate entities. Each is intricately linked to the other two pillars. We must reform all three areas to raise the necessary revenue to ensure effective and responsible behavior by Congress and federal agencies, to keep our obligations to future generations, and to keep our nation strong.

First, we need fundamental tax reform to help make the tax code simple, fair, transparent, and economically efficient. According to the President's tax panel and the Mack-Breaux report, only 13 percent of taxpayers file without the help of either a tax preparer or computer software program--a function of the complexity of the system. Since enacting the Tax Reform Act of 1986--legislation intended to simplify the filing process for taxpayers--15,000 additions have been made to the Internal Revenue Code.

We cannot consider tax reform, however, without reforming our growing entitlement programs. Our already massive debt will spike yet higher as entitlements such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid witness a surge of beneficiaries in the form of retiring Baby Boomers. This mounting debt will soon become a burden our children cannot bear, dragging down our standard of living and our standing in the world.

Finally, we must restore the third pillar of our fiscal foundation-- the budget process. Together we can streamline the system to help lock in long term tax and entitlement reforms. In the past, every major deficit reduction package has included a series of budget process reforms and enforcement mechanisms designed to prevent Congress from undoing tough choices in future years. By transforming the budget process, we can fight back against the all-too-common practice of gaming the system.

While some of our colleagues claim we need tax reform, others claim we need entitlement reform. The bill I am introducing today, however, is the only bill that does it all--because you can't reform one without the other, or it's doomed to fail.

The Securing America's Future Economy Commission Act establishes a national, bipartisan commission to examine these broken systems and to present solutions to place the nation on a fiscally sustainable course and ensure the solvency of entitlement programs for future generations.

The Commission will be comprised of 16 voting members--an equal number of members from each party, with some seats reserved for sitting members of Congress. The Treasury Secretary and the OMB Director will be members, and the other 14 will be appointed by congressional leaders.

The Commission will hold town hall meetings throughout the country to determine the scope of the problem and consider possible policy options. The Commission will present a report--and, if a three-fourths majority of the Commission agrees, they will present actual legislation to Congress.

The administration and Congress will each have 90 days to review the proposal and develop an alternative package of reforms if they believe it's necessary. The most important point is that this legislation uses a fast-track procedure to guarantee a vote in Congress on the Commission's legislation and the congressional and presidential alternatives.

Outside groups across the political spectrum have shown support for our efforts, as have business executives--who view our efforts as an economic necessity--and religious leaders--who view our efforts as a moral necessity. And, when you look at the numbers, it is clear why. We have a moral obligation to improve the fiscal health of our Nation. Otherwise, our children and grandchildren are going to celebrate America's past and the good old days, rather than the future and the good new days.

Restoring our Nation's fiscal health will require hard, bipartisan work and tough decisions. That work, however, must begin immediately. We cannot afford to put it off any longer.

Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce the Servitude and Emancipation Archival Research Clearing House, SEARCH, Act of 2007, a bill that will establish a national database consisting of historic records of servitude and emancipation in the United States to assist African Americans in researching their genealogy. Additionally, Congressman Elijah Cummings is reintroducing a companion to this bill on the House side because we both believe in its importance.

It is a very human instinct for people to want to understand who they are from the lenses of who are their ancestors and where are they from. This is the very reason I stand before you today to reintroduce this piece of very important legislation. Unfortunately, African Americans who attempt to trace their genealogy encounter huge hurdles in reclaiming the usual documentary history that allows most Americans to piece together their heritage. W.E.B. Dubois once said that, ``There is in this world no such force as the force of a person determined to rise, for the human soul cannot be permanently chained.'' The Servitude and Emancipation Archival Research ClearingHouse, SEARCH, Act of 2007 gives African Americans the tools they need to rise above the unique challenges and hardships they face in order to trace their genealogy. The SEARCH Act establishes a national database within the National Archives and Records Administration, NARA, housing various documents that would assist those in search of a history that, because of slavery, is almost impossible to find in the most ordinary registers and census records.

Traditionally, someone researching their genealogy would try looking up wills and land deeds; however, enslaved African Americans were prohibited from owning property. In fact, African Americans, must frequently rely on the records of slave owners--most of which are in private hands--in hope that they had kept records containing birth and death information. Even if records do exist, many African Americans in the past did not have formal last names, thus compounding the difficulty of tracing their lives. The omission of surnames also precludes use of the most popular and major source of genealogical research, the United States Census. Furthermore, letters, diaries, and other first-person records used by most genealogical researchers are scarcely available for slaves, owing to the fact that they could not legally learn to read or write.

Even after the Emancipation Proclamation was given in 1865, we would think that African Americans could begin using traditional genealogical records like voter registrations and school records. However, African Americans did not immediately begin to participate in many of the privileges of citizenship, including voting and attending school. Discrimination meant that African Americans were barred from sitting on juries or owning businesses. Segregation meant segregated neighborhoods, schools, churches, clubs, and fraternal organizations, and thus segregated societies maintained segregated records. For example, some telephone directories in South Carolina did not include African Americans in the regular alphabetical listing, but rather at the end of the book. An African American must maneuver these distinctive nuances in order to conduct proper genealogical research. In my own State of Louisiana, descendants of the 9th Cavalry Regiment and 25th Infantry Regiment, known as the Buffalo Soldiers, would have to know to look in the index of United States Colored Troops since there is no mention of them in the index of State Military Regiments.

Abraham Lincoln said, ``a man who cares nothing about his past can care little about his future.'' By providing $5 million for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission to establish and maintain a national database, the SEARCH Act has the potential to significantly reduce the time and painstaking efforts of those African Americans who truly care about their American past to contribute to the American future. This bill also seeks to authorize $5 million for States, colleges, and universities to preserve, catalogue, and index records locally.

In a democracy, records matter. The mission of NARA is to ensure that anyone can have access to the records that matter to them. The SEARCH Act of 2007 seeks to fulfill that mission by helping African Americans navigate genealogical research sources and negotiate the unique challenges that confront them in this process. No longer should any American have to wait to learn information, which in itself can offer such freedom.

I don't believe there is a more appropriate time than now to pass this piece of legislation, on the day before we honor the legacy of a man who spent his life as an advocate of freedom, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Dr. King once said, ``Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.'' Mr. President, this piece of legislation does matter and I ask my colleagues to join me in passing the SEARCH Act of 2007.