Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to raising awareness and enhancing the state of cyber security in the United States, and supporting the goals and ideals of the sixth annual National Cyber Security Awareness Month.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Colorado for yielding time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule before us today. The underlying legislation is being brought to

the floor under yet another structured rule that does not allow for many of the amendments my colleagues on both sides of the aisle presented during the Rules Committee hearing. This is especially wrong when debating one of the important issues of our time, our Nation's energy policy. By choosing to operate in this way, the majority has cut off the minority and their own colleagues from having any input in the legislative process.

My assumption is that, along with me, all other Members want to see more solar power used in this country; but the Democrats in charge are limiting what ideas can be debated on the floor and what constituents can be adequately represented in the House.

Our constituents in both Republican and Democrat districts are struggling to make ends meet, are facing unemployment, and yet are simultaneously being shut out of participating in debate over how their hard-earned taxpayer dollars are being spent by the Federal Government.

Why is the majority blocking debate on such important legislation? Are they afraid of debate? Are they protecting their Members from tough votes? Are they afraid of the democratic process?

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

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my distinguished colleague from Tennessee, Mr. Duncan.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I need to point out to the gentleman from Massachusetts that the manager's amendment incorporated 10 majority amendments. The only amendments that came in from the Republicans were put in in the names of the majority. There was only one Republican amendment made in order for today under the rule.

I would like now to recognize for 3 minutes my colleague from Nebraska, Mr. Smith.

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

Mr. Speaker, this bill deserves the emperor's new clothes award. We all, again, want to see improved and increased use of solar energy in our country, but this rule and this bill are not going to do it.

The bill before us authorizes $2.25 billion in borrowed money for the creation of a new committee which would devise a solar technology road map or plan. This wasteful spending does not reflect the hard economic times our country and our constituents are experiencing right now and, instead, is spending borrowed money that we do not have.

Whenever I am home in North Carolina, which is every weekend, I hear from numerous constituents their concerns that the Federal Government in Washington is borrowing and spending too much. The American people know that in these tough economic times that they should save, not spend money. However, the Federal Government does not reflect the common sense I see throughout my district. Instead, the Democrats in charge here continue to borrow more and spend more, increasing our Federal deficit on the backs of our children and grandchildren.

The money that Speaker Pelosi and the Obama administration want to authorize today is all borrowed money. We cannot say that often enough. We do not have this money. Our constituents do not have this money and the Federal Government does not have this money. The Democrats in charge have made the irresponsible decision to borrow it in order to spend it at their whim.

Mr. Speaker, the U.S. national debt is currently $11.5 trillion. With over 300 million people in the United States today, each citizen's share of this debt right now is $38.8 thousand. This bill will increase the deficit even more by borrowing and spending money we don't have. We can no longer blame the deficit and economic difficulties today on the previous administration.

Those in charge have shown they don't care about the deficit by continuing to dig America into a deeper and deeper hole with more reckless spending. This borrowed money is all being spent by Speaker Pelosi and the Obama administration. As a result, the unemployment rate continues to rise and the deficit continues to rise also.

Since the Democrats took control of Congress on January 4, 2007, the national debt has increased by $3.282 trillion. Since President Obama was inaugurated just months ago in January, the national debt has increased by $1.325 trillion. The Department of the Treasury has reported that under the Democrats' control, 2009 is the worst fiscal year in this Nation's history. The results get more disastrous with each passing day.

Mr. Speaker, the debt limit has been raised at least three times since 2008. A debt limit increase was included in H.R. 3221, the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. H.R. 1424, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 raised the debt limit again.

The Democrats in charge raised the debt limit yet again less than a year later with passage of H.R. 1, the, quote, stimulus, in February of this year. That bill raised the debt limit to $12.104 trillion, where it now stands. As if that weren't enough, the fiscal year

2010 budget resolution adopted on April 29, 2009, triggered the automatic passage of a separate measure, House Joint Resolution 45, to raise the debt limit to $13.029 trillion, which was then sent to the Senate.

We will soon be asked to raise the debt limit again just as soon as the majority can find a way to do it and hide it in some other bill so that the American people hopefully are fooled by what they are doing. They are not going to be fooled because they are paying attention to what's going on here in the Congress.

I have opposed all these efforts to raise the debt limit. According to an analysis by The Heritage Foundation, the White House projects $10.6 trillion in new deficits over the next decade. This is nearly $80,000 per household in new borrowing. It's beyond time to stop digging.

The new budget estimates, including an estimated total national debt of $24.5 trillion in 2019 under President Obama's budget, are alarming and unsustainable. The result will be the highest level of spending and debt in American history. This is an irresponsible lack of fiscal restraint carried on the backs of our children and grandchildren. My constituents at home and Americans across the Nation are not operating their family budgets as recklessly as this Congress is spending their taxpayer dollars.

On top of all this, the President and Congress' shameless proposals to create a $1 trillion health care entitlement are careless and unaffordable. We should be focusing on capping Federal spending, restraining entitlements, and eliminating wasteful programs. When will the Democrats learn that out-of-control spending will not solve our Nation's problems?

Last week, a group of us had the great opportunity to hear Mr. John Allison, who is chairman of the board of Branch Banking and Trust Company in North Carolina, one of the most successful banks in the United States. He told us then that we are on an unsustainable course in terms of accruing debt.

He said if we do not stop this almost immediately, we have fewer than 25 years left as a great Nation, that within 25 years we will become a Third World country similar to other Third World countries, particularly in South America. We cannot sustain this. We owe our children and grandchildren a better future. We need alternatives.

But what the Democrats in charge are doing is shutting off our opportunity to use alternative sources of energy that we have available to us in this country. We have plenty of oil, plenty of gas, plenty of coal. We could be using all of those sources of energy, but they are shutting us out. We should be utilizing those and not doing what our colleague from California showed, and that is wasting money on setting up committees to devise road maps to bridges to nowhere, when we could be developing the resources that we have, allowing the private sector to do it, and not having government involvement.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, while solar energy is an important resource and worthy of support, there are many flaws in this legislation and in the rule. This is not the right policy to advance our Nation's energy needs.

As usual, the Democrats' approach to another problem is to take money from hardworking citizens to use for their pet projects and their supporters. This approach fails to incorporate creative solutions that do not rely on ever increasing the size of the Federal Government.

According to the Science and Technology Committee, solar energy has been on the forefront for over 30 years, and yet it still makes up only 1 percent of the 7 percent of renewable energy consumed in the United States. Because there is no silver bullet, our Nation's energy policy must encompass many energy alternative solutions.

Mr. Speaker, if the Democrats in charge were serious about achieving energy independence and freeing our Nation from the grip of foreign oil, they would bring legislation to the floor that invests in several energy initiatives, not just one.

Republicans have alternatives. We have alternatives to everything that they have been presenting. We've introduced legislation that would encompass a multitude of energy initiatives, including solar technology. H.R. 2846, the American Energy Act, of which I'm a cosponsor, is a comprehensive energy solutions plan that would create jobs, make energy more affordable, diversify our energy sources, and help the U.S. become more energy independent.

The American Energy Act would increase both the supply of American- made energy in environmentally sound ways and achieve the goal of energy independence for our Nation. Instead of investing billions in taxpayer dollars we don't have for one energy resource, the American Energy Act would establish a renewable energy trust fund using revenues generated by exploration in the deep ocean and on the

Arctic coastal plain. It would permanently extend the tax credit for alternative energy production, including wind, solar and hydrogen; and it would eliminate barriers to the expansion of emission-free nuclear power production. The comprehensive strategy is budget neutral, without tax increases, and would make independence achievable without wasting billions of our constituents' dollars.

But instead of taking real action, this bill places restrictions on solar technology research and development by requiring that the Secretary of Energy allocate at least 75 percent of funding to those solar R&D projects directed under the committee's road map. This leaves little flexibility for innovations that may be feasible and yet were not included in the road map.

When Speaker Pelosi took office, she promised the Nation that this Congress would be the most open and honest in history. This bill works against that objective. At least one-third of the road map committee created by this bill is made up of industry officials who are explicitly exempted from the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which is intended to provide an open and transparent process. The Democrats in charge could have ensured the road map committee was open and transparent, but curiously they chose not to.

When it comes to solar technology research and development, we must have the collaboration of the Department of Energy, universities and industries. However, this bill would create a committee, half of which could be industry, telling DOE where to direct taxpayer money into research and development that could benefit their companies while not having to answer to anyone or defend their recommendations. This is not a responsible policy when billions of taxpayer dollars are on the line.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 900, of which I'm a cosponsor, would liberate energy companies from being suffocated by extreme environmental litigation and allow them to move forward and get approval to implement energy products.

Mr. Speaker, this rule is wrong. This bill is a bad bill.

Since 2005, more than 200 applications have been submitted to the Bureau of Land Management for permission to build solar power projects on federally controlled land. To date, the Bureau of Land Management hasn't approved a single one of them. Mr. Rohrabacher has introduced H.R. 964, the Emergency Solar Power Permit Act, of which I am a cosponsor, to exempt solar energy projects from costly and prolonged environmental impact statement requirements. Enacting this legislation would do more to expedite solar energy than the underlying bill.

Even though the public has repeatedly demanded to take advantage of the resources we have here at home, attempts to develop these resources are consistently and adamantly opposed by radical environmentalists who claim to be in favor of domestic development of renewable energy. The American people are suffering the consequences.

The Democrats' radical environmentalist friends and campaign donors continue to block domestic energy development by imposing excessive environmental litigation on energy companies. This excessive litigation prevents our country from moving forward to implement policies that will develop renewable technology and free us from the grip of foreign oil.

H.R. 900, of which I am a cosponsor, would liberate energy companies from being suffocated by extreme environmental litigation and allow them to move forward and get approval to implement energy projects. However, the Democrats in charge will not allow this bill to come to the floor for debate because they have more allegiance towards their radical environmentalist friends than towards the American people.

Mr. Speaker, amendments to reduce the authorization, give the Secretary of DOE discretion as to how much funding should go to the Roadmap recommendations, and sunset the Roadmap Committee in 2015 were all voted down in the hearing on this legislation.

Amendments to protect small businesses, veteran-owned businesses, and fund this bill through unspent funds authorized under the ``stimulus'' earlier this year were blocked by the Democrats on the Rules Committee so we will not be debating them in order to improve this flawed legislation. Because of this, Mr. Speaker, I oppose this rule and urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, if I can inquire of the gentleman from Colorado if he is prepared to close.

Mr. Speaker, we have no additional speakers, and I will make my closing speech now.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so an amendment can be added to the rule. The amendment to the rule would provide for separate consideration of H. Res. 554, a resolution to require that legislation and conference reports be posted on the Internet for 72 hours prior to consideration by the House. It does not affect the bill made in order by the rule.

The amendment to the rule provides the House will debate the issue of reading the bill within 3 legislative days. It does not disrupt the schedule.

The bill currently has 164 cosponsors. The discharge petition has 182 names, including five Democrats. This bill has gained support of an overwhelming majority of Americans and is widely respected by government watchdogs.

The existing House rule, that committee reports be available for 3 days prior to floor consideration, has been repeatedly waived by Republicans and Democrats alike. This is not a partisan measure. As Members of Congress, we ought to agree that regardless of the legislation brought before us, we should always have the opportunity to read and understand the legislation before we vote.

The American public agrees with this commonsense position. A recent survey by Rasmussen Reports found that 83 percent of Americans say legislation should be posted online and available for everyone to read before Congress votes on it. The poll also found that this is not a partisan issue: 85 percent of Republicans, 76 percent of Democrats, and 92 percent of unaffiliated voters favor posting legislation online prior to its being voted on.

In the beginning of the year, Democrat Members of this Congress voted to spend almost $790 billion in taxpayer dollars on a stimulus package that most Members did not even read. All Republicans voted ``no.'' The 1,073-page document wasn't posted on the government's Web site until after 10 p.m. the day before the vote to pass it was taken.

Furthermore, before debate on the cap-and-tax bill offered last summer, the House was presented with a 300-plus-page amendment at 3 a.m. for debate the following morning and a vote

the following afternoon. This was unacceptable and further demonstrated the need to read the bill and the amendments.

Mr. Speaker, we are elected to Congress to represent our constituents. How are we supposed to determine what is right for our fellow Americans if we have to vote on something before we even have time to read it? We need to have this debate. If people oppose having the text of bills available to read, they should make their case. This amendment to the rule allows them to do just that.

I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so that we can have this debate and do the right thing for the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the amendment and extraneous material inserted into the Record prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and the rule and 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 846 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina, Dr. Foxx.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials in the Record.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 846 provides a structured rule for consideration of H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI and provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Science and Technology Committee. It provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Science and Technology Committee shall be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment and shall be considered as read.

The rule waives all points of order against the substitute except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI.

The rule makes in order only those amendments printed in the Rules Committee report. Such amendments may be offered only in the order printed in the report and shall be offered by the Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, and shall not be subject to demand for division of the question. All points of order against such amendments are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico, a member of the Committee on Science and Technology, Mr. Lujan.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Altmire).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Salazar).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York, a member of the Committee on Science and Technology, Mr. Tonko.

(Mr. TONKO asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, by creating a solar technology road map committee made up of experts representing a variety of perspectives from the private industry, the solar technology industry, from the national laboratories, one of which borders my district, the National Energies Laboratory in Golden, Colorado, from academia and from the relevant Federal, State, as well as local agencies, we can ensure that we have all the stakeholders on board with a forward- thinking strategic plan for using our Federal solar energy research, rolling out development and demonstration, and making sure that funds are spent effectively and efficiently.

The road map that this bill will create is a model that's tried and true. This bill's road map is modeled on the successful National Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors which has been instrumental in helping the semiconductor industry and semiconductor technology advance rapidly over the past two decades. The progress in the semiconductor industry has helped make the technology exponentially more cost competitive and has grown the industry to help establish America as the international leader in semiconductors, just as we have the opportunity to be the true international leader in solar technology.

Like solar technology, the semiconductor industry at one point in time also needed focus. It needed a road map to point it in the right direction, a road map to ensure that its investments were being used wisely and efficiently, allowing us to compete with other countries. This bill will do the same for the solar industry.

Mr. Speaker, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act has gained a wide variety of bipartisan support, support from institutions and organizations from many different perspectives on the energy issue.

I strongly urge passage of this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

I have no additional speakers.

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from North Carolina earlier alluded to her concern that, if we passed this bill and others, our economy will begin to resemble the Third World. She particularly cited, she said, the Third World, particularly South American countries. I would like to remind my colleague that South American countries, in particular Argentina and Brazil, have been on a tear of growth. They have had economic growth. Their currencies have gained value against the dollar. And I hope that our country can enjoy the same kinds of economic growth that in particular Brazil and Argentina have enjoyed this last year. And certainly the technology industry, in having a road map for our solar industry, can be an important part of that economic growth.

Mr. Speaker, this bill is a responsible and well thought out and proven approach to moving our Nation away from its addiction on fossil fuels and towards independence. This is a mission that will help us address some of the largest challenges we face, reducing our dangerous dependence on foreign oil and cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

Time and time again, it has been shown that solar energy is a tremendous win in terms of national security, lessening our reliance on foreign oil. Whether having emergency response centers powered individually during disasters or having additional solar supplying the grid during blackouts, we are learning that energy security means homegrown renewable energy.

What good does it do for us to be dependent on Europe or China for our energy in the future just as we are today on Saudi Arabia? I think not. We can change our future and take ownership of our future here today. The unfortunate truth of the matter is right now Europe and China are winning the technology wars to dominate our renewable energy future; and this will become worse with every day that we fail to act.

Today, Congress can take action to change our future and take ownership of our future for America. We need to realize that the technological gains of China and Europe are a good thing, but not if they are to the detriment of our own small businesses, our own investment, and our own jobs.

There is one factor that every place with a booming clean energy industry has in common. It's not just the sun, which we have in our country, it's not just the wind, which we have, it's not just the biomass, which we have in spades; but it is the policies, the policies that underlie creating a playing field that enables the growth of the solar technology industry.

You may think that California and Colorado are the number one and number three, respectively, renewable energy States in the country because they are sunny or windy. But, in fact, we in Colorado, and the State of California is number one, are in their place because they have the right policies, the right policies to attract investors, the right policies to grow clean energy jobs, friendly State leadership from the Governor to the State legislature, to counties. To prove this point, coming in at number two is actually the somewhat cloudy State of New Jersey, due to their State leadership of embracing a renewable energy economy.

In Colorado, this fact has been known for years. Our State and my hometown of Boulder know the benefits of policies that attract technological advancement, support small businesses and create jobs all because they promote investments in renewable energy.

In fact, today the American Solar Energy Society will unveil a new national report that shows the economic and employment boom that clean energy could provide if only we enact the right policies, which we can through the road map that we have contained in this bill. Policies like net metering, interconnection standards, Property Assessed Clean Energy Bonds and the expansion of distributed generation are the next steps of policies that will give our Nation the benefits that clean energy has given to places like Colorado.

That's why, Mr. Speaker, this bill has been officially endorsed by business groups across the board, like the National Association of Manufacturers, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Solar Energy Industries Association, and the National Semiconductor Association.

In passing the Solar Technology Roadmap Act, we are passing on confidence to investors that our support will be around for the long haul. It is predictable. We are saying to small clean energy businesses that you can hire more employees, and we are saying to researchers that without a doubt you will be inventing technologies that will make our country cleaner and will make our Nation stronger in the world.

Establishing a research road map and prioritizing Federal funding for solar research will help commercialize new solar technologies and make clean, renewable energy sources more affordable and accessible for all Americans. Solar technology offers tremendous opportunity for America, the potential to create tens of thousands of good, high-paying, clean energy jobs that we are currently losing to overseas companies as we build our energy independence future.

The U.S. has some of the best solar resources of any industrialized nation in the world, both intellectual as well as geophysical. Yet while America is currently a leader in solar technology development, other countries, like Spain, Germany and China, are devoting much more of a concerted effort and attention to deployment, putting the U.S. competitive position in jeopardy.

The Solar Technology Roadmap Act has diverse and bipartisan support.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to recognize Chairman Gordon of the Science and Technology Committee for his commitment to this important issue, and my friend from Arizona (Ms. Giffords) for her hard work championing this legislation to ensure that America retains and grows its position as a leader in solar technology and job creation for the future.

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

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

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and revise and extend my remarks.

On Wednesday, October 21, 2009, I was in Long Beach, California hosting Deputy Transportation Secretary John D. Porcari and Maritime Administrator David T. Matsuda at an important national transportation conference held in my district.

On Thursday, October 22, and Friday, October 23, I was in American Samoa and Samoa monitoring the ongoing relief and recovery efforts of FEMA and others currently underway in response to the devastating earthquake and tsunami that struck those islands on September 29. As the Member of Congress with the nation's largest concentration of Samoan Americans on the mainland and as a member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, undertaking this fact-finding mission was directly related to my representational, legislative, and committee responsibilities.

Because of these excused absences I was unable to return in time for rollcall votes 793 through 813.

Had I been present I would have voted as follows:

1. On rollcall No. 793, I would have voted ``aye.'' S. 1793. Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act of 2009.

2. On rollcall No. 794, I would have voted ``aye.'' H. Res. 811. Expressing support for designation of October 2009 as ``National Principals Month.''

On rollcall No. 795, I would have voted ``aye.'' H. Res. 837. Recognizing Kentucky Wesleyan College for their service as an institution of higher education for over 150 years.

On rollcall No. 796, I would have voted ``aye.'' H. Res. 660. Recognizing the distinguished history of the Laurinburg Normal Industrial Institute.

On rollcall No. 797, I would have voted ``aye.'' S. Con. Res. 43. Authorizing the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for the presentation of the Congressional Gold Medal to former Senator Edward Brooke.

On rollcall No. 798, I would have voted ``aye.'' Motion on Ordering the Previous Question on the Rule for H.R. 3585--Solar Technology Roadmap Act of 2010 (H. Res. 846).

On rollcall No. 799, I would have voted ``aye.'' H. Res. 846. Rule providing for consideration of H.R. 3585--Solar Technology Roadmap Act of 2010.

On rollcall No. 800, I would have voted ``aye.'' H. Res. 797. Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to raising awareness and enhancing the state of cyber security in the United States, and supporting the goals and ideals of the sixth annual National Cyber Security Awareness Month (Representative Clarke--Science and Technology).

On rollcall No. 801, I would have voted ``no.'' Broun (GA) amendment. Changes the number of years for which the Committee is authorized from five to three; reduces to $250,000,000 the amount authorized in each of the three years, from 2011 to 2013.

On rollcall No. 802, I would have voted ``aye.'' Kaptur (OH) amendment. Requires the Roadmap Committee to provide recommendations to strengthen the use of research and development strategies in making domestic industry more competitive and to assist in the commercialization of solar technologies.

On rollcall No. 803, I would have voted ``aye.'' Klein (FL) amendment. Includes research on solar energy storage technology as eligible for funding under the Secretary of Energy's research and development program.

On rollcall No. 804, I would have voted ``aye.'' Titus (NV)/Teague (NM)/Cohen (TN) amendment. Includes the development of solar technology products that are water efficient as a focus of the bill.

On rollcall No. 805, I would have voted ``aye.'' Heinrich (NM) amendment. Requires the Solar Technology Roadmap Committee to release a draft Roadmap to the public at least one month prior to publication in order to receive public input.

On rollcall No. 806, I would have voted ``aye.'' Himes (CT) amendment. Clarifies that solar thermal technologies and concentrating solar photovoltaic technologies will be included within the scope of the research and development program authorized by the bill.

On rollcall No. 807, I would have voted ``aye.'' Final Passage of H.R. 3585. Solar Technology Roadmap Act of 2010.

On rollcall No. 808, I would have voted ``aye.'' H. Res. 175. Condemning the Government of Iran for its state-sponsored persecution of its Baha'i minority and its continued violation of the International Covenants on Human Rights.

On rollcall No. 809, I would have voted ``aye.'' Motion on Ordering the Previous Question on the Rule for H.R. 3619--Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010 (H. Res. 853).

On rollcall No. 810, I would have voted ``aye.'' H. Res. 853. Rule providing for consideration of H.R. 3619--Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010.

On rollcall No. 811, I would have voted ``aye.'' H. Res. 836. Expressing support for Teen Read Week.

On rollcall No. 812, I would have voted ``aye.'' Kratovil (MD) amendment. Requires the Coast Guard to study the facility infrastructure requirements needed to fulfill the Coast Guard's missions and capabilities, and ensure that the department in which the Coast Guard is operating maintains the ability to utilize the latest technologies.

On rollcall No. 813, I would have voted ``aye.'' Final Passage of H.R. 3619. Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I thank very much the gentlelady for yielding.

I rise in opposition to this rule and in opposition to the underlying bill; and to explain why, I would like to walk through a little history and a little math.

Let's begin with history and two very important dates: 1978 and 1839. In 1978, The Wall Street Journal carried this headline: ``Solar Power Seen Meeting 20 Percent of Needs By 2000; Carter May Seek Outlay Boost.''

Well, oddly the same paper carried a headline in 2006 making the same promise, this time for all renewable fuels, only this time by 2025, but I digress.

Billions of dollars were poured into research and development for solar technology as a result of that, and an entire solar industry solely supported by NASA subsidies arose in order to grab those dollars. And what was the result of all of this plunder of taxpayers and rate payers? More than 30 years after that promise was made in 1978, solar power accounts for just one percent of electricity generation. That's not for lack of subsidies; it's because despite all of the billions of dollars of subsidies, the technology remains immensely inefficient and expensive.

And that brings me to the second year, 1839. This is not a new technology. Photovoltaic electricity was first discovered by French physicist Alexandre Edmond Becquerel in the year 1839. This technology has existed for 170 years, and in those 170 years of scientific discovery and progress and despite billions of dollars of subsidies to the solar industry, we have yet to discover a more expensive way of producing electricity.

When the State of California was squandering its wealth on subsidizing this industry a few years ago, I asked the California Energy Commission: what is the price range of all of the various forms of electricity generation that we can choose from?

Here is what they reported: the cheapest form of electricity generation is hydroelectric. It ranges from a quarter of a cent to 2.7 cents per kilowatt hour, so the mid-range average is around 1.5 cents. Then comes nuclear power, with a mid-range of around 1.7 cents. After that is coal at about 1.9 cents, then wind at 4.6 cents, and gas at 10.6 cents. Finally, we get to the most expensive way to produce electricity, solar, which is between a low of 13.5 cents and a high of 42.7 cents per kilowatt hour, with a mid-range of about 28.1 cents. But it gets worse.

In a day, a solid acre of state-of-the-art solar panels can produce 2.2 megawatt hours of electricity, assuming an average of 5 hours of peak sunlight--2.2 megawatt hours per day. Now compare that to the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant that produces 49,000 megawatt hours of electricity each day. In order to duplicate that single nuclear power plant, it would require 22,000 acres of solid solar panels--34 square miles of solid solar panels. By comparison, the Diablo Canyon power site sits on just 1 square mile.

So this technology, after 170 years and after countless billions of dollars of research and development, is roughly 17 times more expensive than nuclear power, and it consumes 32 times the land area of a comparable nuclear facility. But don't worry, say the proponents, we just need a few billion dollars more to become competitive. Well, I'm sorry, but we have heard that song before. I suppose hope springs eternal.

For decades, the Federal Government and gullible States like California have kept the solar industry afloat by pumping billions of dollars into subsidized

loans, by crediting consumers who buy solar panels and, of course, through research and development--$166 million last year and $175 million this year by the Department of Energy alone.

This is an industry that exists solely of the dole, by the dole and for the dole, and it is now clamoring for billions of dollars more. If this rule is passed and if the bill is taken up, they are going to get it.

If they get this rule and get this bill, they are going to get those billions of dollars more taken directly out of the shrinking bank accounts of American taxpayers. This is called the Solar Technology Roadmap Act. We have heard of the ``bridge to nowhere.'' This is the road map that's going to get us there.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 797) expressing the sense of Congress with respect to raising awareness and enhancing the state of cyber security in the United States, and supporting the goals and ideals of the sixth annual National Cyber Security Awareness Month.

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. Res. 797, the resolution now under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 797, a resolution to applaud the goals and activities of the National Cyber Security Awareness Month. The Science and Technology Committee has been a leader in Congress supporting the efforts to promote better security and cybersecurity, and I am pleased to support this resolution and to help raise awareness of this critical issue.

Each year, Americans become more and more dependent on technology for their daily lives. More than 200 million people in this country use the Internet for shopping, education, socializing, information gathering, banking and entertainment, and an increasing number of Internet users are children and seniors.

Unfortunately, with this growth in use, we have also seen a startling increase in cybersecurity. Bank accounts are now being hacked; children are

being bullied or harassed on social networking sites; and personal information is being stolen from relatives, retailers, universities, and even government agencies.

For example, earlier this year, computer systems at the FAA were hacked, increasing the risk of large-scale commercial air traffic systems disruption.

Improving cybersecurity will take the effort of all of the key stakeholders: Federal, State and local governments, academia, business and individuals.

We are all part of the user community and we each must do our part, from updating the Web browsers of our personal computers to improving the coordination of cybersecurity research investments across the public and private sectors. We need to change the way we think about cybersecurity and ensure it is built in from the beginning.

Cybersecurity is a challenge that transcends borders. There are 1.7 trillion Internet users worldwide, which means that we can only advance cybersecurity through increased international collaboration. That's why I join my colleagues in applauding the efforts of the National Cyber Security Alliance, a public-private partnership focused on improving cybersecurity for home users, small businesses, and education institutions.

I want to thank my friend from New York (Ms. Clarke) for introducing this resolution and urge my colleagues to support it.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the author of this resolution, the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Clarke), and congratulate her on an outstanding hearing last Friday on this issue.

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

In conclusion, I want to once again thank the gentlewoman from New York for bringing this important resolution to us. I think that this will help give our country a better awareness of the concerns we have about cybersecurity.

Also, as Dr. Ehlers notes, our Science and Technology Committee has spent quite a bit of time on this issue, being the first to have a review of the 60-day review. Hopefully, we are going to be seeing in the next very few days a significant bill coming out of our committee concerning the necessary research and technology aspect of moving forward with our research in the cybersecurity area.

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

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.