Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Boise Rescue Mission, BRM, in my great home state of Idaho. This year, under the guidance of Executive Director Rev. Bill Roscoe, the BRM celebrates 50 years of service to the Treasure Valley community by providing food, shelter, clothing, counseling, education and spiritual guidance for the homeless and others in need.

BRM began as a small facility, but has grown over the past five decades to include three facilities in Boise and Nampa. Today they serve between 600 and 800 meals a day to the hungry at three dining rooms, and provide almost 300 beds to the Treasure Valley's homeless.

In addition, BRM is committed to drug and alcohol counseling through the New Life Drug and Alcohol Addiction Recovery Program. The dedicated volunteers at BRM help participants stay sober and discover a new spiritual life. It is noteworthy that while BRM is a faith-based ministry, its spiritual outreach is non-coercive. It provides its services and programs to whoever needs them, whether or not the client has spiritual interest.

I commend the impact BRM is having on those in need in the Treasure Valley community. The sincere efforts and dedication of its volunteers is inspirational. Thank you, Rev. Roscoe, for your leadership and spiritual guidance. All Idahoans are in your debt.

Madam Chairman, child abuse is a horrendous evil. Such abuse is reported on an average of every 10 seconds in the United States. And three children die every day in our country as a result of abuse. Any abuse in residential treatment programs is an incredible travesty.

While fighting child abuse poses a tremendous challenge for us to overcome, this bill is not the answer. The manager's amendment makes great progress in improving the bill, yet there remain provisions that are simply unconscionable for those who respect the system of Federalism long established in our Nation. H.R. 5876 represents a dramatic expansion of the Federal oversight role in really an unprecedented area. Most States already have systems in place to check the abuse that this legislation would supposedly address. Yet this legislation would trump those systems. This bill provides a one-size- fits-all mandate for residential treatment facilities, inflexible to the needs of actual children and unresponsive to the local challenges faced by such youth treatment programs.

Residential treatment programs have had a great impact on youth in my district in Idaho. For instance, Cherry Gulch is a small, owner- operated treatment facility located on 220 acres of pristine land near Boise, Idaho. The ranch-style therapeutic boarding school is designed specifically for 10- to 14-year-old boys, and has made an incredible difference in the lives of the youth who have participated in those programs. Yet directors of these facilities have expressed grave concerns to me that their needs will not be met by H.R. 5876.

For instance, as one treatment program director pointed out, in a State like Idaho where usage of drugs like methamphetamine has exploded, giving every child the undefined right to so-called ``reasonable'' access to a telephone creates direct and unreasonable risks. Why allow youth the opportunity to contact drug dealers when the entire point of being put in such a facility is to overcome their addictions?

There is kind of political hubris to this approach. The attitude of this bill is that we here on Capitol Hill know better than people in our home States how to address the needs of abused children. I find that stunning. I would invite any of my colleagues to go back to their districts and talk with the people who day in and day out work to bring hope and healing to children victimized by abuse. I believe they will find it, as I have, quite humbling. We don't have all of the answers in Washington, D.C., and we certainly would be wrong to impose a top-down system of Federal management on States and localities.

Overall, I am certain that we can agree that it is important that children in residential treatment programs be protected. However, I do not believe that another Federal intrusion into the affairs of all 50 States is the answer.

In Federalist No. 8, James Madison warned of the dangers of creeping Federal powers over the States. In his words: ``Ambitious encroachments of the Federal Government on the authority of the State governments would be signals of great alarm.''

When the Father of the Constitution issues such a warning, we should listen closely. Even more importantly, the Constitution of the United States says in the 10th amendment: ``The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.''

In 1941, the New Deal Supreme Court, in Darby v. United States, commented that this amendment is mere ``truism.'' Many of us here in this body would challenge that assertion. The authority of the States and their right to govern their own affairs is not a trite and archaic remark but an essential aspect of our Federal system. We diminish it to the peril of our system of Federalism which has been vital to our freedom as a Nation.

H.R. 5876 is not a solution looking for a problem, but it is a solution that I will submit solves fewer problems than it will create.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Ryan Stewart of Boise, ID.

Ryan is representing Idaho as youth governor during the annual YMCA National Youth Governors' Conference here in Washington, DC.

I am proud of Ryan's commitment and involvement in this program. Ryan was elected youth governor after campaigning in Idaho's youth and government program. This is a hands-on program dedicated to educating high school students on how state government operates. Ryan participated in a Regional Convention giving speeches and ultimately being elected to his current position.

I am honored to take the opportunity to recognize Ryan. His involvement in the YMCA program is a great way for him to learn how our government functions. Ryan is an example to his peers and I wish him all the best for a successful year as youth governor in Idaho.

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on H.R. 5540, permanent authorization for the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network.

As my colleague pointed out, today's bill would permanently reauthorize these Federal funds and remove the $3 million annual cap.

When we held a hearing on this bill in committee, the administration testified that there have been some successes with this program, and consequently Federal funds are no longer necessary to subsidize this partnership. So I rise with serious concerns over the permanent authorization of this program.

In committee, I offered an amendment that would strike a compromise limiting this authorization to 5 years. Today's legislation, however, proposes to put the taxpayer, including taxpayers in Idaho, on the hook permanently funding this program, and that in spite of the administration's claim that no Federal funds are even needed.

This comes on the heels of the vote of this body we just took approving the largest tax increase in American history, a tax increase of some $683 billion, as well as action raising the national debt to an all-time record high of $10.5 trillion. This, together with skyrocketing fuel prices and increases in fuel cost, has the American taxpayer, the American family, and everyone across this country, including my great home State of Idaho, under a tremendous burden.

Idahoans are considering the reality that they may not have enough money to pay their bills, let alone enjoy the majestic beauty of Idaho's outdoors this summer. Notably, however, this is not a problem limited to weekend excursions or vacations. The price pinch is hitting folks who have a job, but wonder if they can afford the fuel to get to work, those people that have called my office to complain. In addition, schools across this country are cutting programs and moving to four-day school weeks to address rising fuel costs.

People being hit the hardest by these high gas prices don't even drive, they're our parents and our grandparents, those seniors who rely on services like Meals on Wheels to deliver the food they eat each day. In Idaho, it was reported on Tuesday that five volunteers had quit because they couldn't afford the gas they needed to complete their routes and deliver meals to seniors.

This is a moral issue, an issue which for many senior citizens and low-income, hardworking families affects their access to food as well as to education and even doctors. It's time for Congress to act on that moral obligation, to make provision so the needs of the poor and the elderly will be met. It's time for Congress to lift the restrictions on America's energy-rich public lands, to responsibly increase exploration for production of American crude, and to increase American supply and bring down prices of gas and diesel.

Increasing the supply of crude oil and ultimately lowering its price is the single most effective thing Congress can do to lower gas prices. Today, 73 percent of every dollar we pay for gasoline is the price of producing crude oil. Almost two-thirds of it comes from foreign countries, including OPEC nations and dictatorships like Hugo Chavez's Venezuela.

Congress could vote today to unlock huge American onshore oil and natural gas reserves on public lands in the United States. In a study just released by the Bureau of Land Management, while onshore public lands in the United States are estimated to contain 31 billion barrels of oil and 231 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, some 60 percent of these lands are completely closed to leasing because of the actions of Congress.

Once such example is the oil reserves in Alaska, where in 1980 President Jimmy Carter set aside 2,000 acres specifically for energy production. According to the U.S. Energy and Information Administration, the mean estimate of technically recoverable oil on those section 1002 lands is 10.4 billion barrels. That's more than twice the proven oil reserves in all of Texas and almost half of the total U.S. proven reserves of 21 billion barrels. The recoverable oil within these lands represents a possible 50 percent increase in total U.S. proven reserves.

Congress must act to lift the restrictions on America's energy-rich public lands and increase exploration and production of American crude oil and natural gas. We can do this in an environmentally friendly manner. But we have to act and we have to act now. Of that there can be no dispute.

With those pressing needs before us, why would Congress act on this bill to give a permanent authorization and increase the amount of money to go to the subject of this legislation when the administration has told us that no Federal funds are even needed? Mr. Speaker, we can and we must do better.

I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

In its current form I am.

Mr. Speaker, this motion is a straightforward one and one that I hope we can all support.

Because the underlying bill is a permanent authorization of appropriations for this regional program, it is suitable that the Secretary of the Interior should use some of these funds to help the residents of the Chesapeake Bay better understand exactly how their recreational opportunities, their livelihoods and even their everyday lives are affected by the shocking gas prices affecting the country, prices which have skyrocketed over 71 percent since the current majority was installed in the House of Representatives.

I have read several news reports that show exactly how high boat fuel prices have affected the watermen of the bay. They cannot afford to run their boats to catch seafood we all enjoy. In the meantime, the price of those delicious crabs is climbing almost as fast as gas prices just so these fishermen can make their costs.

While this program creates popular Chesapeake Bay watertrails, tour operators have shuttered their boats because they cannot afford to fill up their tanks. Families are forced to stay home rather than vacationing on the Chesapeake Bay shore to enjoy its historic sites, education programs and Chesapeake Bay gateway sites supported by the authorization in this bill. This is a shame because the area has much to offer.

I wish I could offer a motion to actually decrease these prices, but the majority won't allow a vote on a measure to open up secure, American supplies of oil and natural gas, or oil shale, on our public lands. In the meantime, we are occupying hours of our legislative day with this minor program.

Our constituents, including the millions who live near, use, and enjoy the Chesapeake Bay, deserve better.

Mr. Speaker, we all know that we're going to hear from the other side of this body that there's a problem with this motion being made ``promptly.'' As we also know, the majority controls the work of this committee and schedules the House. Just as they have scheduled this bill today, they can bring this bill back early next week. This motion is made promptly so that, in addition to the matters that are considered within this motion to recommit, that the committee can take up all of the matters and make sure that we have fully addressed all of these issues as they affect the people who live and work in the Chesapeake Bay area.

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

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate the University of Idaho for their re-designation as a National Center of Academic Excellence (CAE) in Information Assurance Education (IA).

The National Security Agency and Department of Homeland Security has bestowed this distinguished recognition on only ninety-three schools across 37 states and the District of Columbia.

In order to be considered a CAE high academic standards must be in place. A CAE is required to have a full-time faculty dedicated to teaching IA, academic courses focused on IA and students involved in IA research projects. CAE students are trained to play a critical role in protecting our national information infrastructure.

The University of Idaho will now be eligible to apply for scholarships and grants through both federal and Department of Defense Information Assurance Scholarship Programs.

Congratulations to the University of Idaho for this fine distinction and commitment to cultivating the minds of our future leaders.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of the national champions from Lewis Clark State College in Lewiston, Idaho.

Last week, the LCSC Warriors won the 52nd annual National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics championship World Series baseball game. It was LCSC's third straight win, and 16th since 1982, all under the leadership of Coach Ed Cheff. Lewis Clark State College can be proud of these men for an extraordinary win and the national recognition they are once again receiving. In fact, I was proud to recognize the fine athletes at LCSC by wearing their red, white, and blue uniform during the congressional baseball game last year.

Mr. Speaker, naturally I believe Idaho produces the best of everything. The best agriculture, the best companies, the best people, and, indeed, the best baseball players, originate in Idaho, and last week's win just proves the point. My congratulations to the Warriors, LCSC, and Lewiston, Idaho.

I thank the gentlewoman.

Today, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 138, supporting National Men's Health Week. Not only should we be recognizing this important health issue this week, but Congress should also be addressing other issues critical to the American people, especially rising fuel prices.

As Americans across this country pay an average of $3.98 per gallon, these prices hit families, and particularly school children. Just yesterday, the Calhoun Times reported in Georgia that, and I quote, ``High gas prices hit high school sports. With gas prices soaring to record heights, the cost of taking teams on the road has become a looming storm on the horizon of high school athletics that has led some to worry what the future may have in store. All across the country, people are dealing with the pinch of high gas prices. With high school teams' main mode of transportation still the average school bus, which runs on diesel, costs are even higher.''

This is unacceptable, Mr. Speaker. We need to act now to lower gas prices.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman.

I rise in support of H. Res. 923, recognizing the 150th anniversary of the great State of Minnesota. While I rise in support and recognition of this anniversary, I also rise to remind my colleagues that we must address rising fuel prices.

Some have blamed rising fuel prices on those who own and manage big oil companies. In a recent study, however, Robert Shapiro, Undersecretary of Commerce for Economic Affairs under President Bill Clinton, found that the vast majority of oil and natural gas company shares are owned broadly by middle-income Americans through mutual funds, pension funds and individual retirement accounts, while a mere 1.5 percent of the shares of public oil companies are owned by company executives. That means that when Congress levies additional taxes on oil companies, the American public will pay for that tax in one of two ways; either through their pension or mutual funds, or by paying a higher price at the pump.

Mr. Speaker, increasing taxes is not the answer to rising fuel prices.

I thank the gentlewoman.

I rise in support of H. Res. 1114, supporting the goals and ideals of the Arbor Day Foundation and National Arbor Day. I wholeheartedly support the planting as well as the management of healthy trees and forests. The Forest Service has estimated that a healthy and well managed forest could sequester much more of our national carbon emissions than our forests currently sequester, currently sequestering an estimated 10 percent of our national carbon emissions.

I rise in support of this resolution. I also rise to urge my colleagues to address other issues facing our Nation, especially rising fuel prices. Increasing the supply of crude oil and ultimately its price is the single most effective thing Congress can do to lower gas prices. Today, 73 percent of every dollar we pay for gasoline is the price of producing crude oil. And yet, according to a study just released by the Bureau of Land Management, while onshore public lands in the United States are estimated to contain 31 billion barrels of oil and 231 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, some 60 percent of these lands are completely closed to leasing. Congress must act to lift the restrictions on America's energy rich public lands and increase exploration for and production of American crude oil and natural gas, and do so in an environmentally friendly manner.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill to designate this Portland post office in the name of and memory of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

While I support this designation, I note with some disappointment that we are not also addressing rising fuel prices on this week's schedule. Dr. King spoke passionately about our Nation's moral obligation to make sure that the needs of the poor and the elderly are met.

American senior citizens and low-income households have been disproportionately affected by higher energy costs. In 2006, before the skyrocketing and record-breaking fuel price increases we are seeing today, low-income households in America spent nearly 20 percent of their income on energy-related expenditures.

This is a moral issue, an issue which, for many low-income families, senior citizens and hardworking families, affects their access to education, and even to their doctors. It's time for Congress to act on that moral obligation to take care of the poor and the elderly, and lift the restrictions on America's energy rich public lands to increase exploration for and production of American crude oil and natural gas, and do so in an environmentally friendly manner.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5477 designating this post office in the name of Chi Mui.

While I rise in support of this resolution, I again rise to urge my colleagues to address rising fuel prices. Chi Mui's efforts to improve his community are

akin to the efforts of America's charitable organizations that seek to meet the needs of Americans all across our lands. Today, as Americans across this country pay $3.98 per gallon at the pump, these prices hit nearly every facet of life, including those charities providing care for many Americans in need.

One Tennessee paper reported today on the effects these prices are having on charities, and it says, ``Nonprofit agencies and charities that rely on voluntary drivers to help carry out their work say soaring gas prices are forcing volunteers to scale back or even stop driving. This means there are fewer people to drive cancer patients to treatment and fewer people to deliver food to the needy.''

Congress has a moral obligation to address rising fuel prices by immediately lifting the restrictions on America's energy-rich public lands to increase exploration for and production of American crude oil and natural gas and to do so in an environmentally friendly manner.

Madam Speaker, ``if we open a quarrel between past and present,'' Winston Churchill reminded us, ``we shall find that we have lost the future.''

Mr. Speaker, I fear that Sir Winston's words are applicable to the House today. We are pondering questions about the imprudent decisions of our past, and not acting wisely in the present. And we are thus at risk of losing America's energy future.

For the 15th day in a row, the average price for a gallon of gas set a new all-time high at $3.83 a gallon. Many of my constituents in Idaho, and many Americans will spend more than $50 every time they fill up at the gas station--in fact, for those who drive some of the most popular vehicles sold in the United States, filling their tank will cost more than $98.

This should be no surprise. Today the United States imports a little less than 1/3 of our crude oil from OPEC nations and another roughly 1/ 3 from non-OPEC nations who gain the benefit of OPEC price increases from production restrictions and we produce a little more than 1/3 of from American sources. OPEC is essentially dictating the high prices we are paying at the pump.

Yet American families are being faced not only with record high fuel prices but also rising food prices with each passing day. In only two years, the price of a gallon of milk has risen by nearly 70 cents. The price of bread, in the same period, is up more than 15 percent. And on it goes.

When food staples and gas are both going up in price, the family is hit hard. In other words, it's not just family vacations that are

being cancelled. These high prices also affect the ability of Idahoans to afford to get to work, drive their kids to the doctor and buy some of the simple necessities of life.

The implications of rising fuel prices on education are also becoming apparent with media reports that some school districts are planning four-day school weeks in large part because of the rising cost of busing children to school. The costs of transporting school children will also affects field trips and other extra-curricular activities.

Similarly, American senior citizens and low income households have been disproportionately affected by higher energy costs. In 2006, before the skyrocketing and record breaking fuel price increases we are seeing today, low-income households in America spent nearly 20 percent of their income on energy-related expenditures.

This is a moral issue--an issue which for many low income families, senior citizens and hardworking families affects their access to education and even to their doctors, particularly in a rural state like Idaho.

Congress is and has been in control of the solution. To lower the price at the pump and to break our addiction to foreign oil, we must increase production of American energy, while in the short term conserving and encouraging innovation to increase renewable energy.

At her press briefing last Thursday, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) acknowledged one of the universal truths of supply and demand when she said ``certainly more supply lowers the price.'' I am relieved that the distinguished gentlewoman from California appreciates this elemental economic truth.

In recognizing the truth that supply lowers the price, Democrats followed Speaker Pelosi, supporting a bill to halt shipments of crude oil from being put into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. They estimated that the resulting increases in supply of a mere 70,000 barrels per day would decrease prices by 5 cents a gallon at the pump. Although recognizing this truth, my Democrat colleagues continue to oppose the production of American crude oil.

Today, 73 percent of every dollar we pay for gasoline at the pump is the price of producing crude oil. Increasing the supply of crude oil, and thereby reducing the price of crude oil, is the single most effective thing Congress can do to lower gas prices.

And yet while my colleagues across the aisle understand that increasing supply is necessary, they consistently have opposed increasing the supply of American-made energy through increased production of American crude oil.

I find this stunning in large part because our dependency on foreign oil is so unnecessary. As far back as 1980, the then-Democrat Congress--under then-President Jimmy Carter--set aside a specific parcel of land in Alaska for oil and gas development. In 1996 Congress voted to explore and produce crude oil from those lands, but president Clinton vetoed that bill. Since then, Congress has failed the American people in not pursuing the domestic exploration and production of oil. It's that simple.

Congress has continued to erect huge roadblocks to exploration and development of oil on federal lands and has prohibited deep water exploration and development of oil and natural gas resources.

If we are to remain prosperous, America needs energy--American energy from every source possible. This means that we must develop and produce oil and natural gas, but it also means we must be innovative-- innovative in conserving energy and innovative in producing alternative and renewable sources of energy.

Electricity is just as vital as gas. It is estimated that our demand for electricity will increase by 25 percent over the next 20 years or so.

For example, there is great potential for woody bio-mass as an alternative and renewable resource. This would allow us in Idaho to remove hazardous fuels from the forest and seek ways to use it to produce energy.

In the Northwest, whenever we talk about renewable and clean energy, we cannot forget traditional hydropower, which provides 60 percent of all power supply to the Northwest.

Hydropower is renewable and for America means no greenhouse gas emissions. Hydropower offsets more carbon emissions than all other renewable energy resources combined. It's a viable, clean and potent source of energy.

Similarly, nuclear power will be essential for our future. It is safe and clean and affordable. There are 104 reactors in the U.S. at present, and licenses for 30 more nuclear power plants are being sought by a variety of companies and groups. Nuclear power is environmentally- friendly and cost-efficient for producers and consumers alike.

In sum, we have substantial energy supplies available on the lands within our own nation.

Tragically, due to the policy changes encouraged by the majority party, Americans across this country have only continued to see higher and higher gas prices.

Congress must not, in some sad tribute to the cramped ideology of an extreme agenda, fail to allow the use of the resources we possess within our borders and within our technological and economic grasp.

America needs a sound energy policy that develops domestic energy from every source available, including crude oil, natural gas, clean coal, hydropower, nuclear power and every alternative source of energy.

To put it another way, we need all the energy we can get from all the sources we can afford to access. Period.

Madam Speaker, let's not lose our future because we dawdle in the present. Let us summon the courage and fortitude to act, and act now. As Winston Churchill, a man greatly honored by our country would, I believe, agree, the American people, and the future they hope for, deserve no less.

Madam Speaker, over 1,668,000 soldiers have been deployed in the service of our Nation in Afghanistan and Iraq since September 11. These veterans sacrificed every day for the well-being of our Nation. Whether they have seen active combat or not, all veterans share a common readiness to commit their all to the defense of the land they love. Their willingness to freely sacrifice their lives epitomizes what makes our country great. As a nation, we will always owe them a great debt.

Several months ago I attended a funeral at Arlington Cemetery. That day a 19-year-old soldier from Pennsylvania was laid to rest. He was in a Bradley fighting vehicle in Iraq when an insurgent threw a grenade down the turret.

It was reported that this soldier had time to get out of the vehicle before the grenade went off, and that is what he had been trained to do. Instead, he wrapped his body around the grenade as it went off, saving the lives of three other crew members.

In the Book of John 15:13 Jesus taught, ``Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.'' The young man laid to rest at Arlington that day lived an example of the love of Christ. He and countless other who had lived stories of bravery and heroism deserve our highest honor and praise. But so do all of our veterans.

That is why I was happy to recently see some developments back in my home State of Idaho that will greatly benefit the wounded warriors in my district. Through the hard work of many, including Karen White, the University of Idaho, located in Moscow, Idaho, recently launched a program known as Operation Education. The purpose of this program is to help veterans ``severely and permanently wounded'' as a result of their service to our Nation since September 11. Through the Operation Education Scholarship, the University of Idaho is able to offer financial support in areas from tuition and books to transportation and child care. They also offer internships and assist in job placement.

Education is one of the greatest commodities we can offer our Nation's veterans. The skills they have learned in the Armed Forces

inevitably benefit them as they go on to future learning and higher education. Operation Education and other programs like it offer veterans the opportunity to continue pursuing their dreams and benefiting themselves, their families, and our Nation.

Not only is Operation Education open to disabled veterans, it is also available for the spouses of those veterans. Spouses of our soldiers are sometimes overlooked when we talk about the sacrifices that are made for our Nation. Those who stay at home while their spouses serve in faraway lands can sometimes do no more than pray and hope, trusting the fate of their loved ones to a higher power.

I am familiar with the experience of a young couple split up less than five months after being married when this young man was called to go to Iraq to train canines for the next nine months. Not only is that young Marine separated from his brand new bride, he will miss the birth of their baby in six months. He and his wife moved just weeks before he was called to Iraq, and she is left at home in a new area faced with the prospect of delivering her first child on her own. Neither this proud soldier nor his brave wife are unique in their situation, and other young military families have faced more dire circumstances. However, their situation epitomizes the sacrifices that our military families make--both those who serve in uniform abroad and those who serve less visibly in the home.

I honor those whose service in defending our Nation has required their lives. I have learned that it is the calling of some in our Nation's military to not come home. However, for those who do come home, the least we can do to show our respect for their service is to provide them with the opportunities they deserve. I commend the University of Idaho for making this program available, and I look forward to future developments that will bless the lives of our Nation's veterans.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to address the subject of the R&D tax credit which lapsed on December 31 of last year.

One of this country's greatest strengths has been its ability to innovate, to create and develop new ideas. The lack of a competitive R&D tax credit here at home is driving American businesses to invest in R&D abroad.

In the last 5 years alone, over 100 global companies have established R&D centers in India due to the long-term benefits provided by that government. With benefits such as a 15-year phased income tax holiday, deductions for in-house R&D equal to 1\1/2\ times the expenses incurred, coupled with accelerated tax deductions on prior period expenses, it is easy to see why companies are choosing to invest in India over the U.S., especially now that we have allowed our R&D tax credit to expire.

The R&D tax credit should be renewed and made permanent as soon as possible, to create jobs in America and ensure we will always be on the cutting edge of innovation.

Madam Speaker, on Question of Consideration on the Rule to provide for consideration of Conference Report on H.R. 2419--Food and Energy Security Act of 2007 (Flake Earmark Point of Order), I was at an award ceremony in which the United States Navy honored the Observation Squadron SIXTY-SEVEN (VO-67) with a Presidential Unit Citation. Mr. Kerry Bignall, a constituent of mine and member of the VO-67, was among the honorees at the event. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''