Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise to honor the memory of Mrs. Corinne Louise Conte, wife of our former colleague, the late Congressman Silvio Conte, who died on April 28, 2009.

Corinne was born on January 24, 1922, in Pittsfield, Massachusetts, to Charles and Kathleen Clemente Duval. As a teenager, she was a champion swimmer, winning the New England Championship for Breast Stroke Swimming at age 13. Following graduation from Pittsfield High School and St. Luke's School of Nursing in Pittsfield, Corinne served as a nurse in the Navy during World War II where she met her future husband, the late Congressman Silvio O. Conte when he was in the Seabees and recovering from an illness.

Corinne and Silvio were married in Pittsfield on November 8, 1947. After Silvio was elected to the U.S. Congress in 1958, Corinne moved to Bethesda, Maryland, where she raised their four children. While in the Washington, D.C. area, she worked as a real estate agent and was an active partner in her husband's political campaigns. Corinne met every U.S. President from Dwight D. Eisenhower to George H.W. Bush, and many of the world's leaders from the 1950s through the early 1990s. She also danced with Lyndon B. Johnson at his Inaugural Ball and served on President George

H.W. Bush's special Committee on Mental Health in the late 1980s.

Corinne was an avid Red Sox fan and was very thankful that she lived to see the ``Curse of the Bambino'' broken. She was committed to her Catholic faith and was a daily communicant for years at Little Flower Roman Catholic Church in Bethesda, Maryland, as well as Notre Dame Roman Catholic Church and St. Joseph Roman Catholic Church, both in Pittsfield. In her younger years, she had a private pilot's license. But, most of all, Corinne loved to play cards on a daily basis while living with her daughter in Mill Valley. She enjoyed a last game with her children a few days before her death, which she won, decisively.

Corinne was a friendly and cheerful person who was loved by everyone who knew her. She had a remarkable and full life, and I extend my condolences to the family on her passing.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 111 recognizing the 61st anniversary of the founding of the State of Israel.

This resolution enjoys bipartisan support, because Americans from across the political spectrum agree that the State of Israel is a great friend of the United States, and we all celebrate the anniversary of its founding today.

As we mark this anniversary, it is fitting that we also note a new American tradition. May 1st of this year marked the beginning of the 4th annual Jewish American Heritage Month, during which we celebrate the many contributions that American Jews have made to the society in which we live and thrive. When the first Jewish settlers came to this land, they sought a place of promise where they could practice their faith in freedom and live in liberty.

The history of Jews in the United States includes the earliest days of the Republic, when in 1790, a member of the oldest synagogue still standing in the United States--the Touro Synagogue in Newport, Rhode Island--wrote to George Washington, expressing his support for Washington's administration and good wishes for the first President. President Washington sent a letter in response, which read in part:

. . . the Government of the United States . . . gives to

bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance . . . May

the children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in this land,

continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other

Inhabitants; while every one shall sit in safety under his

own vine and figtree, and there shall be none to make him

afraid. May the father of all mercies scatter light and not

darkness in our paths, and make us all in our several

vocations useful here, and in his own due time and way

everlastingly happy.

These many years later, I encourage all Americans to stop and think about the great gains in medicine, literature, journalism, law, entertainment, and fine arts that have been made due in no small part to the role of our Jewish friends and neighbors have played in American society.

I will also note that as a nation of immigrants, our culture has been enriched by the traditions that settlers from across the globe have been able to incorporate into their daily lives as Americans. In the Jewish culture, the phrase ``tikkum olam'' directs believers to live their lives to heal the world. There is no better guiding principle in these challenging times, and our shared American culture is stronger because of it.

On the occasion of Israel's 61st anniversary, and as we celebrate the contributions of Jewish Americans in our daily lives, I look forward to the future of our friend and ally, the State of Israel, and to the prospects for peace in the Middle East.

I will remain steadfast in my support of an independent Jewish state, and I am hopeful that we will soon reach the day when children will have to turn to the history books to learn that there ever was conflict in the Middle East.

President Obama has begun the vital work of reengaging the United States in the quest for peace in the Middle East by appointing George Mitchell as Special Envoy for Middle East Peace. As we commemorate the 61 historic years since the founding of the State of Israel, we must also look to the future, and I believe the future for Israel is bright.

I congratulate the State of Israel on its 61st anniversary, and I urge adoption of this Resolution.

Madam Speaker, I rise to commemorate the 94th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, and to call, once again, for the immediate passage of the Affirmation of the United States Record on the Armenian Genocide Resolution.

Between 1915 and 1923, a campaign conceived and executed by the Ottoman Empire forcibly deported nearly 2 million Armenians from their homes, resulting in the deaths of perhaps one and a half million innocents. While the target of this genocide was the Armenian people, it was indeed a crime against all of humanity. Today, I would like to ask this House to remember this great crime, and to commit ourselves once again to the absolute abolishment of genocide wherever it is committed.

The history surrounding this issue is clear. Genocide did occur, and ushered in what was to become possibly the most war-torn century of human history.

This House has had before it, for many years now, a resolution which properly affirms the United States record on the Armenian Genocide. I have been a strong supporter and cosponsor of this resolution every Congress, and I remain so today. It is long past time for this Congress to pass this resolution, which in the 111th Congress has been introduced as H. Res. 252.

The term ``genocide'' had not yet been coined in 1915, when the first Armenians were driven from their homes. The definition of this most profound crime against humanity came in 1944 from Raphael Lemkin, a Polish Jew who survived the Holocaust by fleeing to America after the fall of Warsaw to the Nazis. In the wake of World War Two, in which most of his family was lost in Hitler's genocide against the Jews, Lemkin led the international community to establish the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide. Lemkin's definitive example of genocide? The crimes against the Armenians.

April is Genocide Prevention Month, and it is only right that we have set aside a period of time every year to reflect upon the horrors of the crime of genocide and to rededicate ourselves to ridding the earth of this scourge. And even as we commemorate the Armenian Genocide, we must also recognize the other crimes being committed today, and redouble

our efforts to stop them. Genocide is occurring today in the scorched towns of Darfur, in western Sudan. The genocide in Darfur is not new, the crimes of the Sudanese government and its militia allies are well known to all of us here. As with the Armenian Genocide, there is no factual debate about what is happening in Darfur. It is genocide. It is a crime against humanity. And it must stop immediately.

While much of this debate has been repeated year after year, this year we find ourselves in a particularly hopeful moment in regards to this decades-old conflict about what happened to the Armenians in the early 20th century. Just yesterday, the governments of Armenia and Turkey announced that, after a year of intensive talks mediated by the government of Switzerland and encouraged by the Obama administration, they have ``agreed on a comprehensive framework for the normalization of their bilateral relations.'' This joint statement is an extremely important step for Armenia and Turkey, and I commend both countries and their political leadership for the courage they are showing today. The people of Armenia and Turkey have lived far too long with their bilateral relations in a state of suspended animation. It is time for these two proud countries to stand together, in acknowledgement of the difficulties of the past, with confidence that old wounds can be healed, and with a profound commitment to a better future.

Madam Speaker, I call upon this House once again to pass H. Res. 252, the Affirmation of the United States Record on the Armenian Genocide Resolution. I thank all of my colleagues for commemorating the 94th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide and joining together to reaffirm our commitment to end the crime of genocide wherever it is found. And on this spring day, at a time of rebirth and renewal, I commend Armenia and Turkey on the steps they are taking to fully normalize their bilateral relations, and I urge them to complete this process as soon as possible.

Madam Speaker, today, on Earth Day, I am re-introducing the Bottle Recycling Climate Protection Act of 2009, which would create a national beverage container recycling program. This national Bottle Bill would build on the success of existing state bottle laws and promote recycling by offering a 5 cent deposit on beverage containers, including plastic water bottles that have become more prevalent in recent years. Recycling these products saves energy and money, cuts global warming pollution, and reduces landfill waste.

Twenty-seven years ago, my state of Massachusetts became one of the first states to adopt a state bottle law in order to encourage the recycling of cans and bottles. Since its inception, Massachusetts' bottle law has been a tremendous success. In 2006, over 2 billion beverage containers were sold in Massachusetts and nearly 70 percent of them were recycled rather than littered or incinerated.

Recycling and reusing these bottles not only reduces the amount of trash that ends up in our landfills, it also dramatically reduces the amount of global warming pollution that ends up in our atmosphere. American consumers purchase nearly 600 million beverage bottles and cans, on average, every day. Roughly 385 million of them are landfilled, incinerated or littered. Nine of ten plastic water bottles end

up as garbage or litter where they take up to 1,000 years to biodegrade. A national bottle bill will help us turn this trend around.

A national bottle recycling program would have profound economic benefits from energy savings for American businesses. The energy use associated with manufacturing these containers from virgin materials is far greater than the cost of using recycled materials. In fact, making an aluminum can from recycled materials requires 95 percent less energy than to make it from scratch.

I am proud to introduce this important bill today on Earth Day. Passing this bill would send a clean energy message in a bottle to American consumers and businesses. A national Bottle Bill can help America quench its thirst for imported oil and will allow us to have carbon dioxide in our fizzy drinks, while cutting down on heat-trapping carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 180, I inadvertently voted ``aye'', but intended to vote ``no.''

Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mrs. Dahlkemper

Madam Speaker, I am introducing a resolution expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States seek membership in the International Renewable Energy Agency because our energy security, the health of our planet, and the strength of our economy have reached a critical juncture. With volatile energy prices, emissions of heat-trapping gases continuing to climb to dangerous levels, and the U.S. economy in turmoil, two things have become clear. First, a fundamental change is needed in the way we generate and use energy here at home. Secondly, the rest of the world must be also part of this new energy future. The resolution I am introducing today calls for the United States to seek membership in the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) to address both of these challenges.

On January 26, 2009, 75 countries signed the statute to establish IRENA, marking a promising step towards international collaboration and mitigating climate change. This collaboration was a good start, but the urgency of global warming and our dependence on fossil fuels require that we take the lead in the permanent international agency to drive the development and deployment of renewable energy in all countries, including ours. The United States still has a chance to be a founding member of the body if it signs on by April 30th of this year. As a founding member country, the United States would be eligible to nominate a Director General and bid to host the IRENA headquarters on American territory.

Despite the enormous strides renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies have made over the last several years, hurdles remain to major and rapid scale-up on the level needed to meet the world's need for energy while also addressing global warming. IRENA is the first international organization to focus solely on renewable energy and include a broad constituency of industrialized and developing countries. It will provide the institutional support needed to address the technological, financial, informational, and policy barriers that keep renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies from reaching their full potential.

Renewable energy has the potential to reduce global warming pollution while also creating millions of green jobs, reducing our dependence on foreign sources of energy, and spurring the technological development that will fuel the global economy over the coming century.

In 2007, new investment in clean energy technology worldwide increased 60 percent over 2006, but vast markets remain untapped and not included in the green economy. Over the next two decades, greenhouse gas emissions from developing countries are projected to grow at more than twice the rate of those in developed countries. Encouraging growth of renewable energy in developing countries reduces the extent and likelihood that these economies will follow a carbon- intensive, fossil energy development path. It also opens a valuable market for the clean energy companies that developed economies will rely on for growth over the coming century, a market that American businesses and American workers can benefit from. The International Renewable Energy Agency will have the independence, credibility, and expertise necessary to assist governments at the national, state, and local level implement renewable energy policies and projects.

Other international energy agencies were formed to address narrow problems. The International Energy Agency (IEA): oil security and fuel supply disruptions. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA): nuclear proliferation and safety. With the aid of institutional support, these energy resources became foundations of modern economies. An International Renewable Energy Agency is needed to support the unique problems facing renewable energy: marketplace failures, political inertia, and information gaps. Our membership in the organization will allow us to help shape the direction of this agency. To this end, IRENA will:

Support governments in drafting policies and programs for the promotion of renewable energy and energy efficiency measures.

Assist governments in conducting studies that analyze the potential of renewable energies and the appropriateness of different technologies.

Provide long-term projections and scenarios based on existing data and policy in order to identify opportunities as well as gaps, barriers, and failures in markets and policies.

Organize training programs, information campaigns, and courses for civil servants, scientists, businesses, and non-government organizations.

Supply curriculum for schools and universities on relevant renewable energy topics.

Work with financial institutions to support innovative financing mechanisms for renewable energy projects.

Develop international norms and quality standards.

Gather and disseminate data, statistics, and reports on renewable energy deployment, policy approaches, and technology development.

The status quo is not working for America or the planet. The environmental, energy, and economic problems we are facing are largely due to a failed energy policy. The International Renewable Energy Agency represents an opportunity for America to change its energy path and confront global warming while reestablishing its leadership role and reputation in the international community.

For millions of Americans, after 8 years of laissez-faire economics, they know it is

just a fancy word for ``left behind.'' Fixing the economy is not a spectator sport. That's what has been going on for 8 years. And that's what's going on with the Republicans here today.

This bill creates or saves 3.5 million jobs. It provides tax cuts for 95 percent of Americans. It spurs a green jobs revolution. It has health IT that will revolutionize medicine with privacy and security built in that I requested and the majority has placed in this bill. There's more money in this bill after 5 years of cutting the NIH budget, there's a dramatic increase in the NIH budget to find a cure for cancer, for heart disease, for Parkinson's and for Alzheimer's. This is a revolution in health care, in energy and in job creation.

This bill must be passed today and break with the 8 years of laissez- faire, which has hurt every single American family. Vote ``yes'' on this bill.

Today we're responding with determination and bold action to combat the most severe economic crisis our country has faced since the Great Depression.

For years, as hardworking American families struggled to make ends meet and the economy shed millions of jobs, Republicans told us not to worry--we are in the midst of a ``jobless recovery'', they said. But ``jobless recovery'' is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms, like jumbo shrimp or Salt Lake City nightlife--it just doesn't exist.

The failed ``laissez-faire'' approach of the past 8 years has now been discredited by rising unemployment, loss of confidence in our financial markets, and the economic hardships suffered by families across the country.

For millions of Americans, ``laissez-faire'' is just a fancy name for ``left behind.''

With this economic recovery package, we are taking the bold action that is needed by creating or saving 3-and-a-half million jobs, rebuilding America, making us more globally competitive and energy independent, and transforming our economy.

I say to my Republican friends: ``fixing the economy is not a spectator sport.''

While our country is facing enormous challenges, we also have a once- in-a-generation opportunity to create millions of new jobs, invest in vital priorities, and position our economy for future growth. Today we are seizing this historic opportunity and setting our country on a new direction.

This is about greenbacks and green energy.

This urgently-needed economic recovery package funds infrastructure projects that are ``shovel-ready'', while also supporting future- oriented projects that are ``circuit-ready'': broadband, electronic medical records, smart grid, advanced battery technologies, and other vital priorities.

The massive investments in weatherization, state energy efficiency grants, and federal building efficiency are some of the safest and smartest investments our country can make right now. They put money into the pockets of American workers and pay for themselves in the form of energy savings and lower energy prices. This energy efficiency ``double dividend'' is a proven, reliable phenomenon that our current weak economy must capitalize.

The bill provides $19 billion for a new health IT infrastructure to improve care, lower costs and reduce medical errors. I am pleased that the conference report includes patient privacy safeguards that I have long advocated, including a provision that I offered at the Energy and Commerce Committee markup to ensure that patients' medical records are made unreadable to unauthorized individuals.

This balanced, well-thought out package provides tax relief for 95 percent of Americans and targets investments in key areas to turn around the American economy. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

3.5 million jobs created or saved.

Tax cuts for 95 percent of Americans.

Green job revolution.

Health IT, with privacy.

NIH increase--cure Alzheimer's.

Mr. Speaker, today we're responding with determination and bold action to combat the most severe economic crisis our country has faced since the Great Depression.

For years, as hardworking American families struggled to make ends meet and the economy shed millions of jobs, Republicans told us not to worry--we are in the midst of a ``jobless recovery'', they said. But ``jobless recovery'' is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms, like jumbo shrimp or Salt Lake City nightlife--it just doesn't exist!

The failed ``laissez-faire'' approach of the past 8 years has now been discredited by rising unemployment, loss of confidence in our financial markets and the economic hardships suffered by families across the country.

For millions of Americans, ``laissez-faire'' is just a fancy name for ``left behind.''

With this economic recovery package, we are taking the bold action that is needed by creating or saving 3-and-a-half million jobs, rebuilding America, making us more globally competitive and energy independent, and transforming our economy.

While our country is facing enormous challenges, we also have a once- in-a-generation opportunity to create millions of new jobs, invest in vital priorities and position our economy for future growth. Today we are seizing this historic opportunity and setting our country on a new direction.

This urgently-needed economic recovery package funds infrastructure projects that are ``shovel-ready'', while also supporting future- oriented projects that are ``circuit-ready'': broadband, electronic medical records, smart grid, advanced battery technologies and other vital priorities.

The massive investments in weatherization, state energy efficiency grants, and federal building efficiency are some of the safest and smartest investments our country can make right now. They put money into the pockets of American workers and pay for themselves in the form of energy savings and lower energy prices. This energy efficiency ``double dividend'' is a proven, reliable phenomenon that our current weak economy must capitalize.

In addition, I am pleased that the conference report will provide $6 billion in new loan guarantees for renewable projects such as solar and wind and for upgrading our nation's transmission system to a smarter electricity grid. Section 1705 of the bill supports a program authorized in the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act that permits the Department of Energy to issue grants for developing electric power transmission systems, including upgrading and reconductoring projects. This provision would allow for the development of a smart transmission and distribution grid, which would include support for technologies such as underground superconductor transmission cables that can increase the efficiency of our grid and facilitate the delivery of renewable power from the heartland of our country to the hearts of our cities.

The bill provides $19 billion for a new health IT infrastructure to improve care, lower costs and reduce medical errors. I am pleased that the conference report includes patient privacy safeguards that I have long advocated, including a provision that I offered at the Energy and Commerce Committee markup to ensure that patients' medical records are made unreadable to unauthorized individuals.

This balanced, well-thought out package provides tax relief for 95% of Americans and targets investments in key areas to turn around the American economy. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the House Rules, I am submitting the Rules of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming as well as our list of Members for the 111th Congress.

Rules for the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global

Warming, U.S. House of Representatives, 111th Congress

Rule 1. General Provisions. The Rules of the House are the

rules of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and

Global Warming (hereinafter ``Committee'') so far as they are

applicable.

Rule 2. Time and Place of Meetings.

(a) Regular Meeting Days. The Committee shall meet on the

first Tuesday of each month at 10 a.m., for the consideration

of any pending business, if the House is in session on that

day. If the House is not in session on that day and the

Committee has not met during such month, the Committee shall

meet at the earliest practicable opportunity when the House

is again in session. The Chairman may, at his discretion,

cancel, delay, or defer any meeting required under this

section, after consultation with the Ranking Minority Member.

(b) Additional Meetings. The Chairman may call and convene,

as he considers necessary, additional meetings of the

Committee for the consideration of Committee business. The

Committee shall meet for such purposes pursuant to that call

of the Chairman.

(c) Vice Chairman; Presiding Member. The Chairman may

designate a member of the majority party to serve as Vice

Chairman of the Committee. The Vice Chairman shall preside at

any meeting or hearing during the temporary absence of the

Chairman. If the Chairman and Vice Chairman are not present

at any meeting or hearing, the most senior present member of

the majority party shall preside at the meeting or hearing.

(d) Open Meetings and Hearings. Each meeting and hearing of

the Committee for the transaction of business shall be open

to the public, including to radio, television and still

photography coverage, consistent with

the provisions of Rule XI of the Rules of the House.

Rule 3. Agenda. The agenda for each Committee meeting other

than a hearing, setting out the date, time, place, and all

items of business to be considered, shall be provided to each

member of the Committee at least 24 hours in advance of such

meeting.

Rule 4. Procedure.

(a) Hearings. The date, time, place, and subject matter of

any hearing of the Committee shall be announced at least one

week in advance of the commencement of such hearing, unless

the Chairman, with the concurrence of the Ranking Minority

Member, determines in accordance with clause 2(g)(3) of Rule

XI of the Rules of the House, that there is good cause to

begin the hearing sooner. In such cases, the Chairman shall

make the announcement at the earliest possible date.

(b) Meetings. The date, time, place, and subject matter of

any meeting (other than a hearing) scheduled on a Tuesday,

Wednesday, or Thursday when the House is scheduled to be in

session shall be announced at least 24 hours (exclusive of

Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays, except when the House

is in session on such days) in advance of the commencement of

such meeting.

(c) Motions. Pursuant to clause 1(a)(2) of rule XI of the

Rules of the House, privileged motions to recess from day to

day, or recess subject to the call of the Chair (within 24

hours), shall be decided without debate.

(d)(1) Requirements for Testimony. Each witness who is to

appear before the Committee shall file with the clerk of the

Committee, at least two working days in advance of his or her

appearance, sufficient copies, as determined by the Chairman,

of a written statement of his or her proposed testimony to

provide to members and staff of the Committee, the news

media, and the general public. Each witness shall, to the

greatest extent practicable, also provide a copy of such

written testimony in an electronic format prescribed by the

Chairman. Each witness shall limit his or her oral

presentation to a brief summary of the testimony. The

Chairman, or the presiding member, may waive the requirements

of this paragraph or any part thereof.

(2) Additional Requirements for Testimony. To the greatest

extent practicable, the written testimony of each witness

appearing in a non-governmental capacity shall include a

curriculum vitae and a disclosure of the amount and source

(by agency and program) of any federal grant (or sub grant

thereof) or contract (or subcontract thereof) received during

the current fiscal year or either of the two preceding fiscal

years by the witness or by an entity represented by the

witness.

(A) Questioning Witnesses. The right to question witnesses

before the Committee shall alternate between majority and

minority members. Each member shall be limited to 5 minutes

in the interrogation of witnesses until such time as each

member who so desires has had an opportunity to question

witnesses. No member shall be recognized for a second period

of 5 minutes to interrogate a witness until each member of

the Committee present has been recognized once for that

purpose. While the Committee is operating under the 5-minute

rule for the interrogation of witnesses, the Chairman shall

recognize, in order of appearance, members who were not

present when the meeting was called to order after all

members who were present when the meeting was called to order

have been recognized in the order of seniority on the

Committee.

(B) Questions for the Record. Subject to the Rules of the

House, each member may submit to the Chairman additional

questions for the record, to be answered by the witnesses who

have appeared. Each member shall provide a copy of the

questions in an electronic format to the clerk of the

Committee no later than ten business days following a

hearing. The Chairman shall transmit all questions received

from members of the Committee to the appropriate witness and

include the transmittal letter and the responses from the

witnesses in the hearing record.

(C) Opening Statements. (1) All written opening statements

at hearings conducted by the Committee shall be made part of

the permanent hearing record.

(2) The Chairman and Ranking Minority Member (or their

respective designees) are entitled to deliver a 5 minute

opening statement prior to the recognition of the first

witness for testimony. Opening statements by other members of

the Committee are subject to the discretion of the Chairman.

Rule 5. Waiver of Agenda, Notice, and Opening Statement

Requirements. Requirements of rules 3, 4(a)(1), 4(a)(2), and

4(d) may be waived for good cause by the Chairman, with the

concurrence of the Ranking Minority Member.

Rule 6. Quorum. Testimony may be taken and evidence

received at any hearing at which there are present not fewer

than two members of the Committee. A majority of the members

of the Committee shall constitute a quorum when otherwise

required by the Rules of the House. For the purposes of

taking any action other than those specified in the

preceding sentences, one third of the members of the

Committee shall constitute a quorum.

Rule 7. Journal. The proceedings of the Committee shall be

recorded in a journal which shall, among other things, show

those present at each meeting and hearing, and shall include

a record of the votes on any question on which a record vote

is demanded, a description of the motion, order, or other

proposition voted, and the name of each member voting for and

each member voting against such motion, order, or

proposition, and the names of those members voting present. A

copy of the journal shall be furnished to the Ranking

Minority Member and made available to the public in a timely

fashion.

Rule 8. Committee Professional and Clerical Staff.

(a) Committee staff members are subject to the provisions

of clause 9 of Rule X, as well as any written personnel

policies the Committee may from time to time adopt. The

Chairman shall determine the remuneration of legislative and

administrative employees of the Committee.

(b) The Chairman shall appoint, and may remove, the

legislative and administrative employees of the Committee not

assigned to the minority.

(c) Minority Professional Staff. Professional staff members

appointed pursuant to clause 9 of Rule X of the House of

Representatives, who are assigned to the Ranking Minority

Member, and not to the Chairman, shall be assigned to such

Committee business as the Ranking Minority Member considers

advisable.

(d) Additional Staff Appointments. In addition to the

professional staff appointed pursuant to clause 9 of Rule X

of the House of Representatives, the Chairman shall be

entitled to make such appointments to the clerical staff of

the Committee as may be provided within the budget approved

for such purposes by the Committee. Such appointees shall be

assigned to such business of the Committee as the Chairman

considers advisable.

Rule 9. Supervision, Duties of Staff.

(a) Committee staff members are subject to the provisions

of clause 9(b) of Rule X.

(b) Supervision of Majority Staff. The professional and

clerical staff of the Committee not assigned to the minority

shall be under the supervision and direction of the Chairman,

who shall establish and assign the duties and

responsibilities of such staff members and delegate such

authority as he determines appropriate.

(c) Supervision of Minority Staff. The professional and

clerical staff assigned to the minority shall be under the

supervision and direction of the Ranking Minority Member, who

shall establish and assign the duties and responsibilities of

such staff members and delegate such authority as he

determines appropriate.

Rule 10. Committee Expenditures. Copies of each monthly

report (prepared by the Chairman of the Committee on House

Administration and showing expenditures made during the

reporting period and cumulative for the year by the

Committee), anticipated expenditures for the projected

Committee program, and detailed information on travel, shall

be available to each member.

Rule 11. Broadcasting of Committee Hearings. Any meeting or

hearing that is open to the public may be covered in whole or

in part by radio or television or still photography, subject

to the requirements of clause 4 of Rule XI of the Rules of

the House. The coverage of any hearing or other proceeding of

the Committee by television, radio, or still photography

shall be under the direct supervision of the Chairman and may

be terminated in accordance with the Rules of the House.

Rule 12. Subpoenas. The Committee may authorize and issue a

subpoena under clause 2(m) of Rule XI of the House.

Rule 13. Travel of Members and Staff.

(a) Approval of Travel. Consistent with the primary expense

resolution and such additional expense resolutions as may

have been approved, travel to be reimbursed from funds set

aside for the Committee for any member or any staff member

shall be paid only upon the prior authorization of the

Chairman. Travel may be authorized by the Chairman for any

member and any staff member in connection with the attendance

of hearings conducted by the Committee or any subcommittee

thereof and meetings, conferences, and investigations which

involve activities or subject matter under the general

jurisdiction of the Committee. Before such authorization is

given there shall be submitted to the Chairman, in writing,

the following: (1) the purpose of the travel; (2) the dates

during which the travel is to be made and the date or dates

of the event for which the travel is being made; (3) the

location of the event for which the travel is to be made; and

(4) the names of members and staff seeking authorization.

(b) Approval of Travel by Minority Members and Staff. In

the case of travel by minority party members and minority

party professional staff for the purpose set out in paragraph

(a), the prior approval, not only of the Chairman but also of

the Ranking Minority Member, shall be required. Such prior

authorization shall be given by the Chairman only upon the

representation by the Ranking Minority Member, in writing,

setting forth those items enumerated in (1), (2), (3), and

(4) of paragraph (a).

Rule 14. Reports.

(a) Committee reports. Any report printed by the U.S.

Government Printing Office that purports to express the

views, findings, conclusions or recommendations of the Select

Committee must be approved, in a meeting, by a majority of

the members in attendance of the Select Committee. Members

shall have three days from the time of the approval to submit

supplemental, minority or additional views, which will be

included as part of the printed report.

(b) Other reports. Any report printed by the U.S.

Government Printing Office to be published as a Committee

print other than a document described in paragraph (a) of

this Rule: (A) shall include on its cover the following

statement: ``this document has been printed for informational

purposes only and does not represent either findings or

recommendations adopted by this Committee.''; and (B) shall

not be published following sine die adjournment of Congress,

unless approved by the Chairman of the Committee after

consultation with the Ranking Minority Member of the

Committee.

I thank the gentleman from Michigan very much.

I think that this is just an incredibly appropriate moment to be honoring Mr. Dingell, because he is the living link to the principles of fairness, justice, and advancing the public interest that animated the New Deal, and which remain so relevant today to the important issues which we are discussing here, not only on the floor of the House, but all across America: The lessons of why we regulate Wall Street, why we ensure that those who control the finances of all the families in our country have to be watched with an

eagle eye. Mr. Dingell, who ensured that our securities laws were rewritten to provide for protection against insider trading, curbing penny stock manipulation, increased civil penalties, the 1990 Market Reform Act. He is responsible for so many of the laws that are now going to be looked to, to ensure that we enforce our securities laws against those who have abused the public trust.

So while many people look at his work on the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Children's Health Insurance Act, North America's first international wildlife refuge, there are so many other areas that Mr. Dingell has been working on, including the financial regulatory area, and all of the telecommunications laws that have made it possible for us to have this revolution which now has the words Google and E-Bay and Amazon and YouTube part of our vocabulary.

But for me, the six words that will be remembered are those six words that are the most feared words that have ever been spoken in the history of the United States Congress, ``I'm just a poor Polish lawyer.'' Those words always preceded a dissection by Mr. Dingell in brilliant form of the arguments made by those making presentations to the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Invariably, this brilliant dissection of the flaws and the arguments of those who were testifying before our committee resulted in legislation that ultimately produced protections for the American people in areas across the entire spectrum of the lives of every single American. And this legendary legislator has left a legacy which will benefit families in our country for centuries to come, because like the New Deal principles that his father fought to put on the books, John Dingell has ensured that those principles were carried forward in the laws that were written during his time here. They have been embodied and extended in a way that will protect families in our country and, I might say, around the world, because they will be emulated for generations to come. And we come here today to honor our friend John Dingell for the incredible service that he has provided to our country.

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing the ``American Renewable Energy Act'' to create a national renewable electricity standard that will revitalize our economy by creating hundreds of thousands of green jobs, save consumers billions of dollars on their energy bills and reduce our Nation's global warming pollution by dramatically increasing our use of clean, renewable power. In the 110th Congress, the House repeatedly passed a national renewable electricity standard in overwhelming, bipartisan votes requiring that 15 percent of our electricity come from renewable energy sources like wind, solar and biomass and efficiency gains by 2020. The American Renewable Energy Act that I am introducing today would build upon that legislation and follows President Obama's goal that we generate 25 percent of our electricity from renewables by the year 2025.

Electric power generation is responsible for roughly 40 percent of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions--the most prevalent of the heat-trapping gases causing global warming. Right now, the combustion of fossil fuels like coal, oil, and natural gas currently produce more than 70 percent of U.S. electricity. However, the way that we generate electricity is already beginning to change dramatically.

In 2007, we installed 5,244 megawatts of new wind generation, which accounted for 35 percent of all new generation that came online, second only to natural gas. And in 2008, the United States installed more than 8,300 megawatts of new wind capacity--over 40 percent of all new generation that was brought online. That newly installed capacity in 2008 led to the creation of more than 35,000 jobs in the wind industry over the last year.

Much of that renewable generation is the result of states across the country that are putting policies in place to incentivize renewable generation. Already, 27 States and the District of Columbia have adopted renewable electricity standards at the State level. Adopting a national renewable electricity standard will further unleash our technological innovation and allow for the development of renewable resources all across the country.

Every region of the country has renewable resources waiting to be tapped. For instance, the Southeast is home to nearly a third of the biomass feedstock potential in the entire country. Special power plants can burn biomass exclusively and existing coal plants can co-fire biomass in their fuel stream without costly equipment upgrades, replacing 15 percent or more of fossil fuel needs with renewable fuel. Customer-sited solar photovoltaic cells would also earn triple credits under the legislation that I am introducing today, making the target much easier to achieve in places like Florida and Georgia where the solar photovoltaic resource is estimated to be 83-85 percent of the best solar resources in the world.

Adopting a national renewable electricity standard can reinvigorate our economy and our manufacturing sectors by creating an entire new cadre of green-collar jobs. Each wind turbine requires 220 to nearly 400 tons of steal to produce and workers to produce it. From the revamped Maytag plant that is now producing wind turbines in Iowa to the former Ohio manufacturing plant that President Obama visited on his way to Washington, alternative energy can revitalize our declining manufacturing centers all across our country. Adopting a 25 percent renewable electricity standard will create more than 350,000 green jobs by 2020--allowing the people who most need work to do the work that most needs to be done in order to address the climate crisis.

Moreover, adopting a renewable electricity standard will save consumers money by reducing their energy bills. Adopting a national standard of 25 percent will save consumers more than $49 billion over the next decade in lower energy bills, while channeling more than $70 billion in new investment into renewable technologies.

The American people overwhelming support a national renewable electricity standard. According to a December poll conducted by the

Washington Post and ABC News, 84 percent of Americans support requiring utilities to increase their use of wind, solar and other renewable sources of power.

President Obama understands the importance of increasing our use of renewable energy to unleash a clean energy revolution that will get our economy moving again. The States all across the country that have already put similar policies in place understand the need for action. The overwhelming majority of the American people understand it. Now it is time for the Congress to take action to unleash the clean energy revolution by adopting a national renewable electricity standard.

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing the ``Save American Energy Act'' to obtain the significant benefits of cost-effective, environmentally friendly, energy efficiency resources. These energy efficiency standards will not only lead to lower global warming emissions but will also create jobs, reduce the need for new power plants, and save consumers money. As President Obama clearly articulated, energy efficiency is the cleanest, cheapest, fastest source of energy. The legislation that I am introducing today follows President Obama's stated goal of reducing electricity demand 15 percent by 2020 by creating an energy efficiency resource standard, EERS.

Reducing electricity consumption 15 percent by 2020 will save consumers $130 billion over the next 20 years and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by more than 5 billion tons through 2030. The Save American Energy Act sets minimum levels of electricity and natural gas savings to be achieved through utility programs, building codes, appliance standards, and other efficiency measures. This legislation will initially create a modest savings requirement of 1 percent for electricity and three-quarters of a percent for natural gas and gradually build to a 15 percent cumulative requirement for electricity and ten percent for natural gas in 2020.

The benefits of energy efficiency standards are clear and far- reaching. First, energy efficiency standards will dramatically reduce the global warming emissions that are creating the climate crisis. Energy efficiency is the easiest and quickest way that we as a Nation can take action to reduce emissions. These energy efficiency savings would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by approximately 260 million metric tons per year by 2020--the equivalent of the annual emissions from 43 million automobiles.

Second, energy efficiency standards will create jobs and can help revitalize our economy. The Save American Energy Act will lead to the creation of 260,000 new green-collar jobs. These jobs will be everything from retrofitting buildings to weatherizing homes. At a time when the American economy lost nearly 2 million jobs in the last 4 months of 2008, according to the Department of Labor, passing an energy efficiency standard can help send people back to work doing the work that most needs to be done.

Third, energy efficiency standards will decrease peak electricity demand. Savings from efficiency can be done far more cheaply than bringing new generation online. New generation from conventional resources costs somewhere between $0.073 and $0.145 per kilowatt hour compared to $0.03 per kilowatt hour from energy efficiency savings. The Save American Energy Act will reduce peak electricity demand by about 90,000 megawatts in 2020. This reduction would eliminate the need to build 300 medium-sized new power plants.

Fourth, The Save American Energy Act will result in billions of dollars in consumer savings on their energy bills. This bill allows for numerous cost-effective efficiency savings in every area of the economy. The legislation that I am introducing today requires utilities to obtain energy efficiency savings that are available at a lower cost than traditional energy supply options.

Many States around the country have already implemented successful efficiency standards. Vermont and California are two of the States leading the way and and 15 States and the District of Columbia have put in place policies promoting energy efficiency. The Save American Energy Act would set a federal efficiency standard but allows States with programs that meet or exceed that standard to administer the program directly, fostering policy innovation and adaptation to local circumstances.

The Save American Energy Act will take advantage of the cost- effective, available energy efficiency opportunities that can be quickly put in place. Adopting a national energy efficiency standard will allow us to reduce carbon emissions, create new green jobs, and reduce the need to build power plants: all while benefiting customers. The time to act is now.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Senate-amended version of the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA) of 2009.

I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this important legislation to expand the highly

successful State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). This bill will provide health insurance to an additional 4 million low-income children on top of the nearly 7 million who already benefit from the program. CHIPRA also improves access to dental care and mental health services and includes provisions to improve quality of care and utilize health information technology for children.

In my home state, SCHIP enrollment is part of the reason why Massachusetts has the lowest rate of uninsured children in the country. More than 180,000 Massachusetts children receive health coverage through SCHIP, and this reauthorization will allow the state to cover about 56,000 more Massachusetts children who currently do not have health insurance.

It is unfortunate that the previous two attempts to reauthorize SCHIP were vetoed by President Bush, who chose to side with big corporations over children. With the current economic crisis causing significant job losses, millions of Americans also are losing their health coverage, making today's vote even more urgent.

While President Bush twice dashed the hopes of millions of low-income families in need of health care for their children, the Obama administration recognizes the value of ensuring that all low-income children get the health care they need.

Three weeks ago this chamber approved CHIPRA by a larger margin than the two votes on SCRIP bills in the 110th Congress. I urge my colleagues to once again stand with the hard working families who want to provide their children with the health care they need. Vote yes on this critical legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend you for quickly putting this Senate legislation, once again, before the House for immediate consideration.

In several weeks, without immediate action, millions of Americans may remain unprepared for the digital television transition. Mr. Speaker, as you know, I have had a long interest in the digital television transition. I held the very first hearing on ``High Definition TV'' in October of 1987--more than 20 years ago. In 1990, I battled hard and successfully as then-Chairman of the House Telecommunications and Finance Subcommittee to get the Federal Communications Commission to switch from pursuing an ``analog'' HDTV standard to a ``digital'' standard.

Moreover, I fought to build into the Telecomm Act in 1996 the appropriate way in which broadcasters could utilize ``spectrum flexibility'' to multiplex the digital signal into several video programming channels or offer wireless interactive television or information services. And I pushed unsuccessfully in the context of the 1997 budget battles to prohibit the sale of ``analog-only'' televisions by the year 2000--an amendment that was opposed by every Republican in our Committee markup in 1997. The result was over a hundred million analog-only sets were sold into the marketplace even as the government was stipulating it intended to turn off the analog TV signal. The failure to mandate ``dual tuner'' TVs sooner has compounded the difficulty of this transition immeasurably by increasing the base of TV receivers that need converter boxes to receive digital TV signals.

Most recently, for the last two years as the Telecommunications and Internet Subcommittee Chairman, I convened six DTV hearings, requested and received three Government Accountability Office, GAO, reports, and wrote numerous oversight letters to the FCC, to NTIA, and to industry and consumer representatives in headlong pursuit of ensuring a successful digital television transition on February 17th.

At the last DTV hearing that we held the second week of September-- just after the Wilmington, North Carolina switch-over test--the GAO testified:

NTIA is effectively implementing the converter box subsidy

program, but its plans to address the likely increase in

coupon demand as the transition nears remain unclear. . . .

With a spike in demand likely as the transition date nears,

NTIA has no specific plans to address an increase in demand;

therefore, consumers might incur significant wait time before

they receive coupons as the transition nears and might lose

television service during the time they are waiting for the

coupons.

In response, I asked the Acting NTIA Administrator to give the Subcommittee a contingency plan for dealing with the expected surge in coupons within 30 days. Now, that contingency plan did not arrive in 30 days. Instead, it arrived to us on November 6th--just after Election Day. The NTIA's ``Final Phase'' plan did not echo the GAO's alarm bells, but rather stated the following:

This Plan demonstrates that the Coupon Program has both

sufficient funds and system processing capabilities to

achieve this goal . . . and to do so without the creation a

large backlog. Also, NTIA has built flexibility into the

Program to respond to various or unexpected events. Moreover,

based on actual, cumulative redemption data, NTIA would not

exhaust the authorized $1.34 billion in coupon funding

despite increased demand leading up to the analog shut-down,

on February 17th, and, in fact, may return as much as $340

million to the U.S. Treasury.

That's from the NTIA just over two months ago. ``No problem,'' the agency is saying. In essence the agency is telling Congress, ``We have a plan to deal with the surge and we don't need any more money. No large backlog. And we'll have hundreds of millions of dollars left over.''

Now, why is this important? It is important because we were actually in session in November. We could have acted during the ``lame duck'' session if the Bush Administration had said, ``yes, we will likely have a shortfall'', or ``please, Congress, let's err on the side of caution and budget a couple hundred million more just in case . . .''. Yet NTIA told us all just the opposite. The agency said everything was fine and they didn't need additional money for coupons.

In late December, I asked for an urgent status update on the program. That's when NTIA wrote back to me--on December 24th--stating that a waiting list was going to begin in January of this year because the coupon program was hitting its funding ceiling. The agency indicated that to solve this issue and spend up to the $1.34 billion in the underlying statute for coupons that another 250 million dollars at a minimum might be needed. And that amount would not necessarily reflect the actual demand for coupons the agency was newly projecting. The waiting list now represents approximately 3 million coupons.

In an attempt to respond quickly, I reached out the first week we returned here in January to Ranking Member Joe Barton, R-TX, and said if we work together on an accounting fix we could start to address the waiting list issue and get the coupons flowing to consumers again and buy some time. I want to thank Rep. Barton for his willingness to proceed on such a bill.

But that effort has simply become overtaken by events. If we passed it and also gave NTIA a couple hundred million dollars for additional coupons in a measure that passed through the House and through the Senate today, and arrived to the President's desk this evening, we simply wouldn't be able to address the backlog and get coupons out to people who have requested them by February 17th.

Not every media market will be as unprepared as others on February 17th. I know that in the Boston market, our local commercial and noncommercial broadcasters, as well as our local cable operators, have worked diligently to be ready on February 17th and I commend them for their model efforts. Yet even in Boston, it is important to note that a recent test brought a flood of calls to consumer call centers from citizens confused about or unprepared for the switchover. Many other media markets, in part due to the demographic makeup of such markets, will have an even greater risk of significant dislocation without immediate action. The Bush Administration has simply left us with so little time to make the needed adjustments on a national basis absent a short, one-time delay.

So, although this is the last place we all wanted to be, and in spite of the fact that we toiled mightily to make this effort work, it is my judgment that a short delay is in the public interest in order to protect consumers. I urge passage of this emergency DTV legislation.

Madam Speaker, today I am reintroducing the Georges Bank Preservation Act in the 111th Congress because Georges Bank, America's most valuable fishery and one of our nation's most important marine areas, remains in the crosshairs of the oil and gas industry. Last year, as a result of opposition from the Bush Administration, the longstanding protections against drilling off the east and west coasts expired. As a result, the American people could now begin to see drill rigs as close as three miles to our beaches and in fragile ecosystems like Georges Bank. Allowing oil and gas drilling in Georges Bank would forever destroy this fragile ecosystem and our nation's most important fishery.

In its final days in office, the Bush Administration issued a draft proposal to conduct offshore oil and gas leasing in the entire North Atlantic Planning area in 2013. This area comprises all federal waters off the coast of New England, including Georges Bank. We know that Georges Bank remains a top target of the oil industry and that is why we must take action to restore the longstanding protections for this special place.

The Georges Bank Preservation Act would prohibit the federal government from allowing exploration, development, or production of oil or natural gas in Georges Bank. Protecting Georges Bank from drilling would affect less than 2 percent of federal land on the outer Continental Shelf. The legislation would also protect any areas designated as marine national monuments or national marine sanctuaries, such as the Gerry E. Studds Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary off the coast of Massachusetts. The language in the Georges Bank Preservation Act has already passed the House last year in an overwhelming, bipartisan vote of 236-189 as part of H.R. 6899.

Georges Bank is the heart of the New England fishery and a key economic engine for the region. The Northeast fishery landings are valued at approximately $800 million annually and Georges Bank is the key to the region. New Bedford, Massachusetts is by far the most productive fishing port in the United States, in terms of value of catch, and has held that distinction for the last eight years. Its $268 million catch in 2007 was almost as much as catches from the second and third most valuable ports combined. New Bedford has been the number one fishing port for eight straight years.

We must not let Big Oil claim one of New England's most important economic and environmental treasures. The Georges Bank Preservation Act will prevent the oil and gas industry from destroying this special habitat that is the heart of America's most precious fishery and a uniquely vital marine habitat.

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend you for quickly putting this Senate legislation (S. 328) before the House for immediate consideration. This is a bill that is responsive to the slate of digital television issues confronting consumers and the television industry.

In several weeks, without immediate action, millions of Americans may remain unprepared for the digital television transition. Mr. Speaker, as you know, I have had a long interest in the digital television transition. I held the very first hearing on ``High Definition TV'' in October of 1987--more than 20 years ago. In 1990, I battled hard and successfully as then-Chairman of the House Telecommunications and Finance Subcommittee to get the Federal Communications Commission to switch from pursuing an ``analog'' HDTV standard to a ``digital'' standard. Moreover, I fought to build into the Telecomm Act in 1996 the appropriate way in which broadcasters could utilize ``spectrum flexibility'' to multiplex the digital signal into several video programming channels or offer wireless interactive television or information services. And I pushed unsuccessfully in the context of the 1997 budget battles to prohibit the sale of ``analog-only'' televisions by the year 2000--an amendment that was opposed by every Republican in our Committee markup in 1997. The result was over a hundred million analog-only sets were sold into the marketplace even as the government was stipulating it intended to turn off the analog TV signal. The failure to mandate ``dual tuner'' TVs sooner has compounded the difficulty of this transition immeasurably by increasing the base of TV receivers that need converter boxes to receive digital TV signals.

Most recently, for the last two years as the Telecommunications and Internet Subcommittee Chairman, I convened six DTV hearings, requested and received three Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports, and wrote numerous oversight letters to the FCC, to NTIA, and to industry and consumer representatives in headlong pursuit of ensuring a successful digital television transition on February 17th.

At the last DTV hearing that we held the second week of September-- just after the Wilmington, North Carolina switch-over test--the GAO testified:

``NTIA is effectively implementing the converter box

subsidy program, but its plans to address the likely increase

in coupon demand as the transition nears remain unclear. . .

. With a spike in demand likely as the transition date nears,

NTIA has no specific plans to address an increase in demand;

therefore, consumers might incur significant wait time before

they receive coupons as the transition nears and might lose

television service during the time they are waiting for the

coupons.''

In response, I asked the Acting NTIA Administrator to give the Subcommittee a contingency plan for dealing with the expected surge in coupons within 30 days. Now, that contingency plan did not arrive in 30 days. Instead, it arrived to us on November 6th--just after Election Day. The NTIA's ``Final Phase'' plan did not echo the GAO's alarm bells, but rather stated the following:

``This Plan demonstrates that the Coupon Program has both

sufficient funds and system processing capabilities to

achieve this goal . . . . and to do so without the creation a

large backlog. Also, NTIA has built flexibility into the

Program to respond to various or unexpected events. Moreover,

based on actual, cumulative redemption data, NTIA would not

exhaust the authorized $1.34 billion in coupon funding

despite increased demand leading up to the analog shut-down

on February 17th, and, in fact, may return as much as $340

million to the U.S. Treasury.''

That's from the NTIA just over two months ago. ``No problem,'' the agency is saying. In essence the agency is telling Congress, ``We have a plan to deal with the surge and we don't need any more money. No large backlog. And we'll have hundreds of millions of dollars left over.''

Now, why is this important? It is important because we were actually in session in November. We could have acted during the ``lame duck'' session if the Bush Administration had said, ``yes, we will likely have a shortfall'', or ``please, Congress, let's err on the side of caution and budget a couple hundred million more just in case . . .''. Yet NTIA told us all just the opposite. The agency said everything was fine and they didn't need additional money for coupons.

In late December, I asked for an urgent status update on the program. That's when NTIA wrote back to me--on December 24th--stating that a waiting list was going to begin in January of this year because the coupon program was hitting its funding ceiling. The agency indicated that to solve this issue and spend up to the $1.34 Billion in the underlying statute for coupons that another 250 million dollars at a minimum might be needed. And that amount would not necessarily reflect the actual demand for coupons the agency was newly projecting. The waiting list now represents approximately 3 million coupons.

In an attempt to respond quickly, I reached out the first week we returned here in January to Ranking Member Joe Barton (R-TX) and said if we work together on an accounting fix we could start to address the waiting list issue and get the coupons flowing to consumers again and buy some time. I want to thank Rep. Barton for his willingness to proceed on such a bill.

But that effort has simply become overtaken by events. If we passed it and also gave NTIA a couple hundred million dollars for additional coupons in a measure that passed through the House and through the Senate today, and arrived to the President's desk this evening, we simply wouldn't be able to address the backlog and get coupons out to people who have requested them by February 17th.

Not every media market will be as unprepared as others on February 17th. I know that in the Boston market, our local commercial and noncommercial broadcasters, as well as our local cable operators, have worked diligently to be ready on February 17th and I commend them for their model efforts. Yet even in Boston, it is important to note that a recent test brought a flood of calls to consumer call centers from citizens confused about or unprepared for the switchover. Many other media markets, in part due to the demographic makeup of such markets, will have an even greater risk of significant dislocation without immediate action. The Bush Administration has simply left us with so little time to make the needed adjustments on a national basis absent a short, one-time delay.

So, although this is the last place we all wanted to be, and in spite of the fact that we toiled mightily to make this effort work, it is my judgment that a short delay is in the public interest in order to protect consumers. I urge passage of this emergency DTV legislation.