Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate David Prattis Brewington, of Federalsburg, MD, on being awarded the 2010 Veteran's Award by the NAACP-Talbot County Branch. The presentation will be made on October 9, 2010, in Easton, MD, at the Freedom Fund Banquet.

Mr. Brewington was born May 25, 1925, in Federalsburg, MD, and has been a lifelong resident. He entered the United States Army in 1944 during World War II, after receiving an education in Caroline County public schools. As a member of the 3716 Quartermaster Truck Company in the 2nd Army, Mr. Brewington drove supplies and gasoline to the front lines via tractor trailers and tankers. He served in New Guinea, the Philippines and Japan.

After receiving an honorable discharge in 1946, Mr. Brewington returned to Federalsburg, MD, and became a long-distance truck driver for Service Trucking Co., where he worked for 22 years, as well as being elected as shop steward by his fellow Teamster Union members. He then started a small business as an owner-operator of dump trucks. After retiring from trucking, he started a second career for U-Star and Delmarva Community Transit in Easton, MD, as a van driver for senior citizens and the disabled. He celebrated his second retirement at the age of 82. He and his wife, Mary Henson Brewington, enjoy visiting their two daughters and grandchildren.

Mr. Brewington celebrated his 85th birthday this year. Throughout the past 47 years, he has served as an active and avid member of the Blake- Blackston American Legion Post 77. Having served as Commander, 1st Vice Commander and currently as Chaplain, Mr. Brewington exemplifies the drive and commitment our World War II veterans have exhibited in serving this great country.

I commend my constituent, David Prattis Brewington, on his many years of service and on his achievement of being named the recipient of the 2010 Veteran's Award by the NAACP-Talbot County Branch.

Madam Speaker, today I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating the accomplishments of the Salisbury Alumni Chapter of Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity for their outstanding service to the community. This year marks 20 years of dedication to the youth of Salisbury, Maryland, by providing them with a positive outlet through their summer basketball league.

The co-directors are Bruce Wharton and Tom Vanlandingham. With support from friends, they created a program that keeps children off the streets when schools are closed. The league started for kids on the west side of Salisbury and over the years has shown numerous children what possibilities life has to offer.

While basketball is the hook, Kappa Alpha Psi brothers also strive to show kids the positive side of life by surrounding them with examples of positive male and female role models. Bruce and Tom plan seminars on everything from avoiding the temptations of joining a gang to good eating habits.

Their league is free to all children and includes children from ages 10 to 18. They play Monday through Thursday evenings, four games per night. A recent expansion has allowed students from nearby cities and States to form teams and play in the league as well.

Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity is a prime example of how to give kids the support guidance they need through sports. I commend them on this milestone anniversary.

Thank you, Mr. Kind, for your leadership on this amendment.

I rise in strong support of the amendment so that we can increase, as was said, access to federally protected lands for hunters and anglers through the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Our amendment will simply refocus a very small portion of the Land and Water Conservation Fund to enhance access to existing public lands, specifically for easements or right-of-ways that open access to Federal land which is currently inaccessible or significantly restricted.

Specifically, the amendment directs the Secretary to dedicate no less than 1.5 percent of the funds to increase recreational public access to existing lands for hunting, fishing, or other recreational purposes. Our amendment stays very true to the very intent of the fund, which is stated in the statute, to assist in preserving, developing, and

assuring accessibility to outdoor recreation resources.

I urge my colleagues to support the amendment on behalf of the sportsmen and -women throughout the country and communities that rely on these activities to generate and create jobs.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of the Kratovil-Connolly amendment to the America COMPETES Act, as well as in support of the underlying bill. I would first like to thank the chairman, Mr. Gordon, for allowing the amendment and also for the opportunity to speak on its behalf. And I also want to thank my colleague and friend, Mr. Connolly, for his leadership on this issue as well.

Simply put, Madam Chair, our amendment seeks to inspire students to enter the exciting, fascinating, and often times lucrative fields of science and innovation, by presenting them with real life experiences of the men and women who are leaders in these fields. Our amendment would encourage Federal employees working in the fields of science and engineering to volunteer their time and expertise in STEM educational activity. By sharing their stories with students, we hope to encourage students to study and pursue similar careers while preparing them for the competitive 21st-century global economy and workforce.

Expanding and strengthening science and technology curricula will provide students with the tools they need to enter the workforce. Our amendment builds on this foundation by encouraging Federal scientists and engineers already working in these fields to volunteer their time and expertise to teach today's students how careers in these fields not only support American competitiveness but can contribute to their own professional growth.

The America COMPETES Act will strengthen America's role in an increasingly competitive world while our amendment will bolster this effort by encouraging scientists and engineers to share their real- world experiences with what we hope will be future scientists and engineers.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, as well as the underlying bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).

Madam Chair, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Tennessee, Chairman Gordon.

I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to H.R. 4715, the Clean Estuaries Act, and voice my support also for the underlying bill.

Let me begin by thanking the chairman, Mr. Oberstar, who, as the Chair knows, has the finest voice of all in Congress; and should he ever leave Congress, could certainly go forward in doing commentating somewhere.

But, in any event, Mr. Chairman, Maryland's First Congressional District is defined by the Chesapeake Bay and its waterways. Although not directly part of the National Estuary Program, the program was developed from efforts to protect our Nation's largest estuary, the Chesapeake Bay.

Estuaries are bodies of water, as you've heard, that receive both outflows from rivers and tidal inflows

from the ocean. They are transition zones between fresh water from rivers and salt water from the ocean. The mixing of fresh and salt water provides a unique environment that supports diverse habitats for a wide variety of living resources, including plants, fish, and wildlife.

Estuaries are critical economic engines that generate billions of dollars in revenue each year from fishing and tourism. The sad truth is that along with many of the Nation's estuaries, the Chesapeake is in poor ecological health as well, although we did have, Mr. Chairman, some good news yesterday in terms of the blue crab population which I'm happy to report is rebounding.

Unhealthy estuaries impact not only the commercial and recreational fishing industries, but threaten industries such as tourism, restaurants and charter boats, among others, that generate revenue and create good-paying jobs.

This bill includes effective reforms to that program that will bolster the health of estuaries, as well as the economy and infrastructure of affected communities by increasing transparency, requiring establishment of performance measures and goals, and introducing much needed accountability to the program.

This legislation will support and maintain the Maryland Coastal Bays program as one of the most effective estuary programs in the Nation and ensure that taxpayer dollars are used effectively in the fight to do so.

I have introduced an amendment that I believe will bolster the oversight and accountability of these programs by ensuring a collaborative process involving all stakeholders.

The National Estuary Program is comprised of initiatives across the country that, under my amendment, will now be subject to a streamlined management plan that will ensure all stakeholders play a role in the implementation.

My amendment calls for the equitable inclusion of all relevant estuary stakeholders, the use of neutral facilitators and processes to resolve any conflicts, and the inclusion and use of up-to-date information. Included among these stakeholders will be the region's farming and agricultural representatives, as well as environmental groups, so that all parties will come to the table and reach a consensus agreement about our mutual interests and goals.

While some programs may have used collaborative processes in the past, this amendment will ensure that all new programs and all existing programs undergoing management plan updates will collaborate going forward.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, as well as the underlying bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I'll yield to the chairman, Mr. Oberstar, as much time as he may consume.

I thank the Chair. I also thank the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman) for his support of the amendment.

Again, Mr. Chairman, thank you for your support.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3650 and urge my colleagues to support it.

Maryland's First Congressional District, my district, is a district defined by the water that surrounds it. Healthy water in our district means commerce, recreation, and, most importantly, jobs.

A harmful algal bloom is a rapid overproduction of certain species of algae that produce toxins which are detrimental to plants and animals. These outbreaks are commonly referred to, as you have heard, as red or brown tides and have the potential to kill fish and other aquatic life by decreasing sunlight available to the water and by using up available oxygen in the water.

In recent years, many of the Nation's coastlines, near-shore marine waters and freshwaters have experienced an increase in the number, frequency, duration, and types of HABs. If we continue to allow this problem to persist, bodies of water like the Chesapeake Bay in my district will see a detrimental decline in water quality which will affect the thousands of species that call the bay home.

More importantly, perhaps, the thousands of men and women who rely on the bay to pay their bills will be put out of work. Watermen, commercial fishermen, charter boat captains, and any number of similar professions have been part of the Eastern Shore culture for decades. If gone unchecked, these professions will become less and less prominent, and an entire segment of our local economy will be hurt.

H.R. 3650 is a good bill that takes important steps in the fight against red tides and other harmful algae by creating a coordinated national strategy to deal with HABs while at the same time allowing for flexibility so that different regions can best address their unique concerns.

I am also pleased, again, as was mentioned, that funding will actually be directed to control and prevention of this problem in addition to, simply, research. This will no doubt limit the severity and frequency of this dangerous environmental concern.

Madam Speaker, I once again urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Mr. Speaker, for months we have been debating how to improve the health care system. We have focused on two major goals: One is increasing the number of those who have coverage, and the second major goal is doing what we can to reduce the costs for those that do. One way, obviously, to accomplish these goals is to increase competition. In fact, it's one of the few areas where, in this debate, we have seen bipartisanship. There have been recommendations, various recommendations, on how to do that. One is the bill that we have today. There have been other suggestions, allowing for competition across State lines.

The point is we all know that one of the ways to accomplish the major goals that we seek to accomplish is to create competition, and that is what this bill does. We need to ask the question: Why would we allow this exemption to continue when we do not do that for other industries? Why would we do that when no public interest is served by doing so?

Now, this may not be the silver bullet, but certainly everyone agrees that in order to improve our health care system, we must increase competition. That's not a partisan issue. That's what this bill does. And for that reason, I ask my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, let me begin by thanking Mr. Gordon, the chairman, and the ranking member for bringing the legislation to the floor. I rise in support of my amendment to the Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2009. Information technology has improved everything from the way we pay our bills to the way we communicate with our friends and neighbors. We are increasingly becoming a digital Nation where the strength and vitality of our economy, infrastructure, public safety, and national security are becoming more and more reliant on cyberspace. Of course, with that reliance on technology, as many have mentioned here today, come real concerns about the security of information traveling through cyberspace.

It's time we make every effort to secure and protect the privacy, finances, and resources of Americans who utilize information technology. I believe the underlying bill does much to accomplish this.

Mr. Chairman, I'm sure it won't surprise you, but I do believe that my amendment will enhance this bill by enhancing communication, collaboration, and cooperation between the public and private sectors. The amendment does so by requiring the director of the National Science Foundation to establish a National Center of Excellence for Cybersecurity. This Center would be awarded on a merit-based, comprehensive basis and would support the initiatives put forth by the underlying legislation to ensure the safety of our digital communications infrastructure. This National Center would be a partnership model involving government, private corporations, and academic institutions that will consolidate and coordinate our national cybersecurity resources.

As the cybersecurity industry grows, there is an increasing demand for skilled workers and a severe shortage of workers qualified to fill these jobs. The center will serve not only as a clearinghouse for our national cybersecurity resources, but it will create jobs and train individuals in the skills needed to protect the economy, bolster our national security, and protect Americans from cybercriminals.

Mr. Chairman, I want to take a brief moment also to express my support for an amendment that was heard previously, offered by Representative McCarthy, that would emphasize education and awareness programs in cybersecurity for populations in areas of planned broadband expansion or deployment, such as areas like my district in Maryland's Eastern Shore. Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to support both amendments and the underlying bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield so much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski).

I want to thank the gentleman from Texas for his support and also the gentleman from Illinois.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the Murphy- McMahon-Kratovil amendment to H.R. 4173.

As we improve stability and transparency in the derivatives market and attempt to address the true underlying issues causing the financial crisis, we must also ensure that we are not limiting the ability of responsible companies to access the over-the-counter derivatives they need to keep their businesses up and running.

These derivatives are not just used by the larger broker and dealer banks who do, in fact, present a systemic

threat to the market, but also by smaller companies who use them to manage the risk associated with running an effective business. The fact of the matter is the legislation needs to distinguish between the two.

Without this amendment, H.R. 4173 could subject some end users to burdensome costs and penalties that were primarily aimed at companies whose activities do, in fact, present a real risk to the stability of the financial system. Our amendment clarifies that end users do not pose a systemic risk and should not be designated as ``major swap participants'' and incur the unintended costs.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3570, the Satellite Home Viewer Update and Reauthorization Act of 2009. This legislation reauthorizes the satellite compulsory license for carriage of distant network satellite affiliate TV station signals. If this bill does not become law before the end of the year, the distant network carriage license will expire and satellite subscribers would be left in the dark.

While I support the underlying legislation, I would like to draw attention to a provision that I believe could undermine our efforts to ensure rural residents have access to local programming. By redefining an ``unserved household'' to include those served by multicast networks, this legislation allows satellite broadcasters to continue to import distant, out-of-market signals into short markets when they are no longer necessary. I request that a letter signed by 18 bipartisan Members of the House of Representatives expressing concern over this definition of ``unserved household,'' be inserted as an extraneous material.

Washington, DC,

December 2, 2009.

Hon. John Conyers, Jr.,

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, House of

Representatives, Washington, DC.

Hon. Lamar Smith,

Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary, House of

Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Conyers and Ranking Member Smith: We write

today to express our concerns regarding the manner in which

H.R. 3570, the Satellite Home Viewer Update and

Reauthorization Act of 2009, would diminish the availability

of local programming available to satellite television

subscribers.

Digital multicasting enables broadcasters to provide TV

viewers with expanded options for free, local TV programming

beyond the primary network affiliate channel. In pursuit of

this promise, many broadcasters have already begun

multicasting dedicated sports, ethnic, minority, weather,

news, and hyper-local channels.

In various markets, including ``short markets,'' i.e.,

television markets lacking a full complement of network

affiliates, some stations have begun multicasting a local

network affiliate other than the network affiliate carried on

their primary channel. For example, television viewers in the

Beaumont, TX market, which lacked a local NBC station, can

now watch local NBC affiliate K-JAC as a multicast channel

provided by a station that broadcasts the ABC affiliate

KBMT on its primary channel. It is important to note that

this multicast channel, like numerous similar network

affiliates that are broadcast on multicast channels across

the country, is a full-fledged network station providing

viewers with a full slate of a network's programming to the

same geographic area as the station's other digital channel

that broadcasts ABC programming. There is no rational public

policy reason to treat the two network channels differently

under copyright law.

Unfortunately, H.R. 3570, the Satellite Home Viewer Update

and Reauthorization Act of 2009, enables DBS companies to

impede and undermine multicast network affiliates. By re-

defining a household capable of receiving a local network

signal through the air as ``unserved'' if the signal is

delivered via digital multicast technology, Sections 3(h)(1)

and 3(h)(6) of H.R. 3570 together allow DBS companies to

import distant network affiliates that duplicate the

programming of the local, multicast network affiliate. This

provision will not only undermine existing multicast

stations, but it will also give local stations far less

incentive to multicast an additional local network affiliate

in the future if large numbers of potential viewers are

already receiving an affiliate of that network through a DBS

provider. Thus, these provisions may deprive viewers of

locally-oriented programming by undermining existing

multicast arrangements and removing the incentive for local

stations to continue to offer or roll out new multicast

network affiliated channels.

While H.R. 3570 only provides satellite companies this

ability for 3 years following enactment, after the recent

economic downturn, the next three years will be critical to

the development of new, innovative, free, over-the-air

digital network broadcast services, including networks that

contain programming developed for ethnic minorities. Sections

3(h)(1) and 3(h)(6) of H.R. 3570 should be changed to ensure

that DBS companies cannot import a distant network signal

that duplicates a local network affiliated multicast station.

Additionally, as twelve members of the House Judiciary

Committee stated in the additional views that were filed in

the report language that accompanied H.R. 3570, ``the

preference in section three of the bill may result in

discouraging free over-the-air local broadcasters from

affiliating with more than one network and developing a

market-based solution to the 'missing network affiliate'

problem. This would limit the number of free network

programming options available to consumers and, in effect,

require consumers to subscribe to pay television to receive

network they might otherwise have been able to view for

free.''

We appreciate your attention to this critically important

issue. As you continue to work on the reauthorization of the

Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act

during a House-Senate conference committee, we encourage you

to support the approach to protecting multicast channels that

was adopted by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Sincerely,

Frank Kratovil; Roy Blunt; Tom Cole; Alan Mollohan;

Rodney Alexander; Michael McMahon; Brett Guthrie; Bob

Filner; Thomas Rooney; Nick J. Rahall; Christopher Lee;

Gregory Meeks; Blaine Luetkemeyer; Raul Grijalva;

Shelley Capito; Sam Farr.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to the Small Business Financing and Investment Act of 2009 that would raise the maximum SBA 7(a) loan guarantee from 90 percent to 100 percent on qualifying loans for veteran-owned small businesses. As we approach Veterans Day, I feel we should be supporting our vets not only in words but also with our actions. This amendment is a very simple and appropriate way to do so. Raising the maximum loan guarantee will not only be a way of fulfilling our commitment to veterans, but it will also serve to stimulate lending and financing for the small businesses that are the backbone of local economies and the number one source of new job creation.

Mr. Chairman, this bill frees up the often elusive credit that serves as the lifeline of any established or startup small business; it honors the service of our Nation's veterans; and it will stimulate the small businesses at the heart of the U.S. economy. I urge my colleagues to support it.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to H.R. 3619 because I believe it is our duty to ensure the Coast Guard has top-notch facilities and infrastructure in order to

effectively play its part in keeping America safe.

My amendment requires the Commandant of the Coast Guard to conduct a national study on the facility infrastructure requirements needed to fulfill the Coast Guard's prescribed mission and capabilities. This amendment is needed to assess the prevalence and effects of the Coast Guard operating out of temporary facilities and buildings.

In Maryland's First District, my district, as an example, the Coast Guard is operating out of a double-wide temporary trailer shared with NOAA operations in Oxford, Maryland. The Oxford Coast Guard does not own its own pier and must lease space from a commercial pier nearly 1 mile away from the temporary trailer. This temporary arrangement could be, obviously, affecting operations and mission capability.

My amendment requires a report to Congress that must include an assessment of any shortfalls in facility infrastructure, including the extent of the use of temporary trailers, an inventory of the number and type of new facilities needed to meet the service's mission, and a plan for how the Commandant of the Coast Guard will develop the appropriate facility infrastructure, including timelines, budgets, and additional legislative authority the Commandant determines is required to implement the plan.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment is a commonsense means towards ensuring those entrusted with protecting our coasts and shorelines are being given the right tools and facilities to do so effectively.

I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

The gentleman will yield.

I will yield.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairmen of the committee and the subcommittee for their leadership. I appreciate and also thank the other side of the aisle for their support and urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

I yield back my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1771, the Chesapeake Bay Science, Education and Ecosystem Enhancement Act, and also, with your permission, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1053, the Chesapeake Bay Accountability and Recovery Act of 2009, which I believe is next up on the calendar.

Both bills will protect the beauty and utility of the Chesapeake Bay for future generations while building the economic base of districts like Maryland's First District, my district, whose local economies are dependent on the health of the Chesapeake Bay.

By reauthorizing much-needed funding, the Chesapeake Bay Science, Education and Ecosystem Enhancement Act will allow NOAA's Chesapeake Bay office to continue to play a vital role in the management and restoration of the bay.

Additionally, H.R. 1771 will formally authorize NOAA's Bay Watershed Education and Training, B-WET, program that you heard Congressman Sarbanes discuss. Since first being established in 2002, this program has provided critical assistance for hands-on watershed education for thousands of students and teachers.

When educators are given the necessary tools to engage their students, the curriculum can foster a lifelong understanding about the importance of the bay and create future generations of stewards committed to its health and beauty.

In the short term, the bill will expand the technical assistance that NOAA can offer watermen who practice emerging aquaculture techniques. Many watermen have found success with aquaculture that has led to an increase in both the clam and oyster populations. This bill will build on these successes, keeping the seafood industry viable and protecting the overall ecosystem of the Chesapeake Bay.

Support of the legislation will help ensure the vitality of our natural resources throughout the bay in the long term, and I thank again my colleague from Maryland, Congressman Sarbanes, for introducing this bill.

Similarly, H.R. 1053, the Chesapeake Bay Accountability and Recovery Act, is legislation that will protect one of our national treasures and North America's largest estuary while applying financial responsibility and accountability practices to the funds that we appropriate to do so, and I want to thank Congressman Wittman for his leadership on this. As Congressman Sarbanes said, he's been a leader on a number of issues related to the bay, and I congratulate him on it.

This legislation institutes performance-based measures to ensure that dollars spent on restoration activities are producing results. Every dollar we spend on the bay is money well spent, but not if we fail to track these dollars in order to determine best practices and eliminate waste and duplicity.

The bill would require the adoption of two methods: crosscut budgeting by the Office of Management and Budget; and adaptive management by the Environmental Protection Agency. These initiatives will provide a comprehensive accounting of all bay restoration activities and would be available to everyone, including Congress. By sharing this information, stakeholders can make better-informed funding decisions.

Adaptive management will provide a means to evaluate the success and efficiency of bay restoration programs. It will increase coordination, reduce overlap, and improve decisionmaking. Financial responsibility is a theme we should apply to every dollar we spend, and that includes protection of the bay. We aren't doing future generations any favors if we protect the health of the Chesapeake Bay but, at the same time, neglect to protect the health of our economy as a whole.

And again, I want to congratulate and thank Congressman Wittman from Virginia for introducing the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I urge support of both H.R. 1771 and H.R. 1053.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 965, the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network Continuing Authorization Act offered by my friend and colleague from Maryland, Representative John Sarbanes.

This act is vital to the residents of Maryland's First Congressional District and all those who rely on a healthy Chesapeake Bay for commercial, recreational and historical purposes. The act provides grants to parks, volunteer groups, wildlife sanctuaries, historic sites, museum and water trails. A network has been developed that ties sites together that provide meaningful experiences and fosters citizen stewardship of the Chesapeake Bay, not only by those who have the good fortune to live within its watershed, but all who come to visit or are able to benefit economically from it.

Since 2000, the network has grown to include 156 gateways in six States and the District of Columbia and over 1,500 miles of established and developing water trails, many of which are located in my district, within the boundaries of Maryland's First Congressional District.

From Sandy Point State Park on Maryland's western shore, traversing the Bay Bridge to the schooner Sultana in Chestertown, the Blackwater Wildlife Refuge in Dorchester County, down the lower shore to the Smith Island Center and the Tawes Museum in Crisfield, network destinations literally dot the landscape of the First Congressional District with historical, environmental and cultural landmarks.

The ultimate goal of this network is to create an atmosphere of natural, cultural, historical and recreational sites throughout the Chesapeake Bay region. Residents and visitors are able to visit these places to learn about the bay's diverse stories, experience its history and enjoy its natural beauty. Whether it is a family paddling a water trail, riding on a ferry or driving a scenic tour route, each and every visitor will hopefully develop a greater sense of appreciation for our Nation's largest estuary.

For these reasons, I support the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network Continuing Authorization Act and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Thank you again to Mr. Sarbanes for sponsoring the bill.

Thank you all for being here. And it's so nice hearing my very articulate colleagues talk about this. Mr. Boccieri, thank you for bringing us together once again to talk about this. You know, you have mentioned a number of Presidential candidates in the last election that talked about the significance of cap-and-trade and talked about the significance of reducing our dependence on foreign oil. But I think, you know, it's important that we give some additional historical perspective to this debate.

You mentioned that what we are doing now is failing us. But it's been

failing us for 40 years. We have been talking about reducing our dependence on foreign oil for the last 40 years. We've been talking about the significant impact this has on us in terms of our national security. We've been talking about the need to move towards renewable energy and renewable fuel and reducing our dependence on foreign oil, and yet, we haven't done anything really substantial until now.

Every President since Richard Nixon has advocated the need for our energy independence. In 1974, Nixon promised we could achieve it within 6 years. Gerald Ford said we can do it in 10 years. And Jimmy Carter pledged to wage the moral equivalent of war to achieve it.

And yet, once again, as years have gone by, we haven't had the political will to do what needed to be done to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. And getting back to some of the comments that Mr. Perriello made about the political part of it, you know, the bottom line is, at some point we do have to put politics aside and recognize that we are here for a reason. We are here to represent the best interests of the people of this country and not to represent necessarily simply our political parties. And you are right to say that these initiatives came, many of these ideas, cap-and-trade, came from the other side of the aisle. And yet, when we pushed that forward, we got very little support from the other side of the aisle.

Now, we did have some courageous Republicans in the House who voted with us. I think there were probably seven or eight who voted with us, but the bottom line is that we have been talking about this for years, and it was time that we did something about it, and I'm happy to be here with those of you who were willing to do what needed to be done to move us towards a better future for this country.

With that, I'll yield back.

You're absolutely right. There was a lot of talk in the bill about climate change, and that was certainly a significant part of it. But the bottom line is, what was more important to me in terms of voting for this is exactly what you said, national security and creating American jobs. And the energy bill clearly presents an incredible opportunity to spur innovation and create new jobs in this country, and that was one of the big reasons that I supported it.

Also, I want to go back to something Mr. Perriello said about the fluctuation in prices. Again, the irony in this country is that oftentimes we are faced with a crisis and we deal with whatever that crisis is but we never deal with the underlying issue that causes the crisis.

And you were talking about the gas prices. A year ago, when the gas prices were $4 a gallon, the entire population in America was saying, My gosh. What is going on? What are we going to do about this? It's outrageous that we're paying $4 a gallon. It's outrageous that we're sending money overseas to the people that seek to destroy us. What are we going to do about it?

And then a year later, people in this Chamber have apparently--on the other side of the aisle, apparently forgotten.

Well, my answer to that is we should never forget that if we were paying $4 a gallon for gas last year, we could be paying $4 a gallon tomorrow. That has not changed unless we take responsibility and do what we should have done 40 years ago and started making an effort to have energy independence and reducing our dependence on foreign oil.

We shouldn't get angry. We should get even and do what we need to do as Americans to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.