Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, ``When the work underground stops, everything above pays the price.''

That solemn observation was made by a TV reporter one week ago in Boone County, West Virginia.

News was breaking that two local coal mines were soon going to be laying off workers--one preparing to layoff 116 miners in a matter of weeks.

On Tuesday this week, we learned of Alpha Natural Resources will be closing 8 mines and laying off 1200 workers.

I met with the Alpha CEO shortly after the announcement, and he lamented the administration's regulatory assault on coal.

Sadly, the list of layoffs goes on because of the administration's ``all of the above, but nothing from below'' energy policy.

Coal is the cornerstone of our economy--estimates suggest that every mining job creates an additional 3.5 jobs.

We are electricity independent--and we want to stay that way.

Coal is Abundant. Coal is Affordable. Coal is Reliable. Coal is Jobs.

Today, the House will stand up for jobs, families, and affordable energy.

We must Stop the War on Coal.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Commerce be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 6433) to make corrections with respect to Food and Drug Administration user fees, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials in the Record on this bill, H.R. 6433.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6163) to amend title IV of the Public Health Service Act to provide for a National Pediatric Research Network, including with respect to pediatric rare diseases or conditions, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation brings us a step closer to providing more help to children with unmet health needs, especially those with rare pediatric and genetic diseases.

According to the National Institutes of Health, the NIH, there are 6,800 rare diseases, and most of these conditions have no treatment or cure, and they primarily affect children. I would guess that everyone in this Chamber is personally aware of the devastating impact of these diseases with some family that they know. I, myself, have spent some time with a family from my district whose children have spinal muscular atrophy, SMA. It is a very rare pediatric disease that is the leading genetic cause of death in infants and toddlers.

These are great kids. I've got a picture of one of them here. When they came to see me, they told me that their names were Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty. They really are. These are just really marvelous children. They're great kids, and it's a source of real sadness that their disease is the kind that is often incurable and often untreatable.

The barriers to research on rare and genetic diseases are those that are common to most research. It's already difficult to initiate the experimental and lengthy research needed to find treatments and cures; however, when the population of patients is so small, maybe only a couple dozen in a State, these problems are even more difficult to solve.

This legislation is going to help us establish pediatric research networks and a consortia that are a proven way to overcome those gaps in research. Networks and consortia will be comprised of leading institutions that act

as partners to consolidate and coordinate research efforts. It promotes efficiency and collaboration, especially when a disease affects just a small number of children.

Mr. Speaker, I would urge all my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation. I look forward to a strong vote tonight and working with our colleagues in the Senate to make sure that this bill really does get to the President's desk and makes a difference for families that are in search of something that will help them with their kids.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I just want to again thank Mrs. Capps. As we met these families, we really did not know about these diseases until we saw their courage and what they do as they confront this every day. It's marvelous for me, as I now have visited my family that has this disease 2 years in a row. It's great to see them grow and remember where they were and to really think that there's going to be hope with the legislation that we can see that is done.

With that, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlelady from Washington State, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, who has also been, as we look at a bipartisan leadership, a real trooper to move this legislation not only through our committee, but now on the House floor.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the chairman of the Health Subcommittee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Joe Pitts, in support of the legislation.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I know the hour is late. I would just urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation. I, too, commend every Member that's had a role here and truly appreciate the staff to get this bill prepared and ready for us to vote on tonight.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 6118, the Taking Essential Steps for Testing (TEST) Act of 2012, is an important measure that grants CMS the necessary flexibility to enforce its rules without unnecessarily punishing employers for unintentional acts.

Under current law, laboratories must adhere to CMS procedures for processing testing samples in order to do business under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) law. In addition, they are prohibited from intentionally referring testing samples to other labs.

Unfortunately, CMS is not allowed to look at the circumstances under which labs refer samples, and must levy the same penalties for those operating in good faith as those knowingly and willfully breaking the law. These penalties include the loss of a lab's certification for a year and a prohibition against the owner operating any lab for a period of two years.

In instances where a hospital or independent laboratory has accidentally referred a sample due to mistakes by employees or through automated systems, these penalties can be needlessly harsh and threaten the livelihood of American workers. H.R. 6118 would address these issues by allowing the Secretary discretion when determining penalties.

The legislation has received bipartisan support among this body as well as numerous organizations. I would like to commend Congressmen Grimm and Roskam for their work and urge Members to support its passage.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4124, the Veteran Emergency Medical Technician Support Act of 2012, provides two important benefits. It addresses the shortages of emergency medical technicians (EMT) and it helps get our veterans back to work.

Military medics receive some of the best medical and emergency training available while they serve our country.

Yet, not all military medical training satisfies civilian EMT licensing and certification requirements. As a result, our returning veterans are unnecessarily prevented from working as an EMT when they re-enter civilian life.

This bill will examine ways that states with a shortage of EMTs can streamline requirements so that military medics do not have to duplicate the education and training they received on the battlefield. Our vets will be put back to work, and critical workforce shortages in emergency care can be filled to meet public health needs.

I proudly support this bill and urge my colleagues to support it. I yield the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation, H.R. 733, the Recalcitrant Cancer Research Act of 2012, will indeed take important steps to improve outcomes for cancer patients.

For the many Americans who have been diagnosed with a hard-to-treat cancer, hope is not easy to come by. These patients have heard all about the advances in cancer treatments and cures but are left to wonder why there isn't some help for them. Unfortunately, their cancers do not respond to traditional treatments and, as a result, have had very few improvements in prevention, diagnosis, and treatment in decades.

Take, for example, pancreatic cancer. According to the NIH, it is estimated that 44,000 men and women will be diagnosed with this cancer this year, of which 35,000 will die. The 5-year survival rate is less than 6 percent, compared to other cancers with survival rates of over 90 percent.

This bill will guide efforts at the National Cancer Institute in identifying the scientific framework that will outline those unanswered medical and scientific questions that will help to focus research efforts for those deadly cancers. Ensuring the availability of qualified researchers and important resources, such as patient registries, will also move the process forward.

Tonight we work to provide patients and their families a little more hope. This bipartisan legislation is an important step as we continue to see breakthrough advances in cancer research, particularly for those cancers whose survival rates remain low and treatment options are limited.

I want to thank Chairman Waxman and his staff, as well as Chairman Harkin and Ranking Member Enzi of the Senate committee, which passed the Senate version of this bill today in committee, for enabling us to be on the verge of really getting this legislation into law, which is one of the reasons why we bypassed the full committee.

We were delighted to pass this legislation last week in subcommittee, and I singled out particularly my friends, Anna Eshoo and Leonard Lance, for their stalwart work on moving this legislation. And I've got to tell you, the many times we met and chatted about this legislation, I was given an update on the number of bipartisan cosponsors from 233 to 240, and now 290-something that are there. It is, indeed, a bipartisan piece of legislation.

One of the reasons why we bypassed the full committee this week in markup--which began, actually, this afternoon and we'll finish tomorrow--is we wanted to get this bill to the floor right away so that we don't even have to wait for a lame duck session to get it signed into law. So I would hope that my Senate colleagues move this quickly.

But I just really want to thank my friends, Anna Eshoo and Leonard Lance, for their great work. The staff that put this together--I'll tell you, in sitting down with the NIH folks 2 weeks ago, we've really expanded. We've broadened this to include more than just pancreatic, how this started.

We have the stakeholders now on board that are excited about this legislation and what it will hold. The private sector out there--and, man, we've sure heard from them over the last year or so--but I know, too, that they are very happy with the passage of this tonight. It's a dream that's come true thanks to you.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 6213.

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

Mr. Chairman, I care about America's energy future, and I certainly care about America's fiscal future as well. For those two reasons, I would urge every one of us here to vote ``yes'' on the No More Solyndras Act.

On the energy front, I continue to advocate concrete measures towards achieving North American energy independence. That includes approving the Keystone XL pipeline, it includes increasing conventional and renewable

energy production from Federal lands, and eliminating unnecessary EPA red tape on coal and other fossil fuels. These and other pro-energy measures are part of the all-of-the-above energy agenda that has been championed by the Energy and Commerce Committee here in the House.

But support for this agenda also requires us to pull the plug on existing programs that simply aren't working. And the Department of Energy's title XVII loan guarantee program is simply not advancing the ball on an all-of-the-above energy goal. The No More Solyndras Act, this bill, phases out this costly, ineffective and, frankly, very mismanaged program.

Our extensive investigation of Solyndra uncovered a story worse than anyone could have imagined. It is amazing to me that the administration gave a half-billion dollar loan guarantee to a company that its own experts predicted would fail, a company so dysfunctional that it burned through this giant handout and went bankrupt in 2 years. Even worse, when it became clear to the administration that Solyndra was in trouble, it chose to double down on the risky bet, gambling even more taxpayer dollars with a desperate loan restructuring instead of trying to cut its losses and move on.

Solyndra is the most visible but far from the only example of title XVII failures. In fact, it is hard to point to a single loan guarantee success under this program. Developing new energy sources and technologies is an important part of our all-of-the-above approach, but it is clear that this loan guarantee program is ineffective at best, and counterproductive at worst.

Further, I'm stunned by the cavalier manner in which the administration squandered all of these taxpayer dollars, yet says it has no regrets, no apologies about its handling of the program and continues to declare it an ``enormous success.'' If the administration can't learn anything about irresponsible spending from Solyndra, is it any wonder that we are running still a trillion-dollar annual deficit and just saw the national debt eclipse the $16 trillion figure. Burning money is one source of energy that the country doesn't need. That's why this bill prevents any costly repeats of Solyndra by prohibiting any new loan guarantees and subjecting pending ones to very stringent safeguards.

What's most disturbing about this unprecedented spending is that it is not necessary to secure a brighter future. The private sector is more than willing to step in and provide the necessary cash and energy if only we would let them. What we need is a Keystone economy, not a Solyndra economy. What we need is a privately funded investment, not taxpayer-funded boondoggles.

The goal of the North American energy independence plan certainly is in reach, as well as millions of new jobs that would certainly go with it, but we aren't going to get there through title XVII Department of Energy loan guarantees--no, we're not.

This investigation uncovered a problem, and now we have a thoughtful bill to fix it so that it cannot happen again. The next step is for the House to pass this bill and hopefully get the Senate to take it up as well. We need to pass the No More Solyndras Act.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, before I yield to the Chairman of the Oversight Subcommittee, let me yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes just to respond.

While it's true that the program was signed into law by President Bush in '05, I would note that the Bush administration did not issue a single loan guarantee, in large part because it struggled to identify any company whose energy products were both meritorious and yet unable to secure private financing. So, further, Bush's OMB actually reviewed this project, the Solyndra loan guarantee application, but it rejected it in January of 2009 in the waning days because of the concerns over the long-term viability of the project.

Now, this administration would go ahead with over $15 billion in loan guarantees through 2011. Solyndra, Abound Solar, Beacon Power, they've all gone bankrupt. And I'm afraid this is just the tip of the iceberg, which was why we moved ahead with this legislation.

Without our action, without the action of our committee, there was strong belief, in fact, that this administration was going to go ahead yet with hundreds of millions of dollars more for Solyndra. That's not the answer to this thing. That's not how to save it.

Our role at Energy and Commerce, we had a very aggressive chairman, Cliff Stearns, the chairman of the Oversight Investigation Subcommittee. He led the investigation. He identified the many faults, and now we've come back with corrective legislation to make sure that it doesn't happen again. That's our role.

With that, I yield 5 minutes to gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns), the very able chairman of the Oversight Investigation Subcommittee.

I yield the gentleman 2 additional minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to include in the Record an exchange of letters between the Energy and Commerce Committee, and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.

House of Representatives, Committee on Science, Space,

and Technology,

Washington, DC, September 10, 2012.

Hon. Fred Upton,

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Rayburn House

Office Building, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Upton: I am writing to you regarding H.R.

6213, the No More Solyndras Act. This legislation was

referred initially to both the Committee on Energy and

Commerce and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.

H.R. 6213 was marked up by the Committee on Energy and

Commerce on July 31, 2012.

I recognize and appreciate your desire to bring this

legislation before the House of Representatives in an

expeditious manner, and accordingly, I will waive further

consideration of this bill in Committee. This, of course,

being conditional on our mutual understanding that language

negotiated with the Science, Space, and Technology Committee

will be included in this or any similar legislation

considered on the House floor. However, agreeing to waive

consideration of this bill should not be construed as

waiving, reducing, or affecting the jurisdiction of the

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.

Additionally, the Committee on Science, Space, and

Technology expressly reserves its authority to seek the

appointment of conferees during any House-Senate conference

that may be convened on this, or any similar legislation. I

ask for your commitment to support any request by the

Committee for conferees on H.R. 6213 as well as any similar

or related legislation.

I ask that a copy of this letter and your response be

included in the report on H.R. 6213 and also be placed in the

Congressional Record during consideration of the bill on the

House floor.

I look forward to working with you as we prepare to pass

this important legislation.

Sincerely,

Ralph M. Hall,

Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.

Enclosure.

I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I would just say that although it's true that DOE has $34 billion in loan guarantee authority remaining, DOE is actually capped at $22 billion for nuclear projects, so the argument that this act creates a loophole that would allow up to $100 billion in new nuclear projects is simply not right, and the projects that are in the application pipeline--remember those remain in the pipeline through December of last year--they are not limited to nuclear. In fact, there are only six active nuclear-related applications in that queue. The other 40-plus include solar, biomass, wind, a whole number of things.

I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).

Mr. Chair, may I inquire how much time is remaining on both sides?

Mr. Chair, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. Whitfield), the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee.

Announcement by the Chair

I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to a member of the committee, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Gardner).

Mr. Chairman, I'd just remind my friend from California that the Department of Justice tells us that there is still an active criminal investigation as to the Solyndra matter.

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Pompeo), a member of the committee.

Mr. Chairman, at this point, I will yield 3 minutes to the chairman of the Science Committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall).

We have two speakers that are here, and we've got a couple that are in the queue that may or may not make it.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady, my good friend from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham).

Mr. Chairman, I might just say we are prepared to close. If the gentleman from California is going to be the final speaker and is prepared to close, we can get to the amendments.

How much time do I have remaining on this side?

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of the time that I control to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns).

Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the motion to recommit.

I will be brief.

I would just note that the projects contemplated under title XVII aren't your usual run-of-the-mill, brick and mortar construction projects. Usually, they are advanced energy projects that require highly specialized equipment, complex components, and they aren't always available domestically. Extending the wind tax credit will be, in fact, part of the larger debate that the House will have as we look at all of the expiring tax provisions, and I certainly look for Mr. Markey's support as we look to extend all of those later on, particularly for his good folks in the State of Massachusetts.

This has been a very long and extensive investigation, and I will tell you that Cliff Stearns, the chairman of our Oversight Subcommittee, has done a very good job as we have tried to get to the very bottom of this mess. It is our job--that of every one of us here-- to look wherever we can to find fraud and abuse and mismanagement in any Federal program, to identify it, and then come back and fix it so that it cannot happen again. No more Solyndras. That's what this bill does. It is a credit to the investigatory team and to Mr. Stearns' leadership. We need to defeat this motion to recommit and pass the bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Chet Walker of Benton Harbor, Michigan, who was elected to both the Michigan Sports Hall of Fame and the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame on September 7, 2012.

Mr. Walker began his career as the star of Benton Harbor High School's basketball team, leading the school to the Class A Boys' state finals in 1958. He then matriculated to Bradley College in Peoria, Illinois, where he became the school's all-time top scorer and rebounder, and was a two-time unanimous First Team All-America pick. Mr. Walker led the Bradley Braves to victory in the 1960 National Invitation Tournament and finished his college career with an outstanding 69-14 win-loss record.

His success as a college athlete caught the attention of the NBA, and after graduation Mr. Walker was drafted by the Syracuse Nationals in the second round. Mr. Walker continued in his tradition of success, and was named to the first ever NBA All-Rookie Team. The rest of his professional basketball career proved to be exceptional: over the span of his 13 years, Mr. Walker scored 18,831 points and grabbed 7,314 rebounds, had a free throw percentage of 79.6, was a seven-time All- Star, and won the 1967 NBA championship with what is considered by many today to be the greatest basketball team of all time.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to recognize Mr. Walker's achievements and am glad that he is being properly respected for his contributions by the Michigan Sports Hall of Fame and the Naismith Basketball Hall of Fame. Chet Walker is one of the greatest to ever play the game and we are so proud in southwest Michigan.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Berrien Community Foundation's 60th anniversary of providing invaluable financial support to southwest Michigan.

It is with great pleasure that I congratulate the Berrien Community Foundation after six decades of impeccable service to our community. Founded in 1952 by William Vawter and many conscientious business men and women, the Foundation has, been committed to finding innovative ways to invest charitable dollars to help residents of Berrien County. From grants to scholarships, the Berrien County Community Foundation has been working to educate our young people and prepare them to enter the workforce. Without that assistance, many students would not have the academic prospects they do today.

The Berrien Community Foundation represents the very best our district has to offer. Philanthropic individuals who desire to help deserving individuals reach their goals and meet their dreams are able to do so in a financially responsible way by collaborating with the Foundation. I have been very impressed by the Foundation's creative approach to making dollars go far to help individuals who just need a little help in moving forward with their aspirations. I continue to marvel at their dedication and good will and hope their work continues for many years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to again recognize the achievements and irreplaceable contributions the Foundation has provided to my district and look forward to their continuing efforts to make Berrien County a better place to live and work.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 724, I call up the bill (H.R. 6079) to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and health care-related provisions in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 6079.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.

House Republicans promised the American people that, if granted the majority, we would vote to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, better known as ObamaCare. Let's face it. ObamaCare is nothing like what was promised. Former Speaker Pelosi said we would have to pass the bill to find out what was in it. Rest assured, we found out.

Rather than reform health care, this law epitomizes Washington at its very worst--intrusive mandates, higher costs, red tape, unaffordable spending, taxes on employers and families, and the control of personal health care decisions by boards, bureaus, and agencies in Washington. Let's just consider the many broken promises.

President Obama promised that his reforms would lower family premiums by $2,500 by the end of his first term, yet the cost of an employee- sponsored family plan increased to $15,000 in 2011. The CBO projects, if we allow the rest of ObamaCare's mandates to kick in, premiums will rise further.

The President told us over and over that if you liked your health care plan you could keep it, yet the law pushes employers to drop coverage. The CBO estimates that up to 20 million American workers will lose their plans under ObamaCare.

The President said his law would cost a mere $900 billion as if spending nearly $1 trillion on a new program were thrifty.

Yet, when it is fully implemented, ObamaCare is estimated to cost taxpayers $2.6 trillion over a decade. The President promised to make Medicare stronger. Instead, ObamaCare raided $575 billion from Medicare to pay for new programs and entitlement expansions.

The President pledged that he would not raise taxes for households with incomes under $250,000. Yet ObamaCare includes 21 new tax increases that will cost taxpayers roughly $800 billion over the next decade. The IRS will impose new taxes on medical devices, prescription drugs, health coverage, high-premium health plans. The agency will place new restrictions on health saving accounts and flexible spending accounts. Employers will face a tax for failing to provide health plans approved by HHS and a new surtax on investment.

The President promised American taxpayers that they would not been forced to fund abortions and our conscience rights would be protected. Yet HHS is moving forward with a mandate that requires religious institutions to violate their principles or pay a steep fine. Or is the fine on faith going to be considered a tax as well, just like the individual mandate? The Supreme Court made clear that the mandate is a massive new tax, one that will primarily be levied on middle class households.

Repeal is also the only way to honor and restore the promises the President wisely made but foolishly broke. The Supreme Court rendered its diagnosis, but the American people will be offering a second opinion. We promised the American people that we would work to repeal this terrible law, and that is a promise we are keeping.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts), the chair of the Health Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the chairman emeritus of the Energy and Commerce Committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida, a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Stearns.

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

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. Whitfield), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Dr. Murphy.

Mr. Speaker, at this point I would yield 2 minutes to the vice chair of the Health Subcommittee, the gentleman from Texas, Dr. Burgess, and when he concludes speaking, I ask unanimous consent that the rest of my time be controlled by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts), the chair of the Health Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 3187) to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to revise and extend the user-fee programs for prescription drugs and medical devices, to establish user-fee programs for generic drugs and biosimilars, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material in the Record.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Waxman, Chairman Harkin, Senator Enzi, and Members on both sides of the aisle in both the House and the Senate who played a role in this process. S. 3187 is a reflection of the hard work put in by both Members and staff, and of everyone's willingness to put partisanship aside to look at the issues together. Because of that outstanding dedication, we have a bill today that will make a real difference in the lives of so many patients and provide much-needed support for innovators across our great country.

At the outset of this Congress, I set a goal of enacting this bill by the end of June--and here we are, well before the clock expires for this month--in order to provide certainty for American patients and innovators. I never lost confidence that we could deliver the bipartisan reforms we needed, and I am so proud that we will accomplish that goal.

Mr. Speaker, this is a jobs bill, and it's a medical innovation bill. And as we put this package together, our goal was to improve the predictability, consistency, transparency, and efficiency of FDA regulation. These reforms will help get new treatments to patients more quickly. They will help us not only keep jobs in Michigan and all across the country, but also to create new ones. In order to get it right, we turned to patients, innovators, and job creators who provided firsthand experience of how the current system is broken. And we included many of their suggestions in the bill.

This bill includes significant accountability and reform measures designed to hold the FDA responsible for its performance. The measure includes independent assessments of FDA's drug and device review process. It also includes requiring quarterly reporting from the device center so we don't have to wait a year to find out FDA's progress. The bill is about patients, and that's why so many patient advocates have spoken out in support of these reforms. Whether it is steps that we took to support treatments for rare diseases or mitigate drug shortages or speed up the approval of devices that will improve a patient's quality of life, these are steps that will make a real and significant difference.

They're going to keep the U.S. at the forefront of medical innovation where we belong.

This bill is just the first step. This bill provides the resources and the game plans so that FDA can improve its performance.

I yield myself an additional minute.

It is now up to the FDA to execute that game plan. And I give my commitment today that our committee will continue to monitor and hold the FDA accountable for its performance. So, together, the Members of the House and the Senate have produced a bill that is a win for American patients, innovation, and job creation.

Before I conclude, I would like to recognize Warren Burke and Megan Renfrew from the Legislative Counsel's Office for their tireless work. The role of Legislative Counsel often goes unnoticed. I also want to appreciate our staff, starting with our staff director, Gary Andres, for pushing this legislation over the finish line; Clay Alspach, on the majority staff; Rachel Sher, on the minority staff; and in particular, Ryan Long, the chief counsel for the Health Subcommittee.

This bill, when it becomes law, patients will benefit from faster, newer, and better treatments, and American workers will keep us on the cutting edge of medical innovation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the chairman emeritus of the Energy and Commerce Committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton).

(Mr. BARTON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Health Subcommittee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), the distinguished vice chair of the Health Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from North Carolina, the vice chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mrs. Myrick.

I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania, Dr. Murphy.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to a member of the committee, the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Bilbray).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia, Dr. Gingrey, a member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Lance), a member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass), a member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Paulsen).

Mr. Speaker, may I ask how much time remains on each side?

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time. So if the gentleman wants to close, then I will close.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that with all of the positive comments here, this bill was not a piece of cake. There was a lot of hard work on both sides of the aisle, particularly by the staff on both sides of the aisle. Again, I want to cite Clay and Ryan on our staff.

But let's face it: All of us particularly involved on the health side of the issues, as we meet with different folks afflicted with different diseases, we want to find a cure. And it would be great to find that cure here in America because we have outstanding pharmaceutical industries that have the talent and the staff to work with the different departments, whether it be the NIH, the CDC, certainly the

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the legislation and to insert extraneous material on H.R. 4480.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, the price of gas and the unemployment rate both remain way too high, and American families are struggling as a result. That's why I support H.R. 4480, the Domestic Energy and Jobs Act, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. This bill is truly a win-win for steps that it takes to expand supplies of domestic affordable energy that will create many jobs in the process.

It's no secret that I don't see eye-to-eye with President Obama on energy policy, but perhaps the most inexplicable energy policy move the administration has made was the June 2011 decision to withdraw 30 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve with no plan to replace it. It is hard to understand why the President would take oil from the Nation's emergency stockpile while at the same time keeping off limits the far greater amounts beneath federally controlled lands and offshore areas. It's like a couple pawning their wedding rings for cash while ignoring a major gold discovery in their own backyard.

The amount of untapped oil in areas kept out of reach by this administration is estimated to exceed the entire Strategic Petroleum Reserve dozens of times over. And these estimates are not mere speculation. Indeed, the recent increases in oil production on State and privately owned lands demonstrate the tremendous energy development on Federal lands. But that potential will only be realized if the administration's roadblocks are removed.

Title I of this bill does that. It requires that the next time the President withdraws oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, he must also commit to more oil leasing on Federal lands in offshore areas. The result will be greater supplies of domestic oil and lower prices, not to mention thousands of new energy industry jobs.

Gaining access to untapped oil reserves is part of the equation; but before that oil can reach consumers at the pump, it has to be refined into gasoline and diesel fuel. Title II of this bill will help American refiners so they can keep fueling our economy and fueling the country, because what refiners really need is a little common sense, a little regulatory certainty. It would be an understatement to say that this administration's regulators have not been friendly to domestic oil production, and the truth is they have been no better to the refiners who produce the fuels that we use. In fact, EPA is moving ahead with a number of new regs affecting refineries and other facilities--regs that are likely to drive up the price at the pump and jeopardize refining sector jobs.

Title II requires that we learn about the consequences before imposing additional red tape. It sets up an interagency committee that will analyze the cumulative effects of several upcoming EPA regs on fuel prices as well as jobs. It also defers the finalization of three measures until after the analysis is completed.

The good news is that a future of chronically high gas prices is not inevitable. These policies that I have discussed and numerous other provisions in the legislation will in fact move us toward more secure, more affordable American energy and the jobs that go with it. The Nation can increase domestic energy supplies, lower future prices at the pump, and create many more jobs. This legislation takes the steps to usher in this brighter future. I urge my colleagues to join with me in supporting it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

U.S. House of Representatives,

Committee on Agriculture,

Washington, DC, June 8, 2012.

Hon. Fred Upton,

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Rayburn House

Office Building, Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for the opportunity to review

the text of H.R. 4480, the Strategic Energy Production Act of

2012, as ordered reported by the Committee on Energy and

Commerce for provisions of the bill that fall within the

jurisdiction of this Committee.

Knowing of your interest in expending this legislation and

in maintaining the continued consultation between our

Committees on these matters, I agree to discharge H.R. 4480

from further consideration by the Committee on Agriculture. I

do so with the understanding that it does not in any way

prejudice the Committee with respect to the appointment of

conferees or its jurisdictional prerogatives on this bill or

similar legislation in the future.

I would appreciate your response to this letter, confirming

our mutual understanding with respect to H.R. 4480, and would

ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be

inserted into the Congressional Record during consideration

on the House floor.

Thank you for your courtesy and I look forward to continued

cooperation between our respective committees.

Sincerely,

Frank D. Lucas,

Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Pompeo), and I would ask that at the conclusion of his 2 minutes that the balance of my time be controlled by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Gardner).

Mr. Speaker, last week, the House passed, by 387 5, major legislation that impacts millions of jobs by allowing the faster and safe approval of medical devices and pharmaceutical drugs.

Rather than sending those jobs overseas, they're staying here. The administration's impending tax on medical devices is a ticking time bomb for manufacturing jobs and innovation across the country and especially in Michigan, which is why we need to repeal it and pass this legislation.

Last month, I visited Stryker, a major device manufacturer that is headquartered in Kalamazoo and Portage, Michigan. They reinforced the harmful impacts that this tax will have on our corner of the State. Stryker employs about 2,500 workers in Kalamazoo County. They tell me that the tax is going to cost their company alone $150 million, and that number does not include the millions of dollars and thousands of man-hours that they're going to have to expend on ensuring that they're in compliance with that tax. These are dollars that could be better spent on wages, research, development, and investments in lifesaving technologies, which would not only help the employment sector but, obviously, patients as well. Stryker also recently announced the elimination of 1,000 jobs worldwide, which is a 5 percent reduction in its global sales force. The cause of that reduction: making up the cost for this impending tax.

The President said earlier this year that he would do whatever it takes to create jobs in America. He needs to sign this bill because, without it, it's going to cost jobs--as has been proven in Michigan alone.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5651) to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to revise and extend the user-fee programs for prescription drugs and for medical devices, to establish user-fee programs for generic drugs and biosimilars, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank, first of all, Chairman Pitts, Dr. Burgess, Mr. Barton, Mr. Waxman, Mr. Pallone, Mr. Dingell, and other committee members on both sides of the aisle for their bipartisanship through this process. H.R. 5651 is a reflection of their hard work, dedication, and willingness to work together. And because of that outstanding work, we have a bill today that will help American patients and innovators, and it will support millions of jobs, believe it or not, millions of jobs in an important sector of our economy.

As I've said since the beginning of this Congress, we need to enact this user fee by the end of June, and I believe that we're on track to accomplish that goal.

And as we put this user-fee package together, I wanted to ensure that it fostered American innovation by improving the predictability, consistency, transparency, and efficiency of FDA regulation. Fostering innovation is essential in getting new treatments to patients and creating American jobs.

This bill will foster American innovation because it includes significant accountability and reform measures designed to hold the FDA responsible for its performance. The measures include independent assessments of FDA's drug-and-device review process. It also requires quarterly reporting from the device center so that we don't have to wait a year to find out their progress.

I commit today that our committee will continue its vigorous oversight of the FDA. For example, we're going to use the independent assessments to determine where the review process can be improved, and we will ensure FDA fixes the problems. Also, we'll use the quarterly data on device reviews and bring the FDA before our committee to explain how it's doing.

This bill will give us the information that we need to understand how the FDA is performing. It is up to us to ensure that we use that information to hold the FDA accountable for their performance.

Together, the committee members have produced a bill that will help American patients, while supporting innovation and job creators. I thank the committee for their participation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts), chairman of the Health Subcommittee on the Energy and Commerce Committee.

I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes for the purpose of a colloquy, and I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Buchanan).

I appreciate your constant leadership on the national problem of prescription drug abuse. I appreciated your input during your phone call to me last week back in Michigan when the Senate passed this amendment. Our committee has focused on this issue, and you have been an outstanding partner with Congressman Ed Whitfield and Congresswoman Bono Mack on this.

When used properly, we know that these medications provide needed therapies for those suffering from pain. However, the abuse of some of those products has devastated communities and destroyed families across the country. So, as we move forward on this bill in our discussions with the Senate, I hope that we can continue the partnership and be able to work this issue out.

At this point, Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the balance of my time be controlled by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).