Floor Statements

The author Henry Miller wrote: ``The ordinary man is involved in action, the hero acts, an immense difference.''

Mr. Speaker, having grown up the son of a rural electric lineman, I am more than a little familiar with the not so ordinary actions of these rather ordinary people.

They do a job most of us won't or can't do, often putting themselves in danger's way as they carry out their duties in all kinds of weather conditions. They earn a paycheck for their work for sure, but their contribution to the quality of life of rural America is to the benefit of millions of people.

But today, Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize the extraordinary efforts of two rural electric linemen from North Dakota who stepped beyond being involved in the action to act.

Jody Bruce from Minot, who works for Verendrye Electric Cooperative, and Josh Hoffman from Carrington, who works for Northern Plains Electric Cooperative, left the comfort zone of middle America to facilitate the advent of safe, reliable, and affordable electricity in a community in Haiti.

Their service and sacrifice will improve the lives of many people because electricity is a critical element to improve quality of life, health care, education, clean water, and other vital services.

Volunteering their time and expertise, they both spent 2 weeks in the town of Caracol, providing safety training and mentoring for local linemen. They also assisted with installing power for residents located next to an industrial park. When fully functional, this facility will have the capacity to employ 30,000 people.

Jody and Josh are the only linemen from North Dakota to ever participate in such a project in Haiti, a country where only about 13 percent of the people have reliable access to electricity.

The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association International Foundation has been working on a U.S. Agency for International Development-funded program to bring electricity to the town of Caracol and nearby areas.

Today, more than 1,200 consumers in the town have access to reliable electricity. Some homes now have antennas for their TVs. In fact, some businesses are springing up, things like Internet cafes that have been established, and water treatment plants are in full operation.

While we often take for granted such basic amenities as safe, reliable electricity in this country, we ought to say a prayer for the men and women who ensure that the lights are always on for us and the families who wait for them at home.

In the case of Jody Bruce and Josh Hoffman, well, they deserve a tickertape parade. They, Mr. Speaker, are international heroes.

Mr. Chairman, I thank Chairman Hastings and Chairman Lamborn and my friend from Ohio, Mr. Johnson, for introducing this important legislation.

I had the great honor, for nearly 10 years prior to coming to Congress, to be on the North Dakota Public Service Commission, where we carried the SMCRA laws and enforced the Federal SMCRA laws on behalf of our lignite coal industry that employs thousands of people.

We had a little over 100,000 acres under permit, mined 30 million tons of coal every year, and burned it to generate electricity, very low-cost electricity.

We had a great relationship with our Federal Government, our Federal partners. We did it in partnership. They appreciated and honored State primacy. We carried out the letter and the spirit of the law very well.

As a consequence, we have clean streams; clean water; clean air; good, rich topsoil; as well as the jobs that come with it.

We don't have mountains, so a rule that was designed by somebody to deal with mountain removal mining doesn't really match the prairie of North Dakota, which is always the problem with one-size-fits-all regulations; and that is what we find so offensive back home, is when the Federal Government tries to fix every problem with one piece of legislation or one regulation.

We were very familiar--I worked with the 2008 rule. It works just fine. It involved stakeholder involvement. It involved consultation with stakeholders. We are missing that in this particular case.

Quite honestly, I guess when you talk about the war on coal, and some might want to deny that one exists, you might believe that if it was just one rule occasionally; but in the context of the aggregate of all of the rules and regulations and laws coming down from this administration, it is hard not to believe that there is an attempt to unilaterally disarm our economy and the global marketplace with a war on coal.

I encourage my colleagues to join me in voting for this important piece of legislation.

Thank you, Chairman Whitfield.

Mr. Chairman, I think pretty much everybody I talk to around here is familiar with the fact that North Dakota has 25,000 job openings with fewer than 10,000 people looking for work. It is not an accident. It helps, for sure, to have an 800-year supply of coal under the ground, to have some oil and some gas, but it also is an indication of a regulatory and tax climate that champions work, that champions investment, that doesn't apologize for having the lowest priced electricity rates in the country most times of the year. We also have a robust manufacturing economy as a result of those same policies.

Mr. Chairman, I believe that America's economic security and America's national security depend on America's energy security. I would love to see every Member of this body go to North Dakota and see what that type of development looks like. I would also like to have them breathe some of the cleanest air, see some of the cleanest water and some of the richest topsoil in the world. We are very proud of the fact that we can feed a hungry world while also meeting the growing demands of our economy.

If you really believe that there are several carbon-capture technology projects that are viable on power plants in this country, you should love this bill, because this bill actually prepares the standard for measuring that. It simply states that, for 12 consecutive months, six power plants--six different units--should be able to demonstrate it, with three of them being, of course, lignite, which is what we mine in North Dakota.

We don't have to compromise quality of life for a high standard of living--we don't do it in North Dakota, and we can replicate it across this country--but the EPA's overreach will hurt that.

I think this bill actually helps it, and I am very proud of my colleague Mr. Whitfield for his bicameral-bipartisan approach to this problem and to the solution that he has come up with. I urge all of my colleagues to vote for it.

Madam Speaker, North Dakota is known for having the strongest economy and the lowest unemployment rate in the Nation. We are also known as the home of North Dakota State University, or ``Bison Nation'' as we like to call it.

While millions of football fans spent the first weekend of the new year probably hoping for global warming and while contemplating what a ``polar vortex'' is, hearty Bison football fans watched and cheered as their beloved Thundering Herd earned a third consecutive Division I Football National Championship by handily defeating Towson 35-7, capping a perfect 15 and 0 win last season with an explanation mark. The route to three FCS championships includes a record-setting 24 consecutive victories and a 3-year win-loss record of 43 and 2.

Yes, my little State in the middle of the North American continent produces food for a hungry world, energy

for a growing economy, technology and industrial products, and enough economic opportunity that every NDSU graduate could not possibly take advantage of. But, today, Madam Speaker, I salute the best FCS football program in the United States with a hearty congratulations and a Go Bison.

Mr. Speaker, I certainly want to thank my friend and colleague from Oklahoma. He is a colleague on the Natural Resources Committee with me, as well as the Indian and Alaska Native Affairs Subcommittee, and Mr. Mullin has demonstrated great leadership on this important legislation.

In my State of North Dakota, our citizens enlist in the military at a rate four times the national average. Much of the credit for this impressive statistic really belongs to the thousands of our native citizens who have enlisted at very, very high rates, citizens from the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa, from the Fort Berthold Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation, from our Sioux Nations at Fort Yates and Fort Totten, from the Standing Rock and Spirit Lake Nations as well as Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Nation who have demonstrated exemplary patriotism in their enlistment. And furthermore, they carry out this patriotism with incredible pride, understandable and appropriate pride in the way they participate with their honor and color guards at veterans' events throughout our State.

This memorial and these amendments are really a very appropriate and important recognition of their sacrifice and their service and their unique contribution to our society, especially given the history of our Nation's birth.

So, Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of our colleagues to honor our native veterans by voting ``yes'' on this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by thanking my colleague, Mr. Reed, for his leadership on the Congressional Diabetes Caucus. Thank you, that was very inspiring.

Mr. Speaker, I am of the firm conviction that America's national security and America's economic security are tied directly to America's energy security.

We have a wonderful opportunity today to vote on a couple of very important bills that will enhance that energy security, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on both of them.

I get to represent the entire State of North Dakota. North Dakota was once described by one of our favorite sons, Eric Sevareid, the famous CBS newsman, as the rectangular blank spot in the Nation's mind. But today, everybody is talking about North Dakota. It is the fastest growing economy in the word. It has the lowest unemployment rate in the country. It has the fastest growing personal income in the country. In fact, today, Mr. Speaker, there are tens of thousands of high-paying jobs in North Dakota waiting for more people to come to the State to fill them. If you are willing to work hard and put in a full day's honest work, you can be very successful there.

We have heard some speeches already this morning about the need to reduce hunger. We have heard some speeches this morning about the availability of affordable health care. I am for both of those things, and the best way to enhance availability of health care and to reduce hunger is to provide jobs.

Again, I would urge my colleagues today to vote for the bills that will be in front of us.

H.R. 1965 is the Federal Lands Jobs and Energy Security Act. It is not a complicated bill. It acknowledges two things. It acknowledges the vast energy resources that our country owns under its Federal lands onshore. It also acknowledges contemporary technology that provides all of the security and safety that is required to do the job well. But what it does is it diverts some of the resources into the right places, that allows the streamlining of permitting while also empowering the local offices of our Bureau of Land Management and our U.S. Forest Service in ways that allow them to do the jobs that they do very well even better.

This is something I know a little bit about. Prior to coming to Congress, I was an energy regulator for 10 years in North Dakota. I worked closely with our Federal partners, in fact, found them to be some of the best people that

I had the opportunity to know. I just met with a number of them last week out in the western part of the State. They do a great job, but they need more resources, especially in an economy that is so competitive for workforce and so competitive in areas like rent and housing and the cost of living.

So by allowing the local offices to keep more of the permitting fees, we can channel the resources to allow them to do their jobs better and faster, without compromising the integrity of their charge to protect our other natural resources above the ground. They do it as well as anybody, and we ought to let them do that job and empower them to do it.

H.R. 2728, the Protecting States' Rights to Promote American Energy Security Act, simply acknowledges what the Constitution guarantees, and that is that we are a Nation of States and that States are, in fact, sovereign, and that nobody is more protective of the land and the water and the air than the people who live on it and drink it and breathe it. It simply states that if you have fracturing rules in your State, that is good enough. It is your State, and the Federal Government's minimum standards ought not impose, be an imposition, on the States and their rights to develop their resources the way they want to. It frees up resources of the Federal Government, while unleashing the ingenuity and innovation of our energy economy, providing wealth, providing jobs, and, by the way, reducing the cost of energy for the rest of us, which makes us even more competitive in the global marketplace.

We have a grand opportunity today, Mr. Speaker, to pass these two bills and to put America on a path to full economic recovery and, perhaps, to bring more troops home from the Middle East to reduce our dependency on foreign oil. Let's do this not only as a country, but as a continent, acknowledging that our friends in Canada are better trading partners than Venezuela. Let's build the pipelines and infrastructure necessary. Let's unleash American ingenuity, and let's put America back to work by becoming more energy secure.

I thank the chairman for his leadership on this important issue.

Mr. Chairman, the citizens of North Dakota sent me to Washington in large part to protect our thriving economy from the overreaching regulations, often based on faulty science, from destroying that very economy. In carrying out that charge, I get the opportunity to tell the North Dakota success story in Washington, with the hope that we can duplicate it around our country.

A major part of telling that story, of course, is talking about the successful regulation of hydraulic fracturing in our State.

Lynn Helms, the director of North Dakota's Department of Mineral Resources, testified in the Natural Resources Committee on this very issue, saying:

Our oil and gas rules are reviewed at least every 2 years

through a public comment process. North Dakota regulations

also address flow-back disposal, chemical disclosure, well

construction, and well bore pressure testing and have reduced

well bore failures from six per year to zero.

From six to zero--that is success at the State level.

In addition to the fact that any Federal hydraulic fracturing rule will be duplicative, the rules will be impractical to implement across the Nation, where environmental and geological circumstances are as diverse as the views in this Chamber.

North Dakota has gone from number nine to number two in oil production, and at the same time from number 38 to number 6 in economic success.

While the BLM is developing its hydraulic fracturing rules, the EPA is conducting studies on the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources. A stated goal of the EPA study is to ask the question: What are possible impacts--I restate, possible impacts-- of hydraulic fracturing fluids on drinking water? Even the EPA's independent advisers have raised questions, with one member stating:

There is no quantitative risk assessment included in EPA's

research effort.

Despite, Mr. Chairman, no cases of hydraulic fracturing impacting drinking water resources, title II of this bill does not prevent the EPA from conducting such studies but ensures any such study done is held to the highest standards of review and risk assessment. I urge passage so that the Federal Government cannot impose its mediocrity on States' success.

Mr. Speaker, Wayne and Leann Buchholz operate a ranch near Rhame, North Dakota. They have never been active in politics, but a recent letter from their insurance company has changed all of that, for their letter informed them that they would be losing their health care coverage due to the excessive regulations of ObamaCare.

Mr. Speaker, 36,000 North Dakotans are receiving similar cancelation notices, similar to that of Wayne and Leann. Each of these figures on this poster represents over 1,200 North Dakotans just like Wayne and Leann.

On the other hand, only 30 North Dakotans have been able to sign up for ObamaCare through the first month--not 30,000, not 3,000, not even 300, Mr. Speaker--30. Each figure on this part of the graphic represents one North Dakotan able to sign up.

Mr. Speaker, in North Dakota, like much of America, a man's word is his bond. We must help the President make good on his promise and pass the Keep Your Health Plan Act tomorrow.

IHC Health Solutions,

Independence Holding Group,

Phoenix, AZ, September 30, 2013.

Re Companion Life Insurance Company, Discontinuance of your

Coverage, Contract Amendment to extend coverage until

April 1, 2014

Mr. Speaker, I rise to encourage my colleagues to support today's jobs bill, the Water Resources Reform and Development Act, because it is not an earmark. It authorizes--not appropriates--money for 23 projects identified by the Corps of Engineers as important. They are important for a number of reasons, not the least of which is their primary purpose is the movement of goods and services into the global marketplace, which creates wealth and jobs for Americans.

Further, it authorizes projects that are important to flood protection in flood-prone areas like the Red River Valley of the North, in my area. In addition to that, the real reforms that are impressive are things like it de-authorizes old projects to the tune of $12 billion worth. Furthermore, it gives more leverage and flexibility for the use of non-Federal funds, which is, I think, the very thing that the taxpayers of this State are looking for--the type of flexibility that allows local governments and local communities to do the right thing for themselves.

Madam Speaker, I thank the ranking member and my neighbor for yielding the time and for his leadership on this very important issue that supports the sugar farmers of the Red River Valley of the north, and I am very pleased to confirm that there is, in fact, plenty of room for all of our colleagues to attend American Crystal Sugar's annual meeting; so I appreciate his invitation, as well.

How many Federal programs only cost money every 10 to 12 years? We hear that this program has cost $250 million since July. Yeah, since July of 2002. That's all it has cost.

I want to speak less, perhaps, to the merits of the program because they have already been so eloquently illustrated and speak more to an issue of unity. At a time when unity is so rare, it is unfortunate that some of our colleagues have chosen to attempt to dismantle one of the very few, frankly,

successful achievements of this Congress.

The committee work on the 2013 farm bill began years ago before many of us were even elected to Congress. An anti-sugar amendment was thoughtfully debated on this floor, including the provisions in this resolution, and the House killed it. At that time, a sense of the House was reached and a farm bill was passed.

The Senate passed the exact same language pertaining to the sugar program that is making today's action not only divisive, but a total waste of time, as House rules prohibit the conferees from even considering its language. This maneuver undermines the very integrity of this great institution, and it ignores the unifying achievement of this farm bill by dismantling the support system for our sugar farmers who are facing a 57 percent collapse in prices as we speak.

We don't need more division, Madam Speaker. We need accomplishments. Let's not impose division where there is unity. Let's vote ``no'' on this amendment. Let's allow our conferees to do their jobs, bring back a report that a majority of us can vote for and a farm bill that we can all vote for, that the Senate can agree to, that the President can sign, and demonstrate our functionality once again.

I thank the chairman for yielding the time and for his long-suffering and persistent leadership on this important issue.

I rise to ask my colleagues to please oppose efforts in this House to punish success and vote ``no'' on the Ryan resolution.

The viability of any insurance instrument requires broad participation. To maintain and foster improvement to our farm base and the stable food supply it provides, proper risk mitigation is essential. Although attacking the ``wealthy'' may appear to be noble, AGI limits for crop insurance will drive out large-risk pool participants, making the program less affordable for the farmers least able to do without it.

In North Dakota, the average farm is markedly different than the farm in Wisconsin. North Dakota family farms are thousands of acres involving multiple generations. The proposed AGI limits ignore this reality. They not only include income from farm operations, but other wholly unrelated earnings. USDA research shows average off-farm income greatly exceeds on-farm income, making the targets of this provision more collateral than intentional.

American farmers largely support the major policy shift that eliminates direct payments, relying solely on this cost-sharing arrangement with the Federal Government, resulting in 10 percent taxpayer savings. Unlike previous subsidies, farmers pay for this protection by contributing around 40 percent of the premium. The other 60 percent is not even expended by the government unless a claim is made.

The increasing role of Federal crop insurance as the foundation of the family farm safety net in recent years has diminished the need for crisis appropriations. Absent the stability of an actuarially sound program, future catastrophic disasters will result in greater ad hoc disaster payments. Let's not lose the momentum to shift from direct payments to crop insurance by compromising the financial soundness of this important program.

As the world population grows, the demand for food will increase. We should herald efficiency and increased productivity. Neither is achieved by punishing our most successful farmers.

Please oppose the Ryan sense of the House resolution.

Mr. Speaker, the Democrats who run this town seem to be in denial about the unworkability of this health care law. The President has said it's worked exactly the way it's supposed to, and Harry Reid has even said it's wonderful. If it's so wonderful, why does the administration continue to issue delay after delay of key provisions for key constituencies?

The truth is, this law is not ready for prime time for anyone. What's more, it's not fair. Not only is it not fair to those who own a business, it's not fair to those who work for one. Frankly, it's not fair for anyone at all.

House Republicans are simply requesting a 1-year delay in its implementation for everyone. That seems fair.

Madam Speaker, I don't question the sincerity of our Democrat colleagues' desire to feed the truly needy; I share in that commitment. But, Madam Speaker, I do resent the idea that somehow asking able-bodied adults without dependent children to at least be looking for work as a requirement to receive these benefits is somehow immoral.

When did America trade the dignity of a job for a culture of permanent dependency? President Theodore Roosevelt writes in his autobiography about his life as a North Dakota rancher. In chapter four, ``In Cowboy Land,'' he writes:

We knew toil and hardship, hunger and thirst, but we felt

the beat of hardy life in our veins because ours was the

glory of work and the joy of living.

Madam Speaker, I say let's encourage the dignity of work again and pass these modest reforms.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the heroic efforts of former Staff Sergeant Clinton Romesha of the United States Army. Staff Sergeant Romesha was with the 4th Infantry Division and awarded the Medal of Honor for his acts of gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his own life in Afghanistan on October 3, 2009.

Attacked by an estimated 300 Taliban fighters, Staff Sergeant Romesha moved uncovered to conduct a reconnaissance and seek reinforcements. Romesha took out one enemy machine gun team and was wounded attempting to take out the second. Despite his wounds he continued fighting and directed air support, resulting in the elimination of over 30 enemy fighters.

Clint, his wife Tamara, and their three children--Dessi, Gwen, and Colin--live in Minot, North Dakota, and are the pride of our State.

It is for his extraordinary heroism and resolute commitment to his fellow soldiers that I am proud to honor Staff Sergeant Clinton Romesha.

I thank my colleague and friend from Ohio for leading this important discussion on this very important and somewhat scary week.

Mr. Speaker, I love the opportunity to tell the story of North Dakota. You know, a lot of people think of North Dakota these days as just an oil-producing State out there somewhere in the Wild West. While we're the second-leading producer of oil--and we're rather proud of how well we do it--long before that, even long before North Dakota was one of the 10 top producers of wind energy, long before that North Dakota was producing electricity by burning coal. In fact, for decades, North Dakota has been generating electricity burning coal. In fact, at the current burn rate, there's an 800-year supply of lignite coal under our prairies.

Prior to being elected to this great institution of the people's House, I was a public service commissioner for 10 years and carried the portfolio of coal mining in our State. I got to oversee the data collection, the pre-mine permitting, the permitting of the mine, the inspections of the mines, the releasing of the bond at the end of the life of the mine.

North Dakota companies mine over 30 million tons of coal every year, Mr. Speaker, generating about 5,000 megawatts of electricity. Currently, we have about 120,000 acres under permit for coal mining in our State. It's very important to North Dakota, as it is to the rest of our Nation.

The lignite industry in North Dakota, a State with fewer than 700,000 citizens, employs more than 28,000 of those 700,000 people. It has an annual economic impact in our little State of $3 billion and generates over $100 million of tax revenue to help fund the priorities of our State.

To provide some perspective, Mr. Speaker, on the wage impact of the industry on North Dakota, two counties--Mercer and Oliver Counties--are home to three coal mines and five generating plants. They are the two counties with the highest wages of any county in our State, and we have a State with very high wages. But those direct economic benefits are just a small part of our story. Because, you see, 79 percent of North Dakota's lignite is used to generate electricity for over 2 million citizens in the upper Midwest; 13.5 percent is used to generate synthetic natural gas that is piped to over 400,000 homes in the East.

Every time I have this opportunity to address the House, I like to tell a little piece of the story. You see, 7.5 percent of that coal is used to generate fertilizer for our number one industry, agriculture. It's a great part of our culture. It's what I believe makes us very good at coal mining, it's those agricultural roots.

Let's talk about electricity generation for a moment that's under such attack today. No industry in America is more under attack today than this by this administration.

We're home to seven plants, as I said, owned by rural electric cooperatives and investor-owned utilities that provide low-cost electricity to our region. Beyond the direct employment of the high- paying jobs in this industry by the coal mines and the generation plants, the transmission companies and the utilities that distribute the electricity, our low-cost coal provides the region with some of the cheapest utility rates in the country. In fact, just today I printed out the most recent Electric Power Monthly Report of Average Retail Price of Electricity by State year to date, and North Dakota and the State of Washington have the lowest retail prices of any State in the country. Can you imagine what a tremendous advantage that is in the global marketplace when you're trying to

attract other industries, as my colleague from Kentucky talked about, the opportunity for manufacturing and other industries?

Now, we're also home to the Great Plains Synfuels Plant, which takes our coal and turns it into gas. It is used by homes and industry. In the process of gasifying that coal, 50 percent of it is captured--the carbon is captured--and it's shipped via pipeline to Saskatchewan for tertiary oil recovery. So we capture half of the carbon and then inject it into old oil wells and generate more oil from it.

Long before carbon capture and sequestration was cool, North Dakota innovators saw it as a commercially viable byproduct of energy development. Now all of that is going to get squashed by these rules that we're hearing about this week.

Another innovation of our coal is that we use the ash from the plants, a byproduct of the power plants. Instead of it being emitted out of the stacks, it's collected. And other entrepreneurial-minded individuals have discovered productive ways to utilize the coal ash instead of sending it to landfills. It creates a stronger, longer lasting, and easier to work with concrete that's used in our Nation's infrastructure--something that we need very badly these days. It's used in paint, insulation for stoves and refrigerators, ceiling and flooring tiles, lumber, bricks and masonry, shingles and roofing materials. This is a byproduct, not a waste product, and it's certainly safe.

It is used to make better bridges, like the new I-35 Bridge in Minneapolis; better footings for wind towers. The many, many wind towers in North Dakota are actually attached to coal ash concrete. And their ability to sell this byproduct allows our utilities to keep electricity rates low for everyone.

But you might ask: What of the environment? After all, it's the air, land and water that concerns the magnitude of rules and regulations that are coming at our industries with such zeal out of this administration. I love talking about our environment in North Dakota. I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, and to our colleagues, that very few places on Earth are cleaner and greener than the State of North Dakota.

With regard to our air, you might assume that a State with seven power plants would have dirty air; but no, we are one of very few States that meet all Ambient Air Quality Standards as prescribed by the EPA. We're very proud of that. By the way, remember those two counties, Mercer and Oliver, with the five power plants and the three coal mines? Once again, this year they received an A grade from the American Lung Association for their clean air in their annual report for 2012.

But perhaps the area I'm most proud of is the reclamation of our mine lands. Before the Federal Government passed the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, the State of North Dakota passed its own reclamation laws which were stricter, higher standards. We return our land to pre-mining use. I wish every Member of Congress could come to North Dakota. I wish our President could come to North Dakota and see how good America could be, and see how we reclaim our land, because we love our land. We're farmers and ranchers. Our mines take great pride in and invest vast resources in protecting our environment--their environment. Our companies have won many awards for stewardship.

You see, coal miners and utility company employees not only enjoy high-paying jobs, but they live there, they breathe the air, they drink the water, they farm the land. They're not just farmers and engineers; they're accountants, machinery operators, environmental scientists, rangeland biologists, truck drivers. The care of our natural resources is more important to us than it is to the EPA, quite honestly. And we do it quite well. We're a place made up of people who have proven for centuries you don't have to compromise quality of life for a high standard of living.

We are an all-of-the-above State, and I'm very, very proud of it. And I'm proud to be here with you, my colleague from Ohio (Mr. Johnson), to tell the story one more time about the importance of this industry. And if a war on coal is what's being waged, then we'd better be armed for the war because it's worth fighting for. It's for our future.