Floor Statements

Offered By: Mr. Terry

Amendment No. 4: In the item relating to ``ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY--science and technology'', after the second

dollar amount, insert the following: ``(reduced by

$130,000,000)''.

In the item relating to ``ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY--

hazardous substance superfund'', after the second dollar

amount, insert the following: ``(increased by

$130,000,000)''.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for working with me to put this into the base bill.

Since 1999 natural gas prices have more than tripled to over $7. It is off the charts now. It is projected that if we do not do anything about natural gas supplies, it could reach $13, $14 by 2020.

What does that mean?

It means higher heating bills; 65 percent of my constituents heat their homes in Nebraska by natural gas. By the way, we have lost, Mr. Chairman, about 3 million jobs in the industrial manufacturing bases. Just for our farmers, our agricultural folks in the Midwest, farmers have seen the prices of nitrogen fertilizer increase from $175 per ton in 2000 to more than $400 this planting season, and we have lost half of our fertilizer manufacturers chasing the lower natural gas prices.

Mr. Chairman, in regard to safety, the gentleman wrote into this language specifically giving the States the right to participate in this process, and I encourage my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the bill.

This legislation is perhaps the most important bill we will deal with in this session. The lack of a comprehensive energy plan is hurting our families and our economy. Global energy demand is soaring, America's natural resources are finite and flat, rising energy imports are driving record trade deficits as runaway energy costs drag down the U.S. economy. Unless we implement a long-term, comprehensive energy plan, Americans will pay even more to heat their homes, drive their cars to work, and feed their families and provide other essentials for our loved ones.

For the Members of this Chamber, this bill is our opportunity to ensure a better future. The Committee on Energy and Commerce, along with other committees of jurisdiction, have produced an energy bill that recognizes today's needs while preparing for the future.

To meet today's energy needs, this legislation does several things. It expands the Nation's natural gas supply, primarily by clarifying the Federal Government's role in LNG facilities. It increases our supplies of gasoline and diesel by adding new refineries, limiting the number of specialty blends, and establishing a 5-billion-gallon renewable fuel standard.

This energy bill adds diversity to our energy portfolio by encouraging more nuclear power, clean coal, and renewable energies. It doubles our efforts in energy conservation and efficiency, it reduces America's dangerous dependence on foreign oil, and improves our Nation's electrical transmissions.

But this energy bill looks beyond the horizon as well. By boosting the use of hydrogen fuel cells, microturbines, and other forms of new energy technologies, we can begin preparing to meet the energy demands of tomorrow. I was proud to work with my colleague from across the aisle, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Doyle) to double the authorized funding for this year's hydrogen title. It is just one of many forward-thinking provisions in this legislation.

The energy sector represents a $650 billion piece of the American economy. It is the engine that powers other sectors of the U.S. economy, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule and the bill.

Madam Speaker, I do appreciate the gentlewoman from Tennessee yielding some to me so we can talk about what I think is one of the most important bills that we will vote on in the 109th Congress, and that is a comprehensive energy package.

As the gentlewoman from Tennessee mentioned, this bill is both forward thinking and now thinking. There are alternative technologies. There is I think an incredible statement toward renewable fuels and alternative technologies like the fuel cell, but we also have to recognize some of our issues that face us now, and what I am talking about is the price of natural gas and how it is impacting our economy and our families in America, especially agri business and small businesses.

Natural gas, by the way, accounts for nearly a quarter of America's energy supply and is used by more than half of the households and businesses in America. In fact, in my district of Omaha, Nebraska, about 65 percent of the households are heated, and by the way, it gets cold, maybe not like in the gentlewoman's part of Tennessee, it gets pretty cold in Omaha during the winter, and we rely on natural gas.

Unfortunately, the United States faces a natural gas challenge that threatens the profitability of almost every sector of our economy, as well as our citizens' quality of life. Nationwide natural gas prices just 5 years ago were $1.50 per thousand cubic feet. Today, as this chart shows, it is off the charts. It is over $7 and has been for the last two to three weeks.

Let us look at how the United States' natural gas prices compare to the rest of the world. In Venezuela, it is about 70 cents per thousand cubic feet, 40 cents in Africa, 80 cents in Russia. The next, by the way, is Europe with $3.70, less than half of what we pay in the United States.

Farm States, including Nebraska, have been hit especially hard by higher natural gas prices since natural gas is the primary material in nitrogen fertilizers, as well as the key fuel for irrigation and drying of grains. Anhydrous ammonia fertilizer has increased from about $175 per ton in 2000 to as much as $375 last planting season.

About half of America's nitrogen fertilizer is now imported. Let me restate that. Nearly half of our farmers' nitrogen fertilizer is now imported, mostly due to these high costs of natural gas. This is going to have a severe impact on our economy and for our farmers.

The increased cost of natural gas has played a substantial role in losing nearly 3 million U.S. manufacturing jobs over the last 5 years, according to the Industrial Energy Consumers of America. Whether these jobs were located in an auto plant in Ohio or a petrochemical manufacturer in Houston, many have been moved overseas, chasing the cheaper natural gas where it is more abundant and plentiful.

These reasons for concern are magnified when one considers U.S. natural gas consumption is expected to increase over the next 20 years. Simultaneously, domestic natural gas production is falling about 1 percent a year.

Let me show my colleagues this chart. We actually have a decent supply of natural gas, but most of it is off limits and stays off limits in this bill, especially around the coastal regions of California and Florida.

We do encourage some additional domestic production of natural gas. Last

year, this Congress passed a pipeline from Alaska down to Chicago, but I am telling my colleagues, looking at the politics in Alaska, this may take decades before that pipeline is run from Alaska to the continental United States to provide some price relief for our economy and for heating our homes.

So we must look at these natural gas prices in a holistic way, meaning domestic production, pipeline, and we still have to realize that to meet the increased needs of natural gas within our United States, we are going to unfortunately have to import some of our natural gas. Otherwise, if we do not look at it in a holistic way, domestic, Alaskan pipeline and liquid natural gas imports, natural gas prices may increase to $13 or $14 per thousand cubic feet.

Unfortunately, to import liquid natural gas, we have got about three or four facilities today. There are many applications to site liquid natural gas to an import terminal where the liquid natural gas comes in, it goes in, it is unloaded, it is turned into a gas and then put into pipelines, but we are experiencing the typical not-in-my-backyard with some extreme overexaggerations of the dangerousness of liquid natural gas. Because localities and States have played on this fear, those localities, in fact, in Maine, a locality even, though the States have issued permits, are approved permits, a locality stops an LNG terminal. This forces us to have to look at different ways.

In this base bill, we in the Committee on Energy and Commerce worked on this together in committee. We recognized that what we have to do is streamline this process. If we are going to help alleviate the pressures on price, we have to give more authority for this international and national commerce to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. We want the States to have a part in here. What we just do not want is for the States and localities, based on NIMBY, to have veto power. This is in the base bill.

Tomorrow, we are going to have a movement by a gentleman from Massachusetts and Delaware to strip out this provision, and it is only going to hurt manufacturers, small businesses, agri business and people who heat their homes with natural gas, companies that generate electricity by natural gas. We must overcome this provision tomorrow for the overall economic and basically lifestyle of the citizens of the United States.

So I want to thank the gentlewoman for reserving this time so we can help educate our colleagues and America on something as important as liquid natural gas and its implications to their budgets at home.

Mr. Speaker, in pertinent part, section 202 of S. 256, the ``Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005,'' amends section 524 of the Bankruptcy Code by making the discharge injunction inapplicable to certain acts by a creditor having a claim secured by a lien on real property that is the debtor's principal residence, so long as the creditor satisfies certain criteria. First, the creditor's act must be in the ordinary course of business between the creditor and debtor. Second, such act is limited to seeking periodic payments associated with a valid security interest in lieu of pursuit of in rem relief to enforce the lien.

Section 202 was included because Congress recognized that there are many consumer debtors who, despite filing bankruptcy, desire to repay secured obligations in order to retain their principal residences. Under current law, however, some secured creditors stop sending monthly billing statements or payment coupons for fear of violating the discharge injunction. Section 202 is intended to reassure these secured creditors that if consumer debtors want to continue making voluntary payments so they can keep their principal residences, then secured creditors may take appropriate steps to facilitate such payment arrangements, such as continuing to send monthly billing statements or payment coupons.

Moreover, despite the express reference in this provision to liens on real property, section 202 should not, by negative inference or implication, be construed as limiting any rights that may have developed through existing case law, or otherwise, that permit secured creditors to send, or consumer debtors to request and receive, monthly billing statements or payment coupons for claims secured by real or personal property. See, e.g., Ramirez v. GMAC (In re Ramirez), 280 B.R. 253 (C.D. Cal. 2002); Henry v. Associates Home Equity Services, Inc (In re Henry), 266 B.R. 457 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2002).

Madam Speaker, I have the distinct honor to recognize Pastor Curt Dodd, our guest chaplain in the House of Representatives today, and I also want to thank him for his thoughtful and inspiring prayer.

Dr. Dodd began his ministry as an intern at the First Baptist Church in Houston, Texas, in 1973. He was called to serve as associate pastor and then senior pastor at several Texas churches before shepherding the Metropolitan Baptist Church in Houston. Under Dr. Dodd's pastoral leadership, ``the Met'' received recognition as one of the fastest growing churches in Texas and the Southern Baptist Convention.

From 1995 to 1999, Dr. Dodd was called by God to leave his successful ministry at the church to start a church in Pueblo, Colorado, one of that State's most under-reached areas. With his trademark enthusiasm and commitment to the Lord, he initiated several other church plants, including Fellowship of the Rockies in Colorado Springs. He then went to Florida to Merit Island, and now serves as the senior pastor of Westside Church in Omaha, Nebraska, where my family and I attend.

Dr. Dodd is also an accomplished author of three books: Add One to Grow On; Hearts on Fire--the Keys to Dynamic Church Growth; and Running on Empty in the Fast Lane.

With a heart for the local church and kingdom expansion, he has served on various national and international denominational boards, but his greatest accomplishments are seen in the eyes of the men and women who have heard and accepted the message he brings, that Jesus is our Lord and Saviour who died for our sins.

Madam Speaker, I know that I speak for my colleagues when I say we are proud and honored to have Dr. Dodd with us today.

Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, March 3, 2005, I missed the vote on final passage of H.R. 841, the Continuity in Representation Act, rollcall 52. Because it was announced earlier that this vote would be conducted as a voice vote, I immediately left the House floor following the vote on the motion to recommit, so that I could make a flight to my District. Later in the day, I learned Ms. Millender-McDonald demanded a recorded vote on the question of passage of the bill.

Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on the final passage of H.R. 841.

Madam Speaker, I rise today as a cosponsor of this resolution, and I thank the gentleman from Alabama for offering it.

It is an honor for me to be part of this recognition of the Tuskegee Airmen, members of the Greatest Generation who fought fascism abroad and overcame discrimination at home to become one of our Nation's most successful military units. Their story deserves to be told often, not just in February, to remind all Americans how far we have come to honor the many sacrifices made along the way.

I have the privilege of representing four Tuskegee Airmen who reside in Nebraska's Second Congressional District: Robert Holts, Ralph Orduna, and Charles Lane, all of Omaha and just south of Omaha in Bellevue, Harry Tull. Another Airman, Paul Adams, lives in nearby Lincoln.

I am especially proud to note that Colonel Lane of Omaha was the youngest black fighter in World War II. His daughter, Karen Davis, is a longtime member of my congressional staff and she does a wonderful job; and Colonel Lane can be as proud of her, as we are of him.

I also want to mention Omaha native Alphonza Davis, a graduate of Omaha Tech High School and Omaha University, who finished first in his class at Tuskegee and was chosen squadron leader. He was killed in combat in 1944 while over Germany. Today, the local Tuskegee Airmen chapter is named in his honor.

The story of the Tuskegee Airmen is unfortunately rooted in the racial segregation that still existed in our country during World War II. As a result, African Americans who wanted to fly in the military were trained at a separate location near Tuskegee, Alabama. The Tuskegee Airmen, or Red Tails as they were called because of the crimson tails on their aircraft, were the first squadron of African American combat pilots in the U.S. military. By the end of the war, nearly 1,000 men had graduated from pilot training at Tuskegee.

Under the command of Colonel Benjamin Davis, Jr., these warriors fought over North Africa, Sicily and Europe. By the way, Colonel Davis would go on to be the Air Force's first African American general.

How good were these Tuskegee Airmen? In a book entitled ``Mustang Aces of the 9th and 15th Air Forces,'' one pilot bomber recalled that the Tuskegee pilots had earned great respect from the bomber pilots they protected. Here is a direct quote: ``The Red Tails were always out there when we wanted them to be,'' he said. ``We had no idea they were black; it was the Army's best kept secret.''

Today, the Tuskegee Airmen and their record of success is no secret. Throughout the war, not a single bomber protected by the Red Tails was ever shot down by enemy aircraft. By the war's end, the Tuskegee Airmen had flown over 15,000 sorties, completed over 1,500 missions, destroyed more than 260 enemy aircraft, and more than 1,000 enemy vehicles on the ground; and been awarded 744 Air Medals, 150 Distinguished Flying Crosses, 14 Bronze Stars, and 8 Purple Hearts.

Of the estimated 450 who saw combat, 150 lost their lives while on combat flights or in training, including Colonel Lane's childhood friend, John Squires.

I join my House colleagues in saluting the Tuskegee Airmen 60 years after they first donned the Nation's uniform. They have secured their place in history as American heroes. We are proud of them all. We thank them for their service to this great country. I thank the gentleman from Alabama for his work and for this worthy tribute.

Mr. Speaker, it is with a deep sense of gratitude and profound sense of sadness that I rise to pay tribute to the life of a brave young man who grew up in my hometown of Omaha, Nebraska, Marine Corporal Shane Kielion who died Monday in combat in Iraq, in Fallujah. On the same day, he became a father.

With his entire life in front of him, Shane chose to risk everything to fight for the values Americans hold close to our hearts in a land halfway around the world. This was his second tour of duty.

My heart goes out to his wife April and his brand-new son Shane and his parents, Roger and Patricia. As a father myself, I cannot imagine being unable to see my sons grow up, and it breaks my heart that Shane will not have the same experience. But I know that Shane will be watching over his young son, and I hope the boy will grow up knowing that his father loved him and his mother very much.

Shane was known as a dedicated person to his wife and he would be to his son and to his country, and all Nebraskans will remember him as a true American. We can take pride in the example he set, bravely fighting to make the world a better place. My thoughts and prayers go out to Shane's family and friends during this difficult time. May God grant them strength, peace, and comfort.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 494, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call the House's attention to the Direct Support Professionals Fairness and Security Act of 2004. This act was introduced today by myself and Representative Lois Capps. The Act provides temporary assistance to states who choose to participate to achieve pay parity between private and public direct support professionals who are essential components of our nation's formal long-term support system for individuals with disabilities.

There are more than 54 million Americans with disabilities, 8 million of whom have mental retardation and other developmental disabilities. Nearly fourteen million require long-term supports and services. These supports include assistance to meet the individual's personal care and hygiene, habilitation, transportation, employment, meal preparation, housekeeping, and other home management needs--supports many of us often take for granted.

The workers who provide services to the individuals with disabilities are known by many job titles--but one thing in common is shared by all of them. They are the hands, voice and face of long-term supports and the human relationship established between the individual and the worker is at the core of our nation's formal long-term supports system. Many are women and the sole income earners for their families. Although providing an essential service to humanity, many of them remain impoverished due to low wages that have not kept pace with those of other industries. Turnover rates for these dedicated workers range between 40 and 100 percent. This has caused a retention and recruitment crisis that threatens our ability to provide adequate supports to people with disabilities of all ages. Further, with such rampant turnover, many of the individuals with disabilities must face new, unfamiliar faces for their daily assistance and lose the support of those upon whom they have come to rely.

The Direct Support Professionals Fairness and Security Act of 2004 provides up to five years of temporary assistance in the form of increased Medicaid dollars to states who choose to participate. Participating states will direct these desperately needed funds directly to increase the wages of private direct support professionals providing essential daily supports to individuals with disabilities. States will have the incentive they need to create parity between public and nonprofit workers providing the same essential services.

I ask my House colleagues to join me in support of the Direct Support Professionals Fairness and Security Act of 2004.

Madam Speaker, I want to compliment the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne) for introducing this. He represents the North Platte area.

This is such a magnificent piece of our Nebraska history, and it really represents the comradery and spirit of America here. The gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne) had mentioned that even in a town of 12,000 that over the period of the months of this canteen, there were literally tens of thousands of volunteers that came to help the servicemen and provide them services at this canteen in North Platte. And this canteen needed all of the support that it could get.

And word spread, literally spread, around the community and all of Nebraska; 125 communities came together to join in this effort. And due to fuel rationing, volunteers often carpooled from nearby communities to North Platte. Cities throughout Nebraska gave, through donations, time, money, supplies, food, meat. And it is really an incredible example of what it means to be an American at that time. The entire community gathered together to support and comfort these troops. Men, women, children all gave their time, money, efforts. Though it may not have been well known throughout the rest of the world, the memory of the North Platte Canteen still glows in the hearts of many Nebraskans. In fact, my own press secretary's mother talks proudly of peeling potatoes as a young child to help her older sisters at the canteen.

Lorene Huebner, of Hershey, Nebraska, just a teenager during this time, still remembers the piano in the canteen, and how it was always being played by either a volunteer or one of the troops and how packed the canteen would get with people talking, having coffee and laughing. She still feels that the whole U.S. was opened up to her through the troops from all across the country that she met in this canteen.

From December 25, 1941, through April 1, 1946, a total of 54 months, over 6 million troops were served at the North Platte Canteen. The outreach of communities to support each other remains an enduring mark of compassion and patriotism. That spirit is with us today in a different form, yes, but no less potent.

It is with great honor that I cosponsored this with my colleague, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne), and really look forward to the vote on this.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3313, the Marriage Protection Act. As a cosponsor of this important legislation, I thank Chairman Sensenbrenner and the leadership for bringing it to the House floor.

H.R. 3313 prohibits any federal court, including the Supreme Court, from hearing challenges to a key provision of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which will preserve the rights of states to not recognize same-sex unions permitted in other states. I support this limitation of federal court jurisdiction in this area.

I would like to point out, however, that H.R. 3313 does not address the current situation in Nebraska.

In 2000, seventy percent (70 percent) of Nebraska voters approved a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as ``one man, one woman''--and barring civil unions or domestic partnerships. The ACLU is currently challenging this amendment in federal district court. In a preliminary ruling, the federal district judge (Judge Bataillon) indicated sympathy with the ACLU's claim.

As I understand it, H.R. 3313 would not prevent federal courts from striking down state provisions, such as the one approved by Nebraska voters.

For that reason, an amendment to the U.S. Constitution may be required to further protect state statutes and constitutional amendments from challenge in the federal courts. While I will vote for this legislation, it is becoming increasingly clear to me and many of my colleagues that further action may be required by the Congress to protect and defend traditional marriage in America.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice strong objections to H.R. 3313, the so called Marriage Protection Act. This Act prohibits federal courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States, from hearing cases on the constitutionality of provisions of the Defense of Marriage Act, including those relating to same-sex marriage licenses.

This bill is phony, and it is a sham. The title of the bill itself is false advertising. While claiming to ``protect'' marriage, all the bill does is strip federal courts of jurisdiction so that they cannot even consider whether laws on same-sex marriages are consistent with our United States Constitution. For over 200 years, our Constitution has defined our nation and protected our rights. It is a document of empowerment, not limitation. But the Republican leadership wants to put a fence around it and padlock the gate, and they are doing it for purely political purposes.

The United States Congress should not be in the business of stripping federal courts of their ability to hear particular cases. Such actions, if imposed in the 1960's, could have been used to prevent federal courts from hearing voting rights cases. To limit the power of the courts like this for purely partisan purposes sets a dangerous precedent and is simply intolerable. It would undermine the independence of the judicial branch and run contrary to the vision set forth by our founding fathers in the Constitution.

Even for people who, like myself, believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, this measure does nothing to strengthen or protect those bonds. It seems to me that if a threat exists to marriage, it is that too many of them fail. For every two marriages that occurred in the 1990s, one ended in divorce. The stresses on marriages today are great, but they don't have to do with the jurisdiction of the federal courts. This bill does nothing to deal with problems like affordable housing, quality education and training, daycare for young children, high costs of gasoline, electricity and food, high unemployment rates and underemployment, and the lack of health care coverage and other benefits that place severe strains on many families.

Today, the very nature of the typical American family is changing. Just as families headed by only one adult were rare only a few decades ago but are common today, non-traditional couples are now a widespread fact of American society. Nearly 200 Fortune-500 companies and numerous municipalities and organizations have already recognized this fact on their own and provide benefits to same sex couples. In addition, several municipalities have adopted local ordinances prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation in housing and employment.

It is simply unfair to deny law-abiding American citizens the protections of civil law with respect to taxation, inheritance, hospital visits and the like, and it is wrong to shackle the federal courts by preventing them from even considering court cases pertaining to these matters.

For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to defeat this bill.

Mr. Speaker, tonight I join with my colleague, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne), in a bittersweet evening for us. The dean of our delegation, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), who has served this House faithfully now into his 26th year, as we are here tonight, these are his last votes as a Member of this august body, and I ask all of my colleagues here tonight to join me in bidding our colleague, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) farewell and Godspeed.

Mr. Speaker, 50 years ago a visionary named Robert B. Daugherty introduced the world to an extraordinary product, one that would fundamentally change how the world grows its food. Mr. Daugherty went on to found Valmont Industries, maker of the center irrigation pivot. This technology has revolutionized agricultural productivity while helping to protect our vital water resources.

Today, Valmont is the world's leader in mechanized irrigation. I am proud that this company and its primary manufacturing facilities are located in Valley, Nebraska, within the Second Congressional District. But Valmont's contributions to agriculture go far beyond Nebraska's borders.

Mr. Speaker, I commend Mogens Bay, the chairman and CEO for Valmont; as well as Terry McClain, senior vice president; and CFO, Bob Meaney, senior vice president; and Tom Spears, president of the irrigation division, for their dedication and leadership of a global corporate company. And, of course, I offer my best wishes and heartiest congratulations to the man who started it all, Bob Daugherty.