Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1285 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

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

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

Madam Speaker, House Resolution 1285 provides for consideration of H.R. 6304, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided among and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary and the chairman and ranking minority member on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

Madam Speaker, we have come a long way on the crucial issue of intelligence gathering. First, I must commend our majority leader, Mr. Hoyer, for his commitment and dedication to reaching a sensible, bipartisan and bicameral agreement on FISA. Ensuring that we provide our Nation's intelligence community with the necessary tools and resources to prevent a future terrorist attack on our Nation must transcend partisan politics, and doing it in a way that protects the rights guaranteed to law-abiding Americans under this Constitution.

Clearly, thanks to the hard work of Mr. Hoyer, Minority Whip Blunt, Chairman Reyes and many others, we will continue to work to protect the American people today.

Bringing this FISA agreement to the floor is the result of months of long and thoughtful deliberation between the House and Senate, Democrats and Republicans, and the White House. What we're doing today is proof that we in the House should not have to just settle on the will of the Senate. It's proof that we can achieve a bipartisan, bicameral agreement on how our Nation gathers its intelligence. This type of bipartisanship is precisely what the American people expect of us.

Today we're not voting on the Senate version of the bill, instead we have the opportunity to vote in favor of a sensible, bipartisan FISA bill that will help protect our Nation from terrorism, while protecting the civil liberties we, as Americans, hold dear.

I also admit that I don't think the FISA agreement is perfect, but seldom should we expect an opportunity to vote in favor of legislation that every Member of this Chamber believes to be perfect.

Effective legislation demands bipartisan consensus. And an example of such bipartisan consensus is the issue of immunity for telecom companies. The civil liberty protection provision in this agreement finally removes the shackles for our telecom companies to tell their side of the story. No longer can the administration step in and assert the ``State Secrets Privilege'' and deny telecom companies and the plaintiff seeking to protect his or her Constitutional rights the opportunity to make their case in front of a judge.

As a former district attorney, I for one couldn't agree more that if the intelligence community goes to a telecom company with adequate authorization and says, we need communication records for person X because he or she is believed to be a terrorist, the telecom company deserves to be afforded that protection.

Unfortunately, under the old system we would never know if adequate authorization and substantial evidence, for that matter, ever existed. Thanks to this bipartisan agreement, we now will.

Madam Speaker, we have come a long way over the last few months. We can all agree that the world changed on September 11, 2001. Our Nation faces new threats on new fronts. What we are doing here today is proof that we can come together, Republicans and Democrats, to provide our Nation's intelligence community with the necessary tools to face and fight those threats, while protecting the civil liberties of Americans, and ensuring that the rights guaranteed under the Constitution are not mere words but, rather, solemn ideas that our Nation holds dear.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I'd just like to read a quote today from The Washington Post on the FISA legislation that we are considering today.

The article is entitled ``A Better Surveillance Law.'' I just want to read one excerpt from it:

``Congress shows it still knows how to reach a compromise

in the national interest. Congressional leaders in both

parties should be commended for drafting legislation that

brings the country's surveillance laws into the 21st century,

while protecting civil liberties and preserving important

national security prerogatives.''

Madam Speaker, it's this type of bipartisanship that I think the American people expect out of Congress. And I believe that, as my colleague from Washington just said, this bill is not perfect. But it is the kind of compromise that people expect from their congressional leaders in a way that protects us, and, at the very same time, ensures that the civil liberties guaranteed under the Constitution, again, are not just mere words but rather strong ideals that we preserve. So, again, I strongly urge my colleagues to support this rule. With that, I would reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, we're waiting on several speakers who aren't here yet. But if the gentleman is ready to close, we are prepared to close as well.

Madam Speaker, as I said earlier, we have come a long way over the last few months. We can all agree that the world changed on September 11, 2001. Our Nation faces new threats on new fronts. What we're doing here today is proof that we can come together, Republicans and Democrats, to provide our Nation's Intelligence Community with the necessary tools to fight terrorism while protecting civil liberties of Americans.

Again, I commend Majority Leader Hoyer, Minority Leader Blunt, Chairman Reyes and Conyers, and many others who were able to go beyond the partisanship that too often consumes this Chamber and deliver a sensible FISA bill that we can be proud of.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Speaker, people around America are talking about gas. That's all we hear.

There is a difference, however. The people back home in upstate New York are talking about gas because they are frustrated with the high prices. Yet other people in this country are attempting to demagog this issue and to turn it into a political issue.

We listen to the oil company executives say that we should drill, drill, drill. Drill our way to energy independence. Well, that's an impossibility. They say it as if we should believe what the oil company executives tell us, because, after all, they have always told us the truth in the past. That's just not the way it is.

In fact, if you look at the facts, you will see that there are 68 million acres available for drilling in this country that oil companies have failed and refuse to drill upon. Yet they continue to talk about drill, drill, because they don't want the alternative. They don't want to talk about conservation, and they don't want to talk about alternative energy.

This is useless, and it's divisive to America. We need to find solutions by working together, not pointing the finger and blaming others.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow.

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1265 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate purposes only.

General Leave

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

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

House Resolution 1265 provides for consideration of H.R. 5749, the Emergency Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2008. The rule provides 1 hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Madam Speaker, our economy is in trouble, and hardworking Americans across the country are bearing the weight of it. Times are especially tough for middle-class families. The labor market continues to deteriorate, the price of gasoline and food continues to rise, the value of real estate continues to decline, and millions of American households are forced up to rack up more and more credit card debt just to make ends meet. And we are not talking about frivolous expenditures. Middle class families are racking up credit card debt to do things likes paying their electric bills or buying school supplies for their children.

Madam Speaker, the American people deserve better. Since the beginning of this year, when the majority first began to push for an extension of the unemployment benefits, the national unemployment rate has surged to 5.5 percent, the largest 1-month increase in 20 years. Yesterday, 144 members of the minority made it clear that they don't think the situation is serious enough to warrant extending unemployment benefits for Americans struggling to make ends meet, so we are here again today.

To me, 8.5 million unemployed Americans is a very serious situation. To me, trying to fill up your car with gas at $4 a gallon when you just lost your job is a very serious situation. And to me, when so-called free trade agreements are moving jobs across the border and no new quality jobs are being created, it is a very serious situation.

Madam Speaker, I believe government should lend a hand when its citizens are struggling, especially hard-working, middle-class families. But whether you agree with that or not, extending unemployment benefit is one of the most cost-effective, fast-acting ways to stimulate the economy.

Putting money directly into the pockets of struggling workers ensures that it will be spent quickly on daily necessities, boosting our economy and making it a little easier for folks to make ends meet. Every dollar spent on unemployment benefits generates $1.64 in new economic demand. In my home State of New York, an extra 13 weeks of unemployment benefits would infuse $600 million into the State economy.

For my constituents in upstate New York, a struggling economy and high unemployment has been a fact of life for a very long time now. My district hasn't reaped the so-called cyclical job

growth benefits from trade agreements. Oh, we lost our jobs all right, but we haven't seen the job creation yet. In fact, employees of businesses in my district have applied for trade adjustment assistance over 200 times since the program's inception, and of those applications, the Labor Department certified over half as a result of trade agreements. Unfortunately, as factories close, hard-working families have nowhere to go but to stand in line outside the local unemployment office. The American people deserve better, and that is why we are here today.

This bill would provide up to 13 weeks of extended unemployment benefits in every State to workers exhausting their regular benefits and provide an additional 13 weeks to States with higher unemployment levels.

Federal unemployment trust funds, which were created exactly for this type of situation and have more than enough reserves to cover the costs, will finance these benefits. This costs will not be deferred to our children to pay back, and the trust fund will do so in a structure very similar to the temporary extended unemployment compensation program established in response to the last recession in 2002, an emergency extension, I might add, which was passed by the previous Republican Congress in the same way we are doing today, when there were fewer long-term unemployed workers.

Madam Speaker, extending these benefits for struggling Americans is the right thing to do. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support the rule and the underlying bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I heard my friend from Washington twice refer to this Congress--at least twice, anyway--as a liberal Congress. I guess I would have to respond in that since when does helping people who lost their job have anything to do with being a liberal or conservative?

I think people, the American people, hear people in Congress cite statistics and studies as if the people they are referring to are not real. These people, a person who loses job, who has to support his family, doesn't care if the statistics say that his State has the lowest unemployment in America. He doesn't care. All he wants to know is that he has unemployment benefits so that he can support his family. That is what we are here to do today.

Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington, the chairman of the Family Support Subcommittee of the Ways and Means, Mr. McDermott.

Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moore).

If what the gentleman from Florida says is true, I guess any pay-as-you-go is better than the no-pay-as-you-go that we had in the last Congress.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Matheson).

The gentleman from California gives examples of working for 2 weeks and being eligible for 52 weeks. The fact of the matter is there is no record to indicate that is the case.

With that, I yield 2 minutes to a gentleman who can speak firsthand to that, the distinguished chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Chairman Rangel.

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

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee, a member of the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Tanner.

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

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan, a member of the Committee on Ways and Means, Mr. Levin.

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

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont, a member of the Rules Committee, Mr. Welch.

May I inquire how much time is left.

I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis).

Just to correct the record, this was passed by the House, this bill, weeks ago and it has been blocked in the Senate. Just so it's clear that it has not waited for 8 weeks.

I would yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

(Ms. JACKSON-LEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green).

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

Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

I would yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Lincoln Davis).

(Mr. LINCOLN DAVIS of Tennessee asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.

I am prepared to close. We have no further speakers.

Madam Speaker, unemployment insurance can mean the difference between saving a home and failing to make a mortgage payment. It can mean the difference between purchasing needed medications and going without, and it can mean the difference between filling up the car to go out and look for another job and having to stay home. This legislation has the potential to help over 4 million unemployed Americans put food on their tables while quickly stimulating the economy.

The number of long-term unemployed Americans is higher now than when Congress last extended benefits in 2002. I am hopeful we can come together later today, Republicans and Democrats, to do the right thing and pass this rule and the underlying legislation. American workers and families can't wait any longer.

The idea is not getting the President a bill that he can sign. The idea is to do the right thing and for the President to sign that bill.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and the rule.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Hastings of Washington is as follows:

Amendment to H. Res. 1265 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Washington

At the end of the resolution, add the following:

Sec. 3. Immediately upon the adoption of this resolution

the House shall, without intervention of any point of order,

consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3089) to secure

unrestricted reliable energy for American consumption and

transmission. All points of order against the bill are

waived. The bill shall be considered as read. The previous

question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and any

amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion

except: (1) one hour of debate on the bill equally divided

and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of

the Committee on Natural Resources, the chairman and ranking

member of the Committee on Ways and Means, and the chairman

and ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce;

and (2) an amendment in the nature of a substitute if offered

by Representative Rahall of West Virginia, which shall be

considered as read and shall be separately debatable for 40

minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and

an opponent; and (3) one motion to recommit with or without

instructions.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, NASA's accomplishments over the years have led to some of the greatest advances in human history. These scientific discoveries have led to everything from prolonging the average life span to improving the overall quality of life. NASA's research and exploration has also helped to unlock some of the greatest mysteries in the universe. The problem, however, is that too often the American public doesn't have an opportunity to fully experience NASA's accomplishments. It is when these accomplishments are transferred from the Federal sector to the private sector and the general public that the true benefits of what has been achieved can be realized.

Clearly, we don't have the ability or the financial means to shuttle every American into space, but we can do a better job of bringing the space experience into televisions, computers, and classrooms around the world.

The House Science and Technology Committee, under the leadership of Chairman Gordon and Ranking Member Hall and Chairman Udall, recognize that point. The underlying bill includes language directing the NASA administrator to develop a technology plan that will allow the general public to experience missions to the Moon, Mars and other destinations in our solar system.

My amendment aims to take this effort and expand it in a way that leverages existing technology underway at our universities and high- tech businesses.

Specifically, my amendment tasks NASA to examine the feasibility of entering into contracts with appropriate public-private sector and international partners to share images and video of space missions with the public. The amendment promotes good government by requiring NASA to engage in a transparent bidding process when awarding contracts as it sees fit.

This new chapter in scientific discovery presents a valuable opportunity to engage public and private sectors in advancing NASA's mission for the 21st century. My upstate New York district is fast becoming a science and technology hub. We have an opening here to work together with colleges and universities, private research facilities, and small and large high-tech businesses to provide NASA with the tools it needs to better educate the public about space.

I would like to highlight that this amendment is intended to provide NASA with an additional resource to meet its goals. This measure would authorize NASA to conduct its own feasibility study to determine if and how it can best use the talents of our independent innovators to support its new international exploration initiative. This requirement would grant NASA the flexibility it needs to create a plan that best fits the ideas of its new program.

This amendment would also require all NASA contract decisions to be awarded following a fair and transparent bidding process.

This amendment has the backing of the State University of New York, the New York State section of the American Physical Society, the American Association of Geographers and the Information Technology Association of America. I respectfully urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment and support the contributions that our public and private universities and businesses make to scientific and technological progress in this country.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman for his comments. I would just point out what this amendment does is it attempts to get the private sector more engaged by promoting within NASA the push to transfer not from the public sector, not to just have this go from the public sector to the universities, but from the public sector to the private sector, to get the private sector more engaged and more involved in distributing the information. So that is slightly different than what I think the bill has because we do attempt to get the private sector more engaged. After all, that is probably the best way, by using the market system, to get the information out.

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

Madam Speaker, today American families are paying the price for 7 years of failed economic policies

by this administration. This year alone, our economy has lost more than 300,000 jobs. It's important to remember that in order to just keep up with the population growth, our economy must create at least 150,000 jobs per month.

These statistics are devastating to millions of unemployed Americans who are increasingly competing against each other for the very few jobs that have become available. Yet President Bush continues to sit on the sidelines hoping that the economic situation will correct itself without additional governmental intervention.

The Democratic House believes the government must act, and it must act now. That's why we passed legislation last month that would extend unemployment insurance to workers who have exhausted their benefits. We also plan to move a second economic stimulus package that should help create jobs. I hope both President Bush and congressional Republicans would finally realize that this is the right thing to do.

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank Chairman Oberstar, Chairwoman Brown, and Ranking Members Mica and Shuster for their bipartisan leadership on the Amtrak legislation we will consider today, and as they showed yesterday in the Rules Committee, for their passionate advocacy on behalf of this great bill.

There has been much discussion about the condition of our Nation's transportation system and the growing pressures it faces from all sides: skyrocketing costs of fuel and maintenance; increased congestion from growing demand; and global climate change.

H.R. 6003 will take tremendous strides toward addressing these pressures by continuing our commitment to Amtrak and passenger rail service. Maintenance costs will continue to hinder us, but expanding and improving passenger rail service has the potential to relieve congestion both on our highways and in the skies by offering passengers a viable alternative. A shift toward rail can reduce the harmful CO2 emissions generated by the transportation system.

For too long Amtrak has been the symbol of partisan politics in Washington. If we are to have a robust and successful system that users can rely on, then we must make a bipartisan commitment to supporting Amtrak. We cannot waiver on this commitment and expect to keep pace with the national rail systems of other developed countries around the world.

Partisan bickering has hurt Amtrak's overall state of repair. In fact, the Department of Transportation's inspector general concluded that, ``Despite multiple efforts over the years to change Amtrak's structure and funding, we have a system that limps along, is never in a state of good repair, awash in debt, and perpetually on the edge of collapse.'' That must change.

Amtrak's maintenance backlog is a major impediment to its success. In recent years, Amtrak's ridership has grown at a modest but continuing rate, and Amtrak's on-time performance has declined down to an on-time arrival rate of 67.8 percent.

The Department of Transportation's inspector general has stated that Amtrak's continued deferral of maintenance increases the risk of a major failure on its system. Currently, Amtrak has an estimated $6 billion in backlogged capital maintenance needs, including $4 billion on the Northeast Corridor, its most profitable line.

I would gladly take the train home to my Upstate New York district, or from my home in Utica to New York City, but currently that is not a viable option because of the minimal Amtrak service. And even when there is service available, it is unreliable. Deferred track maintenance, especially in Upstate New York, has required lowering the speed limits on significant portions of the track. In addition, competition with freight carriers for priority on tracks causes Amtrak trains to become seriously delayed, to the point where train schedules are simply unreliable. The on-time arrival rate between Albany and Buffalo is a mere 42 percent, meaning that less than half of the trains arrive on time.

Unfortunately, for hardworking Americans, passenger rail is the only option for travel because of record high fuel prices, making air and car travel less viable.

I thank you for the additional time.

Improving passenger rail service must be part of our long-term transportation strategy if we expect to effectively decrease our Nation's reliance on finite fossil fuels, and allow Americans to get to and from work on time without breaking the bank each month.

The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act will aggressively address these concerns. I encourage my colleagues to vote for this rule and the underlying bill and continue to support the viable passenger rail option in our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1233 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings). All time yielded during consideration of House Resolution 1233 is for debate only.

General Leave

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

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

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1233 provides a structured rule for consideration of H.R. 5540, the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network Continuing Authorization Act. The resolution provides 1 hour of debate, controlled by the Committee on Natural Resources, and makes in order all amendments submitted to the Rules Committee for consideration.

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by congratulating my freshman class colleague from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes) for his leadership on behalf of the Chesapeake Bay. Mr. Sarbanes has worked diligently and tirelessly in a bipartisan fashion to transcend partisan politics and ensure the Chesapeake Bay remains a vibrant recreational and economic network for many years to come.

Mr. Speaker, this rule and the legislation which it provides for consideration of will continue the important restoration and conservation of the Chesapeake Bay watershed by permanently authorizing the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network.

The Chesapeake Bay is our Nation's largest estuary. Many people often think of the Bay only as Maryland and Virginia, but the Bay's watershed covers 64,000 square miles in five States and the District of Columbia. In fact, the watershed's most northern part, or what we in upstate New York would call the starting point, extends into a significant portion of my congressional district and actually starts in Cooperstown, New York.

As a result of its size and location, the Chesapeake Bay has played a role in the development of American history, from early settlement and commerce to military battles and transportation development, as well as recreational uses. It truly is worthy of preservation, both for its natural beauty and the impact on our Nation's cultural evolution.

First established in 1998, the Chesapeake Bay Network is a comprehensive protection program for the Bay. The programs authorized serve to identify, conserve, restore and interpret the natural, historical, cultural and recreational resources within the watershed. These programs can also educate local communities on the significant sites in their region and how their community impacts the overall health of the Bay. The law requires the National Park Service to award grants to State and local agencies and nonprofit organizations with a full matching requirement for such projects.

The resulting network is a system of over 150 parks, museums, historic communities, scenic roadways, watertrails and water access points located within the vast Chesapeake Bay watershed. Each of these sites tells a piece of a vast Chesapeake story while providing Federal support for the preservation and improvement of these sites, to enhance both the historical and recreational experience. The network is overseen by the National Park Service, but the Park Service only manages about 10 of the network's sites. Other gateways are managed by local, State and nongovernmental organizations.

The Chesapeake Bay Network has always been a bipartisan program. The legislation that created it in 1998 passed the House on suspension by voice vote and was agreed to by unanimous consent in the Senate and signed into law by President Clinton. In 2002, a clean 5-year reauthorization received similar unanimous support in Congress and was signed into law by President Bush.

The White House Conference on Cooperative Conservation headed by the Department of the Interior has called the network a success story. The legislation this rule provides for consideration of will permanently extend the authorization for this bipartisan program. It is worth noting that the National Park Service has also recommended permanent reauthorization of the network.

I encourage all my colleagues to vote for this rule and the underlying bill and to continue to support the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I thank my friend from Washington for his comments and just point out, Mr. Speaker, that on the one hand my colleague from Washington says that we are not allowing anyone to make any amendments, that we have closed the rule, and yet we have allowed every amendment in the Rules Committee that was offered including the one amendment from the gentleman from Utah. And then he criticizes in saying that we allow debate for 2 hours on this bill. You can't have it both ways. We have allowed debate on this bill, we have allowed for people to bring their amendments if that is what they choose to do and have an open Congress just the way we talked about.

I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hall).

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that my colleague from North Carolina talks about inaction. And he would have the American people believe that inaction means not drilling. They are two distinctly different things. Just simply because I don't advocate drilling doesn't mean that I am not for alternative energy. We cannot drill our way to energy independence. It just doesn't make sense.

Yes, I will yield.

Reclaiming my time, it is not about drilling. That is what some people in this House want to talk about. It is not. It is about developing alternative energy. In my district, we are developing cellulosic ethanol. In my district, we are developing geothermal power. We are heating schools, we are heating buildings, we are heating offices with geothermal. It is about developing alternative energy. It is not about drilling, drilling, drilling. Because in the end, what is going to happen is in 10 years or in 15 years we are going to defer this problem to our children. It is not something that we should just dump on their laps by just moving the problem to them.

We can drill today, we can drill tomorrow. And then in 10 years and in 15 years our children and our grandchildren will have to deal with this. It is time to deal with it today. Mr. Speaker, it is time to deal with it today and to deal with it now, not to defer it to our children. That is not what a good parent does.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman for the history lesson and for the lesson on what drilling means. I really appreciate that. I know we don't have a lot of domestic oil in New York, but I appreciate having him tell me what drilling means.

But when people in my district talk to me about what are we doing about gas, and we get those very same questions, I tell them that we have done some things. We have passed the Strategic Petroleum Reserve Fill Suspension Consumer Protection Act. I tell them we've passed the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act. I tell them we've passed the OPEC and big oil companies accountability bill. I tell them we've passed the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. I tell them we've passed the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act. I tell them we've passed the Energy Price Gouging Prevention Act. I tell them we've passed the No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act. I tell them we've passed the Energy Market Manipulation Prevention Act.

Mr. Speaker, America is tired of the same old rhetoric. They want new solutions. When I talk about geothermal projects that we have in our district, when I talk about cellulosic ethanol plants, when I talk about wood pellet plants, that is new strategies. Those are new philosophies. Those are the kind of strategies that we need in this country for real, long-term change in direction, the kind of direction that will make it easier for our children and our grandchildren to live and to function and not to be dependent on foreign oil.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

I'll reserve my time, Mr. Speaker.

We have no further speakers.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

I have no further speakers.

Mr. Speaker, I don't think there is a person in America today that hasn't been affected either personally or through their business by the high cost of energy, by the high cost of gas. You know, we all go to the gas pumps. Just last weekend when I was home, I was pumping the gas, and you could see the look on people's faces as they watched the amount and as they went inside to pay the bill. And we all know, whether you're in New York or whether you're in the State of Washington or whether you're in Texas, no matter where you are here in this country, we all know and experience the same thing.

However, the strategy of finger-pointing and blaming just will not get this country to where we need to be. We talk about here whose fault it is. We constantly have people pointing the finger. The fact of the matter is in 2002 when this President took over in the White House, the price of oil was $25 a barrel. Today it's nearly $130 a barrel. The cost of gas per gallon has tripled.

We could point the finger. We could blame. We could do a lot of things. The fact of the matter is we cannot drill our way to energy independence. And people here would have you think that there is no drilling and there is no exploration going on in this country. Right now in my State, in fact, in my district, in the southern part of New York State, the northern part of Pennsylvania, there are huge amounts of exploration going on for natural gas.

Huge natural gas fields there. They are looking for gas. They are searching for gas. They are finding it in this country. It is going on. The American people will have all of the energy that they need.

However, if we are going to get to where we need to be as a country, we cannot depend on a finite resource. We can't depend on gas and oil. It will be gone. It will eventually deplete, and our children will be right where we are now paying double, triple, quadruple what we are paying now for energy.

It is time to look toward alternative energy, and that's what we advocate; Not stopping drilling. No one wants to see us stop drilling or stop exploration. Just to be practical in terms of how we develop our alternative energy in the next step that we take.

Mr. Speaker, allow me to bring us back here to the discussion, just for a moment, of the real reason that we're here today, and that is the reauthorization of the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network. I think it's sad that this bill seems to have been trivialized today because this is a very important bill. This means a great deal to many people that live in the States that the Chesapeake Bay watershed is in but more importantly to this country.

It is such an important part of our history and a critical part of our future. This is a program that did not have even a single Member of Congress oppose its creation or its subsequent reauthorization. Over a decade that the program has existed, it has been heralded as a success by the administration and Congress alike.

The program was unanimously reauthorized by Congress 5 years ago. The legislation this rule provides for consideration would now permanently extend the authorization for this bipartisan program. And the National Park Service has recommended this permanent reauthorization of the network. Everyone agrees that the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network is a good program. That's had a positive impact on the preservation and recreation within the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

I would also like to point out, Mr. Speaker, that we on the Rules Committee have made every amendment on this legislation submitted by the Republican minority for consideration. This will allow for both a full debate and a vote on every item of legislation with which the Republican minority has issue.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

I thank my colleague from Vermont for yielding. I would like to also thank the chairman, Chairman Miller, and Subcommittee Chairman Kildee for this wonderful piece of legislation.

Madam Chairman, I rise today in strong support of this amendment, which would allow schools to purchase and install renewable energy generation systems. Our amendment would allow schools to choose from a diverse selection of renewable energy sources. But I would like to specifically highlight two that pose significant potential: Geothermal and biomass wood pellet systems.

Just last week during the Memorial Day District Work Period, I had an opportunity to tour the Cayuga-Onondaga BOCES in Auburn, New York, and received a firsthand look at a geothermal heating and cooling system in action. The Cayuga-Onondaga BOCES completed installation last July of a closed-loop geothermal system. The system includes 200 wells around the campus, 330 feet deep, that tap into the earth's constant ground temperature at a level of 55 degrees. The system circulates that 55- degree air temperature year round throughout the buildings on the campus.

In the winter, the system relies on a boiler to slightly increase the air temperature on the campus to a comfortable level of 68 degrees, requiring substantially less energy than normal, and in the warm summer months, the system needs no additional energy whatsoever to cool the buildings on campus.

The New York State Energy Research Development Authority recently conducted a study that found the system to be a remarkable 43 percent more energy efficient than a building built to standard code. While it might be too soon to qualify the actual monthly cost savings, I think it is safe to say that a building 43 percent more energy efficient will realize significant cost savings in the future and allow a school district to spend resources where they are most needed, on better educating our students, hiring more teachers, and to fund underfunded programs like the IDEA.

The second component of this amendment I wish to highlight is wood pellet energy. Wood has the potential to meet our Nation's energy needs in a safe and environmentally responsible way. Studies show that commodities can save significant taxpayer funds by switching to wood energy for heating schools. For example, communities can save as much as 50 percent over natural gas, 80 percent over propane, 80 percent over electric heat and 50 percent over oil by switching to wood energy.

Especially in the upstate New York district that I represent, with its bountiful forest resources, wood energy such as biomass offers an array of economic environmental benefits compared to traditional fossil fuels. Both geothermal and wood energy systems can be fueled by renewable local resources. This keeps energy dollars circulating in the local and regional economy, instead of flowing to other nations. These systems also aid local budgets by providing lower and more stable fuel costs for our schools. Investments like this benefit the whole community by relieving pressure on local budgets and associated tax rates, leading to healthier communities. Unlike some other renewable energy systems, both geothermal and biomass systems can run continuously and provide a constant level of power throughout the day.

Beyond the amendment my colleagues and I are offering today, it is also worth noting the overall benefits of the underlying legislation. Everyone in this Chamber, Republican and Democrat, understands the importance of lowering energy prices.

The 21st Century Green High-Performing Public School Facilities Act represents a trifecta of sound public policy. It improves the education system for our children, it does so in an environmentally friendly way that decreases our dependence on finite fossil fuels, and it creates jobs for hardworking middle class families. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and the underlying legislation.

I thank my friend and colleague from California for yielding time to me.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support today of this rule, the fiscal year 2009 Defense Authorization Act, which this year is appropriately named after the distinguished Republican ranking member, Mr. Hunter.

I commend Chairman Skelton and the entire House Armed Services Committee for their ability to work in a strong bipartisan fashion to produce a defense authorization bill that will enhance our Nation's security by providing our troops with superior equipment, and improve the quality of life for our servicemembers and their families by providing a 3.9 percent pay raise for all servicemembers, and require the administration to provide the American people with more transparency and accountability regarding the funding of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

When it comes down to it, maintaining a strong national defense and providing for our troops should never be a partisan issue. We can disagree regarding specific provisions and proposals on occasion, but the fact remains that the American people want bipartisan solutions from Republicans and Democrats. That moves our Nation forward, and that is exactly what this rule and the underlying defense authorization will do.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would just like to urge my colleagues to resist the temptation to point fingers and be partisan on this issue with the farm bill. We need to work in a bipartisan way, because this is what is important to America's farmers, and very, very important to America. By passing this rule and the defense authorization bill today, we can prove to the American people that bipartisanship still exists inside the walls of Congress.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to proudly congratulate the Hamilton College women's lacrosse team on winning this year's NCAA Division III Championship.

I commend the Hamilton Continentals on their remarkable 21-1 performance this season and on setting a NCAA program record for the year. The Continentals achieved a stunning 19-game straight victory leading into the playoffs, and this year marks the first time that the team has advanced to the national semi-finals in its playoff history. This team has proven that a strong will and never looking back will take you far, as it encountered and beat both the number-one ranked team and the defending champions en route to their 13-6 victory in the final.

The Hamilton Continentals are a shining example of what hard work and commitment can produce, and I am delighted to represent such an inspirational group of young athletes in Congress. The sacrifices and contributions of the entire team and their head coach merit true recognition. The Continentals have brought pride and honor to our community as well as their loved ones and the students and alumni of Hamilton College.

Madam Speaker, I deeply congratulate the Hamilton College women's lacrosse team on this great accomplishment, and I wish them luck and success in their future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, last week, Congress, with strong Democratic support, passed the new GI Bill, which provides all veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars the promise of a full 4-year college scholarship. The bill makes veterans a part of the American economic recovery.

The original GI Bill in 1944 allowed millions of families to achieve the American Dream. It also set our economy on the right course after World War II. For every dollar spent on the GI Bill, $7 were returned to the economy. A similar economic spark is needed today. You would think that the new GI Bill would gain the support of President Bush. But he opposes it. Unfortunately, the vast majority of House Republicans opposed the bill when it was on the floor last week. We must make sure that the brave men and women that we are sending off to battle have everything they need and deserve when they return home.

Mr. Speaker, House Democrats vow to never leave a veteran behind after returning from war by ensuring that they receive the quality care and benefits they have earned. That includes living up to the promise of providing them access to quality higher education.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1212 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings). All time yielded during consideration of this rule is for debate purposes only. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1212.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1212 provides for consideration of H.R. 6049, the Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008. The rule provides for 1 hour of debate controlled by the Committee on Ways and Means and waives all points of order against consideration of the bill, except clauses 9 and 10 of rule XXI. The rule also provides one motion to recommit, with or without instructions.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this rule and H.R. 6049, the Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008, which will not only bring this country into a new alternative energy future, but strengthen our economy by directing fiscally responsible tax relief to middle class families, creating jobs at small businesses in the very towns and rural communities where we need it the most.

The legislation this rule provides for consideration of will extend a number of critical tax relief measures targeted at middle class families and small businesses, including deductions for State and local sales tax, tuition education expenses, and expanding the child tax credit and research and development tax credit.

During these uncertain economic times, it is also absolutely critical that we pass legislation to invest in jobs for today and long-term development for tomorrow, including alternative energy like wind and biomass that will reduce our Nation's dependence on foreign oil and bring the price of gas at the pump to a level families and businesses can afford. The best way to encourage growth and development of new technology is to let businesses invest their own money in ways that expand our economic horizons. Tax credits for alternative energy production have the power to truly jump-start our economy and create good paying, highly skilled jobs that can't be sent overseas.

In my upstate New York district, our location, natural resources, renowned colleges and universities and world class scientific and technological companies perfectly poise our community to seize this opportunity to create a new green economy, complete with green jobs.

I have spoken numerous times throughout the debate over how to extend these renewable tax credits and about the new businesses in my district that are utilizing the national investment in alternative energy to create good paying jobs in upstate New York. Those businesses are to be commended, and that is why I am proud to support nearly $20 billion in long-term clean renewable energy tax incentives and investment included in the Energy and Job Creation Act. I hope that doing so will encourage other companies to follow suit, both in our region and across this great Nation.

The underlying legislation extends and modifies critical tax credits for the production of electricity from renewable sources ranging from wind, solar and geothermal energy to closed-loop and open-loop biomass. It would also extend clean renewable energy bonds, efficient commercial building tax incentives, investment tax credit for solar and fuel cell systems, tax credit for energy efficiency upgrades to existing homes, tax credits for production of efficient home appliances and tax incentives for consumer purchases of energy efficient products. Most of these incentives either expired at the end of last year or are set to expire at the end of this year. It is vitally important to sustaining the development of clean energy technology industries that these incentives are extended.

H.R. 6049 also includes an extension of the research and development tax credit that allows companies a tax credit for a portion of their research and development expenditures. Extending the R&D credit is vital to ensuring that America remains on the cutting edge of innovation that keeps our companies competitive and working here, not offshore. This credit is of particular interest to the area that I represent because its extension will further the expansion of the microchip fabrication and nanotechnology industries which are beginning to blossom in our region.

American companies rely on this credit and upon its continuity to adequately plan their long-term research projects. I support this 1- year extension to provide that continuity and I will continue to work with leaders on the committee and in this body to seek a permanent extension that would eliminate concerns over expirations and lapses.

The bill also extends important tax credits for individuals, as well as creating new and expanded credits. It extends for 1 year the personal income tax deductions for tuition and education expenses, the State and local sales taxes, and teachers' out-of-pocket expenses for classroom supplies. The bill creates a new standard deduction for up to $700 for couples to cover State and local property taxes, and expands the eligibility for the refundable child tax credit. Under the child tax credit, certain low-income taxpayers can claim a refundable tax credit equal to 15 percent of their earned income above an inflation- adjusted threshold. In 2008, this threshold is set to be $12,050, but under H.R. 6049 that threshold will be reduced to $8,500, providing increased

relief to more than 12 million families with children nationwide.

Supporting H.R. 6049 comes down to simple common sense. We can create tens of thousands of new jobs, reduce our dependence on oil from hostile regimes, reduce greenhouse gases, spur innovation and provide tax relief to middle class families, and we can do it all--and let me emphasize this--all of those things, without adding to the national deficit.

I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this rule and the underlying legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to make one point. Some people in this institution tend to talk about trial lawyers and seem to want to point out the things that they do that they think aren't good. But no one talks about the fact that trial lawyers are out there representing people who have been injured. They are protecting people's civil rights. They are defending people on a contingency fee basis who don't have the money to come forward and sue people that have hurt them. That is critically important. And this bill does not give a windfall tax rebate to lawyers. All it does is allow them to claim expenditures that they have put out in the year that they have made that expenditure, no different than any other business in this country can do.

So I think it is unfair to criticize trial attorneys who are out there doing the kind of things that people hire them to do; and that is protecting people's civil rights and ensuring that people who are injured are able to get what they need so that they are not victimized even further.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California, my friend and colleague from the Rules Committee, Ms. Matsui.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont, my colleague from the Rules Committee, Mr. Welch.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Altmire).

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Giffords).

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney).

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley).

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

This good bill will help us wean ourselves off fossil fuels. It will help us keep good-paying jobs in the energy industry, in the entertainment industry, and a great many other industries, and I urge support.

We have no additional speakers, so I am prepared to close.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague and friend from Washington. It's always a pleasure managing a rule on the floor with you.

I would like to thank him for making a point which I think is a very good point in his closing, and that is we can't drill our way to oil independence. I think that is abundantly clear, especially to Americans. I think they know that.

The fact of the matter is, is that oil is a finite resource. That as much as we want to dream and that as much as we want to wish, it is a finite resource. And while there may be reserves that may last us 5 years or 10 years, the fact of the matter is if we don't deal with the fact that it is a finite resource, then our children and our grandchildren will have to deal with the fact that there is no more oil left.

That's what today's bill does. That's what this rule does. It attempts to take real steps to promote alternative energy because that is the future of our children and our grandchildren.

H.R. 6049, if it passes the House today, it will be the fourth time the House has voted to extend many of these energy tax provisions. In each of the previous three times, the legislation has come under heavy fire because of the revenue-raising provisions that were included to ensure that the extensions were compliant with House pay-as-you-go rules. That is the new Democratic majority's commitment to lowering the national debt by bringing fiscal responsibility back to the House of Representatives.

The debate has not fallen on deaf ears. I applaud the Ways and Means Committee and Chairman Rangel for its tireless commitment to finding less controversial means for paying for this vital tax relief and alternative energy development incentives. Their efforts have been successful judging by the list of organizations and businesses that are supporting H.R. 6049, including the League of Conservation Voters, the National Retail Federation, the National Wildlife Federation, Dow Chemical Company, The Sierra Club, The American Farm Bureau, and the list goes on and on.

Providing tax relief to middle class families and small businesses, providing incentives to promote alternative energy development, and adhering to fiscal responsibility should never, never be a partisan issue.

Too often in this Chamber we hear countless reasons why not to do something, but the fact of the matter is, we cannot afford to allow the vital tax relief and renewable energy incentives in H.R. 6049 to fall victim to Washington politics.

Just to set the record straight, by voting ``yes'' on the previous question and voting ``yes'' on the rule and bringing this legislation to the floor, it will allow 11 million families to deduct State and local sales taxes; it will allow 3\1/2\ million teachers to deduct classroom expenses so they can better educate the children they teach; it will allow 4 million families the ability to deduct education expenses and help put their children through college; it will allow 13 million families to claim the child tax credit and make it a little easier to put food on their table; and it will allow 27,000 domestic businesses to remain competitive in the global marketplace by investing in vital research and development.

Clearly we in the majority are working to advance the interests of the American people. I am hopeful we can come together later today, Republicans and Democrats, pass this rule, pass the underlying legislation, and move our country forward.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Hastings of Washington is as follows:

Amendment to H. Res. 1212 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Washington

At the end of the resolution, add the following:

Sec. 3. Notwithstanding any other provision of this

resolution or the operation of the previous question, it

shall be in order to consider any amendment to the substitute

which the proponent asserts, if enacted, would have the

effect of lowering the national average price per gallon of

regular unleaded gasoline. Such amendments shall be

considered as read, shall be debatable for thirty minutes

equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an

opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be

subject to a demand for division of the question in the House

or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against

such amendments are waived except those arising under clause

9 of rule XXI.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.