Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, today I am honored to pay tribute to the First Baptist Church Youth Choir in Sulphur Springs, Texas. The choir is made up of 84 high school students. They have traveled to New York City, San Diego, San Francisco, Washington DC, Canada, the Bahamas, Disney World, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Mexico, and this year will be traveling to Ireland. On these trips, the choir performs concerts in areas approved by the city, usually outdoors where anyone who is walking by can stop and listen. While the students are performing, the adult sponsors talk to those who are listening and distribute free Bibles to anyone who asks for one. These high school students have been able to reach the hearts of thousands of people in a variety of places.

The youth choir began in 1981 under the leadership of the Minister of Music of First Baptist Church, Fred Randles, and his wife, Jane. The students meet every Sunday evening for rehearsal. Throughout the year, they perform at church services and at Holiday in the Park at Six Flags over Texas to help them prepare for their summer trip. During the spring, they begin to learn choreography for the songs they sing.

The choir has received certificates of appreciation from four different Presidents, the U.S. Congress, and Disney World Entertainment Industry. They have also been recognized by the Governor of Cozumel, Mexico, and the Bahamas tourist board, and they have had appearances on Good Morning America and The Early Show on CBS.

In addition to performing, the students also participate in a number of ministry activities. In Hawaii, for example, they conducted Vacation Bible School and Sports Camp, worked with people who needed help around their house, helped at homeless missions, and shared the gospel with people who live on the beach.

The First Baptist Church Youth Choir of Sulphur Springs, TX has not only been blessed by the opportunities they have had, but also by the people whom they have met and associated with in their travels, and in turn the choir has been a blessing to their church and to multitudes of people around the world. As they travel to Ireland in July, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing these outstanding young people and commending them for the great work they are doing.

Mr. Chairman, I oppose the Obey amendment. The $200 million funding cut to NASA's exploration program proposed in this amendment would jeopardize U.S. jobs and jeopardize space launch capability. These cuts would threaten personnel reductions in existing NASA exploration systems' workforce across the Nation and could impact more than 1,000 employees. This cut will take money directly from work on the new crew exploration vehicle, a much needed vehicle that will replace the space shuttle

in 2010 or after 2010. It contains very likely the most vital addition of a crew escape module making it a safer vehicle for our astronauts. It is a very important thrust.

The gentleman from Wisconsin's amendment proposes to take funds out of NASA and put them toward justice assistance grants. While I am supportive of local law enforcement officials, it is important to point out that Congress has already appropriated billions for State and local law enforcement. On May 17, the House approved the fiscal year 2006 homeland security appropriations bill which provides $3.7 billion for first responders, including grants to State and local law enforcement agencies. Since September 11, $15 billion has been provided to assist State and local officials. Indeed, the bill on the floor today provides $2.6 billion for crime-fighting initiatives, $1 billion more than the President requested.

Mr. Chairman, Congress has and will continue to support our men and women who fight crime in our communities. Of course we are going to do that. The issue today is not whether Congress supports law enforcement. It is whether Congress supports the economic and national security that our space program provides. Since 1969, America has led the world into space, and it is time to renew that vision. Our ventures into space not only keep America at the forefront of exploration and innovation, but they also are vital to our economy and our national security. This new national vision sets America on a course toward the Moon and Mars, and we should embrace this dream and work to make it a reality.

As the preeminent leader in human space flight, we cannot afford to sit idle and let other nations reap the rewards of our hard work, research and sacrifice. We know that the People's Republic of China has developed a human space flight program that encompasses everything from low-Earth orbit to exploring the Moon and Mars. As the new NASA administrator said recently and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) just pointed out, we need to retire the shuttle as quickly as possible and begin flying the new crew exploration vehicle to the international space station and the Moon. These requirements and these funding cuts that the gentleman from Wisconsin proposes will have a direct impact on that momentum and the President's vision for space exploration, a vision that will advance our national economy and prestige internationally.

America's space program continues to be an engine for our national economy. Exploration brings jobs and technological growth to America. Nearly every State in the Union benefits from the development of technologies needed to propel our space mission. At a time when we are all concerned about jobs leaving the United States, supporting NASA makes sense because we are providing good jobs for Americans. We owe it to future generations of Americans and the men and women who have kept the space program alive to oppose this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, a year ago, Mr. Chen Shui-bian was re-elected president of the Republic of China on Taiwan. On the occasion of the first anniversary of his second term in office, I offer my congratulations to President Chen and the people of Taiwan.

President Chen continues to work to ensure Taiwan's democracy and freedom, and seeks reconciliation and cooperation with Taiwan's opposition party leaders. He also is leading Taiwan's efforts to gain membership in the World Health Organization and other international organizations. Without membership or observership in the World Health Organization, Taiwan is literally an orphan in the world health arena.

I am pleased that our government has come out strongly in support of Taiwan's bid for World Health Assembly observership this May.

As we join our friends in Taiwan in celebrating President Chen's anniversary, we also recognize Taiwan's steps toward democratization. These include Taiwan's end of martial law in 1987, first direct presidential election in 1996, first change of governing party in 2000 and first national referendum in 2004. Taiwan's example is encouraging to all those who seek and support freedom and democracy around the world.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to pay tribute to George Law of Sulphur Springs, TX, who has been selected as the Sulphur Springs Kiwanis Layperson of the Year by Golden K and Sulphur Springs Kiwanis Clubs.

These Clubs will recognize George at a special dinner on May 19, 2005. Hopkins County Judge Cletis Millsap and the Commissioners Court will proclaim May 20 as George Law day. Sulphur Springs Mayor Chris Brown and members of the City Council will issue a proclamation in his honor. State Representative Mark Homer will send special recognition from the Texas Legislature, and I appreciate the opportunity to recognize this outstanding citizen of Sulphur Springs in the Congressional Record.

George is a retired educator, having served more than 20 years as both a teacher and principal. George was vocational agriculture teacher in McCauley, science teacher and Kiwanis Key Club advisor in Sulphur Springs, and principal in the Como-Pickton Consolidated Independent School District. Throughout his years as an educator, George exceeded what might be expected to challenge and encourage young people. He provided emotional support and, in some cases, financial assistance to some of his students in critical need. Untold numbers of former students who have gone on to complete their college education give George the credit for challenging and supporting them.

In addition to his work in education, George has devoted countless hours to his community. For more than 35 years he has been a strong supporter of Boy Scouts and continues to support scouting both financially and through his personal efforts. He has been a driver for the Road to Recovery Program, driving residents to other cities for medical appointments and treatment.

George also is an active member and trustee of First United Methodist Church of Sulphur Springs. As a member of the church building committee, he served as contractor for the renovation of the church administration building free of charge. George has been president of the Messengers' Class, Methodist Men, serves as an usher and helps in the church kitchen. Everywhere he goes George is a general advocate for his church.

George and his wife, Barbara, have instilled good work ethics in their children and grandchildren. When he left the teaching profession he would never say he retired. He would say, ``I just quit,'' and continued to work tirelessly for his family, his church, the Sulphur Springs Golden K Kiwanis, and his community.

According to Kerry Craig, assistant editor of the Sulphur Springs News Telegram, on any project George undertakes, his approach is to ``Lead, follow, or get out of the way.'' Mr. Speaker, so many in Sulphur Springs have benefited from George's leadership and involvement in his community. Today in the House of Representatives, let us join his family and many friends in paying tribute to this outstanding citizen and great American--George Law.

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to celebrate the life of a great East Texan and my good friend, Leo Hackney, who passed away on February 22 at the age of 85. Leo was one of the giants in Greenville, Texas, where he devoted his life to serving the citizens of his beloved community.

Leo served as Mayor of Greenville three times and as Mayor Pro-Tem and Council Member. He was chairman of the Greenville Board of Development and president of the Chamber of Commerce. He served as tri- captain for Greenville's Sesquicentennial Celebration that established the Audie Murphy Statue for the city. He served as a member of the Greenville Independent School District, Greenville Hospital, YMCA, U.S. Savings Bond Board, Citizens for Growing Greenville, Greenville Majors Baseball Team Club and Junior Chamber of Commerce. He headed the March of Dimes Drive and United Way Fund, the drive to build a Sports Complex for the City, and served as president of the Hunt County Development Council. He was one of the organizers of Colonial Bank and operated it for several years. Earlier in his career, he joined KGVL radio station, beginning in sales and reporting and working up to general manager and eventually president. He later became president of sister FM station KIKT and built the first cable television system in Greenville.

Leo's many accomplishments could fill volumes, and his influence in Greenville and Hunt County will be felt for years to come. In recognition of his significant contributions, the Greenville Herald Banner named Leo Outstanding Young Man in 1958, and he received the Greenville Worthy Citizen of the Year award in 1975. The street leading up to the Sports Complex was named Leo Hackney Boulevard in his honor.

Leo also served his Nation with distinction during World War II. He graduated in the top three percent of Naval Midshipman School and served as Captain of the ship that escorted General Douglas McArthur in the Philippines. He retired as Captain from the U.S. Navy after 27 years of service.

For 20 years Leo served on the committee to nominate youth to military academies for my predecessor, Congressman Ray Roberts, and continued to serve for another 20 years on my committee to recommend academy appointments. He served with distinction and was my trusted adviser and good friend.

Leo also was devoted to his family--his wife, Dava, daughters and sons-in-law Susan and Jim Rath of Houston and Sharon and Joe Leonard of Greenville, brother Bill Hackney of Cibolo and six grandchildren. He was a wonderful husband, father, and grandfather who supported and encouraged his family, and he leaves behind a legacy of kindness and accomplishments that will endure for generations.

Leo excelled in all that he did at every stage of his life. He was never satisfied to be only a member or supporter. He was a leader, and when he wasn't leading, he made others better leaders through his example and encouragement. Leo was never simply a friend--he was a best friend to so many. The City of Greenville and our Nation are enriched by the life of this esteemed citizen. Mr. Speaker, as we adjourn today, let us do so in honor and memory of this wonderful man, great American and my good friend--Leo Hackney.

Mr. Speaker, I know you share my concern about the need to increase domestic natural gas supply--the cleanest of the fossil fuels. One sure way to do that is by developing the technologies that are necessary to produce our 1400 trillion cubic feet of technically recoverable natural gas.

As the original sponsor, I want to commend Chairman Barton, Chairman Dreier and Chairman Boehlert for their hard work to develop my ultra- deepwater and unconventional natural gas research and development provision that was passed by the House last week. It was a challenge to reconcile the different versions of the provisions that were reported from the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Science Committee. This natural gas research and development provision will increase domestic natural gas supply and lower the cost of energy to consumers.

The Science Committee, on which I am proud to serve, passed its provisions for the comprehensive energy bill in early February. Those provisions included a program in ultra-deepwater and unconventional onshore natural gas supply R&D that tracked the language in the conference agreement on H.R. 6 in the previous Congress. The provisions funded this program through $1.5 billion in mandatory spending over 10 years. In the last Congress much good work was done to improve this legislation. That good work was reflected in the legislation reported from the Science Committee and I appreciate the hard work.

Several weeks later, the Energy and Commerce Committee, on which I am also pleased to serve, reported its version of the energy legislation which included a similar provision for the ultra-deepwater and unconventional onshore natural gas research and development program that complied with the $500 million ten year mandatory spending limit contained in the House Budget Resolution. However, this provision was also problematic because the score in the first year was $100 million.

The House Rules Committee was responsible for reconciling the differences between various energy provisions reported by several House Committees prior to consideration on the floor of the House of Representatives, as well as to ensure that the final version of comprehensive energy legislation complied with the House Budget Resolution. The ultra-deepwater and unconventional onshore research and development provisions that were sent to the floor and passed by the House are a skillful combination of the work of the Science and the Energy and Commerce Committees. The combined provisions provide the opportunity for implementation of a robust program of research and development, which the DOE Energy Information Administration says would both increase supply and pay for itself in the form of increased royalties, to help develop new technologies to find and produce more of our domestic gas.

It is my understanding that the gas supply R&D provision that was passed by the House was scored by the Congressional Budget Office at $500 million over 10 years or $1 billion less than the provision passed by the Science Committee. I believe that the return to America consumers--according to EIA, a rapid technology scenario could save up to $7 billion in the year 2025 alone--is worth a $50 million per year investment over 10 years. This provision would establish a rapid technology scenario for natural gas production in this country. It is responsive to both budget constraints and is good public policy.

I also commend the Chairman and Chairman Pombo and Chairman Nussle for their hard work to ensure that mandatory funding was made available for these vital natural gas supply research and development provisions and other measures in the bill. There are three other provisions in the energy bill that were also granted $500 million in mandatory spending by the Budget Resolution. The energy savings performance contracts will improve the energy efficiency of federal buildings and help mitigate the environmental consequences of power generation. The domestic offshore energy reinvestment program will provide funds to Coastal Energy States from federal oil and gas royalties. The electric reliability standards enforcement measure will improve the reliability of the Nation's electricity transmission system. Each of these provisions addresses specific problems associated with energy production and consumption. And each, for different reasons, need to be funded outside of the appropriation process. I thank the Chairman for his time.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to recognize the Paris Junior College Dragons on winning the 2005 National Junior College Athletic Association Division I Men's Basketball championship on March 26 in Hutchinson, Kansas. This was the biggest win in the school's history and only the second trip for the Dragons to the national tournament, some 46 years from their first visit in 1959.

The Dragons ended their season with nine consecutive wins and set a school record with 28 victories in a season. They were unranked in the national tournament and beat two ranked teams before taking on 16th- ranked Moberly Area Community College, Mo., during the NJCAA Division 1 Men's Tournament championship game. They won by a score of 70-61.

Paris Junior College coach Bill Foy won the Coach of the Tournament award and subsequently was named the National Association of Basketball Coaches Junior College Coach of the Year. Rod Earls was named the William E. French Most Valuable Player, averaging 13 points a game to lead Paris Junior College in scoring and contributing 10 points in the championship game. Alexander Starr received the Charles Fesher Sportsmanship Award and scored 10 points in the tournament final. Mike Battle scored 5 points in the final game and also was named to the all- tournament team.

The leading scorer for Paris was Lamar Searight with 18 points. Other players who contributed to the victory included Brian Burrell, Donnell Franklyn, Rickey Quarles, Bobby Joshua, Tyler Best and Charles Stoker. Joel Green and Albert Reese also are members of the team.

Coach Foy also acknowledged all those whose efforts and support contributed to the team's outstanding season: Assistant Coach Brad Enright, Athletic Director Jim Moffitt, Dr. Pam Anglin, President, and student assistants Tyler Easthouse and Patrick Thompson, among others.

Mr. Speaker, the faculty and students at Paris Junior College, local citizens and loyal fans in Northeast Texas take great pride in their National Junior College Basketball Championship team. I want to take this opportunity in the House of Representatives to congratulate the Paris Junior College basketball players and coaches for their spectacular victory, commend them for their hard work and determination, and wish them continued success.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an outstanding citizen of the Fourth District of Texas, Vilo Glen (V.G.) Strong of Mt. Pleasant, who passed away recently after living 92 wonderful, happy years. V.G. was an active and beloved member of his community and will be missed by all those who knew him.

Born in Nebraska to Walter and Mary Schneider Strong, V.G. received his Bachelor of Science degree at Colorado College and taught high school in Eckley, CO. After marrying Doris Wells in 1938, he returned to college to receive his Masters degree in 1941. During World War II he was a civilian chemist with the War Department in Pine Bluff, AR, and moved to Mt. Pleasant, TX, in the late 1940s to work for the Cotton Belt Railroad. When offered a promotion with the Cotton Belt in another state, V.G. turned down the opportunity and found a new career as a chemical engineer at Lone Star Steel, where he worked twenty years before retiring.

V.G. and his wife of 66 years, Doris, have been active members of the Mt. Pleasant First Presbyterian Church for over 57 years. V.G. served as a deacon and an elder. He was also active in the Lions Club for over 50 years.

V.G. and Doris developed a passion for traveling after his retirement, visiting more than sixty countries and every continent except Antarctica. Their latest adventure was to Scotland and the Shetland Islands with their grandson and his wife just last August. Also in retirement, V.G. turned a hobby into a part-time job. His love for restoring antique lamps resulted in restoring or converting lamps for numerous East Texas antique dealers and customers.

Most importantly, V.G. had a great love for his family--his wife Doris, sons Jerry and Paul, and five grandchildren. One of his grandchildren, Katie Strong, who is director of the Congressional and Public Affairs Division of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce here in Washington, shared with me her admiration for her grandfather. Katie noted that V.G. was a man of his word who helped so many in need-- social outcasts, young people who needed encouragement, young adults who needed guidance and direction.

``While his life was not extravagant, it was good, it was full, and most importantly, it was honest. We could all try to be a little more like the man his grandchildren called Pop-Pop,'' Katie wrote.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to recognize this respected and beloved citizen of the Fourth District of Texas and ask my colleagues to join me in paying our last respects to Vilo Glen Strong. May the memory of his wonderful life and his legacy of kindness continue to bring comfort to his family and friends.

Mr. Speaker, the greatest sadness for most of us is the loss of a child, and today I want to honor the life and help preserve the memory of Star Nuckolls of Sulphur Springs, Texas, whose life ended on February 7. Star was four years old. Her life and her struggle captured the hearts of hundreds in her community and throughout the Nation, and today we celebrate the joy and inspiration she brought to so many.

Star was first diagnosed with cancer in June 2004 and received numerous medical treatments during the six months prior to her

death. Specialists at MD Anderson Medical Center in Houston performed the necessary surgery and follow-up treatments for a stage four cancer. The citizens of Sulphur Springs and members of the First Baptist Church rallied in support of Star, her parents Steve and Kari, and sister Saylor. Sean Huffman, editor of The Christian News Monthly, wrote and published a moving article about Star and the strength and faith demonstrated by Star's parents.

Star was a beautiful and vibrant young girl who demonstrated a capacity to live with enthusiasm and joy despite her serious illness. She never understood all that was happening to her and certainly could not comprehend the outpouring of support from friends and strangers alike. But her parents did. Their Sunday School class provided groceries so they wouldn't have to shop. Someone mowed their yard every week. Weyerhauser in Dallas donated purple stars with Star's name on them that were sold to help defray out-of-pocket medical expenses. These stars were displayed all around Sulphur Springs in a show of support. Steve and Kari's employer, Farm Bureau Insurance, donated enough to cover a weekly chemotherapy drug that was not covered by their medical insurance. And the prayers that were lifted for Star and her family are countless.

Throughout this difficult time, Kari and Steve demonstrated an unshakeable faith in God and a strength beyond belief. Star may have lost her battle with cancer, but she was victorious in life. Star unknowingly strengthened the faith of her family, brought a community together in love and support, and captured the hearts of many throughout the Nation. As we adjourn today in the House of Representatives, let us do so in loving memory of the life of Star Nuckolls. May her short but remarkable life continue to bless her family and community and all those whose hearts she touched.

Mr. Chairman, like so many times when I stand up here, I am very fond of the author of the amendment, but I do not like the amendment. The name of Udall is almost a sacred name in the West.

The salient part of this bill, I think of this entire bill, that the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Barton) has brought to us and we have passed through committee and subcommittee, is that it covers waterfront, and that means that we need all energy sources. This is just another of the sources that we pool together.

I think assuring reliable, economical, and environmentally sensitive domestic uranium mining industry is essential to be a part of this bill and to carry out and make the fullness of the bill.

As the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Barton) pointed out, section 631 of the bill reported by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, I do not know how many votes were against it, but the committee authorizes a modest research and development program; it is $10 million a year over a 3-year period. I think they have allocated the money out according to the good it will do. This program would be cost-shared, and it is consistent with far larger programs for other electricity generation. It makes no sense to eliminate this important funding and forego opportunities for this.

For all of these reasons, I oppose the Udall amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.

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

This amendment creates an EPA program for awarding competitive grants. We like that. We like the fact that the fleet modernization and retrofitting of existing equipment is going to reduce harmful emissions and lessen smog-forming pollution.

It is a good amendment, and the majority is in favor of it. I thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald) for introducing it and explaining it and passing it.

Creates an EPA program for awarding competitive grants to public agencies and entities for fleet modernization including installation of retrofit technologies for diesel trucks.

Grants are to be awarded to State and local governments or agencies that will allocate funds with a preference to ports and other major hauling operations.

Preference is given to proposals that achieve greatest emissions reductions and involve the use of EPA or California Air Resources Board (CARB) verified retrofit technologies. In addition, those diesel trucks retrofitted with emissions control technologies should operate on ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel.

Marine ports in the United States are major hubs of economic activity and sources of pollution. Ports experience thousands of diesel truck visits per day. This activity contributes significantly to local and regional air pollution.

This program is a measure that will work towards decreasing the impact of air pollution by ports on the local and regional level.

Fleet modernization and retrofit of existing equipment will reduce harmful emissions and lessen smog forming pollutants.

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

Mr. Chairman, on the Blumenauer amendment, I rise to say that we will accept the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, we encourage bicycling. It serves to ease traffic congestion and all that. I think this bill was accepted last year in the same bill and they accept it this year.

Mr. Chairman, the first bill I voted on when I came up here 25 years ago was to give a gasoline allowance to guys that rode their bikes to work. I thought that was interesting. I do not know if the gentleman has that in part of this amendment or not, but I hope it is in here. We do accept it.

It is one of our oldest modes of transportation. Everyone recognizes the benefits, and it is a good amendment, and we thank the gentleman for introducing it again this year. Perhaps we will make it to the end of the gate.

I would like to also, if I have some time, I would like to just say that this establishes the Conserve the Bicycling pilot program within the Department of Transportation, and up to, I think, 10 pilot projects geographically disbursed all across the country designed to conserve energy and resources by providing education and marketing tools to convert car trips to bike trips. It makes a lot of sense.

According to the Chicagoland Bicycle Federation, right now slightly less than one trip in 100 is by bicycle. If the United States would just raise the levels to just 1\1/2\ trips per 100, we would save over 462 million gallons of gasoline a year. That is hard to multiply that out and come up with that, but that is an amazing figure.

Bicycling, as I have said, is one of the oldest modes of transportation. Everyone recognizes the benefits including health and quality of life for bicycling, not only what it does for the environment. And encouraging bicycling serves to ease traffic congestion; it mitigates air quality impact from cars and trucks and traffic. I think it is a good amendment, and I thank the gentleman for offering it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 5 minutes in support of the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, this is such a good amendment. This author is known for amending bills and upgrading them. Here is another instance. Actually, I think it is short enough to read to get it into the Record once again and before us:

``In section 910, add at the end the following new subsection,'' here is the part that I want to emphasize, ``integrated bioenergy research and development in addition to amounts otherwise authorized by this section, there are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for integrated bioenergy research and development, programs, projects and activities, $49 million for each of the fiscal years 2005 through 2009. Activities funded under this subsection shall be coordinated with ongoing related programs of the Federal agencies including the Plant Genome Program of the National Science Foundation. Of the funds authorized under this subsection, at least $5 million for each fiscal year shall be for training and education targeted to minority and socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers.''

That is the end of the amendment. It is a simple and direct amendment. The Jackson-Lee amendment not only acknowledges the value of biomass but at the same time it focuses on socially disadvantaged minority ranchers and farmers. That means it reaches through the Nation. Specifically, what it does, and I thank the gentlewoman for this, it provides the opportunity to translate these products from those particular entities into that wonderful thing we call energy.

What the Jackson-Lee amendment actually does, and let us just see what it does here, it would authorize funds to be appropriated to the Secretary of Energy for integrated bioenergy research and development programs, projects, activities at the cost of $49 million for each of the fiscal years 2005 through 2009.

Activities funded under this subsection would be coordinated with ongoing related programs of other Federal agencies including the Plant Genome Program of the National Science Foundation, as was stated in the bill itself.

Of the funds authorized under this subsection, at least $5 million for each fiscal year shall be for training, that is very important, and for education, that follows, targeted to minority and socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers.

The gentlewoman from Houston, Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) has another good amendment, and we do support the amendment and ask that it be attached to the bill and passed. I think it will help us when we get this bill to the President for his signature after the other body in their wisdom sees fits to find us two more votes and pass it on to a good President who will sign a good bill.

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

Mr. Chairman, we are in favor of the amendment, of course, and I just want to point out that the Davis-Waxman amendment strikes section 978, which I will have the opportunity maybe at a later time to go into in more depth, but it strikes out ``improved coordination and management of civilian science and technology programs'' which would create two new Senate-confirmed Assistant Secretary positions within the Department of Energy, increasing the total number of Senate- confirmed Assistant Secretaries in the Department to eight. The proposed positions include one for science and one for nuclear energy.

Now, some of the talking points for this are, among others, there are a good many reasons to talk for this Department. The Department has significant management challenges. It is not the solution to add two more Senate-confirmed Assistant Secretaries to further bog down the situation. The Davis-Waxman amendment appropriately recognizes we do not need more Senate-confirmed Assistant Secretaries.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition to the amendment, though I will speak in favor of the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, we think this is a good amendment, and I think it is enough to go down through the projects that he outlined. In general, it says it hereby establishes the National Priority Project designation, which shall be evidenced by a medal bearing the inscription National Priority Project. And this medal would be of such design and materials and bear such additional inscriptions as the President might prescribe.

The President, on the basis of a recommendation made by the Secretary, can annually designate organizations, if any, that have, one, advanced the field of renewable energy technology and contributed to North American energy independence; and a project that has been certified by the Secretary under subsection (c). The President shall designate projects with such ceremonies as the President may prescribe.

It goes on to state, an organization that receives the designation under this section may publicize this designation as a National Priority Project in its advertising. Separate designations also could be made to qualifying projects in each of the following categories: the first one is renewable energy generation, and the second is energy- efficient and renewable energy building projects.

Under selection criteria, and it is pointed out absolutely from the very beginning, where this is made clear, that certification and selection of the projects to receive the designation have to be based on criteria, and they set that out, that is, that the project demonstrates that it will install no less than 30 megawatts of renewable energy generation capacity.

It states further that, in addition to meeting the criteria established in subparagraph (A), building projects shall, one, comply with nationally recognized standards for high performance, sustainable buildings; two, utilize whole-building integration of energy efficiency and environmental performance design and technology, including advanced building controls.

They go on to say, also could utilize renewable energy for at least 50 percent of its energy consumption, comply with applicable Energy Star standards, and include at least 5 million square feet of enclosed space.

For the initial applications, it goes on to point out that no later than 4 months after the date of this enactment, and annually thereafter, the Secretary would publish in the Federal Register an invitation and guidelines for it.

Under contents and certification, it reads: the application shall describe the project, or planned project, and its plans to meet criteria listed in paragraph (1), and they certify it not later than 60 days after the application period described in paragraph (2), the Secretary shall certify projects that are reasonably expected to meet the criteria prescribed in this paragraph.

For these reasons, we support this amendment and urge its passage.

Mr. Chairman, I seek the time in opposition to the amendment; and I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Radanovich).

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

Mr. Chairman, as my colleague said a moment ago, this amendment is laudable, and I admire the gentleman for pushing it; but I have to say that, in reality, it is really special treatment for one company, with one facility, in one State. Pure Energy Corporation is the only company I know of in the United States to have a patent for technology that can convert urban waste into a DOE-recognized fuel called a P-Series fuel. This amendment would grant enormous latitude for the application for this one technology to benefit this one company, and it is really not a matter of national policy.

Further, the company in question also receives funding and grants from the DOE in support of this technology. This is the type of action that government agencies are designed and delegated to do, to spot promising technologies and financially assist their development, and they are doing that. Government agencies are a lot better suited to determine the value of burgeoning technologies in their respective fields than Congress would be, and we should leave these decisions to the experts.

I might go on further and say that this amendment essentially provides for the expansion of national policy for the benefit of one type of fuel, the P-Series fuel, and the one technology that can produce it. The production quantities of the fuel are so minimal

that it is unlikely to have any part of an impact on a national scale. And, finally, there are only two vehicle manufacturers that currently produce flexible fuel vehicles that have engines that are compatible to this type of fuel.

The consumer market for this product is extremely limited. With high gas prices, this type of fuel is not cost competitive and is even more expensive than regular fuel.

For this reason it does not please me to oppose a Member of Congress who is supporting his own and goes that extra mile for his constituents that he represents, but I have to point out that actually this will not have an impact on a national scale and is not a matter of national policy.

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

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

The amendment itself is brief. It is titled Consolidation of the Gasoline Industry, and says, ``The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a study of the consolidation of the refiners, importers, producers, and wholesalers of gasoline with the sellers of such gasoline at retail. The study shall include an analysis of the impact of such consolidation on: the retail price of gasoline; small business ownership; other corollary effects on the market economy of fuel distribution; local communities; and other market impacts of such consolidation.''

Then at the very end it says, ``The Comptroller General shall submit such study to the Congress not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this act.'' It could delay it as much as a year.

The hard, cold facts about this amendment are that the GAO released studies in July 2004 that were titled, ``Mergers and Other Factors That Affect the U.S. Refining Industry,'' which attempted to discover the cause behind higher gasoline prices.

This amendment essentially commissions the GAO to create a report that

was already released last year. So there is real need for it.

There have been many criticisms of the GAO report because of its inadequate methodology and faulty assumptions. These critiques arose from the Federal Trade Commission, a government agency that has been studying and tracking gasoline price volatility as a result of mergers or anticompetitive behavior. They found the GAO study to be fundamentally flawed and the results as suspect.

GAO has already tried to wade through these issues of gasoline prices and wade through the issues of wholesale markets, and they have shown it does not have the expertise nor the breadth and depth of knowledge needed to properly analyze this subject.

The amendment would be commissioning a futile study and is a waste of time and resources. I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that debate on the motion to strike offered by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps) be limited to 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by Mrs. Capps and an opponent.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

That is our understanding, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to take the time in opposition, though we do not oppose the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, the use of mustard seed as a feedstock for biodiesel will increase the United States' portfolio of

energy fuel resources. And just to be terribly brief, this amendment would only authorize a study on the benefits and the compatibility of mustard seed oil in the Nation's energy supply. It is a complementary amendment to an energy bill that is full of initiatives intent on expanding the Nation's energy supply and security.

Mr. Chairman, I am for anything that is going to help and further along this energy bill, even anything as small as a mustard seed. We accept it.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition, though we do not have opposition to the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, this amendment requires the Secretary of Energy to work with the Secretary of Transportation and report to Congress on the potential fuel savings from utilizing advanced technology. I think we have seen dramatic strides in technology in systems that help consumers in their drives on the road as well as business opportunities and then through communities, so we feel it will be helpful. We are pleased with the amendment, support it, and urge its passage.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Dallas for his very capable handling of this rule.

We have to have this rule. This rule spawns H.R. 6, and I feel very strongly that the time has come and gone several times for Congress to pass a comprehensive energy bill. There is not any better time to do it than today, but from this very next vote we are going to vote to give the President a bill to sign into law. This rule makes that possible.

I do not know about the rest of my colleagues, I am not positive about them, but I have been receiving a lot of phone calls from my constituents expressing their concern about the high cost of the gasoline.

According to the Department of Energy, the Energy Information Administration, a gallon of gasoline has gone up 42 cents from this very time last year, a year ago.

This is real money and that adds up. And I, for one, would like to see us be able to go home this weekend and tell our constituents that we are one step closer to a little relief, and I cannot do that without this rule.

While H.R. 6 is not going to give us $1 a gallon gas the moment this is passed into law, it is a very important first step toward bringing down the price of gasoline by allowing the production of more domestic oil and by fostering greater conservation of energy, thus increasing supply and lowering demand.

Gas prices are high now in part because we have had no comprehensive national energy policy for the past few decades. We cannot afford to watch another 10 years go by without acting. We need this rule today.

We cannot let our country to get into a situation where we are absolutely dependent on foreign sources of oil; without this rule we are dependent. We are already certainly currently today dependent on foreign sources for 62 percent of our Nation's supply. By 2010, that percentage is projected to grow to 75 percent. This is unacceptable.

H.R. 6 will decrease our country's dependence on foreign oil by increasing domestic gas and oil exploration and development on nonpark Federal lands.

I am particularly pleased about the inclusion of language to open part of ANWR. This rule makes this possible. According to the Energy Department, this coastal plain is the largest unexplored, potentially onshore basin in the United States.

The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that there are $16 billion barrels of recoverable oil there. Now hear this: This is enough oil to offset all Saudi imports for the next 30 years.

Even better, oil could be developed in ANWR as soon as 3 years from the first lease sale, and none of it would be available for export. It would all be used at home.

Of equal importance to me in this bill is my provision on Ultra- deepwater and

Unconventional Onshore Natural Gas. The program created by this legislation will foster the development of new technologies to increase domestic natural gas and oil production, increase domestic oil supplies, and pay for itself through increased royalties, amongst other benefits.

According to an analysis by the Energy Information Administration, this program will increase production of natural gas by 3.8 trillion cubic feet and oil by 850 million barrels, increase Federal royalties in more than sufficient amounts to pay for the effort, and lower the price of both fuels, but not without this bill.

An analysis by the Bureau of Economic Geology at the University of Texas says this will come back to us, five to one.

It is time to save this generation of youngsters and help them be able to say what university am I going to enter rather than what branch of service am I going to have to enter to get energy, when we have plenty here at home if we could mine it.

This is a good bill and a good rule, a bill that has been worked on and debated for five years. Its purpose is to promote conservation, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, improve our economy and create new jobs and probably keep our young men and women from having to fight a war for energy when we have enough energy at home if we pass this bill. I'm proud to support it and I urge my colleagues to do the same by voting yes on this rule.

Madam Chairman, I rise as the designee of the chairman and I offer amendment No. 1.

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

Madam Chairman, I offer a manager's amendment which sets forth clearly all of the changes we are proposing to make in our comprehensive energy bill. We have listed all of the changes, rather than offer a substitute, so all Members know which provisions we are changing. Our summary clearly explains these changes.

Madam Chairman, this amendment makes some technical changes, adds a few provisions which were part of the H.R. 6 conference report from last Congress, and clarifies some of the provisions contained in this year's bill. None of these provisions should be controversial.

We make technical changes in the ceiling fan efficiency standards. We clarify references to the firearm laws in the nuclear security provision, which had referred to a law no longer in existence. We clarified the tax status of the consortium under the ultradeep program. And we made clear the PUHCA provisions would not impair FERC's or State commissions' ability to enforce provisions and that companies still must comply with existing orders during the period repeal becomes effective.

We clarify dates in the NAS MTBE study, rulemaking and appropriation authorization dates for the LUST program, and clarified the bump-up dates. We allowed our clean air coal projects to be eligible to power plants of 600 MW or less. We made technical changes to the boutique fuels studies and our reference to the soybean oil within the Edible Oil Act. We have also included the on road and off-road diesel rules in the fuel harmonization study. We also clarified that FERC would have a role to play with the regional boards we established to set guidelines for efficient, economic dispatch of electric power.

Madam Chairman, we again try to cap the energy savings performance contracts at $500 million. We disagree these provisions should score. Like many, we have voiced our opposition to this score, but we are concerned about the cost of the bill, so we are trying again to cap its cost. We also tried to avoid a $64 million score on our employee benefits amendment we adopted in committee.

Some of our other changes include clarifying that the 3-year time period in which the Federal Government must establish energy efficiency standards on certain products be prospective only. Like we did in the bill of the last Congress, we moved the photovoltaic program from DOE to GSA.

We added back into the bill some of the provisions contained in our H.R. 6 conference report of the last Congress. Several were in the research and development title and include the Western Michigan Demonstration Project, the Western Hemisphere Energy Cooperation Project, the Arctic Engineering Research Center, and the Barrow Geophysical Research Facility.

Madam Chairman, most importantly, we reinserted the natural gas market reform provision from the last Congress to ensure Enron trading practices of the past are not repeated. We had to drop this provision because the parliamentarians thought it could be subject to a point of order in our committee, so we are putting it back in now.

We have also added the aircraft idling study, the engine idling program, and the hydrogen fuel bus program. If any Member has any concerns about these provisions, I look forward to working with you through conference. We have added some noncontroversial amendments through the affordable housing energy efficiency provisions.

The other amendments are purely technical in nature, such as removing duplicative provisions passed by other committees.

Finally, Madam Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo), chairman of the Committee on Resources; the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means; the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), chairman of the Committee on Science; the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), chairman of the Committee on Government Reform; the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and their staffs, for helping us put together this manager's amendment; and I ask for its adoption.

Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton).

Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).

I think this week and this day and tomorrow are probably two of the most important days to the youth of our country because we are discussing an energy bill, an energy bill that might just lay out what their future might be. If I had a youngster who was a sophomore in high school, a junior or maybe a senior, I would be very concerned about their future if we do not solve our energy problems.

Today and tomorrow I think the most important bill that is going to come before this Congress is going to be decided, and I think we are going to pass it. We are going to send it over to the Senate. We are going to go to work on the Senate to try to get those two votes that we have not been able to get in 4 years over there, 4 years.

We have to make this out as a generational bill because we are talking about a generation of youngsters that might have to all go overseas to fight a war to bring us some energy here. It is a shame if they have to do that when we have plenty of energy right here at home.

I know that back in the early days, and I go back to history sometimes, if you look at the past and see that we should not make the mistakes of the past; but sometimes they light a light for us to see what happened and see what caused it to happen.

Back in the 1940s, back in the late 1930s, we had a President named Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He made a lot of great speeches. One of the great speeches he made was about fear, about the Great Depression. He said, ``The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.'' And he led us out of that Depression.

But one of the other speeches that he made that scholars have noted and many people have listened to and many have used it as a part of their thrust in their discussion, he said, ``To some generations much is given, of some generations much is expected, but this generation has a rendezvous with destiny.'' That rendezvous with destiny turned out to be World War II.

As we listened on our Philco radios, we heard him make these speeches. He spoke those words. He spoke those words following the action of Cordell Hull, who was Secretary of State then; Henry Stimson, Secretary of War. They had both cut Japan off from energy. We supplied them their entire energy thrust and they depended on us for it.

When we cut them off, we should have known that they had to break out and go somewhere. They had to go south into Malaysia. They had to have energy because the country of Japan, who did not hate this country, Admiral Perry had opened them up to trade earlier, but they were forced to go south into Malaysia or do something because they had to have energy. That was an energy war; there is no question about it.

I think, as they did when they cut that off with Japan, having 13 months' national existence, war was inevitable and that was an energy war.

Sometime later the Fuehrer, Adolf Hitler, went into the Ploesti oil fields. He went east into the Ploesti oil fields. Their tanks and their airplanes were out of fuel. They had to go east. That was a battle for energy. Energy caused that action.

Then George Bush, the father of our present President, just some 10 or 11 years ago sent 450,000 youngsters over to the desert in Iraq. That was a war for energy. Not because we did not like the Emir of Kuwait or we wanted to help him for some reason. It was a war to keep a bad guy named Saddam Hussein, who is now in a cage, from getting his foot on half the known energy sources in the entire world.

Nations will fight for energy; there is no question about that. But we do not have to because we can solve our own problems. With this bill, H.R. 6, we can prevent a war. We can drill on ANWR. We can drill up to the depths of the gulf. We can go down 5- or 6,000 feet or 10,000 feet but we cannot get it back up. But with technology we can do that. That is provided for in this bill.

We certainly can have energy if we pass this bill. And then our youngsters can say with a great bit of courage and great bit of hope in their voice, What school am I going to attend, rather than what branch of service am I going to have to enter.

This country will fight for energy. We do not have to. This Congress has to fight for H.R. 6. We have to pass H.R. 6, and if we do that, our youngsters will not have to fight that war that the past has indicated could happen.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the lives and the upcoming birthdays on February 14 of two outstanding Texas women, Henrietta C. Smith of Greenville, Texas, in the Fourth Congressional District, and her twin sister, Nina Lee Klein of Garland. Henrietta and Nina will celebrate their 85th birthdays with a family reunion in Austin, and I join their children, grandchildren, and many friends in recognition of this joyous occasion.

Henrietta and Nina have been excellent role models for their families and for young people who have known them. Henrietta obtained bachelor's and master's degrees from Texas

A&M University at Commerce and also attended Miss Hickey's Secretarial School in St. Louis, MO. A resident of Greenville for 54 years, she retired as a vocational counselor from Greenville High School in 1988. Prior to that, she was a guidance counselor at Greenville Junior High School and a sixth grade teacher at Bowie Elementary School. She remains active in the community, as an elder at Grace Presbyterian Church, past president and annual book sale volunteer for the American Association of University Women, and past president of the Greenville Area Retired Teachers and School Employees Association.

Nina also has been active in her church as well as various women's groups and is a lifelong homemaker. Although legally blind throughout her life, Nina graduated from Maryville University in St. Louis with a degree in sociology--a significant accomplishment--and has been a productive and active member of her community.

Henrietta was married to the late Wilson Smith, who died in 1968. They have three children--Charlotte Wright of Davidsonville, MD, Marsha Smith of Pahrump, NV, and Edward Smith of Fairfield, TX, as well as four grandchildren. Nina lost her husband, Walter Klein, in 1995. Their daughter, Barbara Klein, lives in Garland.

Although these sisters live 50 miles apart, they still see each other several times each month. As they celebrate their 85th birthday on Valentine's Day, February 14, with their family, I want to take this opportunity in the House of Representatives to extend my best wishes to Henrietta C. Smith and Nina Lee Klein for a wonderful celebration and recognize their many contributions to their families and their communities.