Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
AND WE'LL HAVE *** CLEAN
WATER SOCIETY, WE'LL HAVE A
BETTER ENVIRONMENT, WE'LL HAVE A
BETTER AMERICA AND AS A RESULT
WE HAVE WILL HAVE THE JOBS THAT
WE WANT.
THANK YOU AND I YIELD BACK THE
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MONTANA YIELDS BACK HIS TIME.
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM WYOMING.
I MOVE TO STRIKE
THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM
WYOMING IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE
MINUTES.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I
RISE TO OPPOSE THE AMENDMENT AND
TO SUPPORT THE UNDERLYING BILL.
WATER RIGHTS ARE A STATE ISSUE
AND THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ALLOW
TWO FEDERAL AGENCIES TO INCREASE
THEIR OWN SCOPE OF JURISDICTION
PURSUANT TO THE CLEAN WATER ACT.
THOSE AGENCIES HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED
THAT THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ALLOW
THEM TO INCREASE THE SCOPE OF
THEIR JURISDICTION UNDER THE CHA
CLEAN WATER ACT -- UNDER THE
CLEAN WATER ACT.
IT IS NOT THAT NONNAVIGABLE
WATERS NON-NAVIGABLE WATERS GO
WITHOUT REGULATION.
NON-NAVIGABLE WATERS ARE
REGULATED.
THEY ARE REGULATED IN THE STATES
BY STATE SYSTEMS.
IN THE STATE OF WYOMING THAT
SYSTEM IS A REGULATORY SYSTEM
ADMINISTERED BY THE EXECUTIVE
BRANCH.
IN COLORADO THAT SYSTEM IS AN
ADJUDICATORY SYSTEM REGULATED
THROUGH THE COURTS.
BUT IN EVERY CASE IN THE WEST
WHERE WATER IS PRECIOUS AND
SPARSE THE PEOPLE WHO CONTROL
IT, WHETHER IT IS IN MY STATE
LIKE THE CONTROL AND OUR WATER
COMMISSIONERS, OUR
SUPERINTENDENTS, OUR DITCH
RIDERS, OUR RANCHERS, OUR
FARMERS, OUR DIVISION OF
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY, THEY KNOW THE NAMES OF
THE STREAMS, THEY KNOW THE NAMES
OF THE PEOPLE WHO INTERACT WITH
THE STREAMS, THE LIFESTOCK THAT
INTERACTS WITH THE STREAMS, THE
WILDLIFE THAT INTERACTS WITH THE
STREAMS, THE WEEDS, THE CROPS,
THE GRASS, THEY UNDERSTAND THESE
ECOSYSTEMS.
STATE GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN
REGULATING WATER FOR OVER A
CENTURY IN A VERY COMPREHENSIVE,
CLEAR, BOOTS ON THE GROUND,
UNDERSTAND THE SYSTEMS WAY OF
MANAGING.
NOW, IF YOU TAKE THAT AND ALLOW
THE E.P.A. AND THE ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS TO EXPAND THEIR
JURISDICTION IN A WAY THAT
INCLUDES NON-NAVIGABLE WATERS IT
WILL TAKE THAT REGULATORY SCHEME
THAT IS WORKING SO WELL AND IT
WILL BRING IT TO WASHINGTON,
2,000 MILES AWAY FROM WHERE THE
REGULATORS ARE CURRENTLY DOING
THEIR JOBS WELL EVERY DAY, AND
PUT IT RIGHT HERE IN WASHINGTON,
UNDERSTAND THE SCARSITY OF
WATER, WHERE PEOPLE DON'T
UNDERSTAND OUR REGULATORY
SCHEMES, WHERE THEY DON'T
UNDERSTAND OUR CASE LAW, WHERE
THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND OUR DITCH
WRITERS, WHERE THEY DON'T
UNDERSTAND OUR SUPERINTENDENTS,
WHERE THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND OUR
BOARDS OF CONTROL, THEY DON'T
UNDERSTAND OUR STATE ENGINEERS.
UNDER THE WESTERN ATTORNEYS
GENERAL CONFERENCE THERE IS A
SPECIFIC ENTITY RELATED TO THE
STATE ENGINEERS, THE STATE
ENGINEERS IN THE WEST ARE THE
PEOPLE WHO REGULATE WATER, THEY
MEET REGULARLY TO DISCUSS
INTERSTATE ISSUES IN WATER
JURISDICTION AS WELL AS
INTRASTATE ISSUES.
THIS IS A WELL REGULATED, WELL
UNDERSTOOD, WELL MANAGED, WELL
ARTICULATED SYSTEM.
TO TAKE IT AND DECIDE THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR NO GOOD
REASON COULD DO BETTER AT A TIME
WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS
BROKE AND WE CANNOT EXPAND ITS
JURISDICTION WITHOUT COSTING THE
TAXPAYERS NEEDLESSLY MORE IS A
TRAVESTY, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM
WYOMING YIELDS BACK HER TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM WASHINGTON.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE TO
STRIKET LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
WASHINGTON IS RECOGNIZED FOR
FIVE MINUTES.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I RISE TOO TO OPPOSE THIS
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MY FRIEND
FROM VIRGINIA, AN AMENDMENT
OFFERED IN MY MIND TO PROTECT A
THIS ADMINISTRATION'S OVERREACH
ON REGULATING ALL BODIES OF
WATER IN THIS COUNTRY.
AS MY FRIEND FROM MONTANA
ALLUDED TO, THIS REALLY IS A
JOB-KILLING AMENDMENT.
SECTION 109 OF THE ENERGY AND
WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS
BILL PUTS A CHECK ON THIS
ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSED
GUIDANCE ON CLEAN WATER ACT
REGULATIONS.
TIME WHEN UNEMPLOYMENT EXCEEDS
9%, THIS SO-CALLED GUIDANCE
DOCUMENT FROM MY POINT OF VIEW,
BEING FROM THE WEST, WILL
UNDERMINE ECONOMIC GROWTH, IT
WILL INCREASE PERMITTING
REQUIREMENTS AND UNDOUBTEDLY
LEAD TO MORE LITIGATION.
ACCORDING TO THE AMERICAN FARM
BUREAU, THIS GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
WOULD, AND I QUOTE, WOULD TAKE
AN OVERLY BROAD VIEW OF WATERS
OF THE UNITED STATES AND WOULD
SERVE AS A ROAD MAP TO DESIGNATE
NEARLY ALL BODIES OF WATER, EVEN
SOME DRY LAND, AS SUBJECT TO
FEDERAL REGULATION THAT DICTATES
LAND USE DECISIONS, AND I END
QUOTE.
MR. CHAIRMAN, WATER IS A
PRECIOUS COMMODITY, ESPECIALLY
TO THOSE OF US IN THE WEST.
IT IS A NECESSARY RESOURCE FOR
MANY ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING AC
CONSULT, ENERGY, TRANSPORTATION
-- AGRICULTURE, ENERGY,
TRANSPORTATION AND RECREATION.
OUR ECONOMY AND WAY OF LIFE
CANNOT AFFORD TO HAVE THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CLAIM CONTROL
OVER ALL WATERWAYS IN THIS
COUNTRY.
THIS ADMINISTRATION'S ATTEMPT TO
ENACT SUCH DRACONIAN REGULATIONS
THROUGH REGULATORY FIAT IS A
DELIBERATE ATTEMPT TO CIRCUMVENT
AS MILLIONS -- MANY OF MY
COLLEAGUES KNOW, THE PRIOR
CONGRESS COULD NOT PASS AN
OVERLY RESTRICTIVE RENEWAL OF
THE CLEAN WATER ACT.
SO IT'S CLEAR THAT THIS PART OF
THE REGULATORY AGENDA IS AIMED
AT PICKING UP THE PIECES THAT
THE CONGRESS COULD NOT ENACT
LAST TIME.
SO IT'S FOR THIS REASON THAT I
JOINED 169 OF MY COLLEAGUES IN
APRIL OF 2010 TO URGE BOTH THE
E.P.A. AND THE CORPS OF
ENGINEERS TO WITHDRAW THESE
PROPOSED GUIDANCE REGULATIONS.
THAT WAS IN APRIL OF 2010.
UNFORTUNATELY THIS
ADMINISTRATION REFUSES TO DO SO.
SO THAT IS WHY SECTION 109 IS SO
IMPORTANT, TO PROTECT RURAL
AMERICA FROM THIS OVERZEALOUS
BUREAUCRACY AND FOR THAT REASON,
MR. CHAIRMAN, I URGE MY
COLLEAGUES TO OPPOSE THIS
AMENDMENT AND I YIELD BACK THE
BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
WASHINGTON YIELDS BACK HIS TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM INDIANA.
I MOVE TO STRIKE
THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MINUTES.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I
APPRECIATE THE RECOGNITION AND I
RISE IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THE
GENTLEMAN'S AMENDMENT.
WITHOUT THIS AMENDMENT THE BILL
WOULD RESULT IN INCREASED
IMPLEMENTATION COSTS TO BUILD
THE FEDERAL AND STATE RESOURCE
AGENCIES AS WELL AS TO REGULATE
ED COMMUNITY.
INCREASED DELAYS IN THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF IMPORTANT
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS AND
PROTRACTED LITIGATION ON THE
DISPARITY BETWEEN EXISTING
FEDERAL REGULATIONS AND THE TWO
COURT DECISIONS.
CLEARLY THE ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS CANNOT EXCEED ITS
CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY.
BUT IT'S CERTAINLY NECESSARY
THAT THE LAW AND REGULATIONS BE
COLLARIFIED GIVEN THE SUPREME
COURT DECISION.
THERE IS A PURPOSE TO THE CLEAN
WATER ACT.
IT IS TO PROTECT THE NATION'S
WATERWAYS.
IN ALL OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND
ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF THESE
AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS ARE AT RISK
IF SOME ELEMENTS ARE PROTECTED
AND OTHERS ARE NOT.
WE CERTAINLY NEED TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE DEFINITIONS ARE
PREDICTABLE AND MANAGEMENT.
THE DEFINITION OF WATERS
PROTECTED BY THE CLEAN WATER ACT
SHOULD BE CLEAR, UNDERSTANDABLE,
WELL SUPPORTED AND TRANSPARENT
TO THE PUBLIC.
I AM CONCERNED IF THE LANGUAGE
CURRENTLY IN THE BILL IS NOT
REMOVED THAT WILL NOT BE THE
CASE.
AND CERTAINLY NEED TO PROMOTE
CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE CLEAN
WATER ACT AND AGRICULTURAL
WETLAND PROGRAMS.
WE NEED THE IDENTIFICATION TO
WATERS COVERED BY THE CLEAN
WATER ACT AND THE FOOD SECURITY
ACT AND OPERATIONAL ELEMENTS OF
IMPLEMENTING PROGRAMS SHOULD
REFLECT CONSISTENT, PROHIBITBLE
AND STRAIGHTFORWARD DECISION
GUIDELINES.
WE OUGHT TO BE PRECISE ON
EXEMPTIONS AS WELL.
MY FURTHER CONCERN IS THAT THE
PROVISION NOW CONTAINED IN THE
BILL DOES NOT APPLY SIMPLY TO
THE COMING FISCAL YEAR.
IT APPLIES TO ANY SUBSEQUENT
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT
ACT, ENSURING UNCERTAINTY
CONTINUES INDEFINITELY AND SO I
AM OPPOSED, I AM SORRY, I AM IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF THE
GENTLEMAN'S AMENDMENT AND WOULD
BE WILLING TO YIELD TIME TO HIM.
VIRGINIA.
I THANK MY VERY GOOD FRIEND,
THE RANKING MEMBER OF ENERGY AND
WATER APPROPRIATIONS.
LET ME FIRST ADDRESS THE POINTS
THAT WERE MADE BY MY VERY GOOD
FRIEND FROM MONTANA.
FIRST OF ALL, THERE
WAS A SUGGESTION THAT THERE WAS
SEWAGE DUMPED INTO THE POTOMAC
RIVER.
I THINK THAT'S PRETTY MUCH A
QUOTE.
THAT'S NOT ACCURATE, I WOULD SAY
TO MIED IF VE GOOD FRIEND -- I
WOULD SAY TO MY VERY GOOD FRIEND
OF.
IT WAS NOT SEWAGE, IT WAS CLEAN,
FILTERED SILT THAT CAME FROM A
DRINKING WATER RESERVOIR THAT
WAS PUT INTO THE POTOMAC WITHOUT
ANY THREAT TO THE QUALITY OF THE
WATER OR THE HABITAT.
THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
UNDERSTOOD THAT.
THEY DON'T NOW PUT IT THERE, BUT
ACCURATE TO DESCRIBE IT IN THE
WAY THAT IT WAS.
WITH REGARD TO THE SUPREME COURT
RULING, EVEN JUSTICE SCALIA MADE
IT CLEAR THAT WATERS THAT ARE
ADJACENT TO NAVIGABLE WATERS
SHOULD BE FEDERALLY REGULATED
AND PROTECTED.
SO THE STATEMENT THAT WAS
OFFERED IN THE DEBATE IS NOT
ENTIRELY ACCURATE.
I WOULD ALSO MENTION THAT E.P.A.
DOES HAVE AN OFFICE IN MONTANA
AND IN FACT THE PEOPLE WHO WERE
ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THE OIL
PIPELINE LEAK THAT PUT A
CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF OIL INTO
THE RIVER, THEY ARE SAYING THAT
E.P.A. WAS WONDERFUL,
TREMENDOUSLY HELPFUL TO THEM.
AND THAT'S WHAT E.P.A. WANTS TO
BE NOW, NOT ONLY TO INDIVIDUAL
COMMUNITIES ADVERSELY AFFECTED
BUT TO THE BUSINESSES, TO THE
MINING INTEREST, TO THE FARMING
INTEREST THAT NEED CLARIFICATION
ON WHAT WATERS ARE APPROPRIATELY
UNDER FEDERAL JURISDICTION.
SO LET ME NOW YIELD BACK MY TIME
TO THE DISTINGUISHED GENTLEMAN
FROM INDIANA.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
INDIANA IS RECOGNIZED.
BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME.
I MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST
WORD.
NEBRASKA IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
NEBRASKA IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE
MINUTES.
THANK YOU.
I WANT TO YIELD MY TIME TO THE
GENTLEMAN FROM MONTANA.
I THANK THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEBRASKA.
THERE WAS MORE THAN JUST CLEAN
WATER DROPPED IN TO THE
POTOMAC.
IT WAS DONE IN THE DEAD OF THE
NIGHT.
IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DONE IN
THE DEAD OF THE NIGHT IF IT WAS
DONE LEGALLY OR ABOVE BOARD.
IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE
OIL SPILL IN MONTANA, THE
YELLOWSTONE RIVER IS A
NAVIGATABLE STREM.
YES, THE E.P.A. DID A GOOD JOB.
TO MY KNOWLEDGE YET, AND THAT
IS STILL YET TO BE OPENED TO
INTERPRETATION BECAUSE WE'RE
WAITING, THERE HAS BEEN NO LOSS
OF LIFE AMONG FISH.
WE'LL WAIT AND SEE.
CERTAINLY SOME OF THE
RAMIFICATIONS WILL BE DOWN THE
ROAD AS A RESULT OF THE STUDIES
THAT OCCUR, AND WE DO
IN.
BUT, AGAIN, IT WAS NAVIGATABLE
STREAM.
AND THIS AMENDMENT STRIPS WHAT
WE ARE TRYING TO DO TO PROTECT
NONNAVIGATABLE FROM BEING
EXPANDED BEYOND THE ORIGINAL
INTENT.
WILL THE GENTLEMAN
YIELD JUST FOR A QUESTION?
CERTAINLY.
THE GENTLEMAN TALKS
ABOUT THE POTOMAC.
I HAVE BEEN HERE FOR MANY, MANY
YEARS.
I WAS ON THE STAFF IN THE OTHER
BODY, AND AT THE TIME -- AND
THIS WAS PROBABLY IN THE MID
1970'S -- WHAT THE GENTLEMAN
SAYS WAS AN ISSUE.
TALKING ABOUT?
ALLOWING ME TO RECLAIM MY TIME.
THIS WAS MORE
RECENT?
THIS WAS IN THE
YEAR 2000.
IT WAS BECAUSE OF
THE POTOMAC GOT CLEANED UP.
I YIELD BACK.
THE ISSUE WAS NOT
THE RESULT OF THE CLEAN WATER
ACT BEING ESTABLISHED TO CLEAN
UP THE VARIOUS RIVERS AROUND
THE COUNTRY.
THE ISSUE HAD TO DO
SPECIFICALLY WITH THE POTOMAC
AND THE DISCHARGE THAT OCCURRED
WITHIN THE POTOMAC AND THOSE OF
US FROM THE WESTERN CAUCUS IN
2001, WHICH IS WHEN I FIRST GOT
TO CONGRESS, WERE TRYING TO
MAKE THE ISSUE OF THE HYPOCRISY
BETWEEN THE EASTERN
CONSTITUENCY, THE URBAN
CONSTITUENCY OF WASHINGTON,
D.C., VIRGINIA, AND MARYLAND
TRYING TO APPLY A DIFFERENT
STANDARD TO MONTANA.
SO THE ISSUE WAS SPECIFIC TO
THE DISCHARGE IN THE POTOMAC
AND THERE WAS SPECIFIC TO THE
WILSON BRIDGE AND THE
ENDANGERED SPECIES AND THE
HYPOCRISY OF TWO SEPARATE
INTERPRETATIONS.
THE SUPREME COURT HAS MADE AN
INTERPRETATION THAT THE
WE AGREE WITH IT.
THE LANGUAGE IN THE BILL AGREES
WITH IT.
THIS AMENDMENT IS A BAD
AMENDMENT AND I HOPE YOU VOTE
NO.
I YIELD BACK.
I YIELD BACK MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM WASHINGTON.
I MOVE TO STRIKE THE
REQUISITE NUMBER OF WORDS AND I
YIELD TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM
VIRGINIA.
RECOGNIZED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA IS
I THANK THE
GENTLEMAN.
I AM NOT GOING TO BELABOR THIS,
BUT I DO THINK FOR THE RECORD
WE SHOULD CLARIFY SOME OF WHAT
THE GENTLEMAN SAID IS ACCURATE
EXCEPT FOR THE MATERIAL.
THIS WAS NOT SEWAGE.
THIS WAS FILTERED SILT THAT
CAME FROM A DRINKING WATER
RESERVOIR THAT IS OPERATED BY
THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
THEY DID PUT IT INTO THE
POTOMAC AFTER THEIR FINDING IT
WOULD NOT JEOPARDIZE THE HEALTH
OF THE FISH OR ANY OF THE
VEGETATION, AND THEY DID SEEK
AN EXEMPTION.
THEY LOST.
AND NOW THAT SILT IS PUT IN THE
LANDFILL.
GENTLEMAN A QUESTION.
DOES THE GENTLEMAN NOT BELIEVE
AS I DO THAT THE POTOMAC RIVER
IS FAR BETTER TODAY IN TERMS OF
WATER QUALITY BECAUSE OF THE
CLEAN WATER ACT.
THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT THE
FOR THE HEALTH SUCH AS IT IS OF
THE POTOMAC RIVER.
THERE WAS A TIME WHEN YOU COULD
ALMOST STRIKE A MATCH AND PUT
-- AND LIGHT THE POTOMAC RIVER
ON FIRE.
THERE WAS SO MUCH POLLUTION IN
IT.
DEBRIS.
THERE WAS RIVERS IN
PENNSYLVANIA WHERE IN FACT THEY
DID THAT.
IT WAS LIT ON FIRE.
AND THEN THE CLEAN WATER ACT
WAS PASSED BY CONGRESS AND
GUESS WHO SIGNED IT?
RICHARD MILLHOUSE NIXON.
HE SIGNED THE CLEAN AIR ACT,
THE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
AND IN THOSE DAYS THERE WERE
REPUBLICANS WHO CARED ABOUT THE
ENVIRONMENT.
BILL RUCKLE.
TO HEAR THIS RANT OVER THERE
ABOUT THE CLEAN WATER ACT IS
REALLY DESPICABLE, AND THIS
AMENDMENT, YOUR AMENDMENT WOULD
IMPROVE IT, WOULD PROTECT THE
ENVIRONMENT, CLARIFY THE
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS SO THAT
WE CAN GET ON WITH IT AND TO
MAKE THE WATERS OF OUR COUNTRY
FISHABLE, SWIMMABLE AND --
WILL THE GENTLEMAN YIELD?
YES, I WILL YIELD TO THE
DISTINGUISHED CHAIRMAN OF THE
NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE.
THIS AMENDMENT IS
NOT ABOUT THE CLEAN WATER ACT.
THIS AMENDMENT IS ABOUT A
BUREAUCRATIC GUIDANCE ON AN
ISSUE, ON AN ISSUE THAT THIS
CONGRESS ATTEMPTED TO TAKE UP
LAST TIME THAT SIMPLY AMONG
OTHER THINGS SAID THAT THE
JURISDICTION OF THE CLEAN WATER
ACT WOULD NOT BE NAVIGATABLE
WATERS.
NOW, THAT CAUSES
A WHOLE LOT OF US IN THE WEST A
LOT OF PROBLEMS.
COMING FROM AN IRRIGATION AREA,
IT BOTHERS ME BECAUSE THAT
MEANS THAT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT WOULD NOW BE IN
CHARGE OF ANYTHING NOT
NAVIGATABLE WHICH COULD BE
IRRIGATION STREAMS.
I'D JUST SAY TO THE GENTLEMAN,
WHY DON'T YOU AS CHAIRMAN -- DO
YOU HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THIS
OR IS THIS THE COMMERCE
COMMITTEE?
THIS IS
TRANSPORTATION.
WHICH ONE?
TRANSPORTATION.
DICTION DKS YOU GUYS ARE IN THE
MAJORITY NOW.
YOU GUYS ARE IN THE
MAJORITY NOW.
YOU ARE CHAIRMAN OF THE
COMMITTEE.
WHY DON'T YOU HAVE THE
COMMITTEE HOLD A HEARING?
WE DON'T -- THE FACT IS WHAT
YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IN THIS
APPROPRIATIONS BILL IS SO
EGREGIOUS THAT WE HAVE TO USE
WILL THE
GENTLEMAN YIELD?
YES, I YIELD.
MY ISSUE IS NOT
-- THE ISSUE FOR ME IS NOT THE
CLEAN WATER ACT.
THE ISSUE IS ATTEMPT TO AMEND
THE CLEAN WATER ACT TO TAKE OUT
NAVIGATABLE AND THAT IS BEING
DONE POTENTIALLY BY THE
GUIDANCE WITH THIS.
THAT'S WHAT THIS AMENDMENT --
TAKING BACK MY TIME.
AGAIN, THE REGULATORY PROCESS
HASN'T EVEN BEEN COMPLETED.
PEOPLE ARE STILL SENDING IN
COMMENTS.
AND SO TO USE A BLUNT -- A
BLUNT TOOL AND PUT THIS
PROHIBITION IN HERE DOESN'T
ALLOW THE PROCESS TO WORK TO
MAKE SURE WE CAN CLARIFY THE
SUPREME COURT DECISION.
WILL THE GENTLEMAN
YIELD?
IF I HAVE TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED.
I WANT TO SAY THIS
AMENDMENT PREVENTS GUIDANCE AND
RULEMAKING.
THE THAT COMPREHENSIVE.
WHAT E.P.A. AND THE CORPS OF
ENGINEERS IS TRYING TO DO IS
CLARIFY WHERE FEDERAL
JURISDICTION EXTENDS AND WHERE
IT ENDS.
THERE IS CLEARLY CONFUSION ON
WHAT CONSTITUTES NAVIGATABLE
WATERS.
THE SUPREME COURT RECOGNIZED
THAT.
EVEN JUSTICE SCALIA SAID IT'S
NOT NAVIGATABLE WATERS, IT'S
WATERS THAT'S CONTIGUOUS AND
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF WATER
SOURCES UNDER THE SURFACE YOU
CAN'T SEE.
MOST OF THE WATER IN THIS
COUNTRY IS UNDER THE SURFACE.
IT CAN BE ON LAND.
IT IS UNDERWATER.
RECLAIMING MY TIME
FOR A SECOND.
THE GENTLEMAN MAY BE BETTER OFF
IN THE LONG TERM BY LETTING THE
PROCESS WORK AND IF IT DOES
THEN CLARIFY BETWEEN
NAVIGATABLE AND NONNAVIGATABLE.
THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO THE
GENTLEMAN FROM WASHINGTON.
WILL THE
GENTLEMAN YIELD?
YES.
THE LAW IS CLEAR.
IT ONLY SAYS NAVIGATABLE.
THAT'S WHAT THE LAW SAYS RIGHT
NOW.
THAT'S WHERE THE DANGER COMES
FROM.
LET'S WORK TOGETHER
TO CLARIFY IT.
THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME
HAS EXPIRED.
SPEAK TIME ON THE GENTLEMAN
FROM VIRGINIA'S AMENDMENT.
IF NOT THE QUESTION IS ON THE
GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA'S
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
THE NOES HAVE IT.
THE NOES HAVE IT.
THE AMENDMENT IS NOT AGREED TO.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA.
RECORDED VOTE.
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6
OF RULE 18, THE GENTLEMAN FROM
VIRGINIA WILL BE POST POPED.
-- PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6 OF RULE
18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ON THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA WILL BE
POSTPONED.
THE CLERK WILL READ.
SECTION 110, NONE OF THE FUNDS
MAY BE USED TO RELOCATE ANY
REGIONAL DIVISION HEADQUARTERS
OF THE CORPS LOCATED AT A
MILITARY INSTALLATION.
SEX 111.
-- SECTION 111.
MADAM CHAIR, I HAVE
AN AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
NEBRASKA.
THE CLERK WILL REPORT THE
AMENDMENT.
MR. TERRY OF NEBRASKA.
AT THE END OF TITLE 1, INSERT
THE FOLLOWING -- SECTION, NOT
LATER THAN ONE YEAR AFTER THE
DATE OF ENACTMENT OF THIS ACT
THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
SHALL CONDUCT AND PUBLISH THE
RESULTS OF A STUDY REGARDING
THE REASONS AND CONTRIBUTING
FACTORS THAT LED TO THE
MISSOURI RIVER DURING THE
SPRING AND SUMMER OF 2011 WITH
SPECIFIC FOCUS ON WHETHER THE
WATER MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES OF
THE CORPS CONDUCTED FOR ANY
PURPOSE OTHER THAN FLOOD
PREVENTION AND CONTROL
CONTRIBUTED TO THE 2011
FLOODING AND IN WHAT WAYS.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW
JERSEY RISE?
MADAM CHAIR,
I RESERVE A POINT OF ORDER ON
THE GENTLEMAN'S AMENDMENT.
THE POINT OF ORDER
IS RESERVED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEBRASKA.
CHAIRMAN.
AND I RISE TODAY WITH THIS
AMENDMENT TO THE ENERGY AND
WATER APPROPRIATIONS BILL.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD DIRECT THE
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS TO
CONDUCT AND PUBLISH A STUDY
REGARDING THE FLOODING OF THE
MISSOURI RIVER THIS YEAR.
WE NEED TO KNOW WHY THIS
FLOODING OCCURRED, PARTICULARLY
IF OUR FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM WAS
UTILIZED FOR PURPOSES OTHER
THAN FLOOD PREVENTION SO WE CAN
THE FUTURE.
LET ME BE CLEAR.
I WOULD ASSUME THE CORPS OF
ENGINEERS IN CHARGE OF FLOOD
CONTROL WOULD BE DOING AN
ANNUAL STUDY OF WHETHER OR NOT
THEY ARE SUCCEEDING IN THEIR
LEGISLATIVE MANDATED GOALS.
THE WHOLE PURPOSES OF THE DAMS
SO WE'RE JUST SIMPLY ASKING
THEM TO DO WHAT THEY SHOULD BE
DOING ANYWAY, ESPECIALLY WHEN
THIS IS SUCH AN INTERESTING --
WELL, STRIKE THE WORD
INTERESTING -- DEVASTATING YEAR
BASED ON THE MISCALCULATIONS OF
THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
AS I'M STANDING HERE NOW, THE
MISSOURI IS FLOODING IN FIVE
STATES INCLUDING NEBRASKA AND
IOWA.
IN MY OWN DISTRICT, I HAVE
CONSTITUENTS DAMAGED,
UNDERWATER, WIPED OUT AS WE
STAND HERE.
WE ARE WONDERING IF THE LEVEES
WILL HOLD BACK THE WATER
PREVENTING DOWNTOWN OMAHA FROM
BEING FLOODED.
THIS IS A 90-DAY SUSTAINED
FLOOD.
IT'S ENTITLED THE GREAT
MISSOURI RIVER FLOOD OF 2011.
NOT TO RECEDE UNTIL MAYBE
OCTOBER OR NOVEMBER.
ANYONE WHO LIVES NEAR A
POWERFUL BODY OF WATER KNOWS
FLOODING IS A REALITY AND MUST
BE EXPECTED OR PLANNED FOR.
THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF THESE
DAMS IN THE CORPS OF ENGINEER'S
PURPOSE IS TO REDUCE THE
FLOODING.
IT'S BEEN SUCCESSFUL SINCE THE
FOR THE LAST COUPLE YEARS.
IT'S IMPERATIVE THAT WE
INVESTIGATE THE DECISIONS,
GUIDELINES AND PARAMETERS IN
PLACE TO DO THE FLOODING TO
DETERMINE IF THERE WAS ANY
POSSIBILITY THAT THIS DISASTER
COULD HAVE AN, I WOULD SAY,
SHOULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED.
WE MUST IMPLEMENT THE NECESSARY
ADDITIONAL REFORMS AND CONTROLS
TO ENSURE OUR FLOOD CONTROL
SYSTEM IS UTILIZED FOR JUST
THAT, MADAM CHAIRMAN, FLOOD
CONTROL.
THE ISSUES, WELL DOCUMENTED IN
OUR LOCAL PAPERS AND SOME OTHER
PUBLICATIONS, HAS SHOWN THAT
EITHER THE MANUAL, THAT THE
CORPS OF ENGINEERS SWEARS BY,
LEADS THEM DOWN THE WRONG PATH
WHICH THEN LED TO THIS DISASTER
THAT WE'RE INCURRING AT THIS
MOMENT OR THAT THEIR' MODELING
AND/OR MODELING.
THERE WERE OTHER WEATHER
EXPERTS THAT WERE PREDICTING,
AND ONE SAID A FLOOD OF
BIBLICAL PURR PORTIONS, YET, IT
WASN'T ON THE CORPS OF
ENGINEERS' RADAR.
SOMETHING WENT TERRIBLY WRONG
HERE, SO ALL WE'RE DOING IS
ASKING THAT THERE BE SPECIFIC
LANGUAGE THAT THEY DO WHAT IS
INHERENT TO THEIR JOB AND
DETERMINE IF THEIR MANUALS,
THEIR MODELS NEED TO BE CHANGED
TO PREVENT THE DEVASTATING
FLOODS THAT WERE OCCURRING AND
INCURRING RIGHT NOW TO PREVENT
THE NEXT ONE IN THE FUTURE.
THAT'S ALL WE'RE DOING WITH
THIS AMENDMENT HERE.
SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME I WILL
YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
NEBRASKA YIELDS BACK THE
BALANCE OF HIS TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NORTH
YOU RISE?
YES, MADAM CHAIRMAN, I HAVE
THERE IS AN
AMENDMENT BEING DISCUSSED AT
THIS TIME.
TO SPEAK TO HIS POINT OF ORDER.
YES, MADAM
CHAIR, I DO.
RECOGNIZED.
MADAM CHAIR,
I MAKE A POINT OF ORDER AGAINST
THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE IT
APPROXIMATE PURR POSES TO
CHANGE EXISTING LAW UNDER
APPROPRIATIONS BILL.
THEREFORE, VIOLATES CLAUSE 2 OF
RULE 21.
THE RULE STATES IN PERTINENT
PART AN AMENDMENT IN THE
GENERAL APPROPRIATIONS BILL
SHOULD NOT BE IN ORDER IF
CHANGING EXISTING LAW.
THE AMENDMENT IMPOSES
ADDITIONAL DUTIES AND I ASK FOR
A RULING FROM THE CHAIR.
DOES ANY OTHER MEMBER
WISH TO SPEAK?
I WOULD LIKE TO
SPEAK.
NEBRASKA.
THANK YOU.
I TRIED TO MAKE THE CASE THAT
THIS IS BASICALLY REITERATING
ALREADY CURRENT DUTYIES AND
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CORPS,
BUT STRESSING THAT THEY NEED TO
LOOK SPECIFICALLY AT WHAT CAUSES
OR WHAT CAUSED THIS DEVASTATING
FLOOD.
I HAVE TO ADMIT THAT YOU'RE
PROBABLY GOING TO RULE THAT THIS
IS LEGISLATING BUT I GOT TO TELL
YOU, I'M EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED.
IF WE HAD SOMEBODY IN THE
MISSOURI VALLEY ON
COULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING
SIMILAR TO THIS IN COMMITTEE BUT
YET WHEN SOMEBODY FROM OUTSIDE
THE COMMITTEE COMES HERE AT THE
RIGHT OPPORTUNITY THEN SOMEHOW
IT'S OUT OF ORDER.
I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW I GO BACK
TO MY CONSTITUENTS AND TELL THEM
THAT THE LEADERSHIP IN THE HOUSE
HAS RAISED AN OBJECTION TO THIS
STUDY.
CONSTITUENTS, I'M DISAPPOINTED
FRANKLY IN THE FACT THAT
SOMETHING LIKE THIS THAT'S SO
ACCEPTED.
I YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
NEBRASKA YIELDS BACK.
ANY OTHER MEMBER WISH TO SPEAK
TO THE GENTLEMAN'S POINT OF
ORDER?
RULE.
THE CHAIR FINDS THAT THIS
THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
THE AMENDMENT THEREFORE DOES
CONSTITUTE LEGISLATION IN
VIOLATION OF CLAUSE 2 OF RULE
2157BD THE POINT OF ORDER IS
SUSTAINED, THE AMENDMENT IS NOT
IN ORDER.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NORTH CAROLINA
RISE?
I HAVE AN AMENDMENT AT THE
THE CLERK WILL REPORT
THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY
MR. MCEN ENTIRE OF NORTH
INSERT THE FOLLOWING, SECTION
112, SECTION 156 OF THE WATER
RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF
1976, 42 U.S.C., 1962-D-5-F IS
AMENDED BY STRIKING THEY AND
INSERTING A THE.
TWO, BY INSERTING BEFORE THE
PERIOD THE FOLLOWING, WHEREAFTER
THE DATE OF THE LAST ESTIMATED
PERIODIC NOURISHMENT OF
CONTEMPLATED IN THE CHIEF'S
REPORT, WHICH EVER IS LATTER,
AND, THREE, BY ADDING AT THE END
THE FOLLOWING, B, BEFORE THE END
OF THE 50-YEAR PERIOD REFERRED
TO IN SUBSECTION 8, THE -- A,
THE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE ARMY
SHALL, SUBJECT TO THE
AVAILABILITY OF APPROPRIATIONS,
THEREFORE UNDERTAKE A REVIEW OF
A PROJECT TO WHICH SUBSECTION 8
PROVIDES TO EVALUATE THE
FEASIBILITY OF CONTINUING
FEDERAL PARTICIPATION IN THE
PROJECT AND SHALL MAKE A
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CONGRESS.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY
RISE?
POINT OF ORDER ON THE
GENTLEMAN'S AMENDMENT.
RESERVED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NORTH
MINUTES TO SPEAK TO HIS
AMENDMENT.
MACMACTHANK YOU, -- MCMCTHANK
YOU.
CONGRESS AUTHORIZED -- MR. MCEN
ENTIRE: THANK YOU, MADAM
SPEAKER.
FOR A PERIOD OF UP TO 50 YEARS
FROM THE STARTING DATE OF THE
INITIAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE
PROJECT.
SEVERAL OF THESE PROJECTS ARE
RAPIDLY APPROACHING THE END OF
THAT FIRST 50-YEAR PERIOD OF
FEDERAL PARTICIPATION.
CURRENTLY THERE'S NO LANGUAGE IN
PLACE TO PROVIDE A PROCESS FOR
THE RE-AUTHORIZATION OF THESE
IN ORDER FOR THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT TO REMAIN A
CONTINUING PARTNER TO PROTECT
THE PEOPLE, THE INFRASTRUCTURE,
THE ECONOMY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
OF OUR NATION'S COASTAL
COMMUNITY, CONGRESS MUST GIVE
THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS THE
AUTHORITY TO ASSESS CONTINUED
FEDERAL PARTICIPATION IN
EXPIRING BEACH AND COASTAL
PROJECTS PRIOR TO THE END OF
THEIR ORIGINAL AUTHORIZATIONS IN
ORDER TO PREVENT INTERPRETATIONS
TO FEDERAL RENOURISHMENT
EFFORTS.
YOU THIS THIS WOULD ALLOW THE
ARMY CORPS AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES
HELP DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT TO
CONTINUE A SHORE PROTECTION
PROJECT BASED ON SCIENCE, ON
LOCAL SUPPORT AND THE STANDARDS
THAT THE CORPS USES FOR
DETERMINING WHETHER THERE SHOULD
BE CONTINUED FEDERAL FISCAL
PARTICIPATION AND WHETHER IT IS
WARRANTED.
THESE PROJECTS ARE OF NATIONAL
AND REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE,
COASTAL STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION
PROJECTS NOT ONLY SUPPORT
REGIONAL ECONOMIES AND INDEED
THE NATIONAL ECONOMY BUT THEY
PROVIDE CRITICAL PROTECTION
AGAINST HURRICANES AND AS WE NOW
ARE IN HURRICANE SEASON REALIZE
THE SERIOUSNESS OF THIS AND
OTHER DANGEROUS STORMS.
FEDERAL PARTICIPATION IN THESE
PROJECTS IS DETERMINED BASED ON
A BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS.
MEANING THAT THESE PROJECTS GO
THROUGH A SIGNIFICANT STUDY IN
ORDER TO DETERMINE THAT THEY ARE
MERITED AND THAT IT IS IN THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S FINANCIAL
INTEREST TO CONTINUE TO
PARTICIPATE IN THESE PROJECTS.
HOWEVER, LEASE -- LET'S BE CLEAR
THAT THIS AMENDMENT WOULD NOT
CUT CONGRESS OUT OF THE LOOP,
BECAUSE CONGRESS WILL ALWAYS
HAVE THE FINAL SAY ON FINAL
APPROVAL OF RE-AUTHORIZING THESE
PROJECTS.
ANY APPROVAL FOR A CONSTRUCTION
PHASE WOULD STILL HAVE TO BE
APPROVED BY CONGRESS.
SO IT ONLY MAKES SENSE TO ALLOW
THESE PROJECTS TO PROCEED
WITHOUT INTERPRETATION.
I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY TO
SPEAK TO HIS POINT OF ORDER.
I MOVE TO
STRIKE THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
I MUST OPPOSE
THE AMENDMENT AS AUTHORIZING ON
AN APPROPRIATIONS BILL.
I SHARE THE GENTLEMAN'S SUPPORT
FOR THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS'
PARTICIPATION IN BEACH
REPLENISHMENT PROJECTS THAT
PROVIDE PROTECTION FROM COASTAL
STORMS, FOR INDIVIDUALS AND
BUSINESSES, COMING FROM A STATE
WITH 137 MILES OF SHORELINE, I
TOO UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF
THESE PROJECTS TO LOCAL,
REGIONAL AND OUR NATIONAL
ECONOMY.
THE AMENDMENT OFFERED HOWEVER
WOULD ADD AUTHORIZING LANGUAGE
TO THE ENERGY AND WATER BILL,
THEREFORE IT IS SUBJECT TO A
POINT OF ORDER.
SO WHILE I AM SYMPATHETIC TO THE
GENTLEMAN'S INTENT, I MUST
OPPOSE THE AMENDMENT AND WILL
INSIST UPON THE POINT OF ORDER.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME?
I YIELD BACK.
DOES ANY OTHER MEMBER
WISH TO SPEAK TO THE POINT OF
ORDER?
THE CHAIR FINDS THAT THE
AMENDMENT PROPOSES DIRECTLY TO
CHANGE EXISTING LAW AND AS SUCH
IT CONSTITUTES LEGISLATION IN
VIOLATION OF CLAUSE 2-C OF RULE
21 AND THE POINT OF ORDER IS
SUSTAINED.
THE GENTLELADY FROM OHIO.
I MOVE TO STRIKE THE
LAST WORD.
THE GENTLELADY IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
YES.
MEMBERS, AND, MADAM SPEAKER, I'M
HAVING HELP FACING THIS CHART UP
HERE JUST TO SHOW HOW MUCH TRELL
AMERICA IMPORTS, THE RED LINE,
AND OVERALL HOW MUCH WE USE.
NATION.
I OFFER THIS AMENDMENT TO HELP
RESTORE THE ENERGY SECURITY,
ECONOMIC SECURITY AND
ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY OF OUR
NATION, NOTHING COULD BE MORE
VITAL.
MY AMENDMENT TAKES A SMALL STEP
AND SHIFTS A VERY SMALL AMOUNT
OF FUNDS, $10 MILLION, FROM THE
ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS WITHIN THE
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY TO HELP
RESTORE FUNDS TO SOLAR ENERGY
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT WITHIN
THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND
RENEWABLE ENERGY PROGRAM.
SADLY THE BASE BILL JEOPARDIZES
AMERICA'S NEW ENERGY FUTURE AS
IT CUTS RESEARCH IN SOLAR ENERGY
BY MORE THAN 1/3 FROM LAST YEAR
AND OVER 60% FROM THE
PRESIDENT'S REQUEST, PROVIDING
$166 MILLION BUT THAT'S $97
MILLION BELOW FISCAL YEAR 2011
AND $291 MILLION BELOW THE
PRESIDENT'S REQUEST.
THE $10 MILLION IN REPROGRAMMING
REPRESENTS LESS THAN 5% OF THE
$220 MILLION ADMINISTRATIVE
BUDGET OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
ENERGY.
IF THEY MADE THEIR BUILDINGS
MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT WE COULD
SHIFT THE FUNDS INTO RESEARCH ON
FOR MONTH IVEBS BEEN HEARING
FROM CONSTITUENTS OUTRAGED ABOUT
THE HIGH PRICE OF GAS AND ENERGY
IN OUR COUNTRY.
AND ONCE AGAIN THE RECENT JOBS
STATISTICS FROM THE DEPARTMENT
OF LABOR TELL US VERY CLEARLY
THAT EVERY TIME YOU HAVE AN OIL
PRICE HIKE YOU HAVE RISING
UNEMPLOYMENT.
YOU CAN GO BACK 40 YEARS, EVERY
TIME IT GOES OVER $4 A GALLON,
WE GET A SPIKE IN UNEMPLOYMENT.
IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE.
AS IT STANDS THIS BILL
REINFORCES OUR DEPENDENCE ON
FOREIGN OIL.
BY CONTRACT MY AMENDMENT FOCUSES
ON A NEW ENERGY FUTURE FOR
AMERICA BY SHIFTING A MODEST
TO PROVIDE AMERICAN CONSUMERS
WITH THE NEW CHOICES THAT THEY
WANT.
OUR PRIORITIES IN THIS BILL MUST
NATION FOR TOMORROW, NOT
YESTERDAY.
AMERICA SHOULDN'T BE HELD
HOSTAGE BY FUTURE ENERGY PRICE
SPIKES.
WE MUST PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP WHILE
CREATING JOBS RIGHT HERE IN OUR
COUNTRY.
WE NEED TO ADDRESS BUDGETARY
REALITIES IN THIS -- AND THIS
BILL DOES IT BUT THERE ARE
ACCOUNTS WE HAVE CUT.
BUT INVESTMENTS IN NEW ENERGY
SOURCES TO DISPLACE IMPORTED OIL
IS NOT THE PLACE TO CUT.
NOT WHEN AMERICA IS THIS
DEPENDENT.
RESEARCH INVESTMENTS IN SOLAR
TECHNOLOGY HAS HELPED CREATE
NUMEROUS NEW COMPANIES CREATING
THOUSANDS OF HIGH QUALITY JOBS
ALREADY WITH DOMESTICALLY
PRODUCED ENERGY.
BUT WE ARE AT THE DAWN OF A NEW
ENERGY AGE AND WE CAN'T LOSE
EDGE NOW.
SOLAR COMPANIES ALREADY EMPLOY
OVER 90,000 AMERICAN WORKERS AND
ARE EXPECTED TO GROW IN BOTH
SALES AND JOBS.
BUT THAT DEPENDS ON NEW RESEARCH
AND MANY OF THE FLEDGLING
COMPANIES CAN'T AFFORD TO DO
THAT.
LAST WEEK I SAW A SPANISH SOLAR
PANEL MANUFACTURER ANNOUNCED
PLANS TO OPEN A NEW PLANT IN
OHIO THAT WILL CREATE MORE THAN
300 JOBS.
GLOBAL FIRMS KNOW THAT
PARTICULARLY NORTHERN OHIO HAS
MADE RENEWABLE ENERGY A PRIORITY
AND THE INVESTMENT IS FOLLOWING.
CONGRESS SIMPLY MUST FOCUS ON A
NEW ENERGY FUTURE FOR OUR NATION
AND NOT LET INERTIA IN THE
HABITS OF THE PAST THWART
PROGRESS.
OVERALL THE U.S. ECONOMY IS
ANTICIPATED TO INCREASE JOBS BY
2% NEXT YEAR, BUT GUESS WHAT?
IN THE SOLAR INDUSTRY THE NUMBER
OF NEW JOBS IS EXPECTED TO
INCREASE 26% ACCORDING TO
CORNELL UNIVERSITY'S 2010 SOLAR
JOBS CENSUS.
THOSE ARE THE KIND OF JOBS THAT
AMERICA WANTS.
IN A RECENT EARNSTON YOUNG
REPORT PREDICTS THE COST OF
SOLAR TO DECREASE BY AS MUCH AS
HALF, CREATING A STRONG SOLAR
OPTION FOR AMERICAN CONSUMERS
AND PROVIDING SOLAR COMPANIES
WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND.
YOU KNOW, INVESTORS KNOW WHERE
TO PUT THEIR DOLLARS AND OUR
NATION KNOWS THAT THIS -- OR WE
SHOULD KNOW THAT THIS IS AN
EMERGING INDUSTRY AND
CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH IS
THE RACE TO BE THE ENERGY
PROVIDER OF THE FEW FUR IS THIS
GENERAL REACTION -- FUTURE IS
THIS GENERATION'S SPACE RACE AND
BASIC RESEARCH IS CRITICAL, IT'S
FUNDAMENTAL, IT IS THE
FUNDAMENTAL INGREDIENT TO MR.
THAT NEW FUTURE FOR OUR PEOPLE.
AMERICA HAS NEVER SHIRKED A
MAJOR CHALLENGE.
AND WE HAVE A REAL FINISH LINE
TO GO ACROSS AS COMPETITORS ARE
FIERCE FROM CHINA, FROM GERMANY
FROM JAPAN.
NEW TECHNOLOGY WILL PROVIDE A
NEW POWER FUTURE FOR US.
AND WE MUST POSITION OURSELVES
NOT TO BE SECOND, NOT TO BE
THIRD, BUT TO BE THE GLOBAL
LEADER AND TO CREATE THOSE GOOD
JOBS HERE AT HOME.
SO MY AMENDMENT SETS A COURSE TO
KEEP THE KEEL MORE STEADY AS WE
ADVANCE ENERGY SECURITY,
ECONOMIC SECURITY AND THE
ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY OF OUR
NATION WHILE PROMOTING JOBS HERE
AT HOME THROUGH NEW ENERGY
INDEPENDENCE AND INNOVATION.
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE IN
FAVOR OF THE KAPTUR AMENDMENT.
THE TIME HAS EXPIRED.
THE CLERK WILL READ.
PAGE 58, LINE 1,
TITLE 2, DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR, CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT,
CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT COMPLETION
ACCOUNT, $27,154,000.
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION,
TO EXECUTE AUTHORIZED FUNCTIONS
OF THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION,
WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES,
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT
RESTORATION FUND, $53,068,000.
CALIFORNIA BAY DELTA
RESTORATION, $35,928,000.
POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION $60
MILLION.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION,
APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF
RECLAMATION SHALL BE AVAILABLE
FOR PURCHASE OF NOT TO EXCEED
FIVE PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES.
GENERAL PROVISIONS, DEPARTMENT
OF THE INTERIOR, SECTION 201,
NONE OF THE FUNDS SHALL BE
AVAILABLE THROUGH A
REPROGRAMMING OF FUNDS THAT
CREATES OR INITIATES A NEW
PROGRAM, PROJECT OR ACTIVITY.
SECTION 202, NONE OF THE FUNDS
MAY BE USED TO DETERMINE THE
FINAL POINT OF DISCHARGE FOR THE
INTERCEPTOR DRAIN FOR THE SAN
LEWIS UNIT UNTIL DEVELOPMENT OF
A PLAN.
SECTION 203 OF THE FUNDS
DEPOSITED IN THE SAN WHAT YOU
KEEN RIVER RESTORATION -- SAN
JOAQUIN RIVER RESTORATION FUNDS,
ALL ARE PERMANENTLY RESCINDED.
TITLE 3, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY,
ENERGY PROGRAMS, ENERGY
EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY,
THE CLERK WILL
SUSPEND.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLELADY FROM OHIO RISE?
YES, I MOVE TO
STRIKE THE LAST WORD.
DOES THE GENTLELADY
OFFER AN AMENDMENT?
YES, I HAVE AN
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
THE CLERK WILL REPORT
THE AMENDMENT.
CAN THE GENTLELADY CLARIFY WHICH
AMENDMENT?
PAGE 23, LINE 4RKS
DEALING WITH SOLAR ENERGY.
MOVEMENT OF $10 MILLION.
CLERK.
PAGE 24, LINE 4,
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MS. KAPTUR
OF OHIO.
INSERT INCREASE BY $10 MILLION.
I ASK THAT THE
READ.
IS THERE OBJECTION?
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY.
POINT OF ORDER.
WE WANT TO KNOW WHICH AMENDMENT
THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT.
AFTER THE DOLLAR
AMOUNT INSERT REDUCED BY $10
MILLION.
PAGE 32, LINE 3, INSERT REDUCED
BY $10 MILLION.
I RESERVE A
POINT OF ORDER ON THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM'S AMENDMENT.
A POINT OF ORDER IS
RESERVED AND THE GENTLELADY
FROM OHIO IS RECOGNIZED FOR
YES.
MADAM CHAIR, I MADE A STATEMENT
A LITTLE BIT EARLIER REGARDING
THIS AMENDMENT WHICH AIMS TO
HELP RESTORE ENERGY SECURITY,
ECONOMIC SECURITY AND
ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY OF OUR
NATION BY FOCUSING ON THE
FUTURE, AND IT ESSENTIALLY
SHIFTS A VERY MODEST AMOUNT OF
FUNDS, $10 MILLION, FROM THE
ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS WITHIN THE
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY TO HELP
RESTORE FUNDS TO SOLAR ENERGY
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT WITHIN
THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND
RENEWABLE ENERGY PROGRAM.
SADLY, THE BILL OVERALL MOVES
BACKWARD IN TERMS OF HELPING
AMERICA IN HELPING THE ENERGY
FUTURE BECAUSE IT CUTS BY MORE
THAN ONE-THIRD FROM LAST YEAR
AND 60% FROM THE PRESIDENT'S
REQUEST.
IT PROVIDES $166 MILLION IN THE
BASE BILL FOR SOLAR RESEARCH
WHICH IS A $97 MILLION
REDUCTION BELOW THIS YEAR'S
LEVEL AND A $291 MILLION
REDUCTION BELOW THE PRESIDENT'S
REQUEST.
WHAT SENSE DOES THAT MAKE WHEN
WE'RE IMPORTING PETROLEUM AT
THIS LEVEL AND WE CONTINUE TO
USE MORE AND MORE?
PRICES ARE GOING UP.
IT'S PRETTY CLEAR AMERICA NEEDS
NEW ANSWERS.
SO MY EFFORT IS TO MERELY
REPROGRAM ABOUT 5% OF THE FUNDS
IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND
SHIFT THOSE TO THE ENERGY
EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY
PROGRAM ITSELF.
I BELIEVE THAT THE DEPARTMENT
OF ENERGY, WHICH TOOK YEARS TO
EVEN GET THEIR SOLAR ARRAY UP
AT THE NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS
HERE, COULD SAVE THE MONEY THAT
WE NEED TO PUT INTO RESEARCH IF
THEY MERELY BE MORE ENERGY
EFFICIENT ABOUT THEIR OWN
BUILDINGS AND THAT COMES OUT OF
THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE FUND.
SO THIS IS A 5% SHIFT.
IT'S $10 MILLION FROM THE
ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET AND PUTS
IT INTO HARD RESEARCH THAT
REALLY CREATES JOBS.
WE KNOW THAT AMERICA HAS TO
INVENT HER FUTURE.
WE CAN'T DEPEND ON THE SOURCES
OF THE PAST ALONE, AND
TECHNOLOGY IS CRITICAL TO THAT.
IN THE SOLAR FIELD THE
COMPETITION GLOBALLY FOR
PATENTS AND FOR THE CUTTING
EDGE RESEARCH THAT IS PART OF
THIS SECTOR THAT IS JUST
GROWING SO FAST GLOBELY,
AMERICA SIMPLY CAN'T SLIP
BACKWARDS.
WE HAVE TO KEEP UP OUR EDGE AND
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT WITH CHINA,
WITH GERMANY HAVING THE KIND OF
INCENTIVES THEY DO IN THEIR OWN
COUNTRY.
FOR EXAMPLE, CHINA EVEN OFFERS
COMPANIES 15-YEAR TAX HOLIDAYS
AND THEY HAVE SO MANY ENGINEERS
AND SCIENTISTS ON WORKING ON
THIS.
I THINK CUTTING THIS OPTION IS
NOT A GOOD OPTION FOR THE
COUNTRY.
THIS BILL MAKES MANY OTHER
WE KNOW THAT RESEARCH
INVESTMENTS IN SOLAR TECHNOLOGY
HAS CREATED NUMEROUS COMPANIES
ALREADY, AND THOUSANDS AND
THOUSANDS OF NEW JOBS.
IN FACT A SOLAR COMPANY EMPLOY
OVER 90,000 AMERICAN WORKERS
NOW, AND THEY EXPECT BOTH
GROWTH IN SALES AND JOBS, BUT
THAT DEPENDS FUNDAMENTALLY ON
CUTTING EDGE BREAKTHROUGHS IN
TECHNOLOGY.
AND THAT IS A FIGHT THAT'S
BEING HELD EVERY DAY.
NOT JUST IN THIS COUNTRY, BUT
IN RESEARCH PLATFORMS AROUND
THE WORLD.
I MENTIONED EARLIER THAT A
SPANISH SOLAR COMPANY IN MY
REGION ANNOUNCED 300 NEW JOBS
THIS PAST WEEK.
SO GLOBAL FIRMS ARE COMING TO
PLACE LIKE NORTHERN OHIO THAT
THEY KNOW THAT THE ENERGY
SYSTEMS OF THE FUTURE ARE BEING
BUILT.
BUT THE NUMBER OF JOBS BEING
CREATED IN THIS SECTOR FAR
EXCEED WHAT IS BEING CREATED IN
JUST A GENERAL JOB CREATION
SECTOR IN OUR COUNTRY.
CORNELL UNIVERSITY'S 2010 SOLAR
JOB CENSUS SHOWS THAT IN SOLAR
ENGINE THE NUMBER OF NEW JOBS
IS INCREASING BY 26%.
AND THOSE ARE GOOD JOBS
BUILDING A NEW FUTURE FOR OUR
COUNTRY AND FOR OUR PEOPLE.
BUT WE KNOW THAT MANY OF THESE
ENTREPRENEURIAL COMPANIES ARE
TOO SMALL TO DO THEIR OWN
IN-HOUSE RESEARCH, AND SO WE
KNOW THAT WE STILL NEED FEDERAL
RESEARCH AND BASIC RESEARCH TO
HELP US USE NEW MATERIALS TO
DEVELOP THE NEW TRANSMISSION
TECHNOLOGY TO MAKE THEM TRULY
COMPETITIVE TO COMPETE AGAINST
THE CHINAS AND GERMANYS OF THE
WORLD THAT IS TAKING MARKET
SHARE AS I STAND HERE EVEN
TODAY.
SO THE RACE IS A SERIOUS ONE IN
THE SOLAR ENERGY RACE, AND
BASICALLY RESEARCH IS A
SO MY AMENDMENT ESSENTIALLY
MOVES 5% OUT OF THE FUNDS OUT
OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ACCOUNTS
INTO THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY
ACCOUNTS AT THE DEPARTMENT.
I ASK FOR MY COLLEAGUES'
SUPPORT ON THAT, AND HOPEFULLY
WE CAN MAKE HELP A SMALL STEP
FOR AMERICAN AND HUMANKIND.
AND I WILL RECLAIM MY EXISTING
TIME.
THE TIME HAS
EXPIRED.
THE GENTLELADY'S TIME HAS
EXPIRED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY
INSIST ON HIS POINT OF ORDER?
I INSIST ON
MY POINT OF ORDER.
MADAM CHAIR, THE AMENDMENT
PROPOSES TO AMEND POURSES OF
THE BILL NOT READ.
-- POURSES OF THE BILL NOT
READ.
IT -- THE AMENDMENT IS NOT
MERELY PROPOSED TO TRANSFER
APPROPRIATIONS AMONG OBJECTS IN
THE BILL BUT ALSO PROPOSES
LANGUAGE OTHER THAN AMOUNTS.
I ASK FOR A RULING OF THE
CHAIR.
DOES ANY OTHER
MEMBER WISH TO BE HEARD ON THE
POINT OF ORDER?
THE GENTLELADY FROM OHIO.
YES.
MADAM CHAIR, I WOULD THANK THE
GENTLEMAN VERY MUCH FOR HIS
THOUGHTFUL POINT OF ORDER AND
WOULD ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO
WITHDRAW THIS AMENDMENT AND I
HAVE A REVISED AMENDMENT AT THE
DESK THAT I THINK WILL SATISFY
HIS CONCERNS.
IS THERE OBJECTION
TO THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE
PENDING AMENDMENT?
NO
OBJECTION.
WITHOUT OBJECTION,
THE AMENDMENT IS WITHDRAWN.
DOES THE GENTLELADY FROM OHIO
HAVE ANOTHER AMENDMENT TO
OFFER?
YES.
I HAVE A REVISED AMENDMENT THAT
IS AT THE DESK.
THE CLERK WILL
REPORT THE REVISED AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY
MS. KAPTUR OF OHIO.
PAGE 23, LINE 4, AFTER THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT INSERT INCREASED
DEL 10 MILLION.
AFTER THE DOLLAR AMOUNT INSERT
REDUCED BY $10 MILLION ON PAGE
24, LINE 4.
THE GENTLELADY FROM
OHIO IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE
MINUTES IN SUPPORT OF HER
AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT AS A NEW AMENDMENT
THAT WOULD PERFORM ESSENTIALLY
THE SAME FUNCTION.
THAT IS TO SATISFY ANY CONCERNS
THE GENTLEMAN MIGHT HAVE ABOUT
WHERE WE ARE MOVING FUNDS FROM
AND MOVING THEM TO IN THE
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE
ENERGY PROGRAM.
COULD YOU --
DOES THE GENTLELADY
YIELD BACK?
DID NOT HEAR
THE QUESTION POSED, MADAM
CHAIR.
OHIO.
YES.
I WOULD SAY I HAD OFFERED A
REVISED AMENDMENT THAT I WOULD
HOPE WOULD SATISFY THE
POINT OF ORDER.
THIS IS A NEW AMENDMENT.
IT ESSENTIALLY MOVES DOLLARS
FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE
ACCOUNTS AT THE DEPARTMENT OF
ENERGY TO THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY
AND RENEWABLE EMERGENCY BLOCK
GRANT.
FROM OHIO YIELD BACK?
I WOULD RETAIN MY
EXISTING TIME.
THE GENTLELADY IS
RECOGNIZED.
DOES THE GENTLEMAN
HAVE CONCERNS?
I RISE TO OPPOSE THE AMENDMENT
EVEN THOUGH YOU WORKED VERY
HARD TO CORRECT SOME OF IT.
COULD I ASK THE
GENTLEMAN THE NATURE IN THE
OPPOSITION, PLEASE?
WELL, I'D
LIKE TO TAKE MY OWN TIME TO
RESPOND.
IN A MORE FORMAL MANNER.
I'D BE HAPPY TO YIELD TO YOU
PERHAPS AT THE END OF MY
REMARKS.
I THANK THE
GENTLEMAN.
MADAM CHAIR.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
NEW JERSEY.
STRIKE THE LAST WORD.
MADAM CHAIR --
DOES THE GENTLELADY
FROM OHIO YIELD BACK HER TIME?
DOES THE GENTLELADY FROM OHIO
YIELD BACK HER TIME?
YES, I WOULD YIELD
BACK MY TIME.
THE GENTLELADY FROM
OHIO YIELDS BACK HER TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY.
I RISE TO
THE AMENDMENT --
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED.
THE
AMENDMENT THAT HAS BEEN
REWRITTEN SOMEWHAT WOULD REDUCE
FUNDING FOR SALARIES AND
EXPENSES IN ORDER TO INCREASE
FUNDING FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY
AND RENEWABLE ENERGY ACTIVITIES
AT THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY.
WITHIN THIS YEAR'S
EXTRAORDINARILY TIGHT BUDGET
CONSTRAINTS THE BILL CANNOT
FUND PROGRAMS THAT OVERLAP
IMPROPERLY WITH THE PRIVATE
SECTOR, FOR ONE, OR FOR THAT --
OR DO NOT HAVE PRESSING NEEDS
FOR ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS.
IN OTHER WORDS, MADAM CHAIR, I
FOR AN ACCOUNT THAT --
ESPECIALLY FOR ACCOUNTS IN
ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES THAT
OVERSEE DEPARTMENTIVE
ACTIVITIES.
WE NEED MORE OVERSIGHT IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, SO I
RELUCTANTLY OPPOSE HER
AMENDMENT.
YIELD TO HER.
I THANK THE
GENTLEMAN VERY MUCH AND I KNOW
THE CHOICES ARE DIFFICULT.
I GUESS I WOULD PUT MY MARBLES
ON GETTING THE DEPARTMENT TO BE
MORE EFFICIENT IN
ADMINISTRATIVE OPERATIONS ON
ITS NUCLEAR SIDE, ON ITS CIVIL
SIDE AND PUT MORE DOLLARS INTO
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AND I
REGRET THE GENTLEMAN'S
OBJECTION BUT I HAVE THE
HIGHEST RESPECT FOR HIM AND
MAYBE WE CAN WORK ON THIS
AMENDMENT.
I YIELD BACK
AND STILL OPPOSE THE AMENDMENT.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLELADY FROM OHIO.
AND THOSE IN FAVOR WILL SIGNIFY
BIG SAYING AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,
THE NOES HAVE IT.
THE NOES HAVE IS AND THE
AMENDMENT IS NOT AGREED TO.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM GEORGIA RISE?
GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA RISE?
MADAM CHAIRMAN, I HAVE AN
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
REPORT THE AMENDMENT.
WOULD THE GENTLEMAN
FROM CALIFORNIA SPECIFY HIS
AMENDMENT THAT HE'S OFFERING?
YES.
IT'S THE AMENDMENT TO H.R.
2354, BEGINNING WITH LINE --
PAGE 23, LINE 4.
THE CLERK WILL
REPORT THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY
MR. MCCLINTOCK OF CALIFORNIA.
INSERT REDUCE BY
PAGE 24, LINE 6, AFTER THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT, INSERT REDUCED
BY $289,420,000,000.
PAGE 24, LINE 18, INSERT
REDUCED BY $476,993,000.
PAGE 28, LINE 13, AFTER THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT INSERT REDUCED BY
PAGE 28, LINE 3, INSERT REDUCED
BY $100 MILLION.
PAGE 29, LINE 7, AFTER THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT, INSERT REDUCED
BY $160,000,000.
INSERT REDUCED BY $6 MILLION.
PAGE 3 , LINE 4, AFTER THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT INSERT REDUCED BY
PAGE 52, LINE 15, AFTER THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT INSERT REDUCED BY
PAGE 53, LINE 7, AFTER THE
WHICH $11,700,000.
PAGE 53, LINE 13, AFTER THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT INSERT REDUCED BY
PAGE 54, LINE 4, AFTER THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT INSERT REDUCED BY
PAGE 54, LINE 12, AFTER THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT INSERT REDUCED BY
PAGE 62, LINE 2, AFTER THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT INSERT INCREASED
BY $3,250,437,000.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
CALIFORNIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR
FIVE MINUTES.
MADAM CHAIRMAN.
I OFFER THIS AMENDMENT ON
BEHALF OF THE REPUBLICAN STUDY
COMMITTEE TO SAVE ROUGHLY 10%
FROM THIS APPROPRIATIONS BILL
WORTH $3.75 BILLION BY GETTING
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OUT OF
THE ENERGY SUBSIDY BUSINESS.
FOR MORE THAN 30 YEARS THE
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY HAS
SQUANDERED BILLS OF DOLLARS,
SUBSIDIZING RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT THAT NO PRIVATE
INVESTOR WOULD SUCH WITH THE
PROMISE IT WOULD SOMEHOW MAKE
OTHER NATION ENERGY
INDEPENDENT.
EVERY YEAR WE HAVE SPENT UNTOLD
BILLIONS ON THESE PROGRAMS AND
EVERY YEAR WE BECOME MORE
DEPENDENT ON FOREIGN OIL.
WE'RE NOW RUNNING A DEFICIT
THAT THREATENS TO BANKRUPT OUR
COUNTRY AND THIS REQUIRES US TO
CAST A CRITICAL EYE ON EVERY
EXPENDITURE THAT'S FAILED TO
MEET ITS OBJECTIVES, AND NONE
HAS FAILED SO SPECTACULARLY AS
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S
SUBSIDY OF ENERGY AND RESEARCH
WHICH HAS LEFT US BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS POORER AND LEFT US
STUCK WITH MEDIOCRE
TECHNOLOGIES THAT ONLY SURVIVE
ON A LIFELINE OF PUBLIC
SUBSIDIES.
I'M SURE THE OTHER SIDE WILL
TRY TO DEPICT THIS AMENDMENT AS
A LUDDITE REACTION TO GREEN
TECHNOLOGY, BUT IT IS NOT.
BY STOPPING THE GOVERNMENT FROM
PICKING WINNERS AND LOSERS FROM
AMONG EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
COMPETING FOR CAPITAL, WE
RESTORE THE NATURAL FLOW OF
THAT CAPITAL TO THOSE THAT ARE
MOST ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE.
FOR EXAMPLE, CUTS FUNDING TO
THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND
RENEWABLE ENERGY PROGRAM WHICH
FUNCTIONS AS AN R&D DEPARTMENT
FOR EVERY SOLAR, BIOMASS,
GEOTHERMAL AND WIND ENERGY
COMPANY IN THE COUNTRY.
WE'RE NOT FUNDING THE MOST
VIABLE RESEARCH IN THESE
TECHNOLOGIES.
PRIVATE CAPITAL BAETZ A PATH TO
THE DOOR OF VIABLE TECHNOLOGY.
THESE EXPENDITURES ARE FOR
RESEARCH CONSIDERED SO DUBIOUS
THAT NO PRIVATE INVESTOR IN HIS
RIGHT MIND WOULD RISK HIS OWN
CAPITAL, YET THIS CONGRESS HAS
BEEN MORE THAN WILLING TO RISK
OUR CONSTITUENTS' CAPITAL IN
THE FORM OF THEIR TAX DOLLARS
AND IT SHOULDN'T SURPRISE US
THAT THOSE INVESTMENTS HAVE NOT
PAID OFF.
THIS MISALLOCATION OF RESOURCES
NOT ONLY DESTROYS JOBS TO
CREATE JOBS IN SUBSIDIZED ONES,
IT WEAKEN OURS ENERGY POTENTIAL
INSTOFEDE EXPANDING IT.
POLITICIANS LOVE TO APPEAR AT
RIBBON CUTTINGS AND ISSUE
SELF-CONGRATULATORY PRESS
RELEASE BUS THEY FALL STRANGELY
SILENT WHEN ASKED TO ACTUALLY
ACCOUNT FOR THE BILLIONS OF OUR
DOLLARS THAT THEY'VE WASTED.
THE BEST THING WE DID FOR SHALE
OIL AND GAS TECHNOLOGY WAS TO
HAVE GOTTEN THE GOVERNMENT OUT
OF THE BUSINESS OF FUNDING IT
AND GUESS WHAT HAPPENED?
ONCE WE GOT THE GOVERNMENT OUT,
IT THEEK PRODUCTIVE SECTOR JUST
A FEW YEARS TO DEVELOP
REMARKABLE NEW DRILLING
TECHNIQUES THAT HAVE UNLEASHED
A CORNUCOPIA OF AMERICAN ENERGY
INTO THE MARKET.
IS THERE ANY QUESTION AT ALL AS
TO WHICH OF THESE MODELS
ACTUALLY WORK?
I'LL GIVE YOU ANOTHER EXAMPLE.
THE APPROPRIATIONS ACT PROPOSES
TO SPEND BILLIONS FOR VEHICLE
TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH.
ISN'T THAT WHAT EXAR COMPANIES
ARE SUPPOSED TO DO?
AND NAIR NOT WILLING TO RISK
THEIR OWN CAPITAL, WHAT RIGHT
DO WE HAVE TO RISK OUR
CONSTITUENTS'.
DOES NOT FUNDING MEAN THESE
RESEARCH -- THE RESEARCH WILL
STOP ON THESE TECHNOLOGIES?
ON THE COP TRARE IT MEANS THAT
PRIVATE CAPITAL CAN FLOW FREELY
TO THOSE TECHNOLOGIES THAT
OFFER THE GREATEST RETURN AT
THE LOWEST COST.
30 YEARS OF GOVERNMENT ENERGY
SUBSIDIES PROMISE TO REDUCE OUR
DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL YET
OUR DEPENDENCE HAS BECOME EVER
GREATER.
ALL WE'VE DONE IS SQUANDER
BILLIONS OF OUR NATION'S
TREASURE AND DISTORTED AND
IMPEDED THE NATURAL FLOW OF
INVESTMENT DOLLARS THAT COULD
RETURNS IN VIABLE TECHNOLOGY.
WE'RE LEFT WITH A BANKRUPT AND
ENERGY DEFICIENT NATION WHILE
PROPPING UP A FEW POLITICALLY
WELL CONNECTED INTERESTS
PRODUCING ETHANOL AND SOLAR
PANELS AT A STAGGERING EXPENSE,
AN EXPENSE WE HAVE HIDEN FROM
CONSUMERS WITH THEIR OWN TAX
DOLLARS.
OUR ENERGY POLICY OVER THE LAST
30 YEARS SIMPLY PROVES THAT
TESTIMONY MAS JEFFERSON WAS
RIGHT WHEN HE OBSERVED, WERE WE
DIRECTED FROM WASHINGTON WHEN
TO TSAO AND WHEN TO REAP, WE
SHOULD SOON WANT BREAD.
FOR 30 YEARS WE HAVE BEEN
DIRECTED FROM WASHINGTON HOW TO
DEVELOP OUR ENERGY.
IT SHOULD SURPRISE NO ONE THAT
TODAY WE LACK ENERGY.
WITH THAT, I YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM INDIANA RISE?
MADAM CHAIR, I RISE IN
OPPOSITION TO THE AMENDMENT AND
MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST WORD.