Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
RETURN IN A MIDNIGHT RULE IS TO
PROHIBIT THE FUNDING IN THIS
I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO JOIN ME
IN SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT AND
I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN
TIME.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM INDIANA RISE IN
MOVE TO STRIKE
THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
WITH THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MINNESOTA THAT THE MONIES FROM
THE TRUST FUND SHOULD NOT BE
DIVERTED FROM THEIR INTENDED
I THINK IT
IS AN OVERREACH TO PROHIBIT THE
EXECUTIVE BRANCH FROM EVEN
DISCUSSING THE TOPIC.
I DO THINK WE ARE IN A POSITION
WHERE LOOKING FORWARD WE OUGHT
TO ALLOW OTHER BRANCHES OF
GOVERNMENT TO TALK ABOUT IDEAS
DEBATED BY THIS BODY.
ADDITIONALLY, WE ALL KNOW THAT
ANY PROPOSAL PUT TOGETHER BY THE
EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO EXPAND
ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES UNDER THE
HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND
WITHOUT FIRST ADDRESSING THE
SURPLUS AND DREDGING BACKLOG
ISSUES WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED
IN EITHER HOUSE OF CONGRESS.
AGAIN, I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE
AMENDMENT IS NECESSARY.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, I DO NOT
OPPOSE ITS CONCLUSION IN THE
BILL AND I YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM MINNESOTA RISE?
I YIELD THE
BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE THE GENTLEMAN
YIELDS BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS
QUESTION IS ON THE AMENDMENT
OFFERED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE
IS AGREED TO.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM MARYLAND RISE?
I HAVE AN AMENDMENT
AT THE DESK.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 18
PRINTED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD OFFERED BY MR. HARRIS OF
MARYLAND.
PURSUANT TO THE ORDER
OF THE HOUSE TODAY, THE
GENTLEMAN FROM MARYLAND, AND A
MEMBER OPPOSED WILL EACH CONTROL
FIVE MINUTES.
THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM MARYLAND.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD
PROHIBIT THE USE OF FUNDS FROM
INTERNATIONAL PROJECTS INCLUDING
THE PRESIDENT'S PLAN TO SPEND
$600,000 ON SUSTAINABLE CITIES
AND PROJECTS IN CHINA AND INDIA.
MY AMENDMENT IS IDENTICAL TO ONE
I OFFERED LAST YEAR THAT WAS
ADOPTED BY THIS CHAMBER.
I WOULD LIKE TO CONGRATULATE THE
CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE FOR
HIS OWN ACTION REGARDING THIS
ISSUE.
THE CHAIRMAN BILL REDUCES
FUNDING BY $428 MILLION.
AND MAKES THE HARD CHOICES
REQUIRED TO ADDRESS OUR SPENDING
PROBLEMS.
THIS AMENDMENT SUPPORTS LANGUAGE
IN THE REPORT THAT ACCOMPANIED
THE F.Y. 2012 APPROPRIATIONS
IN THAT REPORT, THE CHAIRMAN WAS
ABLE TO RETAIN MUCH OF LAST
YEAR'S AMENDMENT TO FUND
PROJECTS THAT DIRECTLY BENEFIT
THE UNITED STATES SUCH AS
INCREASING AMERICAN ENERGY
SELF-SUFFICIENT SI AND REDUCING
DOMESTIC POLLUTION.
UNFORTUNATELY THE DEPARTMENT OF
ENERGY IS FAILING TO FOLLOW
THESE CLEAR INSTRUCTIONS AND
CHOOSING TO SPEND MONEY IN CHINA
AND INDIA ON FOREIGN SUSTAINABLE
PROJECTS EVEN AS WE BORROW MONEY
OUR DEBT.
WE MUST TAKE CARE IN HOW WE
SPEND MONEY.
THIS ISN'T THE BEST USE OF
TAXPAYER MONEY.
THERE ARE GREATER NEEDS THAT ARE
UNMET AND AN ANNUAL DEFICIT THAT
DRAGS DOWN OUR ENTIRE ECONOMY.
I URGE ADOPTION OF THE
AMENDMENT.
AND I YIELD BACK MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME.
WHO SEEKS RECOGNITION IN
GENTLEMAN FROM --
MOVE TO STRIKE
THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
I RISE IN
OPPOSITION TO THE AMENDMENT
OFFERED BY MY COLLEAGUE FROM
THE AMENDMENT WOULD ESSENTIALLY
CREATE AN ENERGY RENEWABLE
PROGRAM FOR THE U.S.-ISRAELI
PROGRAM BY RESTRICTING THE EERE
INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM FROM
DEALING WITH ANY OTHER COUNTRY.
I'M A SUPPORTER OF THE COUNTRY
OF ISRAEL AND IT HAS A
CUTTING-EDGE CLEAN-ENERGY
INDUSTRY, BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE
WE OUGHT TO LIMIT THIS PROGRAM
TO ONE COUNTRY OUT OF MANY.
AND THINK THAT IT WILL BE A
MISTAKE TO PUT ALL OF OUR
INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM EGGS INTO
A SINGLE BASKET.
THIS WAS TO ADVANCE DEVELOPMENT
OF CLEAN ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES AND
NEEDS TO ESTABLISH RELATIONSHIPS
WITH MULTIPLE-PARTNER COUNTRIES
IN ORDER TO BE EFFECTIVE.
THE ACTIVITIES HELP PRIME
MARKETS FOR US FOR CLEAN
TECHNOLOGIES IN MAJOR EMERGING
ECONOMIES.
THE PROGRAM BRINGS HARD LESSONS
LEARNED FROM OTHER EXPERIENCES
TO SHARE AT THE NATIONAL, STATE
THE PROGRAM CAN ALSO PROMOTE
U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY AND
POTENTIALLY REDUCE PRICE
VOLATILITY OF FOSSIL ENERGY
RESOURCES BY DECREASING THE
OF OIL-EXPORTING
COUNTRIES IN MITIGATING DEMAND
FOR OIL.
THIS IS AN EXCELLENT PROGRAM AND
I DON'T THINK IT OUGHT TO BE
LIMITED TO ONE COUNTRY AND AM
OPPOSED TO THE GENTLEMAN'S
AMENDMENT AND YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE AMENDMENT
OFFERED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MARYLAND.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE
AYES HAVE IT.
THE AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS RISE?
I HAVE AN AMENDMENT AT THE
DESK.
THE CLERK WILL
DESIGNATE THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 10
OFFERED BY MR. BURGESS OF TEXAS.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
TEXAS, MR. BURGESS AND A MEMBER
OPPOSED EACH WILL CONTROL FIVE
MINUTES.
THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS FOR FIVE
MINUTES.
THE PASSAGE IN THIS
HOUSE BACK IN 2007 OF THE ENERGY
INDEPENDENCE AND SECURITY ACT
WAS SOMETHING THAT HAS CAUSED A
GREAT DEAL OF DIFFICULTY ACROSS
THE COUNTRY.
IFFER HEARD FROM TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF MY CONSTITUENTS ON
HOW THAT LANGUAGE WILL AFFECT
THEIR LIVES, TAKE AWAY CONSUMER
CHOICE FOR WHAT KIND OF LIGHT
BULBS THEY USE IN THEIR HOME.
AND YOU KNOW WHAT?
THEY ARE EXACTLY RIGHT.
WHEN THE GOVERNMENT PASSED
ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS,
THEY NEVER WEPT AS FAR AS THEY
DID THIS TIME, THEY LOWERED THE
STANDARDS DRASTICALLY AND THE
TECHNOLOGY IS YEARS OFF IN
MAKING LIGHT BULBS IN COMPLYING
WITH THE LAW AND AFFORDABLE FOR
THE CONSUMER.
LIGHT BULB COMPANIES HAVE TALKED
ABOUT THEIR NEW BULBS THAT ARE
COMPLIANT WITH THE EXISTING LAW
AND ARE AVAILABLE NOW BUT AT
WHAT PRICE?
A FOUR-PACK COST $2.97 AT A
HARDWARE STORE LAST DECEMBER 31.
NOW A SINGLE BULB WILL COST $20,
30, $40.
OPPONENTS TO MY SEAMENT SAY THE
2007 LANGUAGE DOES NOT BAN THE
INCAN DESCENT BULB, THAT'S
PARTLY TRUE BUT BANS THE SALE OF
THE 100-WHAT THE OF THE BULBS
BECAUSE THEY CANNOT MEET THE
ENERGY STANDARDS SUPPLIED IN THE
UNDERLYING LEGISLATION.
THE REPLACEMENT BULBS ARE FAR
FROM ECONOMICALLY EFFICIENT.
BUT HERE'S THE DEAL WE SHOULDN'T
BE MAKING THESE DECISIONS FOR
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND LET THEM
DECIDE HOW MUCH ENERGY THEY WANT
TO CONSUME AND DOLLARS THEY WANT
TO SPEND ON KILOWATT HOURS, NOT
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
A FAMILY CAN'T AFFORD TO REPLACE
IN THEIR HOUSE
AT $20 A POP.
THIS EXACT AMENDMENT WASES
PASSED LAST YEAR ON A VOICE VOTE
OBAMA.
IT ALLOWS CONSUMERS TO CONTINUE
TO HAVE A CHOICE AND A SAY AS TO
WHAT THEY PUT IN THEIR HOMES.
IT'S COMMON SENSE AND GIVE
RELIEF TO THE AMERICAN FAMILY AT
LEAST BULBS CAN BE MARKETTED AT
A PRICE THAT CAN BE IN --
REASONABLE.
OPPOSITION.
I WOULD POINT OUT TO MY
COLLEAGUES THAT THIS DEBATE IS
NOT ABOUT CHOICE OR ENERGY
EFFICIENCY, FOR THAT MATTER.
IT IS ABOUT ENDANGERING AMERICAN
MANUFACTURING JOBS.
WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT TRADE
IMBALANCE IN THIS COUNTRY.
GIVEN THAT AMERICAN
MANUFACTURERS HAVE COMMITTED TO
FOLLOWING THE LAW REGARDLESS OF
WHETHER OR NOT IT IS ENFORCED,
THE ONLY BENEFIT TO THIS
AMENDMENT IS TO ALLOW FOREIGN
MANUFACTURERS WHO MAY NOT FEEL A
SIMILAR OBLIGATION TO EXPORT
NONCOMPLIANT LIGHT BULBS THAT
WILL NOT ONLY HARM THE
INVESTMENTS MADE BY U.S.
COMPANIES BUT PLACE JOBS
BULBS.
INCREASE.
IT REPRESENTS AN EQUIVALENT OF
$100 TAX ON EVERY AMERICAN
FAMILY, $16 BILLION ACROSS THE
NATION THROUGH INCREASED ENERGY
COSTS.
THE PERFORMANCE STANDARD FOR
LIGHT BULBS WERE ESTABLISHED IN
AT THAT TIME, THE BILL, AS I
POINTED OUT IN AN EARLIER
PORTION OF THIS DEBATE ENJOYS
STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT THAT
WE WERE ABLE TO OVERRIDE A
PRESIDENTIAL VETO OF THAT ACT.
AWARE, THE ISSUES
THAT INSPIRED THIS STANDARD HAVE
NOT CHANGED AND I WOULD ARGUE
HAVE GOTTEN WORSE.
IT IS A COMMON MISUNDERSTANDING
THAT THE ENERGY INDEPENDENCE ACT
BANS THE LIGHT BULB AND REQUIRES
PEOPLE TO HAVE A LIMITED CHOICE
OF ONLY A COMPACT FLOURESCENT
BULB AND THIS IS NOT TRUE AND I
WOULD REPEAT THIS IS NOT TRUE
AND I WOULD REPEAT ONE LAST
TIME, THIS IS NOT TRUE.
IT SIMPLY REQUIRES THAT THEY BE
MORE EFFICIENT, AND I DO NOT SEE
WHAT THE HARM IS IN THAT.
CLAIMING THAT THE INCANDESCENT
BULB IS DEAD MAKE FARCE GREAT
SOUND BITE BUT IT IS JUST THAT.
I YIELD BACK MY TIME.
THE QUESTION IS ON
THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE POVE -- IN THE OPINION
OF THE CHAIR THE AYES HAVE IT.
THE AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO RISE?
I HAVE AN AMENDMENT AT THE
WOULD THE GENTLEMAN
SUBMIT HIS AMENDMENT TO THE
DESK.
CLERK WILL DESIGNATE THE
AMENDMENT.
WE DO HAVE IT.
CLERK WILL REPORT THE
AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY
MR. TIPTON OF COLORADO.
AT THE END OF THE BILL BEFORE
THE HORT TITLE INSERT THE
FOLLOWING, SECTION, NONE OF THE
FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE BY THIS
SURVEY IN WHICH MONEY IS
INCLUDED OR PROVIDED FOR THE
BEN FOIST THE RESPONDER.
PURSUANT TO THE
ORDER OF THE HOUSE TODAY, THE
GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO, MR.
TIPTON, AND A MEMBER OPPOSED
EACH WILL CONTROL FIVE MINUTES.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO IS
SPEAKER.
I RISE TODAY TO OFFER AN
AMENDMENT AIMED AT ENDING AN
EGREGIOUS PRACTICE OF WASTING
TAXPAYER DOLLARS IN THIS TIME
OF MOUNTING FEDERAL DEBT THIS
AMENDMENT SPECIFICALLY AIMS TO
ELIMINATE THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT'S RECENT PRACTICE OF
SENDING OUT CASH TO ENCOURAGE
SURVEY RESPONSES FAVORABLE TO
AGENCY GOALS.
I WHOLE HEARTEDLY AGREE WITH
THE GENERAL NEED FOR PUBLIC
INPUT IN OUR GOVERNMENT BUT THE
PRACTICE OF SENDING OUT
AMERICAN TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO
ENCOURAGE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
OR WORSE TO BUY PUBLIC SUPPORT
WHERE IT MIGHT OTHERWISE BE
LACKING IS A SYMBOL OF THE LACK
OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND HOW OUT
OF TOUCH OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
FOR GENERATION THE BUREAU OF
RECLAMATION HAS SERVED THE
WESTERN UNITED STATES WELL.
ITS DAMS, RESERVOIRS AND
HYDROPOWER TURBINES HAVE BEEN
THE BACK BONE OF OUR
COMMUNITIES.
THIS WAS ALL BASED ON RATE
PAYERS PAYING FOR ALMOST EVERY
CENT OF THESE PROJECTS WITH NO
EXPENSE TO THE TAXPAYERS.
YET THAT MISSION IS CHANGING.
THIS COULDN'T BE A BETTER
EXAMPLE OF HOW MUCH THE -- HOW
OUT OF TOUCH THE AGENCY HAS
CHANGED UNDER THIS
ADMINISTRATION.
THERE IS A SURVEY AIMED AT
REMOVING DAMS.
IT WAS MAILED TO 1,000
HOUSEHOLDS IN CALIFORNIA,
OREGON AND SELECTED HOUSEHOLDS
IN THE REST OF THE NATION.
EACH RECEIVED A POSTCARD
TELLING THEM THE SURVEY WAS
THEN A LARGE PACKET CAME IN.
A POST AGE PAID RETURN --
POSTAGE PAID RETURN ENVELOPE
AND $2 BILL WAS SENT.
TO THOSE WHO KEPT THE $2 AND
DIDN'T RETURN IT, A FEDEX
PACKAGE WAS SENT OUT.
TO THOSE WHO DIDN'T SEND THAT
BACK, $20 WAS SENT.
LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT SOME OF
THE RESPONSES THAT THE BUREAU
OF RECLAMATION PUBLICED --
PUBLISHED EARLIER THIS YEAR.
ANOTHER WASTE OF TAXPAYER
MONEY, SAID ONE.
NO WONDER THE U.S. IS HAVING
MONEY PROBLEMS IF THE
GOVERNMENT HAS $2 BILLS TO MAIL
OUT RANDOMLY.
WOW WHAT A WASTE OF TIME.
I HAVE NEITHER THE TIME OR
INTEREST ABOUT SOMETHING I HAVE
NOT A CLUE WHAT'S HAPPENING
CLEAR ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
P.S., THEY ADDED, THANKS FOR
THE TWO BUCKS.
THERE WERE SOME POSITIVE
RESPONSES BUT I THINK THIS
COMMENT SAYS IT BEST.
SEND ME NO MORE, THANK YOU.
THAT'S WHAT THIS AMENDMENT
DOES, MR. CHAIRMAN.
IT SIMPLY PROHIBITS THE PEW ROW
OF RECLAMATION AND OTHER
AGENCIES COVERED UNDER THE
LEGISLATION FROM FUNDING A
SURVEY IN WHICH MONEY IS
INCLUDED OR PROVIDED FOR THE
BENEFIT OF THE RESPONDER.
IT DOESN'T SAY THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT CAN'T HAVE PUBLIC
INPUT OR SEND OUT SURVEYS WHICH
IS NECESSARY TO THE PROCESS.
IT SIMPLY SAYS NO MORE GIVING
AWAY TAXPAYER DOLLARS.
THE ABOVE AMOUNTS MAY NOT SEEM
A LOT IN THIS DAY OF TRILLION
DOLLAR BUDGET BUS IT IS
SYMBOLIC OF THE WASTE AND APUCE
GOING ON HERE.
TO MAKE MATTERS WORSE, THE
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION HAS WRET
TO FULLY ANSWER AND COMPLY WITH
THE REQUEST MADE MONTHS AGO BY
THE NATURAL RESOURCES CHAIRMAN
DOC HASTINGS AND WATER
SUBCOMMITTEE TOM MCCLINTOCK
AIMED AT ANSWERING THE
RATIONALE ABOUT THE SURVEY, THE
OVERALL COST OF THE SURVEY AND
WHY TAXPAYER DOLLARS WERE
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DESERVE
ANSWERS THEY DESERVE TRANDS
PARAPHERNALIACY THAT APPARENTLY
THIS ADMINISTRATION WILL NOT
GIVE.
IN THE INTERIM, THEY DESERVE TO
KNOW THAT THEIR GOVERNMENT
WON'T BE SENDING OUT THEIR
HARD-EARNED TAX DOLLARS ON A
DAM REMOVAL SURVEY BY AN
ORGANIZATION ONCE DEDICATED TO
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO END
THIS BLATANT WAIST OF TAXPAYER
THIS AMENDMENT.
I YIELD BACK.
BACK.
I MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST
WORD AND INDICATE I AM HAPPY TO
ACCEPT THE GENTLEMAN'S
IM.
THE QUESTION IS ON
THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR --
I ASK FOR A RECORDED VOTE.
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6
OF RULE 18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO WILL BE
POSTPONED.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS RISE?
I HAVE AN
AMENDMENT AT THE DEFFING, 396.
THE CLERK WILL
REPORT THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY
MS. JACKSON LEE OF TEXAS, AT
THED ON THEY HAVE BILL, BEFORE
THE SHORT TITLE, INSERT THE
FOLLOWING, THE AMOUNTS
OTHERWISE PRVIDED IN THIS ACT
ARE REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT MADE
AVAILABLE BY DEFENSE ACTIVE IT
IS, WEAPONS ACTIVITIES AND
INCREASING THE AMOUNT MADE
AVAILABLE FOR CORPS OF
ENGINEERS CIVIL DEPARTMENT OF
THE ARMY OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE BY $52 MILLION.
PURSUANT TO THED
ORER OF THE HOUSE TODAY, THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS --
I RESERVE A POINT OF ORDER.
RESERVED.
PUFFER SUNT TO THED ORER OF THE
FROM TEXAS, MS. JACKSON LEE,
AND A MEMBER OPPOSED, WILL EACH
CONTROL FIVE MINUTES.
THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS.
I THANK THE
CHAIR VERY MUCH AND I AGAIN ASK
MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT THIS
AMENDMENT BECAUSE ANYONE WHO
HAS LIVED NEAR A PORT
UNDERSTANDS WHAT THE ARMY CORPS
OF ENGINEERS IS GOING THROUGH.
WE'VE SPENT OUR TIME WORKING
WITH THE CORPS ON THIS ISSUE OF
DREDGING AND EVERY PORT IN THE
UNITED STATES, MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS ARE LOST BECAUSE OF THE
INABILITY OF ACCESS AND THE
DIFFICULTY OF MAKING SURE THAT
OUR NATION'S PORTS ARE READY
FOR THE INCREASE IN BUSINESS.
THE TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE
CENTER FOR PORTS AND WATERWAYS
INDICATED ANALYZING THE DIRECT
ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF CHANNEL
RESTRICTION AND A LOS OF ONE
FOOT OF DRAG FROM THE HOUSTON
SHIP CHANNEL AS AN EXAMPLE.
THE DATA WAS COLLECTED IN 2008
AND 2009.
THEY DETERMINED THAT THE DIRECT
ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE LOSS OF
ONE FOOT OVER THREE YEARS
AMOUNTS TO $373 MILLION.
THIS IN FACT IS AN ACCOUNT THAT
HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED AS EVIDENCE
BY THE ARMY CORPS WHICH DEALS
IN PARTICULAR WITH THE ARMY --
DEPARTMENT OF ARMY OPERATIONS
AND MAINTENANCE THIS INFUSION
IS TO ASSIST IN MAKING SURE
THAT JOBS ARE SAVED AND JOBS
ARE CREATED.
THE IMPACT FROM THE STUDY DID
NOT CONSIDER OTHER EFFECTS THAT
ARE VERY REAL BUT EXTREMELY
DIFFICULT TO MEASURE BUT THEY
CAN MEASURE WHAT THE LACK OF
DREDGING OCCURRED CAN BRING
ABOUT.
WHILE I -- WHAT I MAKE THE
ARGUMENT IS, IN PORTS COMPETING
WITH WORLD PORTS, THE FACT OF
ACCESSIBILITY IS CRUCIAL.
I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO BE
REMINDED THAT WE'RE IN THE
BUSINESS OF CREATING JOBS.
IT SEEMS RIDICULOUS THAT WE
CANNOT ADD TO AN EXISTING
ACCOUNT TO CREATE JOBS, TO
ASSIST IN ONE OF THE LARGEST
PORTS IN THE NATION, PORTS
ALONG THE WEST COAST, PORTS
ALONG THE GULF AND PORTS ALONG
THE EAST COAST, ALL PORTS THAT
ARE ENGAGED IN RECEIVING LARGE
VESSELS THAT ARE BRINGING IN
GOODS AND LARGE VESSELS GOING
OUT WITH MANUFACTURED AND OTHER
GOODS FROM THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICAISM ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO
SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT.
I RESERVE MY TIME.
THE GENTLEWOMAN
TIME.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY RISE?
CLAIM TIME IN OPPOSITION.
DOES THE GENTLEMAN
OF ORDER?
GENTLEMAN RESERVES.
THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR
FIVE MINUTES.
I TOO AM
CONCERNED ABOUT MAIN TAPING OUR
WATERWAYS.
THEY CONTRIBUTE SIGNIFICANTLY
TO OUR NATIONAL ECONOMY BY
PROVIDING A MENS OF COST
EFFICIENT CARGO TRANSPORTATION.
TO THIS END, OUR BILL FUNDS THE
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
ACCOUNTS, $2 PPT 5 BILLION, AN
INCREASE OF $109 BILLION ABOVE
THE PRESIDENT'S -- $109 MILLION
ABOVE THE PRESIDENT'S REQUEST.
IN THE EARMARK BAN, THE FINAL
BILL CANNOT INCLUDE FUNDING TO
PRESIDENT'S REQUEST.
INSTEAD OF INCREASING FUNDING
FOR SPECIFIC PROJECTS, IT
INCLUDES FUNDING FOR CAT GOIRS
OF ONGOING PROJECTS, INCLUDING
AN ADDITIONAL $189 MILLION FOR
NAVIGATION GREDGING WITH THE
FINAL PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS,
ALLOCATIONS TO BE MADE BY THE
THE PROJECT MY COLLEAGUE IS
INTERESTED IN WOULD BELE YIBBLE
TO COMPETE FOR THIS ADDITIONAL
FUNDING.
AS AN OFFSET, THIS AMENDMENT
STRIKES THE FUNDING FOR THE
MODERNIZATION OF OUR NUCLEAR
WEAPONS STOCKPILE AND ITS
SUPPORTING INFRASTRUCTURE
ENSURING ADEQUATE FUNDING TO
MAINTAIN OUR NUCLEAR WEAPONS IS
MY HIGHEST PRIORITY FOR OUR
BILL.
THE INCREASES PROVIDED IN THIS
BILL FOR NUCLEAR SECURITY HAVE
SUPPORT.
THIS AMENDMENT UNACCEPTABLY
STRIKES FUNDING FOR BOTH OF
THESE PRIORITY INVESTMENTS
WHICH ARE BOTH URNINGT AND
OVERDUE.
I STRONGLY URGE MY COLLEAGUES
TO MAKE DEFENSE A PRIORITY AND
VOTE NO ON THIS AMENDMENT.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I RAISE A POINT
OF ORDER AGAINST THE AMENDMENT.
THE AMENDMENT PROPOSES TO
INCREASE AN APPROPRIATION NOT
AUTHORIZED BY LAW AND THEREFORE
IS IN VIOLATION OF CLAUSE 2-A
OF RULE 21.
ALTHOUGH THE ORIGINAL COUNT FOR
THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS -- CIVIL
DEPARTMENT OF ARMY OPERATIONS
AND MAINTENANCE IS
UNAUTHORIZED, IT IS PERMITTED
TO REMAIN IN THE BILL PURSUANT
TO THE RULE PROVIDING FOR
DISCUSSION OF THIS BILL.
WHEN IT'S PERMITTED TO REMAIN
IN AN APPROPRIATIONS BILL, THE
AMENDMENT CHANGES THE AM IN
ORDER BUT THE RULES OF THE
HOUSE APPLY A QUOTE MERELY
PERFECTING STANDARD QUOTE FOR
THE ITEMS THAT REMAIN AND DO
NOT ALLOW THE INSERTION OF A
NEW PARAGRAPH NOT PART OF THE
ORIGINAL TEXT PERMITTED TO
REMAIN TO INCREASE THE FIGURE
PERMITTED TO REMAIN.
I WOULD FURTHER SAY THE ACCOUNT
CONTINUES FUNDING FOR PROJECTS
NOT ENTIRELY AUTHORIZED.
THE AMENDMENT CANNOT BE COP
STREWED AS MERELY PERFECTS AND
THEREFORE, MR. CHAIRMAN, I ASK
THAT THE CHAIR RULE THE
AMENDMENT OUT OF ORDER.
DOES ANY OTHER
POINT OF ORDER?
I DO.
I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR HIS
WHAT I WOULD ARGUE IS WHAT ARE
MEMBERS HERE TO DO?
I WOULD VIGOROUSLY DISAGREE
THAT THIS IS AN EARMARK.
I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS
AUTHORIZATION IN PARTICULAR IN
THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
BUT THE DILEMMA THE GENTLEMAN
IS MAKING AN ARGUMENT ON IS
WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN INCREASE
IT VERSUS REDUCING IT.
WHAT MY ARGUMENT IS THAT THIS
IS AN A YEN INCREASE TO
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE WITH
NO SPECIFIC TIE TO INDICATE
THAT IT IS AN EARMARK.
THERE'S NO MONETARY BENEFIT TO
MYSELF AS A MEMBER OF CONGRESS,
PUBLICLY STATED ON THE FLOOR OF
THE HOUSE, AND THEREFORE THIS
IS TO INCREASE MILLIONS OF JOBS
IN AMERICA IN PORTS AROUND
AMERICA FOR AN ISSUE THAT IS
DEVASTATING TO PORTS.
AND THAT THE ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS IS BEING OVERWHELMED
AND THAT IS A REQUIREMENT OF
DREDGING.
DREDGING EQUALS ALLOWING THE
QUALITY OF VESSEL TO INCREASE
BY TONNAGE, TO BRING IN AND
TAKE OUT GOODS THAT AMERICANS
HAVE MANUFACTURED AND GOODS
THAT AMERICANS ARE SEEKING TO
IMPORT.
WITH OUR ALLIES AND TRADING
IT IS TO INCREASE JOBS.
AND THEREFORE I MAKE THE
ARGUMENT THAT WE ARE BOUND BY
RULES THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO
WITH EAR IT IS MARKS IF YOU ARE
IN ESSENCE PLACING FUNDING INTO
TO HELP AMERICANS, ALL OF
AMERICA, AND TO BUILD OUR
PORTS, ALL OF OUR PORTS, MAKING
THEM MORE SECURE AND MAKING
THEM MORE ACCESSIBLE SO THAT
THE GOODS OF AMERICANS CAN GO
TO AND FREE THROW AND THAT JOBS
CAN MULTIPLY.
IF ONE PORT ALONE, BY ONE FOOT
OF INACCESSIBILITY, LACK OF
DREDGING, LOSING -- LOSES $373
MILLION, MULTIPLY THAT BY THE
NUMBER OF MAJOR PORTS IN THE
STATES FROM THE EAST TO
THE SOUTHERN COASTLINE TO THE
WEST COAST.
I MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT THIS
IS A -- AN AMENDMENT THAT CAN
STAND ON ITS OWN AND SHOULD NOT
BE SUBJECT TO A POINT OF ORDER.
I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT
THE AMENDMENT.
YIELDS BACK.
DOES ANY OTHER MEMBER WISH TO
BE HEARD ON THE POINT OF ORDER?
THE CHAIR IS PREPARED TO RULE.
THE PROPONENT OF AN ITEM OF
APPROPRIATION CARRIES THE
BURDEN OF PER SBATIONEN --
PERSUASION ON THE QUESTION OF
WHETHER IT IS SUPPORTED BY AN
HAVING REVIEWED THE INTER--
AMENDMENT, THE IT IS AUTHORIZED
BY LAW.
FOR EXAMPLE, SOME ITEMS
PROMOTED IN THE, QUOTE,
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, END
QUOTE, ACCOUNT ARE NOT MODIFIED
BY THE PHRASE, QUOTE, AS
AUTHORIZED BY LAW, END QUOTE.
UNDER THE PRECEDENCE OF JULY
12, 1995, AND JULY 16, 1997, AN
AMENDMENT ADDING MATTER AT THE
TO
AFFECT AN INDIRECT INCREASE IN
AN UNALTOGETHER RICED AMOUNT
PORTION OF THE BILL ALREADY
PASSED IN THE READ SOMETHING
NOT, QUOTE, MERELY PERFECTING,
END QUOTE.
RULE 21.
THE CHAIR IS THEREFORE
CONSTRAINED TO SUSTAIN THE
POINT OF ORDER UNDER CLAUSE 2-A
OF RULE 21.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA RISE?
MR. SPEAKER, I HAVE AN
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
REPORT THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY
MR. ROHRABACHER OF CALIFORNIA.
AT THE END OF THE BILL, BEFORE
THE SHORT TITLE INSERT THE
FOLLOWING, SECTION, NONE OF THE
FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE UNDER THIS
ACT MAY BE USED FOR THE
U.S.-CHINA CLEAN ENERGY
RESEARCH CENTER.
PURSUANT TO THE
ORDER OF THE HOUSE TODAY, MR.
ROHRABACHER AND A MEMBER OWE
POSSED WILL EACH CONTROL FIVE
THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA.
THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, MR. SPEAKER.
MY AMENDMENT WOULD PREVENT ANY
FUNDS IN THIS BILL FROM BEING
SPENT ON THE U.S.-CHINA CLEAN
ENERGY RESEARCH CENTER.
OUR DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY IS
USING OUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO
SYSTEMS.
THIS SPECIFIC EXPENDITURE IS
$37.5 MILLION OVER FIVE YEARS.
CHINA SHOULD BE SPENDING THEIR
OWN MONEY FOR DEVELOPING THEIR
OWN ENERGY SYSTEMS.
WITH THE MISERABLE SHAPE OF OUR
BUDGET AND OUR ECONOMY, THE
LAST THING WE SHOULD BE DOING
IS DEPLETING OUR RESOURCES TO
HELP THE CHINESE BECOME MORE
EFFICIENT AND THUS MORE
COMPETITIVE.
ARE BORROWING MONEY FROM
CHINA, PAYING INTEREST ON THAT
MONEY AND SUBSIDIZING THE
THAT WILL TAKE AWAY MORE
AMERICAN JOBS.
THIS IS AS NUTTY AS IT GETS.
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY IS
TO BUILD ELECTRIC VEHICLES.
OVER THE NEXT 20 YEARS THE
ELECTRIC VEHICLE INDUSTRY MAY
WELL BE CREATING 130,000 TO UP
TO MAYBE 350,000 AMERICAN JOBS.
AND AS OF 2010 30,000 AMERICANS
ARE ALREADY WORKING IN THE
ELECTRICAL VEHICLE AND ADVANCED
BATTERY INDUSTRIES.
TESLA MOTORS IN MY STATE IS
ALREADY DO IT -- DOING IT.
WHY ARE WE SPENDING OUR A TAX
DOLLARS TO PUT THESE JOBS --
OUR TAX DOLLARS TO PUT THESE
JOBS IN JEOPARDY, BY IMPROVING
THE CHINESE ABILITY TO BUILD
SUCH CARS?
WHY DOES OUR GOVERNMENT WANT TO
SUBSIDIZE THE EFFORT?
THE CLEAN ENERGY RESEARCH
CENTER ALSO SHARES AMERICAN
KNOW-HOW WITH CHINA IN ADVANCED
COAL TECHNOLOGY.
THE GLOBAL VALUE OF ELECTRICITY
GENERATED USING CLEAN COAL
IN
BY 2020 IT WILL REACH $85
BILLION.
U.S. COMPANIES HAVE THE
POTENTIAL TO CAPTURE THE GLOBAL
MARKET AND CAN SELL AMERICAN
DESIGNED AND BUILT TECHNOLOGY
TO CHINA.
BUT IF WE GIVE THE CHINESE
ACCESS TO OUR RESEARCH NOW, OUR
WHY ARE WE UNDERCUTTING
OURSELVES?
LAST MONTH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF COMMERCE ANNOUNCED
ANTI-DUMPING TARIFFS ON CHINESE
COMPANIES FOR UNFAIR TRADE
PRACTICES REGARDING SOLAR
PANELS.
66 CHINESE PRODUCERS WERE NAMED
SUGGESTS THIS IS A CONCERTED
EFFORT ON -- TO UNDERMINE THE
UNITED STATES MARKET.
IN 2011 THE U.S. IMPORTED OVER
$3 BILLION WORTH OF CHINESE
PANELS AND SINCE 2001 OUR SHARE
OF THE GLOBAL MARKET IN THESE
PANELS HAS SHRUNK FROM 27% TO
OVER 100,000 AMERICAN JOBS
DEPEND DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
ON THESOME SOUTH CAROLINA OF
THE U.S. SOLAR INDUSTRY.
WHY -- ON THE SUCCESS OF THE
U.S. SOLAR INDUSTRY.
WHY ARE WE SUBSIDIZING THE
TECHNOLOGY?
CHINA'S NOT PLAYING BY THE SAME
RULES THAT WE'RE PLAYING BY.
THE OFFICE OF THE NATIONAL
COUNTERINTELLIGENCE EXECUTIVE
RELEASED A REPORT LAST YEAR
WHICH STATES, CHINESE ACTORS
ARE THE WORLD'S MOST ACTIVE AND
PERIST SENT -- PERSISTENT
PERPETRATORS OF ECONOMIC
ESPIONAGE.
AMONG THE TECHNOLOGIES THEY
HAVE THE GREATESTTRY TR IN IS
STEALING -- GREATEST INTEREST
IN IS STEALING AND WHAT THEY'RE
INTERESTED IN STEAL SOMETHING
THE CUTTING EDGE ENERGY
TECHNOLOGIES THAT WE'RE
DEVELOPING WITH OUR EXPERTISE.
LET'S STOP PAYING THE CHINESE
TO GIVE THEM ACCESS TO OUR BEST
SCIENTISTS, RESEARCH CENTERS
AND TECHNOLOGY.
THEY ARE ALREADY STEALING
ENOUGH INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY TO
ENHANCE THEIR OWN ECONOMIC AND
MILITARY POWER, THEY ARE
ROBBING US BLIND, BUT WE ARE
NOT BLIND.
THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT IN
FRONT OF OUR FACE.
AMERICA'S HIGH-TECH INDUSTRY,
WHETHER IN ENERGY, AIR SPACE OR
ANY KIND OF MANUFACTURING,
SHOULD BE WAY OUT IN FRONT OF
COMPETITION.
WHY WITH WE HELPING CHINA CLOSE
THAT -- WHY ARE WE HELPING
CHINA CLOSE THAT GAP?
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD PUT A STOP
TO OVER $7 MILLION ANNUALLY
THAT IS BEING USED TO BOLSTER
THE EFFORTS OF OUR CHINESE
ADVERSARY.
TRANSFERRING TECH NORMAL OR
FUNDS TO HELP DEVELOP THAT
TECHNOLOGY TO A STRATEGIC RIVAL
MAKES NO SENSE WHATSOEVER.
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT
MY AMENDMENT AND PUT AN END TO
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN
TIME.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY RISE?
MR.
CHAIRMAN, I RISE IN OPPOSITION
AND TO CLAIM TIME IN OPPOSITION
TO THE GENTLEMAN'S AMENDMENT.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
MR. CHAIRMAN.
I CERTAINLY SHARE SOME OF MY
COLLEAGUE'S CONCERNS.
WE SHOULD NOT BE SPENDING --
SENDING DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
MONEY OVERSEAS, IT DOESN'T
BENEFIT OUR CITIZENS OR
UNDERMINES OUR OWN
WE CANNOT ASSUME THAT ALL
ENERGY COOPERATION IS,BLE --
OBJECTIONABLE AND -- IS
OBJECTIONABLE.
AND IT WOULD ELIMINATE BOTH A
PROPER ROLE FOR FEDERAL FUNDS
AND DIRECTLY BENEFITS AMERICA.
LET ME FIRST POINT OUT, THESE
RESEARCH CENTERS ARE NOT A
DONATION TO CHINA.
THEY ARE FUNDED IN EQUAL PARTS
BY CHINA AND THE UNITED STATES.
THEY ACTUALLY SUPPORT THREE
CONSORTIA CENTERED IN WEST
VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY, THE
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AND THE
LAWRENCE BERKLEY NATIONAL LAB
IN HIS OWN HOME STATE.
THEY FUND RESEARCH AT SEVEN
AMERICAN NATIONAL LABORATORIES,
FIVE AMERICAN UNIVERSITIES AND
INSTITUTES AND OTHER
ORGANIZATIONS.
THERE'S NOTHING NUTTY ABOUT
THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I CERTAINLY SHARE THE CONCERNS
WE KEEP INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
AND MANUFACTURING HERE AT HOME.
TO ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS,
THESE RESEARCH CENTERS SIGN AID
AGREEMENTS TO PROTECT -- SIGNED
AGREEMENTS TO PROTECT AMERICAN
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WHILE
ALLOWING US TO TAKE ADVANTAGES
OF NEW JOINT DISCOVERIES.
ELIMINATING CENTERS ALTOGETHER
WOULD HARM AMERICAN RETURNERS,
AMERICAN SCIENTIST, AMERICAN
INNOVATION, AMERICAN JOB
CREATION AND I OPPOSE HIS
AMENDMENT AND YIELD BACK THE
BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA RISE?
DO WE STILL HAVE?
THE GENTLEMAN HAS 30
SECONDS.
WELL, I'LL MAKE THIS VERY
QUICK.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT ALL
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO ALL
COOPERATION.
I'M OPPOSED TO COOPERATION WITH
THE ADOLF HITLERS OF OUR DAY.
THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MURDERING
CHRISTIANS AND OTHER RELIGIOUS
PEOPLE AS WE SPEAK NO, WE
SHOULD NOT BE COOPERATE WAITING
NO, WE SHOULD NOT BE
COOPERATING WITH THAT
GOVERNMENT.
AND ALL THESE DIVEN GROUPS THAT
ARE COOPERATING WITH THEM, THIS
IS PART OF A GROUP THAT ALSO
HAS RESEARCH GOING ON
THROUGHOUT OUR UNIVERSITIES IN
THE UNITED STATES, THAT MAKES
BECAUSE YOU HAVE CHINESE
NATIONALS THERE WHO ARE TAKING
AS MUCH OF THE INFORMATION AS
THEY CAN AND TAKING IT BACK TO
CHINA FROM OUR UNIVERSITIES.
WE SHOULD BE OPPOSED TO THIS
AND STAND UP FOR THE AMERICAN
WORKER AND WHAT'S RIGHT.
HAS EXPIRED.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE PREPONDERATE OF THE
CHAIR, THE NOES HAVE IT -- IN
THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE
IT PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6 OF RULE
18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ON THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA WILL
BE POSTPONED.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY RISE?
I ASK
UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE
REQUEST FOR RECORDED VOTE ONED
FIRST AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI BE
WITHDRAWN, TO THE END THAT THE
CHAIR PUT THE QUESTION DE NOVO.
IS THERE OBJECTION?
WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,
THE AYES HAVE IT.
TO.
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW YORK RISE?
MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE AN
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
REPORT THE AMENDMENT.
SORRY, THE CLERK WILL DESIGNATE
THE AMENDMENT.
DID THE GENTLEMAN SUBMIT THE
AMENDMENT TO THE DESSSNK
YES, IT'S ENGEL,
DID THE GENTLEMAN SUBMIT
ANOTHER COPY TO THE DESK?
DID THE GENTLEMAN
SUBMIT ANOTHER COPY TO THE
DESK?
THE CLERK WILL REPORT THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY
MR. ENGEL OF NEW YORK.
AT THE END OF THE BILL, BEFORE
THE SHORT TITLE INSERT THE
FOLLOWING, SECTION, NONE OF THE
FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE BY THIS
ACT MAY BE USED BY THE
OTHER FEDERAL AGENCY TO LEASE
OR PURCHASE NEW LIGHT DUTY
VEHICLES FOR THE EXECUTIVE
FLEET OR FOR ANY AGENCY'S NEAT
INVENTORY EXCEPT IN ACCORDANCE
WITH PRESIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM
FEDERAL FLEET PERFORMANCE DATED
MAY 24, 2011.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
NEW YORK, MR. ENGEL, AND A
CONTROL 10 MINUTES.
THE GENTLEMAN -- THE CHAIR
RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN FROM
THANK YOU, VERY
MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN.
ON MAY 24, 2011, PRESIDENT
OBAMA ISSUED A MEMORANDUM ON
FEDERAL FLEET PERFORMANCE THAT
REQUIRES ALL NEW LIGHT DUTY
VEHICLES IN THE FEDERAL FLEET
TO BE ALTERNATE FUEL VEHICLES.
SUCH AS HYBRID, ELECTRIC,
NATURAL GAS OR BIOFUEL, BY
DECEMBER 31, 2015.
MY AMENDMENT ECHOES THE
PRESIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM BY
PROHIBITING FUNDS IN THE ENERGY
AND WATER DEVELOPMENT AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS
ACT FROM BEING USED TO LEASE OR
PURCHASE NEW LIGHT DUTY
VEHICLES EXCEPT IN ACCORD WITH
THE PRESIDENT'S MEMORANDUM.
I'VE INTRODUCED A SIMILAR
AMENDMENT TO FIVE DIFFERENT
APPROPRIATIONS BILLS IN THE
PAST INCLUDING LAST YEAR'S
ENERGY AND WATER APPROPRIATIONS
BILL AND EACH TIME MY AMENDMENT
WAS ACCEPTED AND PASSED BY
VOICE VOTE.
MY AMENDMENTS HAVE ALSO BEEN
ACCEPTED TO THE COMMERCE,
JUSTICE AND SCIENCE
APPROPRIATION BILL FOR F.Y.
DEFENSE AND HOMELAND SECURITY
APPROPRIATIONS BILLS FOR F.Y.
2012.
YES, THANK YOU VERY, VERY MUCH.
I JUST WANT TO SAY BEFORE I SIT
DOWN THAT THIS IS TRULY A
BIPARTISAN EFFORT AND I WANT TO
PAY TRIBUTE TO MY GOOD FRIEND,
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS,
MR. SHIMKUS, WHO HAS BEEN
WORKING ON ME ON THIS OPEN FUEL
STANDARD.
WE'VE INTRODUCED A BILL, H.R.
1687, WHICH REQUIRES 50% OF NEW
AUTOMOBILES IN 2014, 80% IN
2016, AND 95% IN 2017 TO BE
WARRANTED TO OPERATE ON
NONPETROLEUM FUELS IN ADDITION
TO OR INSTEAD OF
PETROLEUM-BASED FUELS AND I
WANTED TO SAY THAT COMPLIANCE
POSSIBILITIES INCLUDE THE FULL
ARRAY OF EXISTING TECHLOGICAL
-- TECH NOTHING -- TECHNOLOGIES
INCLUDING FLEX FUEL NATURAL
GAS, HYDROGEN, BIODIESEL,
PLUG-IN ELECTRIC DIVE AND A
CATCH FOR ALL NEW TECHNOLOGY.
I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW
JERSEY FOR ACCEPTING THIS AND I
YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW YORK.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
THE ACE HAVE IT.
THE AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM FLORIDA RISE?
MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE AN
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
135, I BELIEVE IT IS.
THE CLERK WILL REPORT
THE AMENDMENT.
AT THE END OF THE
BILL INSERT THE FOLLOWING,
SECTION, NONE OF THE FUNDS MADE
AVAILABLE BY THIS ACT MAY BE
USED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
TO SUBORDINATE ANY LOAN
OBLIGATION TO OTHER FINANCING --
TO OTHER FINANCING IN VIOLATION
OF SECTION 1702 OF THE ENERGY
POLICY ACT OF 2005, 42 U.S.C.
155-12 OR TO SUBORDINATE ANY
OBLIGATION TO ANY LOAN OR DEBT
OBLIGATION IN VIOLATION OF
SECTION 609 .10 OF TITLE 10 OF
THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS.
PURSUANT TO THE ORDER
OF THE HOUSE TODAY, THE
GENTLEMAN FROM FLORIDA, MR.
STEARNS, AND A MEMBER OPPOSED
EACH WILL CONTROL FIVE MINUTES.
THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM FLORIDA.
I RISE AN AMENDMENT
ON BEHALF OF MYSELF, MR.
SCALISE, MS. ADAMS AND MR. BROUP
THIS AMENDMENT WILL PROHIBIT THE
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY FROM USING
ANY FUNDS INCLUDED IN THIS BILL
TO SUBORDINATE NATURE ANY LOAN
OBLIGATION IN VIOLATION OF THE
ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005.
THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF
CONGRESS.
AS CHAIRMAN OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATION,
I HAVE LED THE INVESTIGATION
INTO THE ADMINISTRATION'S RUSH
DECISION TO LOAN SOLYNDRA, A
CALIFORNIA-BASED SOLAR
MANUFACTURING COMPANY $335
MILLION THAT WAS ULTIMATELY
DURING THIS INVESTIGATION IT WAS
UNCOVERED THAT SHOCKINGLY THE
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY KNEW AS
EARLY AS AUGUST OF 2009 THAT
THEY WOULD GO BANKRUPT IN
SEPTEMBER OF 2011 BUT SIMPLY
PROCEEDED TO RISK MORE TAXPAYER
FUNDS THROUGHOUT THAT TIME.
THE INVESTIGATION ALSO
DISCOVERED THAT FOLLOWING
MEETINGS WITH OUTSIDE INVESTORS,
D.O.E. MADE THE UNPRECEDENTED
DECISION ON DECEMBER 10, 2010,
TO SUBORDINATE $75 MILLION OF
TAXPAYER MONEY SO MORE PRIVATE
SOLYNDRA.
IT GAVE THEM MONEY OVER
TAXPAYER'S MONEY MEANING IN THE
EVENT OF BANKRUPTCY, THEY WOULD
BE PAID BACK.
SECRETARY CHU WASN'T ALLOWED TO
SUBORDINATE AND IT STATES THAT
THE LOAN GUARANTEES ARE NOT TO
BE SUBORDINATED TO OTHER
AND IT WAS CLEAR THAT
THE INTENT OF CONGRESS WAS.
D.O.E. WENT OUT OF ITS WAY TO
VIOLATE THE WILL OF CONGRESS AND
SOUGHT THE OPINION OF OUTSIDE
COUNCIL ON THE LEGALITY OF
SUBORDINATION AND BASED UPON
THIS OPINION THEY MADE A
DECISION TO SUBORDINATE AND ALL
HINGED ON THE WORD IS, THE
MEANING OF THE WORD IS.
IN A 17-PAGE DRAFT MEMO OBTAINED
BY THE D.O.E.'S PRIVATE
ATTORNEYS THEY SAID THEY WERE
GUARANTEED FUNDS.
HOWEVER THIS DRAFT MEMO WAS
STATED THAT THE SUBORDINATION
WAS QUOTE, IT MAKES THE BEST
POSSIBLE CASE ON A REASONABLE
INTERPRETATION SUPPORTED BY
RESTRUCTURING POLICIES END
SECRETARY CHU IGNORED THE
IMPORTANT PARTS OF THE LAW.
IT REQUIRED HIM TO NOTIFY THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL IN THE EVENT OF
DECEMBER 13, 2010 LETTER, THEN
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE LOAN
PROGRAM NOTIFIED SOLYNDRA BUT
SECRETARY CHU DID NOT NOTIFY THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL AS REQUIRED BY
LAW.
THE EMAILS INDICATE THEY BELIEVE
D.O.E.'S JUSTIFICATION FOR
PLACING TAXPAYERS AT THE BACK OF
THE LINE WAS INCONSISTENT AND
OPINION FROM THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT.
SENT AN EMAIL TO THE DEPUTY
DIRECTOR OF O.M.B. SAYS THE
REGULATIONS AND STATUTES REQUIRE
THAT THE GUARANTEED LOAN SHOULD
NOT BE SUBORDINATED LOAN OR ANY
OTHER DEBT OBLIGATION.
IT IS CLEAR THAT THE DEPARTMENT
OF ENERGY IGNORED THE LAW AND
DID WHATEVER THEY WISHED TO PUSH
THROUGH THE SUBORDINATION.
OUR INVESTIGATION CONTINUES.
I AND MY COLETION ARE WORKING OR
LEGISLATION TO ENSURE THAT
TAXPAYERS ARE NEVER STRUCK AND
STUCK PAYING HUNDREDS OF
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS BECAUSE
OBAMA'S DECISION TO PUT
TAXPAYERS TO THE BACK OF THE
LINE.
I WOULD LIKE TO GET MY
COLLEAGUE.
HOW MUCH TIME DO I HAVE LEFT?
30 SECONDS.
I'M PLEASED
TO SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT AND I
COMMEND HIS LEGISLATION.
I YIELD TO THE
BALANCE TO MY COLLEAGUE.
--
I RISE IN SUPPORT OF
THIS LEGISLATION.
THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME
HAS EXPIRED.
GENTLEWOMAN FROM --
THE QUESTION IS ON
THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM FLORIDA.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE
AYES HAVE IT.
AND THE AMENDMENT IS GOODE TO.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD LIKE A
RECORDED VOTE.
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6,
RULE 18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ON
THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM FLORIDA, WILL BE
POSTPONED.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES -- DOES
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS RISE?
AMENDMENT NUMBER 399
THE CLERK WILL REPORT
THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY
MS. JACKSON LEE OF TEXAS.
THE AMOUNT OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY
THIS ACT ARE REVISED BY REDUCING
THE AMOUNT MADE AVAILABLE FOR
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE
ACTIVITIES, NATIONAL NUCLEAR,
WEAPONS ACTIVITIES, INCREASE THE
AMOUNT MADE AVAILABLE FOR THE
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, CIVIL
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY BY $10
MILLION.
PUBT PURSUANT TO THE
ORDER OF THE HOUSE TODAY, MS.
JACKSON LEE AND A MEMBER OPPOSED
EACH WILL CONTROL FIVE MINUTES.
THIS IS MY ALL
CAN'T WE ALL GET ALONG
AMENDMENT.
AND I THANK THE CHAIRMAN AND
RANKING MEMBER FOR THEIR WORK.
MY AMENDMENT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO
THEIR WORK ON OUR EAST COAST,
OUR GULF AND WEST COAST BECAUSE
IT DEALS SPECIFICALLY WITH
RESTORATION AND SENDS A STRONG
MESSAGE TO THE IMPORTANCE OF
RESTORATION AS AN ISSUE OF
NATIONAL IMPORTANCE AND TALKS
ABOUT THE ECONOMIC WELL-BEING OF
THE REGIONS ALONG THE NATION'S
COASTLINES AND PROVIDES AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR RESTORATION.
THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT OVER THE
YEARS, OUR COASTLINES HAVE
DETERIORATED.
WETLANDS HAVE NOT BEEN
PROTECTED.
WE HAVE EXPERIENCED A
DEVASTATING SPILL IN THE GULF
COASTLINE AND SO MANY ALONG THAT
COASTLINE FROM FLORIDA, TOLL
ALABAMA, TO LOUISIANA, TO TEXAS
AND IN BETWEEN HAVE EXPERIENCED
A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THEIR
WETLANDS AND THEIR COASTLINE.
THIS TAKES A MERE $10 MILLION
AND I SAY IT WITH RESPECT, TO
ASSIST THE NATION IN PROVIDING
AID AND IMPROVEMENT TO THE
NATION'S COASTLINE, WHICH AGAIN,
PRODUCED OPPORTUNITIES FOR
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, TOURISM
AND VARIOUS PROTECTIONS FOR A
COASTLINE THAT HAS SUFFERED
UNDER NEGLECT.
THE UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS ESTIMATES THAT
COASTLINES ALONG THE GULF, 60%
OF ERODING.
THE COAST LOSES UP TO 10 FEET OF
SHORELINE AYEAR WITH TOP SOIL
WASHING TO THE GULF COAST.
FUNDS ARE NEEDED TO PROTECT THE
ECONOMIC STABILITY OF THAT
REGION.
JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO, I
INTRODUCED H.R. 3710, WHICH
WOULD PROVIDE FOR ADDED
OPPORTUNITY FOR PROTECTING THE
DEFICIT
REDUCTION IN THE ENERGY --
THROUGH ENERGY SECURITY FUNDS.
THE LEGISLATION WOULD INCREASE
PROGRAMS OR PROVIDE PUP
COASTAL GRANT PROGRAMS FOR
ADDRESSING DISASTERS,
RESTORATION PROTECTION AND
MAINTENANCE OF THE COASTAL AREAS
I HOPE -- INCLUDING RESEARCH AND
PROGRAMS IN COORDINATION WITH
STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES.
I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING AND
PASSAGE OF THAT LEGISLATION.
TODAY, I RISE TO SUPPORT THE
NATION'S COASTAL REGIONS AND TO
PROVIDE THOSE RESOURCES AND I
ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT
TIME.
RESERVES.
IN OPPOSITION.
I OPPOSE THE GENTLEWOMAN'S
AMENDMENT AND SHARE THE
GENTLEWOMAN'S SUPPORT FOR SMART
INVESTMENTS IN OUR NATION'S
INFRASTRUCTURE AND I UNDERSTAND
THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS.
I WOULD REMIND THE GENTLEWOMAN
UNDER THE EARMARKS THE FINAL
BILL CANNOT INCLUDE FUNDING IN A
SPECIFIC BUDGET IN AN AMOUNT
IT INCLUDES PROJECTS WITH
ALLOCATIONS TO BE MADE BY THE
AS AN OFFSET, THIS AMENDMENT
STRIKES FUNDING FOR THE
MODERNIZATION OF OUR WEAPONS
STOCKPILE AND SUPPORTING
FOR THAT REASON ALONE, I OPPOSE
THE BILL AND URGE MY COLLEAGUES
TO DO SO AS WELL AND I YIELD THE
BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM -- THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS RISE.
THIS IS ON PAGE
THREE.
I DON'T VIEW THIS IN PARTICULAR
AS I DO
PUTTING RESOURCES NECESSARY FOR
THE PROTECTION OF OUR COASTLINE.
AGAIN, IT IS NOT EXCESSIVE.
IT DOES NOT UNDERMINE THE ATOMIC
PROGRAM BUT HELPS MILLIONS OF
PROGRAMS ALONG THE COASTLINE AND
PARTICULARLY THOSE WHO
EXPERIENCED DETERIORATION GOING
FROM THE EAST COAST AND TO THE
WEST COAST AND THIS IS ONE WE
CAN JOIN TOGETHER AND SUPPORT.
IT IS INSTRUCTTIVE AND
PRODUCTIVE AND CREATES JOBS AND
CREATES AN ECONOMIC ENGINE AND
PROTECTS ONE OF OUR MOST VALUED
RESOURCES, WETLANDS INCLUDED AND
COMPATIBLE WITH THOSE WHO ARE
FISHING, THOSE WHO ARE EXPLORING
AND THOSE WHO ARE ENJOYING AND
IT IS CRUCIAL THAT THIS
AMENDMENT BE PASSED BY THIS
HOUSE IN A CONSTRUCTIVE WAY
CREATE JOBS AND RESERVE THE
BOUNTY OF THE ENVIRONMENT WE
HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO PROTECT.
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT
THE JACKSON LEE AMENDMENT WHICH
DEALS WITH THE RESTORATION OF
OUR COASTLINE.
I YIELD BACK.
THE QUESTION IS ON
THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE
NOES HAVE IT.
AND THE AMENDMENT IS NOT AGREED
TO.
YEAS AND NAYS.
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6,
RULE 18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ON
THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
POSTPONED.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM SOUTH CAROLINA
RISE?
I HAVE AN AMENDMENT AT THE
DESK, NUMBER 58.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY
MR. MULVANEY OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
INSERT THE FOLLOWING, EACH
AMOUNT MADE AVAILABLE BY THIS
ACT OTHER THAN AN AMENDMENT TO
BE MADE AVAILABLE BY A PROVISION
OF LAW IS HEREBY REDUCED BY 24%.
B, THE REDUCTION IN SUBSECTION A
SHALL NOT APPLY TO THE FOLLOWING
ONE, CORPS OF ENGINEERS, CIVIL
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY.
TWO, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY,
ENERGY PROGRAMS, NUCLEAR ENERGY.
THREE, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY,
ENERGY PROGRAMS --
READING.
IS THERE OBJECTION?
WITHOUT
OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
PURSUANT TO THE ORDER OF THE
HOUSE TODAY, MR. MULVANEY AND A
MEMBER OPPOSED EACH WILL CONTROL
ONE OF THE THINGS
I TOLD FOLKS BACK HOME I WOULD
DO WHEN I GOT HERE WAS TO TRY
ROLL BACK DISCRETIONARY SPENDING
TO 2008 LEVELS.
ONE OF THE THINGS I HAVE DONE
HERE IS WORK ON THE REPUBLICAN
STUDY COMMITTEE BUDGETS THAT TRY
TO MAKE AN EFFORT TO GET OUR
SPENDING ADDICTION UNDER CONTROL
AND BALANCE OUR BUDGET IN A
REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME.
AS MUCH WORK, IT DOESN'T
ACCOMPLISH THOSE THINGS.
AND I DRAW ATTENTION THAT THIS
BILL AS MUCH AN IMPROVEMENT IT
HAS MADE OVER PREVIOUS BILLS
SPENDS MORE MONEY THAN WE DID
LAST YEAR.
THE AMENDMENT, MR. CHAIRMAN, IS
FAIRLY SIMPLE.
I SEEK TO CUT $3.1 BILLION FROM
THIS EXPENDITURE, THAT
REPRESENTS 10% OF THE OVERALL
BILL.
WE'RE SPENDING OVER D 1
TRILLION IN THE DISCRETIONARY
BUDGET THIS YEAR.
MORE IMPORTANTLY AND I THINK
FOLKS BACK HOME WOULD LIKE TO
KNOW, IT'S ONLY 1/6 OF 1% OF
THE OVERALL FEDERAL EX
IT'S ONLY ONE PENNY OUT OF
EVERY $6 THAT WE SPEND.
IT IS OUR EFFORT TO TRY AND
BRING SOME SANITY TO THE
SPENDING SIDE OF THE EQUATION.
IT IS NOT AN ACROSS-THE-BOARD
WE HAVE TRIED, MR. CHAIRMAN, TO
BE SMART AND SENSIBLE.
WHERE WE'VE CUT THESE FUNDS AND
FOR THAT REASON WE DO NOT CUT
THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEER
NSA ACCOUNTS.
WE DO NOT CUT -- NNSA ACCOUNTS.
WE DO NOT CUT DEFENSE,
NONDEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL,
NUCLEAR DISPOSAL.
WHAT WE'VE CUT, MR. CHAIRMAN,
ARE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE CUT.
WE'VE CUT FEDERAL RESEARCH ON
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE
ENERGY.
WE PROPOSE TO CUT FOSSIL ENERGY
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
YES, A REPUBLICAN IS HERE, MR.
CHAIRMAN, ARGUING THAT WE
SHOULD GET RID OF WHAT MY
COLLEAGUES ACROSS THE AISLE
WOULD CALL SUBSIDIES FOR BIG
WE'RE TRYING TO GET RID OF ALL
OF THE SUBSIDIES.
IMAGINE THAT.
A WORLD WHERE THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT DOESN'T ACTUALLY
SUBSIDIZE ENERGY PRODUCTION AT
ANY FASHION BUT THAT THE MARKET
TAKES CARE OF THE SUPPLY AND
THE DEMAND AND THE PRICES FOR
THOSE PRODUCTS.
WE ALSO GET RID OF THE --
EXCUSE ME, WE CUT ON THE APP
LASHAN COMMISSION, THE DENALI
COMMISSION, THE NORTHERN BORDER
REGIONAL COMMISSION, THE
SOUTHEAST CORRESPONDENCENT
REGIONAL COMMISSION.
SOME OF THOSE ARE PROBABLY IN
MY DISTRICT BUT WE PROBABLY
HAVE ENOUGH COMMISSIONS IN THIS
GOVERNMENT ALREADY.
MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS THE
REASONED AND A SENSIBLE
APPROACH TO TRY AND CUT AS MUCH
SPENDING AS WE POSSIBLY CAN,
ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF TODAY'S
C.B.O. REPORT THAT SAYS THE
DEBT SITUATION, THE DEBT
DIFFICULTIES THAT WE FACE ARE
EVEN WORSE THAN WE'VE BEEN
TALKING ABOUT FOR THE LAST 18
MOBBLETS IN THIS CONGRESS.
SO FOR THAT REASON, MR.
CHAIRMAN, I ASK FOR THE SUPPORT
FOR THIS AMENDMENT AND I ASK
THAT MY COLLEAGUES VOTE YEA.
WITH THAT I YIELD BACK THE
I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN
TIME.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM INDIANA RISE?
I RISE TO
SEEK OPPOSITION TO THE
AMENDMENT, MR. CHAIRMAN.
RECOGNIZED.
I RISE IN
OPPOSITION TO THE AMENDMENT.
OUR BILL ALREADY CUTS NEARLY $1
BILLION FROM THE PRESIDENT'S
REQUEST.
WE'RE BELOW 2009 LEVELS.
WE'RE ACTUALLY PRETTY CLOSE TO
2008 LEVELS AND THE LAST TIME I
CHECKED WE'RE IN THE YEAR 2012.
SPENDING LEVELS FOR NONSECURITY
RELATED ACCOUNTS ARE BROUGHT
DOWN BY MORE THAN $800 MILLION
FROM LAST YEAR'S LEVEL AND
WHILE DIFFICULT TRADEOFFS HAD
TO BE MADE TO GET TO THAT
LEVEL, OUR BILL DID THE HARD
WORK TO BALANCE OUR HIGHEST
PRIORITIES AND SERVE THE
NATION'S MOST PRESSING NEEDS.
UNFORTUNATELY THE AMENDMENT
PROPOSES AN ACROSS-THE-BOARD
CUT ON MANY PROGRAMS, NOT ALL
PROGRAMS, AS THE GENTLEMAN FROM
SOUTH CAROLINA STATES.
BUT ON MANY PROGRAMS THAT
ACTUALLY SERVE PRESSING NEEDS.
OUR BILL CUTS ENERGY EFFICIENCY
AND RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 24%,
BUT PRESERVES PROGRAMS THAT CAN
ADDRESS GAS PRICES AND HELP
KEEP MANUFACTURING JOBS HERE AT
THAT'S THE FOCUS OF THE BILL.
LOWER GAS PRICES IN THE FUTURE,
KEEP JOBS HERE AT HOME.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD JEOPARDIZE
THOSE OBJECTIVES.
OUR BILL FUNDS FOSSIL ENERGY
RESEARCH THAT ENSURES A SECURE
DOMESTIC SUPPLY OF ELECTRIC AND
LOWER GAS PRICES IN THE FUTURE.
THE AMENDMENT CUTS MANY OF THE
ACTIVITIES, MANY PROGRAMS.
OUR BILL FUNDS SCIENCE
RESEARCH, WHICH IS A KEY
COMPONENT OF KEEPING AMERICA
THE AMENDMENT WOULD DO SERIOUS
THE AMENDMENT EVEN CUTS FUNDS
TO THE OPERATION, TO OUR
STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE.
SEVERELY CURTAILING OUR
GOVERNMENT'S ABILITY TO RESPOND
TO REAL EMERGENCIES.
THESE ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE CUTS.
AND I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE
BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM INDIANA RISE?
I APPRECIATE THE
RECOGNITION AND RISE IN STRONG
OPPOSITION TO THE GENTLEMAN'S
AMENDMENT.
THE GENTLEMAN DURING HIS DEBATE