[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 33 (Wednesday, March 22, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H1200-H1222]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    OIL PRICE REDUCTION ACT OF 2000

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, 
I call up House Resolution 445 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 445

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 3822) to reduce, suspend, or terminate any 
     assistance under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the 
     Arms Export Control Act to each country determined by the 
     President to be engaged in oil price fixing to the detriment 
     of the United States economy, and for other purposes. The 
     first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. General 
     debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one 
     hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on International 
     Relations. After general debate the bill shall be considered 
     for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in 
     order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of 
     amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
     International Relations now printed in the bill, modified by 
     striking subsection 6(c). Each section of that amendment in 
     the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. No 
     amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     shall be in order except those printed in the portion of the 
     Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 
     of rule XVIII and except pro forma amendments for the purpose 
     of debate. Each amendment so printed may be offered only by 
     the Member who caused it to be printed or his designee and 
     shall be considered as read. The Chairman of the Committee of 
     the Whole may: (1) Postpone until a time during further 
     consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request for a 
     recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) reduce to five 
     minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any 
     postponed question that follows another electronic vote 
     without intervening business, provided that the minimum time 
     for electronic voting on the first in any series of questions 
     shall be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of consideration of 
     the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 
     the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
     adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House 
     on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the 
     bill or to the amendment in the nature of a substitute made 
     in order as original text. The previous question shall be 
     considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to 
     final passage without intervening motion except one motion to 
     recommit with or without instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Diaz-Balart) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost); 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 445 is a modified open rule providing 
for the consideration of H.R. 3822, the Oil Price Reduction Act 2000. 
The rule makes in order the Committee on International Relations 
amendment in the nature of a substitute now printed in the bill as an 
original bill for the purpose of amendment, modified by striking 
section 6(c).
  The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided 
between the chairman and the ranking minority member of the Committee 
on International Relations.
  Further, the rule provides the bill shall be open for amendment by 
section, and makes in order only those amendments preprinted in the 
Congressional Record, to be offered only by the Member who caused it to 
be printed or his designee, and each amendment shall be considered as 
read.
  In addition, the rule allows the Chairman of the Committee of the 
Whole to postpone votes during consideration of the bill and to reduce 
voting time to 5 minutes on votes following a 15-minute vote.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, the rule provides for one motion to recommit 
with or without instructions.
  Last Thursday an announcement was made advising Members of the 
preprinting requirements for amendments, and I believe that House 
Resolution 445 is a fair approach in order to provide a forum in which 
to debate the current situation regarding the rising price of oil and 
its causes. Because the bill is narrowly tailored and deals only with 
foreign and not domestic oil, it is important all Members have the 
opportunity to review amendments prior to their being offered in order 
to ensure that they are germane.
  I am sure all of us have been bothered, Mr. Speaker, by the high 
price of

[[Page H1201]]

fuel when we have gone to the pump to fill our automobile tanks in the 
past few weeks, and especially we have been disturbed to see the effect 
these oil price increases are having on low-income Americans and people 
trying to live within a family budget each week.
  Clearly, oil prices have almost tripled in the past year, and yet the 
administration failed to respond strongly enough to the OPEC production 
costs at the time of their institution. The Oil Price Reduction Act 
provides that it shall be the policy of the United States to consider 
the extent to which major net oil exporting countries engage in oil 
price-fixing to be an important determinant in the overall political, 
economic, and security relationship between these countries. It also 
provides that it shall be the policy of the United States to work 
multilaterally with other nations that are major oil importers to bring 
about the complete dismantlement of oil price-fixing arrangements.

                              {time}  1500

  In addition, the bill requires the President to report to Congress on 
the overall academic and security relationship between the United 
States and major oil exporting countries, and also how coordination 
among these countries with respect to oil production and pricing has 
affected the U.S. economy in global energy supplies; all the assistance 
programs under the 1961 Foreign Assistance Act and the 1975 Arms Export 
Control Act that are provided to oil-producing countries and which 
countries are engaged in oil price-fixing that harms the U.S. economy.
  Further, the bill requires the President after he submits his report 
to undertake a diplomatic campaign to attempt to persuade any country 
engaged in price-fixing that the current oil price levels are simply 
unsustainable and that they will negatively affect global economic 
growth rates in oil-consuming, as well as developing countries.
  The gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) of the Committee on 
International Relations introduced the Oil Price Reduction Act in 
response to concerns about rapidly rising oil prices and the role that 
the intentional increase in oil-producing OPEC countries may have 
played in this price increase, excessive price increase.
  This is an important first step, Mr. Speaker. Passing this bill today 
will send a message to the international community prior to Energy 
Secretary Richardson's meeting next week with OPEC members, that the 
Congress of the United States is serious about finding solutions to the 
problem of excessive fuel prices.
  I urge my colleagues to support the rule as well as to support the 
underlying legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the do-nothing Republican Congress has a plan for the 
run-up in gas prices: do nothing. That is right. For over 5 years, the 
Republican Congress has done nothing about energy.
  In the midst of runaway gas prices, the Republicans, apparently, do 
not want to do anything that might either in the short term or over the 
long term help American consumers or might have the effect of ensuring 
the national security of this great country of ours.
  Mr. Speaker, case in point: this rule and this bill do nothing, 
except perhaps allow the Republican majority to bluster and play 
bipartisan blame games. When the prices at the pump have reached a 
$1.60 and higher, the Republican leaderships rush to a gas station for 
a photo-op. Perhaps, my Republican colleagues think that casting 
aspersions on the Clinton administration in front of a gas pump will 
magically make the price of gasoline drop, because as far as I can see, 
press releases are all they are offering as a solution to the current 
dilemma.
  If the Republican majority really wanted to help American customers 
instead of taking partisan pot shots, the Committee on Rules would have 
crafted a rule that would allowed the House to consider some common 
sense and substantive amendments proposed by Democratic Members of this 
body.
  The Committee on Rules last night voted to deny the House the right 
to consider legislation which would extend the President's authority to 
use a Strategic Petroleum Reserve to respond to rising gasoline prices 
and heating oil shortages.
  The Committee on Rules Republicans voted to deny the House the 
opportunity to respond to the President's request that we create a 
Northeast storage facility for home heating oil.
  The Committee on Rules voted on a straight party line vote against an 
amendment that would have diverted domestic oil sales from Japan to the 
West Coast where gas prices are soaring to $2.50 a gallon and more.
  The Republicans on the Committee on Rules voted against an amendment 
providing for tax incentives to stabilize the domestic oil industry.
  Mr. Speaker, that the Committee on Rules Republican majority should 
vote to deny the House the right to consider amendments that might 
actually address the problem does not surprise me in the least. Since 
the Republicans took over this body 5 years ago, they have slashed 
funding for energy conservation programs by 62 percent. They have cut 
weatherization programs and have tried time and time again to eliminate 
the Low Income Housing Assistance Program, which is a lifeline for so 
many people in the Northeast in the winter months.
  But what is really unbelievable, Mr. Speaker, is the lack of action 
on legislation to reauthorize the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. In the 
midst of rising oil prices, the Republican majority has blithely 
ignored a tool the President can use to help ease oil prices in this 
country if production limits are not increased after OPEC meets next 
week.
  The Strategic Petroleum Reserve was created to protect our national 
security and our economy from foreign price and supply problems, but 
the Republican majority would rather blame the President for rising gas 
prices than give him the authority he needs to take remedial action.
  But what makes this whole exercise laughable, Mr. Speaker, is the 
fact that last night the Republican Members of the Committee on Rules 
did vote to accept an amendment to the rule. My colleague, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), offered a substitute to the rule 
which deleted the only section of H.R. 3822 which even appeared to be 
decisive.
  That section would have allowed the President to terminate foreign 
assistance, both economic and military, to any country engaging in oil 
price-fixing. The bill would not have required the President to do so, 
of course, but my Republican colleagues decided it was in their best 
interests to defang the already nearly toothless tiger that they had 
tottered out of the Committee on International Relations.
  This bill is a joke, Mr. Speaker. The Republican response to rising 
gas prices is laughable; but unfortunately, I do not think many 
Americans are laughing.
  Mr. Speaker, I intend to oppose the previous question on this rule. I 
would hope that every Member of this body is concerned about the 
failure of the Republican majority to face this situation squarely and 
forthrightly. And I hope that all of those Members will join me in 
voting no on the previous question so that the House might consider 
another substitute rule.
  My rule would allow the House to consider the common sense and 
practical amendments that were offered last night at the Committee on 
Rules but which were summarily denied consideration.
  I urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question to allow 
real solutions to a real problem.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I think it has become evident that one thing that is 
never in short supply on the other side of the aisle is partisanship. 
We are trying to get something serious done here today.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Goss), my distinguished colleague on the Committee on 
Rules.
  (Mr. GOSS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my distinguished colleague and friend, 
the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart) from the Committee on 
Rules,

[[Page H1202]]

for yielding me this time. I rise, obviously, in support of this very 
good rule and the underlying bill.
  Remembering the subject of the bill, I think that we have a good 
rule. It does not cover every possible problem we have with energy. But 
for the subject on the floor, it is an appropriate rule for the aspect 
of energy we are here to discuss.
  Frankly, we should not be here on this issue today. But we are here 
as a result of an ineffectual Clinton-Gore energy policy which has been 
very heavy on photo-ops, very heavy on grandstanding and very, very 
light in substance and has resulted in increased prices of gas at the 
service station for virtually every American.
  As the Energy Secretary's own point man freely admits, since March of 
1998, in testimony before one of our committees here when they were 
expressing concern about this, OPEC has instituted three tiers of 
production cuts, three. Three times this has happened. None of these 
cuts were met with any resistance from the Clinton-Gore team at that 
time. And only now is Secretary Richardson, who has publicly stated 
that he was asleep at the switch on this, only now is he trying to play 
catch-up with our friends in the Middle East and elsewhere.
  I wonder if Secretary Richardson knows how to leverage our awesome 
bargaining power with the Saudis, the Mexicans, the Venezuelans, and 
our other friendly oil producers in the world. After all, what have we 
done for the Saudis or the Mexicans lately?
  Mr. Speaker, it does not make much sense to the folks that I talk to 
in the town meetings and at the gas stations and out about in my 
district back home that it is our friends that are responsible for the 
historic increases at the pumps, that is the oil-producing nations.
  People in my district get even more agitated when I tell them that we 
are not going to be able to expect a tough executive branch response. 
We have not seen one for 2 years. While this has been happening, the 
Clinton-Gore administration has not been taking effective action.
  Managing our energy portfolio is appropriately an executive branch 
function. There is no congressional function that says we are in charge 
of the energy branch portfolio. I know President Clinton is busy in 
India today doing business for the United States of America, and I know 
Vice President Gore is focused on other matters. But I also know that 
Americans are at the gas station looking for lower gas prices, and they 
deserve them.
  The legislation of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) today is 
simply an attempt to prod the Clinton-Gore team into action on a matter 
of concern to most Americans. While that should not be necessary, I am 
hopeful that this effort will send a strong message to OPEC that when 
it comes to protecting Americans from arbitrary and unfair price hikes, 
not all branches of this Government are asleep at the wheel. In other 
words, this is a wake-up call.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Dingell).
  (Mr. DINGELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, this is a day when we appear to be quite 
determined to dress up nothing in a lot of finery and call it 
legislation.
  This is a piece of legislation which will do little or nothing. I 
intend to offer an amendment to it at the appropriate time which I hope 
will address some of the concerns that are held by most Americans, and 
that is an amendment which will extend the President's authority under 
EPCA, which will expire on the 31st of March, to operate and draw down 
as needed the strategic petroleum reserve.
  This is perhaps the only tool now readily available to the United 
States to address the problems of perturbations in the energy market 
and to see to it that we are able to calm a market which is subject to 
both overheating and enormous swings in the level of price. I hope my 
colleagues will support that amendment at the time that I do so.
  I would simply observe something which I think that this body should 
listen to. This is a letter from the executive office of the President, 
and I am reading the last paragraph:

       The administration also calls on the Congress to 
     immediately reauthorize the strategic petroleum reserve and 
     the international energy program at the Department of Energy. 
     This is necessary to ensure that the President maintains the 
     ability to use all available tools to respond to the needs of 
     the U.S. economy. Further, in order to reduce the likelihood 
     that future heating oil shortages will harm consumers, the 
     administration also calls on Congress to authorize the 
     creation of a home heating oil reserve in the Northeast with 
     an appropriate trigger that could supply additional heating 
     oil to market in the event of a supply shortage.

  I urge my colleagues to support these amendments and to recognize 
that, without these kinds of authorities, the President's ability to 
negotiate with foreign countries, particularly the energy-producing 
countries of OPEC and similar bodies, will be virtually nonexistent. 
Because, without these, his capacity to compel behavior by those 
countries or to ensure that there will be appropriate negotiations or 
that the negotiations will be backed up by the apparent ability of the 
United States to address the problems of supply and price.
  So I urge that these amendments be adopted. We consider perfecting 
this legislation and we pass legislation that, in fact, will accomplish 
something which will have merit and meaning and be of value to this 
country and something which will do credit to this body. I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from California (Mr.  Dreier), the chairman of the 
Committee on Rules.
  (Mr. DREIER asked for and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule. It is 
a modified open rule. The only reason it is modified is that we have a 
preprinting requirement, meaning that we will allow every Member to 
have an opportunity to see amendments that are printed in the Record. 
It is an open amendment, and for that reason I believe this deserves 
strong bipartisan support.
  Now, I will tell my colleagues that I am not one who regularly comes 
down here and enjoys pointing the finger of blame. But as I listen to 
my friend, the gentleman from Dallas, Texas (Mr. Frost), blame the 
increase in oil prices on the Republican Congress and the lack of 
action over the last 5 years, I have got to say that it has really 
happened for a couple of reasons which are unfortunate. We want to deal 
with them in a bipartisan way. But since the finger of blame has been 
pointed, I think that we need to responsibly look at exactly who really 
is responsible here. And that is the Clinton-Gore administration.

                              {time}  1515

  They have categorically failed the international leadership effort 
that was needed to convince our OPEC trading partners to stop their 
destabilizing action. I remember going back to the early part of what 
we now have to refer to, the 1990s, as the last decade, the early 1990s 
when we saw President George Bush put together this amazing 28-Nation 
coalition which allowed us to liberate the people of Kuwait from Saddam 
Hussein. We have obviously seen a failure of leadership when it comes 
to dealing with countries in that region. This foreign policy is very, 
very unfortunate and I believe has played a big role in getting us to 
where we are.
  I come from Southern California. I suspect that most people have 
heard of the Los Angeles area. We have a freeway system out there, 
great distances that we travel and gasoline is very expensive. I do not 
like seeing the prices increase myself or for the people whom I am 
honored to represent here. I think we need to do something about that. 
The blame that my friend from Dallas was trying to place on the 
shoulders of the Republican majority has actually been shouldered, I 
think responsibly, shouldered by the Secretary of Energy who said it is 
obvious that we were not prepared. It seems to me that the fact that 
Secretary Richardson courageously stood forward and basically indicated 
that they were asleep at the

[[Page H1203]]

switch on this is something that I congratulate him for taking the 
responsibility but they have taken the responsibility. So do not try to 
point the fingers at those of us here in this Republican Congress.
  The Vice President, as was said by my friend from Sanibel, is 
obviously engaged in a very vigorous campaign to succeed Mr. Clinton 
but if you go back to his book ``Earth in the Balance,'' he made it 
clear he cannot be too unhappy with what has been taking place here. He 
said, ``Higher taxes on fossil fuels is one of the first logical steps 
in changing our policies in a manner consistent with a more responsible 
approach to the environment.''
  I will say this, that I hope very much as our former colleague and 
very good friend Secretary Richardson prepares to meet with OPEC 
members, it is important that we here in the Congress send a message to 
the international community that oil price-fixing and other anti-free 
market practices that are detrimental to global economic growth and 
obviously very dangerous to the economic stability of developing 
nations around the world, that we address that.
  The gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) has come forward with 
responsible legislation. It is basically an open rule, a modified open 
rule. We should have it carry through with again strong bipartisan 
support. I believe the legislation should get that, too, to strengthen 
the administration as they move forward to try and address this 
problem.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson).
  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Speaker, what is hard to figure out is whether we 
should be happy that the majority Republicans want to do nothing and 
are succeeding because it seems if they try to do something, it would 
either be inconsequential or bad for the country. But it is clear 
whether we look at prescription drugs, whether we look at a patients' 
bill of rights, rational gun laws, education or energy, that there is a 
concerted effort to take no reasonable action. For 6 years, no effort 
on increasing the efficiency of automobiles. We cannot in the midst of 
this crisis get the majority to reauthorize the Strategic Petroleum 
Reserve. A few years ago, they wanted to dismantle it. Even in the 
midst of this crisis, they cannot get themselves together to bring a 
bill to the floor, and the rule prohibits us frankly from dealing with 
reestablishing the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
  So what are we doing here? Well, we are going to ask the President to 
study the matter, and when he finishes studying the matter, we want him 
to report to us and we want him to take strong, united, diplomatic 
action. Pick up the phone. Pick up the phone and call the White House. 
Frankly, they are doing diplomatic action. I do not think a lot of what 
they have done is enough. But for God's sakes, this Congress coming 
here with this bill today is an embarrassment. Why? You are against 
conservation, you are against alternative energy, you are against 
providing even the incentives for oil research and going after some of 
the small producing wells. You come here with a letter to the President 
of the United States. Maybe we should be happy that this Republican-
controlled Congress is do-nothing, in health care, in drugs, and now in 
energy.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Reynolds), a distinguished member of the Committee on 
Rules.
  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule. The reason 
we are here today is very simple. The Clinton-Gore administration was 
caught sleeping on the job. A year ago, OPEC nations cut production 
quotas by 2 million barrels a day. A year ago, oil-producing nations 
engaged in a deliberate and calculated effort to drive up energy costs 
in this country. A year ago, the Clinton-Gore administration did 
nothing. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson admits that they were, quote, 
napping. That is not a nap, that is a hibernation. From home heating to 
gasoline, consumers have been hit with double-digit increases in energy 
costs. In my own home area of western New York in the Finger Lakes, we 
have experienced how particularly hard hit the Northeast has been over 
the past several months. Our only hope is that now that the President 
has family living in upstate New York, he may be more sensitive to the 
needs of the Northeast.
  It is time for the Clinton-Gore administration to stand up for 
American consumers and working families by standing up to those nations 
engaged in price fixing. Finally, in the last year of this 
administration, it is time for the Clinton-Gore team offering up to the 
American people a plan for energy management rather than crisis 
management.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. Let us be very clear 
what is going on today. The Republicans are debating a press release. 
They are not debating a bill.
  Let me read their bill: Report on Diplomatic Efforts. Not later than 
120 days after the date of the enactment of this act, the President 
shall transmit to the Congress a report describing any diplomatic 
efforts undertaken in accordance with subsection A and the results 
achieved by those efforts.
  That is all we are debating today. That is it. This is a press 
release.
  Last night, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) came to the 
Committee on Rules and asked that an amendment be made in order to 
permit the President to release oil from the Strategic Petroleum 
Reserve after March 31. March 31, that is a week from this Friday. That 
is when the authority runs out under current law. The Republicans will 
not let that be voted on today. All they want to vote on is a press 
release. They do not want to vote on specific actions that could help 
American consumers.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
DeFazio).
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a sad day for the United States Congress. We are 
legislators. We could legislate today. We could deal with this issue. 
We could take concrete steps. In this piece of legislation, the 
Republicans are offering two points.
  The President shall undertake a concerted diplomatic campaign. That 
is the most important thing they are requiring. Two, he should take the 
necessary steps to begin negotiations.
  That is all this does. Diplomatic campaign and should begin 
negotiations. That is what they are doing. There was another section. 
It would have given the President the authority to reduce, suspend, or 
terminate assistance to these countries. We are giving foreign aid and 
military assistance to the very OPEC nations that are price gouging us.
  But the corporate sponsors of the Republican Party did not like that 
section and the Committee on Rules took it out. This bill could have 
done something, but now it will do nothing. The bill also could have 
allowed my amendment, take our Alaska oil and turn it back from Japan 
and China and ship it to the refineries that need oil on the west coast 
of the United States.
  That was the law of the land in America until the Republicans took 
control of Congress and they jammed through legislation at the behest 
of the oil industry to allow the export of oil from Alaska. The 
district of the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) could benefit 
from that oil. My district could benefit from that oil. But, no, they 
do not want to fly in the face of their campaign contributors, the oil 
companies, who are so generously supporting them and their presidential 
candidate.
  No, we would not want to take a concrete step here on the floor of 
the House and really do something. We are going to undertake a 
concerted diplomatic campaign and take the necessary steps to begin 
negotiations. Pretty pathetic for the majority party. I can support 
that, but I have already asked the President to do more, and they are 
not doing much down at the White House but they are even doing more 
than what the Republicans are asking.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  This legislation is sending a message to the international community 
that the Congress is serious about the fact that there is no one at the 
helm down the street, that there is a crisis, that oil price fixing has 
occurred and that that is being suffered by the American people. The 
consequences of that is suffered by the American people and what

[[Page H1204]]

we are seeing from the other side of the aisle is attack upon attack 
upon attack on this side of the aisle when we wanted to bring forth a 
bipartisan statement before Energy Secretary Richardson's trip in 
upcoming days to fortify his position before the international 
community and specifically the OPEC countries.
  Now, despite the unfortunate tactics that we are seeing from the 
other side of the aisle, we are going to continue to send a message; 
and we are going to say we know there is no one at the helm; we know 
there is no one at the helm. We know that in Colombia today there is 
over 50 percent of the population under narco-terrorists and this White 
House has just found out about it, and that is an oil-producing country 
right by the largest oil producing country in this hemisphere, 
Venezuela, and this White House has just found out about it, and yet we 
hear speaker after speaker after speaker come and talk against the 
majority in this country, when what we wanted to do and what we are 
intent on doing and will continue to do is to send a message to the 
international community that while there may be no one at the helm down 
the other side of Pennsylvania Avenue, this Congress, the sovereign 
Congress of the United States takes this issue seriously and is 
cognizant of the fact that it is unsupportable and condemnable that the 
American people are suffering every day when they have to go and 
purchase gasoline because of the lack of action and the lack of 
leadership of this presidency. That is what we are talking about here 
today.
  Now, what are we discussing at this very moment? My friend the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) got up and started reading some 
language from the bill. We are talking about a rule. We are talking 
about a rule that is bringing this underlying legislation to the floor. 
The rule says that any amendment is possible if you preprinted it and 
it is germane. I remember when we were in the minority here, when the 
Republicans were in the minority, how unusual it was to see open rules, 
to see rules where any Member could bring forth any amendment on any 
issue as long as it was germane. That is what we have here today, as 
long as you preprinted the amendment in the Congressional Record, in 
other words, given all of your colleagues prior notice of the fact that 
you seek to bring forth that amendment. That is what we are talking 
about now, about the rule. I wonder if there will be any discussion 
whatsoever about this rule. There may be, there may not be. As of now, 
what we have seen is total irrelevance.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt).
  Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and in support 
of the Oil Price Reduction Act. Let us turn back the hands of time to 
1978. Gas lines, high prices, President Carter gives us the typical 
liberal, big-government solution. More government, more programs that 
never get smaller and never go away. He forms the Department of Energy 
with the sole purpose of writing a national energy policy and imposing 
price and supply controls. The relief from high prices come when 
President Reagan finally rolls back the price and supply controls, but 
we still do not have an energy policy.
  What do we have? We have the Clinton-Gore administration taking 
millions of acres out of oil production up in Alaska. The gentleman 
from Oregon wonders how come there is no oil coming to his State. It is 
because the Clinton-Gore administration has taken it out of oil 
exploration. Number two, the Clinton-Gore administration increases 
regulations on existing oil producers.

                              {time}  1530

  Right now, if there is a dead bird found anywhere near an oil 
production unit in Kansas, the very person that is trying to provide us 
with energy to take our kids to school, to go to the grocery store, to 
go to work, could be fined up to $10,000 per dead bird no matter how 
come the bird has passed away, regardless of why the death occurred.
  Maybe that explains why before the Clinton-Gore administration we had 
30 rigs in Kansas searching for energy. Today we have 6. There, 
nationwide, are 450,000 stripper wells that could be producing energy 
for us. We have a self-inflicted energy problem and it has been 
inflicted by the Clinton-Gore administration.
  What we do is tax incentives for domestic energy production and to 
ease the regulations on energy productions.
  Third, we have failed to engage the OPEC nations that are actively 
conducting price-fixing. If these were U.S. companies, we would be 
prosecuting them for price-fixing under the antitrust laws, but instead 
we have failed to engage them.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a good rule. This bill is a good step in the 
right direction. I agree with the gentleman who spoke before who said 
it is not enough. I agree, it is not enough. We need to do something 
for our domestic oil production, but I think it is time to get the 
administration off dead center.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Speaker, my friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart), 
said this is an open rule; we can offer any amendment that is germane.
  There is not much that is germane to a press release, Mr. Speaker. 
That is the problem. If we want to offer something that is real, it is 
not germane to this press release.
  The previous speaker just talked about relief for stripper wells. 
Well, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sandlin) came up to the Committee 
on Rules and offered an amendment that would address the problem 
dealing with production from stripper wells and these folks would not 
make it in order.
  There is nothing germane to this press release other than rhetoric. 
So that is why an open rule for a press release really does not amount 
to very much, Mr. Speaker. We have to have real solutions, and those 
are the real solutions that were offered last night and one by one the 
Republicans voted five votes against, three votes in favor, of making 
any of those real solutions in order on the floor today.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. 
Larson).
  (Mr. LARSON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. LARSON. Mr. Speaker, the people in my district care neither about 
whether proposals are made by Democrats or Republicans. They, frankly, 
need help.
  I can only remind this Congress that Americans should not be forced 
to make a choice between putting food on their table, putting gas in 
their vehicle, or heating their homes. We owe it to the American people 
to include in this debate what we plan to do to provide relief for 
those families and small businesses affected by the recent spike in oil 
prices and how we are going to prevent this from occurring again.
  I applaud the efforts of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), 
but obviously that bill has been neutered, but it is clear the foreign 
and domestic sides of this issue are inextricably tied and linked.
  I urge my colleagues to vote against the previous question and 
against this rule so that my colleagues and I can offer amendments to 
address this crisis.
  The foreign and domestic sides of this debate are inextricably 
linked. I urge my colleagues to vote against this rule so that my 
colleagues and I can offer our amendments and we can have a real debate 
about helping people suffering the effects of this crisis. Relief for 
our constituents should not be silenced on a technicality.
  Mr. Speaker, while I applaud this Congress for finally raising the 
oil price issue on the floor, I am forced to rise today in opposition 
to this rule on H.R. 3288, the Oil Price Reduction Act. Unfortunately, 
this rule does not make in order several amendments proposed by my 
colleagues and me that would also address this important issue.
  While the underlying legislation claims provide penalties for foreign 
countries engaging in oil related anti-competitive activities, my 
colleagues and I have been blocked from raising the issue of support 
for the great number of Americans affected by this activity.
  Specifically, my amendment would establish a trigger mechanism to 
force the President to investigate potential price fixing, and make a 
decision about whether or not to release the SPR if crude oil prices 
stay above $25 per barrel for two consecutive weeks, and make that 
decision accountable to Congress with appropriate oversight by the 
Commerce Committee.
  This amendment is based on legislation I introduced earlier, H.R. 
3543, the Oil Price

[[Page H1205]]

Safeguard Act, that already has 46 bipartisan cosponsors from across 
the country. My colleague Mr. Sanders has another equally important 
amendment that I support that would establish a home heating oil 
reserve in the Northeast.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Diaz-Balart) for yielding to me this time and commend the Committee on 
Rules for improving this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I do not have a problem with the rule. I think it should 
be supported, but I do have a problem with any part of the bill that 
tries to blame others for the problems we have inflicted on ourselves.
  I would remind my colleagues that it was not OPEC who raised taxes on 
fuel so that now Americans pay 18 cents for every gallon of gasoline, 
plus State taxes added on top of that to nearly 40 cents a gallon.
  It was not OPEC which imposed a windfall profits tax on the domestic 
energy industry, that took $78 billion out of that industry and cost 
thousands and thousands of jobs.
  It was not OPEC which vetoed the 1999 tax bill that included several 
modest provisions to try to enhance domestic exploration and 
production.
  It is not OPEC that continues the extensive regulations that 
increases the cost of production on domestic producers and results in 
thousands of wells being shut down every year.
  It is also not OPEC that prevents us from exploring and drilling in 
ANWR when ANWR itself provided enough oil to the United States as we 
import from Saudi Arabia over a 30-year period, and it is certainly not 
OPEC that hinders the distribution of natural gas to the Northeast 
where those folks are paying more than they should to heat their homes.
  It has not been OPEC that has prevented us from developing a national 
energy policy.
  Mr. Speaker, I think it is kind of like we have fashioned a noose and 
put it around our own neck and given OPEC the other end of the rope. It 
should not surprise us that they want to jerk the rope every once in 
awhile.
  The only way out of this is to take our neck out of the noose, and we 
can only do that by increasing the production domestically of oil and 
gas and having greater use of natural gas here at home.
  There are a number of good proposals that have been made to increase 
marginal well production, increase exploration, increase domestic 
production. We have to have a national energy policy from the 
administration to get that done.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) 
actually has made some very good points. I would remind him that the 
Republicans on the Committee on Rules did not make in order any 
amendments to do any of the things that he is suggesting last night 
either.
  If the gentleman from Texas wants to have a vote on those type 
matters, he could have come to the Committee on Rules. My guess is the 
Committee on Rules would have rejected his amendments just as they 
rejected all the other amendments that were offered. And what did the 
Republicans on the Committee on Rules bring forward? A press release.
  I wish the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) had come forward and 
asked for votes on some of those matters. It would have been 
interesting to have a debate on some of those on this floor but the 
Committee on Rules did not make any of his proposals in order last 
night, either. That is why this is a terrible, terrible rule the way it 
is crafted.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. 
Sanders).
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this rule. 
This bill theoretically is supposed to deal with the high price of oil. 
Unfortunately, it does not do that but it should do that.
  In my rural State and all over this country, people are paying 
astronomically high prices for the fuel that they need to get to work 
and to do the things that they have to do, but unfortunately this 
legislation does not address that issue.
  As the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) just indicated, last night at 
the Committee on Rules a number of people from both political parties 
went before the committee and proposed different ideas in order to 
discuss the issue and resolve the issue as to how we can lower fuel 
prices in the United States, but not one of those amendments was 
allowed on the floor to debate.
  I had an amendment which is essentially the legislation that I have 
offered which now has 94 cosponsors, including many Republicans, which 
is now supported by the White House, which suggests that in the 
Northeast we should have a home heating oil reserve so that when 
production is cut back we can at least draw on something at lower 
prices to make sure that we do not go through another winter that we 
just went through where the price of home heating oil zoomed upwards.
  This is a sensible proposal. It would have the impact of lowering 
home heating oil for millions of homeowners throughout the Northeast. 
Why spread support?
  Yet we could not get that bill on the floor for discussion or debate 
this afternoon.
  Furthermore, many of us believe that, in fact, unlike what the 
previous speaker just indicated, that we do have a problem. Some of us 
do believe that OPEC bears some of the responsibility for the current 
crisis. Let us all remember that 9 years ago, it was American 
servicemen who brought back to power the emirs in Kuwait, who protected 
the royal family of Saudi Arabia and some of us have a problem with 
those folks colluding in what is very clearly a violation of any sense 
of free trade to limit production to force oil prices up in this 
country, and we think, in fact, and I say this as not a fan of the WTO, 
that what they have done is in clear violation of WTO rules.
  We wanted to discuss that issue, but we did not have that 
opportunity. Some of us think that the President should go today to the 
strategic petroleum reserve, withdraw oil from that in order to bring 
down the prices. Good debate. We are not going to have an opportunity 
to debate that issue as well.
  In other words, there is a whole lot to discuss. We are not going to 
have the opportunity to have that discussion. Let us vote no on this 
rule.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we have an interesting dilemma always in the Committee 
on Rules when we seek to be fair, and we do a good job of it under the 
gentleman from California (Chairman Dreier). Some Members, as we have 
seen, want us to do more. Some want us to do less. One example is the 
distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton).
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Barton).
  (Mr. BARTON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the distinguished 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart) and the Committee on Rules for 
this rule. They have improved the bill. Unfortunately, they did not 
quite improve it enough. They did not kill it entirely, but the rule is 
a fair rule. It is an open rule if the amendment was pre-printed in the 
report. I will be on the floor speaking against many amendments that 
were not, raising points of order.
  The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley) and I asked that the bill be 
jointly referred to my committee and my subcommittee, the Subcommittee 
on Energy and Power of the Committee on Commerce, so we could do many 
of the things that Members have been coming to the floor talking about 
with such emotion. Unfortunately, that was not made in order so we have 
to deal with the issue before us.
  I want to point out a few basic facts in the one minute that I have 
left. First of all, the price of oil is going down. The New York 
market, spot market today, is $27.50 a barrel. It was $32.42 a barrel 
about a week ago, so it has fallen about 22 percent.
  We expect when OPEC meets in Vienna next Monday, which I asked to go 
to take a group of Congressmen on a bipartisan basis, and the Secretary 
of Energy said I should not go, just to give that little fact, we think 
they are

[[Page H1206]]

going to announce increased production quotas and that the price will 
fall further.
  I also want to point out that the underlying theme of this bill is 
that somehow if we rattle our saber the world will quake in fear.
  Let me point out two facts. The United States has 21 billion barrels 
of proven reserve out of the 1,033,000,000. That is about 2 percent. We 
produce about 8\1/2\ million barrels a day. We import about 8 million 
barrels a day.
  The amount of foreign aid and military aid that we give to the OPEC 
countries is less than $200 million; $197.9 million. That is one day's 
imports, less than one day's imports.
  This bill, even if it were to pass and have teeth, would do nothing 
but alienate our allies.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  Mr. Speaker, I would commend the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) 
who just spoke. It is very clear this legislation should have been 
referred to his committee so that at least we could have something real 
rather than this matter before us which really is an empty vessel.
  I wish the House leadership had acceded to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) and referred it to the committee 
where it should have been in the first place.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. 
Thurman).
  Mrs. THURMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am going to call this the stay tuned 
rule, and I call it the stay rule because we are talking about this 
being an open rule, pre-printed amendments and we go on about that.
  The problem is that what is going to happen in the next hour or so is 
we are all going to get up and we are going to offer our amendments, 
and we are going to be told that they are nongermane; that they are not 
and will not work within this piece of legislation.
  Well, that is fine, except for the fact that I will agree with my 
colleagues that we should have gone to committee to talk about these 
issues because we all feel passionately about it.
  I do not think anybody on this floor wants to go home and face angry 
people about the prices in this country. We know what it is costing 
them. We know what it is costing our senior citizens. We know what it 
is costing to get goods to service.

                              {time}  1545

  We understand that. There is nobody that feels as passionately about 
that as any of us here in Congress. But the fact of the matter is, you 
know, the last crisis we had was 20 years ago; and we have had 
opportunities over the past 20 years to try to solve these problems.
  There are pieces of legislation that have been introduced in this 
Congress that have been introduced in the last couple of Congresses. I 
am just going to bring one to you that I think needs some attention and 
has needed some attention and has a bipartisan caucus in this Congress, 
and that is for renewable energies.
  We have got to look at making energy-efficient technology more 
attractive. We have a tax bill, an incentive bill, a $3.6 billion tax 
incentive that would in fact do that. We actually put it before the 
committee last night.
  Again, I am going to tell you, stay tuned, because when I offer it in 
the next hour or so, I am going to be told it is nongermane. But it 
would in fact do what we have all talked about over the years. Let us 
look at wind power, biomass. Why are we not looking at how and what 
best incentives we can give to our families and our businesses and 
reduce energy costs. I am talking about tax credits.
  You will hear more about this, Mr. Speaker. But I just want you to 
know, stay tuned.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham).
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, higher fuel prices have some common 
denominators: diplomatic efforts, foreign policy, support of the 
military, environmental extremists.
  First of all I would ask you to look at Ronald Reagan. Strong 
diplomacy, strong foreign policy, strong on the military, and a 
conservationist.
  Let us go to Jimmy Carter. Look at the long gas lines we had with a 
weak diplomatic effort, even weaker foreign policy. He destroyed the 
military, an extremist on the environmental scene. We had long gas 
lines.
  Let us look at George Bush, Sr. Remember Desert Storm where we 
supported OPEC, and what happened to the fuel crisis?
  Now let us go to the Clinton-Gore administration. Weak foreign policy 
in China, Kosovo, Sudan, Mexico, and the Spratleys.
  I take a look at the presidential candidates that we have coming up. 
Who is going to be strong on the military? Who is going to be strong on 
foreign policy? Who is going to be strong in a conservationist versus 
an environmentalist extremist?
  But the bottom line is, who is hurt from this? Our truckers are 
having to stall their trucks. People and goods are going up. The folks 
that you fight for for LIHEAP in the Northeast, the higher costs.
  But how dare Saudi Arabia, how dare Kuwait and Qatar, after we had 
men and women die for them. Yet the President has not had a foreign 
policy. That is what we are asking the President to do. We feel that 
there has been a weak foreign policy and even weaker support of the 
military. Our allies laugh at us.
  If you look at the DNC and the China policy, from giving coal, giving 
coal to Riady and cancelling Utah, and guess where they have that 
produced? In China. Look at NAFTA.
  I would tell the gentleman that weak foreign policy, weak military, 
is not going to hack it; and we want the President to report on what he 
is going to do to change these around, because he has not done it so 
far.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Oregon (Ms. Hooley).
  (Ms. HOOLEY of Oregon asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend her remarks.)
  Ms. HOOLEY of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to 
this rule. As a cosponsor of H.R. 3822, I agree that we need to engage 
in more forceful diplomacy with OPEC. However, this rule eliminates the 
section of the bill that authorizes the President to suspend foreign 
military and economic assistance to OPEC countries. That makes no sense 
to me. Getting tough with OPEC without touching their foreign aid is a 
little bit like dangling that carrot without a stick.
  Mr. Speaker, there is no question that we are being taken to the 
cleaners by OPEC. In the last 15 months this cartel has made a 
concerted effort, regardless of our protests, to undermine the global 
supply of oil, with no end in sight. It is time for Congress to act, 
not to pass a bill that merely instructs the President to conduct 
additional negotiations.
  I cannot think of a better tool to leverage OPEC into boosting oil 
production than leveraging our foreign aid. Make no mistake about it, 
we send a lot of money and tens of thousands of young Americans to 
preserve the stability in the Persian Gulf every year. I am tired of 
waiting for the oil prices to drop to a reasonable level. If OPEC wants 
to play hard ball, we should too. I urge my colleagues to oppose this 
rule and support the original intent of H.R. 3822.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Bilbray).
  Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Speaker, let me point out that I am supporting this 
rule. I know my colleagues will find excuses to vote against it, but it 
is the beginning of the dialogue. It is not an end-all. You know it is 
not going to be the end-all. But we need to have a dialogue about the 
fact that the energy issue has not gotten its fair share of time, and 
it has not gotten its fair share of attention.
  My colleagues may want to say it has not gotten enough in the House 
of Representatives; but let us face it, it has not been a priority at 
the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue either. I think both sides can say 
there is more we need to do, and we need to be more comprehensive.
  I ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, you have to admit 
that this week, when the administration announces that it is going to 
pull the trade embargo off of Iran and then announce they are going to 
do it for caviar and Persian rugs, but not for oil, you have got to 
say, now, wait a

[[Page H1207]]

minute. No matter whether Democrat or Republican, you have to say, what 
are the priorities of our trade negotiators, what are the priorities of 
our foreign policy, when we say we are going to announce to the 
American people, Don't worry, the Persian rugs and the caviar is on its 
way, but the oil is going to continue to be under injunction, under 
restriction.
  Let me just say, can we at least admit that when the administration 
goes and talks about what they are going to allow Americans to trade in 
and what we are going to allow into the United States, that it is kind 
of ridiculous at this time and place that we are allowing caviar and 
Persian rugs and not oil?
  I think all of us want to say we represent the working people of 
America. Here is a place where the administration and Congress can come 
together and say, doggone it, the American people need affordable oil 
more than any caviar and they need Persian rugs. Now, I do not know who 
lobbied the administration for this. I do not know who said this.
  You can say all you want about campaign contributions on either side 
of the aisle. I do not know where this priority came from. But I would 
ask both of us, Democrats and Republicans, to ask the administration to 
reconsider their priorities when they are talking about what the 
American people need.
  All I have got to say to my colleagues from all over this country, 
you sit here and complain about the price of gasoline. California has 
been putting up with this way too long, and we have been asking for 5 
years for relief. Why do you not join all of us together to address the 
issue.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Speaker, I find this whole thing kind of baffling, quite frankly. 
If the Members on the other side wanted to have a press conference 
bashing the President, why did they not go back to a gas station or why 
did they not go up to the press gallery? Why are they taking the time 
of the House to do this, rather than voting on legislation that means 
something?
  This is an interesting waste of our time this afternoon. The 
Committee on Rules has been upstairs trying to fashion a rule for the 
budget. Why do we not spend our time dealing with the budget of the 
United States? Why do we not spend our time with actual legislation, 
rather than coming down here and giving speeches and not legislating?
  That is all this is. That is all we are doing today. We are not 
passing anything or considering anything that makes any difference at 
all, that has any force of law. It just makes my friends on the other 
side feel good so they can come down to the floor of the House and 
attack the President of the United States.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Inslee).
  (Mr. INSLEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, I must reluctantly oppose this rule because 
it is a monument to inaction. It guarantees inaction on Alaska oil for 
Americans, it guarantees inaction for sanctions against countries that 
are using monopolistic policies against us, and, one you have not heard 
today, it guarantees inaction on improving oil tanker safety.
  Let me share with you some bad news about oil tanker safety that 
occurred about a week ago. About a week ago the U.S. Supreme Court 
knocked a big hole in our national and State ability to guarantee oil 
tanker safety, because in a ruling involving the State of Washington 
the Supreme Court said that States, including the State of Washington, 
could not include very common sense environmental provisions for their 
oil tankers.
  In Washington we had a provision that had a real common sense rule. 
It said you had to have somebody that could speak English on the bridge 
of a supertanker when you ply the waters of the State of Washington. 
Common sense? Legal? According to the Supreme Court, no. We attempted 
to fix that by an amendment that we will not be able to offer, blocked 
by this rule, which will guarantee inaction. I would urge my colleagues 
to join me in future efforts to plug that hole in our safety net, to 
allow safe environmental measures on oil tankers.
  Let me just close by a story from Winston Churchill, a good Tory 
conservative, who in World War II had a little 3 by 5 card on his desk. 
It was sort of his rule for World War II. It said ``action this day.''
  This rule guarantees a continuation of the policies of this year, 
which is inaction this year. Let us defeat this rule and get some 
action on this issue.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert).
  (Mr. BOEHLERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the 
bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule and in strong 
support of the bill offered by my colleague from New York, Mr. Gilman.
  The citizens in my district and across the Northeast have struggled 
this winter to pay for their heating bills because of the extraordinary 
recent spikes in the price of home heating oil. The price of diesel 
fuel rose sharply, too, delivering a severe economic blow to farmers, 
truckers, and businesses. It's been a rough winter for the Northeast.
  Unfortunately, it looks like we're not in the clear yet. Gasoline 
prices are steadily rising and experts predict steeper prices yet 
during the peak driving season this summer, making this winter's crisis 
seem, in the words of one expert, ``like a cakewalk'' by comparison.
  Are these exorbitant energy prices simply the outcome of free market 
forces, the perpetual balancing of supply and demand? No. The United 
States is being held hostage by oil producing countries--many of whom 
have accepted generous U.S. assistance in the past. These same 
countries have colluded to slash oil production, distort the market, 
and drive up the price of oil, which has climbed to over $30 a barrel, 
up from $12 a barrel around this time last year.
  When oil producing countries engage in international price-fixing 
activities, when they manipulate the price of oil on the world market 
to the detriment of the U.S. economy, when American taxpayers are 
directly hurt by their anti-competitive activities, Americans should 
not have to send their hard-earned taxpayer dollars overseas to help 
those very same countries.
  I support the bill that would make this our policy. I support the 
rule, and I urge my colleagues to support them both as well.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot).
  Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Gilman), the chairman of the Committee on International Relations, 
for his leadership on this important issue. I rise in support of the 
Oil Price Reduction Act.
  Let us face it, the Clinton Administration has been asleep at the 
switch. Last month the administration's point man on the fuel crisis, 
Energy Secretary Bill Richardson, said, ``It is obvious that the 
Federal Government was not prepared. We were caught napping. We got 
complacent.''
  Complacent indeed. While the Clinton administration was napping over 
the last 12 months, the price of crude oil has tripled, and the 
American people were paying the price. That price continues to rise 
every day.
  This legislation has been drafted to assist the administration in its 
negotiations with those nations who have deliberately damaged the 
American economy by engaging in crude oil price-fixing. Hopefully, 
passage of the Oil Price Reduction Act will send a wake-up call to the 
slumbering Clinton administration and a strong message to those nations 
whose business practices are harming the American economy. I urge my 
colleagues to support this legislation.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  Mr. Speaker, I guess the preceding speaker must have missed what the 
Committee on Rules did last night. What the preceding speaker was 
asking was that a message be sent to the OPEC nations. The Committee on 
Rules deleted that message from this bill last night.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maine, Mr. 
Baldacci.

[[Page H1208]]

  Mr. BALDACCI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for his 
leadership and to try as hard as he did in trying to make sure that 
this bill was much more comprehensive than what it has before us.
  I oppose this rule. It is not an open rule. It allows for points of 
order to be made against amendments that we offer.
  We in the Northeast have been suffering with a heating oil shortage. 
We have been suffering as far as higher prices and trying to make sure 
people could afford to be able to stay in their homes, then to have it 
translated to a gasoline price spike, and to see how people who are 
having a hard time getting back and forth to work.
  Maine is a rural State. We do not have mass transit. Energy issues 
are important to us. Not to be able to allow amendments that dealt with 
energy conservation, weatherization, not to deal with issues that dealt 
with the heating oiling reserve so we would not be confronted with this 
problem again, is again I believe not being very responsive.
  It is very unfortunate that the majority has not allowed for these 
amendments to be made in order. It is very unfortunate that we have not 
been able to deal with this very serious matter which people in Maine 
and the Northeast are feeling the pinch of and are depending upon their 
representatives to work together to come up with some comprehensive 
energy policy and not some weak study which leaves it up to whoever, we 
do not know who it leaves it up to, to be responsive to the Congress.
  We have got to get off foreign oil dependence. This legislation does 
not do anything about that. The leadership on the other side has cut 
fuel efficiency standards, they have cut energy conservation, they have 
cut research and development, and they even wanted to abolish the 
Department of Energy. What kind of an answer is that to the American 
public that is wondering what kind of future there is going to be for 
us, and to making sure we are not being held hostage to any foreign 
country.
  Nothing in this legislation is going to deal with this kind of thing. 
We have got to be able to work together to come up with a bipartisan 
comprehensive approach that deals with both the short-term problem and 
also the long-term problem, because the sequels to this energy 
situation do not get any better than the original movie.

                              {time}  1600

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I would inquire of the distinguished 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) if he has any remaining speakers.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, we have one remaining speaker, and then I 
will close.
  I would inquire of the Chair how much time remains.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Frost) has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining; the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Diaz-Balart) has 2 minutes remaining.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Hastings).
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Texas for yielding me this time.
  I wanted to take a moment today to express my displeasure with the 
fact that the Committee on Rules refused to waive points of order 
against all Democratic amendments to this bill, including mine. Had we 
been able to consider my amendment, we would be discussing the merits 
of temporarily suspending a 24.4 percent gasoline Federal tax on diesel 
fuel.
  I drafted this repeal in the diesel tax first as a freestanding bill 
and then as an amendment to this bill because I was hopeful that this 
body would be inclined to consider the role of the Federal Government 
in protecting American consumers from a small and manipulative price-
gouging cartel, many Members of which are U.S. allies and recipients of 
our foreign aid largesse.
  While I am disappointed that we will not consider my amendment today, 
I do encourage the Clinton administration to aggressively push the OPEC 
members to increase production, and at the same time I urge my 
colleagues that we reexamine our national energy strategy so that we 
will not find ourselves hostage to foreign producers ever again.
  It is disingenuous for someone to come here and argue that nothing is 
being done at this point.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining 30 seconds.
  Mr. Speaker, I am inserting into the Record at this point the 
amendments I will offer if the previous question is defeated.

  Previous Question for H. Res.--H.R. 3822 Oil Price Reduction Act of 
                                  2000

       At the end of the resolution add the following new 
     sections:
       ``Sec. 2. Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
     resolution, it shall be in order to consider, without 
     intervention of any points of order, the amendments offered 
     to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     printed in section 3 of this resolution. Each amendment may 
     be offered only by the proponent specified in section 3 or a 
     designee, shall be considered as read and shall be debatable 
     for 10 minutes, equally divided between the proponent or an 
     opponent.
       ``Sec. 3. The amendment described in section 2 are as 
     follows:

                               H.R. 3822

                       Offered By: Mr. Gejdenson

       Amendment No. 1: Page 8, after line 2, insert the following 
     (and redesignate the subsequent section accordingly):

     SEC. 7. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS.

       It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) using authority under existing law, directly through 
     time exchanges (or ``swaps'') or through other means, the 
     President and the Secretary of Energy should draw down the 
     Strategic Petroleum Reserve in an economically feasible 
     manner and to a responsible degree, to combat unfair foreign 
     trade practices of OPEC and alleviate the severely 
     deleterious consequences to people and businesses in the 
     United States that those practices have caused; and
       (2) the President and the Secretary of Energy should 
     prepare for future threats to the economy and energy supply 
     of the United States by developing methods to--
       (A) draw down the Strategic Petroleum Reserve quickly when 
     needed; and
       (B) increase the quantity of crude oil in the Strategic 
     Petroleum Reserve over time in an economically reasonable 
     manner.

                               H.R. 3822

                       Offered By: Mr. Gejdenson

       Amendment No. 2: Page 8, after line 2, insert the following 
     (and redesignate the subsequent section accordingly):

     SEC. 7. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS.

       It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) using authority under existing law, directly through 
     time exchanges (or ``swaps'') or through other means, the 
     President and the Secretary of Energy should draw down the 
     Strategic Petroleum Reserve in an economically feasible 
     manner and to a responsible degree, to combat unfair foreign 
     trade practices of OPEC and alleviate the severely 
     deleterious consequences to people and businesses in the 
     United States that those practices have caused;
       (2) the President and the Secretary of Energy should 
     prepare for future threats to the economy and energy supply 
     of the United States by developing methods to--
       (A) draw down the Strategic Petroleum Reserve quickly when 
     needed; and
       (B) increase the quantity of crude oil in the Strategic 
     Petroleum Reserve over time in an economically reasonable 
     manner; and
       (3) Congress should immediately pass, and the President 
     should sign into law, legislation to reauthorize the Energy 
     Policy and Conservation Act and extend the President's 
     authority to release oil from the Strategic Petroleum 
     Reserve.

                               H.R. 3822

                        Offered By: Mr. Sanders

       Amendment No. 3: Page 8, after line 2, insert the 
     following:
       (d) Leverage To Succeed in Diplomatic Efforts To End Price 
     Fixing.--In order to increase the chances of diplomatic 
     efforts succeeding to bring about the complete dismantlement 
     of international oil price fixing, the President shall 
     immediately enter into agreements with members of the oil 
     industry for the swap of crude oil from the Strategic 
     Petroleum Reserve for both crude oil and 6,700,000 barrels of 
     home heating oil at a later date. Such arrangements shall 
     provide that--
       (1) when the price of crude oil drops below $25 per barrel 
     for a period of two consecutive weeks, the oil industry shall 
     replenish crude oil to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve; and
       (2) when the price of heating oil drops below $1.00 per 
     gallon for a period of two consecutive weeks, the oil 
     industry shall provide the President with 6,700,000 barrels 
     of home heating oil for the purposes of establishing a Home 
     Heating Oil Reserve.

     Once the President starts receiving heating oil pursuant to 
     such agreements, the President shall create a heating oil 
     reserve containing 2,000,000 barrels of heating oil in leased 
     storage facilities in Albany, New York, the New York Harbor 
     area, or any other appropriate location in the Northeast. The 
     President shall deposit the remaining 4,700,000 barrels of 
     heating oil received pursuant to such agreements in one of 
     the Strategic Petroleum Reserve caverns. The President shall 
     immediately draw down the Heating Oil Product Reserve 
     (consisting of home

[[Page H1209]]

     heating oil received pursuant to agreements under this 
     subsection) only when fuel oil prices in any region of the 
     United States rise sharply because of international oil price 
     fixing or any other anticompetitive activity, during a 
     national or regional fuel oil shortage, or during periods of 
     national or regional extreme winter weather. There are 
     authorized to be appropriated $25,000,000 to the Secretary of 
     Energy for the period encompassing fiscal years 2000 through 
     2019 for the purposes of carrying out this subsection.

                               H.R. 3822

                        Offered By: Mr. Baldacci

       Amendment No. 5: At the end of the bill insert the 
     following new sections:

     SEC. 8. CREDIT FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING 
                   HOMES.

       (a) In General.--Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     nonrefundable personal credits) is amended by inserting after 
     section 25A the following new section:

     ``SEC. 25B. ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING HOMES.

       ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--In the case of an individual, 
     there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by 
     this chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to 20 
     percent of the amount paid or incurred by the taxpayer for 
     qualified energy efficiency improvements installed during 
     such taxable year.
       ``(b) Limitations.--
       ``(1) Maximum credit.--The credit allowed by this section 
     with respect to a dwelling shall not exceed $2,000.
       ``(2) Prior credit amounts for taxpayer on same dwelling 
     taken into account.--If a credit was allowed to the taxpayer 
     under subsection (a) with respect to a dwelling in 1 or more 
     prior taxable years, the amount of the credit otherwise 
     allowable for the taxable year with respect to that dwelling 
     shall not exceed the amount of $2,000 reduced by the sum of 
     the credits allowed under subsection (a) to the taxpayer with 
     respect to the dwelling for all prior taxable years.
       ``(c) Carryforward of Unused Credit.--If the credit 
     allowable under subsection (a) exceeds the limitation imposed 
     by section 26(a) for such taxable year reduced by the sum of 
     the credits allowable under subpart A of part IV of 
     subchapter A (other than this section), such excess shall be 
     carried to the succeeding taxable year and added to the 
     credit allowable under subsection (a) for such taxable year.
       ``(d) Qualified Energy Efficiency Improvements.--For 
     purposes of this section, the term `qualified energy 
     efficiency improvements' means any energy efficient building 
     envelope component, and any energy efficient heating, 
     cooling, or water heating appliance, the installation of 
     which, by itself or in combination with other such components 
     or appliances, is certified to improve the annual energy 
     performance of the existing home by at least 30 percent, if--
       ``(1) such component or appliance is installed in or on a 
     dwelling--
       ``(A) located in the United States, and
       ``(B) owned and used by the taxpayer as the taxpayer's 
     principal residence (within the meaning of section 121),
       ``(2) the original use of such component or appliance 
     commences with the taxpayer, and
       ``(3) such component or appliance reasonably can be 
     expected to remain in use for at least 5 years.

     Such certification shall be made by the contractor who 
     installed such improvements, a local building regulatory 
     authority, or a qualified energy consultant (such as a 
     utility or an accredited home energy rating system provider).
       ``(e) Special Rules.--
       ``(1) Tenant-stockholder in cooperative housing 
     corporation.--In the case of an individual who is a tenant-
     stockholder (as defined in section 216) in a cooperative 
     housing corporation (as defined in such section), such 
     individual shall be treated as having paid his tenant-
     stockholder's proportionate share (as defined in section 
     216(b)(3)) of the cost of qualified energy efficiency 
     improvements made by such corporation.
       ``(2) Condominiums.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of an individual who is a 
     member of a condominium management association with respect 
     to a condominium which he owns, such individual shall be 
     treated as having paid his proportionate share of the cost of 
     qualified energy efficiency improvements made by such 
     association.
       ``(B) Condominium management association.--For purposes of 
     this paragraph, the term `condominium management association' 
     means an organization which meets the requirements of 
     paragraph (1) of section 528(c) (other than subparagraph (E) 
     thereof) with respect to a condominium project substantially 
     all of the units of which are used as residences.
       ``(f) Basis Adjustment.--For purposes of this subtitle, if 
     a credit is allowed under this section for any expenditure 
     with respect to any property, the increase in the basis of 
     such property which would (but for this subsection) result 
     from such expenditure shall be reduced by the amount of the 
     credit so allowed.
       ``(g) Application of Section.--Subsection (a) shall apply 
     to qualified energy efficiency improvements installed during 
     the period beginning on January 1, 2000, and ending on 
     December 31, 2004.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Subsection (c) of section 23 of such Code is amended by 
     striking ``and section 1400C'' and inserting ``and sections 
     25B and 1400C''.
       (2) Subparagraph (C) of section 25(e)(1) of such Code is 
     amended by striking ``and 1400C'' and inserting ``, 25B, and 
     1400C''.
       (3) Subsection (d) of section 1400C of such Code is amended 
     by inserting ``and section 25B'' after ``other than this 
     section''.
       (4) Subsection (a) of section 1016 of such Code is amended 
     by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (26), by striking 
     the period at the end of paragraph (27) and inserting ``; 
     and'', and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(28) to the extent provided in section 25B(f), in the 
     case of amounts with respect to which a credit has been 
     allowed under section 25B.''.
       (5) The table of sections for subpart A of part IV of 
     subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by 
     inserting after the item relating to section 25A the 
     following new item:

``Sec. 25B. Energy efficiency improvements to existing homes.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years ending after December 31, 1999.

     SEC. 9. CREDIT FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS BY SMALL 
                   BUSINESSES.

       (a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     business related credits) is amended by inserting after 
     section 45C the following new section:

     ``SEC. 45D. ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS BY SMALL 
                   BUSINESSES.

       ``(a) In General.--For purposes of section 38, in the case 
     of an eligible small business, the energy efficiency 
     improvement credit determined under this section for the 
     taxable year is an amount equal to 20 percent of the basis of 
     each qualified energy efficiency improvements placed in 
     service during such taxable year.
       ``(b) Limitations.--
       ``(1) Maximum credit.--The credit allowed by this section 
     for the taxable year shall not exceed $2,000.
       ``(2) Coordination with rehabilitation and energy 
     credits.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(A) the basis of any property referred to in subsection 
     (a) shall be reduced by that portion of the basis of any 
     property which is attributable to qualified rehabilitation 
     expenditures (as defined in section 47(c)(2)) or to the 
     energy percentage of energy property (as determined under 
     section 48(a)), and
       ``(B) expenditures taken into account under either section 
     47 or 48(a) shall not be taken into account under this 
     section.
       ``(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Eligible small business.--The term `eligible small 
     business' means any person engaged in a trade or business if 
     the average annual gross receipts of such person (or any 
     predecessor) for the 3-taxable-year period ending with such 
     prior taxable year does not exceed $10,000,000. Rules similar 
     to the rules of paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 448(c) 
     shall apply for purposes of the preceding sentence.
       ``(2) Qualified energy efficiency improvements.--The term 
     `qualified energy efficiency improvements' means any energy 
     efficient property the installation of which, by itself or in 
     combination with other such property, is certified to improve 
     the annual energy performance of the structure to which it 
     relates by at least 30 percent, if--
       ``(A) such property is installed in or on a structure 
     located in the United States,
       ``(B)(i) the construction, reconstruction, or erection of 
     such property is completed by the taxpayer, or
       ``(ii) such property which is acquired by the taxpayer if 
     the original use of such property commences with the 
     taxpayer,
       ``(C) depreciation (or amortization in lieu of 
     depreciation) is allowable with respect to such property, and
       ``(D) such property reasonably can be expected to remain in 
     use for at least 5 years.

     Such certification shall be made by the contractor who 
     installed such property, a local building regulatory 
     authority, or a qualified energy consultant (such as a 
     utility or an accredited energy rating system provider).
       ``(3) Energy efficient property.--The term `energy 
     efficient property' means--
       ``(A) any energy efficient building envelope component, and
       ``(b) any energy efficient heating, cooling, or water 
     heating appliance.
       ``(d) Application of Section.--Subsection (a) shall apply 
     to property placed in service during the period beginning on 
     January 1, 2000, and ending on December 31, 2004.''.
       (b) Credit Made Part of General Business Credit.--
     Subsection (b) of section 38 of such Code (relating to 
     current year business credit) is amended by striking ``plus'' 
     at the end of paragraph (11), by striking the period at the 
     end of paragraph (12) and inserting ``, plus'', and by adding 
     at the end thereof the following new paragraph:
       ``(13) in the case of an eligible small business (as 
     defined in section 45D(c)), the energy efficiency improvement 
     credit determined under section 45D.''.
       (c) Credit Allowed Against Regular and Minimum Tax.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (c) of section 38 of such Code 
     (relating to limitation based on amount of tax) is amended by 
     redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4) and by inserting 
     after paragraph (2) the following new paragraph:

[[Page H1210]]

       ``(3) Special rules for small business energy efficiency 
     improvement credit.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of the energy efficiency 
     improvement credit--
       ``(i) this section and section 39 shall be applied 
     separately with respect to the credit, and
       ``(ii) in applying paragraph (1) to the credit--

       ``(I) subparagraph (A) thereof shall not apply, and
       ``(II) the limitation under paragraph (1) (as modified by 
     subclause (I)) shall be reduced by the credit allowed under 
     subsection (a) for the taxable year (other than the energy 
     efficiency improvement credit).

       ``(B) energy efficiency improvement credit.--For purposes 
     of this subsection, the term `energy efficiency improvement 
     credit' means the credit allowable under subsection (a) by 
     reason of section 45D.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Subclause (II) of section 
     38(c)(2)(A)(ii) of such Code is amended by inserting ``or the 
     energy efficiency improvement credit'' after ``employment 
     credit''.
       (d) Limitation on Carryback.--Subsection (d) of section 39 
     of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(9) No carryback of energy efficiency improvement credit 
     before effective date.--No portion of the unused business 
     credit for any taxable year which is attributable to the 
     credit determined under section 45D may be carried back to 
     any taxable year ending before the date of the enactment of 
     section 45D.''.
       (e) Deduction for Certain Unused Business Credits.--
     Subsection (c) of section 196 of such Code is amended by 
     striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (7), by striking the 
     period at the end of paragraph (8) and inserting ``, and'', 
     and by adding after paragraph (8) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(9) the energy efficiency improvement credit determined 
     under section 45D.''.
       (f) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart 
     D of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 45C 
     the following new item:

``Sec. 45D. Energy efficiency improvements by small businesses.''.
       (g) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to property placed in service after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

                               H.R. 3822

                        Offered By: Mr. Crowley

       Amendment No. 6: Page 8, after line 8, insert the following 
     new section:

     SEC. 7. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

       It is the sense of the Congress that the President should 
     use authority provided under section 161 of the Energy Policy 
     and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6241) to release petroleum 
     from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve when oil and gas prices 
     in the United States have risen sharply because of 
     international oil price fixing activities, particularly 
     activities by the member nations of OPEC and their allies.
       Page 8, line 9, redesignate section 7 as section 8.

                               H.R. 3822

                        Offered By: Mr. Crowley

       Amendment No. 7: Page 8, after line 8, insert the following 
     new section:

     SEC. 7. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

       It is the sense of the Congress that--
       (1) international oil price fixing results in wide price 
     fluctuations, which are not beneficial to the United States 
     economy;
       (2) higher oil and gas prices mean United States consumers 
     pay more for their home heating bills and more for gasoline 
     to drive their cars;
       (3) these inflated prices affect all areas of the United 
     States economy, but have a particularly adverse impact on our 
     senior citizens; and
       (4) the President should use all powers necessary to reduce 
     United States domestic oil and gas prices when international 
     anticompetitive practices by the member nations of OPEC 
     adversely affect the price paid by American consumers.
       Page 8, line 9, redesignate section 7 as section 8.

                               H.R. 3822

                        Offered By: Mr. DeFazio

       Amendment No. 8: Insert the following after section 6 and 
     redesignate the succeeding section accordingly:

     SEC. 7. SUSPENSION OF EXPORTS OF ALASKAN NORTH SLOPE CRUDE 
                   OIL.

       (a) Suspension.--Effective on the date of the enactment of 
     this Act--
       (1) subsection (s) of section 28 of the Mineral Leasing Act 
     (30 U.S.C. 185(s)) shall cease to be effective; and
       (2) subsection (d) of section 7 of the Export 
     Administration Act of 1999 (50 U.S.C. App 2406(d)) shall be 
     effective, notwithstanding section 20 of that Act.
       (b) Administration.--The President may exercise the 
     authorities he has under the International Emergency Economic 
     Powers Act to carry out subsection (a).
       (c) Lifting of Suspension.--If the President determines 
     that the United States is not experiencing a shortage of 
     foreign crude oil and an inflationary impact due to the 
     demand for foreign crude oil, subsections (a) and (b) shall 
     cease to apply 30 calendar days after the President submits 
     that determination to the Congress.

                               H.R. 3822

                        Offered By: Mr. Dingell

       Amendment No. 9: Page 8, after line 8, insert the following 
     new section:

     SEC. 7. ENERGY POLICY AND CONSERVATION ACT REAUTHORIZATION.

       (a) Title I.--Title I of the Energy Policy and Conservation 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 6211-6251) is amended--
       (1) in section 166 (42 U.S.C. 6246)--
       (A) by inserting ``through 2003'' after ``2000''; and
       (B) by striking ``, to remain available only through March 
     31, 2000''; and
       (2) in section 181 (42 U.S.C. 6251), by striking ``March 
     31, 2000'' each place it appears and inserting ``September 
     30, 2003''.
       (b) Title II.--Title II of the Energy Policy and 
     Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6261-6285) is amended--
       (1) in section 256(h) (42 U.S.C. 6276(h)), by inserting 
     ``through 2003'' after ``1997''; and
       (2) in section 281 (42 U.S.C. 6285), by striking ``March 
     31, 2000'' each place it appears and inserting ``September 
     30, 2003''.
       Page 8, line 9, redesignate section 7 as section 8.

                               H.R. 3822

                         Offered By: Mr. Hobson

       Amendment No. 10: At the end of the bill insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. 8. REPEAL OF 1993 INCREASES IN MOTOR FUEL TAXES.

       (a) Highway Gasoline.--Clause (i) of section 4081(a)(2)(A) 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 
     ``18.3 cents'' and inserting ``14 cents''.
       (b) Aviation Gasoline.--Clause (ii) of section 
     4081(a)(2)(A) of such Code is amended by striking ``19.3 
     cents'' and inserting ``15 cents''.
       (c) Diesel Fuel and Kerosene.--Clause (iii) of section 
     4081(a)(2)(A) of such Code is amended by striking ``24.3 
     cents'' and inserting ``20 cents''.
       (d) Aviation Fuel.--Paragraph (1) of section 4091(b) of 
     such Code is amended by striking ``21.8 cents'' and inserting 
     ``17.5 cents''.
       (e) Fuel Used on Inland Waterways.--
       (1) Paragraph (1) of section 4042(b) of such Code is 
     amended by adding ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A), by 
     striking ``, and'' at the end of subparagraph (B) and 
     inserting a period, and by striking subparagraph (C).
       (2) Paragraph (2) of section 4042(b) of such Code is 
     amended by striking subparagraph (C).
       (f) Technical Amendments.--
       (1) Subparagraph (B) of section 40(e)(1) of such Code is 
     amended by striking ``during which the rates of tax under 
     section 4081(a)(2)(A) are 4.3 cents per gallon'' and 
     inserting ``during which the rate of tax under section 
     4081(a)(2)(A)(i) does not apply''.
       (2) Subparagraph (A) of section 4041(a)(1) of such Code is 
     amended by striking ``or a diesel-powered train'' each place 
     it appears and by striking ``or train''.
       (3) Subparagraph (C) of section 4041(a)(1) of such Code is 
     amended by striking clause (ii) and by redesignating clause 
     (iii) as clause (ii).
       (4) Subclause (I) of section 4041(a)(1)(C)(ii) of such 
     Code, as redesignated by paragraph (3), is amended by 
     striking ``7.3 cents'' and inserting ``3 cents'' and by 
     striking ``4.3 cents per gallon'' and inserting ``zero''.
       (5) Subsection (a) of section 4041 of such Code is amended 
     by striking paragraph (3).
       (6) Subparagraph (C) of section 4041(b)(1) of such Code is 
     amended by striking all that follows ``section 6421(e)(2)'' 
     and inserting a period.
       (7) Subparagraph (B) of section 4041(a)(2) of such Code is 
     amended by striking all that follows clause (i) and inserting 
     the following new clauses:
       ``(ii) 10.4 cents per gallon in the case of liquefied 
     petroleum gas, and
       ``(iii) 9.1 cents per gallon in the case of liquefied 
     natural gas.''
       (8) Paragraph (3) of section 4041(c) of such Code is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(3) Termination.--The rate of the taxes imposed by 
     paragraph (1) shall be zero after September 30, 2007.''
       (9) Subsection (d) of section 4041 of such Code is amended 
     by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4) and by 
     inserting after paragraph (2) the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Diesel fuel used in trains.--There is hereby imposed 
     a tax of 0.1 cent per gallon on any liquid other than 
     gasoline (as defined in section 4083)--
       ``(A) sold by any person to an owner, lessee, or other 
     operator of a diesel-powered train for use as a fuel in such 
     train, or
       ``(B) used by any person as a fuel in a diesel-powered 
     train unless there was a taxable sale of such fuel under 
     subparagraph (A).

     No tax shall be imposed by this paragraph on the sale or use 
     of any liquid if tax was imposed on such liquid under section 
     4081.''
       (10) Clauses (i) and (ii) of section 4041(m)(1)(A) of such 
     Code are amended to read as follows:
       ``(i) 7 cents per gallon on and after the date of the 
     enactment of this clause and before October 1, 2005, and
       ``(ii) zero after September 30, 2005, and''.
       (11) Subsection (c) of section 4081 of such Code is amended 
     by striking paragraph (6) and by redesignating paragraphs (7) 
     and (8) as paragraphs (6) and (7), respectively.
       (12) Paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 4081(d) of such Code 
     are amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) In general.--The rates of tax specified in clauses 
     (i) and (iii) of subsection (a)(2)(A) shall be zero after 
     September 30, 2005.

[[Page H1211]]

       ``(2) Aviation gasoline.--The rate of tax specified in 
     subsection (a)(2)(A)(ii) shall be zero after September 30, 
     2007.
       (13) Subsection (f) of section 4082 of such Code is amended 
     by striking ``section 4041(a)(1)'' and inserting 
     ``subsections (d)(3) and (a)(1) of section 4041, 
     respectively''.
       (14) Paragraph (3) of section 4083(a) of such Code is 
     amended by striking ``or a diesel-powered train''.
       (15) Subparagraph (A) of section 4091(b)(3) of such Code is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(A) The rate of tax specified in paragraph (1) shall be 
     zero after September 30, 2007.''
       (16) Paragraph (1) of section 4091(c) of such Code is 
     amended--
       (A) by striking ``14 cents'' and inserting ``9.7 cents'',
       (B) by striking ``13.3 cents'' and inserting ``9 cents'',
       (C) by striking ``13.2 cents'' and inserting ``8.9 cents'',
       (D) by striking ``13.1 cents'' and inserting ``8.8 cents'', 
     and
       (E) by striking ``13.4 cents'' and inserting ``9.1 cents''.
       (17) Subsection (c) of section 4091 of such Code is amended 
     by striking paragraph (4), and by redesignating paragraph (5) 
     as paragraph (4).
       (18) Subsection (b) of section 4092 of such Code is amended 
     by striking ``attributable to'' and all that follows and 
     inserting ``attributable to the Leaking Underground Storage 
     Tank Trust Fund financing rate imposed by such section. For 
     purposes of the preceding sentence, the term `commercial 
     aviation' means any use of an aircraft other than in 
     noncommercial aviation (as defined in section 4041(c)(2)).''
       (19) Subparagraph (B) of section 6421(f)(2) of such Code is 
     amended by striking ``and,'' and all that follows and 
     inserting a period.
       (20) Paragraph (3) of section 6421(f) of such Code is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(3) Gasoline used in trains.--In the case of gasoline 
     used as a fuel in a train, this section shall not apply with 
     respect to the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund 
     financing rate under section 4081.''
       (21) Subparagraph (A) of section 6427(b)(2) of such Code is 
     amended by striking ``7.4 cents'' and inserting ``3.1 
     cents''.
       (22) Paragraph (3) of section 6427(l) of such Code is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(3) Refund of certain taxes on fuel used in diesel-
     powered trains.--For purposes of this subsection, the term 
     `nontaxable use' includes fuel used in a diesel-powered 
     train. The preceding sentence shall not apply to the tax 
     imposed by section 4041(d) and the Leaking Underground 
     Storage Tank Trust Fund financing rate under section 4081 
     except with respect to fuel sold for exclusive use by a State 
     or any political subdivision thereof.''
       (23) Paragraph (4) of section 6427(l) of such Code is 
     amended by striking ``attributable to'' and all that follows 
     through the period and inserting ``attributable to the 
     Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund financing rate 
     imposed by such section.''
       (g) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (h) Floor Stock Refunds.--
       (1) In general.--If--
       (A) before the date of the enactment of this Act, tax has 
     been imposed under section 4081 or 4091 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 on any liquid, and
       (B) on such date such liquid is held by a dealer and has 
     not been used and is intended for sale,

     there shall be credited or refunded (without interest) to the 
     person who paid such tax (hereafter in this subsection 
     referred to as the ``taxpayer'') an amount equal to the 
     excess of the tax paid by the taxpayer over the amount of 
     such tax which would be imposed on such liquid had the 
     taxable event occurred on such date.
       (2) Time for filing claims.--No credit or refund shall be 
     allowed or made under this subsection unless--
       (A) claim therefor is filed with the Secretary of the 
     Treasury before the date which is 6 months after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, based on a request submitted to 
     the taxpayer before the date which is 3 months after such 
     date of enactment, by the dealer who held the liquid on such 
     date of enactment, and
       (B) the taxpayer has repaid or agreed to repay the amount 
     so claimed to such dealer or has obtained the written consent 
     of such dealer to the allowance of the credit or the making 
     of the refund.
       (3) Exception for fuel held in retail stocks.--No credit or 
     refund shall be allowed under this subsection with respect to 
     any liquid in retail stocks held at the place where intended 
     to be sold at retail.
       (4) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection, the 
     terms ``dealer'' and ``held by a dealer'' have the respective 
     meanings given to such terms by section 6412 of such Code.
       (5) Certain rules to apply.--Rules similar to the rules of 
     subsections (b) and (c) of section 6412 of such Code shall 
     apply for purposes of this subsection.
       (i) Exclusion of Effects of This Section from the Paygo 
     Scorecard.--Upon the enactment of this Act, the Director of 
     the Office of Management and Budget shall not make any 
     estimates of changes in receipts under section 252(d) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                               H.R. 3822

                         Offered By: Mr. Larson

       Amendment No. 11: Page 8, after line 8, insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. 7. OIL PRICE SAFEGUARDS.

       (a) Drawdown of Strategic Petroleum Reserve.--Section 
     161(d) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 
     6241(d)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) Reduction in supply caused by anticompetitive 
     conduct.--
       ``(A) In general.--For the purposes of this section, in 
     addition to the circumstances set forth in section 3(8) and 
     in paragraph (2) of this subsection, a severe energy supply 
     interruption shall be deemed to exist if the President 
     determines that--
       ``(i) there is a significant reduction in supply that--

       ``(I) is of significant scope and duration; and
       ``(II) has caused a significant increase in the price of 
     petroleum products;

       ``(ii) the increase in price is likely to cause a 
     significant adverse impact on the national economy; and
       ``(iii) a substantial cause of the reduction in supply is 
     the anticompetitive conduct of 1 or more foreign countries or 
     international entities.
       ``(B) Deposit and use of proceeds.--Proceeds from the sale 
     of petroleum drawn down pursuant to a Presidential 
     determination under subparagraph (A) shall--
       ``(i) be deposited in the SPR Petroleum Account; and
       ``(ii) be used only for the purposes specified in section 
     167.''.
       (b) Reporting and Consultation Requirements.--If the price 
     of a barrel of crude oil exceeds $25 (in constant 1999 United 
     States dollars) for a period greater than 14 days, the 
     President, through the Secretary of Energy, shall, not later 
     than 30 days after the end of the 14-day period, submit to 
     the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate 
     and the Committee on Commerce of the House of Representatives 
     a report that--
       (1) states the results of a comprehensive review of the 
     causes and potential consequences of the price increase;
       (2) provides an estimate of the likely duration of the 
     price increase, based on analyses and forecasts of the Energy 
     Information Administration;
       (3) provides an analysis of the effects of the price 
     increase on the cost of home heating oil; and
       (4) states whether, and provides a specific rationale for 
     why, the President does or does not support the drawdown and 
     distribution of a specified amount of oil from the Strategic 
     Petroleum Reserve.
       Page 8, line 9, redesignate section 7 as section 8.

                               H.R. 3822

                        Offered By: Mrs. Thurman

       Amendment No. 20: Add at the end thereof the following new 
     title:

          TITLE II--ENERGY EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGY TAX INCENTIVES

     SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Energy Efficient Technology 
     Tax Act''.

     SEC. 202. CREDIT FOR CERTAIN ENERGY-EFFICIENT PROPERTY USED 
                   IN BUSINESS.

       (a) In General.--Subpart E of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 
     inserting after section 48 the following new section:

     ``SEC. 48A. ENERGY CREDIT.

       ``(a) In General.--For purposes of section 46, the energy 
     credit for any taxable year is the sum of--
       ``(1) the amount equal to the energy percentage of the 
     basis of each energy property placed in service during such 
     taxable year, and
       ``(2) the credit amount for each qualified hybrid vehicle 
     placed in service during the taxable year.
       ``(b) Energy Percentage.--
       ``(1) In general.--The energy percentage shall be 
     determined in accordance with the following table:
       

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            ``Column A--Description                   Column B--Energy Percentage                               Column C--Period
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                 For the period:
                In the case of:                        The energy percentage is:       -----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                 Beginning on:                      Ending on:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solar energy property (other than elected       10 percent                               1/1/2000                         no end date
 solar hot water property and photovoltaic
 property) and geothermal energy property.....
Elected solar hot water property..............  15 percent                               1/1/2000                        12/31/2004
Photovoltaic property.........................  15 percent                               1/1/2000                        12/31/2006

[[Page H1212]]

 
20 percent energy-efficient building property.  20 percent                               1/1/2000                        12/31/2003
10 percent energy-efficient building property.  10 percent                               1/1/2000                        12/31/2001
Combined heat and power system property.......  8 percent                                1/1/2000                        12/31/2002.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       ``(2) Periods for which percentage not specified.--In the 
     case of any energy property, the energy percentage shall be 
     zero for any period for which an energy percentage is not 
     specified for such property under paragraph (1).
       ``(3) Coordination with rehabilitation.--The energy 
     percentage shall not apply to that portion of the basis of 
     any property which is attributable to qualified 
     rehabilitation expenditures.
       ``(4) Transitional rules.--Rules similar to the rules of 
     section 48(m) (as in effect on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990) shall 
     apply for purposes of this subsection.
       ``(c) Maximum Credit for Certain Property.--In the case of 
     property described in the following table, the amount of the 
     current year business credit under subsection (a) for the 
     taxable year for each item of such property with respect to a 
     building shall not exceed the amount specified for such 
     property in such table:
       

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Description of property:                           Maximum allowable credit amount is:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Elected solar hot water property.......................      $1,000.
Photovoltaic property with respect to which the energy       $2,000.
 percentage is greater than 10 percent.
20 percent energy-efficient building property:           .......................................................
  fuel cell described in subsection (e)(3)(A)..........      $500 per each kw/hr of capacity.
  natural gas heat pump described in subsection              $1,000.
   (e)(3)(D).
20 percent energy-efficient building property (other         $500.
 than a fuel cell and a natural gas heat pump)
10 percent energy-efficient building property..........      $250.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       ``(d) Energy Property Defined.--
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of this subpart, the term 
     `energy property' means any property--
       ``(A) which is--
       ``(i) solar energy property,
       ``(ii) geothermal energy property,
       ``(iii) 20 percent energy-efficient building property,
       ``(iv) 10 percent energy-efficient building property, or
       ``(v) combined heat and power system property,
       ``(B)(i) the construction, reconstruction, or erection of 
     which is completed by the taxpayer, or
       ``(ii) which is acquired by the taxpayer if the original 
     use of such property commences with the taxpayer,
       ``(C) with respect to which depreciation (or amortization 
     in lieu of depreciation) is allowable, and
       ``(D) which meets the performance and quality standards (if 
     any), and the certification requirements (if any), which--
       ``(i) have been prescribed by the Secretary by regulations 
     (after consultation with the Secretary of Energy or the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, as 
     appropriate), and
       ``(ii) are in effect at the time of the acquisition of the 
     property.
       ``(2) Exception.--Such term shall not include any property 
     which is public utility property (as defined in section 
     46(f)(5) as in effect on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990). The 
     preceding sentence shall not apply to combined heat and power 
     system property.
       ``(e) Definitions Relating to Types of Energy Property.--
     For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Solar energy property.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `solar energy property' means 
     equipment which uses solar energy--
       ``(i) to generate electricity,
       ``(ii) to heat or cool (or provide hot water for use in) a 
     structure, or
       ``(iii) to provide solar process heat.
       ``(B) Elected solar water heating property.--
       ``(i) In general.--The term `elected solar water heating 
     property' means property which is solar energy property by 
     reason of subparagraph (A)(ii) and for which an election 
     under this subparagraph is in effect.
       ``(ii) Election.--For purposes of clause (i) and the energy 
     percentage specified in the table in subsection (b)(1), a 
     taxpayer may elect to treat property described in clause (i) 
     as elected solar water heating property.
       ``(C) Photovoltaic property.--The term `photovoltaic 
     property' means solar energy property which uses a solar 
     photovoltaic process to generate electricity.
       ``(D) Swimming pools, etc., used as storage medium.--The 
     term `solar energy property' shall not include a swimming 
     pool, hot tub, or any other energy storage medium which has a 
     function other than the function of such storage.
       ``(E) Solar panels.--No solar panel or other property 
     installed as a roof (or portion thereof) shall fail to be 
     treated as solar energy property solely because it 
     constitutes a structural component of the structure on which 
     it is installed.
       ``(2) Geothermal energy property.--The term `geothermal 
     energy property' means equipment used to produce, distribute, 
     or use energy derived from a geothermal deposit (within the 
     meaning of section 613(e)(2)), but only, in the case of 
     electricity generated by geothermal power, up to (but not 
     including) the electrical transmission stage.
       ``(3) 20 percent energy-efficient building property.--The 
     term `20 percent energy-efficient building property' means--
       ``(A) a fuel cell that--
       ``(i) generates electricity and heat using an 
     electrochemical process,
       ``(ii) has an electricity-only generation efficiency 
     greater than 35 percent, and
       ``(iii) has a minimum generating capacity of 5 kilowatts,
       ``(B) an electric heat pump hot water heater that yields an 
     energy factor of 1.7 or greater,
       ``(C) an electric heat pump that has a heating system 
     performance factor (HSPF) of 9 or greater and a cooling 
     seasonal energy efficiency ratio (SEER) of 15 or greater,
       ``(D) a natural gas heat pump that has a coefficient of 
     performance of not less than 1.25 for heating and not less 
     than 0.70 for cooling,
       ``(E) a central air conditioner that has a cooling seasonal 
     energy efficiency ratio (SEER) of 15 or greater, and
       ``(F) an advanced natural gas water heater that has an 
     energy factor of at least 0.80.
       ``(4) 10 percent energy-efficient building property.--The 
     term `10 percent energy-efficient building property' means--
       ``(A) an electric heat pump that has a heating system 
     performance factor (HSPF) of 7.5 or greater and a cooling 
     seasonal energy efficiency ratio (SEER) of 13.5 or greater,
       ``(B) a central air conditioner that has a cooling seasonal 
     energy efficiency ratio (SEER) of 13.5 or greater, and
       ``(C) an advanced natural gas water heater that has an 
     energy factor of at least 0.65.
       ``(5) Combined heat and power system property.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `combined heat and power system 
     property' means property comprising a system--
       ``(i) which uses the same energy source for the 
     simultaneous or sequential generation of electrical power, 
     mechanical shaft power, or both, in combination with the 
     generation of steam or other forms of useful thermal energy 
     (including heating and cooling applications),
       ``(ii) which has an electrical capacity of more than 50 
     kilowatts or a mechanical energy capacity of more than 67 
     horsepower or an equivalent combination of electrical and 
     mechanical energy capacities,
       ``(iii) which produces--

       ``(I) at least 20 percent of its total useful energy in the 
     form of thermal energy, and
       ``(II) at least 20 percent of its total useful energy in 
     the form of electrical or mechanical power (or a combination 
     thereof), and

       ``(iv) the energy efficiency percentage of which exceeds 60 
     percent (70 percent in the case of a system with an 
     electrical capacity in excess of 50 megawatts or a mechanical 
     energy capacity in excess of 67,000 horsepower, or an 
     equivalent combination of electrical and mechanical energy 
     capacities).
       ``(B) Special rules.--
       ``(i) Energy efficiency percentage.--For purposes of 
     subparagraph (A)(iv), the energy efficiency percentage of a 
     system is the fraction--

       ``(I) the numerator of which is the total useful 
     electrical, thermal, and mechanical power produced by the 
     system at normal operating rates, and
       ``(II) the denominator of which is the lower heating value 
     of the primary fuel source for the system.

       ``(ii) Determinations made on btu basis.--The energy 
     efficiency percentage and the percentages under subparagraph 
     (A)(iii) shall be determined on a Btu basis.
       ``(iii) Input and output property not included.--The term 
     `combined heat and power system property' does not include

[[Page H1213]]

     property used to transport the energy source to the facility 
     or to distribute energy produced by the facility.
       ``(iv) Accounting rule for public utility property.--In the 
     case that combined heat and power system property is public 
     utility property (as defined in section 46(f)(5) as in effect 
     on the day before the date of the enactment of the Revenue 
     Reconciliation Act of 1990), the taxpayer may only claim the 
     credit under subsection (a)(1) if, with respect to such 
     property, the taxpayer uses a normalization method of 
     accounting.
       ``(v) Depreciation.--No credit shall be allowed for any 
     combined heat and power system property unless the taxpayer 
     elects to treat such property for purposes of section 168 as 
     having a class life of not less than 22 years.
       ``(f) Qualified Hybrid Vehicles.--For purposes of 
     subsection (a)(2)--
       ``(1) Credit amount.--
       ``(A) In general.--The credit amount for each qualified 
     hybrid vehicle with a rechargeable energy storage system that 
     provides the applicable percentage of the maximum available 
     power shall be the amount specified in the following table:
       

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               ``Applicable percentage
------------------------------------------------------ Credit amount is:
    Greater than or equal to--         Less than--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 percent.........................      10 percent           $  500
10 percent........................      20 percent           $1,000
20 percent........................      30 percent           $1,500
30 percent........................                           $2,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       ``(B) Increase in credit amount for regenerative braking 
     system.--In the case of a qualified hybrid vehicle that 
     actively employs a regenerative braking system which supplies 
     to the rechargeable energy storage system the applicable 
     percentage of the energy available from braking in a typical 
     60 miles per hour to 0 miles per hour braking event, the 
     credit amount determined under subparagraph (A) shall be 
     increased by the amount specified in the following table:
       

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               ``Applicable percentage
------------------------------------------------------   Credit amount
    Greater than or equal to--         Less than--        increase is:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
20 percent........................      40 percent           $  250
40 percent........................      60 percent           $  500
60 percent........................                           $1,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       ``(2) Qualified hybrid vehicle.--The term `qualified hybrid 
     vehicle means an automobile that meets all applicable 
     regulatory requirements and that can draw propulsion energy 
     from both of the following on-board sources of stored energy:
       ``(A) A consumable fuel.
       ``(B) A rechargeable energy storage system.
       ``(3) Maximum available power.--The term `maximum available 
     power' means the maximum value of the sum of the heat engine 
     and electric drive system power or other non-heat energy 
     conversion devices available for a driver's command for 
     maximum acceleration at vehicle speeds under 75 miles per 
     hour.
       ``(4) Automobile.--The term `automobile' has the meaning 
     given such term by section 4064(b)(1) (without regard to 
     subparagraphs (B) and (C) thereof). A vehicle shall not fail 
     to be treated as an automobile solely by reason of weight if 
     such vehicle is rated at 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight 
     rating or less.
       ``(5) Double benefit; property used outside united states, 
     etc., not qualified.--No credit shall be allowed under 
     subsection (a)(2) with respect to--
       ``(A) any property for which a credit is allowed under 
     section 25B or 30,
       ``(B) any property referred to in section 50(b), and
       ``(C) the portion of the cost of any property taken into 
     account under section 179 or 179A.
       ``(6) Regulations.--
       ``(A) Treasury.--The Secretary shall prescribe such 
     regulations as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out 
     the purposes of this subsection.
       ``(B) Environmental protection agency.--
       ``(A) Treasury.--The Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall prescribe such regulations as may be 
     necessary or appropriate to specify the testing and 
     calculation procedures that would be used to determine 
     whether a vehicle meets the qualifications for a credit under 
     this subsection.
       ``(7) Termination.--Paragraph (2) shall not apply with 
     respect to any vehicle placed in service during a calendar 
     year ending before January 1, 2003, or after December 31, 
     2006.
       ``(g) Special Rules.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Special rule for property financed by subsidized 
     energy financing or industrial development bonds.--
       ``(A) Reduction of basis.--For purposes of applying the 
     energy percentage to any property, if such property is 
     financed in whole or in part by--
       ``(i) subsidized energy financing, or
       ``(ii) the proceeds of a private activity bond (within the 
     meaning of section 141) the interest on which is exempt from 
     tax under section 103,

     the amount taken into account as the basis of such property 
     shall not exceed the amount which (but for this subparagraph) 
     would be so taken into account multiplied by the fraction 
     determined under subparagraph (B).
       ``(B) Determination of fraction.--For purposes of 
     subparagraph (A), the fraction determined under this 
     subparagraph is 1 reduced by a fraction--
       ``(i) the numerator of which is that portion of the basis 
     of the property which is allocable to such financing or 
     proceeds, and
       ``(ii) the denominator of which is the basis of the 
     property.
       ``(C) Subsidized energy financing.--For purposes of 
     subparagraph (A), the term `subsidized energy financing' 
     means financing provided under a Federal, State, or local 
     program a principal purpose of which is to provide subsidized 
     financing for projects designed to conserve or produce 
     energy.
       ``(2) Business use.--The rule similar to the rule of 
     section 25(B)(d)(5)(B) shall apply for purposes of 
     determining the business use of a vehicle.
       ``(3) Certain progress expenditure rules made applicable.--
     Rules similar to the rules of subsections (c)(4) and (d) of 
     section 46 (as in effect on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990) shall 
     apply for purposes of this section.
       ``(4) Double benefit.--Property which would, but for this 
     paragraph, be eligible for credit under more than one 
     provision of this section shall be eligible only under one 
     such provision, the provision specified by the taxpayer.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 48 of such Code is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 48. REFORESTATION CREDIT.

       ``(a) In General.--For purposes of section 46, the 
     reforestation credit for any taxable year is 10 percent of 
     the portion of the amortizable basis of any qualified timber 
     property which was acquired during such taxable year and 
     which is taken into account under section 194 (after the 
     application of section 194(b)(1)).
       ``(b) Definitions.--For purposes of this subpart, the terms 
     `amortizable basis' and `qualified timber property' have the 
     respective meanings given to such terms by section 194.''.
       (2) Subsection (d) of section 39 of such Code is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(9) No carryback of energy credit before effective 
     date.--No portion of the unused business credit for any 
     taxable year which is attributable to the energy credit 
     determined under section 48A may be carried back to a taxable 
     year ending before the date of the enactment of section 
     48A.''.
       (3) Paragraph (3) of section 50(c) of such Code is amended 
     by adding at the end the following flush sentence:
     ``In the case of the energy credit, the preceding sentence 
     shall apply only to so much of such credit as relates to 
     solar energy property and geothermal property (as such terms 
     are defined in section 48A(e)).''.
       (4) Subclause (III) of section 29(b)(3)(A)(i) of such Code 
     is amended by striking ``section 48(a)(4)(C)'' and inserting 
     ``section 48A(g)(1)(C)''.
       (5) Subparagraph (E) of section 50(a)(2) of such Code is 
     amended by striking ``section 48(a)(5)'' and inserting 
     ``section 48A(g)(3)''.
       (6) Subparagraph (B) of section 168(e)(3) of such Code is 
     amended--
       (A) in clause (vi)(I)--
       (i) by striking ``section 48(a)(3)'' and inserting 
     ``paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 48A(e)'', and
       (ii) by striking ``clause (i)'' and inserting ``paragraph 
     (1)(A)'', and
       (B) in the last sentence by striking ``section 48(a)(3)'' 
     and inserting ``section 48A(d)(2)''.
       (7) Subparagraph (E) of section 168(e)(3) of such Code is 
     amended by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ii), by 
     striking the period at the end of clause (iii) and inserting 
     ``,

[[Page H1214]]

     and'', and by inserting after clause (iii) the following new 
     clause:
       ``(iv) any combined heat and power system property (as 
     defined in section 48A(e)(5)) for which a credit is allowed 
     under section 48A and which, but for this clause, would have 
     a recovery period of less than 15 years.''.
       (8) The table contained in subparagraph (B) of section 
     168(g)(3) of such Code is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

    ``(E)(iv).....................................................22''.
       (c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart 
     E of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is 
     amended by striking the item relating to section 48 and 
     inserting the following new items:

``Sec. 48. Reforestation credit.
``Sec. 48A. Energy credit.''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to periods after December 31, 1999, under rules 
     similar to the rules of section 48(m) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (as in effect on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990).

     SEC. 203. EXTENSION OF CREDIT FOR QUALIFIED ELECTRIC 
                   VEHICLES.

       (a) Extension of Credit for Qualified Electric Vehicles.--
     Subsection (f) of section 30 of such Code (relating to 
     termination) is amended by striking ``December 31, 2004'' and 
     inserting ``December 31, 2006''.
       (b) Repeal of Phaseout.--Subsection (b) of section 30 of 
     such Code (relating to limitations) is amended by striking 
     paragraph (2) and redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph 
     (2).
       (c) No Double Benefit.--
       (1) Subsection (d) of section 30 of such Code (relating to 
     special rules) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(5) No credit shall be allowed under subsection (a) with 
     respect to any vehicle if the taxpayer claims a credit for 
     such vehicle under section 25B(a)(1)(B) or 48A(f).''.
       (2) Paragraph (3) of section 30(d) of such Code (relating 
     to property used outside United States, etc., not qualified) 
     is amended by striking ``section 50(b)'' and inserting 
     ``section 25B, 48A, or 50(b)''.
       (3) Paragraph (5) of section 179A(e) of such Code (relating 
     to property used outside United States, etc., not qualified) 
     is amended by striking ``section 50(b)'' and inserting 
     ``section 25B, 48A, or 50(b)''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to property placed in service after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 204. MODIFICATIONS TO CREDIT FOR ELECTRICITY PRODUCED 
                   FROM CERTAIN RENEWABLE RESOURCES.

       (a) Extension.--Paragraph (3) of section 45(c) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to qualified 
     facility) is amended by striking ``July 1, 1999'' and 
     inserting ``July 1, 2004''.
       (b) Qualified Facilities Include All Biomass Facilities.--
       (1) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 45(c) of such 
     Code (relating to definition of qualified energy resources) 
     is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph 
     (A), by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B), 
     and by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
       ``(C) biomass (other than closed-loop biomass).''.
       (2) Biomass defined.--Paragraph (2) of section 45(c) of 
     such Code is amended to read as follows:
       ``(2) Biomass.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `biomass' means--
       ``(i) closed-loop biomass, and
       ``(ii) any solid, nonhazardous, cellulosic waste material, 
     which is segregated from other waste materials, and which is 
     derived from--

       ``(I) any of the following forest-related resources: mill 
     residues, precommercial thinnings, slash, and brush, but not 
     including old-growth timber,
       ``(II) waste pallets, crates, and dunnage, and landscape or 
     right-of-way tree trimmings, but not including unsegregated 
     municipal solid waste (garbage) and post-consumer wastepaper, 
     or
       ``(III) agriculture sources, including orchard tree crops, 
     vineyard, grain, legumes, sugar, and other crop by-products 
     or residues.

       ``(B) Closed-loop biomass.--The term `closed-loop biomass' 
     means any organic material from a plant which is planted 
     exclusively for purposes of being used at a qualified 
     facility to produce electricity.''.
       (c) Electricity Produced From Biomass Co-fired in Coal 
     Plants.--
       (1) Credit amount.--Paragraph (1) of section 45(a) of such 
     Code (relating to general rule) is amended by inserting 
     ``(1.0 cents in the case of electricity produced from biomass 
     co-fired in a facility which produces electricity from coal) 
     after ``1.5 cents''.
       (2) Qualified facility.--Paragraph (3) of section 45(c) of 
     such Code (relating to definitions) is amended by striking 
     the period at the end and inserting the following: ``, and 
     any facility using biomass other than closed loop biomass to 
     produce electricity which is owned by the taxpayer and which 
     is originally placed in service after June 30, 1999.''.
       (3) Adjustment for inflation.--
       (A) In general.--Paragraph (2) of section 45(b) of such 
     Code (relating to credit and phaseout adjustment based on 
     inflation) is amended by striking ``1.5 cent amount'' and 
     inserting ``1.5 and 1.0 cent amounts''.
       (B) Base year for inflation adjustment factor.--
     Subparagraph (B) of section 45(d)(2) of such Code (relating 
     to inflation adjustment factor) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new sentence: ``In the case of the 1.0 
     cents amount in subsection (a), the first sentence of this 
     subparagraph shall be applied by substituting `1999' for 
     `1992'.''.
       (d) Credit Not To Apply to Electricity Sold to Utilities 
     Under Certain Contracts.--Subsection (b) of section 45 of 
     such Code (relating to limitations and adjustments) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(4) Credit not to apply to electricity sold to utilities 
     under certain contracts.--
       ``(A) In general.--The credit determined under subsection 
     (a) shall not apply to electricity--
       ``(i) produced at a qualified facility placed in service by 
     the taxpayer after June 30, 1999, and
       ``(ii) sold to a utility pursuant to a contract originally 
     entered into before January 1, 1987 (whether or not amended 
     or restated after that date).
       ``(B) Exception.--Subparagraph (A) shall not apply if--
       ``(i) the prices for energy and capacity from such facility 
     are established pursuant to an amendment to the contract 
     referred to in subparagraph (A)(ii),
       ``(ii) such amendment provides that the prices set forth in 
     the contract which exceed avoided cost prices determined at 
     the time of delivery shall apply only to annual quantities of 
     electricity (prorated for partial years) which do not exceed 
     the greater of--

       ``(I) the average annual quantity of electricity sold to 
     the utility under the contract during calendar years 1994, 
     1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998, or
       ``(II) the estimate of the annual electricity production 
     set forth in the contract, or, if there is no such estimate, 
     the greatest annual quantity of electricity sold to the 
     utility under the contract in any of the calendar years 1996, 
     1997, or 1998, and

       ``(iii) such amendment provides that energy and capacity in 
     excess of the limitation in clause (ii) may be--

       ``(I) sold to the utility only at prices that do not exceed 
     avoided cost prices determined at the time of delivery, or
       ``(II) sold to a third party subject to a mutually agreed 
     upon advance notice to the utility.

     For purposes of this subparagraph, avoided cost prices shall 
     be determined as provided for in section 292.304(d)(1) of 
     title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, or any successor 
     regulation.''.
       (e) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided by paragraph (2), the 
     amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years 
     ending after June 30, 1999.
       (2) Adjustment for inflation.--The amendments made by 
     subsection (c)(3) shall apply to taxable years ending after 
     December 31, 1999.

     SEC. 205. CREDIT FOR CERTAIN NONBUSINESS ENERGY PROPERTY.

       (a) In General.--Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     nonrefundable personal credits) is amended by inserting after 
     section 25A the following new section:

     ``SEC. 25B. NONBUSINESS ENERGY PROPERTY.

       ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of an individual, there 
     shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this 
     chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to the sum of--
       ``(A) the applicable percentage of residential energy 
     property expenditures made by the taxpayer during such year,
       ``(B) the credit amount (determined under section 48A(f)) 
     for each vehicle purchased during the taxable year which is a 
     qualified hybrid vehicle (as defined in section 48A(f)(2)), 
     and
       ``(C) the credit amount specified in the following table 
     for a new, highly energy-efficient principal residence:

``New, Highly Energy-Efficient Principal Residence:      Credit Amount:
  30 percent property...........................................$1,000.
  40 percent property...........................................$1,500.
  50 percent property...........................................$2,000.
       ``(2) Applicable percentage.--
       ``(A) In general.--The applicable percentage shall be 
     determined in accordance with the following table:
       

[[Page H1215]]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            ``Column A--Description                Column B-- Applicable Percentage                             Column C--Period
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                 For the period:
                In the case of:                      The applicable percentage is:     -----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                 Beginning on:                      Ending on:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20 percent energy-efficient building property.  20 percent                               1/1/2000                        12/31/2003
10 percent energy-efficient building property.  10 percent                               1/1/2000                        12/31/2001
Solar water heating property..................  15 percent                               1/1/2000                        12/31/2006
Photovoltaic property.........................  15 percent                               1/1/2000                        12/31/2006.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       ``(B) Periods for which percentage not specified.--In the 
     case of any residential energy property, the applicable 
     percentage shall be zero for any period for which an 
     applicable percentage is not specified for such property 
     under subparagraph (A).
       ``(b) Maximum Credit.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of property described in the 
     following table, the amount of the credit allowed under 
     subsection (a)(1)(A) for the taxable year for each item of 
     such property with respect to a dwelling unit shall not 
     exceed the amount specified for such property in such table:

       

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            ``Description of property item:                        Maximum allowable credit amount is:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20 percent energy-efficient building property (other         $500.
 than a fuel cell or natural gas heat pump).
20 percent energy-efficient building property:           .......................................................
  fuel cell described in section 48A (e)(3)(A).........      $  500 per each kw/hr of capacity.
  natural gas heat pump described in section 48A             $1,000.
   (e)(3)(D).
10 percent energy-efficient building property..........      $ 250.
Solar water heating property...........................      $1,000.
Photovoltaic property..................................      $2,000.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       ``(2) Coordination of limitations.--If a credit is allowed 
     to the taxpayer for any taxable year by reason of an 
     acquisition of a new, highly energy-efficient principal 
     residence, no other credit shall be allowed under subsection 
     (a)(1)(A) with respect to such residence during the 1-taxable 
     year period beginning with such taxable year.
       ``(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Residential Energy Property Expenditures.--The term 
     `residential energy property expenditures' means expenditures 
     made by the taxpayer for qualified energy property installed 
     on or in connection with a dwelling unit which--
       ``(A) is located in the United States, and
       ``(B) is used by the taxpayer as a residence.

     Such term includes expenditures for labor costs properly 
     allocable to the onsite preparation, assembly, or original 
     installation of the property.
       ``(2) Qualified energy property.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified energy property' 
     means--
       ``(i) energy-efficient building property,
       ``(ii) solar water heating property, and
       ``(iii) photovoltaic property.
       ``(B) Swimming pool, etc., used as storage medium; solar 
     panels.--For purposes of this paragraph, the provisions of 
     subparagraphs (D) and (E) section 48A(e)(1) shall apply.
       ``(3) Energy-efficient building property.--The term 
     `energy-efficient building property' has the meaning given to 
     such term by paragraphs (3) and (4) of section 48A(e).
       ``(4) Solar water heating property.--The term `solar water 
     heating property' means property which, when installed in 
     connection with a structure, uses solar energy for the 
     purpose of providing hot water for use within such structure.
       ``(5) Photovoltaic property.--The term `photovoltaic 
     property' has the meaning given to such term by section 
     48A(e)(1)(C).
       ``(6) New, highly energy-efficient principal residence.--
       ``(A) In general.--Property is a new, highly energy-
     efficient principal residence if--
       ``(i) such property is located in the United States,
       ``(ii) the original use of such property commences with the 
     taxpayer and is, at the time of such use, the principal 
     residence of the taxpayer, and
       ``(iii) such property is certified before such use 
     commences as being 50 percent property, 40 percent property, 
     or 30 percent property.
       ``(B) 50, 40, or 30 percent property.--
       ``(i) In general.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), 
     property is 50 percent property, 40 percent property, or 30 
     percent property if the projected energy usage of such 
     property is reduced by 50 percent, 40 percent, or 30 percent, 
     respectively, compared to the energy usage of a reference 
     house that complies with minimum standard practice, such as 
     the 1998 International Energy Conservation Code of the 
     International Code Council, as determined according to the 
     requirements specified in clause (ii).
       ``(ii) Procedures.--

       ``(I) In general.--For purposes of clause (i), energy usage 
     shall be demonstrated either by a component-based approach or 
     a performance-based approach.
       ``(II) Component approach.--Compliance by the component 
     approach is achieved when all of the components of the house 
     comply with the requirements of prescriptive packages 
     established by the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with 
     the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, 
     such that they are equivalent to the results of using the 
     performance-based approach of subclause (III) to achieve the 
     required reduction in energy usage.

       ``(III) Performance-based approach.--Performance-based 
     compliance shall be demonstrated in terms of the required 
     percentage reductions in projected energy use. Computer 
     software used in support of performance-based compliance must 
     meet all of the procedures and methods for calculating energy 
     savings reductions that are promulgated by the Secretary of 
     Energy. Such regulations on the specifications for software 
     shall be based in the 1998 California Residential Alternative 
     Calculation Method Approval Manual, except that the 
     calculation procedures shall be developed such that the same 
     energy efficiency measures qualify a home for tax credits 
     regardless of whether the home uses a gas or oil furnace or 
     boiler, or an electric heat pump.
       ``(IV) Approval of software submissions.--The Secretary of 
     Energy shall approve software submissions that comply with 
     the calculation requirements of subclause (III).

       ``(C) Determinations of compliance.--A determination of 
     compliance made for the purposes of this paragraph shall be 
     filed with the Secretary of Energy within 1 year of the date 
     of such determination and shall include the TIN of the 
     certifier, the address of the building in compliance, and the 
     identity of the person for whom such determination was 
     performed. Determinations of compliance filed with the 
     Secretary of Energy shall be available for inspection by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(D) Compliance.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Secretary of Energy in consultation 
     with the Secretary of the Treasury shall establish 
     requirements for certification and compliance procedures 
     after examining the requirements for energy consultants and 
     home energy ratings providers specified by the Mortgage 
     Industry National Accreditation Procedures for Home Energy 
     Rating Systems.
       ``(ii) Individuals qualified to determine compliance.--
     Individuals qualified to determine compliance shall be only 
     those individuals who are recognized by an organization 
     certified by the Secretary of Energy for such purposes.
       ``(D) Principal residence.--The term `principal residence' 
     has the same meaning as when used in section 121, except that 
     the period for which a building is treated as the principal 
     residence of the taxpayer shall also include the 60-day 
     period ending on the 1st day on which it would (but for this 
     subparagraph) first be treated as his principal residence.
       ``(d) Special Rules.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Dollar amounts in case of joint occupancy.--In the 
     case of any dwelling unit which if jointly occupied and used 
     during any calendar year as a residence by 2 or more 
     individuals the following shall apply:
       ``(A) The amount of the credit allowable under subsection 
     (a) by reason of expenditures made during such calendar year 
     by any of such individuals with respect to such dwelling unit 
     shall be determined by treating all of such individuals as 1 
     taxpayer whose taxable year is such calendar year.
       ``(B) There shall be allowable with respect to such 
     expenditures to each of such individuals, a credit under 
     subsection (a) for the taxable year in which such calendar 
     year ends in an amount which bears the same ratio to the 
     amount determined under subparagraph (A) as the amount of 
     such expenditures made by such individual during such 
     calendar year bears to the aggregate of such expenditures 
     made by all of such individuals during such calendar year.
       ``(2) Tenant-stockholder in cooperative housing 
     corporation.--In the case of an individual who is a tenant-
     stockholder (as defined in section 216) in a cooperative 
     housing corporation (as defined in such section), such 
     individual shall be treated as having made his tenant-
     stockholder's proportionate share

[[Page H1216]]

     (as defined in section 216(b)(3)) of any expenditures of such 
     corporation.
       ``(3) Condominiums.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of an individual who is a 
     member of a condominium management association with respect 
     to a condominium which he owns, such individual shall be 
     treated as having made his proportionate share of any 
     expenditures of such association.
       ``(B) Condominium management association.--For purposes of 
     this paragraph, the term `condominium management association' 
     means an organization which meets the requirements of 
     paragraph (1) of section 528(c) (other than subparagraph (E) 
     thereof) with respect to a condominium project substantially 
     all of the units of which are used as residences.
       ``(4) Joint ownership of energy items.--
       ``(A) In general.--Any expenditure otherwise qualifying as 
     a residential energy property expenditure shall not be 
     treated as failing to so qualify merely because such 
     expenditure was made with respect to 2 or more dwelling 
     units.
       ``(B) Limits applied separately.--In the case of any 
     expenditure described in subparagraph (A), the amount of the 
     credit allowable under subsection (a) shall (subject to 
     paragraph (1)) be computed separately with respect to the 
     amount of the expenditure made for each dwelling unit.
       ``(5) Allocation in certain cases.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     if less than 80 percent of the use of an item is for 
     nonbusiness purposes, only that portion of the expenditures 
     for such item which is properly allocable to use for 
     nonbusiness purposes shall be taken into account. For 
     purposes of this paragraph, use for a swimming pool shall be 
     treated as use which is not for nonbusiness purposes.
       ``(B) Special rule for vehicles.--For purposes of this 
     section and section 48A, a vehicle shall be treated as used 
     entirely for business or nonbusiness purposes if the majority 
     of the use of such vehicle is for business or nonbusiness 
     purposes, as the case may be.
       ``(6) Double benefit; property used outside United States, 
     etc., not qualified.--No credit shall be allowed under 
     subsection (a)(1)(B) with respect to--
       ``(A) any property for which a credit is allowed under 
     section 30 or 48A,
       ``(B) any property referred to in section 50(b), and
       ``(C) the portion of the cost of any property taken into 
     account under section 179 or 179A.
       ``(7) When expenditure made; amount of expenditure.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     an expenditure with respect to an item shall be treated as 
     made when the original installation of the item is completed.
       ``(B) Expenditures part of building construction.--In the 
     case of an expenditure in connection with the construction of 
     a structure, such expenditure shall be treated as made when 
     the original use of the constructed structure by the taxpayer 
     begins.
       ``(C) Amount.--The amount of any expenditure shall be the 
     cost thereof.
       ``(8) Property financed by subsidized energy financing.--
       ``(A) Reduction of expenditures.--For purposes of 
     determining the amount of residential energy property 
     expenditures made by any individual with respect to any 
     dwelling unit, there shall not be taken in to account 
     expenditures which are made from subsidized energy financing 
     (as defined in section 48A(g)(1)).
       ``(B) Dollar limits reduced.--The dollar amounts in the 
     table contained in subsection (b)(1) with respect to each 
     property purchased for such dwelling unit for any taxable 
     year of such taxpayer shall be reduced proportionately by an 
     amount equal to the sum of--
       ``(i) the amount of the expenditures made by the taxpayer 
     during such taxable year with respect to such dwelling unit 
     and not taken into account by reason of subparagraph (A), and
       ``(ii) the amount of any Federal, State, or local grant 
     received by the taxpayer during such taxable year which is 
     used to make residential energy property expenditures with 
     respect to the dwelling unit and is not included in the gross 
     income of such taxpayer.
       ``(e) Basis Adjustments.--For purposes of this subtitle, if 
     a credit is allowed under this section for any expenditure 
     with respect to any property, the increase in the basis of 
     such property which would (but for this subsection) result 
     from such expenditure shall be reduced by the amount of the 
     credit so allowed.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Subsection (a) of section 1016 of such Code is amended 
     by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (26), by striking 
     the period at the end of paragraph (27) and inserting ``; 
     and'', and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(28) to the extent provided in section 25B(e), in the 
     case of amounts with respect to which a credit has been 
     allowed under section 25B.''.
       (2) The table of sections for subpart A of part IV of 
     subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by 
     inserting after the item relating to section 25A the 
     following new item:

``Sec. 25B. Nonbusiness energy property.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to expenditures after December 31, 1999.
       Page 2, after line 5, insert ``TITLE I--OIL PRICE 
     REDUCTION''.
       Page 2, line 6, strike ``2'' and insert ``101''.
       Page 5, line 4, strike ``3'' and insert ``102''.
       Page 5, line 16, strike ``4'' and insert ``103''.
       Page 6, line 10, strike ``section 5'' and insert ``section 
     104''.
       Page 6, line 12, strike ``5'' and insert ``104''.
       Page 6, line 15, strike ``section 4'' and insert ``section 
     103''.
       Page 6, line 17, strike ``section 4(1)'' and insert 
     ``section 103(1)''.
       Page 6, line 21, strike ``6'' and insert ``105''.
       Page 6, line 24, strike ``section 4'' and insert ``section 
     103''.
       Page 7, line 3, strike ``section 5'' and insert ``section 
     104''.
       Page 8, line 2, strike ``section 4'' and insert ``section 
     103''.
       Page 8, line 7, strike ``section 5'' and insert ``section 
     104''.
       Page 8, line 9, strike ``7'' and insert ``106''.
       Page 8, line 10, strike ``Act'' and insert ``title''.

                               H.R. 3822

                       Offered By: Mr. Traficant

       Amendment No. 21: Page 8, after line 2, insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. 7. CIVIL PENALTY FOR UNREASONABLE PRICE INCREASE FOR 
                   CRUDE OIL, RESIDUAL FUEL OIL, OR REFINED 
                   PETROLEUM PRODUCTS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 3 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall issue 
     regulations that--
       (1) apply to all crude oil, residual fuel oil, or refined 
     petroleum products that are sold in the United States;
       (2) prohibit any unreasonable price increase for such 
     products by an energy-producing company (as defined in 
     section 205(h)(6) of the Department of Energy Organization 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 7135(h)(6))); and
       (3) impose a civil penalty of not more than $100,000,000 
     for each unreasonable price increase.
       (b) Unreasonable Price Increase Defined.--For purposes of 
     this section, the term ``unreasonable price increase'' means 
     any price increase that exceeds any concurrent increase in 
     the production or operation costs of the energy-producing 
     company that are directly related to the products being sold.
       (c) Determination of Unreasonable Price Increase.--The 
     Administrator of the Energy Information Administration shall 
     determine at least annually whether any energy-producing 
     company has implemented an unreasonable price increase in 
     violation of regulations issued under subsection (a).
       Page 8, line 3, redesignate section 7 as section 8.

                               H.R. 3822

                       Offered By: Mr. Traficant

       Amendment No. 22: Page 8, after line 8, insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. 7. CIVIL PENALTY FOR UNREASONABLE PRICE INCREASE FOR 
                   CRUDE OIL, RESIDUAL FUEL OIL, OR REFINED 
                   PETROLEUM PRODUCTS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 3 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall issue 
     regulations that--
       (1) apply to all crude oil, residual fuel oil, or refined 
     petroleum products that are sold in the United States;
       (2) prohibit any unreasonable price increase for such 
     products by an energy-producing company (as defined in 
     section 205(h)(6) of the Department of Energy Organization 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 7135(h)(6))); and
       (3) impose a civil penalty of not more than $100,000,000 
     for each unreasonable price increase.
       (b) Unreasonable Price Increase Defined.--For purposes of 
     this section, the term ``unreasonable price increase'' means 
     any price increase that exceeds any concurrent increase in 
     the production or operation costs of the energy-producing 
     company that are directly related to the products being sold.
       (c) Determination of Unreasonable Price Increase.--The 
     Administrator of the Energy Information Administration shall 
     determine at least annually whether any energy-producing 
     company has implemented an unreasonable price increase in 
     violation of regulations issued under subsection (a).
       Page 8, line 9, redesignate section 7 as section 8.

                               H.R. 3822

                       Offered By: Mr. Traficant

       Amendment No. 23: Page 8, after line 8, insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. 7. CIVIL PENALTY FOR UNREASONABLE PRICE INCREASE FOR 
                   CRUDE OIL, RESIDUAL FUEL OIL, OR REFINED 
                   PETROLEUM PRODUCTS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 3 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall issue 
     regulations that--
       (1) apply to all crude oil, residual fuel oil, or refined 
     petroleum products that are sold in the United States;
       (2) prohibit any unreasonable price increase for such 
     products by an energy-producing company (as defined in 
     section 205(h)(6) of the Department of Energy Organization 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 7135(h)(6))); and
       (3) impose a civil penalty of not more than $100,000,000 
     for each unreasonable price increase.
       (b) Unreasonable Price Increase Defined.--For purposes of 
     this section, the term ``unreasonable price increase'' means

[[Page H1217]]

     any price increase that exceeds any concurrent increase in 
     the production or operation costs of the energy-producing 
     company that are directly related to the products being sold.
       (c) Determination of Unreasonable Price Increase.--The 
     Administrator of the Energy Information Administration shall 
     determine at least annually whether any energy-producing 
     company has implemented an unreasonable price increase in 
     violation of regulations issued under subsection (a).
       Page 8, line 9, redesignate section 7 as section 8.

                  Amendment to H.R. 3822, as Reported

                   Offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida

       Page 8, after line 8, insert the following new section (and 
     redesignate section 7 as section 8):

     SEC. 7. 1 YEAR MORATORIUM ON CERTAIN DIESEL FUEL EXCISE 
                   TAXES.

       (a) In General.--Section 4081(d) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (relating to termination) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
     (3) and (4), respectively,
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(2) Diesel fuel.--The rate of tax specified in subsection 
     (a)(2)(A)(iii) with respect to diesel fuel shall be--
       ``(A) zero during the 1 year period beginning on the date 
     of the enactment of this paragraph, and
       ``(B) 4.3 cents per gallon after September 30, 2005.'', and
       (3) by striking ``clauses (i) and (iii) of subsection 
     (a)(2)(A)'' in paragraph (1) and inserting ``subsections 
     (a)(2)(A)(i) and (a)(2)(A)(iii) with respect to kerosene''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Subclause (I) of section 4041(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to rate of tax on 
     certain buses) is amended by striking ``shall be 7.3 cents 
     per gallon (4.3 cents per gallon after September 30, 2005).'' 
     and inserting ``shall be--
       ``(aa) zero during the 1 year period beginning on the date 
     of the enactment of the Oil Price Reduction Act of 2000,
       ``(bb) 7.3 cents per gallon after the end of the 1 year 
     period under item (aa), and before October 1, 2005, and
       ``(cc) 4.3 cents per gallon after September 30, 2005.''.
       (2) Section 4081(c)(6) of such Code is amended by inserting 
     ``(other than paragraph (5))'' after ``subsection''.
       (3) Section 6412(a)(1) of such Code is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``(the date of the enactment of the Oil 
     Price Reduction Act of 2000, in the case of diesel fuel)'' 
     after ``October 1, 2005'' both places it appears,
       (B) by inserting ``(the date which is 6 months after the 
     date of the enactment of such Act, in the case of diesel 
     fuel) after ``March 31, 2006'' both places it appears, and
       (C) by inserting ``(the date which is 3 months after the 
     date of the enactment of such Act, in the case of diesel 
     fuel) after ``January 1, 2006''.
       (4) Section 6427(f)(4) of such Code is amended by inserting 
     ``(during the 1 year period beginning on the date of the 
     enactment of the Oil Price Reduction Act of 2000, in the case 
     of diesel fuel)'' after ``September 30, 2007''.
       (c) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date 
     of the enactment of this section.
       (2) Decrease in crude oil prices.--If the Secretary of 
     Treasury determines that the average refiner acquisition 
     costs for crude oil are equal to or less than such costs were 
     on December 31, 1999, the amendments made by this section 
     shall cease to take effect and the Internal Revenue Code 
     shall be administered as if such amendments did not take 
     effect.

                  Amendment to H.R. 3822, as Reported

                 Offered by Mr. Markey of Massachusetts

       Page 8, after line 8, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 7. REFINED PETROLEUM RESERVE.

       Section 160(g) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 6240(g)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``conduct a test'' and 
     all that follows through ``the Reserve which'' and inserting 
     ``establish a program of storage of refined petroleum 
     products within the Reserve. Such program shall include 
     mechanisms for storage of such products, which'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``demonstrated'' and 
     inserting ``to be included'';
       (3) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``, other than the site 
     of the Reserve established pursuant to section 154,'';
       (4) in paragraph (4)--
       (A) by inserting ``up to'' after ``amount equal to'';
       (B) by striking ``of the fiscal years 1992, 1993, and 
     1994'' and inserting ``fiscal year''; and
       (C) by striking ``of the fiscal years covered by the test 
     program'' and inserting ``fiscal year'';
       (5) by striking paragraph (5) and redesignating paragraph 
     (6) as paragraph (5); and
       (6) in paragraph (5), as so redesignated by paragraph (5) 
     of this section--
       (A) by striking ``the test program may be withdrawn from 
     the Reserve before the conclusion of the test program'' and 
     inserting ``this subsection may be withdrawn from the 
     Reserve'';
       (B) by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (A);
       (C) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B) 
     and inserting ``; or''; and
       (D) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(C) on the basis of a finding by the President that a 
     severe shortage in the supply of such refined petroleum 
     products has occurred.''.
       Page 8, line 9, redesignate section 7 as section 8.

  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, sometimes people laugh at Congress. This is a 
day for laughing at Congress. We have spent the last hour debating a 
bill that provides a report on diplomatic efforts from the President 
and rejecting the opportunity to offer amendments to actually deal with 
the problem. No wonder people laugh.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.
  This is an open rule, so long as one preprinted one's amendment in 
the Congressional Record.
  With regard to one of the last statements from the distinguished 
gentleman from Texas, specifically in response to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Chabot), when the gentleman from Texas said that the 
Committee on Rules deleted the sanctions section and the gentleman from 
Ohio had not found out about it, the gentleman from Texas voted for the 
deletion of the sanctions section in a voice vote.
  But this is important legislation. The OPEC countries are about to 
meet. They are following this vote. The message must be sent clearly 
that Congress stands firm behind a policy that says that this must be 
taken with all due seriousness, despite the fact that there has been no 
one at the helm on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. So I would 
urge my colleagues to support both the rule and the underlying 
legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, let me conclude my remarks by reminding my colleagues 
that defeating the previous question is an exercise in futility because 
the minority wants to offer an amendment that will be ruled out of 
order as nongermane to this rule. So the vote is without substance.
  The previous question vote itself is simply a procedural motion to 
close debate on this rule and proceed to a vote on its adoption. The 
vote has no substantive or policy implications whatsoever.
  At this point in the Record I insert an explanation of the previous 
question.

                       The Previous Question Vote

       Dear Republican Colleague: In light of recent public 
     statements regarding the intent of the minority to utilize 
     all available procedural options to advance their legislative 
     endeavors, I believe it is important to understand that the 
     vote on the previous question is strictly a procedural vote 
     that has no substantive policy implications.
       The previous question is a motion made in order under House 
     Rule XIX, and accorded precedence under clause 4 of Rule XVI, 
     and is the only parliamentary device in the House used for 
     both closing debate and preventing amendment. The effect of 
     adopting the previous question is to bring the pending 
     proposition or question to an immediate, final vote. The 
     motion is most often made at the conclusion of debate on a 
     special rule, motion or legislation considered in the House 
     prior to a vote on final passage. A Member might think about 
     ordering the previous question in terms of answering the 
     question ``is the House ready to proceed to an immediate vote 
     on adopting the pending question?''
       Furthermore, in order to amend a special rule (other than 
     by the managers offering an amendment to it or by the manager 
     yielding for the purpose of amendment), the House must vote 
     against ordering the previous question. If the motion for the 
     previous question is defeated, the House is, in effect, 
     turning control of the Floor over to the Member who led the 
     opposition (usually a Member of the minority party). The 
     Speaker then recognizes the Member who led the opposition 
     (usually a minority member of the Rules Committee) to control 
     an additional hour of debate during which a germane amendment 
     may be offered to the rule. This minority Member then 
     controls the House Floor for the hour.
       The vote on the previous question is simply a procedural 
     vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on adopting 
     the resolution that sets the ground rules for debate and 
     amendment on the legislation it would make in order. 
     Therefore, the vote on the previous question has no 
     substantive legislative or policy implications.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Deborah Pryce,
                                               Member of Congress.

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, 
and I move the previous question on the resolution.

[[Page H1218]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair will reduce to a minimum 
of 5 minutes the period of time within which a vote by electronic 
device, if ordered, will be taken on the question of agreeing to the 
resolution.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 222, 
nays 200, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 64]

                               YEAS--222

     Aderholt
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brady (TX)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (WI)
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill (MT)
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kasich
     Kelly
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kuykendall
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     Martinez
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Morella
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ose
     Oxley
     Packard
     Paul
     Pease
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roukema
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stump
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Toomey
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NAYS--200

     Abercrombie
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Forbes
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green (TX)
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hastings (FL)
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Jefferson
     John
     Johnson, E.B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Larson
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lucas (KY)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Phelps
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Sisisky
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Ackerman
     Crane
     Franks (NJ)
     Greenwood
     Hill (IN)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Lowey
     McDermott
     Pallone
     Royce
     Rush
     Schakowsky

                              {time}  1626

  Mr. UDALL of Colorado and Mr. HINCHEY changed their vote from ``yea'' 
to ``nay''.
  Messrs. McKEON, NORWOOD and BALLENGER changed their vote from ``nay'' 
to ``yea''.
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hanson). Pursuant to House Resolution 
445 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of 
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the 
bill, H.R. 3822.

                              {time}  1625


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 3822) to reduce, suspend, or terminate any assistance under the 
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Arms Export Control Act to each 
country determined by the President to be engaged in oil price fixing 
to the detriment of the United States economy, and for other purposes, 
with Mr. LaHood in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.

                              {time}  1630

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) and the 
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson) each will control 30 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman).
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to rise in strong support of 
H.R. 3822, the Oil Price Reduction Act of 2000. I urge my colleagues on 
both sides of the aisle to support this measure, which spotlights 
OPEC'c price-fixing activities. Its enactment will help to ensure that 
the force of demand and supply set the prevailing price of oil, and not 
a back-room deal among countries that do not share our national 
interest.
  If we are concerned about excess oil profits going to the oil-
producing nations, we should be supporting this measure. In early 
March, a news release from the Energy Department confirmed what we had 
all suspected at that time: that oil revenues to OPEC and other major 
oil exporting countries have doubled over the past 2 years to $212 
billion, their highest level since 1984.
  If we are concerned that the Energy Secretary is riding on empty 
every time he visits an OPEC country, then I urge my colleagues to 
support this measure and put our energy diplomacy in high gear. If we 
are concerned that the administration has been asleep at the switch 
over the past 18 months as OPEC oil production cutbacks led to a 
tripling of energy prices, then I urge

[[Page H1219]]

my colleagues to support this measure as we put the administration back 
to work on a long-term approach to America's energy security.
  The House Committee on International Relations held 2 days of 
hearings on OPEC and the Northeast energy crisis and on U.S. policy 
toward OPEC in February and in March; and we heard testimony from 
several administration witnesses, including our Secretary of Energy 
Bill Richardson. This measure was fully debated in our Committee on 
International Relations and was ultimately reported out of our 
committee in mid-March. It is a balanced, responsible approach to the 
challenge that the American economy and the American consumer faces 
from the current energy price crisis that was engineered by OPEC and 
other major net oil exporters.
  We need to send a strong message to the OPEC price cartel, prior to 
its forthcoming March 27 meeting in Vienna, that continued price-fixing 
efforts to prop up the price of oil will be an important consideration 
in our Nation's foreign policy.
  Is OPEC price-fixing? Let me answer by quoting a statement issued on 
Tuesday of this week by the secretary general of that organization, and 
I quote: ``We should increase production by an amount needed to reach 
the target price of around $24 a barrel.'' In so many words, that is a 
resounding yes to the fact that they are price-fixing.
  Does OPEC have to make any major increases in its current production 
to get to that price level? The answer is not at all. That organization 
calculates the current global composite price at slightly over $25 a 
barrel. With very minor production increases, OPEC could achieve its 
purposes and literally thumb its nose at our Nation with our 
skyrocketing gas prices.
  This late-breaking news about OPEC's intentions at the upcoming March 
27 Vienna meeting provides ample evidence to the administration that 
their price-fixing activities are still alive and well and that they 
are prepared to dismiss concerns in this country about low oil stocks 
and our steadily rising fuel prices.
  How has the administration handled OPEC? It has dispatched the 
Secretary of Energy to OPEC countries to engage in quiet diplomacy over 
the past 2 years. However, as prices continue to rise, Secretary 
Richardson conducted business as usual, with OPEC members pursuing 
business for American companies while failing to protect the interests 
of the American consumer.
  In fact, it appears that Secretary Richardson might well have been 
giving the green light to OPEC ministers when he told them prior to 
their meeting in March of last year, and I quote, ``We feel that lower 
prices are good for the consumers, but we recognize they can have a 
negative impact domestically on some of our friends. So far OPEC's 
response has been responsible and restrained,'' said Secretary 
Richardson.

  If my colleagues believe that OPEC has not been responsible or 
restrained in its policy toward their constituents, then they should 
support this measure.
  How does this bill respond to OPEC and the ongoing energy crisis? 
Specifically, this bill requires our President, not later than 30 days 
after its enactment, to send to the Congress a report containing a 
description of our security relationship with each OPEC member and any 
other major net oil exporting countries, together with information 
about our assistance programs and our government supported arms sales 
to those countries.
  This bill requires a presidential determination as to whether or not 
an OPEC member is engaged in price-fixing to the detriment of our 
Nation's economy.
  Finally, this bill further directs the President to undertake a 
concerted bilateral and multilateral diplomatic campaign to bring about 
the end of international oil price-fixing arrangements.
  It is my understanding that many, if not all, of the proposed 
amendments to this bill are nongermane and subject to a point of order. 
And while I am sympathetic to many of these important policy proposals, 
the Oil Price Reduction Act has a much narrower focus and cannot be a 
vehicle for the overdue reform of our entire policy in energy.
  If we are concerned about the oil price-fixing, and if we are 
concerned about its impact upon our economy, then I urge my colleagues 
to support this bill, a bill which sends a clear message to the 
administration and to the oil-producing nations that oil price-fixing 
is harmful to our American consumers and detrimental to the American 
economy.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  This legislation, in the midst of a crisis, is akin to what a city 
council would do. It has no common sense energy proposal, we do not 
reinstate SPR, and we ought to be taking real action.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Frank).
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I will say that while 
decorum is important, it seems to me the Members were paying this bill 
about as much attention as it deserves.
  I should explain to some of my colleagues, whose amendments will be 
ruled out of order, that I will not be able to side with them if they 
appeal the ruling of the Chair, because I am afraid that they are not 
germane. I have looked at these amendments, and those amendments each 
try to accomplish something. The governing principle of this bill is to 
do nothing. And an amendment which tries to do something is clearly not 
germane to this feel-good piece of legislation. So I would have to say 
to my friends that I cannot be with them, because we have to uphold the 
spirit of this bill. Something is not germane to nothing. That is an 
important parliamentary point.
  This is a bill which the Republicans could have brought forward 
anything they wanted. Part of it is a ratification. This is the 
Republican ratification of the tax increase of 1993. Members will 
remember some of them and others will remember the gnashing and wailing 
and lamentation about the gas tax increase. It was a terrible thing, 
that gasoline tax increase. Well, the Republican Party had the 
opportunity to bring forward a bill repealing the 1993 gasoline tax 
increase, and their answer is a resounding ``never mind,'' in the words 
of Emily Litella.
  So we have on the part of the Republican Party a ratification of the 
gasoline tax increase of 1993. Better late than never.
  We now have on our side suggestions for taking some of the strategic 
petroleum reserve and making it available to the American people, who 
paid for it. That is not to be considered. The Republican Party is 
adamant, apparently, against doing anything with this strategic 
petroleum reserve or setting up a new one for the future.
  What we have, instead, is a very interesting political phenomenon: a 
man who is being talked about for vice president, but is still only the 
Secretary of Energy, apparently has coattails. Because as the gentleman 
who spoke said, this is an effort to mandate a diplomatic campaign to 
get OPEC to change its position. Well, that is what Secretary 
Richardson has been doing.
  Now, a week before the vote we come forward, and I think what we have 
here is an effort to take credit for what might happen anyway. So 
Secretary Richardson turns out to have coattails not in November but in 
March. Because what we have is a bill that if OPEC changes its 
position, as the administration has been working to have them do, we 
will take the credit for it.
  In fact, I differ with the administration. I do not think they should 
be simply relying on trying to move OPEC by persuasion. I think we 
should have been doing things with the strategic petroleum reserve. But 
the bill absolutely agrees with the administration. As we heard the 
chairman say, we have two things here: first of all, a report, a report 
the issuance of which no doubt is having them quaking in Kuwait. It has 
them terrorized in Venezuela. A report is coming. The Congress of the 
United States is going to issue a report. And no doubt that strikes 
terror into the hearts of the oil-producing nations.
  But beyond the report, what do we have? We have a diplomatic campaign 
to get OPEC to change its position. Exactly what the administration has 
been doing. So this bill fails to push the administration to do more 
and, instead, violates the copyright laws by trying to take credit for 
what they are already doing.

[[Page H1220]]

  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. DeLay), the distinguished majority whip.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I just have to say to my colleagues that it 
is mind-boggling, and I do not think anybody in the United States 
believes, that the other side of the aisle has an answer to this 
problem, period. They talk about emptying out the strategic petroleum 
reserve. What do my colleagues think OPEC would do if we did that? They 
would just tighten the valve down just enough to offset that amount 
that we are doing. That is not the point here.
  Now, gas taxes. I am for cutting the gas taxes. I am for cutting more 
than the Gore gas tax. I am for cutting the Bush gas tax. Mr. Chairman, 
today's high gas and oil prices are unnecessary, and it is unfortunate 
that we have to do a bill like this because this administration has no 
credibility in the world, and everybody in America understands that.
  We are having a tin cup diplomacy running around begging OPEC to open 
their valves. And the reason is because the Clinton-Gore administration 
is squarely to blame for this, what is going on in America today, the 
high prices of gasoline. The simple fact is that the American economy 
is too dependent on foreign oil because this administration refuses to 
allow an increase in domestic oil production.
  Just this month, just this month this administration has increased 
the royalties on drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, despite the repeated 
objections of Congress. They have also banned new pipeline and dam 
construction and forbidden access to multipurpose Federal lands. These 
restrictions should be lifted.
  Kowtowing to environmental extremists, Clinton and Gore policies have 
severely restricted oil, coal, hydro- and natural gas energy production 
across the board. And if my colleagues do not believe me, read the Vice 
President's book, Earth in the Balance. It is all here. It is all 
designed to drive up the cost of gasoline so he can eliminate the 
internal combustion engine.
  Steps must be taken across the board to make all these energy sources 
more viable. The facts speak for themselves. Today our domestic oil 
production is at the lowest point since World War II, and we are 
importing more oil than ever before, even more than during the 1973 
embargo when everybody was in gas lines to fill up their cars.

                              {time}  1645

  In fact, every day Americans spend more than $300 million on foreign 
oil. In light of this situation, you would think that American 
refineries and wells would be working overtime to provide as much fuel 
as possible, but that is not the case.
  During the 1998 oil price crash, over 150,000 marginal oil wells were 
closed and never reopened, because the Clinton-Gore administration 
simply did not care about domestic production. Now, while these wells 
each produce less than 15 barrels a day, the total output derived by 
opening only half of them would boost domestic oil production by 
250,000 barrels of oil every day, but Federal tax incentives, like ones 
we have in Texas, could easily achieve this increase.
  On March 27, a little less than a week away, OPEC ministers will be 
meeting to discuss a possibility of increasing their production levels 
to help stabilize oil prices. This bill is an honest effort to 
encourage them to do the right thing. And I am going to vote for it; 
but let me be perfectly clear, the reason we are in this mess in the 
first place is because for the last 7 years, this administration has 
turned its back on our domestic energy needs.
  In effect, Clinton and Gore have left us with no choice but to beg 
our OPEC allies to turn the spigot up. This is a humiliating position 
for America, and it hurts families and businesses, especially truckers 
who are stuck with paying higher prices.
  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), and say in doing so, the only report that we 
really need is the report on where Congress has been for the last 6 
years.
  (Mr. MENENDEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, my constituents in New Jersey have not 
been immune to skyrocketing oil and gas prices. We have seen consumers, 
truckers, and oil-dependent industries suffering for months as a result 
of exorbitant prices, including some independent truckers having to 
take their trucks off the road, because they simply cannot afford to 
operate them.
  In essence, what this legislation does, which we voted for in the 
community, but let us be honest, what it does is, it does exactly what 
the administration has been doing, which is to leverage its 
relationship with OPEC countries and diplomacy to get them to produce 
and, therefore, help the price. That is what we expect the result to be 
next Monday when OPEC meets; that is the diplomacy that we need.
  This is a cheering of that effort. Regardless of what happens on 
Monday, we need steps to protect the American economy and consumers in 
the short and long terms. In addition to passing this bill, we will 
send a message to OPEC that the administration has already done through 
its diplomacy, that we will not be held hostage to its monopolistic 
practices. We need to implement President Clinton's initiative to 
create a home heating oil reserve for the Northeast to cushion future 
spikes in oil prices. And we should also reauthorize the strategic 
petroleum reserve, which is set to expire in a few days on March 31, 
next week.
  Regardless of your position on drawing down the reserve in these 
prices, we think we can all agree that that option should remain 
available, including to create opportunities for fluctuations in the 
market. The majority has the power and should have already brought that 
bill to the floor.
  Over the last 5 years the majority has failed to provide Americans 
with energy security. When they vote against alternative fuel research 
and development, when they send Alaskan oil to Japan, when they do not 
reauthorize the strategic petroleum reserve with provisions to deal 
with extreme market fluctuations, when they make the administration 
sell off part of the reserve in order to meet some of their budget 
requirements and when they fail to assist the administration in buying 
oil, that will give us the opportunities.
  Let us not have our constituents choose between heating their homes 
and feeding their families. Let us get some real energy policy going 
here.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the distinguished chairman of the 
Committee on Resources.
  (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I noticed one thing when I 
listened to this debate. If we can bottle the hot air that has been 
coming from some people on this side of the aisle over here, we can 
solve the energy crisis right now.
  I have never heard so many what I call knee-jerk reactions, if we 
check each one of your cheeks, you will see a black eye, about this 
whole oil crisis. The solution that I have heard today, we are going to 
have our strategic reserve drawn down.
  I happen to agree with the gentleman from Texas (Mr.  DeLay). If I 
was an OPEC member, I would say draw it, buddy, because when it is all 
going, you are going to pay $55 a barrel of oil. That is what I would 
do, and that is what they will do if we do that.
  What I want to talk about is the selling of Alaskan oil. My good 
friend, the gentleman from California (Mr.  George Miller), the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) talking about Alaskan oil, we sell 
from Alaska 55,000 barrels a day of heavy crude. And by the way, we 
also sell 59,000 barrels a day from California, heavy crude.
  Now, think about that a moment; but more than that, we are importing 
8,650,000 barrels a day from the OPEC countries. If we would stop that 
55,000 barrels, it would not stop one bit of the prices increased on 
the Western States. But more than that, you do not have the capability 
to refine the oil. The refineries are not there. They are not there, 
and they will not be there. And most of you know that. This is all, 
again, hot air.
  But more than that, we have to set an energy policy. This 
administration has not done so. I would suggest one

[[Page H1221]]

 thing, the only policy this administration has is a set of kneepads 
for Mr. Richardson, because he is going to have to beg and beg and beg 
again.
  As the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) also reminds us, they will 
drop the price of oil down to about $24, $25 a barrel, and we will go 
on our merry way, because this Congress, in fact, will not come to 
grips with producing oil.
  And by the way, gentlemen, all of you in this room are opposing 
opening ANWR; think about it a moment. I passed that bill in 1995, and 
your President vetoed it. That is 2,200,000 barrels a day that could 
come to the West Coast and the East Coast if we had the refining 
capability; but we do not, and trying to get a refinery built in this 
country is nearly impossible because it is of this administration. I am 
saying let us talk about real domestic production.
  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller).
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman 
for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Chairman, somebody ought to call the police. Something ought to 
call the police because this bill is simply a fraud on the public. This 
bill does nothing about the current gas price crisis in our country. It 
does nothing about America's future energy problems. This bill is 
simply to try to make the Republicans look good while they do nothing. 
It is a fraud.
  It is a fraud on the American public. Let us understand what the 
Republicans have done. When oil was $10 a barrel, they would not allow 
us to buy it for the strategic oil reserve. Now, when oil is $35 a 
barrel, they will not let us use the reserve to help the American 
people. They cut $1.3 billion out of energy conservation efficiency and 
research and development. They put a rider on the transportation 
appropriations bill so we cannot even investigate getting better 
mileage in people's automobiles.
  Between the 1970s and the 1980s, we doubled the mileage on 
automobiles. But we have not been able to do anything since then 
because of the Republican Presidents and Republican Congress. So now 
people have to sit in automobiles that are not fit and pay $2 for 
gasoline.
  No, we need the Republicans to stop their actions, to stop their 
actions against conservation, to stop their actions against home 
heating oil. They cut home heating oil; and 250,000 people who have 
homes in the Northeast that could have been weatherized were not 
weatherized, so 250,000 people this year had to go out and be gouged in 
the home heating oil market.
  Obviously, the Republicans now are trying to cover their tracks. 
Obviously, now they want to pretend like they had nothing to do with 
the energy problem that we have. But in appropriations bill after 
appropriations bill, we see the cuts on kinds of programs that can lead 
to new energy efficiencies, can lead to automobile mileage standards, 
that can bring about the kind of technology that can save this country 
millions and millions and millions of barrels every day. Because that 
is what we did during the 1970s, but we cannot do that with the 
Republicans.
  Call the police and get these frauds out of here.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Manzullo), a member of our Committee on International 
Relations.
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, this debate is not about the Congress, 
and it is not about the President of the United States. This debate is 
about Gene Wilmarth from Leaf River, Illinois.
  Gene has to go out and pay more interest on his note to buy cattle, 
and he has got to pay more interest on his operating loan because the 
Fed increases the short-term interest rate because the price of 
gasoline goes up and the Fed thinks it is going to fuel inflation. And 
Gene Wilmarth has to buy diesel fuel to put his crops and cultivate 
them, and he has got to haul them to the market and to the elevator, 
all in a time when crop prices are one of the lowest in history.
  The debate is not about the President. It is not about the Congress. 
It is about the thousands of Gene Wilmarths across this country. They 
cannot take any more.
  How ironic it would be for the young men and women who are farming 
today if some of those had fought in the Gulf War to protect the 
countries of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, who, in exchange for the 
gratitude of the nearly 300 American lives that were lost, turn around 
and stick it to the American people by being engaged in an 
international criminal conspiracy to fix the price of oil. It has got 
to come to a stop.
  The purpose of this bill today is to remind the President that he can 
do something, something to send a message around the world that when we 
pump money through the IMF to bail out countries, that when we send 
foreign aid, that, in exchange for our benevolence, help out the 
American farmer, help out the American consumer, help out the American 
people, do not hold hostage the friend that they have in this country.
  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), and I yield the balance of the time to the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) for the purpose of controlling 
the time.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, this was not a half bad resolution as it 
was produced by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) and the 
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson) out of the committee.
  In fact, what it said was that the President would be able to use his 
existing legal authorities to reduce, to suspend, or to terminate 
assistance to these OPEC nations, including military aid or arms sales.
  So in other words, if the heads of all these counties are going to go 
into a room and say, they are not getting any more oil from us or we 
are going to reduce it dramatically, then leaders from our country are 
going to go into a room and say, well, they are not going to get what 
we have got in our country that they want.
  But by the time that it had been transformed by the miracle of the 
Committee on Rules, every meaningful part of this resolution has been 
removed; and all we have left is, basically, a resolution which says 
this oil crisis is really a very bad thing.
  Now, we are all going to agree with that. It is a bad thing. But the 
Committee on Rules had a chance to put into order for us to debate out 
here on the floor the reauthorization of the strategic petroleum 
reserve, which is what our President can use to talk to the leaders of 
their country in deploying our oil reserves, 560 million barrels of 
oil.
  The Committee on Rules did not put into order my amendment, which 
said that we should build a regional home heating oil reserve up in the 
northeastern part of the United States for Maryland, for New Jersey, 
for New York, for all of New England. That is not in order here. Let us 
just go through another winter without giving those people up in the 
Northeast the chance not to have themselves tipped upside down and have 
money shaken out of their pockets by OPEC when their governments, not 
private companies, my colleagues, when their governments decide that 
they are going to take our consumers hostage and just stick them up.
  So as this resolution is out here on the floor, it is really worse 
than meaningless because it gives the false message to the rest of 
America that we are doing something here today when, in fact, we are 
not doing anything at all.

                              {time}  1700

  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Wyoming (Mrs. Cubin).
  Mrs. CUBIN. Mr. Chairman, over the past year we have watched this 
country slide further and further what could very well be described as 
a full-lown energy crisis. Gas prices have increased dramatically over 
the past year to the point of being the largest price increase in 
history. American oil inventories are at their lowest level in 4 years. 
This has all occurred under the Clinton-Gore administration's watch. 
This administration's lack of an energy policy and its resistance to 
allowing oil and gas exploration on public lands has brought us to this 
point.
  Clinton and Gore pay lip service to energy policy but in reality they 
do all they can to prevent domestic industries from meeting our energy 
needs. This administration has locked up one

[[Page H1222]]

of the largest clean coal sources in the lower 48 States, in Utah's 
Grand Escalante National Monument. This administration has been opposed 
to any new nuclear power plants and has been opposed to waste disposal.
  This administration is importing more oil than ever with regulations 
and taxes designed to close our domestic oil industry. It is closing 
vast areas to gas development in the outer continental shelf. Due to 
extreme environmental policies, domestic reserves of oil and gas in the 
Rocky Mountains are too expensive to produce. And possibly more 
importantly, in the Rocky Mountains, pipelines are tougher than ever to 
permit. We must be able to increase domestic crude oil production not 
only to help alleviate the risks to our national security but also to 
make energy in the United States more affordable.
  This administration is importing more oil than ever, with regulations 
and taxes designed to close our domestic oil industry.
  We have a wealth of untapped energy resources in this country and yet 
we can't get at them because this administration keeps throwing up 
barriers through needless rules and regulations.
  Why should we have to depend on any foreign energy resource when we 
have it setting right here in our backyard.
  I implore this administration to wake up and start working on a 
solution to this crisis so that our national security will not be 
jeopardized, and our constituents can know and appreciate stable energy 
prices.
  This bill, the Oil Price Reduction Act, is a step in the right 
direction.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt).
  Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
this time. We have heard a lot today about OPEC and sending the message 
to OPEC and how there was an expression of surprise that OPEC would be 
fixing prices. Well, they have been doing it since 1960. It should not 
come as a surprise. Is OPEC a problem? Of course OPEC is a problem. At 
the same time, there was reference to Secretary Richardson being 
dispatched by the President.
  Let us go back a bit in history. In 1990, it was President Bush that 
dispatched a half a million men and women in combat to the Gulf. Let us 
be candid. They were not dispatched there to safeguard democracy. They 
went there to protect economic interests of the United States. They 
went there because of the oil. Not only did we fail to remove Saddam 
Hussein, but when we had the leverage in terms of our relationship with 
OPEC, when they needed us, what happened, when we could have absolutely 
once and for all crushed the cartel? Nothing happened. That is what 
happened. That is why we are in the problem today. Not because of the 
failure of this administration but what went on back in 1990.
  Mr. Chairman, with gas prices hitting record highs, approaching the 
$2-a-gallon mark, consumers are understandably searching for villains. 
OPEC is an easy target.
  Last year, OPEC removed about 6 percent of world production from the 
market. These cutbacks have significantly reduced worldwide stockpiles 
of crude oil and refined petroleum products, and nearly tripled crude 
oil prices to around $30 a barrel.
  According to the Energy Department, this winter distillate fuel 
stocks nationwide were nearly 32 percent below last year. The supply 
shortfall was even more severe in the Northeast, where distillate fuel 
stocks were 13 million barrels below average levels.
  The Clinton administration's sluggish response has made it another 
easy target, especially when the original rationale for inaction was 
``Sorry, can't intervene. Leave it to market forces.''
  I, for one, believe government intervention is entirely appropriate. 
When the price of home heating oil triples in a few weeks, the public 
interest demands that we help. I believe we must act aggressively to 
lower prices by increasing supplies; provide additional relief to the 
most vulnerable; and combat any anti-competitive actions--both 
domestically and abroad.
  While we're sorting causes from effects, let's look a little deeper.
  It should come as no surprise that OPEC is a cartel. We've known that 
since 1973. And we haven't done much about it for almost 20 years.
  When American troops marched toward Iraq in 1991, their mission was 
broader than saving democracy in Kuwait. They were also there to keep 
our hands on the oil spigot. When former President Bush had the 
leverage to keep that spigot open, he blew it.
  By failing to take care on the cartel then, former President Bush 
allowed American families today to be held hostage to OPEC nations.
  Now, almost a decade later, there's a chorus of outrage against OPEC. 
And for good reason--the cartel's continued efforts to restrain supply 
has affected prices throughout the world.
  But when there is a drastic price hike in home heating oil--as much 
as 300 percent in a year, and 100 percent in just a few weeks--when the 
majority of supplies come from domestic producers, then factors other 
than OPEC reductions may be at work. When I hear accounts of a $9 per 
barrel fee assessed on crude oil during the refining process in 
domestic ports, then we have an obligation to oppose any unscrupulous 
actions by domestic producers, too. And an obligation to intervene.
  Beyond stepping up pressure on OPEC to boost production, I support an 
immediate release of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to exert 
a downward pressure on prices. This is a step that is completely within 
our discretion.
  Back in 1991, within hours of the first air strike against Iraq, 
former President Bush authorized a draw-down of the reserve. When the 
Energy Department activated it, crude prices plummeted by nearly $10 
per barrel overnight, falling below $20 per barrel for the first time 
since the original invasion.
  Some of our colleagues oppose a draw-down out of blind faith in the 
``invisible hand'' of market forces. To them, I ask, what about price 
supports for domestic cartels--for example, for dairy farmers.
  Why a helping hand for farmers, but no hand for the elderly trying to 
heat their homes, or the small independent trucker trying to bring 
goods to the market?
  So let's be clear. OPEC production cuts are a big factor. But there's 
a lot more to this current crisis, and a lot more at our disposal than 
relying on OPEC production to increase supplies and reduce prices.
  For instance, what about suspicions of domestic price gouging? Yes, 
it's possible there are culprits within our own borders.
  The fact that fees are added at different points along the process of 
moving crude oil to consumers--from processors to refiners to shippers 
to dealers--makes it hard to pin down all the factors which have 
contributed to the price spikes. No matter who you blame or how you 
calculate it, however, consumers are now paying two-and-a-half times 
the cost of crude straight out of the ground.
  Although milder weather is on its way, we can not wait idly for the 
sun to shine and for OPEC to convene next week while soaring gas prices 
continue to afflict and affect families and businesses.
  So, I rise in support of immediate action. With or without this bill, 
the Administration has the authority to withhold foreign assistance. It 
has the authority to draw down from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. It 
has the authority to create heating oil reserves to provide supplies to 
cushion against future shortages and price hikes. The Congress has the 
authority to broaden LIHEAP to struggling families who can't pay 
exorbitant heating bills, and to invest more in energy conservation and 
renewables to wean us off dependency on foreign oil and help our 
environment.
  At a time when U.S. taxpayers are suffering, our government has every 
right--and an obligation--to press OPEC countries, who receive 
substantial U.S. aid, to consider the impact of their policies on the 
streets of the United States. I urge the administration to act now--and 
to learn from and help compensate for the mistakes of almost a decade 
ago.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will rise informally.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Saxton) assumed the chair.

                          ____________________