[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 83 (Tuesday, June 27, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H5207-H5211]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4733, ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001

  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the 
Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 532 and ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 532

       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. 4733) making appropriations for energy and 
     water development for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
     2001, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill 
     shall be dispensed with. Points of order against 
     consideration of the bill for failure to comply with clause 4 
     of rule XIII are waived. 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 Appropriations. After general debate the bill 
     shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. 
     Points of orders against provisions in the bill for failure 
     to comply with clause 2 or clause 5(a) of rule XXI are 
     waived. The amendment printed in the report of the Committee 
     on Rules accompanying this resolution may be offered only by 
     a Member designated in the report and only at the appropriate 
     point in the reading of the bill, shall be considered as 
     read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report 
     equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
     opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be 
     subject to a demand for division of the question in the House 
     or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against 
     the amendment printed in the report are waived. During 
     consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chairman of the 
     Committee of the Whole may accord priority in recognition on 
     the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment has 
     caused it to be printed in the portion of the Congressional 
     Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule

[[Page H5208]]

     XVIII. Amendments so printed 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. 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.

                              {time}  1445

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The gentleman from Washington 
(Mr. Hastings) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate 
only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York 
(Ms. Slaughter), 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. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 532 provides an open 
rule for consideration of H.R. 4733, the Energy and Water 
appropriations bill for fiscal year 2001. The resolution waives clause 
4 of rule XIII, requiring a 3-day layover of the committee report and 
requiring a 3-day availability of printed hearings on a general 
appropriation bill against consideration of the bill.
  The rule provides 1 hour of general debate to be equally divided 
between the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Appropriations. The rule waives clause 2 of Rule XXI, prohibiting 
unauthorized or legislative provisions in an appropriations bill, and 
clause 5(1) of rule XXI, prohibiting a tax or tariff provision in a 
bill not reported by a committee with jurisdiction over revenue 
measures, against provisions in the bill.
  The bill further provides that the amendment printed in the Committee 
on Rules may be offered only by a Member designated in the report and 
only at the appropriate time in the reading of the bill, shall be 
considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the 
report, equally divided and controlled by a proponent and an opponent, 
shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand 
for a division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the 
Whole.
  The rule also waives all points of order against the amendment 
printed in the report, and authorizes the Chair to accord priority in 
recognition to Members who have preprinted their amendments in the 
Congressional Record. 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 a postponed question if the vote 
follows a 15-minute vote. Finally, the rule provides on a motion to 
recommit with or without instructions.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard), the 
chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, and the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), the ranking member of the 
subcommittee, are to be commended for their efforts on this 
legislation. H.R. 4733 appropriates funds for civil projects of the 
Corps of Engineers, the Department of Interior's Bureau of Reclamation, 
most of the Department of Energy, and several independent agencies such 
as the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Bonneville Power Administration, 
and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
  The bill appropriates $21.7 billion in new budget authority, which is 
$546 million more than fiscal year 2000, but $952 million less than the 
President's request. The vast majority of the bill's funding, $17.3 
billion, goes to various programs run by the Department of Energy, such 
as cleanup of nuclear waste on a number of Federal facilities, 
including the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in my district.
  The bill also allocates $4.1 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers 
and $770 million to the Department of the Interior. The funding in this 
bill is necessary to protect important investments in our Nation's 
water and energy infrastructure and to maintain and operate the wide 
range of facilities and programs within the subcommittee's 
jurisdiction.
  As a Member of Congress from the West, I am particularly aware of the 
importance of these projects. Therefore, I commend the members of the 
Energy and Water subcommittee for their effort on this legislation, and 
I urge my colleagues to support both the rule and the underlying bill, 
H.R. 4733.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington 
(Mr. Hastings), my colleague, for yielding me the customary \1/2\ hour, 
and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
her remarks.)
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the open rule, but 
have several concerns regarding the underlying bill. Despite the best 
efforts of the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development chairman 
and members to put together a bipartisan bill, the fiscal year 2001 
Energy and Water Development appropriations bill is yet another 
spending bill that misses the boat.
  On the one hand, the bill funds numerous projects of critical 
importance to many of our districts. At the same time, however, it 
leaves serious spending gaps that fail to address real-world concerns 
that will have to be dealt with before the bill is signed into law.
  For instance, gas prices have topped $2 per gallon in many places. 
While the Federal Government has launched an investigation through the 
Federal Trade Commission in hopes of uncovering the answer to what is 
behind the soaring prices, the bill fails to adequately address the 
roots of the gasoline price problem.
  When oil prices plunged to $8 to $10 a barrel in March of 1999, the 
current leadership took little action to protect domestic oil 
producers, and when gas prices across the Nation stood at $1 per 
gallon, the majority party leadership pushed to eliminate the Energy 
Department entirely. They ignored efforts by Members to replenish the 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve with oil from struggling domestic 
producers. Had they acted, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve could have 
115 million barrels more of oil, and we might have a healthier domestic 
oil industry.
  Fortunately, the rule will protect efforts in committee by the 
gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) to amend the bill to 
reauthorize the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Were it not for the 
gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) offering this amendment 
adopted in the committee, the floor amendment proposed today would not 
be germane to the bill. The full House will also have an opportunity in 
the amendment process to establish a new regional home heating oil 
reserve in the Northeast, a program of critical importance to my 
district in Rochester and one I have long supported.
  Nevertheless, the underlying bill is $100 million short of the 
President's request for solar and renewable energy research, stifling 
hope for developing marketable solutions to what promises to be a 
perennial problem. This makes little sense. The majority continues to 
criticize the administration for failing to have an energy policy, yet 
has systematically shut down administration initiatives to fund energy 
research efforts that could help in finding a solution to this problem.
  During consideration of this bill at full committee, the gentlewoman 
from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) offered an amendment to restore the line for 
Solar and Renewable Energy Research to the level requested in the 
President's budget. The amendment was rejected by the committee on a 
party line vote.
  This has been a continuing pattern throughout the appropriations 
process. The House has just passed the VA-HUD appropriations bill, 
which slashes the President's budget request for the National Science 
Foundation by half a billion dollars. Floor action on the Interior bill 
made a bad situation worse by leaving the bill $100 million below last 
year's level on energy efficiency.

[[Page H5209]]

  The Congress does not have the ability or the desire to set fuel 
prices, but we should have the good sense to support research into ways 
to avoid the kinds of shocks high fuel prices can deliver to our 
economy and encourage the development of alternative energy sources and 
domestic energy production.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I would advise the 
gentlewoman from New York that I have no requests for time, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to set the record straight as far as the 
rule that is before us. The Energy and Water bill, as reported out of 
subcommittee, includes only the language offered in committee by the 
gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) that would deal with the 
critical issue of rising gasoline prices, and I want to make that very 
clear today.
  Why is this the case? Perhaps it is because the appropriations bill 
that should have been dealt with on this issue was the Interior bill. 
That bill passed the House on June 15 after the House rejected a 
proposal by the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) to include funding 
for the Northeast home heating oil reserve, as requested by the 
President of the United States.
  The majority's interior appropriation bill did nothing to address the 
rising gasoline prices in this country. After their refusal to do 
anything in the full Committee on Appropriations, the gentlewoman from 
Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) did seek a vehicle, that is this bill, the 
Energy and Water bill, to address the issue. I would also 
parenthetically add that she follows on other initiatives taken by many 
Members on our side of the aisle from New England, the State of 
Pennsylvania, and other areas, pursuant to negotiations and meetings 
with the President in January, in February, and other legislative 
initiatives.
  The gentlewoman from Michigan did take the lead in full committee to 
add a simple reauthorization for the short-term extension of the 
strategic petroleum reserve. If it was not for her efforts in full 
committee and the efforts of her Democratic cosponsors, the amendment 
in order by this rule would not have been germane, and it would not 
have been allowed to be offered today in this Chamber. In fact, the 
Chairman of the authorizing committee, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Bliley), wrote to the Committee on Rules asking that the Kilpatrick 
language not be protected from a point of order since it was 
authorizing in an appropriations bill. If the chairman of the Committee 
on Commerce objected so strongly to the Kilpatrick language, a simple 
1-year reauthorization of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve just to get 
the process moving, then surely he must have even more vehemently 
objected to the language made in order by this rule, which goes much 
further.
  Mr. Speaker, this rule makes in order an amendment by the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Sherwood) that basically duplicates language 
that was in the bill passed by the House a few weeks ago, the same 
language of the majority of the other body. So I do want to make one 
thing clear. We are today considering a bill with language put into it 
at full committee by the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick).
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Frost).
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, not only has there been a failure of 
leadership on the part of the Republican majority when it comes to 
energy independence, there has been a concerted effort to undercut the 
efforts of the administration to address energy issues. In fact, 
members of the Republican leadership have jeopardized our abilities to 
address our energy needs by attempting to abolish the Department of 
Energy, slashing energy efficiency programs, and selling off the 
strategic petroleum reserve.
  In the past few weeks, as the price of gasoline has soared, the 
Republican majority has offered not one solution to America's 
consumers.

                              {time}  1500

  Instead, where American families see an energy crisis that 
jeopardizes their summer vacations, Republican leaders see an 
opportunity to score political points and cover up their 6-year record 
of negligence on energy independence.
  The Republicans have cut crucial energy supply programs by 23 percent 
below the President's request, including $106 million less than 
requested for solar and renewable energy programs. They have even cut 
these programs by $61 million below the current appropriation.
  The Republican bill also cuts research by $320 million, or 10 percent 
below the President's request.
  Mr. Speaker, today the Congress is rightly taking action to 
reauthorize the President's ability to use the Strategic Petroleum 
Reserve, establish a Northeast Home Heating Reserve, and authorize the 
Department of Energy to purchase oil from stripper wells when the price 
drops below $15 a barrel, all measures Democrats have long been 
advocating, as indicated by the previous speaker, the ranking member on 
the subcommittee.
  But the Republican budget continues to ignore many of the crucial 
long-term investments that are vital to America's future energy 
independence. I call on the Republican leadership to call a halt to the 
photo ops and press releases and stop attempting to abolish the 
Department of Energy, and finally work with Democrats to make 
investments in research and renewable energy sources that are vital to 
America's energy independence.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Udall).
  (Mr. UDALL of Colorado asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), for yielding time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and in general support of 
the bill. The rule appropriately provides an opportunity for the House 
to consider germane amendments to this important appropriations 
measure.
  On the bill, I am sure each of us might want it to be different one 
way or another. For example, I do not think it does enough for solar 
and renewable energy programs. That is why I will be joining many 
others in trying to improve that part of the bill. Overall, I think the 
committee has done a good job, especially considering the limits 
imposed by the budget resolution.
  In particular, I want to express my appreciation for the fact the 
committee has included all the money that was requested for the nuclear 
facilities closure projects, an increase of more than $21.8 million 
over this year's amount for that purpose. This is crucial for my 
district because the Rocky Flats facility, located in my congressional 
district, is just a few miles from the center of our State's major 
population areas. Safe, effective, and timely clean-up and closure of 
the flats is a matter of highest priority for all Coloradans. I greatly 
appreciate the committee's inclusion of the requested funding for this 
purpose.
  I also want to join the committee in urging the DOE to ensure that 
the complex-wide funding issues are addressed as they relate to closure 
for Rocky Flats. As the committee has correctly noted, if DOE is to 
keep on its timetable for closing Rocky Flats, important tasks must be 
completed at other sites, as well.
  I urge support for the rule so the House can begin to consider this 
very important measure.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 
minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen), a member 
of the subcommittee.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding 
time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the rule, to make brief comments in 
support of the energy and water bill, and to make a few comments on 
security issues and the current oil crisis.
  Mr. Speaker, our committee, under the leadership of the gentleman 
from California (Chairman Packard), rightly has addressed the critical 
issues of security at our Nation's nuclear labs by providing an 
additional $331 million

[[Page H5210]]

for the National Nuclear Security Administration, for a total of over 
$6 billion.
  Mr. Speaker, the problem of security at our national labs is one of 
leadership, not of resources. The security at our national labs, or at 
least some of our labs, has not just been compromised, it has been 
violated. It is time for Secretary Richardson to accept the 
responsibility for the ongoing security violations and to take whatever 
actions are necessary to restore the faith of the American people in 
their ability to secure our Nation's nuclear secrets.
  Furthermore, even with the strong congressional support from our 
committee, the leadership of the Department of Energy has been lacking, 
particularly in regard to developing a comprehensive energy strategy. 
Getting as much oil as we can for as little as we can is not energy 
policy. Recent oil prices clearly show that the Secretary has once 
again been negligent.
  One of the core missions of the Department of Energy, and I quote, is 
``to develop and implement a national energy policy.'' Congress has 
provided the necessary resources, and the increased funding for the 
Department contained in this bill needs to be spent wisely and with 
strict accountability so that a workable energy strategy can be 
developed to address exorbitant energy costs.
  On the issue of national security, on the issue of an energy policy, 
the Secretary needs to do better.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick).
  (Ms. KILPATRICK asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
her remarks.)
  Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule today, and 
to thank our ranking member for the tenacity that he has shown and the 
leadership he has shown in protecting a very important amendment as we 
address the high gas prices in America today.
  To the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard), I thank him for his 
work and for the product he has brought before us today. This, unlike 
some of the other bills, is a close call. We can support this bill. It 
is not perfect, it could be better, but we certainly are going to 
support the rule and the bill that will be before us.
  I want to urge the Federal Trade Commission, who has been now 
assigned the task, to look at the high gasoline prices that Americans 
are facing today. In our State of Michigan, people who are on fixed 
incomes, who do work, who have to drive to work, find buying gas at 
over $2 a gallon is too much. It restricts their family resources, it 
restricts what they need for their housing, what they need for their 
children. We ought to take a look at that.
  Additionally, truckers have advised me that the high gas prices 
really make it impossible for them to bring in revenues, bring in 
profits that they use to take care of their families. Many independent 
truckers find that the high gasoline prices, in Michigan anywhere from 
$2.19 to $2.39 a gallon, are not adequate. We have to look at it. I 
want to urge the Federal Trade Commission to take a good look.
  In the State of Michigan, tourism is our third revenue producer for 
our State. With the high gas prices, many people are rethinking their 
travel plans. Many people are not going to be going as far or coming to 
our State because of the high gasoline prices.
  I believe we have to do something, that we have to have the Trade 
Commission act on it soon and not take a long time, and at the same 
time, that we do not posture as Congressmen and Congresswomen to get 
credit. This is not a credit issue, this is an American issue.
  I want to thank the Committee on Rules as well as the subcommittee 
for doing their work. It seems possible that in this great, prosperous 
time of ours, we can succeed as a nation.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Maine (Mr. Baldacci).
  (Mr. BALDACCI asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BALDACCI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding time 
to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the ranking member, the gentleman 
from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), for doing outstanding work as the ranking 
member of the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development of the 
Committee on Appropriations.
  I am supporting the rule and I support the bill. It is completely 
unfortunate that the circumstances in relationship to the heating oil 
and petroleum and gasoline supplies in our country have taken this long 
to address.
  There has been a delegation from the Northeast and New England that 
have worked together since early January meeting with the President, 
meeting with the Energy Secretary, trying to get this Congress to 
confront the issues. All we have been able to get from this Congress, 
the leadership of this Congress, is to cut and gut the weatherization 
conservation efforts, not to address fuel efficiency standards, not to 
do anything to lay the groundwork to having a comprehensive energy 
policy so we can become energy-independent and not energy-dependent.
  It is easy to try to blame people, but it is a lot harder to work 
together and establish these policies. We have been working very hard 
in the Northeast and the Southeast and throughout the country to 
establish a comprehensive, bipartisan energy policy.
  Many months ago, legislation was authored by the gentleman from 
Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), 
and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barton) and many of us in the 
Northeast and across the aisle to try to get the heating oil reserve 
established, to try to lay the groundwork for the Strategic Petroleum 
Reserve reauthorization, to give the President the power to be able to 
do that.
  Congress and the leadership in Congress, where have they been? It has 
been weeks since the last action was taken. We have the legislation in 
an amendment form before us that has been submitted, and it takes away 
the issue from the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) and 
others who have worked on this legislation. Nowhere do we see any 
credit being able to be given for all of the hard work they have done 
in regard to this legislation.
  We must seek to have a bipartisan, comprehensive energy policy. It is 
way beyond time that any reasonable person would have taken action. Mr. 
Speaker, today we are considering an amendment that is identical to the 
legislation that this Congress should have sent to the President a long 
time ago.
  Mr. Speaker, we must act on this legislation. We must get it to the 
President, or history is going to repeat itself again in the Northeast. 
That is not going to be pleasant for the people that we seek to 
represent.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Bentsen).
  (Mr. BENTSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and in 
support of H.R. 4733, the fiscal year 2001 energy and water 
appropriations bill.
  I would like to thank the gentleman from California (Chairman 
Packard) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Visclosky), for their hard work on this important legislation, as well 
as my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) for all the 
help they have provided our constituents in the greater Houston area.
  In particular, I want to highlight that the bill fully funds the 
request for important U.S. Army Corps of Engineers projects in the 
greater Houston area. In particular, the bill provides the second 
consecutive year full funding for the Brays Bayou project in southwest 
Houston at $6 million for fiscal year 2001.
  This project is necessary to improve flood protection for an 
extensively developed residential area along the Brays Bayou in 
southwest Harris County. This project was originally authorized in the 
WRDA 1990 act as part of a $400 million local flood control project.
  Subsequently, the Brays project was reauthorized as one of the 
original sites for a demonstration project for new Federal 
reimbursement program as part of the WRDA 1996 bill based upon 
legislation drafted by my colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr.

[[Page H5211]]

DeLay) and myself, which has strengthened the core and local sponsor 
role in giving the local sponsor a greater responsibility.
  Recently, the local sponsor, the Harris County, Texas, Commissioners 
Court, approved the Brays redesign per the WRDA 1996 Act, and now this 
project can move forward with strong public support.
  I am also gratified the subcommittee decided to fully fund the Sims 
Bayou project at $11.8 million. This is a project that also affects an 
area of southeastern Harris County that is heavily residential. This 
project is 2 years ahead of schedule. It is about midstream right now, 
scheduled to be completed in 2004. It is critically important to a 
number of my constituents who live in areas that are otherwise ravaged 
by continual flooding.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, I am gratified that the committee chose to 
fully fund the request for the Houston Ship Channel deepening and 
widening project. This is the largest deepening and widening project 
that the Corps of Engineers has been involved in since the Panama 
Canal. It is important to the local economy that I and my colleagues in 
the Houston area represent. It is also being done in a very 
environmentally sound manner in reestablishing natural habitat 
throughout the Galveston Bay.
  I appreciate the fact that the committee has kept this project on 
track and fully funded the administration's request.
  I urge my colleagues to support the bill.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Connecticut (Mr. Larson).
  (Mr. LARSON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. LARSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding time to 
me.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Visclosky) for his outstanding work, and the gentlewoman from New York 
(Ms. Slaughter), as well.
  I would note to my colleagues that victory has many fathers, and 
defeat, of course, is an orphan. But defeat is not an option, 
especially for those who are dependent upon home heating oil and have 
to make the awful choice between heating their homes, providing 
themselves with prescription drugs that they need, or in fact the food 
that they place on their table.
  Mr. Speaker, I associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman 
from Maine (Mr. Baldacci) who spoke eloquently about the coalition of 
those of us in the Northeast who have sought bipartisan support, 
especially in the area of the release of the Strategic Petroleum 
Reserve and the establishment of a strategic home heating oil fuel base 
for those who need this kind of relief.
  I further concur with the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) 
about the need for the Federal Trade Commission to further pursue these 
companies with respect to what seems to be gouging at the gas lines.
  Further, I would also note that there is an important need for an 
investment that is not addressed in this legislation. We currently 
import somewhere in the area of $5 billion worth of oil a month. That 
is $60 billion a year. We are making cuts in the very area of research 
and development, specifically in the area of fuel cells, that could 
benefit us and allow us to compete in a global economy, and get us to a 
point where we are not dependent upon foreign sources of oil, so we can 
provide ourselves with efficient home heating oil and the means to 
provide us with transportation to and from our jobs.

                              {time}  1515

  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Vermont (Mr. Sanders).
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for 
yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the specific rule to permit 
an amendment on the floor offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Sherwood), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), and the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) authorizing the establishment 
of a Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve. Not only do we need to pass 
this rule, but what we really need to do is to appropriate funding for 
the creation of a Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve.
  Mr. Speaker, we are experiencing an energy crisis in this country. 
The price of gasoline is skyrocketing. In the Midwest and other parts 
of the country, the price of a gallon of gas is now over $2 a gallon. 
Throughout the rest of the country, including my State of Vermont, it 
is well over $1.50 a gallon, and that is unacceptable.
  Mr. Speaker, the price of crude oil has more than tripled since last 
year and is the highest it has been since the Gulf War. The reason the 
prices are high is because the supply for gasoline is low. This can 
only mean one thing. If we do not adequately prepare for next winter, 
we will have a home heating oil disaster on our hands.
  But my colleagues do not have to take my word for it. I quote from an 
article that appeared in USA Today just yesterday: ``Those who heat 
with oil will shiver this winter and pay a premium. Just 15.3 million 
barrels of heating oil are stockpiled for the East Coast, which uses 75 
percent of the Nation's heating oil in the winter. That's well down 
from 41.3 million barrels on hand last June.''
  Mr. Speaker, we all know what happened last year. Home heating oil 
prices were the highest they have ever been in history. And now we are 
faced with a home heating oil stockpile that is 37 percent lower than 
last year. It does not take a genius to figure out that we are setting 
ourselves up for a huge heating oil crisis next year unless Congress 
acts now.
  According to Bill O'Grady, oil analyst at A.G. Edwards & Sons, ``If 
we have a cold winter early, we could end up seeing in heating oil what 
we're seeing in gas prices in spades.''
  Mr. Speaker, we must not let this happen. We must make certain that 
the huge increase in home heating oil prices that we experienced last 
winter never happens again. Too many people were hurt by that huge 
increase in home heating oil prices. The astronomical prices that our 
constituents were forced to pay for home heating oil in order to stay 
warm last winter was unconscionable. Let us unite behind the creation 
of a Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve, and let us make sure that we 
have adequate funding to guarantee that it is up and running as soon as 
possible.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of 
my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________