[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 58 (Thursday, April 10, 2003)]
[House]
[Page H3231]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page H3231]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

                        House of Representatives

                      ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2003--

                              (Continued)

                              {time}  1630

  Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, 39,700 of these people are directly employed 
by the industry.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a bad amendment. Let us defeat it.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson).
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding me time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment. The 
National Academy of Sciences identified 13 readily-available 
technologies, each one of which would improve fuel economy from .5 
percent to 12 percent. Three major automakers, GM, Ford and Toyota, 
have already announced plans to introduce vehicles that would get 35 to 
40 miles per gallon within the next 2 years.
  New technologies can improve fuel economy without reducing weight and 
size. It is irresponsible to pass a national energy policy that does 
not reduce the use of gasoline because 70 percent of the oil we use is 
to power our cars.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the 
distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), the chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. The 
answer to better fuel mileage is probably in a different fueled 
vehicle. It is called hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.
  This morning I met GM officials who gave me their new brochures on 
these cars that they are going to be manufacturing. They have spent 
hundreds of millions of dollars to develop and finance the new hydrogen 
fuel cell vehicle.
  Now, what this amendment would do you cannot create with just magic. 
You cannot say just ``Poof, here it is. There you go.'' It would be 
nice to have a vehicle that delivered 40 or 50 miles per gallon. But to 
do that would take all of the engineering gusto away from developing 
what I think is the real answer, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. It would 
take hundreds of millions of dollars out of that engineering cycle 
today and invest it into something else.
  This is the answer. Let science prevail. Let science and the experts 
decide that this is the vehicle. Let them develop these types of 
vehicles, knowing that we are there, that we are going to have these 
cars in the showroom before too long. Let us not get off that track. 
Let us defeat this amendment. Let the research and development continue 
so that all of us will be able to drive one of these vehicles in the 
near future.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Bonilla). The Committee will rise 
informally.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bass) assumed the chair.

                          ____________________