[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 100 (Wednesday, July 26, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H5878-H5883]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     FUEL CONSUMPTION EDUCATION ACT

  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 5611) to provide for the establishment of a partnership 
between the Secretary of Energy and appropriate industry groups for the 
creation of a transportation fuel conservation education campaign, and 
for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 5611

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited at the ``Fuel Consumption Education 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds that--
       (1) today's gasoline prices are taking a severe toll on the 
     pocketbooks of all Americans;
       (2) a large number of factors contribute to the price of 
     gasoline, including worldwide demand for crude oil, taxes, 
     international conflicts, regional supply chains, 
     environmental regulations, and refining capacity;
       (3) individuals can take steps to address rising demand by 
     using a few simple gas saving tips; and
       (4) increased driving efficiency will lower the demand for 
     gasoline and thereby lower prices in the short term.

     SEC. 3. PARTNERSHIP.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy, through the 
     existing programs at the Office of Energy Efficiency and 
     Renewable Energy, shall enter into a partnership with 
     interested industry groups, including groups from the 
     automotive, gasoline refining, and oil industries, to carry 
     out a public education campaign that provides information to 
     United States drivers about immediate measures that may be 
     taken to conserve transportation fuel. This public-private 
     partnership shall include a five member advisory board, to be 
     chaired by the Secretary or his designee, which shall include 
     representatives from the Department of Energy, the oil 
     industry, the automotive industry, and the Congress, to be 
     appointed by the Secretary.

[[Page H5879]]

     The Secretary shall appoint the advisory board not later than 
     30 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (b) Accessibility.--The public information campaign under 
     this section shall be targeted to reach the widest audience 
     possible. The education campaign shall include television, 
     print, Internet website, or any other method designed to 
     maximize the dissemination of transportation fuel savings 
     information to drivers.
       (c) Funding.--The Secretary is authorized to expend not 
     more than $10,000,000 to carry out this section from funds 
     previously authorized to the Office of Energy Efficiency and 
     Renewable Energy, but shall provide no more than 50 percent 
     of the cost of carrying out this section.

     SEC. 4. PARTNERSHIP ON FUEL SUPPLY FOR EVACUATIONS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy, through the 
     exisiting programs at the Office of Energy Efficiency and 
     Renewable Energy, shall enter into a partnership with 
     interested industry groups and State and local governments, 
     including groups from the gasoline refining and marketing 
     industries, to carry out an education campaign that provides 
     information to the State and local governments and the 
     private sector about best practices to ensure adequate fuel 
     supplies during emergency evacuations. This public-private 
     partnership shall include a five member advisory board, to be 
     chaired by the Secretary or his designee, which shall include 
     representatives from the Department of Energy, the gasoline 
     refining industry, the gasoline marketing industry, a State 
     government, and a unit of local government. The Secretary 
     shall appoint the advisory board not later than 30 days after 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       (b) Funding.--The Secretary is authorized to expend not 
     more than $3,000,000 to carry out this section from funds 
     previously authorized to the Office of Energy Efficiency and 
     Renewable Energy.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Shadegg) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.


                             General Leave

  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material on the 
bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Arizona?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5611, the Fuel 
Consumption and Education Act.
  I would begin by noting that in the debate on the last bill and, 
indeed, in the 1-minute speeches which occurred in this Chamber just 
this morning, it was noted that the cost of gasoline across America is 
spiking. Indeed, it is imposing a severe financial burden on every 
single American family and on every single American business. 
Rightfully, the American people have asked Congress to solve this 
problem and to solve it quickly, and yet I think most Americans 
understand, indeed, survey data show that they understand, that there 
is no single silver bullet that we can enact and solve this problem 
overnight.
  But, Mr. Speaker, there are steps we can take. And this legislation, 
the Fuel Consumption and Education Act, takes one of those important 
steps. The rising cost of gasoline is a hardship, and this bill goes 
right at how we might address that hardship, and that is to reduce 
unnecessary demand for gasoline and gasoline products through a 
cooperative effort to understand how we can reduce that demand.
  Indeed, the problem of high cost is, in part, specifically that, a 
result of excessive demand and inadequate or insufficient supply. This 
bill establishes a fuel conservation public service education campaign 
aimed at lowering demand for gasoline in the short term. And, indeed, 
it can work. Using mass media to influence energy consumption behavior 
across the country has been proven to work in the past.

                              {time}  1400

  Let me give you some examples.
  In January of 2000, increased energy demand led to rolling blackouts 
in California. A part of the effort to combat those rising energy costs 
and to avoid rolling blackouts was a government-funded, public-private 
cooperative campaign undertaken to help reduce demand. Over the course 
of the year, Californians reduced peak demand by 89 percent. That is a 
fact. That is not a mistake. Californians, through this education 
program, reduced peak demand by 89 percent. They reduced total 
consumption by 6.7 percent in that year.
  There are many things that can be done to reduce consumption, from 
properly inflating the tires of a vehicle, to making sure that the 
engine is tuned, to making sure that the air cleaner for the vehicle is 
replaced when it should be, to making sure that the fuel filter for the 
vehicle is replaced when it should be.
  Mr. Speaker, there are many steps that we can take, that the average 
consumer, the average automobile driver does not understand and does 
not routinely do. All of that causes demand to go up, and all of that 
forces prices higher.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I believe it is 
critically important. I want to commend my colleague from Texas, Mr. 
Conaway, for introducing this legislation and bringing it forward. It 
is the kind of step that we can do immediately to address both our 
excessive demand and the high prices.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5611, the Fuel 
Conservation Education Act. Again, I find myself agreeing with my 
friend from Arizona in everything he said, which is why the bill is 
having strong support from all the members of the Energy and Commerce 
Committee on both sides of the aisle.
  Mr. Speaker, during this time of record gasoline prices, over $3 a 
gallon in my home State of New York and in most States of this Union, 
we have to be smarter about the way we conserve energy. As individuals, 
we have a responsibility to make informed choices about what we drive, 
how we drive and what fuel we put in our cars.
  In a recent Energy and Commerce Committee markup, our committee 
considered several bills to help consumers make decisions about how to 
improve the fuel economy of their cars. One of these was H.R. 5611, the 
Fuel Conservation Education Act, which we are debating today, which 
will direct the Department of Energy to establish a public-private 
partnership with industry on a conservation education program and 
campaign, teaching drivers about simple steps they can take to achieve 
real results. Education is clearly a necessary component of our 
national commitment to improving fuel economy.
  During the same committee markup, our committee considered a bill by 
Congressman Shimkus, Congressman Allen and myself that would establish 
a National Tire Education Program. Right now, consumers have no way of 
knowing how efficient the replacement tires they purchase are or even 
that proper maintenance of tires will improve the fuel economy of these 
tires and of their automobile. It has been estimated that you can 
improve fuel economy by anywhere from 1 to 3 percent per year if tires 
are kept properly inflated. This could lead to savings of 1 to 2 
billion gallons of fuel per year.
  So it is all about education, and that is what this bill is about.
  So, Mr. Speaker, while we must work on long-term solutions to our 
energy challenges that will have a significant impact on gasoline 
prices, we should also promote programs in the short term that will 
empower individuals to make informed choices about fuel economy. That 
is what this bill does, and that is why I urge the adoption of H.R. 
5611 today.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I yield 8 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway), the author of this legislation.
  Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that high praise indeed. I 
appreciate members of the Energy and Commerce Committee moving this 
bill along and moving it to the floor today with bipartisan support. I 
also want to thank the cosponsors of the bill, Fred Upton, Ralph Hall, 
Ed Towns and Gene Green, who helped work on this modest attempt to 
address the usage of gasoline in this country.
  Several speakers ahead of us this morning during the one minutes 
spoke very eloquently about the rising cost of

[[Page H5880]]

gasoline. I think yesterday there was a report that it hit a record 
$3.02 a gallon on average across the United States. It seems as though 
we as consumers will begin to make decisions at $3 a gallon that we 
won't make at $2 a gallon, decisions we ought to make at $2 a gallon, 
but the concern about the money is not there in our heads to make that 
happen.
  This effort of a joint public-private educational effort has shown 
results in the past, as Mr. Shadegg has already mentioned, in 
California, the dramatic results they had; people just making informed 
decisions, decisions that they ought to make day in and day out, but 
they don't.
  There is a recent headline in the USA Today which said natural gas 
prices, not gasoline prices, but natural gas prices went down 
dramatically. Let me read one sentence out of that. ``Prices have 
fallen because natural gas supplies are far above normal after a mild 
winter and lower demand, leading to an inventory surge.''
  Here is what we are trying to effect. If each one of us, each of us 
who drives a car in America this coming week and for the foreseeable 
future, would use just one gallon less of gasoline, you would see that 
impact. Inventories would begin to surge, and the prices would come 
down.
  When I am out at town halls and other places in the district, even 
from a district that represents Midland and Odessa, the crude oil and 
natural gas production capital of the world, that may be a bit over the 
top, but, nevertheless, an awful lot of crude oil produced in West 
Texas, even there, people complain about high gasoline prices.
  If all of us would collectively do small things, Mr. Shadegg 
mentioned a couple of those, several of them, we could have a dramatic 
impact on total gasoline demand. As demand goes down, inventories would 
rise; and as those inventories go up, the law of supply and demand 
takes over and the prices go down.
  We would have two benefits from that. One, the benefit we would get 
directly by actually spending less money on the gasoline for powering 
our cars; and then collectively we would benefit, the economy benefits 
as well as the ecology benefits.
  2004, the last time we had statistics on that, we drove in America 
2,962 billion miles, vehicle miles. You add all the cars up, the 243 
million registered cars and trucks in this country, collectively we 
drove those many miles. With a volume of that size, modest reductions 
in the usage of gasoline or modest improvements in the efficiency of 
the usage of that gasoline can yield dramatic results.
  Each one of us, on average, drives about 12,000 miles a year. It 
works out to about 234 miles a week. If we could begin to do the things 
that would improve the efficiency with which we drive those miles, or 
simply drive a few miles less, on average, it is about 17 miles to the 
gallon. If we just drove next week 17 miles less in our car than we did 
this week, if all of us did it, then the impact we want to achieve on 
this would begin to happen.
  We are going to try to begin to convince the American gasoline users 
of this idea through media, print, television, Internet, Web sites, a 
variety of ways, to communicate the benefits of being smarter when you 
drive. Benefits like driving sensibly. If you are an aggressive driver, 
if you accelerate aggressively from stop signs and run the tachometer 
on your car above 2,000 RPMs, you will use more gasoline than you need 
to. So if you make a conscious effort to keep your tachometer below 
2,000 RPMs a minute, you will use dramatically less gasoline. On 
average, the savings would be between 5 and 30 percent, which would 
save up to between 8 and 52 billion gallons of gasoline a year.
  If you observe the speed limit, something that we all do here in this 
body, I am sure, religiously, but if you simply observe the speed 
limit, you could save economy fuel benefits between 7 and 23 percent, 
another 12 to 40 billion gallons of gasoline a year.
  Excessive weight. These are some small things that most of us don't 
think about. But all that extra stuff that you haul around in the trunk 
of your car that ought to be stored in the garage, if you will take 
that weight out, you will improve your gasoline efficiency. In fact, 
the smaller your car, the greater that weight, then the differential is 
even bigger. So take all that extra weight out of the trunk of your 
car, and you will have savings there.
  If you also keep your car tuned and the filters changed, there are 
dramatic savings in those regards as well. Keeping the tires inflated, 
our colleague on the other side has mentioned the importance of tires 
and the impact that they have.
  So every one of these issues, each of us can choose to do our own. 
Particularly on our side of the aisle, we talk an awful lot about less 
government regulation, freedoms and personal choices. That is what we 
are talking about here. These are personal choices that you and I can 
make, not walking into work or not riding bicycles, not doing draconian 
kinds of things that really aren't going to work in the long run, but 
smart things that we can do, day in and day out, to begin to form a 
habit that allows us to use a little bit less gasoline than we would 
have otherwise used and also to keep money that we would spend on that 
gasoline.
  So I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation. It is a 
modest attempt to address the problem. The overall problem of gasoline 
costs and usage in this country needs a long-term solution. This is not 
what that is about. This is about something we can begin to do today 
and tomorrow to affect this problem.
  So I appreciate the Energy and Commerce Committee moving this bill 
forward, and I appreciate the sponsors that have helped with it.
  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Gene Green).
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am a proud cosponsor of H.R. 
5611. I serve on the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and I am glad 
our committee reported this bill to the floor.
  It does basically two things: One, it creates these public-private 
partnerships so we can deal with the demand side. That benefits all 
Americans. I am honored to represent a district where we make a lot of 
gasoline that fuels our cars, but we also have to pay that high price 
at the pump. We can control our own destiny if we use public-private 
partnerships that this bill will allow between the Department of Energy 
and different groups. They will really help to show how we can lower 
our number of miles we need to drive and do a lot of other things, some 
of them are being done right now.
  Making the Department of Energy more proactive with these private-
public partnerships, will lower our demand side and hopefully lower our 
individual costs we have to pay for fuel. Also, if we lower demand, the 
price will come down. Because the reason we are paying over $3 a 
gallon, at least in my area and some areas of the country, is because 
of the high demand.
  The other part of the bill I think is really good, and I am glad Mr. 
Conaway included it, the partnership on fuel supply for evacuations. I 
don't think there is any secret that in the Houston-Harris County area 
last year when Rita just barely missed us, it went to the east and hit 
both Congressman Ted Poe's district and Congressman Kevin Brady's, but 
we were concerned enough that we had almost 2 million people trying to 
evacuate, and the supply side for evacuations was not there.
  The State of Texas and our local community is doing some planning now 
in anticipation. But, in hindsight, it really is the Department of 
Energy's responsibility to be able to look at this and make sure that 
in emergencies we have a plan in place for supply for evacuations but 
also after the fact.
  In the Houston area, we have a number of refineries, and we actually 
shut those down because we thought Rita was going to be in the Houston 
Ship Channel and we were going to have 5 feet of water in those 
refineries. To get that refining capacity back up, we have to have some 
assistance; and I want the DOE to be a partner in that.
  I support the bill and thank you, Mr. Conaway, for introducing it
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers).
  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. I 
appreciate it.
  I want to compliment Mr. Conaway from Texas for his introduction and

[[Page H5881]]

pushing this bill, H.R. 5611, to the forefront. It is an important part 
of what we are doing in this House.
  We get to the point where Asia has used more oil last year than North 
America, and India is yet to come online fully in its oil consumption. 
There is only going to be more pressure on the oil produced around the 
world.
  So this House has taken some important steps to try to steady our 
supply. We have invested in the policy changes for domestic production 
and expansion of our refinery capability. We have invested in 
alternative fuels, not only in research and development but trying to 
make sure there is refining capability for ethanol across the country.
  Lastly, we talk about conservation, when I recall back to being a 
young child and my parents coming home and telling us about President 
Nixon's challenge to every American to lower their thermostat in their 
house to help conserve energy, and it worked.
  What this bill does is really present some very commonsense options 
for all of us that we get to follow. It is a true partnership from all 
of the players who have really the most to gain by conservation. It 
will lower demand, number one; and it will reduce our dependency on 
foreign oil, number two. They are small, commonsense things that we can 
do individually that add up to big solutions. That is what is important 
about this bill.
  Just a few examples, Mr. Speaker, if I may. Replacing your clogged 
air filter can improve your car's gas mileage by as much as 10 percent. 
You can improve gas mileage by around 3 percent by keeping your tires 
inflated to the proper pressure. You can increase your gas mileage by 2 
percent by using the recommended grade of motor oil by your car's 
manufacturer.
  These are commonsense, simple things. But Americans need to 
understand how important those small things are in adding up to big 
savings of barrels of oil consumed every year, which means, at the end 
of the day, lower prices, less dependence on foreign oil.

                              {time}  1415

  Every family has sat at the table and talked about the consumption of 
their budget by gas prices. If you stop to fill up your pump on the way 
to take your kids to school, or to go to work, or run an errand, you 
know how painful it is today.
  If we continue on the path of this House with good energy policy and 
domestic supply and alternative fuels, and individual conservation, Mr. 
Speaker, we will ensure that we have an energy supply for the future 
that is both affordable and meets the demands of an American economy 
that is on the move.
  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, this bill that we are debating right now was 
supposed to be a part of a comprehensive Republican Energy Week that we 
were going to have here at the end of July, showing how committed the 
Republican Party was to dealing with the energy crisis in our country.
  And this is energy week for the Republicans, although I would spell 
``weak,'' w-e-a-k, because that is really what this bill is. This is a 
conservation, efficiency, education bill.
  Now, it turns out that if you go to the Department of Energy Web 
site, you find out that they are already doing almost everything that 
is in this bill. It is already on their Web site. What I think the 
American people understand is that they should not expect the 
Republican Party to actually stand up to do something about energy 
efficiency.
  Because, after all, we put 70 percent of all of the oil which we 
consume into gasoline tanks. So you would think that they would be out 
here on the floor, we would be having a huge debate about how to 
increase the fuel economy for the automotive fleet in our country, 
which has gone backwards over the last 20 years, to a standard that we 
met in 1981.
  Now, the problem is that America now imports 61 percent of all of the 
oil which we consume. We put 70 percent of that oil into gasoline 
tanks. Now, if we just improve the fuel economy standards for our 
country to 33 miles per gallon over the next 10 years, that would be 
all of the oil that we actually import from the Persian Gulf. Thirty-
three miles per gallon is all of the oil from the Persian Gulf.
  Instead, we are back down at 25 miles per gallon in the United 
States, with this huge challenge knowing that the United States only 
has 3 percent of the oil reserves in the world.
  So this bill out here educating the public as to how to drive their 
vehicle better or inflate their tires, that is all fine. But it is 
already out there. The Department of Energy is already doing it. 
Consumers are already trying to save the price of gasoline at the pump, 
because they know that OPEC and the oil industry is tipping them upside 
down and shaking money out of their pockets every time they go in to 
refill their tank.
  By the way, when it comes to appliances, when it comes to electric 
consumption in our country, the Bush administration, over the first 6 
years, has yet to promulgate a regulation on making the devices which 
we use in our country more efficient. They keep putting it back and 
back and back. And what they do is they tell us that the first one 
might be issued in September of 2007, and the last of the backlogged 
standards will not come out until 2011 and will not go into effect 
until 2016.
  That will be the energy efficiency legacy of the Bush administration, 
of the Republicans, because, ladies and gentlemen, all of the coal-
fired, oil-fired, nuclear-fired power plants that are built in America 
are nothing more than that electrical generation which is built so that 
we can plug in toasters, refrigerators, stoves, computers, have light 
bulbs go on.
  But the Bush administration does not want to ensure that the 
industries that make these devices have to make them more efficient. So 
as a result we have more pollution, more health problems, and when it 
comes to automobiles and the importation of 70 percent of the oil, 
which we consume, by the way it was only 30 percent of the oil that we 
consumed in 1975 at the first oil crisis.
  We are now up to 61 percent getting deeper and deeper. Since the 
Republicans took over the Congress in 1995, we have gone from 45 
percent dependence on imported oil to 61 percent dependence upon 
imported oil, a 16 percent increase. Goes up about 1\1/2\ percent every 
year that the Republicans control the House and the Senate, and it 
really accelerates when they take over the Presidency, which they have 
had for the last 6 years.
  They are saying today that they are not going to do anything about 
the fuel economy standards for SUVs and for automobiles. They are not 
going to improve the efficiency over the next 10 years, next 20 years, 
no plan in place. Same thing is true for the appliances which we use, 
the devices which consume electricity, no plan. But you can go to the 
Web site. That is what their bill will do. You can find out how to make 
more efficient the inefficient devices which you now have. That is the 
plan.
  Mr. Speaker, I will tell you it is about as dangerous an abdication 
of responsibility on any issue that our country has ever seen. We just 
had the new President of Iraq address the Congress today. Is there a 
connection between the volatility in the price of oil for Americans at 
the gas pump and his presence here today?
  The pictures that we see every night in Lebanon? All of it is related 
to the unfortunately crazy, speculative marketplace that is now opening 
up on the price of oil, because people believe that chaos is breaking 
out. Who is the victim? Each and every American who has to pay these 
exorbitantly high prices for energy because there is no Republican 
energy plan.
  This is energy week for the Republicans, w-e-a-k. That is what we 
have on the floor debated this afternoon. I urge a ``no'' vote on this 
ineffectual, redundant, unnecessary piece of legislation
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Upton).
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I guess it was about 2 months or so ago that 
my friend and colleague from the good State of Texas (Mr. Conaway) came 
up to me with a piece of legislation that he thought would really help 
consumers, an education plan that promoted, in fact, could save lots of 
gasoline that we would not have to import.

[[Page H5882]]

  Mr. Conaway wanted to do this the right way. He said, you know, this 
is such a good idea, obviously it is going to be referred to the Energy 
and Commerce Committee. He wanted it to be bipartisan. And as a new 
Member, he was not quite sure what his relationship was with some of 
the members on our committee, particularly on the other side of the 
aisle.
  He asked for some advice. And he went and shopped that piece of 
legislation before he introduced it. As it turned out, he got every 
person that he asked to be a cosponsor of the bill.
  Now, Mr. Towns, Mr. Gene Green, a whole number of different Members. 
The bill moved through our committee. And it passed without dissent. 
Had a hearing. It passed without dissent and here it is today.
  Mr. Speaker, we have an energy crisis. We do. There is a host of 
things that we as individuals can do ourselves to help our own family 
budget, particularly as it relates to the fuel efficiency of our 
vehicles.
  Some of us know some of these things already: Going the speed limit, 
removing the excess weight. But a whole number of different things, 
and, yes, the Department of Energy talks about it on its Web site. I 
think we can do a better job. That is what this bill is about, how can 
we do better?
  Working with industry, working with the Department of Energy, working 
with our constituents trying to promote a whole number of things that 
collectively make an awful lot of sense. But the bottom line is that we 
can save, perhaps, if we did them all, if we were in violation of all 
of these things, perhaps save us as much as 25 or 30 percent of the 
income that we otherwise use for gasoline.
  Mr. Speaker, I would urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan 
legislation. I endorse wholeheartedly what our colleague, Mr. Conaway, 
does. I would like to think that it will pass with a very strong vote 
this afternoon.
  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to our Democratic whip, my 
friend, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, I think this bill, the Fuel Conservation Education Act, 
is a worthwhile piece of legislation. I am going to support it. This 
bill calls for a public education campaign by the Department of Energy 
and industry groups to provide U.S. motorists with information about 
measures that they may take to conserve fuel. I think that is important 
information.
  Many of the measures, from observing speed limits to keeping tires 
properly inflated, of course, are already well known.
  I believe that even the cosponsors of the bill acknowledge that it is 
no substitute, however, for a real, proactive energy policy that seeks 
to wean our Nation from its dependence on foreign oil.
  Thus, today, I want to take this occasion to call the Members' 
attention to legislation that seeks to do precisely that. I call it the 
PROGRESS Act, a program for real energy security.
  I, along with others, unveiled this proposal yesterday, along with 
the dean of the House, Congressman Dingell; the ranking Democrat on the 
Transportation Committee, Congressman Oberstar; and Congressmen Udall, 
Herseth, Holt, Blumenauer, and Schiff.
  In short, the PROGRESS Act seeks to initiate a robust, vigorous, 
focused national program, akin to the Manhattan Project, this one 
focused on energy independence.
  The PROGRESS Act would establish a National Energy Security 
Commission, bringing together government, industry and academic leaders 
to develop consensus national goals on energy.
  Well, that sounds very good, another commission. But it is, in fact, 
like the Base Closure Commission, because they will then submit through 
the President its proposals, and the Congress will have to act on those 
in an expedited fashion, as is true with Base Closure.
  It would establish as well a new Manhattan Center for high efficiency 
vehicles, seeking to double the current average vehicles' efficiency, 
and to diversify fuel types. America, the greatest innovator on the 
face of the Earth, ought to be producing cars that are 
60-, 70-mile-per-gallon cars, and selling them to India and China, as 
opposed to the other way around.
  It would establish a national biofuels infrastructure development 
program, establishing a grant program to encourage the private sector 
to invest in wholesale and retail biofuel pumps, tanks, and related 
distribution equipment.
  It will do us no good to produce biofuels if we cannot deliver them 
to biofuel-capable vehicles. The PROGRESS Act calls for a stimulus 
package to upgrade the pipeline for biofuels. You cannot ship them 
through pipelines, they are a different chemical make-up and they eat 
up pipelines.
  The freight rail system, while also providing grants to promote 
conservation alternatives, such as public transit and commuter rail, 
the freight rail systems are critical.
  This bill would also increase the use of alternative fuels in Federal 
fleets. Federal fleets are the largest users of petroleum products in 
the world. The largest single user in the world. Many of our vehicles 
are flex fuel vehicles. The problem is, there is no delivery of flex 
fuel infrastructure in place, and therefore they do not use it.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge the Members to review the PROGRESS Act, this 
program for real energy security, which will be introduced tomorrow.

                              {time}  1430

  Energy independence is inextricably linked to our national security, 
our economic well-being and our environmental integrity. So, from a 
security point of view on national security, from an economics point of 
view in terms of the growth of our economy and from an environmental 
standpoint, we must apply America's technological capability to 
producing clean-burning alternative fuels that are energy efficient and 
sell them to China and India. Because if China and India do not have 
that capability as well, they will choke us to death. So it is not just 
what we do but what these two behemoth societies, growing industrial 
societies in our globe are doing. We must act now.
  That is the point the gentleman from Massachusetts was making. I 
disagree with him on whether we are for or against this bill. I am 
going to vote for this bill. There is nothing wrong with this bill. 
Educating consumers is a good thing to do. To the extent that they are 
more knowledgeable in saving fuel, that is a positive step for us to 
take; and I am going to vote for it.
  But the point that the gentleman from Massachusetts was making is it 
is not enough nor is it a substitute for very focused, comprehensive 
action. That is what the PROGRESS Act is all about. I hope that you 
will look at it, and I hope that you can help us pass it, perhaps not 
this year but in the very early part of the next session of the 
Congress of the United States.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick).
  Mr. FITZPATRICK of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise as one Member on 
this side of the aisle that in the past has supported Mr. Markey's 
calls for increased fuel efficiency standards and voted for his 
amendments but believe that it would be foolish to so vote and not also 
support this demand side plan presented by Mr. Conaway from Texas, 
which also has a proven track record, and urge my colleagues to support 
H.R. 5611, the Fuel Education Conservation Act.
  I just want to point out one fact, that, over one year, Californians 
reduced peak demand by 89 percent and total consumption by 6.7 percent. 
I would submit, if we can do it in California, we can do it across 
America. So I would urge my colleagues to support the bill.
  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers. Again, I urge our 
colleagues to support the bill, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill. It is a 
constructive suggestion. And I am sorry to say that at least at one 
point in this debate it was proven that any issue, sadly, any issue 
that is brought to this floor can be made partisan.
  It seems to me that the famous quote by Roosevelt applies here, and 
that is that it is always easy to point out how the strong man stumbled 
or how the doer of deeds might have done them

[[Page H5883]]

better. It is always possible to come in and say, well, this isn't good 
enough. You should have done this. You should have done that.
  But, as that quote suggests, the credit belongs not to the critic but 
to the man who is in the arena struggling and trying to do the right 
thing. In this case, Mr. Speaker, that is my colleague, Mr. Conaway of 
Texas.
  Now, some people say facetiously, oh, this is energy week for the 
Republicans; and they criticize that we haven't done enough. I would 
note that some of those people oppose drilling in ANWR where we might 
find additional resource. They oppose even rational proposals to do 
offshore drilling. They oppose rational proposals called for by the 
industry to incentivize additional refineries.
  Indeed, I worked very hard to increase hydroelectric energy; and the 
same people who are today here criticizing this bill opposed the 
construction of additional hydroelectric production facilities. Indeed, 
they say we should tear down existing dams that produce hydroelectric 
energy.
  One of the speakers on this bill said, well, this really is 
unnecessary. Indeed, it is a waste of time. Because in point of fact 
there is already an Energy Department Web site which tells consumers 
this information.
  Well, unfortunately, that misapprehends what this bill does. This 
bill doesn't just create a Web site. This bill calls for a cooperative 
effort to advertise to American consumers what they can do.
  Perhaps the gentleman who made that argument knows that every single 
person residing in his congressional district understands already that 
using their cruise control on the highway can help maintain a constant 
speed and save gas.
  Perhaps the gentleman understands, or in his congressional district 
every single consumer understands, that aggressive driving can reduce 
mileage by 33 percent.
  Presumably, in that particular Member's district, every single member 
observes the speed limit and understands that for each five miles per 
hour over the 60 miles an hour that you drive, you are increasing the 
cost of gasoline by 21 cents a gallon.
  Perhaps, indeed, I assume, every single consumer in that 
congressional district understands that a single 100 pounds of extra 
weight in your vehicle can cost you an additional 2 percent each year.
  Perhaps in that congressional district every consumer understands 
that fixing a car that is not timed properly can save you 4 percent of 
the gasoline you need to consume. Indeed, fixing a serious maintenance 
problem can save you 40 percent.
  And perhaps every consumer in that congressional district understands 
that if you keep your tires properly inflated you will save 3.3 
percent.
  But I would suggest that not all Americans do understand those 
things. I would suggest that this is good legislation. I would suggest 
that it is indeed the right thing to do, to help educate consumers; and 
I am, quite frankly, stunned that an opponent would come to the floor 
and say we do not need to educate America's consumers on the cost of 
excessive consumption of gasoline.
  This is good legislation. I commend the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Conaway) for his effort. I appreciate the support of some of my 
colleagues on the other side, and I urge that all of the Members pass 
this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bonilla). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5611, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``A Bill to 
authorize a partnership between the Secretary of Energy and appropriate 
industry groups for the creation of a transportation fuel conservation 
education campaign, and for other purposes.''.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________