[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 96 (Wednesday, June 11, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H5322-H5326]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
A NEW ENERGY POLICY FOR THE COUNTRY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 18, 2007, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota
(Mr. Ellison) until midnight.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, tonight the freshmen, the Democrats of the
Freshman Caucus are going to take the rest of this hour to talk about
our economy. And it's an excellent way to move forward, Mr. Speaker,
because the prior speaker had some interesting things for us to chew
on, and we will help the American people to see that under Republican
control, the economy has not fared well, that they're not good at
running the economy, and the proof is out there for everybody.
We'll be able to show how, when Democrats are in charge, that we do
have job growth, we do have strong economy, we do have an economy where
we are reducing poverty. We have an economy where all Americans are
doing better than they were doing before.
I think it is obvious to everyone if you reflect only a few years ago
in the late 1990s--I think it was a different President in office than
the one we have now--that the economy was much better than it is today
and that it is these policies that we've seen over the last 8 years
where it was a Republican House, a Republican President, that have
really led us to the difficult situation that American consumers and
workers are seeing today.
So we have a different vision. We have a vision that includes
everybody. We have a vision that says that workers should have the
right to organize. We have a vision that says we should have a fair
trade policy. We have a vision that says that we need investment in our
public infrastructure. We have a vision that says that we need
universal health care coverage for all people. We have a vision for an
economy, Mr. Speaker, that says that everybody counts and everybody
matters.
And, you know, I really couldn't be happier tonight because I'm
joined by my good friend from Colorado, Ed Perlmutter, not only a very
excellent legislator but a really nice guy.
Ed, how you doing?
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Good evening. It's good to be here with my friend
from Minnesota, and we just were listening to the gentleman from Iowa,
and he was talking about what's the Democrat's plan.
Well, what is the Democrat's plan for energy? Well, it's just obvious
what the Republican's plan has been with two oil men in the White
House. You can see exactly what has happened to the price of oil under
the Bush administration. From $25 a barrel to $134.35.
So when he is making comments or generally people are saying what is
going on here, we can see with two oil men in the White House what the
energy plan has been for this country, and that's higher and higher and
higher gas prices.
Now, what we've got to do is we've got to take ourselves off of oil
to a greater extent than we are right now. We have to relieve ourselves
of this addiction. And in the short run, we're going to feel some pain,
but in the long run, the liberation from being addicted to one
commodity the way we are, which is oil, which is really having a ripple
effect throughout the economy, will be fantastic.
And so what we are doing as Democrats is to provide other ways to
save energy. A gallon saved is a gallon earned. A kilowatt saved is a
kilowatt earned. And so what we want to do first is make sure that
we're efficient in how we use our energy so that there is a lower
demand and we aren't so hooked on petroleum and petroleum by-products.
Second, we've got to find other commodities that compete with
petroleum, whether it is cellulosic ethanol or better ways to make
electricity through renewable energy sources. As Democrats, those are
the kinds of things we're doing. It's time for us to get to the future
and not continue to be hooked on oil like we have been for the last 30,
40, 50 years.
Mr. ELLISON. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. PERLMUTTER. I certainly will yield to my friend from Minnesota.
Mr. ELLISON. Now, let me just ask you this question sir. You have
studied this issue. I consider you one of the most learned persons on
this issue in the Congress, and I just want to know, isn't this
proposal of just drilling in the Continental Shelf, drilling in ANWR,
isn't this kind of like trying to cure a disease by simply treating the
symptoms of the disease? For example, if I were to have cancer, you
could try to find a cure for my cancer, or you could simply try to
alleviate the symptoms of the suffering that I am enduring but not
really get to the root of the matter.
Is this kind of like--does that analogy work when it comes to just
drilling for more oil and continuing to spoil our natural wilderness
areas and to risk oil spills? Isn't that sort of an analogous
situation?
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Well, if the gentleman will yield.
Mr. ELLISON. Yes, sir.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. It clearly is.
This is the time for us to get healthy, and we can get healthy in
many, many different ways. And it is going to be across the spectrum,
whether it is making our buildings more efficient, our homes more
efficient when it comes to energy consumption, our cars more efficient,
come up with different fuels, different ways to power this country, we
can do those things; and it's just so obvious because it's good for
national security, it's good for climate, and it is good for jobs.
But let us go back to this thing about they want to drill in ANWR,
they want to drill offshore, they want to drill a million places.
Well, we know that right now, and I'll put up a chart, that right now
oil companies are not drilling 30.6 million acres that they have
offshore and 30.5 million acres that they have on shore.
Mr. ELLISON. Well, then, why are they crying about wanting to drill
in ANWR and wanting to drill off the Continental Shelf when they have
all of these places they can drill now? I mean, I know that there's got
to be a million Americans watching this broadcast who want to know that
question.
[[Page H5323]]
Mr. PERLMUTTER. I think the question is to try to distract from the
real answer which is the plan, the energy plan has been to raise gas
prices, and the energy plan has not worked. It's hurt Americans. And we
have to come up with other ways so that we aren't dependent upon one
commodity like that because we're dealing with eight or so countries in
OPEC and five, or about five big oil companies. Very few countries and
very few companies. And we need to have other ways to power this
Nation, and we can do it.
I mean, we have the ability to come up with better and more efficient
cars. We have the ability to come up with more efficient homes and not
in expensive ways. We're talking about changing out windows, putting in
more insulation. There are opportunities to add solar or wind so that
we have renewable energy sources, and these are thousands and thousands
and thousands of jobs; and certainly in the construction industry,
those jobs are needed today. So it is a win-win situation if we're just
going to have to do these things.
But even in the short run, we know that oil companies have plenty of
places to drill that they aren't drilling today. So it's a phony
argument.
Mr. ELLISON. Well, you know, the gentleman from Colorado makes an
excellent point, Mr. Perlmutter. And what you're describing is a slice
of a Democratic vision for our country for a fair economy and a cleaner
economy.
I think it's important when you mention construction jobs and
retrofits and things like that, what you're talking about is the green
economy, an economy that can include everybody, people who can do
relatively menial jobs and also the innovators. Up and down the
educational scale. But it's going to take training, it's going to take
opportunity, and it is going to take courage.
You know, when Jonas Salk, who cured--came up with the polio vaccine,
when he was--he could have spent his time making better braces for kids
who had polio, right? But what did he do?
What did he do, Mr. Perlmutter?
Mr. PERLMUTTER. He came up with a vaccine so that they didn't have
the disease in the first place.
Mr. ELLISON. So what we need is a vision for a green economy for now
and in the future where we can increase the fuel efficiency of
vehicles, where we can invest in transportation and transit, where we
can move people and not just cars, where we can take some of our old
windy buildings where right out of the roof the heat's just going out,
retrofit them for some green roofs.
Are these the kinds of things that you have in mind, Mr. Perlmutter?
Mr. PERLMUTTER. And, Mr. Ellison, you are right on the mark. This is
about changing the direction of this Nation and not doing things the
same old way that now is forcing us to see $4-a-gallon-priced gasoline.
This is about changing the direction of this Nation, moving us into
this century where we have many other ways to power this Nation.
Now we just, all of us as a country, as Americans, we have to step
forward and do this and knowing in the short run that we're facing $4-
a-gallon gasoline. Now, we're going to take a look, as Members of
Congress, why we've seen this dramatic spike to $4, whether--hopefully
there's not been manipulation, there's not been speculation that's been
improper.
But even so, we need to come up with other ways to power this
country, and we can do that whether it is through the research being
conducted at the National Renewable Energy Lab in Colorado, whether it
is the new designs that we're seeing for cars across the globe. There
are many, many ways that we can improve our energy situation, and most
of them start with really pretty low-hanging fruit; and that's just
being more efficient.
Mr. ELLISON. Conservation.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Conservation but efficiency.
We can, through just engineering, basic engineering, architecture,
design work, be more efficient in how we power this country and how
much energy we use and consume. And we don't want to be putting a lot
of carbon, continue to be putting carbon into the atmosphere. We don't
want to continue to be so beholden on oil countries and oil companies.
So we are, as the Democratic Congress, moving us to a new energy
future. We are changing the direction of this Nation. We're not going
to follow the energy plan of two oil men in the White House. That's
just not where we're going to go any more.
Mr. ELLISON. Well, you know, Mr. Perlmutter, when you talk about
these energy issues, it makes me think that this is where the country,
I think, really wants to go. I mean, in these last several months we've
heard a lot about change. It seems Americans want change. We don't want
to be stuck in oil handcuffs. We want to go towards an energy future
that includes everybody and that where we need to invest in our
innovation, we need to invest in our brain power, you know, where we
can have a into new opportunity in our country to make sure that we're
not polluting the air, warming up the globe.
And again, as our friends on the other side of the aisle talk about,
well, why don't we just drill off the Continental Shelf off Florida,
they kind of imply it's just a matter of sunbathers not wanting to see
an unsightly rig out there. Of course it is ugly to see that. But that
does minimize the real concerns we're talking about; isn't that right,
Mr. Perlmutter?
Mr. PERLMUTTER. I think it minimizes it. I think there are plenty of
opportunities to drill.
You know, having said we're going to change direction, we're not
going to go cold turkey from oil and gas. It will play a role in our
energy spectrum for a long time to come. But we certainly can reduce
our demand.
There are certainly places to drill now that aren't being drilled by
the big oil companies, and there are other ways that we can wean
ourselves from the dependence on foreign oil.
{time} 2330
We just have to do that. We can't ignore this any longer, and this
particular White House and the Republican Congress before us would just
want to drill and drill and stay hooked on one commodity. It is never
smart in business to only have one supplier.
Mr. ELLISON. Don't the businesspeople say you've got to diversify?
Mr. PERLMUTTER. You have to diversify, yes.
Mr. ELLISON. I'm all for saying let's not build more leg braces;
let's find some vaccines.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. And I'm going to not add to that because that is a
very good analogy.
Mr. ELLISON. As we talked about the gas prices and things like this,
we'll be talking more about that as we get closer to the end of the
hour. But I also want to bring some other things into the conversation
which I think are very important.
One of those things is that today the House tried to increase the
unemployment insurance, and we tried to put it on the suspension
calendar and pass it that way. Unfortunately, we did not meet the
marker we were looking for. We needed three more votes to get there on
suspension calendar, and we are not going to quit. As you know, the
Democrats have a lot of fortitude, and we don't quit, and we are
persistent and dogged in our efforts to stand up for the American
people.
But the Senate recently did pass a 13-week extension of the
unemployment insurance as part of a supplemental appropriation, and I
think that it is really indicative of the situation people are finding
themselves in.
As we're talking about $4 a gallon gas, we also have to take into
consideration, Mr. Speaker, that we've seen 30 years of stagnant wages,
except for that period in the late 1990s when we had a Democratic
President. We have seen 30 years of stagnant wages except for that
1990s blip, and now that paycheck is being asked to do more, being
asked to take on more child care, more health care, more fuel prices,
more in terms of food prices.
Americans are in a difficult situation, and I dare say that now we
have about 8.5 million unemployed people
[[Page H5324]]
who need help, and I think that it is a little unfortunate we were not
able to pass that mark today with that unemployment insurance, but I'm
sure that we're going to keep on trying until we get it.
I just wonder how the people in Colorado are faring. Are they
unemployed, having a tough time there, and basically, as we see
ourselves having creeping expenses for our food, fuel and things like
that?
Mr. PERLMUTTER. In Colorado, we've had kind of a slow economy for
several years now. We've faced a lot of foreclosures in the Denver
metro area and throughout the State. We keep feeling like we're going
to come out of this slump and then kind of get bumped back in. I
believe in Colorado we're going to come out of the slump before much of
the Nation just because we went into it before much of the Nation.
But even so, with the oil prices the way they are, with the way the
economy has been managed by this administration, the people in Colorado
need a safety net which is what unemployment insurance is. These are
hardworking people who, for one reason or another, may have lost a job.
They're looking for work. They want work. They want to get back in
employment, and they need to do that. People in Colorado are workers.
They like to be employed. They like to earn an income. They like to
provide for themselves, and given the slow economy that we've had in
Colorado, which I think and I hope is ready to turn, people do need
that extra safety net.
Mr. ELLISON. Well, you know, all of us are looking for better days.
You know, I can tell you that my constituents in Minnesota let me know
that we've been hit with the foreclosure crisis as well as stagnant
wages, and I'm sad to report to you that the Nation's job market showed
clear signs of recessionary conditions, as the jobless rate leapt up a
half a percent in May alone from 5 percent to 5.5 percent. That's a lot
of people, and that's according to our Bureau of Labor Statistics. And
this monthly increase was the largest since the mid-1980s. It's been a
while, pushing unemployment to the highest rate since 2004.
I don't like to rattle the sabers in terms of the partisan divide,
but I'm one, speaking only for myself, who's prepared to say that, you
know, the Democrats have a better vision for how to run the economy,
vision in terms of the energy future, vision in terms of trying to get
some unemployment insurance extended so that people can have a little
relief as they try to find that next hard-to-find job.
But I think it's important that we see this thing in a broader
context.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Well, and in a broader context, I want to go back to
our prior conversation on the green jobs, the green collar jobs.
One of the things that we see in Colorado, and I think this can be
nationwide, is that there are thousands and thousands and thousands
upon thousands of jobs in the green industry, in the energy industry
with renewables and with energy efficiency in housing. There are
thousands of jobs, and they are jobs here in America.
Mr. ELLISON. Right.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Not overseas, but they're here in America.
Mr. ELLISON. I've got to ask you a question. If you are training
somebody to retrofit a downtown office building in, say, Denver or
Minneapolis, and they're going to retrofit that building to be green
and efficient, can you offshore that job?
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Your question answers itself. Of course not. When
somebody comes in to change the windows in my house, they're doing it
at my house in Golden, Colorado. These are good construction jobs.
They're design jobs. There are some manufacturing jobs attached to it.
The new direction for energy also is a place where there are
thousands of jobs which will help us stem this unemployment, but for
those people who can't find those jobs right now, we need to have a
safety net for them.
Mr. ELLISON. We need a safety net. We need to have a caring Nation,
and Americans are a caring people and a compassionate people, but we
also are a working people and we want to work, and we also need a
vision for our future because if you're unemployed right now, this
might not be a bad time to think about getting some extra education, as
long as you can get some unemployment insurance, and if you get that
education, maybe you want to think about a green job for a green energy
future.
You know, I want to add, too, while we're on the subject of jobs, the
payroll contracted for the fifth month in a row, down 49,000 with most
of the net job losses occurring in the construction industry,
factories, offices, and retailers. Since the total payroll peaked last
December, they've been down by around 324,000 jobs since the government
sector tends to be less cyclically affected by downturns.
And looking at just the private sector, job loss can provide a more
accurate gauge of the lagging economy's impact on job growth. Private
sector employment has fallen over the past 6 months by over 400,000
jobs. I'm not happy to report that to you, Mr. Speaker, but it is the
situation that people are facing, and I think it's important that this
Congress be willing to respond to the needs of the people, which is why
we needed three more votes in order to get that extension of the
unemployment insurance passed as we tried to do today.
I think we're going to hit that mark. We're certainly not going to
quit. I certainly believe that there are a lot of people out there who
really want this policy. They certainly can get on the phone, get on
the e-mail, and let folks who represent them know how they feel. But
this unemployment extension is a big deal, but I think it's important
as we push to extend unemployment insurance benefits that we tell folks
that while they know they're dealing with putting the food on the table
tomorrow and paying the rent tomorrow and paying the mortgage tomorrow,
we want them to look to a better future, and that involves the green
job economy that you've so amply described.
I also want to just say, too, as we talk about the economy and the
job situation that, you know, we've got to have a real clear
understanding about those indicators that tell us which direction the
economy is going in. And I'm looking for a time when we can actually
set policies in place that really will give Americans the kind of
vision that they need, as we talked about just a little while ago.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. If you would yield, I think one of the places where,
again, going back to your education and a vision for this country that
looks beyond just tomorrow but to next year and 10 years down is the GI
Bill that we would like to see passed that the President has threatened
to veto.
Mr. ELLISON. Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. This
President, who shakes his finger about supporting the troops, would
never, never veto the GI Bill. Certainly you jest.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. I'm sorry to say that he's considering that, and what
I find so hard to believe is that the best investment this country ever
made was in the GI Bill after World War II. And now we have had our men
and women in Afghanistan and in Iraq for more than 5 years, which is
longer than we were in World War II, and to provide them with education
and educational opportunities simply will be a fantastic investment for
this country.
The wealth that was created, the happiness that was created because
people could live full lives and educated lives after World War II,
those are the kinds of things that we want for America. And my Dad,
when we're talking about this, and you can see him well up with pride
about the GI Bill and how so many men came back from World War II and
then were successful after seeing the horrors of war, but came back and
were able to provide for their families in ways that nobody
anticipated. He describes that as the greatest investment this country
has ever made, and he kids around by then saying, ``And a distant
second was the Louisiana Purchase.''
So this GI Bill that we're proposing now for the 21st century will be
a fantastic investment for our men and women who have served us. I
believe we owe them a responsibility to provide for education, and we
just need to go forward with this. And the White House has objected to
this. Senator McCain has objected to this, as I understand it. And it
just doesn't make sense.
Mr. ELLISON. Well, you know, Mr. Speaker, these are important facts
you bring up. I kind of think of that period
[[Page H5325]]
after World War II, up until about 1973, as the almost, almost golden
age of America. I say ``almost'' because it was marked by Jim Crow and
other things like that, very important, serious issues. And we've come
a long way. Our country's come a long way.
But you cannot ignore the fact that after World War II, you had the
GI Bill. You had FHA. We had already established Social Security to
make sure that no seniors had to live out their retirement in an
undignified way. And we also had tax rates for the very wealthy that
were much, much higher than they are now, and we also had a higher rate
of unionization.
I know some folks don't understand how important that is, but the
fact is, in 1957, 33 percent of all workers were in a union. Another 33
percent were paid like they were, and folks were living relatively
well. We all look back at those old TV shows and kind of chuckle now at
how corny they were, but they actually were doing pretty well
economically in the 1950s.
And the fact is that some of these kind of policies are things we
need today, but we have the advantage today to have greater equality
which is so great, you know. It's a great honor of America that we have
overcome some of those things of the past, those lack of equality
issues. But as we've gotten greater social equality, we've lost in the
area of income and economic equality, and we've got to revitalize our
economy to make sure that everybody can share in it. And I think that
green jobs are the way, but a compassionate response to people who are
unemployed now is also part of the picture as well.
And you mentioned your dad. My dad was born in 1928, went to World
War II, to the Pacific at a very young age, about 17 years old, but he
did go. He was a military person and served in the Pacific, was in
Hawaii and was a beneficiary of the GI Bill and was able to go to
college, Wayne State University in Detroit, on that program. And it
made him into a man who could put five boys through college, me and my
brothers, and you know, it's an amazing thing.
You know, I am proud of my brothers. They're all doing well. They're
all doing great. And the fact is, none of us would be doing this well
if our dad had not been the beneficiary of an enlightened,
compassionate, common-sense program like the GI Bill, and I'm glad that
we're able to pass it through this House. And I pray that the President
sees the light and passes and signs that bill.
{time} 2345
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Ellison, while we're on the subject of our
service men and women, I think one of the things where there really was
a change in the direction of this Nation in the past year was the fact
that the Democratic House and the Democratic Senate, the Congress, sent
to the President and he signed--and I want to applaud him for doing
that--the greatest increase in veterans' benefits in the 77-year
history of the Veterans Administration. And again, when we send men and
women into harm's way, when we ask them to protect us, serve us, we
have a moral contract, a moral responsibility to provide them with as
normal a life as possible and to provide the benefits that are promised
when they go in.
Mr. ELLISON. Well, you know, soldiers are people, too. They want a
future. They want an education. They want something to pass onto their
children. They want to live a quality lifestyle. They want to own their
home.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. And I feel that we've made great strides in living up
to our end of the bargain. Now, it has to have execution, but I know in
Colorado, for instance, in terms of veterans' claims, there was this
tremendous backlog. Because of what we did last year, we've added 65
people to the benefits section so that claims can be processed in a
reasonable and timely fashion so that the benefits are received by our
service men and women in a reasonable and timely fashion. So there has
been actual progress on the ground.
Mr. ELLISON. There has been actual progress on the ground in
Colorado. I'm happy to report that in Minneapolis we have a wonderful
VA hospital there, and we've seen things getting better all the time.
But I want to let the veterans know that, as we talk tonight about the
economy, we've talked about gas prices, we've talked about unemployment
insurance, looking out for our veterans, making sure our veterans have
economic opportunity, educational opportunity, health care opportunity
is part of the whole dialogue. This is a working class prosperity
issue, veterans' benefits. GI Bill benefits is a factor when it comes
to trying to make sure that the American middle class, American working
class has a real chance at doing well in this economy. So I want to
thank you for bringing that out.
And I just want to say, you know, that it's important to understand
veterans as an important component in our economy because when you just
separate the soldier from the economy, you forget that the soldier is
coming back. And they should have a good way to go when they get back.
You know, I also just wanted to mention, as we start walking into our
final 15 minutes tonight, that we just had a Memorial Day. And on that
day, I am proud to tell you that a number of our veterans are well
aware of some of these programs; a number of them are well aware of the
work that Congress is trying to do, not always with a cooperative White
House, but on some things we have found cooperation, and we're thankful
for that.
And I just want to mention to you as well that it's really tough on
our veterans to have to deal with foreclosure. I've had a few vets in
my district, while they were away, they had only their spouse to try to
keep up the mortgage, and they've fallen behind. And I bring that up
only because I think that it's important, as we talk about this, that
we do mention that a part of what this Democratic Congress and the
``difference makers,'' this freshman class, has been a part of is
trying to close the gap when it comes to the foreclosure crisis.
You know, I don't have to tell you, Mr. Perlmutter, that we're
dealing with about 2,800 foreclosures a day. We're dealing with about
20,000 a week. We're dealing with a very serious problem. And I just
want to point out that this foreclosure crisis is something that there
have been bills introduced that try to forestall foreclosure for a
veteran, for a soldier who's overseas, but it's something that really
is affecting our entire economy.
We've passed bills through the House recently that will allow FHA to
be put in a position to buy some of these mortgages and restructure
them going forward. I think it's important that we point this out
because the Congress has been responsive. You and I are both on the
Financial Services Committee, and so we both know that we've been
working on this housing issue quite a bit. And also, last December, I
believe, we also passed a bill through Congress, an anti-predatory
lending bill that I think should pay some good dividends if we could
get that enacted into law.
But this foreclosure crisis is hitting our veterans and it's hitting
all of our people. And maybe you would like to comment on that.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Well, we've taken steps to stem foreclosures by using
the FHA guarantee as a way to slow things. And the way it works is that
a bank that has a loan to somebody can write the loan down to whatever
the market value is. Then the FHA will guarantee 90 percent of this
lower amount for the borrower so long as the borrower can pay that 90
percent back. Now they have to go through a credit check, and they've
got to be able to pay the lower amount.
So the Federal Government is coming in to stop a foreclosure which,
if it takes place, could result in a vacant home that then ends up
decaying, and it starts the decay in a neighborhood. So it assists the
neighborhood. It allows the bank to become liquid. And it gives the
borrower a chance to make the payments at this lower amount.
Now, if the borrower were to sell in, I believe, within 5 years, the
Federal Government would receive a portion of anything above the
written down purchase price. But the bottom line is, in a very prudent
and fiscally responsible manner, FHA is being used to guarantee lower
loans, reduced loans so that we can limit the numbers of foreclosures
in our neighborhoods and maintain the strength of our neighborhoods.
Mr. ELLISON. Well, you know, I'm glad you mentioned that it's not
just the individual who is getting their
[[Page H5326]]
mortgage restructured with the FHA assistance who will benefit,
actually, it's the neighborhood. Foreclosures really don't hit
individuals alone, they hit neighborhoods. Because if you end up with a
foreclosed home and an abandoned house, it's an attractive nuisance for
people in the neighborhood who have bad intent. We know the price of
copper. These houses are being stripped of their copper wiring. And
oftentimes the copper strippers are not very careful about how they get
it out. They've been known to nick and cut and damage gas lines and
cause fires and explosions, not to mention other damage.
And so when you have a concentration of foreclosed and abandoned
buildings in a neighborhood, it really does put downward pressure on
the homes of everybody in the neighborhood, even the people who have
been fortunate enough to pay every single mortgage payment on time
every time. And so it really is something to help everybody, not just
the individuals who are being directly assisted.
And of course, as you also know, when a house is abandoned, the city
cannot receive property taxes on that house anymore. And so really what
it's doing is coming up with a practical solution which will allow the
bank to keep getting some of that money back, maybe not the originally
intended amount, but a portion; of course half a loaf is better than
none often. And so it's a practical solution to a serious problem. And
it's just one more example of how Democrats and how freshman Democrats
like you and I are part of solutions to try to improve our Nation.
And we're trying to bring benefits not only to our citizens, but
also, as you mentioned before, our veterans, trying to make sure that
our vets and all kinds of people who are going through this foreclosure
crisis are able to keep their homes, neighborhoods are able to be
stable, cities are able to receive property tax, city police
departments aren't having to run out to properties and spend resources
kicking people out of abandoned houses, or fire departments putting out
fires. It really is a responsible way to sort of operate and try to
improve the situation here.
Well, Mr. Perlmutter, it looks like we've got about 5 minutes left.
Any parting shots?
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Well, I'd like to go back to the gas prices.
You know, I think that the gas prices show the lack of an energy plan
by the prior Republican Congress, by this White House, except to the
degree that it has caused an increase in oil prices.
You know, we're in Iraq in a substantial way; and a lot of it, in my
opinion, has to do with oil. Now, the average price per gallon of fuel
paid by U.S. military units in Iraq is at least $3.23. The price per
gallon of gasoline for Iraqi residents is $1.36. Why the difference
there? Oil revenues for the Iraqi Government is expected to be $70
billion, which should be paid back to this country when we are running
a deficit. We're spending $2.5 to $3 billion a week to be in Iraq. And
that obviously has had an effect on our economy over the course of
these 5 years that we've been in Iraq.
We've got to change the direction of this Nation, Mr. Ellison. We're
trying to do that every day. We need to change the direction when it
comes to energy. We've got to change the direction when it comes to
Iraq. We've been changing the direction when it comes to our veterans
and living up to our contracts and responsibilities in terms of their
benefits.
We're making a difference. We have a long way to go to really change
the direction of this Nation. This country is in need of big change in
a lot of ways. And I'm glad that I've been elected to the Congress by
the people of the suburbs of Denver to try and institute some of that
change.
And so with that, I would yield back to you, sir.
Mr. ELLISON. Well, Mr. Perlmutter, I want to be a witness to what you
just said. You have made a great difference. You, together with our
freshman class--which I'm also a member of--have been here trying to
improve the lives of Americans. And what we've been offering, yes,
vision on energy policy, yes, vision on dealing with unemployment
insurance and the jobs and the economy, yes, vision on veterans. But
what we're really offering is a bigger vision of America, not just a
litany of bills, but a bigger vision of our country, a bigger vision,
an America that is fairer, that's more prosperous, that's more
innovative, that takes care of its own. This is the America that we all
know we can have because people like your dad and mine fought for an
American that could be that way. And we believe that it is our
generation's responsibility to make a better America for our children
and our parents and everyone.
So it's been great hanging out with you, Mr. Perlmutter. Have a great
night.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Good night.
____________________