[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 149 (Thursday, September 18, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H8402-H8405]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3036, NO CHILD LEFT INSIDE ACT OF 
                                  2008

  Ms. CASTOR. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 1441 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 1441

       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. 3036) to amend the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 regarding environmental education, and 
     for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be 
     dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of 
     the bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 
     of rule XXI. 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 
     Education

[[Page H8403]]

     and Labor. After general debate the bill shall be considered 
     for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in 
     order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of 
     amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
     Education and Labor now printed in the bill. The committee 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered 
     as read. All points of order against the committee amendment 
     in the nature of a substitute are waived except those arising 
     under clause 10 of rule XXI. Notwithstanding clause 11 of 
     rule XVIII, no amendment to the committee amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed 
     in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
     resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the 
     order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member 
     designated in the report, 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 such 
     amendments are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 
     10 of rule XXI. At the conclusion of consideration of the 
     bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the 
     bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
     adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House 
     on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the 
     bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute. 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.
       Sec. 2.  During consideration in the House of H.R. 3036 
     pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of 
     the previous question, the Chair may postpone further 
     consideration of the bill to such time as may be designated 
     by the Speaker.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Florida is recognized 
for 1 hour.

                              {time}  1030

  Ms. CASTOR. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart). All time yielded during consideration of the 
rule is for debate only. I yield myself such time as I might consume. I 
also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days 
in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1441.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. CASTOR. Madam Speaker, House Resolution 1441 provides for 
consideration of H.R. 3036, the No Child Left Inside Act of 2008, under 
a structured rule.
  The rule provides 1 hour of general debate controlled by the 
Committee on Education and Labor. The rule makes in order five 
amendments printed in the Rules Committee report. The rule also 
provides for one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
  Madam Speaker, it is important that elementary and secondary schools 
across America continue to offer curriculum that is aligned with the 
needs of our children and the interests of our great country. That is 
why the Congress will move today to extend the National Environmental 
Education Act under an initiative offered by the gentleman from 
Maryland, Mr. John Sarbanes, entitled the No Child Left Inside Act.
  This national environmental education bill was reported by the 
Committee on Education and Labor by a strong bipartisan vote. Under the 
leadership of the Education and Labor Committee chairman, George 
Miller, our Nation's students have been well served by this Congress 
with numerous landmark reforms and investments.
  I thought we would take the time just to name a few. This Congress 
has passed the College Cost Reduction Act that was signed into law last 
year. It provides the single largest increase in college aid since the 
GI Bill, roughly $20 billion over the next 5 years. But it does so at 
no new cost to taxpayers.
  Under the law, 6.8 million students who take out need-based Federal 
student loans each year will see the interest rates on their loans 
halved over the next 5 years, saving the typical borrower over $4,000 
during the life of the loan once that is implemented.
  That College Cost Reduction Act also boosts the maximum Pell Grant 
scholarship to $5,400 over the next 5 years. That's up from about 
$4,000 in 2006.
  In a part of that bill that has not received a lot of attention, that 
new law provides loan forgiveness for public service members like 
nurses, police officers, firefighters and first responders and makes 
those loan repayments more manageable and gives up-front tuition to 
students who commit to teaching in the high-need public schools.
  This Congress has also passed, and it has been signed into law, the 
Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans for American Families. There 
is nothing more important during this credit crunch than that 
affordable student loans and access to college remains available for 
our young students that would like to attend college.
  That Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans for American Families 
Act provides new protections, in addition to those already in current 
law, to ensure that families continue to have timely, uninterrupted 
access to Federal college loans in the event that distress in the 
credit markets leads to a significant number of lenders in the 
federally guaranteed student loan programs to substantially reduce 
their lending activity.
  The Congress has also passed, and it was signed into law just last 
month, the expanding college access for students and families law. It 
passed the House here by a vote of 380-49. The legislation addresses 
the rising price of college by encouraging colleges to rein in price 
increases, clean up corrupt practices in student loan programs and 
streamline the Federal financial aid application process. The bill also 
addresses textbook costs and increases college aid and support programs 
for veterans and military families.
  Madam Speaker, this is another bill before us today that continues 
the new direction, Congress' commitment to higher education, and to 
improving elementary and secondary education for students across 
America.
  Today we will focus on improvement to environmental education for 
America's schools, the best kind, where Washington doesn't dictate the 
parameters or curriculum to local schools, but gives schools the tools 
they need to decide themselves how to modernize curriculum. Today, it 
is our challenge, and the challenge of our children, to build a more 
sustainable energy efficient world, and sometimes you have to get 
outside the classroom and learn by doing and exploring your 
environment.
  Many children, including my 9-year-old daughter, learn more 
effectively this way. I know many of you love to visit classrooms and 
talk with students, like I do.
  Students today are particularly interested in energy conservation, 
climate change, clean air and clean water. Students, teachers and 
schools are clamoring for more knowledge and understanding of our 
natural environment.
  Unfortunately, many schools and school districts simply do not have 
the resources to teach beyond the basics these days. Since the 
enactment of the No Child Left Behind Act, we have seen a narrowing of 
school curriculum with schools being forced to spend more and more 
learning time preparing for high-stakes testing.
  Well, like other science courses, this grant program, under the 
national environmental education program, the environmental education 
instructs students in critical thinking, problem solving, teamwork, 
obtaining and analyzing data, communication and learning by doing. 
These skills are critical for success in the 21st century, and 
environmental education helps students by learning how to conserve, how 
to conserve energy, how to ensure safe products are on the shelves, 
which eventually strengthens our Nation's economy and makes it a much 
safer world.
  Our environmental actions here at home have an impact on the global 
economy and on our energy security, and energy security is national 
security. Having a solid understanding of natural environment and our 
global interdependency is critical to keeping this Nation safe.
  The modest but important resources we will send to local schools 
under this National Environmental Education Act is particularly helpful 
now. Helping our kids to learn about the natural environment in an 
active learning setting will motivate students and propel them

[[Page H8404]]

towards success. It will pull kids away from the TV sets and the video 
games and the video screens and bring them outdoors.
  The bill supports local efforts to expand and enhance environmental 
education and also provides teachers with important professional 
development opportunities. Under this legislation, our Nation's 
teachers will become better equipped to teach students about the 
environment and encourage students to be knowledgeable about 
environmental issues and how they affect all of us.
  When environmental education is integrated into the classrooms, 
students and teachers are better able to use current, local 
environmental issues to increase their understanding of math, science, 
history and other academic subjects.
  Environmental education is a powerful tool to help motivate students 
to help take care of the environment and help improve their academic 
achievement.
  This bill also strengthens environmental literacy plans. According to 
the Campaign for Environmental Literacy, Americans still widely lack 
the environmental knowledge that will enable them to safeguard the 
public health, protect natural resources, support energy conservation 
efforts and engage in the movement towards a more sustainable future.
  So this is a win-win proposition for our local schools, for teachers 
and for the future of our great country. This legislation will 
modernize environmental education for the 21st century by emphasizing 
environmental literacy.
  I urge passage of the rule and this underlying bill.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance my time.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I would like to thank my good 
friend, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor) for the time, and I 
yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Every day our Nation faces new and critical challenges on how to 
approach globalization, really the great issue of our time. It is an 
extremely difficult and controversial issue that affects our economy, 
and it affects so much more.
  It is important, now more than ever, to equip our students, not just 
with the basics, math, reading, social studies, and et cetera, but also 
with opportunities in areas such as science and the environment to 
compete in tomorrow's global economy.
  This legislation, the legislation we are bringing to the floor with 
this rule, reauthorizes the National Environmental Education Act 
administered by the Environmental Protection Agency. Among other 
things, the bill will create opportunities for enhanced and ongoing 
professional development in environmental fields.
  It authorizes the Secretary of Education to award grants to help 
environmental education become more effective, more widely practiced. 
It establishes seven uses of funds aimed at encouraging increased 
environmental education.
  Environmental education is an important issue that Congress should 
support. But, really, with just a few days left in the legislative 
calendar for this Congress, what we ask is whether this is what really 
is considered by the majority among the highest priorities, whether it 
is legislation that we need to be considering, with just hours before 
leaving before the end of this Congress, and with great challenges 
facing the Nation, including very significant economic challenges and 
an energy situation, extraordinarily rising prices, whether this is the 
type of priority that we need to be setting aside time for at this 
time.
  This bill, which is a good bill, could easily have been placed on 
what is known as the suspension calendar, in other words, taking it 
automatically to the floor. Obviously it received overwhelming 
bipartisan support. But, instead, we are here today spending time on 
debating a noncontroversial--an important but noncontroversial 
environmental education program.
  So we think that it's most unfortunate, but symptomatic, of how this 
new majority has run this Congress. Just last week we spent 2 hours of 
debate time discussing a study of a river in Vermont. On another 
occasion we spent precious time debating the Washington-Rochambeau 
Revolutionary Route National Historic Trail, the Taunton River in 
Massachusetts, the land claims of the Bay Mills Indian community, and 
the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Water Trails Network. Those are the 
priorities of this majority.
  Now those are important issues. They are not the energy crisis and 
the serious attention that we need to be devoting to stabilizing our 
markets. We need to make sure that America remains the Nation where the 
entire world seeks to invest because of confidence in the future of the 
United States.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. CASTOR. Madam Speaker, we do not have any additional speakers, so 
I will reserve the balance of my time until the gentleman from Florida 
has made his closing statement.

                              {time}  1045

  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I thank my 
distinguished friend, Ms. Castor.
  Americans are tired of spending more and more of their paycheck, of 
their resources, for their energy needs. And for months they have been 
calling on us to take up legislation that will help lower the price of 
gasoline.
  Now just like the overwhelming majority of the American people, we in 
the minority in this Congress have been calling for legislation that 
will help the American consumer with the skyrocketing price of energy. 
Yet every time we have tried to debate real energy legislation, the 
majority has blocked and has stymied our efforts.
  In August, the majority decided to go on the recess instead of 
seeking to solve an extraordinarily high priority for the American 
people, the rising gas prices. I guess the majority must have heard 
quite a bit from their constituents in August because when they 
returned in September, they decided they would finally say they would 
debate energy legislation.
  On Tuesday of this week, the majority brought to the floor 
legislation, the so-called Comprehensive American Energy Security and 
Consumer Protection Act, which does nothing to produce energy or 
provide Americans with energy security since it will only increase our 
dependence on unstable foreign sources of energy. The bill brought to 
the floor this week by the majority was a farce. It will never be 
enacted into law and was only put together to provide the majority with 
an attempt at political cover so they can say that they passed energy 
legislation when in reality they did nothing.
  Now the majority is set to end this Congress and any chance to 
actually pass genuine comprehensive energy legislation. That's where we 
are today.
  Well, we do not have to leave here and head home without having 
considered comprehensive energy legislation.
  Madam Speaker, I will be urging my colleagues to vote with me to 
defeat the previous question so the House can finally consider genuine 
solutions to rising energy costs. If the previous question is defeated, 
I will move to amend the rule to prohibit the consideration of a 
concurrent resolution providing for adjournment until comprehensive 
energy legislation has been enacted into law.
  Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the 
amendment and extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the 
previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. By voting ``no'' on the previous 
question, Members can assure their constituents that they are committed 
to enacting legislation to help their constituents with rising energy 
prices. I also remind Members that the previous question in no way will 
prevent consideration of H.R. 3036, this legislation on environmental 
grants to schools. I encourage a ``no'' vote on the previous question.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. CASTOR. Madam Speaker, over the past year and a half, this new 
direction Congress has been solely focused on growing and strengthening 
America's middle class. Despite the protestations from my friend from 
the other side of the aisle, it was just this

[[Page H8405]]

week that we passed the most comprehensive, balanced energy legislation 
that has been considered in the past decade. That Comprehensive 
American Energy Security and Consumer Protection Act proved that there 
are real differences between the two sides of the aisle here because 
our energy bill was focused on lowering prices for consumers and 
protecting taxpayers.
  Yes, it expanded domestic drilling offshore and on land, but it also 
added a huge expansion of renewable sources of energy. It increases our 
security by freeing America from the grip of foreign oil. And it 
finally requires Big Oil to pay what it owes the American taxpayers.
  Is it fair that Big Oil continues to receive taxpayer subsidies at a 
time when they are making huge record profits? No, it doesn't, so we 
end the subsidies to the big oil companies. And a lot of this new 
emphasis on clean, green, renewable energy will have the extra added 
benefit of creating good-paying jobs here in America.
  Besides energy, we have also been focused on landmark education 
reform. Indeed, as I highlighted at the beginning of consideration of 
this bill, we've passed truly landmark historic investments in 
education for America's students. First was the single largest increase 
in college aid since the GI bill, the College Cost Reduction and Access 
Act of 2007. Under that law, 6.8 million students who take out need-
based Federal loans each year will see the interest rates on their 
loans cut in half.
  We increased Pell Grants by over $1,000. We have also passed and it 
was signed into law by President Bush the Ensuring Continued Access to 
Student Loans For American Families Act. That is so vital during this 
turmoil in the financial markets. It is absolutely vital that American 
families can still get those low-cost student loans. That new law 
provides new protections to ensure that families have timely, 
uninterrupted access to Federal college loans in the event that 
distress in the credit markets leads to a significant number of lenders 
not being liquid and being able to lend to families.
  We also expanded college access for students and families, we cleaned 
up the corrupt practices going on on some campuses in student loan 
programs, addressed student textbook costs and increased college aid 
and support programs for veterans and military families.
  And one that I didn't mention but I think we can all celebrate, the 
hugely bipartisan and popular new GI bill for the 21st century that 
will provide 4-year scholarships to the brave men and women who have 
served in the wars of Iraq and Afghanistan. We truly have been on the 
side of American families and the middle class.
  This modest bill today also renews our commitment to the No Child 
Left Inside Act. Doesn't that really bring all of this together as we 
focus on energy policy and improving our public education and higher 
education in this country, a modest but important commitment to 
students at home who are interested in environmental sustainability and 
energy conservation. We will provide additional resources to our 
schools and our students so they can get outside the classroom, get 
away from the TV set and the video games and learn by doing, learn in 
an active setting, learn out in the natural environment how to conserve 
energy and to address global climate change.
  Studies shows that environmental education boosts student 
achievement, it builds students' critical thinking and social skills, 
it improves student behavior, and it can enhance teaching. So we are 
going to help schools and States expand and enhance environmental 
education. We are going to focus on qualified expert teachers in the 
Nation's classrooms, and strengthen and develop environmental literacy 
plans.
  For a long time there was another group in charge here in Washington, 
and it oftentimes seems like over the past decades it has been the 
Democrats who have had to come in and clean up the mess of past 
administrations. Well, I think we are proving again that we are on 
track to do that again. We are all in this together and we need to pass 
this bill. I urge a unanimous ``yes'' vote on the previous question and 
on the rule.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of 
Florida is as follows:

Amendment to H. Res. 1441 Offered by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida

       At the end of the resolution add the following new section:
       Sec. 3. It shall not be in order in the House to consider a 
     concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment of either 
     House of Congress until comprehensive energy legislation has 
     been enacted into law that includes provisions designed to--
       (A) allow states to expand the exploration and extraction 
     of natural resources along the Outer Continental Shelf;
       (B) open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and oil shale 
     reserves to environmentally prudent exploration and 
     extraction;
       (C) extend expiring renewable energy incentives;
       (D) encourage the streamlined approval of new refining 
     capacity and nuclear power facilities;
       (E) encourage advanced research and development of clean 
     coal, coal-to-liquid, and carbon sequestration technologies; 
     and
       (F) minimize drawn out legal challenges that unreasonably 
     delay or prevent actual domestic energy production.
                                  ____

       (The information contained herein was provided by 
     Democratic Minority on multiple occasions throughout the 
     109th Congress.)

        The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means

       This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous 
     question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. 
     A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote 
     against the Democratic majority agenda and a vote to allow 
     the opposition, at least for the moment, to offer an 
     alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be 
     debating.
       Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of 
     Representatives, (VI, 308-311) describes the vote on the 
     previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or 
     control the consideration of the subject before the House 
     being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous 
     question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the 
     subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling 
     of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the 
     House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes 
     the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to 
     offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the 
     majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated 
     the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to 
     a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to 
     recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said: 
     ``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman 
     from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to 
     yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first 
     recognition.''
       Because the vote today may look bad for the Democratic 
     majority they will say ``the vote on the previous question is 
     simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on 
     adopting the resolution . . . [and] has no substantive 
     legislative or policy implications whatsoever.'' But that is 
     not what they have always said. Listen to the definition of 
     the previous question used in the Floor Procedures Manual 
     published by the Rules Committee in the 109th Congress, (page 
     56). Here's how the Rules Committee described the rule using 
     information form Congressional Quarterly's ``American 
     Congressional Dictionary'': ``If the previous question is 
     defeated, control of debate shifts to the leading opposition 
     member (usually the minority Floor Manager) who then manages 
     an hour of debate and may offer a germane amendment to the 
     pending business.''
       Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of Representatives, 
     the subchapter titled ``Amending Special Rules'' states: ``a 
     refusal to order the previous question on such a rule [a 
     special rule reported from the Committee on Rules] opens the 
     resolution to amendment and further debate.'' (Chapter 21, 
     section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues: Upon rejection of the 
     motion for the previous question on a resolution reported 
     from the Committee on Rules, control shifts to the Member 
     leading the opposition to the previous question, who may 
     offer a proper amendment or motion and who controls the time 
     for debate thereon.''
       Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does 
     have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only 
     available tools for those who oppose the Democratic 
     majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the 
     opportunity to offer an alternative plan.

  Ms. CASTOR. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, on that I demand 
the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.




                          ____________________