[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 107 (Thursday, July 16, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H8287-H8294]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              CLEAN ENERGY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 2009, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boccieri) is recognized 
for 60 minutes.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
  It's an honor to be in this Chamber, in this body, to talk about an 
issue that is so important to our country. I'm so happy to be joined by 
my colleague Steve Driehaus from Cincinnati, a fellow Ohioan, and my 
good friend and neighbor in the Longworth Building, Tom Perriello from 
Virginia.
  Tonight we're going to have a very spirited dialogue about clean 
energy and about the American Clean Energy and Security Act that passed 
this Chamber and the necessity of enacting this legislation very soon 
as it pertains to our national security.
  With that, let me begin by suggesting this, my friends. In this 
Congress, we were elected to represent the people of Ohio and Virginia 
collectively here with my colleagues, but to represent the interests of 
the United States in much broader terms. And after having spent 15 
years in the United States Air Force as a C-130 pilot flying all over 
the world, to 60 different nations, visiting places I never dreamed I 
would see, seeing people, meeting people I never dreamed I would meet 
and doing things that I never dreamed that I would do, it only takes 
one trip outside the borders of the United States to understand how 
good we have it here. And when you think about all the blessings that 
this country has been given in terms of the abundance of natural 
resources, in terms of the opportunity to write our own destiny, we are 
truly a blessed nation. And I say this because we find ourselves at a 
crossroads in our history as it pertains to energy.
  Now we have 3 percent of the world's population but we consume nearly 
40 percent of the world's natural resources. The United States has a 
very big demand, whether it's electricity, whether it's our dependence 
on foreign oil, or whether it's our overreliance on other fossil fuels 
that make this country very dependent on international geopolitical 
forces.
  I've got to tell you, what specifically concerns me with respect to 
our energy policy is the fact that 60 percent of our oil comes from 
overseas. Sixty percent. And 40 percent comes from the Middle East, 
where we find our military engaged in two wars on two different fronts 
in a region that has an abundance of oil but a lack of democracy and a 
lack of attention to humanitarian interests and a democracy that works 
for the people.
  So while we become very dependent on overseas supply of oil, we find 
ourselves now at a crossroads. We were elected, and we're freshman 
Members here, it's our first term serving in this august body, but I 
will tell you this, that we will be judged by two measures. We will be 
judged by action or inaction, and now is the time to take action for 
our national security, to create jobs in this country that cannot be 
outsourced and to make sure that we move away from our dependence on 
foreign oil. It's in this spirit that I look for a robust conversation 
about how this protects our national security.
  I will yield to my colleague from Ohio.

                              {time}  2200

  Mr. DRIEHAUS. Thank you very much, Congressman Boccieri, and I would 
agree that this is about action versus inaction.
  From 1994 until 2006, the Republican Party ruled the Congress. They 
ruled the House of Representatives, and they were at the root of the 
inaction. This energy crisis didn't sneak up on us. This health care 
crisis didn't sneak up on us. The housing bubble and the financial 
crisis didn't sneak up on us. We could have done something. We could 
have done something about our reliance on foreign energy. We could have 
done something about health care. We could have done something about 
the financial institutions. But my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle, rather than act, they chose not to act. So I agree 
wholeheartedly that we will be judged on what we are willing to do for 
this country.
  I have a couple of observations about the bill that we passed, and I 
have never seen so much information--misinformation, on a bill in my 
life as I saw on this one.
  My colleagues on the other side of the aisle--who are chatting--were 
spreading rumors. They were spreading rumors about costs of $4,000 a 
year in tax increases on the energy bill.
  Now, I don't know about you, but I talked to my energy friends back 
home. I talked to my friends at Duke Power, and they suggested that the 
potential increases, if there are increases--and I would argue that 
those

[[Page H8288]]

increases are going to be offset by savings and they're going to be 
offset by job creation--but they were spreading misinformation about 
the cost of this bill; yet it went on and on and on and on.
  And then they talked about the fact that no one had read the bill as 
they searched the Chamber for an amendment that sat right in front of 
them. Their leader came to the floor with the very amendment and went 
through page by page that he had earmarked, clearly having had time to 
read the bill.
  The fact of the matter is we have been discussing our reliance upon 
foreign oil. We have been discussing energy for years.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DRIEHAUS. No.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. The gentleman made an allegation, and I would be 
very happy to respond to that. I appreciate it if the gentleman would 
yield.
  Mr. DRIEHAUS. I'm talking about the misinformation.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. That's what I hear, and that challenges the 
integrity of some of the Members. I asked the gentleman to kindly 
yield. It's a courtesy that's commonly offered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boccieri) 
controls the time.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. It is up to the gentleman from Cincinnati if he would 
yield.
  Mr. DRIEHAUS. No, I won't yield. I have heard misinformation after 
misinformation come to this floor, and the American people deserve the 
truth. They deserve the truth.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. KING of Iowa. Parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Ohio will suspend. The 
gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, is it inappropriate under the rules of 
the House to challenge the mendacity of any of the Members in this 
House?
  Mr. DRIEHAUS. Mr. Speaker, point of clarification. I am challenging 
the facts.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I made a proper parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's remarks did not target any 
individual Member.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. I'm sorry, Mr. Speaker. I can't hear you.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's did not target any 
individual Member.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Further parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his parliamentary 
inquiry.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. The gentlemen from Ohio alleged intentional 
misinformation on the part of members of my conference, and that, I 
believe, challenges the mendacity of Members of this Congress.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's remarks did not specify any 
individual Member.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Further parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his parliamentary 
inquiry.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Is it the ruling of the Chair that the gentleman 
from Ohio can challenge the mendacity of a Member provided he doesn't 
name them specifically?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded not to engage in 
personalities.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I think everybody gets the message 
here.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. Mr. Speaker, I want to yield to the gentleman and my 
colleague from Cincinnati to finish his remarks.
  Mr. DRIEHAUS. I will further clarify it for my colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle that I believe there was gross exaggeration engaged 
in on the debate with regard to energy. And the attempt wasn't to solve 
a problem. The attempt was to scare the American people. They scared 
the American people rather than addressing the problem, rather than 
taking on the problem. The attempt was to scare the American people, to 
scare the American people and suggest to them that this was some type 
of massive tax increase when, in fact, this is about the energy 
security of the United States of America. That's what this bill is 
about. And that's what we had the courage to do.
  It is about the job creation for our State of Ohio. It is about job 
creation and clean energy and new energy jobs across the United States, 
and it is about ensuring the energy security for our children and 
future generations. And that's the courage that it took to pass this 
bill rather than letting it go, letting it go, taking the ostrich 
approach of sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the problem.
  So I appreciate the opportunity to speak, Mr. Boccieri.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. Thank you for those comments.
  And there is very clearly misinformation out there. I have had a 
number of inquiries into my office, both here in Washington and back in 
the district in Ohio, that have clearly been misrepresented of what the 
bill actually stands for and what it actually means.
  And with that, I will yield to my friend and colleague and neighbor 
in the Longworth Building, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Perriello).
  Mr. PERRIELLO. Thank you very much, Mr. Boccieri.
  It's very easy to focus on the normal misinformation and all of the 
bad news that people expect from politics, but what we miss in that is 
this tremendous opportunity, the excitement of this moment. We are 
betting on America again. We're betting on innovation. We are better at 
this than any other country on Earth.
  And the fact of the matter is I'm sick and tired of going to the gas 
pump and knowing that my hard-earned dollars are going to support 
petrol dictators overseas instead of American innovation back at home. 
Sometimes you have to put America ahead of Ahmadinejad, and this is one 
of those moments.
  We can make a choice that America will be at the forefront of the 
clean energy economy. This is our time. Both parties, for the last 
couple of decades, have had a disastrous strategy on international 
trade and other things that have sold the middle class and the working 
class of this country down the road.
  It is time to reinvest in America again, and the new energy economy 
is a big part of that. We are one of the only countries in history that 
have been funding both sides of a war. Under President Bush's 
Department of Defense in 2003, they wrote the risk of abrupt climate 
change should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a U.S. national 
security concern.
  We spent $357 billion last year on foreign crude oil, 2.3 percent of 
our GDP. That's the bad news. But the good news is we are getting ahead 
on this now. And this bill helps create the incentives to reward 
success, to reward leadership instead of continuing to reward failure 
and reward the lack of innovation that we've seen in recent years.
  And with your discretion, Mr. Boccieri, I would like to brag on south 
side Virginia for a second.
  My part of the country has been hurting. We've had 20 percent 
unemployment in parts of my district. We've been hit hard by the 
exporting of manufacturing jobs, textile, furniture, tobacco farming. 
But we're now hearing phrases like ``first in the Nation,'' ``best in 
the Nation,'' moducraft homes, the first and best on energy-efficient 
modular homes.
  Red Birch, a truck stop owner who turned his truck stop into the 
front lines of the freedom fight for energy independence by developing 
the first farm-to-fuel closed-loop system, not only is he keeping those 
dollars in America, he's keeping them in the community. When you go to 
that truck stop to buy a high cetane premium diesel fuel, 92 cents on 
every dollar stays in the community. Moducraft homes, Red Birch, Windy 
Acres, these are things to be proud of.
  And let me mention one other thing, Mr. Boccieri. I don't care 
whether a good idea comes from the Democratic Party or the Republican 
Party. I only care that it's a good idea. And the fact is you wouldn't 
know it from this debate, but cap-and-trade was a Republican idea. The 
tradable permit scheme was invented and produced under the first 
President Bush in the effort to combat acid rain.

                              {time}  2210

  One of the most efficient and effective environmental laws ever 
created

[[Page H8289]]

under the leadership of Bill Riley at the EPA and the first President 
Bush, tradable permits were a smart Republican idea that said we can 
use the free market and capitalism to drive that innovative edge and 
that competition.
  It's something that Senator McCain and the former Senator Warner and 
others have supported as being the right mix of a national security 
solution using free-market strategies.
  So this was a Republican idea that was good enough for this country 
until Democrats also supported it, and this is what Americans are sick 
of. They're sick of the idea that we're going to put scoring political 
points ahead of patriotism and problem-solving.
  The fact is this was about putting the best ideas on the table to 
solve what is one of our leading national security threats, one of our 
leading economic threats, and get America right back on to the cutting 
edge.
  It's a great thing that we've done. We've stood up to the special 
interest groups, and for once, in a few years, we're going to be able 
to start supporting an energy economy that's creating jobs right here 
in America and selling that technology all around the world.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. I appreciate the gentleman from Virginia's comments, 
and he is exactly right on. A good idea doesn't have to be a Democrat 
or Republican idea. It's an American idea. And while we may disagree 
about some of the approaches, let's look at and revisit some of the 
comments of some of the leading leaders who ran for the Presidency last 
year and talked about how climate change and our dependence on foreign 
oil is a matter of national security.
  Let's visit the Presidential candidate for the Republicans last year, 
John McCain, who I incidentally flew out of Baghdad, is a man of honor 
and integrity, and this is what he has to say: It's cap-and-trade. 
There will be incentives for people to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 
It's a free-market approach. Let me repeat that: it's a free-market 
approach. The Europeans are doing it. We did it in the case of acid 
rain. Look, if we do that, we will stimulate green technologies. This 
will be a profit-making business, and it won't cost the American 
taxpayer. It won't cost the American taxpayer. Joe Lieberman and I 
introduced a cap-and-trade proposal several years ago which would 
reduce greenhouse gases with a gradual reduction. We did the same thing 
with acid rain. This works. It works.
  Mr. DRIEHAUS. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BOCCIERI. I will.
  Mr. DRIEHAUS. This goes back to the question of action versus 
inaction, and the question is, If you don't embark down this road, if 
you don't address the energy crisis, if you don't work toward a system 
of cap-and-trade, what's the alternative? And the alternative is simply 
this:
  The EPA comes out with rules cracking down on utilities and emitters 
of carbon, which would in fact be a massive tax, a massive government 
mandate on utilities and manufacturers, killing jobs, raising rates for 
businesses, raising rates for residential consumers. Instead, the 
choice we made, the choice for action was about using a free-market 
approach to incentivize job creation, to incentivize creativity, just 
like we did with telecommunications.
  We now have the opportunity to do the same with energy. We believe in 
the American economy. We believe in the innovation that can be released 
through the use of a free-market system like cap-and-trade. That's why 
we went down this road, and that's why we chose to act
  Mr. BOCCIERI. Let me just expound on the gentleman's remarks there.
  I believe that this truly is about our national security, and I'm 
going to go over some facts here in just a moment. But back to 
revisiting what some of our colleagues have said running for President. 
Mike Huckabee really summed it up best when he said, A nation that 
cannot feed itself, that cannot fuel itself or produce the weapons to 
fight for itself is a nation forever enslaved.
  And he further added, So it's critical that for our own interests 
economically and from a point on national security we commit to 
becoming energy independent, and we commit to doing it within a decade. 
Within a decade. We went to the Moon in less. We can do this in less 
than a decade. We have to take responsibility in our own house before 
we can expect others to do the same in theirs. It goes back to my basic 
concept of leadership. Leaders don't ask others to do what they are 
unwilling to do themselves.
  This gentleman was right on with his remarks. I yield to the 
gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. PERRIELLO. Well, you know, Mr. Huckabee is a great man of faith, 
and I was meeting with a number of evangelical leaders today, and they 
were talking about the frustration they've had with some people in the 
pews about the seriousness of this issue. And they say, you know, some 
people get so caught up on whether climate change is a partisan issue, 
whether this is about some Democratic conspiracy theory to tax or 
whether it's some Republican denial of scientific evidence.

  And the evangelical leaders were saying to me that do you realize 
over the next 10 years 250 million of God's children in Africa could be 
denied access to water because of the effects of climate? How willing 
are we to roll the dice on this uncertainty to do nothing, to accept 
inaction when we know that our national security demands it, when we 
know that our innovation and our job creation demands it, when we know 
that our conscience demands it, when so many of those who had nothing 
to do with creating the problem, the most vulnerable amongst us, 250 
million in Africa alone could be denied that access to water?
  Mike Huckabee has been a leader on this. He's talked about the 
importance of climate, as has John McCain, as has Sarah Palin and 
others.
  The reality is, we all know how important this is, but somehow in 
this body here we can get lost in scoring political points for the next 
election instead of doing what's right for our country and for our 
economy. You served in uniform, and we appreciate that service, and 
once again, here we're doing what we need to do to keep this country 
safe and to keep it strong.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. I cannot agree with my gentleman and neighbor as he so 
eloquently suggested that this is about the faith that we have in our 
own innovation, the faith that we have in our own country and our own 
people to come up with ideas that can make our country stronger in the 
long run. And let me revisit some of what our faith leaders have said.
  Billy Graham said that the growing possibility of destroying 
ourselves in the world with our own neglect and excess is tragic and 
very real.
  Pope Benedict said, The brutal consumption of creation begins where 
God is not. I think, therefore, that true and effective initiatives to 
prevent the waste and destruction of creation can start only where 
creation is considered as beginning with God. Particularly, attention 
must be paid to the fact that the poorest countries are likely to pay 
the heaviest price for ecological deterioration.
  Pat Robertson said, I have not been one who believed in global 
warming, but I tell you, they are making a convert out of me. It is 
getting hotter and the ice caps are melting and there is a buildup of 
carbon dioxide in the air. We really need to address the burning of 
fossil fuels because if we are contributing to the destruction of the 
planet, we need to do something about it.
  Dr. Rick Warren, author of ``The Purpose Driven Life'' said, We 
cannot be all that God wants us to be without caring about the Earth.
  Now, our faith leaders are telling us, our national security folks 
who are in charge and responsible for our national security are saying 
it, the Congress has spoken, that this is a matter of national 
security, creating jobs here at home, jobs that cannot be outsourced 
and moving away from our dependence on foreign oil.
  Let me touch on just a few points before I yield back to my friends.
  Eighty percent of the world's reserves of oil are in the hands of 
governments and their respective national oil companies. Sixteen of the 
world's 20 largest oil companies are state-owned. We import 60 percent 
of the world's oil. We know that we're going to, with the Senate 
version of this bill, we're expanding exploration and drilling right 
here in America in the Gulf of Mexico, knowing that that's not going to 
be enough to sustain our 20 million barrels that we consume every day. 
We

[[Page H8290]]

only have 3 percent of the world's oil reserves, but we can consume 25 
percent of the world's oil. It is very clear that we have to move away 
from our dependence on oil.
  One last point before I yield to my colleague from Ohio. The largest 
consumer of oil in this country, the largest consumer of oil in this 
country is not the American. It's the Department of Defense. The United 
States Department of Defense consumes more oil than some countries 
overseas. In fact, it consumes more oil than Greece in 1 year. So our 
Nation is dependent on 60 percent of that oil coming from overseas 
sources, from Venezuela, from Mexico, from Saudi Arabia in particular, 
which is one of our largest producers and suppliers of oil, and this 
makes our country and puts our country in a compromising position.
  I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

                              {time}  2220

  Mr. DRIEHAUS. I appreciate that, Congressman. I think it begs the 
question: Do we want the future of this country dependent upon the 
innovation of the American worker; do we want the future dependent upon 
green energy and new technologies that will be driven by the American 
people; or do we want to rely upon and depend upon the sheikhs in Saudi 
Arabia, as we do today and as we have in the past?
  Our dependency is growing, not declining. This bill provides us an 
opportunity for a future, a destiny controlled by Americans, controlled 
by the American worker, and unleashing the innovation of the American 
worker.
  I was dismayed during this debate when I heard critics suggest that 
maybe we shouldn't go first. Maybe shouldn't lead. That we should wait 
for others--maybe developing countries, maybe others in Asia to lead 
before we move forward. I don't know when we became a Nation of 
followers. I am not of that belief.
  I believe the United States of America has led time and time again 
for this vote on issues of freedom, on issues of democracy, on issues 
of economic innovation. And we should be the leaders on new technology 
when it comes to energy. We need to lead and we should set an example 
for the globe.
  I am not one to follow the examples of countries on the other side of 
the world suggesting to us what we should be doing on our energy 
policy. We should be leaders. And we need to restore our place as 
leaders when it comes to energy.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. I couldn't agree with the gentleman from Ohio more. I 
think that he speaks with passion and conviction about what this means 
and what stake we have in making certain that we move away from our 
dependence or foreign oil.
  I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. PERRIELLO. I think the gentleman from Ohio makes a great point. 
These people aren't climate skeptics, they're America skeptics.
  We all come from manufacturing areas in this country that led the 
world. And we sat by while both parties let that manufacturing go 
overseas.
  We have a chance to be the first to craft carbon capture and 
sequestration technology. We have a chance to lead on nuclear and lead 
on biofuels and bio refineries. And this isn't just about switching 
from one fuel to other. It's: Who's going to make those wind turbines? 
Who's going to make those batteries for those hybrid cars that could 
free us from this dependence on foreign oil? Who's going to make those?
  Do you want to buy them from China or do you want to sell them to 
China as they are building what will become the biggest auto consumer 
market in the world.
  I want to build them here. And those climate skeptics or America 
skeptics want to sit on the sidelines and let all that technology and 
let all that manufacturing happen overseas. We are better than that. We 
can lead. We can do this better than anyone else. We can out-innovate. 
We are better entrepreneurs. We will do that.
  But we don't do it by sitting on the sidelines. We don't do it by 
making easy choices and waiting for others to lead. We do it by putting 
solutions above special interests, by putting this country first--even 
if it means an unpopular vote, and going out and explaining to the 
American people that this is why this is going to be great for our 
country and great for our region.
  I am proud that we have put ourselves back in a position to lead. 
That's what the American people deserve. I yield back.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. I couldn't agree with you more, Congressman Perriello.
  Before I yield to my good friend from northeast Ohio, Congressman 
Ryan, who's joined us tonight, let me just revisit two more of these 
quotes from our colleagues who ran for President and suggested that 
American innovation, American entrepreneurship, and American ideas are 
stronger than our dependence on oil overseas.
  Mr. Giuliani, a fellow Italian, he said, We need to expand the use of 
hybrid vehicles, clean coal, carbon sequestration. We have more coal 
reserves in the United States than they have oil reserves in Saudi 
Arabia. This should be a major national project. This is a matter of 
our national security.
  We went on: Mitt Romney said, There are multiple reasons for us to 
say we want to be less dependent on foreign energy and to develop our 
own sources. That's the real key. Of course, additional sources of 
energy here, as well as more efficient use of energy. This will allow 
the world to have less oil being drawn out from the various sources it 
comes without dropping the prices to a high level. It will keep people, 
some of whom are unsavory characters, from having an influence on our 
foreign policy.
  Ron Paul, who we serve with here in this Chamber, said, True 
Conservatives and Libertarians have no right to pollute their 
neighbor's property. You have no right to pollute your neighbor's air, 
water, or anything, and this would all contribute to protection of all 
air and water.

  Mr. Gingrich said, The concept of reducing the amount of carbon 
emissions over the next 50 years is a totally sound concept.
  These are not Democrats saying this. These are Republicans who are 
standing with us tonight in spirit, I know, saying that this is about 
our national security, saying that this is about geopolitical balance, 
and this is about creating jobs here in our country.
  I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I appreciate it. I want to take off on what the 
gentleman from Virginia was saying. I was reading an article the other 
day. In China, 400,000 people a year die from air pollution. And if you 
look at the history of China, you will see that they have periods where 
there is a very tumultuous uprising within the country. And if you can 
read the tea leaves here, you will see that at some point China and the 
people of China will demand clean air. There's no question about it. 
And they're using dirty coal. I mean, it's dirty. And those of us who 
have been there recognize--with the Olympics especially--how many 
months ahead of time they had to stop letting people drive cars into 
the city and everything else.
  So the point that the gentleman from Virginia was making is that this 
is an opportunity for us. And some people say, Well, China and India 
aren't going to do this, so why are we going to do it? Let them not do 
it. Let us jump ahead. My goodness gracious, it would be like saying, 
you know, the Soviet Union is not going to continue their space program 
back in the Sixties. Great. We'll jump ahead of you.
  That's basically what we have here. And we have an opportunity to 
seize this moment and then begin to develop this technology, invest 
this money, get our manufacturing going here in the United States, and 
export--things we have been talking about in our district for a long 
time.
  When are we going to manufacture? When are Americans going to make 
things again? When are we going to export? This is the opportunity. And 
the same people that call on the talk radio that say, When are we going 
to make things again, are the same people that are against the cap-and-
trade bill because the dots aren't connected here.
  This is the opportunity. Take the $700 billion that we're shifting 
abroad, focus it on the United States, revitalize manufacturing, and 
export this stuff, because China at some point is going to recognize 
they're wasting a lot of energy, their people aren't as healthy, their 
people are dying because of this, and they're going to want them to be 
healthy. So that's one point I wanted to make.
  The other point I want to make is, Congressman Boccieri and I, Mr.

[[Page H8291]]

Speaker, were on a radio show a few days ago and a gentleman called in 
who had some business issues, other issues, but he says, I like the 
alternative energy stuff.
  So I asked him what he did. He makes the technology, manufactures the 
products that go into the scrubbers that go into the power plant and go 
into the steel mills to keep the air clean.
  And here is a businessman in Youngstown, Ohio, who had, I think he 
said, 70 employees, who's manufacturing these scrubbers that were a 
result of the Clean Air Act. Because of the Clean Air Act, there's 
someone in Youngstown making these products.
  I think it's important for us to let everyone know this is 
opportunity for us. These are jobs that are going to be revitalizing 
communities in all of our districts.
  Mr. DRIEHAUS. Just to back up the gentleman's point, China is moving 
down that road. They're not waiting. The week after the vote, Jim 
Rogers, the CEO of Duke Energy, went to China. And he went to China to 
check out the carbon sequestration that they're currently employing on 
new Chinese coal-burning power plants. Because the Chinese aren't 
waiting. The Chinese are moving ahead with new technology.
  So we have a choice. We have an opportunity. Do we want to continue 
with business as usual and just sit still as China moves forward, or do 
we want to be at the cutting edge, do we want to be leading when it 
comes to new energy technology?
  This is an opportunity. We need to seize that opportunity. And this 
legislation allows the free market to do that. So that's what this is 
about. This is about creating jobs and creating an economic future for 
the United States.
  Mr. PERRIELLO. In many ways, if I may, it's also a chance to reward 
the people who are already innovative. In my district, I have poultry 
farmers coming who want to turn the waste into energy; not only energy, 
but produce a low-sulfur fertilizer that's even better for our aquifers 
and our Bay.
  I have dairy farmers who want to take the manure from their farms and 
turn that into energy. What's stopping them? We aren't on the cutting 
edge of smart-grid technology. We don't have the technology in place, 
and we don't have the incentives that this provides.
  What this does is give a profit motive to people for doing the right 
thing. I think we have had far too much in our financial system and 
elsewhere of rewarding people for failure, rewarding people for 
irresponsibility. For once, we have a system that's going to reward 
everyone, from the homeowner to the capitalist, for doing the right 
thing.

                              {time}  2230

  Again, I know I'm surrounded by folks from Ohio, but I can't say 
enough about the people----
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. You're so lucky. Do you have any idea how lucky you 
are?
  Mr. PERRIELLO. Hey, you know, my grandparents grew up outside of 
Toledo, Ohio, in Sylvania, but we're from Virginia, and I will tell you 
that we have farmers ready to do this. Like you all, we have a lot of 
manufacturing plants that have shut down. We have hardworking people 
who are ready to go to work, and they would love nothing more than to 
have a job and to have a job that's making this country safe, that's 
keeping our country safe. Now you've done that in uniform. This is a 
chance for every worker to be part of that effort of national security, 
and we're fired up to do it.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. People are asking, What does this mean for the average 
consumer? What does this mean for the average Ohioan and Virginian? 
This is what it's going to mean: When you roll into a fuel station 
someday, you're going to have a choice between traditional gasoline, 
traditional oil. You're going to have a blended fuel that may be 
ethanol-based or cellulose-based. You may have an opportunity where you 
plug in your electric hybrid or where you drive by the gas station all 
together because you have a fuel cell that allows you to get 100 miles 
to the gallon.
  Now, how is that for American innovation? How is that for 
opportunity? How is that for standing up for the innovation, 
entrepreneurship, and for the longevity of American ideas and thinking? 
That's what this bill does, and that's what this idea is. It's of 
moving away from our foreign dependence and reliance on overseas oil to 
make our economy drive.
  Let me just say this: In my district, we are researching fuel cell 
technology. We are very close to having some sort of prototype ready to 
go. They're researching this with the Department of Defense at Stark 
State Technical College, Community College. We have the opportunity 
there to be leaders in Ohio. We also have the opportunity to do 
research at the Ohio State Agriculture Research and Development Center. 
That is in Wayne County, in my congressional district, that right now 
is using anaerobic digesters like you were talking about. Imagine this: 
I know Congressman Ryan--whose birthday it is today. Happy birthday.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. What does that have to do with anaerobic digesters?
  Mr. BOCCIERI. You may be too young to remember.
  It was when I was standing in line with my father, waiting for oil in 
the 1970s. I remember seeing that movie Back to the Future. The 
professor comes in. He has a DeLorean, and he opens up the trash can 
and starts jamming in waste--garbage--into his DeLorean to fuel his 
engine. Now think about this: What they're doing at this research 
center is taking sewage sludge. They're taking manure from dairy farms, 
and they're adding 20 percent biomass--a busted up watermelon from the 
supermarket, cooking grease from the local restaurant. Just by adding 
that 20 percent biomass, they're increasing the BTUs by 50 percent of 
that compressed natural gas. They're actually selling it back to the 
grid.
  This German CEO who was doing this research, Schmack Industries, 
suggested this: He said, You Americans are doing in 2 years what it 
took Germany 20 years to do, and we have 3,800 of these anaerobic 
digesters that are actually producing energy--compressed natural gasses 
that light our cities.
  The city of Canton is getting ready to--or is thinking about building 
an incinerator for its sewage sludge. Could you imagine if they turned 
that into renewable energy and if they actually created compressed 
natural gas and sold it to the utility or if they heated some homes or 
if they turned on some lights in the city? This is the type of 
innovation that has driven America to be one of the great producers of 
wealth that we are.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. If the gentleman would yield.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. Sure.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I don't know if anyone followed when Barack Obama 
was in Russia, but there was a deal made and struck where--Exxon is, 
obviously, doing business there, and they are opening up a refinery 
somewhere in New England to process the oil coming back from Russia.
  So this is what we're trying to get away from. This is what this 
energy bill is all about. We can't get in the position where, yeah, it 
may be over the next 5 to 10 years where this is something that needs 
to happen for the transition. This is an example of the road we don't 
want to go down, the road relying on Vladimir Putin's Russia for oil 
for the United States. You know, the American people don't want that. 
That's not good geopolitics. That's not good for our manufacturing 
base. That's not good for a variety of reasons that are all pretty 
obvious to anybody who has blood running through their heads right now. 
You know, this is pretty basic stuff here. We don't want to rely on 
Russia for our oil.
  The other point is, whether it's in Cincinnati, in Virginia, in 
Canton, in Akron or in Youngstown, we have these manufacturing 
facilities that are just sitting here. In my district, there's a 
company called Parker-Hannifin. It's a big company in Cleveland and in 
Youngstown. They have 1,000 workers, steelworkers. They make the 
hydraulics that go into the back of, you know, waste management--you 
know, garbage trucks. They do the hydraulics. These same hydraulics go 
into windmills.
  We have a specialty steel company called Thomas Steel, in Warren, 
that has about 300 workers. They make a decent wage. Their specialty 
steel goes in the solar panels. We have a company called Roth Brothers 
in the Youngstown area. There's a new wind cube

[[Page H8292]]

that you can put on top of big buildings in downtown areas that will 
generate wind. You plug it right into the building, right into the 
grid, to generate energy that can turn and face the wind and that can 
really harness all of the wind no matter what the direction change. 
This is right in Youngstown. They said, If this wind cube takes off, 
we'll hire 100 people like that.
  So we have it here. It's not so much new business--although, there 
will be a piece of that. It's also about the businesses that we already 
have, those that can grow and that can manufacture. They're good-paying 
jobs. They're steelworkers. You know, they're people who can make some 
money and who can revitalize the middle class again.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. Let's address something that's important to all of our 
States--to both of our States that we're discussing here presently. 
It's the use of coal. We've heard a lot of talk from those, at least 
from the detractors of this bill who have now somehow fallen off their 
plateau of suggesting that this is about national security, who are 
suggesting that coal-intensive States are going to be 
disproportionately hurt. That is completely false.
  We have worked together to make sure that coal, which is the most 
abundant and cheapest source of energy that we have in this country, is 
going to be used for a long, long time. Right now in Ohio, we are 
investing in some very, very awesome opportunities for job creation. 
The company Babcock & Wilcox is researching right now using pure oxygen 
and pulverized coal and mixing it in these huge burners to make near 
zero emission burners. They capture this carbon, and then they inject 
it back into the wells, into the very wells from which we're drilling 
for oil, to push out those last remaining drops of oil.
  I have a chart here--and I'm not going to get into the technical 
parts of it--but those scientists who may be watching and listening to 
us tonight can refer to this because it is very important that we 
understand that we will continue to use coal. This is carbon capture 
sequestration. The bill provides $180 billion for this type of 
innovative research that is going to be the next generation of coal 
use.
  In the 1940s, when the United States of America bombed the Ploesti 
Romania oil fields, we essentially cut off the oil for Germany. What 
did they do? They quickly transitioned to a synthetic fuel, which is a 
derivative of coal. We're testing this right now at the Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio. We're testing blended fuels on our 
military aircraft. We're testing the new fuels that are going to drive 
the innovation of tomorrow and that are going to make our country 
stronger.
  I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

                              {time}  2240

  Mr. PERRIELLO. I wanted to pick up on something that Congressman Ryan 
said which is to cull out what I call paper tiger patriotism, this 
ability to talk tough about Chavez, Ahmadinejad and Putin until you 
actually have to do something about it. It's one thing to give speeches 
against these guys on the floor, but then to not have the guts to vote 
for the very policies that will cut them off at the knees. Here we are 
at one of the most crucial moments in Iran's history, where we have 
people risking their lives in the streets of Tehran; and then people in 
this body will stand up and vote for the very policies that keep a 
petro-dictator in place. This is about crushing that paper tiger 
patriotism and putting in its place the courage that American people 
deserve because we do, in our core, have it in us to lead in all of 
these areas.
  This is an unprecedented renaissance for clean coal technology. It's 
the first bill in a generation that actually opens up opportunities for 
nuclear at the same time that we see wind, solar and biofuel. But we 
also know that the cheapest energy is the energy you never have to buy 
in the first place because of energy efficiency technologies. And 
that's what we can see through smart grid technology, through the 
advanced battery manufacturing. This is our chance to crack that 
technology for the whole world in the same way we did when we had the 
guts to go to the Moon.
  This really is one of those moments. And I go back to the point where 
you started, Mr. Boccieri, which is, why was this idea good enough for 
Republicans when it was their idea but as soon as we started to support 
it, they ran away from it as cap-and-trade? Cap-and-trade was something 
the Republicans should be proud to have come up with. The first 
President Bush was a great conservationist, a true conservative, who 
understood the challenge of acid rain, the challenge of the Earth's 
summit and other things, that this was a time for America's leadership 
heading into the 21st century. We need to focus on, what are the ideas 
that keep us safe and keep us strong, not what are the ideas that score 
us points for the next election cycle. I think all of us came in and 
changed elections because people were sick and tired of that. These are 
the kinds of solutions the American people deserve.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. You are right. Mr. Speaker, I will remind the folks 
listening tonight that Teddy Roosevelt said that the welfare of each of 
us is dependent upon the welfare of all of us and that in a moment of 
decision, the worst thing that we can do is nothing. What is the cost 
of doing nothing? We're going to continue to be dependent on foreign 
oil. Maybe it rises from 60 percent to 80 percent. Maybe we don't 
create the jobs that we need to right here in our country that can't be 
outsourced, like a nuclear reactor. Congressman Ryan always talks about 
the 8,000 manufactured components that go into making a windmill. You 
know, these are the types of jobs and the types of innovation that 
makes our country stronger.
  Mr. DRIEHAUS. I will just go back to the analogy of 
telecommunications. If you remember, it wasn't more than a decade or 
two ago when you were paying exorbitant rates on your long distance 
bills; there were a very limited number of channels on TV. And then 
through the Telecommunications Act, we made sure that we allowed for 
innovation and competition. We allowed for the cable companies and the 
telephone companies to use those same broadband lines. We required that 
to happen. And now today broadband is across the country. We have the 
potential today to unleash that same type of innovation that was 
unthought of 20 years ago in telecommunications; but we all know it 
today, as people send IMs, as people e-mail each other--that wasn't 
thought about 20 years ago--the hundreds of TV stations that you get on 
cable TV. I don't think we can begin to imagine the innovation that we 
are going to see over the next several decades in the field of energy 
because of the steps of this House, because of the steps of this 
Congress, the courage to move us from the status quo toward energy 
security for the future and unleashing the innovative nature of the 
American people.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. If the gentleman would yield, if you just think 
about the history of this country--and I don't want to get corny--but 
there has never been a scenario where we have said as a country, we 
want to do something, and it's not happened. I mean, let's be honest. 
Because of the system of government that we have, because of all the 
DNA that happens to be in our great country, because of people having 
the courage to get on a boat with no money, and all that DNA, all that 
courage that it took to get here is here now; and it's been replicating 
itself. There is something special about whether it's World War II or 
it's storming the beaches of Normandy or it's going to the Moon or it's 
getting out of the Depression or it's that we need to be educated or 
the number of patents that we get. Whatever it may be, we have the 
ability to do this. And I think when you look at this policy in 
particular, the energy policy, the more I read about it, the more I 
like it. And when people say, Well, how is it going to work? I get 
excited about explaining it to them because here we are in northeast 
Ohio where we have all this manufacturing, and it has been dead for 30 
years. We've not had any opportunities coming down the pike, like clean 
energy, in 30 years. This is something that is so exciting for so many 
people because they recognize that--I think it's 400 tons of steel that 
go into a windmill or 8,000 component parts that go into a windmill, 
and the Midwest being the Saudi Arabia of wind, and the Southwest being 
the Saudi Arabia of solar. My goodness gracious, what an opportunity. 
We can't let this

[[Page H8293]]

slide by. We capture it. We take advantage of it. We make it work for 
us. That's what we do as Americans, and this is an opportunity for us 
to do that and to grow all of these companies. Putin, be gone. Chavez, 
be gone. Middle East sheiks, be gone. We're going to take care of our 
own business here.

  Mr. BOCCIERI. Let's revisit the three pillars of this legislation. 
Number one, create jobs in our country that cannot be outsourced; 
number two, that it's about national security, moving away from our 
dependence on foreign oil and other energy sources; making sure that we 
have those homegrown energy jobs right here in our country. Those are 
the three pillars of this legislation. When we think about the two 
largest countries that market natural gas, it is Iran and Russia, when 
if we invested in the technology that we recently just talked about, 
anaerobic digesters and the like, we talk about these different 
opportunities, we can actually create natural gas and harvest natural 
gas from our part of the country. This is important that we understand 
that moving away from dependence on imported sources of energy is going 
to make our country stronger.
  So national security, creating jobs, moving away from our dependence 
on foreign oil, that's what this legislation is about. That's what this 
opportunity is about. And I believe in the innovation and 
entrepreneurship of Americans. I believe in our success as a country 
when we challenge each other to think outside of the box, to move 
ahead. And if we just allow ourselves to be bogged down by the fear of 
the past and bogged down by those detractors who are now saying, this 
is not the right time--well, when is the right time? When is the right 
time, when we have 80 percent of our oil coming from overseas? When is 
the right time, when energy costs are through the roof? Now is the time 
because our country can make these investments and create jobs here.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I would just like to say, I don't think anybody 
here is anti-nuclear. I think we all recognize how important this is as 
a part of our portfolio. There is no one here who is against coal. We 
represent Virginia and Ohio and think it's a good way to do it. That's 
why there's $180 billion in here to figure out how to make it clean and 
make it work for us. We're not saying that there's only one specific 
way to do this. We recognize you may need to drill a little bit, you 
may need to take advantage of nuclear and coal and all this. But look 
at the advantage. We have $700 billion going to these other countries 
that could be coming here, revitalizing the United States of America, 
and I think that's important for us to remember.
  And lastly, because I think we're winding down, and I want these guys 
who are a lot smarter than me to be able to talk, our friends on the 
other side, who have been so critical, had control of this government, 
had control of the House, had control of the Senate, had control of the 
White House. Their energy policy was nonexistent. It was more subsidies 
for oil companies, more subsidies for the big power companies, and got 
us to where we are today. Which means over the last 8 years, an 
increase of $1,100 just in gas prices for the average family. And the 
same group of people who thought that cutting taxes for the top 1 
percent was somehow going to be to the benefit of all hasn't worked. 
We've got two wars going on, and a war our friend has served in here. 
That's $1 trillion dollars, $3 trillion when you factor in the costs of 
the veterans' health care. That's not a good energy policy of us having 
to go over, getting into the middle of the desert and getting ourselves 
in this sticky web of politics in the Middle East. Why are we doing 
that?

                              {time}  2250

  We don't have to do that anymore. And that is what is at the heart of 
this bill, and I think that is the magic of this bill, rely on the 
innovation, the spirit of the American people and reduce our dependency 
on all those other countries.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. I agree with you, Congressman Ryan, and this is the 
time to do it. We have about 6 minutes remaining. I would like to yield 
each of the gentlemen at least a minute or two.
  Happy birthday, Congressman Ryan.
  Mr. PERRIELLO. First of all, your reference to back to the future, he 
also says that where we are going, we don't need roads. And as a member 
of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, I have to take 
issue with that. But otherwise, I support the amendment.
  On a serious note, every one of us here, I believe, is also a 
supporter of the Second Amendment. We are pro-freedom people. And what 
you described before is about the freedom for me to go to the gas pump 
without having to support petro-dictators because of that decision. It 
is the ability to buy a car with a battery that is manufactured here in 
the United States. That is the kind of freedom that we believe in.
  This is also about honor and integrity. And part of integrity means 
being true to your word. I just want to say that I think this is about 
rising above partisanship in the way that you said. Sarah Palin wrote 
an op-ed recently bashing the cap-and-trade bill. But there is a quote 
from her in the campaign where she was asked, Do you support capping 
carbon emissions? And she said, I do, I do. You have a quote from John 
McCain. These are leaders. These are leaders who understood when they 
were ready to lead that this is what it looked like.
  It looked like taking on the biggest national security challenges we 
face and doing so using the free market and the innovation that makes 
America great. If those ideas made sense then, they need to make sense 
now when you have to make the tough votes to do what is right for our 
country.
  I think it is a very exciting time for America. It is an exciting 
time for south side Virginia. I believe we are on the cusp of a great, 
new economic revolution, full of innovation that is going to bring 
those jobs back to the United States. I'm proud to be part of it. I 
think we will look back on this and be very, very proud.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. So let me get this straight. This is about jobs that 
can't be outsourced, about our national security and moving away from 
our dependence on foreign oil. John McCain said it. He said it. He was 
introduced to a cap-and-trade bill three times. Three times, he said it 
is a free-market approach that will stimulate green technologies, a 
free-market approach. And he said that this is a matter of our national 
security. That is what this legislation is about.
  It is so important that we enact this very soon so that we can move 
away from our dependence on these foreign sources of energy.
  I will yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. DRIEHAUS. I appreciate the opportunity, Congressman Boccieri, to 
be here tonight with you. And I think there is a reason that you see 
four relatively young Members of Congress standing here talking about 
the future of energy in the United States. We all have a vested 
interest in this. We all understand how important this issue is for our 
future and the future of our kids.
  We sat on the sidelines for far too long, as the other side did 
nothing, as Congressman Ryan explained. They had an opportunity to act 
when it came to energy policy, creative energy policy that would move 
us forward into the next generation, but they failed to do it. We have 
been elected to take responsibility and to move forward on critical 
issues that are impacting our families today and will impact them in 
the future. That is what we are doing on financial services. That is 
what we are doing on energy. That is what we are doing on health care.
  On energy, this bill takes us down that road for ensuring a future of 
prosperity for our children. It is the right thing to do for the 
country today. It is the right thing to do for our children tomorrow.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. Well, let me just wrap by saying this: this is about 
jobs in our country that can't be outsourced. It is about our national 
security. And it is about moving away from our dependence on foreign 
oil.
  We have set up a free-market approach, one that is supported by both, 
or was supported by both, Democrats and Republicans before we 
introduced it and passed it, but one that is a free-market approach 
with no taxes that invests in regional opportunities for States like 
Ohio and Virginia to make

[[Page H8294]]

certain that we have an energy policy that works for this country.
  I flew wounded and fallen soldiers out of Baghdad. And it is very 
clear that we have two fronts over in the Middle East, in Afghanistan 
and Iraq and a much broader region because of the oil that that area 
produces. This is about making our Nation stronger. We have to do this 
now. The Department of Defense realizes this, and that is why they are 
testing alternative fuels. We can make that innovation. We believe in 
the American people. That is what this bill is about.

  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I just want to add, the answer that our friends on 
the other side have given when we said, increase the Pell Grant, no; 
increase minimum wage, no; change the energy policy, no; change health 
care policy, no; add a stimulus bill that is going to keep people 
working, no.
  That is not leadership, and this is bold stuff that we are trying to 
do. We are trying to lead the country. At the end of the day, that is 
going to pay off for everyone. I yield back.
  Mr. BOCCIERI. You're exactly right, Congressman Ryan. We are going to 
be judged by two measures in this Congress, two measures, by action or 
inaction. And I am so happy that we had this opportunity to speak 
tonight on clean energy and our national security.

                          ____________________