[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 47 (Wednesday, April 10, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H1893-H1897]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        THE SAFE CLIMATE CAUCUS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Mullin). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 3, 2013, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) 
is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments we just heard 
on the floor from my colleague from Tennessee talking about Dr. 
Hansen's retirement, a gentleman who has faced a great deal of 
criticism, including many from this Congress, because of his forceful 
presentation of his point of view. And time after time after time, Dr. 
Hansen has been proven correct.
  This is the most important issue that we're really not debating in 
Congress. There are a group of us here who have formed the Safe Climate 
Caucus to be able to promote this discussion. Today we extended an 
invitation to the leadership of the Commerce and Energy Committee to 
join us on the floor of the House for a bipartisan debate, encouraging 
our Republican colleagues to come to the floor to be able to deal with 
this issue that, frankly, deserves to be in the spotlight.
  We're not aware of any Republican Member who's spoken on the floor of 
the House about the dangers of climate change or the need to reduce 
emissions and prepare for its impact in this entire session of 
Congress. In fact, as near as we can determine, no Republican Member of 
Congress has even uttered the words ``climate change'' on the floor in 
this Congress.
  It's, I suppose, better that they're not talking about it at all than 
what we had in the last Congress where the Republican-led House of 
Representatives voted 53 times to block action on climate change. My 
Republican colleagues voted to defund research, to block action by the 
EPA to control pollution, to prevent energy efficiency measures from 
going into effect.
  Remember, one of the most comical was the assault on light bulb 
efficiency, an efficiency standard that was developed, admittedly, when 
Democrats were in charge, but signed with legislation that we worked 
out with the Bush administration. That was certainly a travesty.
  It was interesting. The industry looked at them and shrugged and 
said, we're moving on, we're not going back to produce less energy-
efficient light bulbs.
  They voted to stop the administration from encouraging developing 
countries to do their part.
  This year, the Republican members of the Energy and Commerce 
Committee, which is the committee of primary jurisdiction over energy 
policy, even voted against holding hearings with scientists who could 
explain the role of climate change in causing extreme weather, drought, 
heat waves and wildfires. That's why we've created the Safe Climate 
Caucus, to work to end the conspiracy of silence here in the House 
about the dangers of climate change.

  But we hope, we sincerely hope, that our Republican colleagues would 
join us here on the floor of the House in one of these Special Orders 
to discuss our various approaches. If they don't agree with human-
caused impacts of extreme weather events, engage in the debate to 
explain why. If they do agree that we are at least having extreme 
weather events, whether or not they're human-caused, let's debate what 
we should do to be protecting us from those impacts. The American 
public deserves no less.
  So until we're able to engage our Republican colleagues in a 
spirited, thoughtful debate on the floor of the House, we will continue 
pointing out the problems that we face, the risks, the danger, the 
paths forward, because in 2012, there were over 3,500 weather-related 
records set due to extreme heat, rain, drought, cold and wind. The 
American public has seen that. They've suffered the consequences. 
They're concerned.
  Hurricane Sandy was one of just 11 weather disasters last year in the 
United States that caused more than a billion dollars in losses, a 
total of over $60 billion, which taxpayers are being forced to help 
assume the burden.
  Here in Washington, D.C., we set another record, 90 degrees today, 
for April 10. At the same time, there are snowstorms in Colorado.
  2012 was the 36th consecutive year with a global temperature above 
the 20th century average. The last time there was a year with a global 
temperature that wasn't above average was 1976, before Jimmy Carter was 
elected President. We were celebrating the Bicentennial. Most of our 
staff here in Washington, D.C., on Capitol Hill, has never experienced 
a year where temperatures weren't above average.
  Now, just because our Republican friends don't want to debate it, 
just because they have fought to prevent our initiative, doesn't mean 
that it's not having an economic impact. The United States Congress has 
appropriated $188 billion for climate-related disasters over the last 3 
years.
  Just 2 months ago, the Government Accountability Office released a 
GAO report listing the Federal Government's vulnerability to climate 
change impacts as one of its greatest areas of potential risk. Climate 
change could increase investment portfolio risk by 10 percent over the 
next 2 decades by disrupting supply chains.
  Those of us in Congress who are noticing these problems, these 
changes, these challenges, are not alone. According to the Gallup poll 
last month, 58 percent of the American public worry a fair amount or a 
great deal about climate change and its impacts. Sixty-two percent of 
Republicans believe that America should take steps to address climate 
change.
  Monday, Arnold Schwarzenegger joined the list of Republican 
politicians who now acknowledge that climate change is a serious 
concern, speaking at the Price School of Public Policy in California. 
Governor Schwarzenegger said, if we're smart, we listen to our doctors. 
If we're stupid, we ignore our doctors, and it takes a heart attack to 
realize that we should listen.
  Schwarzenegger said the national climate assessment report is our 
physical, and these scientists can give us a prescription for what we 
need to do to improve our climate. It's our duty to listen to them and 
encourage action, action all over the country. And Republican Governor 
Schwarzenegger is to be commended for his vision and stepping forward.
  Another of my colleagues from California is with us here this 
evening, and I notice that he may be willing to step in. He's been 
greatly concerned about infrastructure, climate, the environment in a 
long and distinguished career in California politics and now here in 
Congress.

                              {time}  1620

  We're honored that you would be willing to join us, and I would be 
happy to yield to you if you would like to join in this conversation.

[[Page H1894]]

  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Blumenauer, I would be honored to participate in 
this conversation. And, Mr. Speaker, it's always a great pleasure and, 
in fact, important that those of us 435 that have been elected to 
represent the American citizens rise on the floor to speak to issues of 
great importance.
  When all is debated, at the end of those debates I suppose we ought 
to say, Was that important? We debated earlier about a piece of this 
puzzle, but this is the most consequential issue facing the entire 
globe. Climate change is a very, very real challenge for the human 
race.
  In the early nineties, I was Deputy Secretary at the Department of 
the Interior and was asked by the President and Vice President at the 
time to join in developing a strategy for America at the Kyoto 
Conference, which was the second international effort to come to grips 
with this issue. We studied the various ramifications of climate change 
and we predicted that what you just described in your opening 
statement, Mr. Blumenauer, would happen. And, indeed, it is happening--
the climate is changing. It is warmer.
  There are more extreme events, and the impact is already being 
perceived in those things that are most unnoticed, which is the change 
in the vegetation and in the flora and fauna throughout the United 
States. As you hike through the mountains of the Sierras, you have to 
go a little higher to see species, both animal and fauna, that lived at 
a lower elevation. They're moving up the mountain, those that can. 
Those that can't, for example, some species of trees and plants that 
aren't able to remove their roots and move up the mountain, and they're 
simply going to become extinct.
  Now, what do we do about it? Well, there are many things we can do 
without actually harming the economy. In fact, there are many things we 
can do that will cause the economy to grow, for example, conservation. 
Conservation of energy is an enormously important way to conserve our 
money, our energy supplies, and reduce carbon emissions, because much 
of the energy in the United States actually comes from carbon 
emissions.
  For example, how about better mileage in our cars? Thankfully, we 
have President Obama and the Democratic administration that has taken 
very aggressive steps to reduce the consumption of gasoline and diesel 
in our automobiles and trucks, thereby conserving and saving us money 
and simultaneously reducing greenhouse gas emission.
  There are many, many other things. One bill we took up on the floor 
today that passed--and my amendment wasn't adopted--but, nonetheless, 
it is the small hydro. It's using hydropower wisely where we can, 
without harming the environment, but also adding to the energy 
production. Moving away from coal, which we know to be the single 
biggest source of carbon from power plants as we generate electricity, 
moving initially to gas-fired power plants, which have significantly 
less carbon emissions, and in that process, taking the steps to move to 
renewable power sources of all kinds--hydro, where it makes sense.
  How about wind turbines? I don't have the statistics with me today, 
but we've made an enormous advancement in wind energy and solar energy. 
And by the way, if we're going to do that in the United States with our 
tax policies and give a tax rebate or credit, then we ought to make it 
in America. Have those turbines and solar panels made in America so 
that we not only do what is right by the environment, but we also do 
what it right by the American workers so that we can rebuild our 
American manufacturing.
  There are many, many other concepts, all of which grow the economy. 
They don't harm the economy at all but, rather, grow the economy. 
Reducing emissions, not only carbon emissions, but from the coal-fired 
power plants, reducing rather dangerous substances like mercury and 
arsenic.
  So we should move these things forward. Unfortunately, we are running 
up against a block of votes on the right side of this House--not right 
on policy but, rather, in location--where they are blocking the efforts 
that we must make to come to grips with this. My point here is that, 
while this is a fundamental problem for this Nation, it's also a 
fundamental opportunity for America to grow a new economy.
  We just heard read here on the floor not more than 30 minutes ago the 
statement by the President of his new budget in which he makes the 
point that, by addressing climate change, we also address the need to 
rebuild the American economy and to set it on a path where we can 
compete and sell these technologies and products all around the world. 
Because this is not just an American problem, this is a national-
international problem, and all of us, wherever we are, whatever country 
we are in, we must take action. We must take action. We cannot let this 
slide.

  And my plea, as you made yours, Mr. Blumenauer, to our Republicans 
colleagues is: let's debate this. If you don't believe this is a 
problem, come to the floor and tell us why this is not a problem. If 
you do not believe that we should manufacture wind turbines and solar 
panels here in the United States and deploy them rather than continuing 
with the coal-based economy, then tell us why. I wait for that debate, 
and I'll join you in it, Mr. Blumenauer.
  Thank you for the privilege of joining you. I see that we have 
another colleague. We may reopen the West Coast-East Coast show, Mr. 
Blumenauer.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Congressman Garamendi. Thank you for your 
comments and for your leadership in your native State of California on 
so many different levels in pressing this point. Your observation is 
that there's a great deal of economic opportunity. The installed wind 
energy has exploded in recent years. In fact, not only are we producing 
the energy here in the United States, it's American wind. It's not 
dollars that we're exporting.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. If I might interrupt you for a second, there are those 
that would claim that this place is also a windy Chamber.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. And part of what we need to be harvesting. That's why 
I have a small wind energy tax credit that I think we can install here 
in the House Chamber. But part of what we've done with the Recovery Act 
has increased dramatically the amount of manufacturing that's here in 
the United States for that installed energy.
  We are joined by one of our colleagues, Congressman Tonko from New 
York. Before he came to Congress, where he's been very active in these 
areas, he's had his own series of activities providing leadership and 
technology and energy efficiency.
  We'd be honored for you to join in the conversation.
  Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Representative Blumenauer, for leading us in 
this discussion. I appreciate the fact that you've brought together 
this thoughtful discussion, this dialogue on how we need to embrace a 
stronger sense of stewardship with our environment that ties to our 
energy policy, that ties to our economic recovery opportunities.
  I have to first and foremost mention that you're right; I headed the 
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority in the State 
of New York, my last workstation before serving here in the House. I 
was totally surrounded by consummate professionals who make it their 
role, their job, their advocacy, their vocation to make a difference 
with energy policy that allows us to be stronger stewards of our 
environment and to advance this effort for renewables, for innovation 
that allows us to reduce that mountain of electrons that we require for 
the workplace, the home place, for quality of life, and allows us to 
use that in much more useful, measured terms so that energy efficiency 
is seen as our fuel of choice and that that comes before any of our 
energy thinking. And that provides for a greener outcome that allows us 
to address this phenomenon of climate change.
  Now, whether or not you believe in climate change--and to me, the 
scientific evidence is insurmountable--but see it as an opportunity for 
good-paying jobs, jobs that advance research and innovation and 
intellect and ideas as an economy that can then transition us into a 
very powerful economic recovery.
  But I want to make certain that I introduce onto this floor the 
discussion about Mother Nature and its grip on the 20th Congressional 
District and, before redistricting, when I represented the 21st, as 
major storms Irene and Lee impacted my region. People had lost,

[[Page H1895]]

Representative Blumenauer, everything for which they ever worked--
houses swept into the river through storms that just, through the force 
of Mother Nature, overpowered communities.

                              {time}  1630

  Many houses were destroyed. Heritage crown jewel items in the region 
that were visitation centers and destinations, destroyed. Covered 
bridge, historic in nature, wiped away through the ravages of water.
  This was a profound impact. Lives lost, many injured. Communities are 
still rebuilding, businesses are coming back, households are still 
abandoned. The efforts have been powerful. We've witnessed volunteerism 
to the Nth degree, a tremendous statement about the human heart to 
respond to the needs of neighbors and at times total strangers. And 
then this year, seeing what had happened with the ravages of Sandy, 
Superstorm Sandy, that impacted New England, impacted metro New York, 
New Jersey and beyond, Pennsylvania. These are atypical situations. 
Tornadoes, tropical storms, hurricanes as far north as upstate New York 
had been unheard of.
  So there is a statement that Mother Nature is making. We are faced 
with this climate change phenomenon, a concept that we need to address 
in scientific measure, in ways that allow us to constructively build a 
plan that allows us to move forward, again, by enhancing the 
opportunities for job creation.
  What I had seen through the advocacy at NYSERDA, the State Energy 
Research and Development Authority, was this effort for us to be the 
keepers of the funds that would go towards innovating and transitioning 
into a better reliance on renewables, using in a benign way the 
environment qualities that surround us--the winds, the sun, the soil, 
the water--in a way that allows us to respond to the needs that we have 
as a society for energy and to do it through intellect. The 
intellectual capacity of our Nation is something we constantly 
cultivate through education, training, higher ed, apprenticeship 
programs. These are forces that can then bear good news of invention, 
of innovation.
  I have the renewable center for GE, the international center in the 
heart of my district. We have the R&D lab in Niskayuna. All of these 
places are working in a way to allow for us to look at new battery 
design, the linchpin to innovation that allows us to embrace, perhaps, 
storage of intermittence power, that it makes it more predictable and 
of more useful capacity. Investment in cable that allows for less line 
loss in the delivery, in the transporting of electrons to the source.
  There are many, many ways that we can be significantly sensitive to 
the demands on our society for energy and not to be wasteful, to be 
innovative in our approach, and to green up our thinking.
  I'll say this--and I know we have others that want to speak. When I 
first arrived here in 2009, after the 2008 election for my first term 
to serve in the House, I was able to sit at the table when we formed, 
as Democrats, SEEC, the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition. 
It's a group of like-minded thinkers who want to take us in a green 
direction, with progressive politics, and enable us to think outside 
the barrel, to be able to be clever in our approach to provide for new 
ways to meet society's needs, to open the door to job creation, to 
provide for soundness of outcomes in a sustainable way that allows us 
to make a very bold and noble statement, and that is typically this: 
that we inherit this environment for the moment, and it is our task, I 
believe, morally to hand it over to the next generations in even better 
stead.
  That is a daunting challenge these days. It's a daunting challenge. 
But in my heart I believe that we can accomplish what we need to 
accomplish. We can respond to the challenge by opening up to new 
thinking, and to not be restrained and restricted by status quo or by 
the disbelief that these things are happening right before our very 
eyes, right in the heart of our communities.
  I wanted to make certain that I shared the impact on my district of 
Mother Nature and the clarion call to respond with urgency and with in-
depth knowledge, driven by the passion to make a difference because 
there is always that pioneer spirit in America, and we're at our best 
when we embrace that inspiration and move forward as a Nation.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Congressman Tonko. I appreciate your 
comments. I appreciate your leadership on this issue before and after 
you joined Congress. And I like the notion about thinking outside the 
barrel.
  Mr. TONKO. You're a great leader also, so thank you for leading us in 
this discussion and leading us routinely on sound transportation 
quarters, including those bicycles that don't pollute.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Indeed. Well, the cheapest electron is one that we 
don't have to use. If we just double American energy efficiency, we can 
cut carbon emissions 22 percent by 2020--and, by the way, that would 
save American consumers $327 billion a year. This is a tremendous 
opportunity to achieve savings, generate economic activity, and pay a 
dividend, economically as well as environmentally.

  Mr. TONKO. Representative, if I might just add to that statement, the 
many discussions I have had with constituents who say where is the 
wisdom in sending hundreds of billions of dollars to foreign nations--
oftentimes enemies of this country--who are using American energy 
consumer dollars to train troops to fight our son and daughters on the 
battlefield.
  This is a no-brainer. This gluttonous dependency on fossil-based 
fuels, imported to keep our energy agenda alive, has got to stop. We 
need to move forward--again, with the progressive thinking that I know 
we can embrace in this House. Get it done. So I thank you again for 
your leadership in this dimension.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. That last element is one that makes it so surprising 
that my Republican friends don't want to talk about dealing with 
climate change, energy efficiency on the floor, especially given the 
fact that an amazing stellar array of distinguished foreign policy and 
military experts who have identified climate change and fossil fuel 
dependency as a strategic vulnerability for this country, and why they 
have argued that we ought to move forward aggressively dealing with 
climate change, dealing with energy efficiency because it strengthens 
America, rather than sending dollars, as you point out, to people who 
don't necessarily share our interests or our beliefs. It has been 
pointed out more than once that we are financing both sides of the war 
on terror.
  But I would like to turn, if I could, to my friend from Memphis, 
Congressman Cohen, who started us off this evening with a terrific 1-
minute observation about Dr. Hanson's retirement. We would welcome your 
thoughts and further observations about our moving forward.
  Mr. COHEN. Thank you. I appreciate your leadership on this issue and 
your scheduling this Special Order.
  Dr. James Hansen did retire. He is considered the foremost 
climatologist in the world. As I understand it, he shared in a Nobel 
Prize in 2007 on this general type of issue. He's been the leading 
proponent of watching out for the future.
  The Keystone pipeline, he's the clarion call, I guess, on the 
problems that that would cause to the environment in the future. 
Because the tar sands, to mine, is a very carbon-intensive activity. 
You take away the forest. You also have to use a lot of water and a lot 
of energy in the production. Just the production of the tar sands 
causes great damage to the environment, let alone the potential for 
damage to our country when they would travel through the pipelines. 
Then, when they're burnt, that's, I guess, lighting the carbon bomb and 
letting it go off. But Dr. Hanson studied climate and was one of the 
first to warn on this issue. He has retired, so we will have his voice.
  I live in Memphis. It's kind of the center of the region, Oklahoma 
over, for tornadoes. Tornadoes have been much, much more prominent in 
the United States. This just isn't a quirk. Mother Nature can have her 
times and certain variances in her schedule, but it's obvious what's 
been happening with the increase in tornadoes, the droughts, the 
floods. The Mississippi River, it's been the lowest it's ever been in 
spots--and it's flooded. It had the worst floods in Memphis ever about 
2 or 3 years ago, and this year the river

[[Page H1896]]

was its lowest. We've gone from its highest to its lowest, and 
something's happening; it's obvious something is happening. Scientists, 
almost to one, tell us that this is because of what we've done to the 
environment.

                              {time}  1640

  There might be two out of 100 scientists. It seems so unfortunate 
that the other side always grabs one or two of those people, rather 
than the 98.
  We all have a debt and a duty to protect the Earth and, I think, 
looking out for issues where we do conserve, as you've said. I've got a 
company in Memphis I met with last week--they're really in 
Mississippi--called Griffin, and they have found a way to come up with 
a system that when a vehicle idles--and they're talking about, in their 
specific situation, armored cars that have a lot of going around and 
they idle their engines when they pick up their financial deposits--it 
costs a lot to the environment in burning of oil when the car is 
running. They've got a way where the car can be turned off and the 
idling of the engine can stop, but, nevertheless, the vehicle still 
gets air-conditioning and power. It can save a tremendous amount of 
gasoline and protect the environment. Hopefully, they can come within 
some grants that are already available to make companies that need to 
retrofit their vehicles to use that, but it is like raising our CAFE 
standards. The best way to save energy is not to have to use it and to 
conserve on that.
  There are opportunities we have. Obviously, we have to concentrate on 
this. We've got to look to alternatives, and wind and solar are two of 
them. It's a disaster waiting to happen, and we just can't close our 
eyes to it. It's important that we take a leadership role in the world.
  Mr. Blumenauer, I would like to ask you, the Defense Department that 
raised those issues about it being important to our national defense, 
were they referring to the droughts that they foresaw coming in the 
future with climate change and what might happen in some of those 
countries where they have less opportunity to produce food and have 
water, et cetera?
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Well, the threats are manyfold.
  One is just when we are subjecting our armed services to try and deal 
with the extremes that you talked about, it's unpredictable. They have 
to be dealing with drought and with flood extreme weather events. When 
we find the disruption that occurs in other parts of the world with 
drought and with famine, it provides an instability that creates a 
security challenge for us. And the fact that we are vulnerable still, 
in terms of energy supply for the United States and for our allies and 
the world economy can be held hostage, all of these were part of this 
challenge.
  Last but not least, the Department of Defense, the United States 
military, is the largest consumer of energy in the world. Energy 
supply, energy cost, energy efficiency is a matter of military 
readiness and operational efficiency. When we spend $18 billion for 
air-conditioning in Iraq and Afghanistan, that's a drain on the budget. 
When we are sending to the front tanker trucks, because we are so 
dependent on fossil fuel, they might as well have a great big bull's-
eye on them. We've lost thousands of Americans on these fuel convoys.
  Being able to be energy efficient, being able to stretch the dollars, 
being able to promote American security is all part of an equation 
where these experts are saying, it ought to be a no-brainer to move 
forward with energy efficiency. Security experts are deeply concerned 
about the disruptive impact globally of this uncertain climate effect.
  I notice that we are joined by my colleague from the State of Oregon, 
Congresswoman Bonamici, who has long exercised leadership in areas of 
environment and energy in her previous career as a distinguished State 
legislator in Oregon. I welcome her and would invite comments in 
conversation with us.
  Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you so much, Mr. Blumenauer, for leading this 
discussion about such an important topic.
  The reality of what we are talking about is really impossible to 
deny. We've had numerous scientists testify in Congress. You mentioned 
Dr. Hansen. I want to mention that his first testimony in Congress was 
25 years ago. 1988 was the first time that Dr. Hansen, a well-renowned 
NASA scientist, testified about the problems of climate change--25 
years ago. Since, so many peer-reviewed studies have shown the reality 
of what we are facing and the human impact, a significant contributing 
factor.
  Not only do we have a lot of impacts on the planet, from glacial 
withdrawal and loss of sea ice, ocean acidification, rising 
temperatures and rising sea levels, we are feeling the impact here in 
our country with record droughts in the American Southwest and historic 
severe weather events. You probably have already mentioned that, 
according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, 
and NASA, last year, 2012, was the warmest year on record for the 
United States. The 9 warmest years on record have all occurred since 
1998.
  I want to talk for a minute, Mr. Blumenauer, about some of the 
effects we are feeling in our home State of Oregon. We have a 
reputation for quality wine grapes, including the world-renowned pinot 
noir grape. The quality of wine is attributable to the climate in 
Oregon. The pinot grapes grow in a temperature range between 57 and 61 
degrees, and a minor variation threatens the quality of the grapes and 
the value, significant value, to Oregon's economy.

  Also, the district that I represent, and I know you've been out to 
our Oregon coast frequently, includes the shellfish industry. There's a 
thriving fishing community there. There's dungeness for sale on the 
commercial market and recreational crabbing that helps draw tourists 
over to the coast. In recent years, the changes have caused low oxygen 
content in the water. Hypoxia is the condition that results. It is 
creating dead zones in our ocean that kill fish, crab, and other marine 
life.
  This is a serious problem that's affecting the industry over there. 
There's a shellfish hatchery, Whiskey Creek, over in Tillamook that 
supplies three-quarters of the oyster seed used to produce shellfish up 
and down the West Coast. It's an industry worth $110 million annually. 
Their stock of oyster seed is being threatened by the rising acidity of 
the ocean, which is, again, a serious impact of climate change. So 
right there in Oregon there's two examples, economic examples, of how 
our local industry is being affected.
  Oregonians, I know, as well as people around this country, they're 
looking to us for solutions. They're looking to us for leadership. So 
we need to discuss how we are going to mitigate and begin to reverse 
these environmental and economic effects. We have a great 
responsibility, not only to our own home States, but to our country and 
the rest of the world, and we need to take a leadership role.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate that comment. I was just thinking, as 
you were describing the threats on our Oregon coast, to what we just 
read in the Washington Post a couple of days ago here where the impacts 
of climate change are having a profound effect on the blue crab, 
breeding a super crab that's actually growing more rapidly; at the same 
time, climate impacts are weakening the oysters, making them more 
vulnerable, so the potential here of completely disrupting this 
critical part of the ecosystem in the Chesapeake Bay.
  I appreciate very much your joining in this conversation. I wish that 
my Republican friends would join us in the invitation to actually 
debate this issue in the finest tradition of the House of 
Representatives. There was a time when, in this Chamber, there were 
echoes of great challenge, debate, where people went back and forth 
with ideas to be able to bring out the best in us. We actually saw that 
when the Republicans took control 23 months ago, one of the first 
things they did was abolish the Special Committee on Climate Change and 
Global Warming, and since then we haven't really had an opportunity to 
engage in this fashion.
  Mr. COHEN. I appreciate your bringing up the idea of the hottest 
year. In Memphis, it does occasionally get hot, but it also does in 
Washington. I think it's supposed to be 90 today. I suspect, and 
somebody is going to be able to prove me wrong, but this may be the 
hottest----

[[Page H1897]]

                              {time}  1650

  Mr. BLUMENAUER. It is an all-time record for today.
  Mr. COHEN. I figured it was, and it's just unbelievable. And last 
week it was cold. I mean, I had my winter suit when I went home, and I 
brought my summer stuff here today.
  The heat does have effects, and you brought up some of the other 
issues. It's not just the polar bears. I'm a big fan of the polar 
bears, but they're going to be eliminated because they're going to lose 
their ability to survive in their natural climate. Also, the flora and 
the fauna are at risk.
  What Mr. Blumenauer mentioned about defense made me think of a long 
time ago when I was in college. There was a man I thought a lot of 
named Don Wolfson. He was a smart man from a family that had knowledge 
of power in this country. We were talking about who was the most 
powerful person in the country and what were the most powerful 
interests. I had said something about the military industrial complex 
and how President Eisenhower had warned us in his last address about 
the military industrial complex. What he warned us about really was the 
impact they would have on the budget and all those things. But what Don 
Wolfson told me was the military industrial complex is all tied to one 
thing: oil. That's what it's about.
  The military runs on oil. And as Mr. Blumenauer so well pointed out, 
they're the most consuming user of oil, and they also at the same time 
are spending much of their efforts defending the trade routes to get 
oil. That's why the 5th Fleet is over there in Bahrain, and it is 
defending the Strait of Hormuz and why Iran has particular significance 
in the Middle East.
  It's amazing what President Eisenhower warned us about, and I don't 
know if that was part of his warning, but maybe there was more truth to 
what he said and we probably should spend a part of each day reflecting 
on President Eisenhower's warning about the military industrial complex 
and what it has done to our Nation, because that's where the budget has 
really got a great problem, and that all goes back to our dependence on 
foreign oil.
  Ms. BONAMICI. If I may add, too, that it calls out for continued 
investment in alternative technologies and energy from electric 
vehicles to hybrid vehicles to alternative fuels, solar power, wind 
power, and bicycles. We need to continue that research and investment 
in those alternative technologies to decrease our dependence on foreign 
fuel.
  One of the things that I want to mention too and what we have debated 
here on the floor is how much we're going to spend to clean up after 
disasters. That is something that we have debated here on the floor.
  I want to point out that a recent GAO report for the first time lists 
climate change as a significant financial risk to the Federal 
Government. We're not well positioned to address the fiscal exposure 
presented by climate change.
  As a Nation, we've become too familiar with the consequences of 
waiting until the 11th hour to develop solutions. The time is now to 
work together, to begin to reverse these changes, to develop 
alternative technologies, to come up with policies that will begin to 
take on this very serious problem and build our economy at the same 
time.
  And even for those who dispute or ignore the scientific evidence of 
climate change, we can still discuss the economic gains we can make by 
investing in a clean-energy economy and modernizing our infrastructure 
and seeking energy independence, which is also a national security 
issue, as you had mentioned, as well.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Absolutely.
  Those 11 weather disasters last year cost us over $60 billion. It's 
also creating uncertainty in agriculture and in the business of 
insurance where it's more difficult for them to be able to calculate 
what they're doing. It places more burden on the Federal Government 
because in many cases there aren't private alternatives available. 
That's why we had to create flood insurance. You're touching on an area 
that has profound economic consequences because of this environmental 
instability.
  Mr. COHEN. Mr. Blumenauer, let me ask you this--and we've worked 
together on the Keystone XL issue--When people come to you and say that 
it's going to create all these jobs, we need jobs and they can get this 
oil, these tar sands to China if they need to by going to the West, 
what do you tell folks about those jobs and the effect it will have on 
the future?
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. It's very important for us to take a step back and 
evaluate exactly what the economic employment opportunities are because 
things that we do to rebuild and renew America in a sustainable way--
Keystone has a few thousand temporary construction jobs and maybe a 
handful--I've heard various estimates--a few dozen, a couple hundred 
permanent jobs and has, as you pointed out, significant environmental 
consequences.

  But when we're investing in wind, solar, geothermal, these are areas 
that are producing far more jobs already and that they are using a 
sustainable source of energy that pays a continuing dividend over time. 
This wind is American. This geothermal energy is American. It's 
renewable, and it doesn't cost us anything.
  Mr. COHEN. Memphis borders Arkansas, and there was some kind of a 
pipeline problem over there recently. I think it might have been Exxon. 
They had a leak. That's kind of an expensive process. That's similar to 
the Keystone pipeline; isn't it? It gives us kind of a warning of what 
could occur.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Well, energy transmission is something that is a part 
of the broader equation.
  Pipeline reliability is something that we all need to be concerned 
about. More fundamentally, we need to deal with the sources of energy, 
what is driving them, how we reduce carbon emissions, not sort of how 
we shift the pieces around. The priority, I think, ought to be 
sustainable energy, more economic investment, reducing greenhouse gas 
emissions, not cooking the planet.
  I recently had my first two grandchildren in a course of a few 
months. It was interesting to me--some of these dry debates that we 
have that talk about by 2100, sea levels may rise 3 or 4--that always 
seemed kind of remote to me until I realized that these two young men, 
if they live as long as their great-grandmother, will be alive in the 
year 2100, and what we do as a Congress helps shape the world that they 
inherit.
  That's our responsibility. That's why I deeply appreciate both of you 
being a part of this discussion this evening and why I hope that our 
Republican friends will join us in an actual debate of these policies, 
practices, what the choices are. Hopefully, it may actually lead to 
action in the floor of the House for a more sustainable future.
  Ms. BONAMICI. I know we join you in that.
  I also wanted to mention, while you're talking about renewable 
energy, the great promise of wave energy as well with the coast.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman will suspend.
  Members are reminded to address their remarks to the Chair and not to 
others in the second person.
  The gentlewoman may continue.
  Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
  I know that Mr. Blumenauer has grandchildren. I don't yet. We owe it 
not only to the current generation, but to future generations to take 
action on these important issues.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I'm prepared to yield back, unless my friend from 
Memphis wants any concluding comment.
  Mr. COHEN. I just want to thank you for your leadership, and it's 
been an honor to join you today on the floor on this issue. It's 
important to be addressed.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of 
my time.

                          ____________________