[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 11]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 16246]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



              SECURING AMERICA'S FUTURE ENERGY ACT OF 2001

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. BETTY McCOLLUM

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, August 1, 2001

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4) to 
     enhance energy conservation, research and development and to 
     provide for security and diversity in the energy supply for 
     the American people, and for other purposes.

  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, today I will vote against the Boehlert-
Markey amendment. I support increasing fuel efficiency standards for 
SUVs, light trucks and minivans as a way of improving our air quality 
and reducing our reliance on foreign oil. I also support using 
alternative fuels and much needed flexible fuel vehicles that can burn 
the home grown ethanol-based gasoline E85. This amendment asks me to 
make a false choice between higher fuel efficiency standards and an 
increasingly successful clean air program in the Twin Cities. It will 
stop the production of clean air vehicles at Ford Motor Company's St. 
Paul plant that use E85 fuel. This amendment could have done both--
raise fuel efficiency standards and protect this clean air program. I 
will unfortunately oppose it today.
  The St. Paul-Minneapolis metropolitan area has shown the nation that 
alternative fuels can help clean our environment and sustain our 
economy. E85, a fuel that is 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent 
gasoline, helps our cars and trucks burn cleaner, reducing air 
pollution while at the same time helping Minnesota's farmers and our 
rural economy.
  The Twin Cities leads the nation in the number of gas stations that 
offer E85 with over 60 fueling stations throughout the metro area. It 
will not matter how many stations we have if we are not manufacturing 
the cars and trucks that use this innovative fuel.
  And that is the problem I have with this amendment. Currently, our 
St. Paul Ford plant receives a credit for producing Flexible Fuel 
Vehicles that can use a combination of gasoline or another hybrid fuel 
like E85. Manufacturers like Ford use this credit as an incentive to 
produce these types of cars and trucks. The Boehlert-Markey amendment 
would shift the credit from the number of vehicles produced to the 
actual consumption of the alternative fuel, whether it's E85 or 
something else.
  I agree with the amendment's authors about CAFE standards. However, 
it Is equally important for us to provide incentives for people to 
consume home grown fuels. Because so little E85 and other alternative 
fuels like it are consumed nationwide, would we be reintroducing the 
age-old chicken and the egg conundrum? Do we need the cars to encourage 
the use of the fuel, or do we need the fuel before the cars? Would this 
be a disincentive to car and truck manufacturers to make automobiles 
that run on multiple fuels? Would we be providing a disincentive to car 
and truck manufacturers to make consumption of alternative fuels, and 
do not provide incentives for manufacturers to make these cars and 
trucks, we will be left without both.
  What's more the Ford Motor Company plant in St. Paul has been a 
leader in manufacturing trucks that run on E85 and other innovative 
fuels. Ford, the Minnesota Corn Growers, American Lung Association of 
Minnesota, the U.S. Department of Energy, and Minnesota Department of 
Agriculture and others on the E85 Team have been instrumental in our 
area in promoting these clean-air vehicles and the alternative fuels 
that run them.
  Mr. Chairman, this isn't an easy decision for me. We need to increase 
the fuel efficiency standards of all our cars and trucks and continue 
to work on improving our air quality. We put ourselves on the moon. 
Surely we can raise the efficiency of our automobiles. However, I know 
what the negative impact could be on the production of clean air 
vehicles and clean air in St. Paul. I unfortunately have to oppose this 
amendment today.

                          ____________________