[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 16222-16224]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2641, ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT 
             AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008

  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 481 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 481

       Resolved,  That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 2641) making appropriations for energy and 
     water development and related agencies for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes. The first 
     reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of 
     order against consideration of the bill are waived except 
     those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. General 
     debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one 
     hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. 
     After general debate the bill shall be considered for 
     amendment under the five-minute rule. Points of order against 
     provisions in the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of 
     rule XXI are waived. During consideration of the bill for 
     amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may 
     accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the 
     Member offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in 
     the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that 
     purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. Amendments so printed 
     shall be considered as read. When the committee rises and 
     reports the bill back to the House with a recommendation that 
     the bill do pass, the previous question shall be considered 
     as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final 
     passage without intervening motion except one motion to 
     recommit with or without instructions.
       Sec. 2. During consideration in the House of H.R. 2641 
     pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of 
     the previous question, the Chair may postpone further 
     consideration of the bill to such time as may be designated 
     by the Speaker.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Snyder). The gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Matsui) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, for purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for purpose of 
debate only.


                             General Leave

  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
and insert extraneous materials into the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, this rule permits the House to consider the 
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of 2008. The bill today 
is being considered under an open rule. The issues of energy and water 
are always important, but this year these issues are the very center of 
our national dialogue.
  I applaud Chairman Visclosky and Ranking Member Hobson for their 
continued commitment to provide the resources for our water 
infrastructure. This investment protects communities and saves lives.
  I feel I could speak directly to this because in my home, Sacramento, 
this bill is arguably more important to the everyday life and safety of 
our population than nearly any bill this Congress will pass. Sacramento 
is the most at-risk river city for catastrophic flooding in this 
country.
  My district serves as the seat of government for California, the 
sixth largest economy in the world, as well as the hub of a six-county 
regional economy that provides 800,000 jobs for 1.5 million people. A 
major flood along the American and Sacramento rivers would have 
catastrophic ripple effects regionally and nationally, cause upwards of

[[Page 16223]]

$35 billion in direct property damage, and likely result in significant 
loss of life to our families, our friends, and neighbors.
  Sacramento needs this bill, but so do countless other communities 
across the Nation. I remember all too well on New Year's Eve of 2005 
when the headline in our local paper said: ``North State braces as 
rains' onslaught arrives.'' My district and I sat on the edge of our 
seats and held our breath to see how the storm would unfold.
  Flooding did occur, and for those that endured it, it was tragic. But 
the majority of Sacramento was spared. Our flood system performed as it 
should, but it was definitely put to the test. Bolstering our system, 
working through this bill, and with the Army Corps of Engineers made 
our survival during that storm possible.
  Locally, on a daily basis, we are working closely with the Army Corps 
of Engineers, the Bureau of Reclamation, the State of California and 
the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency, our local partner, to achieve 
greater flood protection. We have achieved impressive results by 
integrating an approach that combines flood protection and dam safety 
with partners that can share resources. But what makes an approach like 
this possible are strong partnerships between the Federal Government, 
the States, and local entities.
  I am pleased that this bill strengthens and supports this and other 
similar partnerships. Another key component of this bill is funding for 
the Army Corps of Engineers operation and maintenance funding account. 
This important increase will begin to address billions of dollars in 
Army Corps maintenance backlogs.

                              {time}  1030

  This bill takes on the responsibility of not only building but also 
maintaining our infrastructure and makes an investment in securing our 
communities, property and, most important, lives.
  As our country witnessed in the devastation in New Orleans, 
maintaining our infrastructure is an important function of the Corps 
that we cannot afford to overlook.
  It is vital that the Federal Government continue to be a strong 
partner for these ongoing water infrastructure and flood protection 
investments. This will allow at-risk communities across the country to 
strengthen their vulnerable points. It will protect jobs and it will 
protect lives. There are few investments as worthwhile as this.
  Just as we must invest in our country's water infrastructure, we must 
also implement a clean energy economy. This starts with weaning 
ourselves off of fossil fuels.
  Mr. Speaker, the rising price of gas is well documented. In many 
communities gas prices are monitored more closely than the stock 
prices. Mr. Speaker, I stood here 1 year ago to manage the rule for 
last year's Energy and Water appropriations bill. During last year's 
debate I noted that the average cost of a gallon of gasoline was $2.93. 
Last year, there appeared to be no end in sight to rising prices.
  Unfortunately, we have not seen much improvement at the pump. In fact 
what has changed has done so for the worst. According to AAA, the 
average price of a gallon of gas today is $3.06. In my hometown of 
Sacramento, it's $3.19. Many of us are probably asking, has energy 
policy improved?
  To begin with, Chairman Visclosky has recentered our priorities with 
this appropriations bill. We are now investing in renewable energy 
research. We are finally reducing our dependence on foreign oil and 
cutting greenhouse gas emissions. We are finally protecting our 
national energy security. Chairman Visclosky and Chairman Obey should 
be commended for these improvements.
  These investments are long overdue, Mr. Speaker. They support our 
States and cities. For example, in my home State of California, we have 
plans to create a 20 percent renewable portfolio standard within the 
next decade.
  These increased investments in energy programs contrast greatly with 
the President's priorities. Incredibly, the President's total request 
for renewable energy and energy efficiency is the same as it was in 
2001.
  During this President's entire administration, his goals and 
priorities have not changed. This is in spite of the everyday reminders 
of rising gas prices and the constant stream of evidence that our world 
is warming.
  I applaud Chairman Visclosky and Ranking Member Hobson for their 
leadership in this area. They have set a responsible and innovative 
course with these priorities.
  Finally, as I mentioned at the outset of this debate, this bill is 
being made in order under an open rule, which is our tradition. I hope 
that all Members will give that tradition the respect it deserves.
  The American people want action on energy policy, climate change, 
flood protection and a number of issues that this bill funds. Let's let 
the process work, and let's support this responsible bill.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to support this rule and final passage 
of the underlying Energy and Water appropriations bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the 
gentlelady from California (Ms. Matsui) for yielding me the customary 
30 minutes. I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of this Congress, the Democrat majority 
chose to gut the earmark transparency and enforceability rules that the 
Republicans enacted just last year. They then decided to bring the 
spending bills to the floor that did not include earmarks so no Member 
could challenge, discuss, and call for a vote on the House floor.
  Fortunately, the Republicans were successful in forcing the Democrat 
majority to restore earmark transparency and enforceability rules and 
bring spending bills to the floor with earmarks where they can be 
discussed, debated, and voted upon.
  But, Mr. Speaker, let me be clear that the Fiscal Year 2008 Energy 
and Water appropriations bill before us today does not contain 
earmarks. However, Republican and Democrat leaders have reached an 
agreement that Members will have an opportunity to debate and vote on 
earmarks to be included in this bill before this bill is sent to the 
Senate, and I, along with my colleagues, will work to ensure that this 
promise is kept.
  Mr. Speaker, I also wish to point out that the underlying bill is of 
tremendous importance to the central Washington congressional district 
that I represent. I am pleased by the funding provided for Hanford 
cleanup and the efforts to ensure that the Richland Operations Office 
can meet legal cleanup milestones along the River Corridor and in 
transuranic waste retrievals.
  However, I must say, Mr. Speaker, the funding level for the waste 
treatment plant at Hanford is of a concern to me. It is important for 
this House and the Congress to recognize that while the bill provides 
sufficient funds for construction in this fiscal year, this bill's 
funding level will require a significant boost in funding in just 2 
years to keep the project on its new independently verified budget and 
schedule. We must acknowledge that the choices made on funding for the 
waste treatment plant in this bill require balancing with a substantial 
increase in the very near future.
  I also, Mr. Speaker, support the funds vital to the operation of 
Pacific Northwest National Lab, particularly the DOE Office of Science 
and NNSA plan to transition scientists' work in the 300 area to 
replacement lab facilities. This initiative is critical to our 
country's national security. And this bill provides a solid endorsement 
and boost to that project.
  So, Mr. Speaker, when the Democrat majority keeps its promise to 
include earmarks and detail spending in this bill, we will know far 
more about the multibillion-dollar budgets of the Army Corps of 
Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation. These are also of great 
importance to the irrigators, farmers and ports of Washington State and 
the Pacific Northwest.

[[Page 16224]]

  Originally, as we know, the Democrat majority would have had this 
House consider the Energy and Water appropriations bill with a report 
that included page after page of blanks where dollar amounts should 
have been in the Army Corps and Reclamation budgets. But due to the 
demands of the Republicans, they will now fill in the blanks before and 
not after the House votes and sends this bill to the Senate. This will 
ensure that all Members will have an opportunity to review earmarks on 
the House floor and not just see them added months from now when they 
would have been beyond the scrutiny of a House vote.
  We Republicans have secured a rules change to ensure this House and 
the American taxpayers can scrutinize earmarks, and that earmarks are 
subject to a vote of the House. This is the right thing to do, Mr. 
Speaker, and I'm pleased that the Democrat majority has agreed to 
Republican demands to restore transparency and openness on earmarks.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Vermont, a member of the Rules Committee, Mr. Welch.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady from 
California (Ms. Matsui) for her excellent work on this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, in November Vermonters and the American people demanded 
a change in direction in Washington and a change in priorities. The 
past 5 months have been an important down payment on our commitment to 
change.
  Today the House takes up the third of 12 appropriation bills where we 
will continue making this progress of taking America in a new 
direction. This is a balanced bill adopting the pay-as-you-go principle 
enacted by this House of Representatives.
  This Energy and Water Appropriation bill represents a bipartisan 
approach to our response to a growing energy crisis. We're making real 
changes by focusing on commonsense priorities.
  We know we must reduce our dependence on foreign oil and cut our 
greenhouse gas emissions. This legislation invests $3 billion in 
addressing global climate change. It does so by researching effects of 
greenhouse gases and then working on the technologies that will make a 
new energy future. It also focuses on the growing renewable energy 
industry, making an investment in energy programs that both reduce 
greenhouse gases and help our Nation meet its energy needs.
  This Energy and Water bill provides a 50 percent increase in energy 
efficiency, renewable energy and important water projects, including 
$200 million towards solar, $235 million in vehicle technology to 
increase mileage efficiency, $146 million in energy-efficient 
buildings, $117 million in enhancing hydropower.
  In addition, it invests over $5 billion, as the gentlelady from 
California said, in construction operations and the management of 
critical water projects around the entire country, including in the 
State of Vermont.
  These programs are important not only when talking about the need to 
reduce America's dependence on foreign oil and greenhouse gas 
emissions, but to make critical investments in new industries that can 
be seen across the country. If we make this commitment now, we can have 
a pro-growth, pro-high tech, pro-environment economy of the future.
  In my district of Vermont, we have dozens of thriving, renewable 
energy companies rooted in our community and creating goods jobs. 
Efficiency Vermont, GroSolar, Agrefresh and NRG Systems, to name a few.
  This is a timely bill. It invests in our energy independence and 
makes a down payment on the necessary progress to address climate 
change in our energy future. This Congress is committed to taking our 
country in a new direction, working in a bipartisan manner and in a 
fiscally responsible way. We're committed to making this an energy-
independent country.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I would ask my friend from 
California if she has any more requests. I have no more requests for 
time and I'm prepared to yield back if she is.
  Ms. MATSUI. I have no additional speakers.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time 
as I may consume.
  And this is a truly open rule that continues the longstanding 
tradition of providing open rules for appropriation bills. So 
therefore, Mr. Speaker, I support House Resolution 481, and urge my 
colleagues to do the same.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington. I 
yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill that puts our energy policy on line 
with the people's priorities by investing. It also raises our 
investment in our water infrastructure.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this open rule 
and the fiscal year 2008 Energy and Water Appropriations bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to commend Chairman Visclosky, Ranking Member 
Hobson, and their subcommittee for putting together a strong bill that 
clearly recognizes the importance of scientific research and energy 
security to our national competitiveness. In particular, I want to 
commend them for more than meeting the President's request for the DOE 
Office of Science.
  Mr. Speaker, we face a world in which our economic competitors in 
Asia and Europe are making significant new investments in their own 
research capabilities. These investments are beginning to payoff, as 
Asian and European countries challenge U.S. leadership in the sciences, 
no matter how it is measured--by number of patents won, articles 
submitted to scientific journals, degrees awarded, or Nobel prizes won.
  Report after report has called on Congress and the President to 
invest in U.S. research capabilities. The benefits of such an 
investment to the U.S. economy and U.S. competitiveness are well known. 
Economic experts have concluded that science-driven technology has 
accounted for more than 50 percent of the growth of the U.S. economy 
during the last half-century.
  That's why President Bush and Congressional Democrats and Republicans 
have proposed doubling federal funding for basic research in the 
physical sciences over the next 5 to 10 years as part of their 
innovation and competitiveness initiatives.
  Supporting over 40 percent of total federal funding for basic 
research in the physical sciences--more than any other Federal agency--
the DOE Office of Science is the Nation's primary supporter of research 
in the physical sciences.
  Mr. Speaker, U.S. scientists are as bright as any in the world, but 
they traditionally have had better tools than everyone else. Under the 
President's budget, 21,500 researchers would have access to the DOE's 
unique system of large-scale, specialized user facilities. Nearly half 
of those users will be university faculty and students, many will be 
from other federal agencies, and a significant number will be from U.S. 
industry.
  And the Office of Science is using those facilities and its expertise 
to address our energy challenges. It supports basic research related 
to: The production of cellulosic biofuels; the development of advanced 
materials for the safe storage of hydrogen; more durable and efficient 
solar panels and wind turbines; and advanced nuclear systems, not to 
mention fusion power.
  Mr. Speaker, the Office of Science has developed a balanced 
investment strategy to ensure the U.S. retains its dominance in such 
key scientific fields as biotechnology, nanotechnology, materials 
science, and supercomputing well into the next century. I again commend 
my colleagues on the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee for 
recognizing the great contributions that basic research in general--and 
the DOE Office of Science in particular--make to our energy security 
and our national competitiveness.
  Ms. MATSUI. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________