[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 14469-14476]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   AMERICA'S BEAUTIFUL NATIONAL PARKS QUARTER DOLLAR COIN ACT OF 2008

  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules 
and pass the bill (H.R. 6184) to provide for a program for circulating 
quarter dollar coins that are emblematic of a national park or other 
national site in each State, the District of Columbia, and each 
territory of the United States, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 6184

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``America's Beautiful National 
     Parks Quarter Dollar Coin Act of 2008''.

                 TITLE I--NATIONAL SITE QUARTER DOLLARS

     SEC. 101. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds as follows:
       (1) Yellowstone National Park was established by an Act 
     signed by President Ulysses S. Grant on March 1, 1872, as the 
     Nation's first national park.
       (2) The summer and autumn of 1890 saw the establishment of 
     a number of national sites:
       (A) August 19: Chickamauga and Chattanooga established as 
     national military parks in Georgia and Tennessee.
       (B) August 30: Antietam established as a national 
     battlefield site in Maryland.
       (C) September 25: Sequoia National Park established in 
     California.
       (D) September 27: Rock Creek Park established in the 
     District of Columbia.
       (E) October 1: General Grant National Park established in 
     California (and subsequently incorporated in Kings Canyon 
     National Park).
       (F) October 1: Yosemite National Park established in 
     California.
       (3) Theodore Roosevelt was this nation's 26th President and 
     is considered by many to be our ``Conservationist 
     President''.
       (4) As a frequent visitor to the West, Theodore Roosevelt 
     witnessed the virtual destruction of some big game species 
     and the overgrazing that destroyed the grasslands and with 
     them the habitats for small mammals and songbirds and 
     conservation increasingly became one of his major concerns.
       (5) When he became President in 1901, Roosevelt pursued 
     this interest in conservation by establishing the first 51 
     Bird Reserves, 4 Game Preserves, and 150 National Forests.
       (6) He also established the United States Forest Service, 
     signed into law the creation of 5 National Parks, and signed 
     the Act for the Preservation of American Antiquities in 1906 
     under which he proclaimed 18 national monuments.
       (7) Approximately 230,000,000 acres of area within the 
     United States was placed under public protection by Theodore 
     Roosevelt.
       (8) Theodore Roosevelt said that nothing short of defending 
     this country in wartime ``compares in importance with the 
     great central task of leaving this land even a better land 
     for our descendants than it is for us''.
       (9) The National Park Service was created by an Act signed 
     by President Woodrow Wilson on August 25, 1916.
       (10) The National Park System comprises 391 areas covering 
     more than 84,000,000 acres in every State (except Delaware), 
     the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, 
     and the Virgin Islands.
       (11) The sites or areas within the National Park System 
     vary widely in size and type from vast natural wilderness to 
     birthplaces of Presidents to world heritage archaeology sites 
     to an African burial ground memorial in Manhattan and include 
     national parks, monuments, battlefields, military parks, 
     historical parks, historic sites, lakeshores, seashores, 
     recreation areas, scenic rivers and trails, and the White 
     House.

[[Page 14470]]

       (12) In addition to the sites within the National Park 
     System, the United States has placed numerous other types of 
     sites under various forms of conservancy, such as the 
     national forests and sites within the National Wildlife 
     Refuge System and on the National Register of Historic 
     Places.

     SEC. 102. ISSUANCE OF REDESIGNED QUARTER DOLLARS EMBLEMATIC 
                   OF NATIONAL PARKS OR OTHER NATIONAL SITES IN 
                   EACH STATE, THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, AND EACH 
                   TERRITORY.

       Section 5112 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(t) Redesign and Issuance of Quarter Dollars Emblematic 
     of National Sites in Each State, the District of Columbia, 
     and Each Territory.--
       ``(1) Redesign beginning upon completion of prior 
     program.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding the fourth sentence of 
     subsection (d)(1) and subsection (d)(2), quarter dollars 
     issued beginning in 2010 shall have designs on the reverse 
     selected in accordance with this subsection which are 
     emblematic of the national sites in the States, the District 
     of Columbia and the territories of the United States.
       ``(B) Flexibility with regard to placement of 
     inscriptions.--Notwithstanding subsection (d)(1), the 
     Secretary may select a design for quarter dollars referred to 
     in subparagraph (A) in which--
       ``(i) the inscription described in the second sentence of 
     subsection (d)(1) appears on the reverse side of any such 
     quarter dollars; and
       ``(ii) any inscription described in the third sentence of 
     subsection (d)(1) or the designation of the value of the coin 
     appears on the obverse side of any such quarter dollars.
       ``(C) Inclusion of district of columbia, and territories.--
     For purposes of this subsection, the term `State' has the 
     same meaning as in section 3(a)(3) of the Federal Deposit 
     Insurance Act.
       ``(2) Single site in each state.--The design on the reverse 
     side of each quarter dollar issued during the period of 
     issuance under this subsection shall be emblematic of 1 
     national site in each State.
       ``(3) Selection of site and design.--
       ``(A) Site.--
       ``(i) In general.--The selection of a national park or 
     other national site in each State to be honored with a coin 
     under this subsection shall be made by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury, after consultation with the Secretary of the 
     Interior and the governor or other chief executive of each 
     State with respect to which a coin is to be issued under this 
     subsection, and after giving full and thoughtful 
     consideration to national sites that are not under the 
     jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior so that the 
     national site chosen for each State shall be the most 
     appropriate in terms of natural or historic significance.
       ``(ii) Timing.--The selection process under clause (i) 
     shall be completed before the end of the 270-day period 
     beginning on the date of the enactment of the America's 
     Beautiful National Parks Quarter Dollar Coin Act of 2008.
       ``(B) Design.--Each of the designs required under this 
     subsection for quarter dollars shall be--
       ``(i) selected by the Secretary after consultation with--

       ``(I) the Secretary of the Interior; and
       ``(II) the Commission of Fine Arts; and

       ``(ii) reviewed by the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee.
       ``(C) Selection and approval process.--Recommendations for 
     site selections and designs for quarter dollars may be 
     submitted in accordance with the site and design selection 
     and approval process developed by the Secretary in the sole 
     discretion of the Secretary.
       ``(D) Participation in design.--The Secretary may include 
     participation by officials of the State, artists from the 
     State, engravers of the United States Mint, and members of 
     the general public.
       ``(E) Standards.--Because it is important that the Nation's 
     coinage and currency bear dignified designs of which the 
     citizens of the United States can be proud, the Secretary 
     shall not select any frivolous or inappropriate design for 
     any quarter dollar minted under this subsection.
       ``(F) Prohibition on certain representations.--No head and 
     shoulders portrait or bust of any person, living or dead, no 
     portrait of a living person, and no outline or map of a State 
     may be included in the design on the reverse of any quarter 
     dollar under this subsection.
       ``(4) Issuance of coins.--
       ``(A) Order of issuance.--The quarter dollar coins issued 
     under this subsection bearing designs of national sites shall 
     be issued in the order in which the sites selected under 
     paragraph (3) were first established as a national site.
       ``(B) Rate of issuance.--The quarter dollar coins bearing 
     designs of national sites under this subsection shall be 
     issued at the rate of 5 new designs during each year of the 
     period of issuance under this subsection.
       ``(C) Number of each of 5 coin designs in each year.--Of 
     the quarter dollar coins issued during each year of the 
     period of issuance, the Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     prescribe, on the basis of such factors as the Secretary 
     determines to be appropriate, the number of quarter dollars 
     which shall be issued with each of the designs selected for 
     such year.
       ``(5) Treatment as numismatic items.--For purposes of 
     sections 5134 and 5136, all coins minted under this 
     subsection shall be considered to be numismatic items.
       ``(6) Issuance.--
       ``(A) Quality of coins.--The Secretary may mint and issue 
     such number of quarter dollars of each design selected under 
     paragraph (3) in uncirculated and proof qualities as the 
     Secretary determines to be appropriate.
       ``(B) Silver coins.--Notwithstanding subsection (b), the 
     Secretary may mint and issue such number of quarter dollars 
     of each design selected under paragraph (3) as the Secretary 
     determines to be appropriate, with a content of 90 percent 
     silver and 10 percent copper.
       ``(7) Period of issuance.--
       ``(A) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the program 
     established under this subsection shall continue in effect 
     until a national site in each State has been honored.
       ``(B) Second round at discretion of secretary.--
       ``(i) Determination.--The Secretary may make a 
     determination before the end of the 9-year period beginning 
     when the first quarter dollar is issued under this subsection 
     to continue the period of issuance until a second national 
     site in each State, the District of Columbia, and each 
     territory referred to in this subsection has been honored 
     with a design on a quarter dollar.
       ``(ii) Notice and report.--Within 30 days after making a 
     determination under clause (i), the Secretary shall submit a 
     written report on such determination to the Committee on 
     Financial Services of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the 
     Senate.
       ``(iii) Applicability of provisions.--If the Secretary 
     makes a determination under clause (i), the provisions of 
     this subsection applicable to site and design selection and 
     approval, the order, timing, and conditions of issuance shall 
     apply in like manner as the initial issuance of quarter 
     dollars under this subsection, except that the issuance of 
     quarter dollars pursuant to such determination bearing the 
     first design shall commence in order immediately following 
     the last issuance of quarter dollars under the first round.
       ``(iv) Continuation until all states are honored.--If the 
     Secretary makes a determination under clause (i), the program 
     under this subsection shall continue until a second site in 
     each State has been so honored.
       ``(8) Designs after end of program.--Upon the completion of 
     the coin program under this subsection, the design on--
       ``(A) the obverse of the quarter dollar shall revert to the 
     same design containing an image of President Washington in 
     effect for the quarter dollar before the institution of the 
     50-State quarter dollar program; and
       ``(B) notwithstanding the fourth sentence of subsection 
     (d)(1), the reverse of the quarter dollar shall contain an 
     image of General Washington crossing the Delaware River prior 
     to the Battle of Trenton.
       ``(9) National site.--For purposes of this subsection, the 
     term `national site' means any site under the supervision, 
     management, or conservancy of the National Park Service, the 
     United States Forest Service, the United States Fish and 
     Wildlife Service, or any similar department or agency of the 
     Federal Government, including any national park, national 
     monument, national battlefield, national military park, 
     national historical park, national historic site, national 
     lakeshore, seashore, recreation area, parkway, scenic river, 
     or trail and any site in the National Wildlife Refuge System.
       ``(10) Application in event of independence.--If any 
     territory becomes independent or otherwise ceases to be a 
     territory or possession of the United States before quarter 
     dollars bearing designs which are emblematic of such 
     territory are minted pursuant to this subsection, this 
     subsection shall cease to apply with respect to such 
     territory.''.

                 TITLE II--BULLION INVESTMENT PRODUCTS

     SEC. 201. SILVER BULLION COIN.

       Section 5112 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by 
     inserting after subsection (t) (as added by title I of this 
     Act) the following new subsection:
       ``(u) Silver Bullion Investment Product.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall strike and make 
     available for sale such number of bullion coins as the 
     Secretary determines to be appropriate that are exact 
     duplicates of the quarter dollars issued under subsection 
     (t), each of which shall--
       ``(A) have a diameter of 3.0 inches and weigh 5.0 ounces;
       ``(B) contain .999 fine silver;
       ``(C) have incused into the edge the fineness and weight of 
     the bullion coin;
       ``(D) bear an inscription of the denomination of such coin, 
     which shall be `quarter dollar'; and
       ``(E) not be minted or issued by the United States Mint as 
     so-called `fractional' bullion

[[Page 14471]]

     coins or in any size other than the size described in 
     paragraph (A).
       ``(2) Availability for sale.--Bullion coins minted under 
     paragraph (1)--
       ``(A) shall become available for sale no sooner than the 
     first day of the calendar year in which the circulating 
     quarter dollar of which such bullion coin is a duplicate is 
     issued; and
       ``(B) may only be available for sale during the year in 
     which such circulating quarter dollar is issued.
       ``(3) Distribution.--
       ``(A) In general.--In addition to the authorized dealers 
     utilized by the Secretary in distributing bullion coins and 
     solely for purposes of distributing bullion coins issued 
     under this subsection, the Director of the National Park 
     Service, or the designee of the Director, may purchase 
     numismatic items issued under this subsection, but only in 
     units of no fewer than 1,000 at a time, and the Director, or 
     the Director's designee, may resell or repackage such 
     numismatic items as the Director determines to be 
     appropriate.
       ``(B) Resale.--The Director of the National Park Service, 
     or the designee of the Director, may resell, at cost and 
     without repackaging, numismatic items acquired by the 
     Director or such designee under subparagraph (A) to any party 
     affiliated with any national site honored by a quarter dollar 
     under subsection (t) for repackaging and resale by such party 
     in the same manner and to the same extent as such party would 
     be authorized to engage in such activities under subparagraph 
     (A) if the party were acting as the designee of the Director 
     under such subparagraph.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
New York (Mrs. Maloney) and the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.


                             General Leave

  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent all 
that Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend 
their remarks on this legislation and insert any extraneous material as 
they so wish.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6184, America's Beautiful 
National Parks Quarter Dollar Coin Act, introduced by my good friend 
and colleague from Delaware, Congressman Castle.
  I have had the great pleasure to work with Mr. Castle on several coin 
bills of this nature in the past, the very successful State quarters 
and most recently the Presidential dollars. I am proud to be the 
Democratic lead sponsor of this bill, and I am happy to report that it 
has strong bipartisan support, as shown by the fact that it passed out 
of the Financial Services Committee on a unanimous vote in support.
  I want to thank Congressman Castle for all of his hard work on this 
legislation, as well as Chairman Frank for his support, and the support 
of the staff of the Financial Services Committee and our individual 
staffs for their hard work on this bill. Of course, all of us love our 
national parks, and especially those of our home State, which will be 
honored on each of these coins.
  Beginning in 2010, new quarters will bear a design representing a 
national park or site in each State and the District of Columbia at the 
rate of 5 new designs a year. The sites will be selected at the 
beginning of the process by the Secretary of the Treasury in 
consultation with the States, and the coins will be minted in the order 
in which the sites selected were established as national sites, which I 
think is a very clever touch.
  As a former teacher and educator, I am always excited about the new 
designs on everyday coins because they encourage more Americans of all 
ages to pay attention to the coins in your pockets and learn a few 
facts about what is depicted. I can say of the very successful State 
quarter program, it became a very popular teaching tool. Many teachers 
devised lesson plans around the quarters, and many of my constituents 
collected these coins. My own daughter had a book with each of the 
quarters in it; and many people would ask me, when is the next quarter 
coming out? And because it was so successful, the 50 State quarter 
program raised $6.2 billion over the past 10 years of its life span 
which is just ending this year. And we can hope that we will have 
similar results from this series of coins.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to 
support this legislation. It is an education tool. It also will 
generate needed revenues for our Treasury.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6184, the America's Beautiful 
National Parks Quarter Dollar Coin Act of 2008, which I am pleased to 
support with my friends, the gentlelady from New York (Mrs. Maloney), 
and I appreciate her kind comments here on the floor, and the gentleman 
from Chicago (Mr. Gutierrez).
  This is an easy bill to understand and I hope an easy bill to like. 
It was popular enough, as the Congresswoman from New York pointed out, 
in committee to have passed by a 58-0 vote 2 weeks ago.
  We all know the popular 50 State quarters program which sequentially 
honored every State in the Union with a design of its choosing on the 
back of the quarter. There are just two more States, Alaska and Hawaii, 
to be honored. Next year, there will be quarters honoring the District 
of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the territories, and the program will be 
done.
  Mr. Speaker, the 50 State quarters program met or exceeded every 
goal. It honored every State in such a way that educated the rest of 
the country about things that made that particular State so special. 
The national parks quarters program is a follow-up to the State 
quarters, and I believe nothing could be more logical than recognizing 
the sites all America hold most dear, places like Yosemite, 
Yellowstone, or Glacier National Park.
  The national parks quarters program will focus on the great natural 
beauty of our country or on other national sites important to history 
or conservation, such as seashores, forests, wildlife refugees, or 
monuments.
  Just to mix things up a little, instead of honoring the States in the 
order they were admitted to the Union, this legislation honors national 
sites in the order in which they were recognized. I note with some 
chagrin but in the spirit of fairness, Mr. Speaker, that this will 
honor the western States that joined the Union later before the 
original 13 States, and ensures that my own State of Delaware will not 
again be first. As a matter of fact, we do not have a national park; we 
will be last in this particular sequence.
  The bill also creates a special new investment-grade coin that will 
be three inches in diameter and made of five ounces of silver. These 
noncirculating coins will bear exact duplicates of each quarter and 
will be available only in the year in which the equivalent quarter's 
design is issued. Although normally our investment-grade coins are 
distributed only through a small network of highly specialized dealers, 
this legislation allows the National Park Service to buy these bullion 
coins in bulk so they may be sold as souvenirs to visitors.
  The national park quarters program will start in 2010, after the 
completion of D.C. and the territories quarters, which is why it is so 
important for us to send this bill to the Senate and President quickly. 
We must ensure adequate time is given for the United States Mint to 
work with the Interior Secretary, other Federal officials, and State 
Governors to honor the best sites and choose each design. The Mint has 
done a terrific job with the State quarters, and I have great faith 
that the artists, engravers, and the excellent staff there will do a 
great job for this program as well.
  Mr. Speaker, I am proud to work on this effort with Mrs. Maloney, who 
joined me as a tireless and skilled supporter of the Presidential $1 
Coin Act and with Mr. Gutierrez who chairs the Domestic and 
International Monetary Policy Subcommittee that I once chaired. Their 
input and suggestions from the Mint before introduction of this bill 
have certainly improved it. I would also like to thank Chairman Frank 
for his willingness to move this

[[Page 14472]]

bill along. I urge immediate passage of this bill, and urge the other 
body to move it on as swiftly as well.
  I would point out to the Speaker that the District of Columbia, 
Puerto Rico, and the territories are included already in this 
legislation, which they were not originally as we know in the 50 State 
quarters program.
  I yield to Mr. Price such time as he may consume.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank 
him for his leadership on this issue, the national parks quarter bill. 
We have in my district the Chattahoochee River National Recreation 
Area, which is under the National Park Service, the longest linear park 
in the Nation, 48-mile linear park, and so I am pleased to support this 
bill.
  The concern that I have, however, about the national parks is that, 
Mr. Speaker, more and more Americans aren't able to get to them, and 
they aren't able to get to them because of the price of gasoline. And 
so what we ought to be doing here as the House of Representatives, in 
addition to recognizing the wonderful work of the National Park 
Service, is to do all that we can to make certain that the number one 
issue of Americans across this Nation is addressed. That issue is 
energy policy and gas prices. So I come to the well today to lend my 
support to those who are trying to move forward in a positive way as it 
relates to energy policy for our Nation.
  We have, Mr. Speaker, as you know, a number of bills that aren't 
being brought to the floor because the Speaker doesn't want them to 
come to the floor, is not interested in increasing supply of oil for 
Americans, American energy for Americans. There are a number of 
discharge petitions, which is the only avenue that Members of the House 
have when their bills are bottled up when they can't get to the floor. 
We have four of them that are available right now.
  One is the No More Excuses Energy Act that would increase the ability 
of new refineries to be brought on line in the United States. Mr. 
Speaker, we haven't had a new refinery built in this Nation in over 30 
years, and the problem with that is that we can't get product to the 
retail market. We cannot increase the supply if you don't have increase 
in refineries. That is H.R. 3089.
  Mr. Speaker, there is another one, H.R. 2279, which would expand the 
refining capacity on closed military installations, one of those that 
allows for increasing refining capacity on land that is currently not 
even being used, Federal land that is not being used. And this is 
important as it relates to national parks, because again, Mr. Speaker, 
my constituents are having trouble getting to the national parks 
because of the price of gasoline. And this House is not acting because 
the leadership, the Speaker and her leadership, are not interested in 
bringing forward bills that increase supply.
  Another one is H.R. 5656, which would repeal the ban on acquiring 
alternative fuels. Mr. Speaker, we were home last week, and one of the 
things I heard from my constituents as I know folks heard all across 
this Nation is: You have got to solve the energy problems. You have got 
to solve the gas price problem.
  One of the ways to do that is to conserve. Yes, there is no doubt 
about it. Another way is to increase supply. We have talked a lot about 
that. Another way in the long run is to make certain that we have got 
the kind of technology available to provide for alternative fuel.
  This is a bill, H.R. 5656, that would allow for increasing 
accessibility to mechanisms to bring alternative fuels on line, diverse 
sources of fuels like oil shale and tar sands and coal-to-liquid 
technology.
  I was surprised to learn, Mr. Speaker, as I know you were that the 
United States has one of the largest resources of oil shale in the 
world. In the world. So much so that the estimate is that we could get 
over 2 trillion barrels of oil out of the oil shale, oil sands that is 
American resource. American resource.
  Now, 2 trillion is a big number. It has got a lot of zeroes after it. 
What does it really mean, 2 trillion barrels of oil? Well, just to put 
it in perspective, Mr. Speaker, the world has used 1 trillion barrels 
of oil since 1875. Mr. Speaker, the world has used 1 trillion barrels 
of oil since 1875. We Americans possess, our natural resources, the 
ability to gain 2 trillion barrels of oil without any influence from a 
foreign source, without utilizing any foreign source or any foreign 
technology. We could do that right now if we were able to have this 
House and Senate act.
  So this is remarkable, remarkable information. It is important that 
the Members of the House know this. It is important that all Americans 
know this. Because we have within our capacity the ability to become 
not just less reliant on foreign oil but self-sufficient on American 
oil. American energy for Americans. That is what it is all about. That 
is what we hear when we go home.
  So why, Mr. Speaker, why will this House not be allowed to vote on 
H.R. 5656? Or H.R. 2279? Or H.R. 3089? Or the one that has brought a 
discharge petition this week H.R. 2208, which is the Coal to Liquid 
Fuel Act, which would reduce the price of gasoline by encouraging the 
use of clean coal technology?

                              {time}  1400

  Mr. Speaker, as you also know, we in the United States possess the 
world's largest reserves of coal, and technology has changed so 
drastically over the past 20 to 30 years, that now it is possible in an 
environmentally sensitive and sound way, and responsible way, to gain 
natural gas, to gain gasoline from liquid coal, from coal-to-liquid 
technology, energy for Americans, American energy for Americans.
  But what is happening here in the House of Representatives when it 
comes to energy policy? Nothing, Mr. Speaker. Nothing. And so when I 
went home last week, I know I heard what all of our colleagues did, and 
that is the House has got to act. The House has got to act. The 
frustration level of the American people is huge. And it ought to be. 
Their anger is huge, and it ought to be.
  I encourage my colleagues to communicate to the Speaker's office, to 
let the Speaker know that we want to vote on these bills. I don't know 
how the vote will turn out, but I do know that the constituents of my 
district and the constituents of districts all across this Nation want 
to know how their Member will vote on these bills. It is imperative, 
American energy for Americans.
  Once again, I want to thank my good friend from Delaware for 
providing me this time, and getting to the issue of the national parks 
in a little side way manner, but I think it is important. I think it is 
important because our constituents, I know, want us to solve the issue 
of energy so they can visit the national parks, the beautiful national 
parks all across this Nation.
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to yield back our time at this 
point.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to my 
dear friend and colleague on the other side of the aisle who has 
attacked the Speaker of this House really unfairly and with false 
statements.
  The point is and the reality is that we have two oil men in the White 
House and their policies are the ones that have benefited Big Oil and 
hurt the American consumer. Now under the leadership of the Democratic 
Speaker and the New Direction Congress, we have been passing solutions 
for the first time to help American consumers and to help this country 
move into the 21st century with policies that are important for 
conserving energy, renewable energy, efficient technologies, and 
reducing energy prices for the long run.
  No, I will not yield. I have my time; you had yours.
  First of all what, the New Direction Congress passed was the first 
new vehicle fuel-efficiency standards in 32 years. We also passed an 
historic commitment to affordable American-grown biofuels. If the other 
side of the aisle was interested in moving us into the 21st century and 
conserving energy, why in the world didn't they pass new vehicle fuel-
efficiency standards? We passed it. This Congress passed it. The 
Democrats passed it, and are forcing the car builders and others to 
move in with fuel-efficient standards.

[[Page 14473]]

  We also took action to lower gas prices by suspending oil purchasing 
for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. These are very important 
initiatives.
  Now the gentleman on the other side of the aisle, my very good 
friend, talked about the need to build new refineries. Well, 
ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP and Shell have publicly stated 
that they have no plans to build new refineries; instead, they prefer 
to expand existing facilities. These are their statements. Shell and BP 
all testified that they were unaware of any environmental regulations 
preventing them from building new refineries or expanding old ones. 
They can do that now.
  Internal memos from oil companies make it very clear that oil 
companies decided that they needed to reduce refinery capacity to drive 
up their profits. And the New Direction Congress is continuing to bring 
real relief to those feeling the pinch of the high gas and diesel 
prices, and ensuring the needs of families and businesses are put 
before the interests of Big Oil companies.
  Now my dear friend on the other side of the aisle talks about 
drilling, drilling, drilling, drilling, as if we could drill ourselves 
out of the challenges we face.
  The fact is that there are over 68 million acres on shore and 
offshore in the United States of America that are currently leased by 
oil companies and they are open to drilling and actually under a lease 
to do so but are not developed. Now we are talking about leases on 68 
million acres of land that is owned by the American people. Now what 
Chairman Rahall says is use it or lose it, and I think he is absolutely 
correct. I support his bill, to say that you either drill on those 68 
million acres or you give up your lease and let someone else drill 
there. That's what the Democrats are saying. We are not going to hand 
out more leases to the oil companies on public land that is owned by 
the public and is the land and the reserves of this country. We are 
saying to them if you have a lease, you use that lease. You drill. 
You're not going to get another one. And if you're not going to drill, 
then let's put it out for competitive bid and let someone else come 
forward and drill on that land.
  The fact is that 80 percent of the oil available on the Outer 
Continental Shelf is in regions that are already open to leasing, but 
the oil companies haven't decided if it is worth their time to drill 
there. The fact is that drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge wouldn't 
yield any oil for 10 years, and then would only save the customer, the 
consumer, 1.8 cents per gallon in 2025. The fact is that America uses a 
quarter of the world's oil consumption every day, but only 1.6 percent 
of the world's supply, so there is simply no way to drill ourselves to 
a solution.
  I repeat, while my colleagues were running this body, where were 
their solutions? I didn't see any. I didn't see them raising the mile 
per gallon of gas, I didn't see them conserving. I didn't see them 
investing in biofuels or moving forward with innovative energy 
solutions, as this new Democratic leadership has been doing. They have 
just held onto the failed policies of the past which have gotten us to 
where we are. As I repeat, we have two oil men in the White House that 
have been behind these policies.
  So I would say that the Democratic leadership has done a great deal 
to help the American consumer. They are facing many challenges. Their 
wages are stagnant. The price of gasoline is now over $4 a gallon. The 
price of milk is over $4 a gallon. So they are facing really inflation 
and many, many challenges.
  The Democratic leadership has come forward with a stimulus package to 
help the American taxpayer, the American citizen. We have come forward 
with a fuel-efficiency standard. We have come forward with many 
hearings today on the possible manipulation of oil in the futures 
market so that we can curb those abuses if they are documented. We are 
for drilling on the 68 million acres that are currently under contract 
and should be drilled on.
  So this Congress, I congratulate the leadership of Speaker Pelosi and 
the Democrats and the relevant committees. We have passed legislation, 
the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act. We have passed the Gas Price 
Relief for Consumers Act. We have passed the Energy Price Gouging 
Prevention Act which will provide consumer relief by giving the Federal 
Trade Commission the authority to investigate and punish those who 
artificially inflate energy prices. President Bush has threatened a 
veto of this very commonsense consumer protection measure.
  So I say with all due respect to my wonderful colleagues and friends 
on the other side of the aisle, where were your ideas when you could 
pass them? Where are your ideas now? The ones that we are passing that 
helps the consumer and moves this country into the 21st century, and 
that makes a profitable use of land that is owned by the American 
people instead of giving more, and in many cases in a no-bid process to 
oil companies who are just sitting on it and not doing anything to help 
the American consumer.
  So I would say you brought it up, so I am just responding to some of 
your allegations.
  I feel this is such an important issue that I would like to yield 2 
minutes to my distinguished colleague from the great State of New York, 
Congressman Serrano, on H.R. 6184, and I thank him for his leadership 
on this important bill.


                Announcement By the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ross). All Members are reminded to 
address their remarks to the Chair.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, I would like to try something innovative. I 
want to discuss the bill before us and not this other discussion we had 
on drilling. While I understand the importance of it, we were 
discussing a bill, for those Americans who were watching who might have 
forgotten by now, on putting national parks on the backs of quarters. 
And I want to congratulate both Mr. Castle and Mrs. Maloney and the 
committee for including the Territories. As the gentleman from Delaware 
stated, he alluded to the Speaker and the fact that I have great 
concern about the involvement of the Territories and the recognition.
  When the original quarters program came about, I was dismayed at the 
fact that the territories and the District of Columbia were not 
included. Last year in an appropriations bill, we expanded the program 
to include D.C. and the Territories.
  What you have done today is you have picked up on that and now have 
started a new era, I believe, where the Territories and the District of 
Columbia will become part of every discussion we have here from postage 
stamps to coins to, in many other areas, fairness across the board.
  When that first quarter comes out, both the one for the national 
parks and the one for the regular quarters program with Puerto Rico on 
it, since Puerto Rico is of great concern to me, having been born there 
before moving to New York, many people throughout the country will 
actually ask, Why is Puerto Rico on the back of a quarter in the United 
States? And that will start a proper discussion as to the fact that we 
not only include in the American family the 50 States, but we include 
the District of Columbia and the Territories. That in the Territories 
are American citizens, American citizens who served this country at 
wartime and peacetime, and who, in fact, at any moment can participate 
in all parts of American society but are always forgotten.
  So something as symbolic and perhaps to some people as unimportant as 
making sure that when these quarters come out with national parks, they 
include Puerto Rico and the Territories, is very important.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentleman for his statement. He 
has been a strong advocate for the Territories. He raises and 
highlights an important point that the Territories are included, and I 
appreciate his recognizing the many contributions from the citizens of 
Puerto Rico and other Territories to our great country.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back 
the balance of my time and urge my colleagues to support this creative 
bill

[[Page 14474]]

that is before us. I hope that it passes unanimously and moves to the 
Senate with swift passage.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, may I ask for a point of clarification.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Delaware.
  Mr. CASTLE. About 10 or 15 minutes ago, I said I was prepared to 
yield back the balance of my time. I don't know if there was a ruling 
on that.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman ask unanimous consent to 
reclaim his time?
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to reclaim my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Delaware?
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I do object. We have a system. We have gone 
through it, and I feel we should move to a vote.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, could I get a clarification.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Delaware.
  Mr. CASTLE. I'm not certain I yielded back the balance of my time. I 
don't know who was responsible in the Chair at that point, but I 
indicated I was prepared to yield back. I'm not sure if there was a 
ruling at that time. Could that be clarified.

                              {time}  1415

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair heard the gentleman utter the 
words that he did yield back the balance of his time.
  Mr. CASTLE. The words I uttered were, ``I am prepared to yield back 
the balance of my time.'' And then I believe the gentlewoman from New 
York was called on at that point without the ruling from the Chair. 
That's why I am asking for the clarification.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. If the gentleman feels so strongly about 
it, he has worked so hard on this bill, it's a successful bill, and we 
hope to have another successful bill, so I will allow the gentleman to 
reclaim his time.
  I would inquire how much time remains on both sides, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from New York, who has 
yielded back the balance of her time, had 6\1/2\ minutes remaining. The 
gentleman from Delaware had 9\1/2\ minutes remaining before he yielded 
back the balance of his time.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I ask for reciprocity. If he 
is reclaiming his time, then I would like to reclaim my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Delaware ask 
unanimous consent to reclaim his time?
  Mr. CASTLE. I do ask unanimous consent to reclaim our time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Delaware?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentlewoman from New York ask 
unanimous consent to reclaim her time?
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I do ask unanimous consent to reclaim my 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Delaware.
  Mr. CASTLE. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
  At this time I would yield to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden) 
such time as he may consume.
  Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from 
Delaware and congratulate him and our colleague from New York on this 
legislation and just advise the body that Oregon, once again, is in the 
lead when it comes to recognizing national parks as our quarter. The 
design for the back of it for our State was processed through a very 
public effort. They picked Crater Lake National Park as the park to 
recognize on the back of the quarter. And so we're already in the lead, 
and it's a wonderful national park; and as my colleague from Georgia 
talked about earlier, it's also one you have to drive a great distance 
to get to.
  When I was in my home county this last week, diesel was $5.08 a 
gallon. Gasoline was $4.39 a gallon. And if this is the result of the 
new Democratic direction for the Congress and for the country, then I 
hope we're at about the end of this new direction because it's taken us 
to a dead-end.
  Now, I just wanted to point out a clarification, I guess, in terms of 
these leases we've heard so much about. My understanding is that when 
the Democrats were last in charge, they actually voted a law to extend 
the length of those leases that the oil companies had. And I would like 
to see them, the oil companies, process these leases and move forward 
with development because that's what I think America needs, more 
energy, more American energy. And yet this Congress has refused to even 
allow a vote, afraid to even allow a vote on accessing the 85 percent 
of the offshore resource that is not available. It's not available. And 
if the argument is that we would be better off by accessing the leases 
already there, then the argument really is adding to supply matters and 
that adding to supply will result in lower gas and lower diesel costs.
  So then it seems logical to presume that accessing America's great 
reserves, the Outer Continental Shelf, would not only create new oil 
and gas supplies for America and American consumers, it would also 
generate royalty dollars for government services.
  I have been working on legislation that would deal with the twin 
issues of energy policy for America that creates new gas, new diesel, 
new access to oil, as well as fund the biggest investment in renewable 
energy this Congress has seen and help those lowest income among us 
with their home heating bills and take care of the neglected challenge 
this Congress has refused to take up and pass, and that is help for our 
counties that are dominated by Federal lands.
  So we would pay for 5 years in county timber payments. We would fully 
fund the commitment to rural counties for payment in lieu of taxes. We 
would put $1 billion into LIHEAP and $3.1 billion into developing 
renewable energy.
  Now, my colleague from New York said, What did Republicans do when 
they were in charge? Well, we passed bill after bill after bill that 
raised conservation standards on appliances. We invested in the newest 
and futuristic technology trying to drive the basic science in hydrogen 
fuel cell development. We supported efforts to extend successfully, I 
might add, the tax credits for wind energy and geothermal and solar and 
the things that I think will give us a great future in renewable 
energy.
  But we have a here-and-today problem that this Congress and its 
leadership fails to address. I don't know where my colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle were over the Fourth of July, but I was home 
with real people. They're hurting. There are truckers who are losing 
their jobs. There are farmers who tell me it costs hundreds of dollars 
to fill a tank in their tractor, and fertilizer has doubled in cost. 
There are families who can't go to their kids' summer games because it 
costs $87 to fill the Voyager van. If this is the new direction that 
the Democrats in this Congress have for America, I've got to tell you 
it's a dead-end direction and it needs to change.
  Why not give us at least the opportunity in this great House, this 
great place where Americans come together to debate issues, to at least 
allow a vote to access the energy reserves we know are out there on 
Federal land or in the Outer Continental Shelf, up in Alaska? And if it 
fails, it fails. The Congress will have spoken in the House. But so far 
we have gone through, as a result of the Democrat leadership, the most 
incredible--this reminds me of the game of Twister. We are so 
convoluted and upside down and twisted to avoid any vote that it is 
reprehensible.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I both support not only the act before us today, but 
I call for this House to at least allow a vote that I think would not 
only be bipartisan, as it was in 2006 when we passed,

[[Page 14475]]

in this House, overwhelmingly with 40 Democrats supporting our efforts 
to get at our offshore oil resource. It would be an overwhelming 
bipartisan vote. And isn't that what democracy is really all about? You 
put an issue up on the table, you allow a vote, and we live with the 
outcome.
  So I ask for that opportunity, Mr. Speaker, just as we're voting 
today on this wonderful bill to allow national parks to have a coin. As 
I said, Oregon has been at the forefront on that issue just as we are 
on renewable energy. Let's have a vote. Let's not have a vote like we 
had when we passed the Energy Act of 2007 that said if another country 
is making oil from tar sands, don't let the American military use it. 
Or like was stuffed in that bill a provision that said if you could 
take woody biomass and turn it into an ethanol-like fuel, don't count 
that against the ethanol fuel standard. Why is that in there?
  Why can't you use the great resource of our American forests, convert 
them into ethanol using cellulosic technology, which Republicans and 
Democrats both agree need to happen? But then to say, Oh, but if you 
succeed at that, it doesn't count towards this out-of-control ethanol 
standard because we wouldn't want to count woody biomass off of Federal 
forests or unless it's specifically grown for that purpose, as ethanol, 
it can be used for a fuel standard in America. No. We would rather rely 
on corn, I guess. And that hasn't helped us a lot.
  So I think we have invested in new technologies when Republicans were 
in control. We invested in new science. We also tried to expedite 
access to America's great reserves. Every other country on the planet 
that has an ocean exercises its right to its own reserves, and yeah, it 
might take 10 years, but if Bill Clinton, former President, hadn't 
vetoed access into Alaska's reserves, we would be pumping a million to 
a million and a half barrels out a day. America uses, I think, what is 
it, 20 million barrels a day? We produce 5. Where would we be if 
President Clinton hadn't vetoed that? We would be a lot better off, 
folks, because the world produces about 85 million barrels a day and 
consumes 86, or thereabouts.
  This has a lot of things around it: certainly money supply, value of 
the dollar, inflation, speculators, who knows what. But at its core, 
until we bridge to the next generation of fuel for our vehicles, we 
have a here-and-now problem at the gas pump, at the diesel pump, and at 
the American budget.
  The families in this country are hurting, hurting; and if you're not 
hearing that on the other side of the aisle, you're not going home and 
listening. You can't hide forever on the ability to access America's 
resources. You can't stop the country from demanding a vote. Just one 
vote. Give us a vote, up-or-down, clean, simple, the way democracy is 
supposed to work here in this House. But no.
  The appropriations process ground to a halt. There might be a vote on 
energy. Every other bill that might have anything to do with energy 
ground to a halt. Heck, even declaring a wild and scenic river in 
Massachusetts had to be pulled because it dealt with LNG. Ground to a 
halt.
  This country is grinding to a halt. It's time for a change in how 
this Congress acts.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. The gentlewoman has no further speakers, 
but I wonder if the gentleman on the other side of the aisle yields 
back his time.
  Mr. CASTLE. We do have an additional speaker.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CASTLE. I will yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on our side?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Delaware has 1\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the Speaker.
  I thank my good friend from Delaware for allowing me to comment on a 
few of the comments that have been made by the gentlelady from New York 
and try to set the record straight a little bit.
  The issue of the 68 million acres of leased land, of Federal land to 
gain access to oil reserves under Federal land of the United States 
isn't whether or not all of those have been used, it's whether or not 
there is any oil underneath them. And the fact of the matter, Mr. 
Speaker, as you well know is that in much of those areas, there is no 
oil underneath them, and you don't need to drill in every single acre 
to confirm there's no oil in adjacent acres. The technology is 
incredible today. So the fact that all haven't been drilled doesn't 
mean that the resources that are under those 68 million haven't been 
utilized, because they have. In fact, Mr. Speaker, 95 percent of the 
land that ought to be available for leasing has not been leased.
  My good friend asked what happened on our watch. What happened when 
the Republicans were in charge. Well, Mr. Speaker, as you know, we 
passed the vast majority of these and they got held up in the Senate. 
They got held up because it requires 60 votes to move anything through 
the Senate. My suspicion though, Mr. Speaker, is that now there aren't 
40 individuals who would stop these bills from moving forward, that the 
holdup is here in the House of Representatives.
  My good friend from New York talks about all of the bills that have 
already been passed. Well, Mr. Speaker, the problem with that is that 
none of them, not one of them deals with increasing supply. They call 
it a law of supply and demand because it's a law. It's a law. If you 
increase the supply, you will decrease the cost at the pump. Americans 
know that.
  Americans want a vote on supply. Mr. Speaker, give us a vote on 
supply. American energy for Americans.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Just to respond to my dear friend and 
colleague on the other side of the aisle, I'm very appreciative that 
you're supportive of the bill before us, but I want to point out that 
there is nothing in this bill that would in any way prevent drilling. 
In fact, they can drill now on 68 million acres of land on which they 
have a lease.
  And we did have a vote, and my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle did not support the vote that would compel the oil industry to 
start drilling or lose permits on this 68 million acres of undeveloped 
Federal oil reserves which they are currently warehousing and keeping 
domestic supply lower and prices higher. I believe that's a very 
balanced premarket approach. Use it or lose it. Let someone else drill 
there.
  And industry is only using a fraction of its leases now. And refining 
is not an issue. Refineries are running below capacity.

                              {time}  1430

  But we have enacted in law, past laws, that are laws now, the Energy 
Independence and Security Act. This historic Act would increase vehicle 
fuel efficiency to 35 miles per gallon, and this is the first 
congressional increase in more than three decades. And this would be 
very helpful.
  And I'd like to place into the Record an entire list of laws that 
have been enacted by this Democratic leadership, laws that are coming 
up to be considered, including cracking down on price gouging, and 
legislation that the House has passed and we're waiting for the Senate 
to act on: the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act, the Gas Price 
Relief for Consumers Act, the Energy Price Gouging Prevention Act. 
These are all important concrete steps, not rhetoric, but concrete 
steps to help consumers.

                       New Direction Legislation


                            Enacted into Law

       Energy Independence and Security Act in 2007--Historic 
     energy legislation with provisions to combat oil market 
     manipulation, increase vehicle fuel efficiency to 35 miles 
     per gallon in 2020--the first Congressional increase in more 
     than three decades--and promote the use of American biofuels. 
     Signed into law, December 19, 2007.
       Strategic Petroleum Reserve Fill Suspension and Consumer 
     Protection Act--Temporarily suspends the filling of the SPR, 
     starting June 30th, to put more oil on the market to help 
     drive down gasoline prices. Signed into law, May 19, 2008.

[[Page 14476]]

       Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008--The new Farm 
     Bill makes an historic commitment to more affordable American 
     biofuels and increases Commodity Futures Trading Commission 
     (CFTC) oversight authority to detect and prevent manipulation 
     of energy prices. President Bush vetoed this bill, but the 
     Congress overrode that veto.


                    Recent and Upcoming Legislation

       Reducing Transit Fares (H.R. 6052)--Gives grants to mass 
     transit authorities to lower fares for commuters pinched at 
     the pump and expand transit services.
       Cracking Down on Price Gouging (H.R. 6346)--Gives 
     enforcement authority to the Federal Trade Commission to 
     investigate and punish those who artificially inflate fuel 
     prices.
       ``Use It Or Lose It'' for Oil Companies Holding Permits and 
     Not Drilling--Compels the oil industry to start drilling or 
     lose permits on the 68 million acres of undeveloped federal 
     oil reserves which they are currently warehousing, keeping 
     domestic supply lower and prices higher.
       Further Close the ``Enron Loophole'' for Petroleum 
     Markets--Takes steps to curb excessive speculation in the 
     energy futures markets, which experts have noted is driving 
     up the price of a barrel of oil.


                 Legislation that the house has passed

       Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act--Extends and expands 
     tax incentives for renewable energy (including incentives for 
     plug-in vehicles), retains and creates hundreds of thousands 
     of green jobs, spurs American innovation and business 
     investment, and cuts taxes for millions of Americans. The 
     President has threatened a veto.
       The Gas Price Relief for Consumers Act--Combats record gas 
     prices by authorizing lawsuits against oil cartel members for 
     price fixing, and creating an Antitrust Task Force to crack 
     down on anticompetitive behavior or market manipulation. 
     President Bush has threatened a veto.
       Energy Price Gouging Prevention Act--This bill will provide 
     consumer relief by giving the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) 
     the authority to investigate and punish those who 
     artificially inflate energy prices. President Bush has 
     threatened a veto.

  I'd like to remind my dear colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
that when President Bush came to office he had a $5 trillion projected 
surplus. We now have a series of records that have been given to us by 
the Republican leadership, only they are the wrong kinds of records.
  We have record debt that is galloping towards $9 trillion. Each and 
every American owes over $30,000 to this debt. We have the largest 
trade deficit in the history of this country, over $900 billion, and we 
have the largest deficit in the history of this country. We have lost 
more jobs in the first half of this year than have been lost since the 
Great Depression, and if we continue at this rate, we will lose over 1 
million jobs in this year.
  Now, that is the record of the Republican leadership. But what is 
before us is a very important bill, one that I support, one that I urge 
my colleagues to support. And I urge my colleagues to support 
consideration of H.R. 6184, and I hope that we will have a bipartisan 
commitment to passing this legislation.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of 
America's Beautiful National Parks Quarter Dollar Coin Act (H.R. 6184) 
introduced by the Gentleman from Delaware. It's a good bill and a good 
follow-up to his 50-State quarter bill we have all enjoyed. However, 
Madam Speaker, I would like to make a point in the process of 
supporting this bill.
  The idea of following the State quarters by honoring national parks 
is a very good idea, and I salute Mr. Castle and his co-sponsors, Mrs. 
Maloney and Mr. Gutierrez. I even want to suggest a place in my 
district as the one for the back of the New York quarter--the Sagamore 
Hill National Historic Site, the beautiful summer home of former 
President Theodore Roosevelt, in Oyster Bay.
  But that brings me to the point I'd like to make Mr. Speaker. Teddy 
Roosevelt, as the bill itself notes, is known as the first great 
champion of the country's National Parks, and in my view, the front of 
this new coin should bear the image of Teddy Roosevelt.
  I, of course, mean no disrespect to George Washington. He was the 
Father of our Country, and his image has appropriately been on the one-
dollar bill and the quarter. But I think, as a recent editorial in Coin 
World magazine pointed out, that it's about time we honor Teddy 
Roosevelt by placing his image on U.S. currency--after all, he's the 
only one of our four great Presidents honored on Mount Rushmore, who 
does not appear on a U.S. coin or banknote.
  Mr. Speaker, I do not mean to criticize this legislation, and I 
intend to vote for it enthusiastically. But I hope all Members will 
think about the fact that without Teddy Roosevelt's championing of the 
ideas of conservation and National Parks, we would still have national 
parks, but the commitment to them would not have been as great, or so 
early. So, I hope the sponsors of this bill will work with me to help 
find a place somewhere in the U.S. system of money for the image of the 
great Rough Rider on a coin or banknote.
  With that I urge adoption of the bill.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 6184.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________