Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 12 - Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 for July 24, 2008

[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 12]
[Issue]
[Pages 16127-16481]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

[[Page 16127]]

VOLUME 154--PART 12

SENATE--Thursday, July 24, 2008

(Legislative day of Wednesday, July 23, 2008)

Vol. 154, Pt. 12

The Senate met at 9:30 a.m., on the expiration of the recess, and was
called to order by the Honorable Ken Salazar, a Senator from the State
of Colorado.
______

prayer

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Today's opening prayer will be offered by
guest Chaplain Rev. Willie C. Barnes from Macedonia Missionary Baptist
Church in Eatonville, FL.
The guest Chaplain offered the following prayer:
Let us pray.
O Lord our God, how excellent is thy Name in all the Earth.
We come today to give You thanks for Your excellent greatness
throughout this country, the United States of America. We acknowledge
You, O God, for Your wonderful attributes of omnipotence, omniscience,
and omnipresence.
As we assemble in this august body, it is our prayer that You restore
Your blessings upon the Commander in Chief of these United States,
President George W. Bush. Give him wisdom to execute the many
responsibilities he is confronted with for the sake and safety of this
Nation. Bless his family with health and prosperity.
Then, Lord, for this branch of Government, the Senate, it is our
prayer that each Member of this great body may be gifted with the
acumen to make decisions that will reflect the principles and morals of
this great Nation. For every dilemma, please provide the answer through
these men and women You have ordained to satisfy the needs of the
millions of people they represent. As this Senate debates the issues at
hand, let every voice that desires to be heard speak with clarity, with
honesty, and profoundness in such a way that the democratic process of
this Government be made with peace from every representative.
We ask that You would bless the men and women of the armed services
who serve this country so bravely. Bless their families and loved ones
with comfort.
We pray this day that Your guidance will revive, restore, and refresh
in these arduous times; that the towns and cities and States of our
country may give help and the hope so needed today. There is an answer,
O God, from You. We need You for reasoning for families, for
businesses, for schools, and faith-based institutions, that the future
prosperity of the United States may be well even to the benefit of the
needs of this world.
Please forgive us for erroneous infringements that have resulted in
ill will toward our families and neighbors alike. Help us, dear God, to
appreciate You for our daily necessities, and help us to realize that
our sufficiency comes only through You.
Now unto Him who is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all that
we can ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, unto
Him be glory throughout the world without end.
In the Name of God the father, God the son, Jesus Christ our Lord,
and the Holy Spirit, we pray. Amen.

____________________

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

The Honorable Ken Salazar led the Pledge of Allegiance, as follows:

I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of
America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

____________________

APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to
the Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Byrd).
The legislative clerk read the following letter:

U.S. Senate,

President pro tempore,

Washington, DC, July 24, 2008.
To the Senate:
Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable
Ken Salazar, a Senator from the State of Colorado, to perform
the duties of the Chair.
Robert C. Byrd,
President pro tempore.

Mr. SALAZAR thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro
tempore.

____________________

RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY LEADER

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized.

____________________

SCHEDULE

Mr. REID. Mr. President, following leader remarks, the Senate will
resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 3186, the Low-
Income Home Energy Assistance Program.
I ask unanimous consent that following leader time, the time until
10:30 be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or
their designees.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. REID. As previously agreed to, the time from 10:30 until 5:30
will be equally divided and controlled by the leaders in 30-minute
alternating blocks, with the majority controlling the first 30 minutes
and the Republicans controlling the next 30 minutes.
As a reminder to all Senators, there will be a moment of silence at
3:40 p.m. today in remembrance of Officers Gibson and Chestnut. They
were murdered 10 years ago today in the Capitol. All Senators are
encouraged to be on the floor for this moment of silence.

____________________

ORDER OF PROCEDURE

Mr. REID. Mr. President, it is my understanding and I ask unanimous
consent that the Senator from Florida, Mr. Nelson, be recognized to
make remarks regarding our guest Chaplain.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.

[[Page 16128]]

The Senator from Florida is recognized.

____________________

WELCOMING THE GUEST CHAPLAIN

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, it has been some time, with
great anticipation and joy, that I have extended an invitation for Rev.
Willie C. Barnes of Eatonville, FL, to come and be with us as the guest
Chaplain for the day. Reverend Barnes's church in the historically
Black town of Eatonville is a very large church. It is a church that
ministers to the entire Orlando metropolitan area. They do it not only
with the excellence and the soaring oratory of Reverend Barnes himself
but with an outreach to the community, with projects to help the least
of these, our brothers and sisters.
It is with great appreciation and humility that I recognize the
accomplishments of that church and am so glad to have its pastor, a man
who, with a twinkle in my eye, I call my pastor, come and be with us
here in our Senate family today.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader.

____________________

ENERGY CRISIS

Mr. REID. Mr. President, it appears that our Republican colleagues
think they finally found a way. They think, with Americans from coast
to coast facing huge gas prices, up to $4.70 a gallon in some places,
they can score some easy political points off the energy crisis. They
say that all we need to do is open our coasts for oil companies to
drill and gas prices will go down. I should say that is what they did
say. Now they say that is not enough. They say the energy crisis is so
important that the Senate should stay on the issue and do nothing else
until this problem is solved. We all know actions speak louder than
words, and the Republican rhetoric has no basis in reality.
This is not the first time Democrats have tried to address energy. We
have tried on many other occasions. We have worked to try to lower gas
prices before this latest energy crisis hit. In fact, Democrats have
proposed plans to lower gas prices six times in the past few weeks. Six
times, Republicans have blocked us, just as they are blocking us now on
the speculation legislation. What has happened over those weeks? Gas
prices have broken one record after another.
Democrats proposed legislation to extend tax credits for innovators
who are researching and producing clean, renewable energy to decrease
our consumption of oil. Republicans said no. Democrats proposed
legislation to roll back tax breaks on the oil companies--remember,
last year they made $250 billion, oil companies that are making record
profits while we pay record prices--and invest that money in renewable
energy. But the Republicans said no. Democrats proposed a cap-and-trade
system that would address global warming and provide billions of
dollars of alternative energy and create hundreds of thousands of jobs.
Republicans said no. Democrats proposed legislation to protect
consumers from price gouging of already record-high prices.
Republicans, of course, said no, because this would have been an
opportunity to have the oil companies pay back some of the obscene
profits they are making. Democrats proposed a renewable electricity
standard which would save consumers billions of dollars through energy
savings. Republicans said no. Democrats proposed legislation to go
after OPEC for collusion and price fixing. But the Republicans said no.
Democrats proposed legislation that would curb the excessive
speculation of Wall Street traders who artificially bid up the price we
pay at the pump. Republicans said no. Democrats proposed improvements
to the LIHEAP program which helps senior citizens and the disabled with
assistance to pay the cost of heating and cooling their homes.
Republicans said no. Democrats even offered the one thing they have
been talking about: drilling. Let's vote on drilling. But the
Republicans said no. They didn't take our offer, yet they claim it is
the panacea for the problems facing America today. They said no.
The game they seem to be playing is this: Make the American people
think they are willing to grind the Senate to a halt to deal with gas
prices. The American people obviously can see the record.
Republicans are having trouble finding out what they really want.
Yesterday, out of the blue, came a new one. After all these years, they
decided they wanted to drill in ANWR again, even though their
Presidential nominee, John McCain, has said no on the drilling they
have said they want to do. Maybe the one reason they have been a little
hesitant is because their Presidential nominee, John McCain, has said
it is only psychological; it is not going to help anything.
The American people can see the record. We have tried. Democrats have
offered a comprehensive set of solutions for the short- and long-term,
and Republicans have offered nothing but talk. They have talked more
about drilling. What they don't say is that their drilling bill
wouldn't put a drop of oil in the marketplace for at least 12 to 15
years. Even the Republican nominee for President, John McCain, has
called the Republican drilling plan purely psychological. Democrats
believe in increased domestic production through responsible drilling,
but the American people deserve solutions a lot quicker than 12 to 15
years.
If Republicans truly believe their drilling legislation would solve
the problem, why would they say no to an offer to have a vote on it? It
doesn't add up. Or maybe it does add up.
Fortunately, the American people are seeing clearly exactly what is
going on. That is why a moderate columnist like David Broder today said
that he has never seen a worse month for a Presidential candidate than
what we have seen with John McCain this past month.
It appears there is a lot of desperation going on here. While the
Republicans keep talking--we have three filibusters going on as we
speak--Democrats are trying to address a critical problem the American
people are facing every day. Republican strategists have called the
disingenuous Republican strategy a Hail Mary for the fall elections.
Perhaps a 2-year Republican strategy of nonstop delay, obstruction, and
slow-walking has put them in such electoral peril that a Hail Mary is
all they have left. Their strategy is bad for the American people. I
have no doubt that the American people will see what they are trying to
do and, come this November, will reject it.

____________________

RECOGNITION OF THE MINORITY LEADER

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Republican leader is
recognized.

____________________

TENTH ANNIVERSARY OF THE LOSS OF OFFICER CHESTNUT AND DETECTIVE GIBSON

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, if you visit the U.S. Capitol through a
certain entrance on the first floor of the East Front, you will see a
plaque by the door. The plaque is in honor and remembrance of Capitol
Police Officer Jacob Joseph Chestnut and Detective John Michael Gibson,
where 10 years ago today they gave their lives in defense of this
Capitol.
Their deaths remind us that, just as bravery was required from our
Founders who built the Capitol, the bravery of great men is required
today to protect and keep it. The names of Chestnut and Gibson will
forever be remembered among American patriots.
Officer Chestnut, or J.J. to his friends, was 58 and a father of
five. An 18-year veteran of the force, he was just months away from
retirement. He was also an Air Force veteran of 20 years who had served
in Vietnam and Taiwan, where he met his wife.
J.J. lovingly tended a vegetable garden in the back yard of his
house, and neighbors often saw him practicing his golf swing in his
front lawn.
John Gibson also had 18 years of service with the Capitol Police. A
friend of his recalls that just a few days before the shooting, John
told him he had

[[Page 16129]]

never had to draw his weapon on the job. Forty-two
years old, he had three children, and was a native of Massachusetts.
Friends recall John's ardent love for his Boston sports teams--the
Bruins, the Red Sox, and U Mass basketball.
Officer Chestnut and Detective Gibson were the first Capitol Police
officers to die in the line of duty. As we honor them today, we also
honor the hundreds of brave men and women of that force who put their
lives on the line to protect this House of democracy.
To the casual tourist, Capitol Police officers may just seem like
friendly people who stand guard at the doors. But in truth, they are an
elite, highly trained force charged with a critical mission. In moments
of crisis, when not just lives but our very system of government is
threatened, they stand ready at the front lines.
We saw again on September 11, 2001, how the Capitol can be a target
for terror. And we saw again the bravery of the Capitol Police, who
rushed into the building to rescue others when most of us were busy
rushing out.
As my friend, the majority leader, a former Capitol Police officer
himself; certainly know, police work is both an honorable job and a
dangerous one.
In fact, in the 10 years since the loss of Officer Chestnut and
Detective Gibson, 24 peace officers in my home State of Kentucky have
also been lost in the line of duty. If there is no objection, Mr.
President, I ask unanimous consent that their names be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

Kentucky Peace Officers Killed in the Line of Duty, July 24, 1998-July
24, 2008.

Regina Woodward Nickles
Joey Tremayne Vincent
Jason Wayne Cammack
William J. Collins Jr.
Billy Ray Walls III
Charles Brown Morgan Jr.
Samuel Wilson Catron
Howard Callis
Ray B. Franklin
Eddie Mundo Jr.
Douglas Wayne Bryant
Robert T. Hansel
Steven Lloyd Hutchinson
Larry Dale Cottingham
Peter Alan Grignon
Roger Dale Lynch
Elmer Kiser
David George Whitson
Jonathan Kyle Leonard
Ronnie K. Jones
Garry Randy Lacy
Randy Wells
Anthony Sean Pursifull
Joe E. Howard Sr.

Mr. McCONNELL. So today the U.S. Senate remembers J.J. Chestnut and
John Gibson. We are grateful for their heroic sacrifice. And we say a
prayer for their families, who we embrace as we would our own.

____________________

HONORING OUR ARMED FORCES

Staff Sergeant Delmar White

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I rise because a son of Kentucky who
joined the Kentucky National Guard has been lost in service to his
country. SSG Delmar White of Wallins, KY, was tragically killed on
September 2, 2007, when an improvised explosive device detonated near
his vehicle while he was on patrol in Iraq. He was 37 years old.
Staff Sergeant White had been stationed in Iraq for less than a week.
For his valor in uniform, he received numerous medals, awards, and
decorations, including the Bronze Star Medal and the Purple Heart.
For anyone who wonders how those who loved Staff Sergeant White will
remember him, the words of his wife, Michele, leave no doubt.
``He went out a hero,'' Michele says. ``He was a hero before he went
to Iraq, in my book. . . . He was a fantastic person that everybody
loved.''
Born in Illinois, Delmar--or Dale, as his friends called him--was
raised in Wallins, a small town in Harlan County, KY, in the
southeastern corner of my State. He graduated from James A. Cawood High
School there. He eventually moved to Lexington, KY, heart of the
Bluegrass Country.
In Lexington, Dale worked as a corrections officer for the Lexington-
Fayette Urban County Government. He also worked at the University of
Kentucky, where he met Michele--the woman who would become his wife.
There was an instant attraction between the two. Their first date was
to a local carnival, where Dale showed off his athletic prowess for
Michele by winning some stuffed animals. Or maybe he had his old
training to thank--Dale was a former U.S. Marine of 4 years who had
served in Desert Storm.
Dale was proud of his service, and in 1998, he chose to enlist again,
this time with the Kentucky National Guard. But he didn't do anything
without first talking to Michele, by that time his wife. He was
concerned she wouldn't want him to go. He shouldn't have been.
``You are military and always will be--do it,'' Michele told him in
support.
One Labor Day weekend, Dale was in Cincinnati with the Guard, working
crowd control for a local event. Michele tells us that an older man
walked up to him and asked, ``Why would you wear that uniform?''
At that moment, a little boy approached Dale and stretched his hand
up to him. The boy said, ``Mr. Soldier, can I shake your hand?''
After Dale shook the boy's hand, he looked the man right in the eye
and said, ``That's why.''
Clearly, Dale was proud to serve his country, and confident in his
mission. As Michele says, ``He was military 100 percent.''
Of course, there was a lighter side to Dale. He loved the outdoors
and the go-cart track, where he was so aggressive he was known as ``the
Competitor.'' He liked a good video game, especially one that involved
shooting at something and honing his target skills.
Most of all, he was a devoted father to his two children, daughter
Shelby and son Seth. He would plan special game nights for them and
other children. Dale had previously served as a youth minister, and he
told Michele that was something he was interested in doing again. He
also hoped to serve with a fire department in the future.
Dale was deployed to Iraq in August of 2007 with Battery B, 2nd
Battalion, 138th Field Artillery, based out of Carlisle, KY. He left an
impression on his commanding officer, CPT Robert S. Mattingly, among
others. This is what Captain Mattingly had to say:
There is a line that we are familiar with that says we will
``cheerfully obey the orders.'' That was Delmar White for certain.
Captain Mattingly said: he was an excellent [non-commissioned
officer], who led by example and never asked anything of his soldiers
he wasn't willing to do himself.
Captain Mattingly added: Delmar White was loved by everyone in the
battery and will be terribly missed by all.
Dale talked to Michele and his children over the Internet the day
before the bombing that took his life. Son Seth was so small all he
could do was bang on the keyboard, but Dale would always write back,
``hey buddy,'' so Seth knew he was there.
During the funeral procession to Dale's burial in Camp Nelson, KY,
Michele was overwhelmed at the people lining both sides of the street
to pay their respects. Police cars and fire trucks stopped as police
and firemen stood, solemnly saluting or with their hands on their
hearts.
At the service, bagpipes played ``Amazing Grace,'' and there was a
21-gun salute. Three helicopters flew overhead as the American flag
that had covered Dale's casket was folded and given to Michele.
Mr. President our thoughts are with Staff Sergeant White's family
after his tragic loss. We are thinking of his wife, Michele; his
daughter, Shelby; his son, Seth; his brothers, Robert and Doug; his
sister, Tressa Fisher; his mother, Hazel White Blincoe; and many other
beloved family members and friends. Dale was predeceased by his father,
Perry White.
Mr. President, this U.S. Senate rises as one today to salute Staff
Sergeant White's service, and to honor his sacrifice. The legacy he has
left for his family, friends, neighbors, and a little boy in
Cincinnati--who only remembers him as ``Mr. Soldier''--will live on.
And that is a legacy that his loved ones can cherish forever.

____________________

[[Page 16130]]

ENERGY

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, when historians look back at the 110th
Congress, they will say the most vexing domestic issue we faced was a
rapid and dramatic rise in the price of gas at the pump. As it stands
today, they will have to conclude that the Democratic leaders ignored
the problem by refusing to unlock the domestic energy resources that
were put off limits when gas and oil were cheap.
If these historians do their homework, they will note the irony in
all of this. They will note that these same Democrats were the ones who
took the majority less than 2 years ago, promising to do something
about gas prices that were a lot lower back then than they are today.
I recently received a letter from a dialysis center in Kentucky. It
was an urgent plea to do something about gas prices. The letter said
some of the rural patients who have to go to this center for treatment
three times a week are now foregoing their dialysis treatment because
they cannot afford the gas to get there. This is the kind of crisis
high gas prices is for low-income and sick people.
After reading that, I have a simple question for our friends across
the aisle: If you won't act now, with dialysis patients unable to get
into town for treatment, when will you unlock the natural resources
Americans have right under their own feet? What is it going to take?
Clearly, this is a very serious problem for the American people, and we
have an obligation to address it, and the time to do it is now. I am
afraid the Democrats who run the Senate want it all to somehow go away.
They have been going to great lengths to make sure it goes away. They
are cancelling hearings when they are afraid the issue might come up,
and they are muzzling their own Members, more than a dozen of whom
favor a balanced solution that includes more domestic production and
increased conservation. They are telling them the same thing they are
telling the American people: No, we can't.
The problem we face, as everyone knows, is that the demand for oil is
rising faster than the supply, and the solution, as everyone knows, is
to increase supply and lower demand. Yet this week, the Democratic
leadership in Congress is saying: No, we can't. They are saying: No, we
can't produce a single barrel of oil at home.
Instead of increasing supply, they are trying to distract us with the
same blame game they roll out whenever the demands of some special
interest group conflict with the will of the people.
This time they have turned their attention on speculators. They say
the reason gas prices have nearly doubled since the Democrats took over
a year and a half ago is the speculators.
Well, Republicans have no problem strengthening regulation of the
futures markets. That is part of the bill that 44 of us are sponsoring.
But if Congress does not allow any new exploration, it is perfectly
clear what the speculation about future prices will be: not good. The
speculators are betting on scarcity, and the majority is helping to
prove them right.
So here we are. After months of frustration, Americans are hearing
from the Democratic leaders that Congress is going to do one thing
about the single most vexing issue in America today. The Democratic
leaders are telling the American people that the solution is to write
up some new guidelines for energy traders, call it a day, and head
home. And if we do not support this very timid solution, they will go
back to the blame game again. They will say Republicans voted against
lowering gas prices, when the fact is not a single person in America
who does not sit behind a desk on the other side of the aisle thinks
this particular speculation provision will do anything to lower gas
prices.
Let's be perfectly clear: A vote for this narrow bill alone is not a
serious vote about high gas prices. It is an abdication of our
responsibilities as lawmakers. It is an insult to the American people
who are demanding every single day that we do something to ease their
pain at the pump.
This is not a theoretical problem. This is not a looming problem. It
is an urgent problem. It is an urgent problem with families who have to
struggle to put food on the table or send their kids to school. It is
an urgent problem for the dialysis patients in my State who can't get
treatment because they can't afford to get to town to see the doctor.
And Americans are hearing the Democratic leadership's response, which
is: No, we can't.
The ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, my
good friend from New Mexico, put it this way. He said that in his 37
years of service in the Senate, he has never seen a single bigger
problem met with a smaller solution. The Senator from New Mexico said
he had never seen a bigger problem met with a smaller solution.
I would put it this way: Americans are saying the house is on fire,
and the Democratic leadership is showing up at the scene with squirt
guns.
Let's put the scope of this bill in perspective. During last year's
energy debate--a year ago--on the Energy Independence and Security Act,
331 amendments were proposed, 49 amendments were agreed to, and gas
prices were $3.06 a gallon. Two years before that, during the debate on
the Energy Policy Act, 235 amendments were proposed, 57 amendments were
agreed to, and gas was selling for $2.26 a gallon.
With gas prices in some places at more than double what they were
then and when Americans are clamoring for dramatic action and when it
is clearly the No. 1 issue in the country, the Democratic majority
wants us to tighten the leash on a few speculators and then head home
and do nothing else until next year.
To drive down gas prices, we could be opening the Outer Continental
Shelf. Democratic leaders say: No, we can't. To drive down gas prices,
we could be lifting the ban on development of vast oil shale deposits
in Western States that sit on three times the reserves of Saudi Arabia.
The Democratic leaders say: No, we can't.
To drive down gas prices, we could be approving incentives for
battery-powered electric cars and trucks. Democratic leaders say: No,
we can't.
To drive down gas prices, we could be voting to open untapped
American oil. Democratic leaders say: No, we can't.
To drive down gas prices, we could be voting for new clean nuclear
technology, but Democratic leaders say: No, we can't.
To drive down gas prices, we could be approving new and promising
coal-to-liquid technology. Again, Democratic leaders say: No, we can't.
When will the Democratic leadership listen to the 77 percent of
Americans who want us to use our own domestic resources to drive down
the price of gas and say: Yes, we can. When will they listen to more
than a dozen of their own Members on the other side of the aisle who
are saying: Yes, we can.
Americans never imagined they would be paying these prices at the
pump, but if the Democratic leadership has its way, Americans will be
paying even more in the years to come. When that time comes and there
is no one else to blame, they will look around and see that there is no
one else around to blame but themselves. Then Americans will know whom
to blame, and I can tell my colleagues it will not be the speculators.
Mr. President, I see my friend from Arizona on his feet, and I am
wondering if he wishes to ask me a question.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I wonder if my colleague would yield for two
questions.
Mr. McCONNELL. I would be happy to.
Mr. KYL. I thank the Senator. Mr. President, I believe at least twice
the majority leader has made a comment about my colleague from Arizona,
John McCain, and I wanted to see if the Republican leader's
understanding is the same as mine.
The majority leader said: ``McCain says drilling is only
psychological and won't make a difference.''
I have checked the actual record of what Senator McCain said. It was
a discussion of offshore drilling, which Senator McCain strongly
supports on the Outer Continental Shelf, and the question was whether
there would be short

[[Page 16131]]

-term relief. Here is precisely what Senator McCain
said in response:

I don't see an immediate relief, but I do see that
exploitation of existing reserves that may exist--and in view
of many experts that do exist off our coasts--is also a way
that we need to provide relief. Even though it may take some
years, the fact that we are exploiting those reserves would
have psychological impact that I think is beneficial.

Now, I ask the leader: Is it correct, in your view, that what Senator
McCain was saying is that while the benefits of production would take
some years to achieve, there could be an immediate psychological
benefit simply from the decision that we were going to do this, such as
the $20 reduction in the price of a barrel of oil following shortly
after the President's announcement that he was going to lift the
moratorium on offshore drilling?
Mr. McCONNELL. My understanding of Senator McCain's position is the
same as my good friend from Arizona. I believe he states correctly the
position of his senior colleague from Arizona on this important issue
of whether it would be useful for America--the third-largest oil
producer in the world, sitting on vast reserves--to expand the usage of
those reserves, particularly on the Outer Continental Shelf.
Mr. KYL. Secondly, Mr. President, the second question. The Republican
leader said a moment ago that speculators were betting on scarcity and
the majority is doing everything to prove them right.
With respect to a decision to begin production off our shores on the
Outer Continental Shelf, is it the Senator's opinion that this would
have a beneficial effect on drawing down the price of futures in the
oil market because the decision would be seen as a commitment to
produce more?
Mr. McCONNELL. I would say to my friend from Arizona, my view on that
is probably not as significant as others. For example, the famous
oilman, T. Boone Pickens, who has been in town this week and who has
met with Republicans and Democrats, has made it quite clear that he
thinks we ought to be doing all these things, both on the find-more
side, which would certainly involve greater use of the Outer
Continental Shelf which is currently off-limits. He thinks we ought to
be doing all these things. I gather that most experts understand the
law of supply and demand, and if you increase supply and diminish
demand, you are working in tandem to get gas prices down. I think it
makes elementary good sense that that is the only way we will be able
to make progress on this issue.
Mr. KYL. I thank the leader.

____________________

RESERVATION OF LEADER TIME

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
leadership time is reserved.

____________________

WARM IN WINTER AND COOL IN SUMMER ACT--MOTION TO PROCEED

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 3186
which the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 835, S. 3186, a bill to
provide funding for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance
Program.

Mr. DURBIN addressed the Chair.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the time
until 10:30 a.m. shall be equally divided and controlled between the
two leaders or their designees.
The assistant majority leader is recognized.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I was going to ask unanimous consent to
speak as in leader time on behalf of Senator Reid, who is not here,
following Senator McConnell.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection?
Mr. DOMENICI. Reserving the right to object, I understand the
remaining time until 10:30 is already allocated, half of it to the
Democrats and half to us. From our side, I intend to claim our half,
and I will use it when the time arises.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The time until 10:30 is equally
divided.
Mr. DOMENICI. Does the Senator from Illinois desire to speak now? Is
that what he is saying? I am glad to let that happen.
Mr. DURBIN. Yes. I ask to be allocated the Democratic time, and I am
going to yield to the Senator from Missouri to begin that.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator is correct. The
assistant majority leader.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, might I clarify? There was no objection to
the assistant leader speaking as part of the Democratic time as it is
now allocated; is that right?
Mr. DURBIN. I would like to yield to the Senator from Missouri.
Mrs. McCASKILL. Mr. President, I would like to ask, if I could, the
minority whip one brief question before he leaves the Chamber. I notice
you all were trying to clarify the position of our colleague from
Arizona on drilling, and this is simply a yes or no question. Does
Senator McCain support drilling in ANWR?
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I am happy to respond. I was not only
clarifying his position but ensuring people understood what the
majority leader said about his position was incorrect. Senator McCain
does not support drilling in ANWR, but he does support drilling off our
coastal shores and the Outer Continental Shelf.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The assistant majority leader is
recognized.

____________________

GAS PRICES

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the motto of the Republicans in the Senate
is: Talk more, produce less. Do you know what we offered them this
week? We said to the Republicans: Here is the opportunity of a
lifetime. Do you have a position on speculation? Do you think it is an
issue? If you do, put your proposal on the floor and we will put our
proposal on the floor. We will have an equal vote requirement, equal
debate time. We will go at it and we will let the Senate decide. We are
not going to write your version of the speculation, you would not write
ours, but you have every right to do that. The Republican response was:
No, we are not interested in that. We don't think speculation is a
problem.
Well, they ought to meet with the CEOs of the major airlines. They
ought to spend a minute talking to them about what they feel because
they are paying the jet fuel costs and they are cutting back on service
and they are cutting back on employment. That is the reality of what
they face today. Speculation, manipulation is a major concern. We have
a responsible approach to it. The Republicans refuse to offer an
alternative. OK. That is their decision.
Then we said to them: Why don't you present your energy bill? The
Republican leader came to the floor with a litany of things the
Republicans believe in. For over a week we have said to them: Put it in
a bill offered on the floor. They have said: No, no. We would rather
come to the floor and complain, rather than come to the floor and
debate our approach.
I listened to the Republican leader as he came to the floor, and it
is very clear to me. They don't want a debate and a vote. They want
this issue to drag out forever and ever, amen. That is not what the
American people want. They want us to tackle this thing, offer
alternatives on the floor, debate them up or down, go forward.
It troubles me when the Republican leader repeatedly says--
incorrectly--that when it comes to energy, from the Democratic view, we
want to deal with speculation and, in his words, ``do
nothing else.'' He forgets the whole second part of this--the Energy
bill we are proposing on the Democratic side and they are going to
propose on the Republican side. We offered them that. They turned us
down.
I might also say there is no idea how many amendments the Republicans
are going to offer. Two days ago, Senator Kyl and I were on the floor,
and he said there were 25 amendments. Senator Specter walked up and
said: I have 2, so make that 27. Then Senator Kyl said: Come to think
of it, I have one too. We are up to 28. That was 2 days ago. This is
growing similar to bacteria in a petri dish as the Republicans meet in
their conference and

[[Page 16132]]

dream up more amendments. That is good. It shows a
creative mind at work, and it is a great exercise, but it isn't what
the American people are asking for.
If you have a good set of ideas, offer them. You want to bring up
more nuclear power, Senator Domenici? Put that in your package. You
want to have more offshore drilling, put it in your package. You want
to have coal to oil, put it in your package. If you believe in it,
stand and fight for it. But they will not. They will not fight for it.
They want to run. Run to the press and explain that they are not being
given enough time on the floor, if they could have a little more time,
as days burn off the calendar as they stand and complain. They can't
come up with a plan, and that is the unfortunate reality.
Then, they quote T. Boone Pickens. Mr. Pickens, I am sure, is a
gifted man. I have never met him. I have seen him on TV. He has spent a
lot of money to make sure we all get to see him. They have misquoted
him on the floor so often. I have watched that ad he is paying millions
of dollars for America to see, and I do remember the part of the ad
where he says: ``We can't drill our way out of this problem.'' Mr. T.
Boone Pickens said that.
You don't hear that from the Republican side. Their idea is we can
drill our way out of this. They forget the reality. Of all the oil in
the world, if you look at the vast quantity, we have 3 percent of it
under our control--3 percent. We use 25 percent of the oil. You can't
drill your way out of it. We know we are going to need exploration and
production, but we know we need a lot more, including conservation,
renewables, sustainable energy sources. That is the reality of what we
face.
We have made this offer to them time and again. They will not accept
it. They would rather come to the floor and complain.
When you go through the list, you see first drilling offshore.
Democrats support that. There are 34 million acres currently under
lease to oil companies for drilling they are not using. Why don't they
start drilling there since they paid for this land?
Oil shale. That is in our bill. Even though that is 15 years away, we
want to take a look at oil shale as an opportunity.
Incentives for batteries, of course we support that. There is no
debate there.
Untapped American oil. We think there is untapped American oil in
Alaska--23 million acres' worth that the oil companies aren't touching.
They should go in there and take a look, drill for it, bring it
forward.
Nuclear energy. I don't understand how Senator McConnell could come
to the floor and say we could bring gasoline prices down with more
nuclear energy. Could you picture a car being powered by nuclear
energy? I can't. If he is talking about plug-in hybrids, he ought to
clarify the example he is using.
There are plenty of things we can do. It should have started with a
good-faith offer which we made to the Republicans and, frankly, they
should have accepted.
I yield the floor to the Senator from Missouri.
Mr. DOMENICI. He can't yield the floor to the Senator. He either uses
it or it is there made available for the Republicans to use. He can't
yield to someone.
Mrs. McCASKILL addressed the Chair.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator can allocate time to
another Senator based on the time allocated to him.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I have no objection to her speaking. I
understand that the time is allocated specifically. Who has time?
Mr. DURBIN. How much time remains?
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. There is 3 minutes 45 seconds on
the majority side, 12 minutes on the minority side.
Mrs. McCASKILL. Mr. President, I will speak as in morning business,
so I am happy to yield now to the Senator from New Mexico. I am happy
to do that.
Mr. DOMENICI. I understand there is 3 minutes left for the Senator
from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. I will use it after the Senator speaks.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from New Mexico is
recognized.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I don't know where to begin. So many
things are being said by the other side. In particular, the Senator
from Illinois spoke for 10 minutes, and it is impossible for me to
answer all of the falsities he indicated to the American people in his
remarks.
I want to say that yesterday afternoon I got word from the floor of
the Senate that the American people are not going to be permitted to
have a vote by the Senate on an amendment that would open the offshore
lands owned by the American people, because the majority leader has
seen fit to use a parliamentary process--and I know the people are
confused and tired of us talking about parliamentary processes around
here, but the truth is that Senators are also getting fed up with it.
The majority leader comes along--and we all understand he has the right
to be recognized--and, when he was recognized, he offered amendments,
so that yesterday evening, as I sat preparing for today, I was told to
change your thoughts and your approach because you cannot offer any
amendments. That is an undeniable fact.
The majority leader has cloaked this bill in amendments and that is
called ``filling up the tree.'' I don't know where such an interesting
concept came from. If it were Christmas time, filling up the tree would
seem like a nice event. When you are here trying to get the Senate to
vote on whether a giant asset that belongs to the American people can
be open for drilling, it is not a very good-sounding series of words.
``Filling up the tree'' means that those who want to offer
amendments, who want to let the Senate determine the future of that 85
percent of the offshore lands of America, cannot do so. Those Senators,
on behalf of their people--every Senator represents people and all of
the people have an interest in the ownership of this land; it is a huge
piece of land. It is very valuable in terms of crude oil and natural
gas. Americans should probably have woken up this morning to go to
breakfast and to read in the paper: United States Senate permits
drilling in the offshores of continental America so the price of
gasoline can come down. That is what they should have read in the
newspapers across the land. There is no question that more than 50
Senators--Democrats and Republicans--favor opening all of those lands
to exploration; that is, drilling, and to let the Governors of the
States participate in that process so the States can share in the
royalty. That is a very simple proposition. That is the bill and that
is the issue.
Now we have been told, for their own reasons, the Democrats have said
you cannot do that, we have filled the tree. You will come to us and
prayerfully ask for permission to do anything on this bill. You will
have to seek our permission. So the Senator from Nevada can stand here
and say you can do this or that, but the truth is, what he is saying
is: If I want to let you do it, you can, because the rules of the
Senate do not permit it.
So we are unable to get a vote. That doesn't mean we are going to
quit. We are going to stay here on this floor. If, in fact, the
majority leader tries to close off debate, he will lose, because we
believe the biggest issue confronting the American people, bar
none, today is the price of oil. We think the biggest opportunity to
lower the pressure and bring down gasoline prices at the pump and cause
us to import less is to open the offshore of the United States to
drilling, plain and simple.
The majority started this issue with a bill they put in, which is
supposed to have something to do with the price of oil. It has to do
with speculation.
I send to the desk to be printed the statement of several prominent
Americans, all of whom say the problem is not speculation; the problem
is supply and demand. To affect supply and demand, you ought to be
opening the offshores, which affects supply in a big

[[Page 16133]]

way. I ask unanimous consent that this be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

``It's not speculation, it is supply and demand. We don't
have excess capacity in the world anymore, and that's what
you're seeing in oil prices.''--Warren Buffett, Chairman &
CEO, Berkshire Hathaway, 6/25/08
``There is little evidence that large investment flows into
the futures market are causing an imbalance between supply
and demand, and are therefore contributing to high oil
prices. . . . Blaming speculation is an easy solution which
avoids taking the necessary steps to improve supply-side
access and investment or to implement measures to improve
energy efficiency.''--International Energy Agency, Medium-
Term Oil Market Report, July 2008
``If financial speculation were pushing all prices above
the level consistent with the fundamentals of supply and
demand, we would expect inventories of crude oil and
petroleum products to increase as supply rose and demand
fell. But, in fact, available data on oil inventories shows
notable declines over the past year.''--Ben Bernanke,
Chairman of the Federal Reserve, 7/15/2008
``There is speculation, but speculation, under most
circumstances, is a positive thing. It provides liquidity and
allows people to hedge their risks. And it provides price
discovery. It can help allocate oil availability over time,
depending on the pattern of futures prices and so on.''--Ben
Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, 7/15/2008
``The rise in oil prices can be explained by basic economic
factors, such as limited growth in supplies in recent years,
a weakening dollar, a global surge in energy demand and a
string of production disruptions in countries like
Nigeria.''--Daniel Yergin, Chairman, Cambridge Energy
Research Associates, 6/25/08
``The truth is that increased speculation in oil futures is
not a cause of rising oil prices, but rather an effect of
those prices, which have skyrocketed due to growth in global
demand, geopolitical instability, and constricted supply in
several producing countries.''--John Chapman, Researcher at
the American Enterprise Institute, 7/16/2008
``If Congress is literally going over the CFTC's head and
talking about imposing legislation or making the CFTC
exercise its emergency powers to limit excess speculation
when they don't even know what that means. I don't even know
what excess speculation means.''--Michael Haigh, senior
commodity analyst at Societe Generale Corporate and
Investment Banking and former associate chief economist with
the CFTC, 6/30/2008
``There's no evidence of speculative influence. Speculators
are not contributing to the demand for physical oil as they
almost always roll positions prior to delivery.''--Craig
Pirrong, professor of finance at the University of Houston,
member, CFTC energy markets advisory committee, 6/24/08
``On any given day, expectations determine the price; but
the spot market also has to clear, and the way this happens
is that excess supply must be added to physical stocks. Even
with fairly inelastic supply and demand, any large
speculative deviation from the ``fundamental'' price should
show up in a noticeable increase in inventories.''--Paul
Krugman, New York Times columnist, 6/28/08
``To date, the PWG has not found valid evidence to suggest
that high crude oil prices over the long term are a direct
result of speculation or systematic market manipulation by
traders. Rather, prices appear to be reflecting tight global
supplies and the growing world demand for oil, particularly
in emerging economies. As a result, Congress should proceed
cautiously before drastically changing the regulation of the
energy markets.''--President's Working Group on Financial
Markets, Letter to Senator Saxby Chambliss, 7/21/2008
``The Task Force's preliminary assessment is that current
oil prices and the increase in oil prices between January
2003 and June 2008 are largely due to fundamental supply and
demand factors. During this same period, activity on the
crude oil futures market--as measured by the number of
contracts outstanding, trading activity, and the number of
traders--has increased significantly. While these increases
broadly coincided with the run-up in crude oil prices, the
Task Force's preliminary analysis to date does not support
the proposition that speculative activity has systematically
driven changes in oil prices.''--Interagency Task Force on
Commodity Markets, Interim Report on Crude Oil, 7/22/2008

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I have been here for 36 years. I chose
this year to leave. When an energy bill came forth on the floor and we
were going to be able to amend it, I thought we were going to be able
to talk about all of the issues, get together with the Democrats and
see how many would join us in a major piece of legislation, and I was
rather excited. I thought the American people might be pleased with us
again, because we were going to do something good.
Do you know what. This 9-percent approval rating of the Senate is not
there for no good cause. We are, today, adding to that negative image
when the American people try to understand what is going on. We were
told--and we applauded when we heard it--that this great big piece of
property we own--everything 3 miles out from the shoreline of America
is owned by the people. There is oil and gas there. For some reason, we
closed it down 27 years ago, and every year we put that moratorium on
again. It is time to open that and say to the world that we don't have
a total solution, but we have a lot of oil and gas we ought to put into
the mix and let our companies get to work on, trying to drill and see
how it will affect the price of oil.
Some people are saying, well, there are already a lot of oil and gas
leases on the Outer Continental Shelf; why don't we force those oil
companies to do better at using it? Let me make that proposition clear.
Eighty-five percent of the offshore land is tied up in the moratorium
and 15 percent is being used. That 15 percent that is being used is all
subject to leases which say that if you don't produce on time, you lose
the lease. We don't need any further management in that regard. It is
already managed by a ``use it or lose it'' clause in every lease that
anyone has on any of the lands that are currently on lease to American
companies, or a consortia of American companies and others. So that is
a joke when we talk about the fact that we will get more by rearranging
that. We need to open the portions that are closed. We need a thorough
debate on a number of amendments, and our leaders have said there are
at least five or six of them. We don't need a long period of time, but
we need an open and free amendment process that we could use. We could
go to the other side and get some bipartisan things going. I believe
there are many Democrats who want to join us.
It serves the wishes of the majority leader to close off debate,
because even Democrats cannot join in amendments to do anything now,
because the tree is filled--and it is not with Christmas presents. It
is filled with amendments so we cannot offer any more amendments. In
other words, we are dead in the water in trying to offer what Americans
expected--amendments that will open the offshore to drilling.
Mr. President, as I understand it, I have how much time, 3 minutes?
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Yes.
Mr. DOMENICI. I think Senators understand that this Senator from New
Mexico, as part of the last 6 years while serving on the Energy
Committee, has been party to producing three major energy bills that
have all been good for the country. They all have ended up being
bipartisan. They all required a lot of time on the floor. I could not
come down here and put in an amendment and say it is done. It took some
time. We wanted to use this time to thoroughly debate the appropriate
options to opening the offshore for drilling.
We thought Americans, who are watching the price of crude oil come
down since the President lifted the Executive closures that existed,
would like to see the job finished. We thought they would like to see
it opened totally, taking off all of the congressional hangups, the
congressional moratorium.
I think Americans deserve that. They deserve something positive. They
are very worried. The economy is suffering because of the $700 billion a
year that goes to foreign countries. It is taken from us for the crude
oil we buy. While that foreign country grows, America dwindles. We get
poorer; the world gets richer. I don't know how much longer we can
stand it. We didn't want to stand it too much longer. We wanted to put
in our offsets offshore and let them join in this war we are in,
instead of letting us die by attrition as we send our money overseas.
It doesn't seem anybody in America should get confused. Democrats can
make laundry lists of things that happened and put up a sign in the
Senate saying we are the ones blocking this. How could we be blocking
this when we

[[Page 16134]]

are not in control? The majority leader stood up and
locked this bill up with his amendments, so we cannot offer amendments
without his approval. We don't intend to do that. That is not the way
to do business.
The American people expect us to have debates and up-or-down votes on
this issue, with every Senator expressing his or her will on what
happens to this big asset. That is what we want.
I thank the Chair.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Missouri is
recognized.
Mrs. McCASKILL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in
morning business.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mrs. McCASKILL. Mr. President, I thank my friend from New Mexico. I
know his service in this body is one that every American should admire.
He is a good Senator for his State. He has been a warm and friendly
senior Senator to this very junior Senator from Missouri. I appreciate
his friendship very much.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I thank the Senator. I will not use her
time, I will use mine. It has been a pleasure since I first met the
Senator. I don't always remember all of the new names, but the Senator
has the same name as one of my daughters. We have become friends. I
admire the Senator from Missouri too, and say I do believe she is
learning to be a Senator very fast. I am proud to be her friend. I
thank her for her kind words.

Audit Report

Mrs. McCASKILL. Mr. President, yesterday there was an incredibly dark
cloud that passed over Washington. I think the saddest thing about this
very dark cloud is the fact that there wasn't an immediate outcry from
every corner of this building and every office in the Pentagon. One of
the most frustrating things about Washington is the attention span of
so many in Washington and the search for the headline that is the most
sensational. So it is no wonder that news about auditing doesn't bust
out.
I come to the floor to try to emphasize the crisis we are facing
right now in terms of the Pentagon and auditing of taxpayer dollars.
Let me briefly explain the two agencies involved. One is the Defense
Contract Audit Agency. What is DCAA? That is part of the problem.
Nobody knows what it is. Nobody knows what it does. DCAA is the
auditing agency in the Department of Defense that is responsible for
auditing the contractors. Think about that for a minute: 3,500 people
are employed by this Agency, and they are our eyes and ears into
contractor practices at the Department of Defense. We are talking
serious money here. We are talking about hundreds and hundreds of
billions--with a ``b''--of dollars.
One would think that if we have 3,500 people working full time to
audit the contractors, we should all feel good about that and, frankly,
before yesterday, I kind of felt good about it. As I learned about all
of the auditors of the Department of Defense, I thought: I am glad we
have an agency with the responsibility to get to the bottom of the
prices that were charged by contractors, to get to the bottom of the
money that comes out of our Treasury for contractors--until yesterday.
The other agency involved is the GAO. I know the initials ``GAO'' are
thrown around all the time. Let me explain what GAO is. GAO is the
Government Accountability Office. They are what I would call the papa
bear of auditors in Government. They are the auditors who look at all
parts of Government, many times in response to a request by Congress
but many times in response to a hotline call they have gotten from
people within Government.
They start getting hotline calls about the practices at DCAA. This is
enough to worry an auditing agency, that they are getting hotline calls
on an auditing agency. This is enough to get their attention. So GAO
started this audit of the Defense Contract Audit Agency based on
complaints to their fraud hotline.
Here is the allegation. Are you ready for this? Here is the
allegation: that these audits were being changed with no factual basis
at the direction of supervisors, without evidence to support the
changes, to help the contractors. This is a wildly sensational claim
within the world of auditing. This is the kind of claim that, frankly,
most auditors would probably not take seriously because it is so
outrageous. But because there had been so many calls to the hotline,
GAO went to work, over 100 interviews, months and months of work, and
yesterday they issued their report.
They looked at 13 different audits named in the complaints and found
that in every single audit, favorable findings for the contractors had
no backup in the workpapers. What does that mean? If you are an
auditor, your job is to find the facts. Everything you put in an audit
has to be backed up by what are called workpapers. That means that
anybody at any time could go in and find the factual evidence to
support every line in the audit. That is part of Government auditing
standards.
What else did GAO find? You are not going to believe this. You are
not going to believe how bad this is. They found that supervisors
dropped findings and changed opinions without the evidence to support
it. They found several instances where auditors were threatened if they
did not change their findings to support what the supervisors wanted
and if they did not change their findings to favor the contractors. GAO
found this practice to be so pervasive at two of the three locations,
they called it ``a pattern of frequent management actions that served
to intimidate auditors and create an abusive environment.'' These
auditors were intimidated by supervisors and made to tell them what
they were telling GAO. So not only were the supervisors on the auditors
to do findings favorable to the contractors, they got on them when they
started talking to GAO. They intimidated them into telling them what
they were telling the investigators, the auditors from GAO. Their
supervisors made them feel their jobs were threatened.
At one location, auditors were sometimes given 20 days to finish an
audit, and if it wasn't enough time to do the audit work, they said:
Just do it; just do it with what you have.
Supervisors admitted to not reviewing the workpapers. That doesn't
sound like a big deal, right? Who reviews workpapers? Let me tell you,
in the world of auditing, it is a very big deal.
This is how an audit works. The field auditors gather the papers, the
factual information, and then it goes through a series of reviews and
checks. It is ultimate quality control in an audit. It is unheard of
for an audit to be issued without review up the line. That review is
how you cull the information that is incorrect and make sure everything
in that audit is factual and objective.
Here is a very good example of how serious and systemic the problem
is. DCAA actually agreed with a contractor, one of the five largest
contractors in the country, ahead of time what items would be reviewed
for the audit. It is like giving a kid the answers to the test. There
is no point in doing an audit if you tell the auditee ahead of time:
OK, we are going to test you on this.
Here is the amazing thing. Even with the inside information, the DCAA
auditors found the process to be inadequate with the contractor. Did
they issue an
unfavorable opinion? Oh, no, they didn't issue an unfavorable opinion.
Instead, the auditor was removed by a supervisor. The new auditor was
threatened with personnel action if the audit was not changed to favor
the contractor.
In every single one, all 13 audits that were reviewed, the GAO found
that Government auditing standards were not followed.
There is a book in auditing called the Yellow Book. It is the bible
of auditing. It is the generally accepted Government auditing
standards, and every Government auditor is required to follow these
standards. Once again, auditors have a lot of professional pride about
the objectivity of their work and

[[Page 16135]]

about the standards they follow. It
would not be effective if you had auditors who were auditing the
government in Michigan and auditors who were auditing the government in
San Francisco and auditors who were auditing the Pentagon all using
different methodology to do audits. So this standard is, in fact,
revered within the Government auditing world.
Here is what is amazing. Thirteen audits were looked at. Did one of
them not meet standards? No. Did two of them not meet standards? No.
Every single audit failed Government auditing standards--13 of 13, 100
percent. This is mind-boggling, that we would have 3,500 people
watching Defense Department contractors in this country and every audit
that was looked at was failed by Government auditing standards. Nine of
the thirteen had audit opinions changed without documentation and
without workpapers to support the charges. Three had evidence that
showed the DCAA auditor trying to perform his or her job and his
independence impaired by his supervisors. Nine of the thirteen audits
had conclusions that were not supported by the work performed by the
auditors.
They got caught. They have gotten caught in what could be the biggest
auditing scandal in the history of this town. And I am not
exaggerating. I will guarantee you, as auditors around the country
learn about this, they are going to have disbelief and raw anger that
this agency has impugned the integrity of Government auditors
everywhere by these kinds of irresponsible actions.
By the way, auditors are very conservative with other auditors. Every
auditing agency has peer review. By the way, GAO has always passed all
of its peer review without any problem. But I know when we were getting
peer reviewed when I was the State auditor in Missouri, it was a very
nervous time because auditors come into your office from all over the
country and they pore through your work. They go through your
workpapers. They check all of your reviews. They, in fact, as an
objective third party, look and make sure you are doing objective
professional government auditing work. They are very conservative
because it is peer to peer, right? It is hard to criticize your peers.
It is hard to call out another auditor. That is why this is such a big
deal. It is damning. This audit is damning of DCAA and the job it
should be doing to protect Government taxpayers from the incredible
waste and inefficiency in the contracting of the Department of Defense.
So when you get an audit, another part of the audit is you respond to
the audit. The auditee gets an opportunity to speak in the audit. It is
a very good thing because the auditee, if they firmly believe the audit
is not justified, has an ability to give their side of the story. It
also allows the opportunity to make sure you are exchanging
information. So that response in the audit is also a part of Government
auditing standards.
Let me tell you, when they got this audit, it was a dark day for
them, and they had a choice. DCAA had a choice. They could have come
forward and said: We have a big problem here and we have to clean
house, and announced they were firing people in all of these offices
and that supervisors were being fired and that they were going to clean
up their act. That was one choice they had, to admit they had been
caught in this scandal and to admit they would make it better. But what
did they do? What did DCAA do as a result of this incredible audit
report? They ``disagreed'' with the totality of the audit.
Here is what is so insulting about them disagreeing with the totality
of the audit. They have no evidence to back it up. They have nothing to
refute. The voluminous--this is not a small audit, this is page after
page of documentation. They dispute the facts about the contractor
being given prior notice that he would be audited in the above case
even though there is clear evidence to support this conclusion in the
DCAA workpapers.
They said, believe it or not--wait until you hear this:

They are currently operating at a satisfactory level of
compliance with Government auditing standards.

Satisfactory? Thirteen out of thirteen failing Government standards,
and that is satisfactory? How dare they. How dare they say that is
satisfactory. They flatly stated they don't believe any supervisors
harassed or intimidated staff or willfully removed findings. The
evidence is there. The fact they are denying the evidence is there
shows the level of dysfunction in this auditing agency. They don't seem
to be too concerned about zero percent of these audits meeting
Government standards.
The Department of Defense has been on the high-risk list of this
Government for more than a decade. Scandal after scandal has rolled out
of the Department of Defense on contracting.
I took a trip to Iraq on contract oversight, and with an auditor's
eye, meeting with the people who oversee the contracts in Iraq. And I
will tell you conservatively--and auditors are very conservative--
conservatively, I think we have burned up more than $150 billion in
pure contracting abuse.
We have had hearings where weapon system after weapon system comes in
100 percent more expensive, 3 or 4 years off time. And all this time we
have been wasting hundreds and billions of dollars, the fox was in the
chicken coop. The Defense Contracting Auditing Agency has been indicted
in the strongest terms by their peers at GAO.
This situation demands hearings. And if somebody doesn't lose their
job at DCAA before nightfall, the problem is more serious than anybody
in this Chamber can possibly imagine. Because they think they can sweat
it out. They think we are not going to pay attention. They think we are
going to move on to the next headline, the next campaign stop. They
think we are so worried about all the other problems that no one is
going to notice this auditing agency has been disclosed and exposed as
being fundamentally corrupt in the way they issue audits.
It calls into question every single audit done by this agency. And if
we don't take it seriously, if we don't give it our attention, if we
don't demand that the fox get out of the chicken coop, and we start
taking care of taxpayer dollars, ultimately it is our national
security. All of the needs we have for our men and women who fight for
us, all the needs of our active military, all the technology we need to
stay secure and safe, all of it is so important to our Nation. Yet what
we have found out in the last 24 hours is no one is paying attention to
the way we are spending that money. It makes me sick to my stomach.
I am angry. And I will tell you, this Senator is not going away on
this issue. If I have to stand on this floor every day for the next 6
months, I will do it, to get someone fired at that agency and to get
them to clean up their act.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Pryor). The Senator from Washington.

Energy

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I come to the floor this morning to talk
about the fact that the Senate is going to have an opportunity to vote
on cloture to move us to an important bill that will address the issue
most of my constituents in the State of Washington, as well as all
those in the country, are facing, and that is the high price of
gasoline today--$4.45 is what I paid last weekend when I went home to
Washington State. This is having an impact on our families, on our
communities, and on all of our businesses--on everyone.
It is important that we address this issue. The bill that is being
offered, which we hope to get past cloture and filibuster from the
other side, is not a silver bullet, but it is an attempt to get at what
we believe is a fundamental part of the solution, and that is the
manipulation of the oil marketers by a few greedy traders, thereby
increasing the cost you and I pay at the pump. We are not asking for a
large energy bill, but we are saying it is important that we address
this issue in a way that will produce relief as quickly as possible in
some way for our consumers as we head out a week from now for our
August break.
I have been listening to this debate, and I have to say I am fairly
surprised

[[Page 16136]]

by all of those who come to the floor and say: Wait, wait,
wait, wait, wait. Unless we get to offer amendment after amendment
after amendment on drilling more, and drilling more, and drilling more,
then we are not going to allow the Senate to deal with the issue of
speculation, which Members on both sides agree is critical that we
address. I think it is important that we step back for a minute and go
back in history and talk about energy and this Senate's history over
the last 8 years and this White House's history over the last 8 years.
Democrats understand there are short-term solutions for the crisis
facing us, but we also need long-term solutions because we believe, at
the end of the day, that we have to decrease our dependence on oil. We
have to decrease our dependence on oil, otherwise this Senate body, 10
years from now, will again be debating whether to open up more
drilling. Meanwhile, we are all supposed to ride our bikes until we
have more oil out there again, and then the next generation gets to
debate oil again. We want to break this cycle. We want to get to long-
term energy independence. We want to create new alternatives for
people. We want that new technology to be invested in so that consumers
10 years from now, and the next generation of Senators who are here and
consumers out across the country, don't have to listen to this debate
again. We can get there, but it is not easy.
Eight years ago, this country elected two oilmen to the White House.
No surprise: Every energy debate since then has focused on how we can
drill more for oil. Here we are today, a week before we leave for the
August recess, and those on the other side want to take us right back
to drilling again. Let me remind our colleagues what Senators on this
side of the aisle have been doing for some time. When we got the
majority a year and a half ago, we said: Okay, with the majority, we
want to begin making inroads on focusing on energy independence which,
by the way, will reduce the cost to everybody as the consumption
decreases. We looked at CAFE standards. We were successful, not in
doing it quickly, but at least beginning to make progress on setting
CAFE standards so our cars will be using less fuel. That is part of
reducing the price of gas in the long term and our dependence on oil.
We also looked at an energy tax package. In fact, we brought an
energy tax package to the floor of the Senate that would create
incentives for alternative energy. It costs a lot to develop new
technology for energy. We said it is time for the Government to put its
backing there and provide tax credits for these companies so they can
do the research that is necessary to get that alternative technology
out there. What did the other side do? Filibustered. Blocked it. And
today, those investors are not out there investing in new technology.
Democrats said we need to move this bill. It is part of our plan in the
long run to reduce the price of oil to create those alternatives. We
were blocked on the other side from doing that.
A few months ago, Democrats said: It is important to look at how we
can stop this increasing, spiraling cost as soon as possible. We put
together an energy package, and one of the key components was focusing
on the oil companies, who were reporting record profits at the time--
and by the way, still are today--and we tried to repeal some of the oil
companies' tax breaks they currently get so that those costs would go
back to consumers and reduce our prices. What happened? We brought the
bill up, and it was blocked by the other side. Why? Because they wanted
to focus on drilling more oil.
We have tried many ways on this side to focus on the larger picture
of energy and how we can reduce consumption, how we can get to energy
independence, how we can focus on making sure those high gas prices
that my constituents and others pay today--and by the way, when this
administration took office 8 years ago, gas was $1.46 a gallon, but
because of the energy bills that have been pushed by the other side
that focus on drilling, it is now $4.45 a gallon in my home State. Yet
here we are today, as we try to focus on speculation in the markets,
and what does the other side say? Oh no, we need to drill for more for
oil. Well, that hasn't worked in the past. We have already, several
years ago, added an additional--and I see my colleague from Illinois
here on the floor--I believe it was an additional 8 million acres to be
leased in this country. We added that. Did it reduce the price of gas
at the pump?
Mr. DURBIN. Will the Senator, through the Chair, yield for a
question?
Mrs. MURRAY. I would be happy to yield to the Senator from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. Is it not only true that we have 68 million acres of land
we have leased to the oil companies, which they are paying us money to
lease in order to find oil and gas, but they are not doing anything
with it--some 34 million offshore, on the Outer Continental Shelf and
some 33 million onshore that they are now leasing?
The Republican side of the aisle has become a one-trick pony--keep
drilling, keep drilling, keep drilling. We know if we decided today to
drill on any acreage here, it would be 8 to 14 years before we would
see any oil coming from it. So this notion not only flies in the face
of the 68 million acres they currently have, but it doesn't solve the
problem.
As the Senator from Washington said, it makes the problem worse
because we don't face the realities of what we need to do to have a
national energy policy.
Mrs. MURRAY. The Senator from Illinois is absolutely correct. Every
time we have come out here to try to broaden the energy debate and to
bring down the price of gasoline and get to energy independence, we
have heard from the other side: Oh, no, there is only one answer, and
that is drill more.
We have given them that. In fact, yes, the oil companies have 68
million acres of land today that can be drilled, but they are choosing
not to. Why? Because if they increase the supply, the price is going to
drop. So what good does it do for us to give them even more of our
Federal lands, because their benefit is keeping the price high.
Mr. DURBIN. If the Senator from Washington will yield for another
observation, she noted that when we elected President Bush and Vice
President Cheney we brought two people in from the oil industry, and
coincidentally, during this two-term administration, profits of the oil
companies in America have reached historic high levels at the expense
of our economy and families. The Republicans, the President's party,
want to end this administration by giving them the biggest farewell
gift anyone could ever wish for in the oil industry--millions and
millions more acres so that they can, at their pace and in their time,
decide to drill on.
It would seem to me, if you are honest about the oil companies and
what they have done to this economy, this is the last thing we should
be doing. We should be holding them accountable for the prices they
charge, the profits they are reporting, and what they have done to the
American economy. So I ask the Senator from Washington: The
alternatives we have talked about over the years--fuel efficiency for
cars, more efficiency in the appliances we use, the buildings we build,
all of this is part of the big energy picture, is it not? It isn't just
about keeping oil companies happy.
Mrs. MURRAY. Well, I say to the Senator from Illinois, he is
absolutely correct. In fact, in the past few days, a
headline from Reuters read: ``ConocoPhillips' Earnings Rise With Record
Oil Prices.''
The oil companies are making a lot of money, so what is the other
side's answer to every energy debate we have? Give them more money.
I say to my colleague from Illinois, I know he goes to the
President's State of the Union Addresses every January, as I do, and we
sit in the House Chamber and listen to what the President is presenting
to us. I wonder if the Senator from Illinois remembers 2\1/2\ years
ago, the President's third State of the Union, I believe it was--and I
rose with excitement when I heard the President say this to us:

Keeping America competitive requires affordable energy. And
here we have a serious problem:

[[Page 16137]]

Now, this is the President of the United States in his State of the
Union speech.

America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from
unstable parts of the world. The best way to break an
addiction is through technology.

These are not my words, but those of the President of the United
States. Yet every time we have tried to bring a bill to the floor to
break our addiction to oil, we are stopped because the other side wants
to drill more oil.
So I say to my colleague from Illinois, does it feel to him as though
we are trying to break our addiction to oil here?
Mr. DURBIN. I would respond to the Senator from Washington, through
the Chair, and say that I think America understands this. Sure, we are
going to be drilling oil in America--we need to, for exploration and
for production--but we know we only have 3 percent of the world's
supply of oil--3 percent--and we use 25 percent of the oil. So we can't
drill our way out of this.
Whether it is T. Boone Pickens or some friend of mine in central
Illinois, it is obvious: You have to look for other solutions, and
those solutions mean the oil companies are not going to be the answer
to every question. Unfortunately, the Republican side of the aisle,
time and time and time again, all they have to suggest is drill more
oil and make more money for the oil companies.
That isn't the answer to America's energy problem. If it were the
answer, we would have seen, as the Senator said, gasoline prices coming
down as we made more acreage available for drilling over the last
several years. It has not happened. They have gone up dramatically.
Mrs. MURRAY. The Senator from Illinois is absolutely correct. I have
listened to this debate, and it is not just the debate today on
speculation, about whether we should do that. It is whether we should
bring energy tax credits, whether we should repeal oil company tax
breaks and whether we can invest in alternative energy. Every time, the
only answer we get from the other side is, no, we are not going to do
that. We want to drill more.
I would say to my colleague that drilling for oil is a false promise
to the American people that it will bring down their prices
substantially as we head off to our August break. Even their own
Presidential candidate has said drilling oil only brings psychological
benefit. We don't need any mental health care. We need real reductions
at the pump. Even President Bush's own energy experts say drilling more
oil will not produce a significant decrease in the price at the pump.
As I truly believe and I think most people understand in this
country, until we invest in long-term energy independence, all we are
going to do is see the oil companies get more profits and our prices go
up. The bill we are offering today and hope to move to will begin to
deal with that and that addresses the issue of speculation. I hope we
move to that.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Brown). The time of the majority has
expired.
The Senator from Wyoming is recognized.
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the
extraordinary impact of rising gasoline prices, the extraordinary
impact it is having on all Americans, and the parliamentary games of
those on the other side of the aisle.
The airline industry, truckers, ranchers, families who must travel to
and from work and school, families going to buy groceries, all of them
are experiencing dramatic increases in the cost of energy. These
soaring gasoline prices offer a glimpse at the effect home heating
costs will have on the American family budget this coming winter.
Today's energy crisis is focused on prices at the pump. But the
Nation's energy concerns stretch well beyond the pump. In the coming
weeks and months, rising energy prices will be seen in the monthly
bills for home heating, natural gas, electricity, and heating oil. In
fact, this month, in Washington, DC, right here in this Capitol
Building, we are operating our own Senate offices under an electric
brownout advisory. This is recent evidence that our electric grid is
stressed. When it comes to energy, we need it all.
We need to develop domestic supplies of oil and gas. We need to
develop nuclear energy. We need to develop renewable energy, such as
wind and solar. We need to develop America's most affordable, secure,
and abundant energy supply, and that is coal. In fact, coal to liquid
offers great promise in reducing America's reliance on foreign oil
imports.
We must also develop concerted policies to promote increased
efficiencies, to promote increased conservation, and to reduce waste.
In summary, we must find more and use less.
On the subject of soaring gasoline prices, I must ask my colleagues:
When is enough enough? When will this body be willing to address the
underlying issue of both supply and demand. Many are calling for
change. Few are offering meaningful solutions. Here are a few examples.
Some on the other side of the aisle want to tax their way to lower
oil prices. Increased taxes will result in higher prices and less oil
and gas production, not more. Taxes will stifle our economic security.
Taxes will not encourage economic security.
Many on the other side of the aisle think litigation is the way to
bring down prices at the pump. The proposals I am cosponsoring choose
innovation over litigation.
Some on the other side of the aisle claim we can regulate our way to
lower prices at the pump. They want to do it by penalizing oil and gas
leaseholders. This approach shows very little understanding of the
energy development process. This approach offers no help, no help at
all with the bureaucratic maze and roadblocks to finding more energy.
Some propose restrictions on price gouging by gas station owners, but
those same individuals fail to show any actual evidence of price
gouging. In fact, the margins for the gas station retailers in this
country are being squeezed. Rather than increased regulation, I support
proposals that invest in inspiration, in ingenuity, and in productivity
gains. I support technology gains that unleash the power of the private
sector to develop short- and long-term energy solutions.
Some want to impose heavy-handed Government mandates to nationalize
the speed limit. Some are suggesting 55 miles an hour. I bring along a
copy of a newspaper that hardly ever makes it to the streets of
Wyoming. It is the New York Times, and this is this morning's paper.
While the people of Wyoming do not read it, reporters from that paper
actually went to Wyoming and covered Sheridan, WY.
There are five wonderful colored pictures of Wyoming and there is a
nice map and it talks about Wyoming. On the front page of today's New
York Times, it talks about the Kerns family, a wonderful family in the
Sheridan, WY, area. They were at a town meeting I recently had and they
were talking about ranching. This summarizes it. When I hear people
propose a 55-mile-an-hour limit, talk about ranch families such as the
Kerns--conservative, self-sufficient, and wanting mostly to be left
alone.
That is what it is all about in Wyoming--conservative, self-
sufficient, and wanting to be left alone. We do not need Washington
telling us how to drive and how fast. We can make those decisions for ourselves.
I have the belief in the ability of Americans to choose for
themselves. I am confident the people of America, not Washington, will
make the right decisions. History has proven that American's self-
reliance is an effective tool against rising energy prices.
American families right now are conserving in record numbers. They
are carpooling, they are cutting back on the miles they drive, and they
are purchasing more fuel-efficient vehicles. Statistics show that this
year the year-over-year gasoline use is down roughly 2 percent. It is
the steepest drop in demand in the last 17 years. American families are
responding and they are responding without being told by the

[[Page 16138]]

Federal Government to inflate their tires. Yes, that is what I heard yesterday
in an Energy Committee hearing from an official: It is time to inflate
your tires.
American families are conserving. They are doing so without far-
reaching Government mandates. American families are demanding and
purchasing more fuel-efficient cars regardless of any timeline for
energy efficiency standards Congress may impose.
In fact, American families have done much more than simply conserve
on energy in the past several months. Some have dealt with serious job
losses. Many have struggled with housing deflation. We are all facing
inflation at the grocery store.
You say: Is that happening everywhere? Wyoming has been in the news
today. First, a front-page story in the New York Times and now a large
story in the Wall Street Journal today; the headline: ``Want to See
Inflation's Pressures? Try Wyoming, and Its $1.14 Bagels.''
There is a nice picture of a friend of mine, a bakery owner, Marsha
Asbury, in Casper, and first it talks about this city. It talks about
``this wind-raked city on the plains.'' It tells you we are committed
to renewable sources of energy because we have a lot of wind in
Wyoming. But they talk about gasoline prices.

Gasoline prices, too, have risen sharply as they have
across the country. But it is the price of--

Actually it is what Ms. Asbury puts into her bagels that is causing
her the trouble because it is causing the inflation. It says:

Most of her ingredients are shipped in from nearby states.
The prices have jumped dramatically this past year, as
suppliers struggle to recoup the high cost of trucking items
to Wyoming.
Heavy items have increased in price the most. The canned
jalapenos and pumpkin that Ms. Asbury uses for her specialty
bagels; the canned apples, for strudel; the sugar and flour--
all are up 35 percent in the past year. Butter and milk are
up 25 percent.

All because of the cost of energy and transportation fuels.
As it says:

Still, the rising cost at the pump hits hard, because
Wyoming drivers put an awful lot of miles on their pickups
and sport utility vehicles as they traverse this sparsely
populated state.

Yes, American families have moved beyond simply conserving. Now many
are sacrificing. Despite the resilient response of the American people,
there is still no meaningful action from this Congress to address the
fundamental supply and demand for foreign oil. The Senate leadership on
the other side of the aisle will not allow a debate on bills that will
actually increase American energy supplies. Each of the provisions to
increase American energy offered by this side would be coupled with
measures to improve conservation, to promote energy-efficient measures.
To be very clear, I agree with some of the components of the
speculation bill before us. In fact, several of these provisions were
included in legislation I have cosponsored. Yet, as a matter of
principle, I believe the Senate must act on a set of solutions rather
than pursue a piecemeal approach. It is not simply the soaring prices,
but it is America's reliance, America's dependency on foreign imports.
Congressional leadership is opposed to even debating increasing
American exploration and production. With more American supply, there
is a more secure energy future.
We have seen the same old responses from the other side of the aisle.
They approach the current energy crisis, such as nearly every other
policy challenge, with more taxation, with more regulation, and with
more litigation. Rural States such as Wyoming are especially hit hard
by soaring prices. Mass transit is not an option. Prices are high and
the hundreds and hundreds of letters I received on this issue are a
testament to the real pain. Wyoming does contribute greatly to
America's energy needs. We are the largest producer of coal in the
country; the largest producer of uranium; the second largest source of
onshore natural gas; and we have world-class wind resources.
The citizens of Wyoming get it. We have been involved in domestic
energy production and transmission for decades.
The other side of the aisle simply says no to domestic energy
exploration; no to American energy. America faces an energy crisis and
an economic crisis. Continuing to rely on increasing amounts of foreign
oil leverages our country's future. It is time to focus on an American
response: American energy efficiencies, American conservation, and,
yes, American energy exploration. Our country deserves better and our
children deserve better.
The massive transfer of wealth that is happening every day, from our
country to overseas, is putting our children and our grandchildren's
future at risk.
When is enough enough? I am asking those opposing American
development, how much transfer of wealth is enough? How many hundreds
of billions of American dollars must we send to foreign nations to buy
their oil? How much of our Nation's great wealth must we transfer
before it is acceptable to develop American resources? Is it $100
billion? Is it $200 billion? Is it $300 billion? Apparently not.
Some on the other side of the aisle do not want to allow American
energy production through deep sea exploration, through oil shale
development, through streamlined permitting. Their so-called responses
leave America more and more reliant on foreign countries to provide for
America's energy. We can do better and we can do so in an
environmentally sensitive manner, as we have done for the 118 years we
have been a State in Wyoming.
There have been extraordinary technological developments in oil and
gas exploration and development. Provisions to address excess
speculation must be coupled with added supply and added conservation.
We must find more and use less. The rhetoric from the other side is all
about change. I think those blocking American solutions to foreign
energy dependence would do well to change their minds, change their
policy prescriptions, and change their approach on energy policy;
otherwise, this Congress will only be leaving American families with
change in their pockets at the end of each month.
I believe Americans want meaningful solutions, not merely change.
There is a difference. American energy is the most important issue
facing the American people today. American families are sacrificing. At
a minimum, at an absolute minimum, those same families deserve real
action from this Congress.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Dakota is recognized.
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I congratulate my colleague from Wyoming
for his comments. His State of Wyoming and my State of South Dakota
share a border. We have a lot of very similar ways of making a living.
We share a commonality when it comes to the people we represent, their
values. And he is exactly on point when he talks about the importance
of energy to a State like Wyoming and a State like South Dakota and its
impact on the economy and how families in our States are struggling and
sacrificing with this extraordinary challenge that faces our Nation
today, and that is the high cost of energy.
I want to speak to that subject today as well because on Tuesday,
July 22, the Interagency Task Force on Commodity Markets released its
Interim Report on Crude Oil. I think it is important and it bears on
the debate we are having in the Senate today because the primary purpose of the bill
that is before us, as put forward by the Democratic leadership as a
solution to energy, is to focus on the very narrow issue of speculation
in the marketplace.
Well, the task force is chaired by the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission and includes staff members from the Departments of
Agriculture, Energy, and the Treasury, the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Securities and
Exchange Commission.
Although its final report is not expected until September, I think
the interim report provides some valuable insight on the energy markets
and the record increase that we are seeing in

[[Page 16139]]

oil prices. The report concludes that record oil prices are caused by
the simple economic laws of supply and demand.
The report states:

Current oil prices and the increase in oil prices between
January of 2003 and June of 2008 are largely due to
fundamental supply and demand factors.

The report describes that worldwide demand for petroleum has greatly
increased over recent years due to population growth and rising
incomes.
Specifically, the report states:

World economic activity has expanded to close to 5 percent
per year since the year 2004, marking the strongest
performance in two decades. Between 2004 and 2007, global oil
consumption grew by 3.9 percent, driven largely by rising
demand in emerging markets that are both growing rapidly and
shifting toward oil-intensive activities.

It continues to say:

China, India, and the Middle East are among the fastest
growing in the world; together they have accounted for nearly
two-thirds of the rise in world oil consumption since 2004.

The report also states:

Since 2003, world oil consumption growth has averaged 1.8
percent per year, representing an estimated 1 million barrels
per day in 2008.

On the supply side, on the other side of the equation, the report
also details how the worldwide supply of oil is inadequate. Both non-
OPEC and OPEC supplies are failing to keep pace with increasing demand.
The report states:

In the past 3 years, non-OPEC production growth has slowed
to levels well below historical averages, and world surplus
capacity has fallen below historical norms. Preliminary
inventory data also shows that the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) stocks have fallen below
1996-2002 levels.

The report continues:

World oil consumption growth has simply outpaced non-OPEC
production growth every year since 2003. OPEC production is
also falling behind.

The report describes the failure to meet what they call the ``call on
OPEC,'' which is the difference between global demand for oil and oil
produced by non-OPEC countries.

Since 2003, OPEC oil production has grown by only 2.4
million barrels per day while the ``call on OPEC'' has
increased by 4.4 million barrels per day. As a result, the
world oil market balance has tightened significantly.

Recently, the President's Working Group on Financial Markets
reinforced the Interagency Task Force's conclusion. This working group
consists of the Secretary of the Treasury, Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, U.S. Security and Exchange Commission, and the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
In a recent letter to congressional leadership, the Working Group on
Financial Markets stated:

Prices appear to be reflecting tight global supplies and
the growing world demand for oil, particularly in emerging
economies.

The Interagency Task Force and the President's Financial Working
Group have concluded what several Members of Congress and, I think,
what the majority of the American people have known for a long time: we
have a supply and demand problem. The solution to that problem is to
find more energy, to produce more and to use less.
Now, with regard to the supply solution, we have lots of solutions
that are out there. We have talked about the North Slope of Alaska. We
know there are about 10 billion barrels of oil on the North Slope of
Alaska. We have had numerous votes since I have been in the Senate, and
prior to that in my service in the House, on opening the North Slope of
Alaska to more production. Every time, it gets defeated by the
opponents.
In fact, in 1995, it was actually passed by Congress, and it was at
the time vetoed by President Clinton. If it had not been vetoed back
then, we would have an additional 1 million barrels of oil in the
United States each and every single day.
Ironically, we hear the same arguments against that today that we
heard back then: that it will take 5 to 10 years to develop it. Well,
that is exactly the argument that was used in the debate 10 years ago.
If we had acted then, now, 10 years later, we would have that extra 1
million barrels of oil a day available to us, which is the equivalent
of about what we get from Venezuela.
The Outer Continental Shelf is home to about 18 billion barrels of
oil, and that, too, is off-limits. Some of the Outer Continental Shelf
data is almost 30 years old. There are estimates that there are 86
billion barrels of undiscovered reserves that exist right off our very
own coasts.
Oil shale--there are estimates of 2 trillion barrels of oil shale
that is currently off-limits; 800 billion barrels of that, of the U.S.
oil shale, could be economically recoverable.
Now, Saudi Arabia has the world's largest proven reserves of oil in
the world; that is, 263 billion barrels. The next largest is Iran with
133 billion barrels, followed by Iraq with 115 billion barrels. Kuwait
and Venezuela bring up the next, with 100 billion and 77 billion
barrels, respectively.
But the point very simply is that Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado may
have more oil than Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, and Venezuela
combined. Right now, U.S. energy companies are ready to invest billions
of dollars in developing this domestic research. They are not asking
for Government funding. They are not asking for Federal financing. They
are not asking for environmental exemptions or any kind of special
treatment.
All they are asking for is for the U.S. Government to govern. They
simply want consistent regulation that will allow them to move forward
with their research. Unfortunately, this Congress has said no--no to
ANWR, no to the Outer Continental Shelf, no to oil shale, no to coal to
liquid, no to nuclear, no to all of the things that could lessen our
dependence on foreign sources of energy.
Meanwhile, I think the American family is asking, why? Why will
Congress not work to lower gas prices? Why is Congress standing in the
way of American ingenuity? Why is Congress limiting access to our
resources while we send, Americans send, $1.6 billion each and every
single day outside the United States for imported oil to petro
dictators around the world, where we are propping up and enriching
people in places such as Iran and Venezuela who have nothing but
hostile intentions toward our country?
Well, it is past time for Congress to act on a supply solution. It is
time for us to deal with this issue of our supply, and it is also
important that we deal with the issue of demand because, as I mentioned
earlier, when you are talking about impacting supply and demand, you
can do one of two things. You can affect supply by increasing domestic
production or you can affect the demand side by using less energy. I
think the solution consists of both, but neither are getting a vote in
the Senate.
Congress must invest in advanced technology, batteries and hydrogen
fuel cells. Those are new technologies that we have to support, and we
need to continue to invest in renewable fuels. There has not been a
bigger advocate in the Senate than I am of renewable energy. It is
already reducing domestic demand for traditional petroleum by about
130,000 gallons per day.
We also need to address America's fleet of vehicles. Last year,
Congress raised the vehicle efficiency standards by 40 percent to 35
miles per gallon for cars and light trucks. I think we can and we must
do more. We should extend the tax credits for fuel-efficient hybrid
vehicles.
I believe Congress should create a new tax credit for next-generation
electric plug-in hybrid vehicles which can go 20 to 40 miles before
using an internal combustion engine.
In addition to tax credits, Congress should require the production of
flex-fuel vehicles. This week, a tripartisan group of Senators, led by
Senator Brownback, introduced a bill that would dramatically change our
transportation sector. Senators Brownback, Lieberman, Salazar, Collins,
and I have introduced the Open Fuel Standard Act, which essentially
requires that starting in 2012, 50 percent of new vehicles be flex-fuel
vehicles that are warranted to operate on gasoline, on ethanol, on
methanol, or on biodiesel.

[[Page 16140]]

This requirement increases 10 percent each year until 2015 when 80
percent of new vehicles would be required to operate on renewable fuel.
We will never break OPEC's monopoly over our fuel supply without
enacting bold policies. And the one I just mentioned is an example of
such a policy. That bill would give consumers a choice at the pump and
give all consumers the option of purchasing cheaper, homegrown fuel
such as ethanol and biodiesel when it comes to addressing their energy
needs.
But the fact is, as I noted in the study that I cited, we cannot
solve America's energy problem by simply dealing with a narrow
solution, a minimalist solution such as that which has been put on the
floor by the Democratic leadership in the Senate. What they have
attempted to do is to block the consideration of amendments that would
address those other issues that I think are so important to this
debate. There is not anything in this bill that was put forward by the
Democratic leadership that reduces the dangerous dependence that we
have on foreign energy. Now 60 percent of our energy is coming from
outside the United States. There is not one thing in this bill that
affects that.
They can talk about lawsuits. They can talk about taxing oil
companies. You can talk about regulating, further regulating the
commodities markets. I am all for some of the things that are being
proposed with regard to speculation and the commodities market. I,
frankly, think there are things in the bill that are good.
But the bottom line is, it does nothing. It does nothing to affect
the fundamental rule of supply and demand, which, as I just noted, is
what is driving energy prices higher in this country. And if we try to
do something in the Senate or in Congress to address energy in this
country and the tremendous economic impact it is having on American
families and businesses without going at this fundamental basic issue
of increasing our domestic supply or domestic production and reducing
our demand, we will not have done anything meaningful for the American
people to address the issue that is impacting their pocketbooks more
than anything else today; and that is, the high price of gasoline.
If you are serious about getting the commodities futures market to
reflect or to bring down the futures price for energy stocks and all
this trading that is going on, the way to do that is to send a clear,
unequivocal signal to the energy markets that America is serious, that
American ingenuity and hard work and our entrepreneurship in this
country--that we are serious about increasing the domestic supply of
energy that we have, about increasing domestic production because the
market will interpret that.
The market looks down the road and says: OK, in the future, what is
the price of oil going to be based upon the current supply of oil and
the current demand?
If we are serious about increasing supply and reducing demand, the
market will reflect that. We will see lower prices per barrel of oil,
per gallon of gasoline, and some relief for hard-working American
families and small businesses taking on tremendous water in their
personal households and in the needs they have to meet for families
because they are spending all their money, literally, to fill their
cars with gasoline and to pay for the high cost of energy. It is
affecting literally every sector of the economy.
South Dakota, as my colleague from Wyoming spoke to earlier, is a
vastly rural State and sparsely populated, heavily dependent upon
transportation. The energy issue impacts in a dramatic way our ability
to grow our economy and create jobs. I hope the debate today will
include more than only a narrow issue and will get to the fundamental
issue of supply and demand, that we can have an open debate in which we
may offer amendments so this issue will be addressed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
Mr. SCHUMER. I believe our side now has the next half hour. I yield
myself 20 minutes and 10 minutes to the Senator from New Mexico, Mr.
Bingaman.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. SCHUMER. I request the Chair to alert me when I am halfway
through.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will be notified.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I rise to speak on two issues, both
pending before us, both vitally important to the economy. One is
energy, one is housing.
We all know the pain Americans experience. We all know the price of
gasoline. In New York, people are already anticipating, with fear in
their hearts, the price of home heating oil to heat their homes in
winter. Everywhere else the costs of energy are driving prices higher,
creating a middle-class squeeze.
We had a hearing at the Joint Economic Committee yesterday. Elizabeth
Warren, a professor at Harvard, outlined that squeeze. The average
middle-class person is hurting. They have built up a good life for
themselves. Now they are hurting because, on the one hand, their income
is not going up--productivity is but income is not--and at the same
time their costs are going much higher than the rate of inflation. So
they are caught in a vise--income declining, prices increasing.
This Friday night, there will be millions of Americans who, after
dinner, husband and wife, will be sitting around the table talking
about the things they care about, their children and their futures,
their health. But probably the No. 1 topic will be, how the heck are we
going to pay the bills.
Democrats are here to try and finally, after 7\1/2\ years of being
dominated on the energy debate by oil, oil companies, oilmen in the
White House, change the debate. The other side has a simple solution.
It gets modified every couple of years, but it is basically the same.
Do what big oil wants. When the price is low, give them subsidies. When
the price is high, make sure they don't pay much in taxes. All
throughout, focus our energy economy on oil, because that is what the
big oil companies want.
Rex Tillerson, the head of ExxonMobil, came before the Judiciary
Committee a year and a half ago and said: ExxonMobil does not believe
in alternative energy. I guess if I were ExxonMobil, I wouldn't either.
Because as demand goes up and supply stays relatively flat, the price
goes up and the profits go up. I have been asking, what do the big oil
companies do with their profits. A huge percentage goes not into new
exploration. They say they want to explore, but a majority of the
money, in some cases, and a plurality, in most, goes to buying back
their stock to raise the share price for themselves and their
shareholders. This idea that oil companies are eager to explore is
belied when we look at their financial statements. They are buying back
their stock. It doesn't create one drop of oil. For the limited number
of people who have ExxonMobil stock, that is a godsend. For the rest of
us, it squeezes us even more. Chevron does it. BP does it. They all do
it, with billions and billions of dollars. I believe last year
ExxonMobil took $29 billion to buy back their stock.
I challenge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, if they are
so eager for exploration, why aren't they putting that $29 billion into
exploration? But they are not. Again, we have the answer from the other
side: Big oil today, big oil forever.
The American people know we are not going to drill our way out of
this crisis. Even if the oil companies wanted to--and statistics show they
do not--we don't have enough oil to prevent the price from going up,
because demand worldwide is dramatically increasing, in China, in
India, in the Middle East. The number of new cars in China and India in
a short while will exceed the total number of cars in America, in 10
years, 15 years. Imagine that, new cars in China and India competing
with us to buy gasoline. Obviously, the price will go up.
When our majority leader repeats over and over that we have 3 percent
of the reserves and 25 percent of the consumption, there is no way to
reduce prices significantly in the long term

[[Page 16141]]

other than to get off our
dependency on oil. So drilling is not the answer. Yes, in certain
places, it may help. We are not opposed to that. I proudly went to the
Republican majority, got Democrats to vote for drilling in the gulf.
But it is not going to solve our problem. It will ameliorate it a tiny
little bit in certain places, if you drill in the gulf and places near
refineries.
The answer is to ween our dependence from foreign oil and tell OPEC
and Chavez in Venezuela and Iran to take a hike because we don't need
them anymore. They can't have their hands around our necks any longer--
economically, politically, or geographically.
The good news is, we can do that. We can do that on both sides of
supply and demand. That is what we Democrats are attempting to do. We
are attempting to help get an electric car. Electric cars, no gasoline,
will ride as smoothly and as well but much more cheaply than our
present cars. They are not these little golf carts you drive around.
You can have a big SUV with a battery that goes 250, 300 miles, same as
a tank of gasoline, and drives with the same speed and the same power
and the same torque. We are not too many years away from that, if we
help create the battery. They have the battery. It just has to be mass
produced. We need some research to get that done in a cheap enough way
so that the price of cars stays the same while the price of fueling the
cars goes down.
Senator Bingaman will be here shortly. He put one of my proposals in
the Democratic proposal for housing conservation when you build. Forty
percent of our energy is consumed not driving cars but cooling and
heating homes, air conditioning and heating. If we were to adapt
conservation measures, that could dramatically drop. One State has done
it, California. California's energy consumption is lower than just
about any other State, even though they are a car culture. Why? Because
in 1978, under Governor Jerry Brown, whom many regarded as ``Governor
Moonbeam,'' this was an excellent idea that has proven successful; they
put conservation in building standards for homes and offices. Now, in
terms of buildings, their per capita consumption of energy is about
what Denmark's is. Why don't we do it nationwide?
Then there is alternative energy. There was an op-ed in the
Washington Post by an oilman, someone I know named Jim Tisch, who said
that now it is profitable to do wind power, solar power and other kinds
of power and take our dependency off oil and gas.
We can both increase supply and decrease demand, reduce the price, if
we embark now on a program of change. When we have tried to do this,
our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have said no. Why? The
big oil companies don't like it. Some of the big utilities don't like
it. The big special interests don't like it. But they are doing great.
It is the average middle-class person who needs the help.
The equation is simple. I will put it in stark terms, but I think it
has to be put that way: Republicans, big oil, the past; Democrats,
alternatives, the future. Let me repeat that. Republicans, big oil and
the past; Democrats, alternatives and the future. Every American knows
which side we want to be on.
I am sorry they have decided not to accept Majority Leader Reid's
generous offer and take their proposal and our proposal and debate
them. We will do that any day of the week. I am sure Senator Obama is
eager to debate Senator McCain, who is following in the big oil
footsteps of George Bush and Dick Cheney.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 10 minutes remaining.
Mr. SCHUMER. I thank the Chair.
I am sure he is eager to have that debate. When you ask people in
polling, should we drill, they say sure. Then when you ask, can we
drill our way of the problem, they know we can't. We are going to
continue to push. I hope and pray we don't have to wait for the next
President to do this. I would like to see it done now, because we have
waited 7 years. We have had bills on the floor in the past: bills to
raise mileage standards of cars, stopped by the auto companies; bills
for alternative fuels, stopped by the oil companies; bills to make sure
utilities are more efficient, stopped by the utilities. When the price
was low, no one paid much attention. But now we are all paying the
awful price. Let us change once and for all. There are short-term
solutions, whether with the SPR or tamping down speculation. But the
only long-term, real answer is to reduce our dependence on oil, move to
alternatives and conserve more, consume more efficiently. I hope my
colleagues will do that. I hope we will look forward to the future and
not delay the future any longer and not look back at the past.

Housing

The other bill that is before us now and upon which we will vote
shortly is the housing bill. I urge my colleagues to support it. Unlike
the energy issue, I think we do have broad bipartisan support. I was
delighted to hear yesterday that the President changed his view and
will now support the bill Chairman Dodd and Congressman Frank have put
together. I am very glad of that. It is a good bill. I have had some
significant input into it, for which I thank both of them.
Housing is at the nub of the recession. Housing prices go down and
people don't have the money to do other things. That hurts. Homes are
foreclosed upon and neighborhoods suffer. Even if you keep your home
and even if your housing price is flat, mortgage rates go up. Since so
many people have adjustable rate mortgages, that hurts us as well. But
housing has been the bull's-eye of the economic crisis. For too long,
Washington has twiddled its thumbs, despite the efforts of those on our
side who want to do something and who have smart, rational, and
targeted plans. But now finally, because the crisis is screaming at us,
the President has agreed to support our legislation, and many on the
other side, hopefully, will vote for it, as they did last week.
The housing bill has many important components. It has a plan that
will set a floor for some home prices. It is not a panacea, but it will
help reduce the decline in home prices in many places, which is
desperately needed, and reduce the rate of foreclosure for several
hundred thousand homes, which is also desperately needed. I would have
liked to have seen that part of the bill be stronger. I would have
liked to have seen the bankruptcy provisions put in there which would
have been a club and made them work a little better. They are not
there, but this is still good.
We also have in the proposal CDBG money. We held a hearing of the
Joint Economic Committee where, from the community in Slavik Village,
people testified how empty and vacant homes were killing their
neighborhood. I don't know what entity Slavik Village is in, what town,
whether it is Cleveland or somewhere else, but no local community has
the ability to deal with all these foreclosed homes. The only entity
that can is the Federal Government.
The CDBG money, which, thank God, now the President has dropped his
opposition to, will buy up those homes and prevent the market from
getting worse and communities from deteriorating. Because when you have
an abandoned house and some vandals come in and pull out the plumbing
and electricity, and then it becomes a haven for drug dealers and
criminals, it ruins the whole neighborhood. The person living down the
street, who has paid his or her mortgage and does not even have a
mortgage anymore, suffers as well.
So this CDBG money, as well as the whole program we are putting
together, is not simply aimed at those
who cannot pay their mortgages. It is actually aimed at the millions of
homeowners who are hurt because even though they pay their mortgages,
and even though they may have finished paying their entire mortgage,
their home prices decline because there are foreclosures in the
community.
Then there is the part about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I think this
is necessary. It is unfortunate we are at this stage but necessary.
Fannie and Freddie are at the center of our housing market, and the
housing market is at the center of our declining economy. If you are
simply going to say: Well, let

[[Page 16142]]

Fannie and Freddie fail, let's learn the
moral hazard, you are hurting tens of millions of innocent people along
the way as you teach that lesson. That is why I do not think we should
do it.
Do we need tougher regulation for Fannie and Freddie? Yes. And in the
bill is a much strengthened regulator. I supported that from the get-
go. But to allow Fannie and Freddie to deteriorate, and deteriorate as
dramatically as they might have without a possible Government backstop,
would do far more damage than the Government backstop itself. The odds
are, we will never have to use it. And when you add to that the odds
that we will use it but it will not cost all that much, they are
overwhelming. But the alternative, the risk of looking into the abyss
and letting the economy roll down--because if Fannie and Freddie were
to go under, Lord knows what would happen in this economy--is not worth
it.
I have spoken at length to Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernanke,
both appointees of the President, and they believe this is desperately
needed. I was surprised so few of our House colleagues voted for this
proposal. Ideologs do not usually solve problems. They have a narrow
way of looking at things. So if you say Government is always the
answer, you are going to mess things up. But just as equally, if you
say Government is never the answer, you will mess things up as badly.
We have a whole lot of people, at least in the House, who said: Don't
get the Government involved at all. Let people suffer. That is for
their overall good.
It reminds me of the old days when the Adam Smith theory said: Well,
let anyone sell any medicine they want, and if it is a bad medicine,
and you die from it, your family will learn from it and you won't buy
it again. It is an awfully harsh view of the world, and not a view most
Americans agree with.
In a somewhat less serious but serious note, this is the same thing
with housing. If you let the housing market go in the tank, so much
suffering will occur that the risk is not worth it. So this is a good
package. Is it what we would have done? No. Is it what Mr. Paulson
would have done on his own? No. But it is a fair and workable
compromise, and unlike the Energy bill, it is a place where we can all
come together and do something for the good of the economy.
I also do want to mention there is more money for mortgage
counselors. The Senator from Washington, you, I say to the Presiding
Officer, the Senator from Pennsylvania, and I have been working hard to
get more mortgage counselors in the bill, and there is $180 million
more for that, as well as $10 billion in mortgage revenue bond
authority, which will help States and localities to develop refinancing
programs--very important in my State. It is something the Presiding
Officer has supported, and I am glad it is in the bill.
In conclusion, Mr. President, on energy, let's look forward to the
future. Let's hope some of our colleagues will join us and not cling to
the answer: oil today, more oil tomorrow. We do not have it, given the
increase in demand.
On housing, let us move this bill forward quickly. Both are vital to
the future prosperity of our country, and both ought to become law
without further delay.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico is recognized.

Energy

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I believe I have 10 minutes reserved to
speak in relation to energy legislation.
The first point I want to make is that the legislation the majority
leader, Senator Reid, brought to the Senate floor addresses one of the
three aspects of the problem we face with high gas prices. I think all
of us recognize there are three main factors that are resulting in high
gas prices.
One is the problem with the functioning of our oil and gas markets,
and specifically the problem of speculation and excessive investment in
these commodities. That is something Senator Reid has proposed to deal
with in the legislation he brought to the floor, and we are going to
have a cloture vote on that legislation, I believe, tomorrow. I hope
Senators will vote for cloture.
I also hope we can add to it some amendments. There is one amendment
I am filing today at noon, along with Senator Reid and other Democratic
Senators, that tries to address the other two factors that we know and
all recognize impact the price of gas; that is, the supply: the supply
of oil and, of course, a reduction in demand; how do we reduce the need
to buy so much gasoline? This amendment talks about supply and demand,
primarily.
Let me briefly summarize what this amendment will try to do.
First, it promotes diligent development of existing leases. As we
have had many debates here on the Senate floor, I think most people are
aware there is a lot of the Federal land that is currently leased. The
question is, how do we get more of it in a producing state? How do we
encourage the companies that have those leases to move ahead more
quickly?
What we do is we authorize the Secretary to take several steps to
encourage more diligent development. We authorize the Secretary to
shorten lease terms where appropriate to increase rental fees in later
years where appropriate, and generally to do a better job than we fear
has been done in connection with encouraging rapid development of these
leases.
Second, we are suggesting that areas that have not been leased but
that could be leased should be looked at and, where possible, leasing
should occur.
Let me put up a chart in the Chamber that makes the point. I know
there has been a lot of talk about how the current moratoria on
drilling in this country is locking up 80-some-odd percent of all of
our opportunity for drilling. Those are not the facts, as I understand
them.
As I understand it, there is 33 percent of the Outer Continental
Shelf that is subject to a moratorium that therefore, by law, is not
available for leasing.
There is 67 percent of the Outer Continental Shelf that is available
for leasing. What we are saying is, in that area where we have not yet
leased--we have leased some of that, but there are other parts of it,
substantial parts that have not been leased--let's do several things to
try to do more leasing.
First, we suggest that the Secretary go ahead and reoffer portions of
this 181 lease sale area. The first lease sale in the 181 area occurred
in March. There were about 300,000 acres that were not bid on by
companies. We think those should be offered again sometime in the near
future. That is one of the provisions in this legislation.
We call for a doubling of the number of lease sales in the Gulf of
Mexico. Two-thirds of the Gulf of Mexico is not subject to moratoria,
and we think in the areas that are not subject to moratoria we ought to
have more frequent lease sales.
Third, in areas offshore Alaska, we think, again, that the Secretary
ought to look and see if additional leasing can occur.
Let me put up another chart in the Chamber.
The current schedule for leasing carries us through 2012. This is the
schedule of the Department of the Interior. They have 16 additional
lease sales scheduled from now until the end of 2012, some of those
offshore Alaska, some of those in the Gulf of Mexico. What we are
saying is, let's look and see if there are other lease sales that we
could have in the Outer Continental Shelf between now and 2012 to
accelerate this.
We also propose there be an annual lease sale in the National
Petroleum Reserve-Alaska. That is not in the Outer Continental Shelf. That is
onshore. But there is a very substantial area there, and a very
substantial resource, as best we can determine.
On the Roan Plateau leasing in Colorado, again we are proposing that
55,000 acres in that area be leased. This is estimated to contain 9
trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
We are also proposing that Renewable Energy Pilot Project Offices be
established to help facilitate use of public lands for renewable energy
resources. I am talking about wind

[[Page 16143]]

farms, I am talking about solar,
concentrating solar powerplants that are beginning to be built in the
Southwest.
Then, on the demand reduction side, we also have a series of
proposals in this amendment that I think are meritorious.
One is a provision that has been passed through the Senate several
times calling for an interagency task force in the administration to
develop an action plan to save 2.5 million barrels of oil by 2016, to
save 7 million barrels of oil by 2026, and 10 million barrels of oil by
2030--per day in each case.
We are proposing to expand the effort at the Federal, State, and
local levels to promote telework and telecommuting.
We are proposing to increase support for public transit--transport
systems. Many of those systems, because of the high price of fuel, have
cut back rather than being able to expand their capacity.
We are proposing a fuel economy indicator device be required on all
vehicles that are sold in the country beginning in 2012. We believe
that would help to focus people's minds on the fact they are using
substantial amounts of fuel and encourage smart driving habits to
reduce fuel consumption.
We have a proposal for an Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing
Incentive Program. This would provide help to the automobile
manufacturing companies, but also to component companies, including
those that are making batteries so they can get on with the
construction of the plants needed and the modernization of the plants
needed in that regard.
As far as advanced batteries are concerned, we believe we should have
an interagency task force that develops a roadmap for advanced battery
development.
We have a proposal with regard to tire efficiency labeling, since we
are told by experts that tire efficiency labeling is one of the areas
that would improve vehicle fuel efficiency.
We have a proposal to require more energy efficient building codes
throughout the country. Again, we believe that would be a step in the
right direction.
And, of course, we also have some provisions that the administration
has asked for with regard to the management of our own royalty on
Federal leases. They have recommended that we repeal the mandatory Deep
Water and Deep Gas Royalty Relief Act for Outer Continental Shelf
leases in the Gulf of Mexico. We are suggesting that should be done as
part of this amendment, and various other royalty management reforms
that have also been recommended by the administration.
To sum up, what we are trying to do in the amendment is, we are
trying to add to the bill responsible provisions that would help us
address the other two factors, in addition to speculation and in
addition to problems with additional investment in commodity markets
that we think are impacting the price of gas. Taken together--the
proposal Senator Reid has made that is going to be voted on tomorrow
and these provisions related to supply and related to demand
reduction--taken together, we believe we would be taking a positive
step on behalf of the American people to begin to moderate the price of
gas at the pump.
I hope the amendment receives strong support. I hope we have the
opportunity to offer it.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have a summary of the
amendment I have been talking about printed in the Record following my
statement.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

Section-by-Section Summary of the Democratic Amendment to the
Speculation Bill

Amends S. 3268 to add at the end of the bill the following:

Title II--Oil Supply and Management

Subtitle A--Diligent Development of Federal Oil and Gas
Leases
Sec. 201.--Diligent Development of Federal Oil and Gas
Leases.--Clarifies the requirement of existing law that all
federal oil and gas leases require the lease holder to
diligently develop in order to ensure timely production.
Requires the Secretary to issue regulations that set forth
the requirements and benchmarks for oil and gas development
that will ensure diligent development and production from the
lease during the initial lease term (to the maximum extent
practicable). Lessees are required to submit a diligent
development plan to the Secretary.
Sec. 202.--Diligent Development in the National Petroleum
Reserve-Alaska.--Provides that leases shall be for a primary
term of not less than 8 and not more than 10 years with a 5-
year extension if drilling is taking place and so long
thereafter as production is occurring. The Secretary must
seek to maximize the timely production of oil and gas in
setting the lease term for new leases. Repeals the provisions
of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that allowed lessees to
renew their leases for up to 30 years. Sets the royalty rate
at not less than $3.00 per acre and requires the Secretary to
increase the royalty by not less than $1.00 per acre per year
for new leases.
Sec. 203.--Length of Lease Terms.--Provides that new
federal onshore oil and gas leases issued pursuant to the
Mineral Leasing Act shall be for a primary term of not less
than 5 years and not more than 10 years. The Secretary must
seek to maximize the timely production of oil and gas in
setting the lease term.
Sec. 204.--Rentals.--Sets rentals for nonproducing Federal
onshore oil and gas leases issued after the date of enactment
at $1.50 per acre and requires the Secretary to increase the
rental by not less than $1.00 per acre per year. Requires the
Secretary to set rentals for OCS leases at a rate determined
by the Secretary to maximize the timely production of oil and
gas and to increase the rents annually. The rents may be set
at a rate that takes into account differences in development
conditions.
Subtitle B--Acceleration of Leasing of Offshore Areas Not
Subject to Moratoria
Sec. 211. Offshore Oil and Gas Leasing in Portion of the
181 Area Authorized to be Leased Under the Gulf of Mexico
Energy Security Act.--Provides that the Secretary should
offer for lease within 1 year after the date of enactment
that portion of the 181 Area offered for lease in March 2008
pursuant to the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act but not
leased.
Sec. 212. Acceleration of Lease Sales in Western and
Central Gulf of Mexico.--Provides that the Secretary conduct
an OCS lease sale every 6 months in the Western and Central
Gulf of Mexico. Allows the Secretary to conduct sales less
frequently if the Secretary determines it is not practicable
to conduct the lease sale every 6 months and provides a
report to Congress describing the reasons for holding the
sales less frequently and certifying that holding the sales
less frequently will not adversely affect production.
Sec. 213. Lease Sales for Areas Offshore Alaska.--Not later
than 1 year after the date of enactment, the Secretary shall
conduct a survey of oil and gas industry interest in oil and
gas leasing and development in planning areas offshore Alaska
that are not included in the 5-Year Plan for 2007-2012. In
any such planning area where there is a high level of
interest, the Secretary shall evaluate the oil and gas
potential of the area, the environmental and natural values
of the area, and the importance of the area for subsistence
use. The Secretary shall provide a report to Congress within
2 years after the date of enactment containing the results of
the survey and the evaluation. If the Secretary concludes
that leasing should be pursued further in the planning area,
the report shall describe the additional steps required by
law and the timeframe for conducting a lease sale. The
Secretary shall consult with the Governor of Alaska and
provide an opportunity for public comment in preparing the
report. The section does not modify any environmental or
other law applicable to leasing and development on the OCS.
Subtitle C--Acceleration of Leasing and Development in the
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska.
Sec. 221. Acceleration of Lease Sales for National
Petroleum Reserve in Alaska.--Provides that the Secretary
accelerate environmentally responsible competitive leasing in
the NPR-A to the maximum extent practicable, and conduct at
least 1 lease sale each year. The Secretary shall comply with
all applicable environmental laws.
Subtitle D--Strategic Petroleum Reserve
Sec. 231. Definitions.
Sec. 232. Modernization of the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve.--Directs the Secretary to exchange 70 million
barrels of light crude oil held in the SPR for 70 million
barrels of heavy crude oil. The sale of light crude is to be completed
within 180 days of enactment. The purchase of heavy oil is to
begin more than 365 days after enactment, but within 5 years
of enactment. The net proceeds generated by the exchange are
to be dispersed to the Secretary of Health and Human Services
to carry out the low-income home energy assistance program
established under the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Act
of 1981.
Sec. 233. Deferrals.--Encourages the Secretary to use his
existing authority to grant any request to defer a scheduled
delivery of petroleum to the SPR, if the deferral will result
in a reduced cost for the oil acquisition, or increase the
volume of oil delivered to the SPR.

[[Page 16144]]

Subtitle E--Resource Estimates
Sec. 241. Resource Estimates.--Requires Secretary of the
Interior to collect and annually report to Congress
information regarding resource estimates and federal acreage
under oil and gas lease and available for leasing.
Subtitle F--Sense of Senate on Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline
Sec. 251. Sense of Senate on Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline.--
Encourages all parties to work together to allow the Alaska
Natural Gas Pipeline to move forward and to negotiate a
project labor agreement.
Subtitle G--Roan Plateau Oil and Gas Leasing
Sec. 261. Short title.
Sec. 262. Findings and purpose.--Calls for the balanced
development of energy resources on the Roan Plateau in a
manner that minimizes environmental impact while increasing
leasing revenues.
Sec. 263. Definitions.
Sec. 264. Special Protection Areas.--Designates certain
special protection areas and requires the Secretary of the
Interior to manage them in a manner that prevents irreparable
damage.
Sec. 265. Phased Mineral Leasing.--Authorizes the Secretary
to issue mineral leases, except for the exploration or
development of oil shale, within the Roan Plateau Planning
Area. Provides for phased development of the Planning Area by
prohibiting the Secretary from issuing mineral leases within
more than one phased development area at a time.
Sec. 266. Selection of Subsequent Leasing Areas.--Provides
for the selection of subsequent phased development areas once
at least 90 percent of the recoverable natural gas has been
recovered from previously selected areas and 99 percent of
the ground disturbed in each previously selected area has
been reclaimed.
Sec. 267. Federal Unitization Agreements.--Requires each
lessee within the Planning Area to enter into a unitization
agreement.
Sec. 268. Record of Decision.--Preserves the June 2007 and
March 2008 records of decision.
Sec. 269. Conforming Amendments.--Makes leasing of Oil
Shale Reserves 1 and 3 discretionary rather than mandatory
and provides that leasing receipts will be deposited in the
Treasury for use in accordance with the Mineral Leasing Act.
Subtitle H--Export of Refined Petroleum Products
Sec. 271. Export of Refined Petroleum Products.--Requires
the President to report to Congress if net petroleum product
exports to any country outside of North America exceed 1
percent of the total United States consumption of refined
products for more than 7 days.

Title III--Oil Demand Reduction

Subtitle A--Oil Savings
Sec. 301. Findings.--Finds that dependence on foreign oil
is one of the gravest threats to the national security and
economy, and that the United States needs to wean itself from
its addiction to oil.
Sec. 302. Policy on Reducing Oil Dependence.--Establishes
the policy to reduce our dependence on oil.
Sec. 303. Oil Savings Plan.--Establishes an interagency
task force to publish an action plan to reduce oil
consumption by--2.5 million barrels per day during 2016; 7
million barrels per day during 2026; and 10 million barrels
per day during 2030.
Subtitle B--Telework
Part I--Sec. 306. Incentive Programs for Reducing Petroleum
Consumption.--Requires each federal agency to promote
incentive programs to encourage federal employees and
contractors to reduce petroleum usage through telecommuting,
public transit, carpooling, and bicycling. Directs the
Secretary of Energy to make grants to state and local
governments to pay half the cost of carrying out state and
local incentive programs to reduce petroleum usage.
Authorizes the Secretary to pay the entire cost of local
government incentive programs serving rural areas.
Part II--Telework Enhancement.--Requires the head of each
executive federal agency to establish a telework policy and
to provide an interactive telework training program for
eligible employees. Requires the Office of Personnel
Management to submit an annual report on telework programs.
Extends the authority for travel expenses test programs.
Subtitle C--Public Transportation
Sec. 331. Energy Efficient Transit Grant Program.--Directs
the Secretary of Transportation to establish a program for
making grants to public transportation agencies to assist in
reducing energy consumption or greenhouse gas emissions of
their public transportation systems.
Sec. 332. Transit-Oriented Development Corridors Grant
Program.--Directs the Secretary of Transportation to
establish a program for making grants to public
transportation agencies, metropolitan planning organizations,
and other State or local government authorities to support
planning and design of Transit-Oriented Development
Corridors.
Sec. 333. Enhanced Transit Options.--Authorizes the
Secretary of Transportation to make transit enhancement
grants to public transit agencies to expedite construction of
new transit projects, address maintenance backlogs, purchase
rolling stock or buses, and continue or expand service to
accommodate increased ridership.
Subtitle D--Sec. 336. Fuel Consumption Indicator Devices.--
Requires the Secretary of Transportation to require, by model
year 2012, that cars and light trucks be equipped with
onboard electronic devices that provide real-time and
cumulative fuel economy data and signals drivers when
inadequate tire pressure may be affecting fuel economy.
Subtitle E--Sec. 341. Vehicle-to-Grid Demonstration
Program.--Directs the Secretary of Energy to carry out a
demonstration program on integrating plug-in hybrids into the
electricity grid.
Subtitle F--Sec. 346. Advanced Technology Vehicles
Manufacturing Incentive Program.--Amends section 136 of the
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 by directing the
Secretary of the Treasury to transfer to the Secretary of
Energy, without further appropriation, $200 million for each
fiscal year from fiscal year 2009 through 2013 to pay for the
cost of loans to automobile manufacturers and component
suppliers for reequipping, expanding, or establishing
manufacturing facilities in the United States to produce
advanced technology vehicles and components.
Subtitle G--Advanced Batteries
Sec. 351. Definition of Advanced Battery.
Sec. 352. Advanced Battery Research and Development.--
Directs the Secretary of Energy to expand and accelerate
research and development efforts for advanced batteries and
doubles the authorization levels in the energy
competitiveness storage programs established under section
641 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
Sec. 353. Advanced Battery Manufacturing and Technology
Roadmap.--Directs the Director of the Office of Science and
Technology Policy (in coordination with the Secretaries of
Energy, Defense, and Commerce and the heads of other
appropriate federal agencies) to develop a multiyear roadmap
to develop advanced battery technologies and sustain domestic
advanced battery manufacturing capabilities and supply chain.
Sec. 354. Sense of the Senate on Purchase of Plug-in
Electric Drive Vehicles.--Expresses the Sense of the Senate
that the Federal Government should increase the purchase of
plug-in electric drive vehicles.
Subtitle H--Sec. 361. National Energy Efficient Driver
Education Program.--Directs the Secretary of Transportation
to develop and promote educational materials on optimizing
fuel economy through driving and maintenance practices.
Subtitle I--Sec. 366. Oil and Gas Reserves Reporting
Requirements.--Expresses the sense of the Senate that the
Securities and Exchange Commission should accelerate the
rulemaking process on oil and gas reserves reporting.
Subtitle J--Sec. 371. Tire Efficiency Consumer
Information.--Accelerates from December 19, 2009 to March 19,
2009, the deadline for the Secretary of Transportation to
publish rules establishing a consumer information program on
the effect of tires on automobile fuel efficiency, safety,
and durability.
Subtitle K--Sec. 376. Petroleum Use Reduction Technology
Deployment.--Authorizes $50 million for each of 5 years for
grants to local Clean Cities participants to promote the
adoption and use of reduction technologies and practices.
Subtitle L--Sec. 381. Energy Efficient Building Codes.--
Directs the Secretary of Energy to update national model
building energy codes and standards at least every 3 years to
achieve overall energy savings for commercial and residential
buildings of at least 30 percent by 2015 and 50 percent by
2022.
Subtitle M--Sec. 386. Renewable Energy Pilot Project
Offices.--Directs the Secretary of the Interior to designate
one Bureau of Land Management field office in Arizona,
California, New Mexico, Nevada, and Montana to serve as a
Renewable Energy Pilot Project Office.

Title IV--Royalty Reforms

Subtitle A--Royalty Relief Repeal.
Sec. 401. Repeals mandatory deep water and deep gas royalty
relief for Outer Continental Shelf leases in the Gulf of
Mexico.
Subtitle B--Royalty Reforms.
Sec. 411. Definitions. Makes conforming amendments to
definitions contained in FOGRMA.
Sec. 412. Liability for Royalty Payments. Makes both
lessees and their payor/designees liable for royalty
payments, amending existing provisions that have made it
difficult for the Secretary to collect royalties from all
responsible parties.
Sec. 413. Interest. Eliminates the requirement that the
Federal government pay interest on royalty over-payments
submitted by industry.
Sec. 414. Obligation Period. Amends existing law to start
the seven-year statute of limitations at the time any
adjustment to royalty payments is made by responsible parties
rather than when the payor submits its initial royalty
report.

[[Page 16145]]

Sec. 415. Tolling Agreements and Subpoenas. Makes changes
related to FOGRMA's existing tolling and subpoena provisions,
to conform with section 412.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky is recognized.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I wish to speak on the bill.
We are in an energy crisis. Don't let a 10 percent drop in oil prices
fool you. We are in for a long battle with energy costs and America
will need to step up if we want to keep driving our cars, flying our
jets, and fueling our economy.
But this bill before us today isn't about lowering prices. it is
about finding someone to blame so Americans don't blame the Democrats
for failing to act in Congress.
Democrats need a scapegoat because under their watch America has
become more addicted to oil than ever and gas prices have more than
doubled. They don't want to solve your problems. They don't want to
face the environmental lobbyists who don't care how much Americans pay
for energy as long as it doesn't come from oil and coal. They want to
find someone to blame. They have blamed oil companies, Republicans, the
Middle East, and the military. Today it is energy speculators.
I say the time for scapegoats and politics is over. Americans don't
want excuses or even someone to blame--Americans want solutions.
They want to be able to afford to drive their truck to work every
day. They don't want to worry about turning on the air conditioner or
how much it is going to cost to heat their homes this winter.
Back home in my State of Kentucky I have seen how much these prices
are hurting families. I know many people who moved farther out into the
suburbs to get a bigger yard and more for their real estate investment.
Now those same people are stuck using $4.50 gasoline for their workday
commute. Another community in eastern Kentucky is fighting to keep
local bus service running to their senior center.
Many older Americans rely on bus and shuttle services to get out of
their homes and are being cut off from their community services because
of high prices. There are even places that have gone to a four-day
school week to cut back on the cost of busing students.
These people want solutions for energy prices, not more politics.
The best way to address high prices is to get more fuel on the
market. America has domestic energy resources that we only need to open
up.
I have supported bills and amendments that would expand offshore
drilling, start coal-to-liquid fuel production, encourage alternative
sources of jet fuel, expand cellulosic biomass fuels, and many other
issues. Facing these issues is what Congress should be working on.
For example, I think one part of our solution should be more offshore
drilling. More domestic oil means less we have to buy from the Middle
East, lower transportation costs, a more stable supply, and therefore
lower prices. So why have the Democrats in Congress stopped us from
acting on this one issue?
If it is because of the environment, I say we will make sure any new
drilling is the cleanest and safest in the world. If it is because we
are not sure what to do with the Federal revenue, I am ready to discuss
it and develop a compromise. What is the problem with letting
individual States choose whether or not to drill offshore? Even if it
takes a decade to get to full production, we have to start somewhere.
Congress should at least have the debate and vote on the issue. But
every time we try to address even one energy production issue, we are
stopped in our tracks and blocked from offering amendments.
I am tired of watching this Democrat-led Congress do nothing. The
energy crisis has gone on long enough. We can talk all day about who to
blame and make up excuses, but that won't bring down energy prices.
Instead, we find ourselves discussing another bill that tries to
blame someone rather than address the problems of domestic production
and supply.
The other side is selling you a bill of goods when they say this
legislation would impact energy prices. I hear they have a great deal
for you on a bridge in Brooklyn too.
This bill will undermine legitimate hedging activities and threatens
the liquidity of the commodities marketplace. Futures markets make it
possible to buy and sell things at a specific price and date in the
future. These markets allow participants to offset risk of price
changes to those willing to take risks.
This legislation would also make us citizens subject to foreign rules
and regulations related to energy trading. Understanding U.S. laws will
not be enough, as energy traders will be required to consult with
foreign boards of trade and will be subject to the regulations made by
foreign governments.
This bill would also encourage traders to use foreign markets that do
not have as many regulations and take American jobs and business
activity with them. But my principal concern with this bill is that it
asks a Federal regulator, the CFTC, to wade into the marketplace and
make a determination of what is and what is not legitimate trading
activity.
Let me explain how this works. How many Americans stock up on an item
when they see a good sale at the grocery store? I know I do. Or maybe
some people wait to buy in bulk with buy one get one free coupons.
While we don't resell our groceries to someone else, this simple act
of timing our purchases or varying how much and when we buy is similar
to what traders do in the commodities markets.
Now imagine the Government used this same legislation to regulate
grocery shopping that has been proposed for the energy markets. It
would mean the Government would keep track of all your purchases and
determine whether you were a legitimate or non legitimate grocery
shopper. Do you want the government penalizing you if they feel you are
overbuying a certain product?
Buy too many hot dogs in 1 month and the Government could impose
limits on your purchases or keep you out of grocery stores altogether.
While this legislation isn't going to regulate grocery stores, this
bill is the beginning of more government regulations that will limit
your options. Maybe next Congress will regulate the precious metals
market and determine that buying gold jewelry is a non legitimate
purchase, penalizing Americans who want to buy jewelry. Or will the
government say that collecting shotguns is a non legitimate purchase
that increases the cost of shotguns, allowing it to limit sales to gun
collectors?
Allowing the Government to over regulate any market is a recipe for
disaster that puts Americans' freedom at risk.
In America, we are proud of our open markets and lack of government
interference. We need the already established rules to stop illegal
activities such as price manipulation and cornering markets, but we do
not need new regulations that prohibit normal market activities, such
as buying and selling commodities as an investment or as a price hedge.
I will support efforts to make the markets as transparent as
possible. Information allows traders to most efficiently allocate
resources and make sure prices actually reflect supply and demand. But
I find it unreasonable to on the one hand say the market needs to be
more transparent so it can work efficiently, and then on the other
mandate new requirements and regulations that will clog the market and
prevent it from working normally.
The bottom line is that this legislation will not bring down energy
prices.
However, there is something Congress and America can do about
prices--we can produce more of own energy. I strongly believe that
America should use every resource it has to produce energy. Our
dependence on Middle Eastern oil is worse than simply paying too much
at the pump; it is a threat to national security. Every gallon of fuel
we make from biomass, domestic oil and gas, and coal is a gallon of
fuel we don't have to buy from the Middle East. It is just that simple.
We need a Manhattan Project for energy in America.

[[Page 16146]]

The greatest minds we have should be working on ways to produce
alternative fuel, capture and use carbon emissions, produce clean
electricity, and improve oil and gas production.
We should agree to take politics out of clean energy and ensure that
government programs are technology and feedstock neutral. Too often I
see tax incentives and programs that pick and choose what technology or
process America should use.
To support all these alternative technologies, we need to change the
way government spends money.
I think we should pick performance-based goals--like zero emission
alternatives to oil--and let the marketplace decide the most efficient
way to achieve it. If you can produce an environmentally sound
transportation fuel, we should not care whether it comes from coal or
switch grass.
If you can produce a megawatt of clean energy, we should not care if
it comes from waste heat on a paper mill or from underground
geothermal. By opening up our options, we will get more for the
Government dollar and America will see results faster.
I believe the most important alternative fuel technology is coal-to-
liquids. We are sitting on a huge coal reserve that we can turn into
diesel for our trucks and aviation fuel for our planes. And our
military can no longer rely on imported oil from the Middle East. The
Air Force has tested this fuel, and it burns cooler and cleaner than
conventional fuel. It has less pollution as well. And I know that with
the right government incentives and carbon capture technology, we can
make coal-to-liquid fuel with less greenhouse gases than oil-based
fuels.
Kentucky coal can help bring down the price of oil, provide a secure
fuel for our military, reduce pollution, and create jobs.
While new domestic production will go a long way to bring down
prices, we should also think about conservation efforts. There are the
simple things like turning off lights we don't use and more important
measures like the increased fuel economy standards Congress passed. But
there are other ways to reduce fuel use using technology. For example,
we have a company in Kentucky that produces retrofit kits to reduce
diesel fuel use while trucks are idling.
The answer to America's energy problems is more domestic production,
clean technologies, and conservation. We have the resources and know-
how to make clean energy, but for the last few decades our government
regulations have held us back. We should not find more ways to over
regulate our markets--we should vote now to open up domestic production
and pursue promising alternative fuel technologies that will actually
bring down the prices of oil and gas at the pump for the American
people.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. McCaskill). The Senator from Florida is
recognized.
Mr. MARTINEZ. Madam President, no issue at the present time is
hitting Americans any harder than the high price of gasoline at the
pump. American families are hurting.
For a variety of reasons, we are paying more for a gallon of gas and
more to heat and cool our homes than ever before. There are a number of
factors contributing to rising energy costs, such as a weak dollar and
an incredible surge in demand from the developing world.
It is not entirely clear what the magnitude of the role is that
speculators might be playing in this situation. For certain,
speculation is not the major contributing factor for $4-a-gallon gas.
Even so, we have a responsibility to ensure that speculators aren't
doing something illegal or profiting at taxpayers' expense.
That is why I have joined 43 of my colleagues in introducing the Gas
Price Reduction Act, which will put more cops on the beat at the CFTC
to ensure there is no foul play occurring between those participating
in the oil futures market and those investing in the oil market itself.
This regulatory body needs more help so they can be more effective at
their job and give the American people the kind of assurance and
transparency they should have about the work of this trading
environment.
This act also commissions a study to better examine and understand
the influence these speculators have on the cost of oil.
We have heard much lately concerning speculators and what they may or
may not be doing to influence the price of gas.
On July 21, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Fed Chairman Ben
Bernanke, SEC Chairman Chris Cox, and the Chairman of the CFTC stated
in a signed letter:

To date, the President's Working Group has not found valid
evidence to suggest that high crude prices over the long term
are a direct result of the speculation or systemic
manipulation by traders.

That is a pretty strong statement coming from the people we trust in
overseeing major parts of our economy--the Secretary of the Treasury,
Chairman of the Fed, Chairman of the Securities and Exchange
Commission, and Chairman of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission.
While I believe speculators are an area of concern, the bigger
problem stems from simple economics and the law of supply and demand.
Our efforts should be focused on getting right to the heart of the
matter by working to increase our Nation's energy supplies and reducing
our demand. It is not enough to do one or just the other; we must do
both. According to the International Energy Agency, global demand is 86
million barrels of oil per day and global supply is about 85.5 million
barrels per day.
While Congress's record in increasing energy supplies has been scant
as of late, we have made progress in recent years.
In 2006, I helped negotiate, with Senator Nelson, the opening of 8.3
million acres in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. This area is estimated to
contain 5.8 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 1.25 billion barrels
of oil, and it is currently open and available for exploration. This
area was denied until 2006. It is now open and available for
exploration.
The Gas Price Reduction Act honors the compromise that was reached in
2006, protecting Florida's gulf coast, while empowering other States to
explore for oil and gas if it is supported by the Governors and State
legislature.
I believe increasing our Nation's domestic energy supply is perhaps
the most critical component to lowering gas prices, and to overlook it
would be grossly unwise. In addition to increasing our Nation's
domestic supplies, I also believe we should have access to affordable
alternatives.
Currently, Americans are paying a premium on Brazilian ethanol
because we have a 50-cent-a-gallon tariff on Brazilian ethanol. If we
mean what we say about offering cleaner, renewable alternatives to
gasoline, I propose we eliminate this tariff. I plan to introduce an
amendment that does just that.
The amendment I am proposing would repeal the 54-cent-a-gallon tariff
on foreign ethanol that was extended for 2 years--December 31, 2010--
under the recently passed 2008 farm bill.
The 2008 farm bill also extended the blenders credit for ethanol
producers for 45 cents a gallon, which creates a trade barrier of 9
cents per gallon. Ethanol producers can also receive a small blenders
tax credit of 10 cents a gallon if they produce less than 60 million
gallons of ethanol per year.
My amendment helps to stop these protectionist policies and offers
alternatives to hard-working Americans who are paying too much for gas.
On the other side of the equation, more must be done to reduce demand
and promote conservation.
This Congress took a significant step by mandating CAFE energy
standards in the Energy bill we passed in 2007, which was the largest
increase in fuel economy standards in nearly 30 years. According to the
Department of Transportation, these new fuel standards will save over
55 billion gallons of fuel and save American motorists more than $100
billion over time.
But that is not enough. These standards will go a long way in helping
to increase fuel economy, but more must be done to foster the market
for efficient energy alternatives and other breakthrough technologies.

[[Page 16147]]

One of the more promising technologies in this area is advanced
batteries for plug-in hybrids. The Gas Price Reduction Act contains
$500 million in research and development for advancements in plug-in
technology and $250 million in direct loans for manufacturers who
retool factories to produce plug-in batteries. It will help to make
batteries in many of the current hybrids more affordable and longer
lasting.
In the long term, I envision a market where renewable fuels are
viable and available and drivers will have affordable alternatives to
fossil fuels such as gasoline. My State of Florida has been a leader in
helping to make this vision a reality. The State recently created the
Florida Energy Systems Consortium, which brings together researchers
and resources from State universities to develop renewable energies.
The University of Central Florida--a member of the consortium--
recently announced it is receiving $8.75 million in grants to focus on
how technology can make new and existing construction projects more
energy efficient. In addition, with the help of $20 million from the
State of Florida, the University of Florida is currently building the
State's first biorefinery, which could produce clean cellulosic ethanol
to power our cars.
As we continue to discuss the ongoing energy crisis, I urge my
colleagues to consider the consequences of failing to offer viable
solutions to the American people as they grow increasingly worried over
dwindling energy supplies in America. Now is not the time for the
politics of energy. It is not the time for us to look for one-
upsmanship in the political game. It is time for us to act on a problem
that is hurting American families throughout the State of Florida and
throughout the United States.
We need to address this problem. We need to put us on a track of
finding more and using less--a track that, where possible, is
environmentally safe, where we can produce more domestic energy, while
at the same time turning loose the energies of this Nation, the
technology, to look for future opportunities for different blends of
fuels, different types of automobiles, and other ways we can improve
the efficiency of our fleet so that we can increase the opportunity for
the American people to live in a world that is cleaner and in which
they can afford to drive their kids to school and go to work. When we
have alternative fuels available, they may not have to be totally
dependent upon fossil fuels or imported oil.
I believe this is imperative, and it is an issue of national security
proportions. We cannot continue to transfer our wealth overseas. We are
transferring, year after year, $750 billion to countries that are not
particularly our friends. Some of them, in fact, would be considered
hostile to us. Nonetheless, we purchase oil from them because of our
necessity; our need is too great.
The fact is, we know there is plenty of political opportunity on both
sides of the aisle on this issue. The American people are focused on
this, and the American people are saying: Please do something about
this. Hear our cry for help.
I say that this is the time for bipartisan cooperation, for us to
come together, Republicans and Democrats, put partisan interests aside,
put American interests first, and look for ways to cooperate, work
together, and do what is doable, do what can be done.
On five occasions, I have voted to open ANWR to oil exploration.
Whether that is acceptable or not, let's come together and decide. I
would be prepared to support that once again. If that is a deal-
breaker, let's not go there. Let's look for those common-ground areas
where we can agree and move forward with a comprehensive energy plan.
Let's not say we have done our job by simply looking at speculation
as a scapegoat. We can deal with that and add transparency to it, but
that is not an answer in and of itself.
We have to have a comprehensive approach that tackles the issue of
supply, that tackles the issue of demand, where we have more oil
available, where the supply is increased from domestic production,
American production on America's lands and shores, and where we can
also reduce our consumption, utilize less. That will make America a
safer place. Then we can go home for this August break and face our
citizens and let them know we did a job they sent us here to do; not to
play politics but to get the job done for the American people.
I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I was in the House of Representatives for
14 years and have been in the Senate for a year and a half, as has the
Presiding Officer. During that time, all of us have noticed when there
is a spike in oil prices, as there has been obviously intermittently
for decades in this country, we can always ascribe a spike in oil
prices to one of several factors: either a major fire in a refinery or
there might have been an outage on a pipeline somewhere in our country.
It might have come from something such as Hurricane Katrina, some major
natural disaster in our country that caused a disruption of oil
supplies, or it may have come from an international incident where
there would be, again, a disruption in oil getting to our country, some
major international incident. So it has either been a refinery fire,
pipeline outage, a Katrina-type disaster or some interruption in
foreign oil supplies coming to this country.
That is what it used to be. The huge increase in oil prices, the fact
that since George Bush and Dick Cheney came to the White House, two
oilmen in the White House, oil has gone from $30 a barrel to quadruple
that number, that gasoline prices have gone from roughly, I believe, no
more than a couple dollars a gallon--less than that back then--to about
double that now, that has been for different reasons. It is pretty
clear, because there has not been a major outage of a pipeline, a
refinery fire or a disruption because of a natural disaster or because
of a foreign international incident, that something else has happened.
That is why Senator Reid's legislation is on the floor today because we
know part of the reason for prices doing what they have done is
certainly there has been more demand from China and India, but that
does not account for the doubling and tripling of prices when, in fact,
so much of this is about the issues of gaming the system by the oil
industry, whether it is price fixing in some sort of way that the
Justice Department should go after or mostly what this bill is about,
speculation.
It is clear that kind of hanky-panky has gone on in the oil market.
You don't have to look very far to figure that out, that it is not just
a question of supply and demand.
The other factor compounding this--even though I hear my friends on
the Republican side of the aisle talk about we need to do more
drilling, and I am fine with that. But the fact is there are 68 million
acres out there--2\1/2\ times the size of my State, the State of Ohio,
2\1/2\ times the number of acres of the State of Ohio--there are 68
million acres on which the oil companies have leases. Yet they are not
drilling in most of those 68 million acres. If they are committed to
producing more oil to bring prices down, they would begin drilling in
far more of those acres than they talk about drilling in.
So why should we, again, in this institution, the Senate, and as I
saw for years in the House, buckle to the oil industry? Why should big
oil always have its way here? Why should Wall Street always have its
way here? That is why Senator Reid's bill on speculation is so
important, empowering the Commodity Futures Trading Commission,
empowering the Justice Department to go after the oil industry on price
gouging.
It is clear we need a more aggressive Federal Government, a more
aggressive administration. Again, we have had

[[Page 16148]]

two oilmen in the White
House. Look what happened in these 8 years to oil prices.
I beseech my colleagues to support Senator Reid's speculation bill,
and I beseech the President to be more aggressive with his Justice
Department to go after the oil companies that are price gouging and to
empower the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to go after Wall
Street on some of this speculation. It is pretty clear that is the
biggest reason for these price increases, and it is important the
Federal Government get behind efforts to do all we can to rein in the
cost of oil for truckers, for motorists, people who are getting
squeezed and hurt so badly by these increasing oil prices.
I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DODD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008

Mr. DODD. Madam President, I rise this afternoon to share with my
colleagues the good news: that we are about to pass, I believe, after
many weeks and months, numerous votes on countless amendments on the
floor of this body, as well as efforts in the other Chamber, the
Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008.
I am going to share some thoughts on where this is and what is
included in this bill that passed the House yesterday and is pending as
one of the matters that will be considered in the next 24 to 48 hours
by this Chamber.
My first expression of gratitude goes to the majority leader, his
staff, and others, along with the minority leader's staff, particularly
those on the floor who have been very patient.
In the case of the majority leader, he has been far more patient but
tremendously supportive of this effort. This has taken a long time and
has gone through a lot of different processes over the last number of
months to get to the point where we are today: on the brink of passing
the most sweeping housing legislation in more than a generation, that
will particularly focus on trying to keep people in their homes.
There are literally thousands every day who face the prospect of
foreclosure. This legislation will not protect everyone, but it will
make a difference in the case of thousands, as well as many of the
provisions which I will address in a minute or so. But I begin by
expressing my gratitude to those who made it possible for us to get to
this point.
Again, the majority leader and his staff played a critical role.
Senator Shelby of Alabama, former chairman of the Banking Committee,
today the ranking Republican of that committee--we would never have
been able to succeed at what we achieved without him and his staff and
the work he has done on the committee. We were able to mark up this
bill several weeks ago and bring it to the floor of the Senate on a
vote of 19 to 2, and that was because of the work of Senator Shelby and
others, along with, of course, the wonderful staff I have as part of
the Democratic majority of that committee and as chairman of the
committee. They worked well together. They spent countless hours. Last
weekend alone, they were up until 2 o'clock, 3:30 in the morning trying
to iron out details with ourselves and with the leaders in the House of
Representatives. There are a lot of people who can claim credit for
helping us get to this point. I wish to recognize them and I will
continuously over the coming days as we move beyond this legislation.
But it is very important to know that people who never get a chance
to speak in this Chamber but who put in the countless hours, the staff
who work on these bills, work in our respective offices, work for the
committees, do tremendous work on behalf of the American people. I, for
one, am very grateful to all who made such a difference in bringing us
to the point of stepping up and doing something about this economic
crisis, which at its heart, of course, is the housing crisis, and
behind all that is the foreclosure crisis.
I wish to share some views on what the bill does and why this moment
is important beyond the specifics of this bill.
In my view, we should have and could have acted months ago on this
legislation. Regrettably, there are still one or two Senators who are
doing everything and anything they can to block this bipartisan
legislation from going forward, delaying the kind of relief American
homeowners, and so many others, desperately need to get our economy
moving in the right direction.
Yesterday, the President of the United States agreed to sign this
legislation. That was a reversal. Only a few days earlier they
announced they would veto the bill. But yesterday they made the
announcement they are going to accept this legislation and they are
going to sign it into law.
Let me say how grateful I am to the President of the United States.
We are of different political parties. We have different views on many
issues. But I thank him. It takes a big person to recognize a mistake,
in this case announcing a veto and then changing your mind and saying,
in fact, this legislation deserves passage. I appreciate President
Bush's willingness to come to that point of view and to make that
announcement and to virtually, I hope, guarantee the adoption of this
legislation and to begin working to make a difference in people's
lives.
As many of my colleagues know, we are in the midst of the most
serious economic crisis to face our Nation in many years. Certainly,
the American people live it every day. They don't need to read the
data; they live the data, whether they are losing their jobs, losing
their homes, watching the value of their stocks, their pensions, their
401(k)s. All are worth less today than they were even a few weeks ago.
So the American people do not need a tutorial on whether things are
tough out there. They are living it and their families are and they
want to know whether their Government is doing anything about it to
make a difference.
Income is stagnant, and for many people it is falling at precisely
the time Americans are experiencing increasing costs in their daily
lives. The source of wealth creation in this country has been damaged
badly. Housing, which is a source of great wealth creation for many
people, is losing value. Stocks, we know, have lost value. Bonds are
losing value. These are the items upon which many Americans, through
mutual funds and other vehicles, are able to increase their wealth,
increase their security, prepare for their retirement, assist their
children to achieve a higher education and to lead decent lives with a
degree of happiness and hope that Americans ought to expect, living in
this great country of ours. But all these items have been badly damaged
over the last number of weeks and compound that loss of wealth creation
with the fact that gasoline prices are going up, food costs are going
up, health care costs are going up, and the cost of an education is
going up. At the very time the source of wealth creation is going down,
the cost of living is rising.
Unemployment numbers are also worrisome. In the month of May, we saw
a one-half of 1 percent increase in unemployment. That is the largest
single monthly increase in unemployment in 22 years in our Nation.
The root cause of all this--again, you don't need to know all this
because you have been feeling it--the root cause of all this is the
virtual collapse of the housing market that, in my view, did not have
to happen. This did not have
to occur. This is not a natural disaster. It is not a hurricane or a
cyclone or a snowstorm. This is a problem that was created because the
people responsible for being the cops over these institutions were not
doing their job. As a result, we are in the mess we are in today.
I do not want to oversimplify it, but virtually that is what
happened. The collapse was caused by what the Secretary of the Treasury
has described as ``bad lending practices'' that were at best ignored
and, in crucial respects, knowingly tolerated, if not encouraged,

[[Page 16149]]

by Government officials over the last number of years. As a result, every
single day in this country, Madam President, 8,000 to 9,000 of our
fellow countrymen are entering into foreclosure. Home prices nationwide
have dropped by the largest and most precipitous amounts since the
Great Depression back in the 1930s. Tens of millions of Americans have
watched their retirement savings, their pension funds, and the value of
their homes fall by alarming amounts.
Madam President, I want to remind my colleagues that this legislation
has proven time and time again to enjoy strong bipartisan support.
Again, without the work of my partner in all of this, Senator Shelby,
we wouldn't have arrived at that remarkable result. But my colleagues
who have been with us on all of this, those who have added their ideas
to this legislation, who have brought thoughtful proposals and added
comments as well as specific ideas, deserve a great deal of credit for
this as well.
Shortly before we left for our July recess, this piece of legislation
passed this Chamber by a vote of 79 to 16. Yesterday, in the House, the
bill received a bipartisan vote of 272 to 152. It is time to take up
this bill one last time and send it to the President for his signature.
Let me review for my colleagues, if I may, exactly what it is we are
working so hard to achieve. The bill we are about to adopt, and that we
have worked on for weeks and months, has a number of key elements, all
of which have been supported by the strong bipartisan votes in this
body. First, we have the HOPE for Homeowners Act, which we are told
will help somewhere between 400,000 to in excess of 500,000 Americans
keep their homes and avoid going into foreclosure.
My hope, Madam President, is that number will actually be larger than
that. That is a low estimate but certainly an important one. These
families were simply seeking the American dream of home ownership.
Sadly, in case after case after case, they were led astray. They were
steered into mortgages they couldn't afford, and the people who steered
them into those mortgages knew it because they were going to make their
money quickly, and then they were going to sell the mortgage, move on,
and never be accountable. In my view, these people should be going to
prison for what they did.
I know people say that is a harsh conclusion, but to knowingly lure
someone into a financial arrangement you know they could never afford,
and to know full well they would end up defaulting on or falling
behind, to me, that behavior is reprehensible and people ought to be
held accountable. I am speaking of those who knowingly engaged in a
practice that caused so much harm in our country. These are cases where
often the mortgage brokers and loan officers pretended to be trusted
financial advisers but were exactly the opposite. They had no intention
and were doing nothing when it came to advising and providing help to
these borrowers at all.
In fact, we now know, according to the Wall Street Journal, over 60
percent of the people who were talked into subprime loans actually
could have qualified for a conventional mortgage at far lower cost to
them than what a subprime mortgage cost. Sixty percent of these people
were lured into that category by people who knew they had an
opportunity to qualify for something that would have cost them far less
than they ended up paying.
Anyway, this part of our HOPE for Homeowners Act is a voluntary
program that will help save these homes by forcing the lenders who
chose to participate to take some losses. These are not bailouts. The
borrowers will have to pledge at least 50 percent of all new equity and
future appreciation in order to get the benefit of a new reduced
mortgage at a fixed rate that they can afford to pay. So the lender
takes a haircut. They are not going to get what they thought they were
going to get, but they are not going to get zero; and the borrower gets
to stay in his or her home. They are going to end up paying that
insurance and also contributing a part of the equity that will increase
over the years to compensate for this program.
There are many protections built into this program. Only homeowners
will qualify; no speculators, only homeowners. No investors or
speculators will be allowed to participate. Borrowers will have to show
they cannot afford their current mortgages, and all loans will be
underwritten at a level the borrower can afford to pay. New loans will
be at 30-year fixed rate mortgages.
All of this is done at no cost to the taxpayer. In fact, over the
next 10 years, the Congressional Budget Office tells us that the
program will actually raise some $250 million for the Treasury of the
United States. This provision, combined with the government-sponsored
enterprises--Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the home loan banks--regulatory
reform of this bill, passed the Banking Committee 19 to 2, as I
mentioned earlier.
Now, let me put to rest, if I can, an issue that has been raised. I
have just described what this will do for that borrower who is with
that very distressed mortgage. I can hear someone out there listening
to these remarks and saying: Well, Senator, I live next door, and I
have a mortgage I would like to get reduced as well. Now, I am not at
risk of losing my home because I have my job and, frankly, I got a
mortgage at a time when my broker and my banker worked out an
arrangement that I could afford to pay. But why is that neighbor of
mine getting this deal and I am not? Is that fair?
That is a good question. Let me say to you, as a borrower, first of
all, I want to keep that borrower, if I can, in a home. If you are in a
similar problem, we want to do what we can to help you. But you don't
want that neighbor of yours to go into foreclosure. If your neighbor
goes into foreclosure, then the value of your home that day begins to
decline dramatically. The last thing any neighbors want on a block is
foreclosed properties. So for every 8,000 or 9,000 people who go into
foreclosure today, as they will, there are 16,000 people who live next
door to that foreclosed property. And when the value of properties go
down in a neighborhood, crime rates go up, and it just spirals further
and further down.
So I hear what you are saying. But if you think carefully about how
this actually helps you as well, by keeping that homeowner in that
house, keeping up the value of your property, then everyone benefits.
So to those out there who wonder why everyone is not going to get a new
mortgage at a rate they can afford, the value of this program is to try
to put a tourniquet, if you will, on the hemorrhaging that is going on.
There are 1.5 million people who have lost their homes in the last
year. It is predicted by some--Credit Suisse being one--that one out of
every eight homes, if we don't act, will end up in foreclosure in the
next 5 years. Obviously, that is an intolerable situation in our
country.
So this legislation is designed to provide hope not only for the
homeowners but hope for the neighborhoods and communities being so
adversely affected by this present problem. We desperately need this
legislation. And as I have said repeatedly, every day we wait, some
8,000 to 9,000 foreclosures are filed. In fact, the delays we have
suffered over the last number of days have caused an awful lot of
people whom we might have been able to help to find themselves without
a home.
Remember, these aren't just numbers. I have been citing numbers to
you--a million and a half, 8,000 to 9,000, and how this program would
work. But for every one of these numbers there is a family. Just
imagine tonight that you had to go home and tell your husband or your wife or your children:
We are no longer going to live here. We can't afford to stay here. This
has been our home, but we have to find some other place to live. I
don't know of anyone who would like to come home carrying that message
because someone lured them into a mortgage knowing full well they could
never afford to pay the fully indexed price.
These numbers don't speak about the human tragedy and the cost beyond
the financial implications. So the importance of this legislation goes
to the

[[Page 16150]]
XXXXXXXXXX

heart of who we are as a people, that sense of optimism and
confidence. That fulfillment of a dream--of owning a home and raising a
family, living in a quiet, safe neighborhood--for many people is no
longer going to be there because these foreclosures are occurring at
such a rapid rate around our country.
In late June of this year, Census reported that the home ownership
rate, after reaching an all-time high in 2005, has fallen to a little
over 67 percent, the sharpest annual decline in 20 years. According to
the New York Times, minorities, who are disproportionately likely to
get subprime loans, are suffering especially badly. That is why this
legislation is widely supported by community and civil rights groups,
financial institutions, and others. They see a generation of wealth
being lost as a result of this foreclosure crisis.
The Senate expressed its strong bipartisan support of the HOPE for
Homeowners Act when it defeated an amendment that was offered to strip
out this program entirely. To the credit of my colleagues, Democrats
and Republicans, we voted 69 to 21 to keep this program a part of this
bill.
I want to make people understand something. There is no miracle here.
I am not suggesting to you that this is going to work perfectly. It is
our best judgment that this voluntary program could make a difference,
and my hope is it will.
The second part of the bill, Madam President, includes the FHA
Modernization Act. This passed early in April of this year as part of
the Foreclosure Prevention Act by a vote of 84 to 12. The provisions in
the current bill are identical to that legislation that I authored
earlier this year, with the exception that the loan limits have been
increased in high-cost areas to a maximum of $625,000.
As the administration has repeatedly said, the modernization of the
Federal Housing Administration will put it in a better position to keep
future borrowers away from abusive subprime loans.
Thirdly, this legislation creates a strong, effective, world-class
regulator for the housing government-sponsored enterprises--Fannie Mae,
Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks. These entities have kept
the housing and conforming mortgage markets going while other capital
markets have literally frozen. We need to make sure these crucial
market players are appropriately capitalized, well regulated, and
properly supervised so the American people can continue to depend on
them to ensure that affordable mortgages will always be available.
Recent losses at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac speak to the urgency of
this need, and the legislation before us accomplishes that goal.
In addition to the government-sponsored enterprise portion of this
bill, we have created a new permanent affordable housing fund that will
help finance the construction and preservation of affordable homes and
apartments across this Nation. Again, the need for this is growing,
especially as the foreclosure crisis is pushing more and more families
into rental housing. Again, the Senate spoke forcefully in support of
this program when an amendment was offered by a Senator in this body to
strike that entire program. My colleagues, again Democrats and
Republicans, voted 77 to 11 to keep this permanent affordable housing
program.
The bill also includes $3.9 billion for community development block
grant funds to help communities across the Nation revitalize
neighborhoods that have been devastated by foreclosures. This provision
has strong support from the Nation's mayors, community groups,
religious organizations, housing groups, and civil rights organizations
as well. Unfortunately, we can't stop every foreclosure, but these
funds will help our communities deal with the fallout of this terrible
problem and help stabilize and renew our hardest hit communities.
There are important sections of the legislation that help our
Nation's veterans find and keep housing and provide them with housing
counseling. We increase housing counseling money in this bill so we can
help people avoid the scourge and trauma of losing their homes to
foreclosure.
There are a number of important tax provisions, and I want to commend
my friend and colleague from Montana, Max Baucus, and Senator Grassley
of Iowa. The Finance Committee did a terrific job with this bill. They
got rid of some onerous, and I think wrong, tax provisions that had
been adopted earlier and included some wonderful provisions to help
first-time home buyers, as well as to provide some assistance in the
area of encouraging additional investments in our housing areas.
So I want to commend Max Baucus and Chuck Grassley and members of the
Finance Committee for the additions they have added to this bill that
are going to make a significant difference.
Finally, the legislation includes important standby authority, which
was requested by the Secretary of the Treasury, Hank Paulson. He worked
all weekend, two weekends ago, with various other people to do what
they could to figure out how not to lose the major investments in our
government-sponsored enterprises, and he came up with this idea of
standby authority. Now, it is unprecedented the authority he is asking
for, but Hank Paulson impresses me as someone who has thought about
this. He has spent a lifetime in the private sector and knows and
understands these issues pretty well. And I know for a fact that he
reached out to a lot of other people in the country as well, not of his
own political persuasion but people he respects, and listened to them
as they crafted this standby authority.
My colleagues have raised some very good questions about it. We had a
long, almost 5-hour hearing on the Banking Committee last week where
Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, and
Christopher Cox of the SEC, sat there for 4\1/2\ hours and answered
questions from 22 members of the Banking Committee about this proposal.
And there are legitimate issues about it.
I see my friend from New Mexico here, the former chairman of the
Budget Committee, and we asked questions that he would have asked in
that committee, and I think we answered them as well as we could.
But I think Hank Paulson has it about right. This authority is going
to be critical if we are going to encourage people to stay involved in
this critically important area of liquidity to the housing market. So I
know my colleagues are concerned about this 18-month proposal, and that
is how long it will last, but we will watch it carefully. Any authority
that he would seek would be subject, of course, to the debt ceiling
limit, which the Congress can impose at any point to slow this down.
But the idea that the authority is there will give us, I think, the
needed security that many global investors--and I want to point out
they are global investors these institutions need in order to stabilize
them at a critical time when there are significant jitters about
whether these institutions can survive.
So, Madam President, this provision is one that was added by the
Secretary of the Treasury, added by the administration, but Senator
Shelby and I believed it was worthy of inclusion in this bill, and that
is why we included it.
In short, this is a good, balanced bill. In many ways it is almost
landmark legislation. It has taken a long time to get here and
unfortunately it took some bad news for us to build the support this
bill needed. But we are where we are.

[[Page 16151]]

This bill is going to make a difference almost immediately. In fact,
we are seeing a difference already in the markets around the country--
and around the world, for that matter. This bill has very broad
support, including from the Conference of Mayors, the League of Cities,
the Mortgage Insurance Companies of America, the Leadership Conference
on Civil Rights, the Mortgage Bankers Association of America, the
Consumer Federation of America, the National Association of
Homebuilders, NAACP, ACORN, the Financial Services Roundtable, and
numerous other business, consumer, and civil rights organizations. In
fact, I ask unanimous consent that a long list of these organizations
be printed in the Record for my colleagues.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

American Financial Services Association; National Governors
Association; U.S. Conference of Mayors; Mayors Newsom (San
Fran), Menino (Boston), Daley (Chicago); National Assoc of
Counties; National Assoc of Local Housing Finance Agencies;
National Assoc for County Community and Economic Development;
National Community Development Association; National Council
of State Housing Agencies; Manufactured Housing Institute;
National Housing Trust Fund; Mortgage Insurance Companies of
America and National Assoc of Mortgage Brokers.
National Association of Realtors; AARP; FM Policy Focus;
NAACP; Mortgage Bankers Association; Conference of State Bank
Supervisors; ACORN; Homeownership Preservation Foundation;
Mission of Peace National Corp; Mon Valley Initiative;
National Council of La Raza; National NeighborWorks
Association and Council of State Community Development
Agencies.
Mr. DODD. Madam President, I point this out because, as my colleagues
will tell you, oftentimes we have one group of people for something and
not another. But when you get the Financial Services Roundtable, the
NAACP, the Consumer Federation of America, the League of Cities--you
get some idea of what we have been able to put together, Senator Shelby
and I have, with this bill.
Is this a bill Richard Shelby would write on his own? No. Is this one
I would write on my own? Absolutely not. We do not do business like
that here. There are 100 of us here, and we try to work together to
fashion ideas that make sense, and that is what we have done with this
critically important legislation.
I thank Senator Shelby. I thank my colleagues, my Democratic
colleagues on the Banking Committee--Jack Reed, Chuck Schumer, Tim
Johnson, a long list of people who made a significant contribution to
this bill. I thank my Republican colleagues on the committee as well; 8
out of 10 of my Republican colleagues on that committee have supported
this effort and stayed with us through this long, arduous process, a
process that did not have to last this long and should not have to last
this long over the next several days. We could pass this bill in the
next hour and send it to the President for his signature this
afternoon. That is the kind of news I think the world is waiting for,
both at home and around the globe--that the American Congress,
Democrats and Republicans, contrary to the opinion people have of us,
can actually sit down and work together and produce something for the
American people.
That is what we have done with this bill. I thank my colleagues for
it and I urge the adoption of this legislation when the moment occurs.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.
Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that during
the 30-minute block of time for our side 5 minutes be allocated to me,
12\1/2\ to Senator Vitter, and 12\1/2\ to Senator Enzi.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, let me first ask that I be permitted
to use 1 minute upfront that is not allocated to my 5 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DOMENICI. I say to my good friend before he leaves the floor how
good it is to see you in action again. I think you probably feel you
are back being a Senator. Remember the days when we, together, passed
that one piece of legislation where we overrode the veto of President
Clinton, when you were the chairman of the Democratic Party and we had
a bill going here? It was the right bill; class action. Do you remember
that one? It started us moving where that whole process was cleaned up.
I regret to say, with the lawyers we were fighting with in our
committees, one of them ended up in jail, I noticed recently. That was
the fate he had. I saw that coming as he was conducting his law
practice in the days we were investigating class action litigation.
I wanted to say what a pleasure it was then. I know from what you are
saying that you have had a lot of opportunity to debate, share ideas,
work with other Senators, and I think that is what makes the Senate
great. I compliment you for it.
Mr. DODD. I thank the Senator very much.
Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, it is obvious I just finished telling
the good Senator how we work together to make good laws when we have
important issues. I also want to say, in the year 2005 we passed an
Energy Policy Act. The Senate took 19 rollcall votes on amendments and
agreed to 57 of them. Last year on the Energy Independence and Security
Act we took 16 rollcall votes on amendments and agreed to 49.
We can look back further, if you would like to, to the successful
legislation on the Clean Air Act of 1990. I was here. I was working on
it. The Senate acted upon 131 amendments and took well over 3 weeks
here on the floor of the Senate.
Let me say to my fellow Senators, that is not what is happening
today. Today an issue just as important, as I view it, as important as
any of the legislation I talked about--any legislation that my good
friend from Connecticut talked about here on the floor, any legislation
that we have considered in the field of energy--is before us today
during a critical time, a time more critical than at any other time we
were considering energy legislation that I have alluded to, and a
couple of other times that are similar.
What did we do then? We had time for important legislation and we
must have time for this, for the one who is saying: What are you going
to do to the offshore inventories of American oil and gas that are
locked up that we cannot use and have not used for 20 to 27 years and
now they are there, ready to help the American people? The price of
gasoline must come down and that is one way to do it. We have to open
the reserves that belong to the people.
It is interesting the distinguished Senator from Connecticut could
talk about working together and how that has taken place in this
important housing bill. It is important that we understand how we did
the previous Energy bills. But here today, let it be known that bill
which the American people have been wanting us to vote on, wanting us
to do something about--that is to open up these reserves that belong to
the people and see how much that might affect the price of gasoline--we
cannot get a vote unless we do what the majority leader wants us to do.
One person, the majority leader, decides whether we can have an
amendment, what it will say, what it will be about.
It is completely different than the way we have discussed here for
the last 5 minutes, the way legislation takes place here in the Senate.
Remember what has happened in this bill. You can throw away all the
words and look at where are we today.
There is a bill pending that the Democratic leader brought to the
floor on the subject matter of whether there is speculation going on
that affects the price of crude oil in a bad way, with bad conduct on
the part of those who are participating. He brought a bill down to cure
that. We have been told that is a small part of the problem. But the
big part of the problem is supply and demand. We, the Republicans--
joined by some Democrats, I am sure, if we ever had a chance to do it--
are addressing the issue of supply and demand. That is the big issue.
That is the issue that might indeed make some Americans smile instead
of being so

[[Page 16152]]

worried about their future because of the price of gasoline and what it
is doing to them and to the American economy. We must have the right to
freely amend that bill until we come to a consensus. That is how we get
things done. But, remember, plain and simple, no matter what is said,
we cannot do that.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired.
Mr. DOMENICI. That is because the majority leader has precluded us
procedurally from doing anything other than what he wants, what he will
let us do. We cannot act the way the Senate should act on important
issues.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
Mr. VITTER. Madam President, I too rise to talk about the single most
important issue, bar none, facing American families--gasoline prices,
energy. Again let me restate the obvious. This is the single most
important issue facing all Louisiana families I represent, facing
American families across the country. In that context, for families who
struggle every week, particularly when they go to the gas station to
fill up, particularly as they try to take family vacations in the
summers or they struggle with their basic needs of commuting to work--
those folks in ag, or transportation, doubly hit with diesel costs--we
need to act, not talk but act in a meaningful way on this issue.
Let me first congratulate the majority leader. He has finally allowed
a bill on the floor which at least touches on this issue. He has a bill
before the Senate right now, the issue on the floor, that deals with
speculation in energy, particularly oil and gas. That is an issue we
should address head on and I applaud that.
But there is a big problem with how he has gone about running the
Senate in this instance; that is, he has not allowed any meaningful
amendment to that bill so that we can have an open debate and open
amendment process about gasoline and energy.
Again, I am happy to look at the speculation issue and act on the
speculation issue. I support provisions that do that. But I do not know
a single American who thinks that is nearly enough, that it addresses
the bulk of the issue, that we should not move on to other crucial
issues revolving around supply and demand.
Like virtually every Member of this body, I have introduced
significant amendments that go to the heart of the matter, that impact
supply and demand, that try to make us use less, bring down demand,
conserve more, have greater fuel efficiency standards, new technology.
But that would also have us find more right here at home. We have those
resources here. Yet because of the ground rules laid down by the
distinguished majority leader, we are not being allowed to call up any
of those amendments, have that open debate, consider my ideas or the
ideas of the 99 other Senators on both sides of the aisle. I urge the
majority leader to abandon that approach and to get back to the best
traditions of the Senate--open debate and an open amendment process.
Specifically, in that vein:
I ask unanimous consent that the Senate consider S. 3268 in the
following manner: that the bill be subject to energy-related amendments
only and that amendments be considered in an alternating manner between
the two sides of the aisle. I further ask unanimous consent that the
bill remaining be the pending business to the exclusion of all other
business other than privileged matters or items agreed to jointly by
the two leaders.
I ask unanimous consent that the first seven amendments to be offered
on the Republican side of the aisle by either the Republican leader or
his designee be the following: an Outer Continental Shelf amendment,
including a conservation provision; an oil shale amendment, including a
conservation provision; an Alaska energy production amendment,
including a conservation provision; the Gas Price Reduction Act, which
has 44 cosponsors, myself included; a clean nuclear energy amendment; a
coal-to-liquid fuel amendment, including a conservation provision; and
a LIHEAP amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. In my capacity as Senator, I object.
Mr. VITTER. Madam President, I am obviously not surprised, but I
continue to be disappointed. Gasoline prices--energy--are the single
greatest challenge facing every Louisiana family. I know they are the
greatest challenge facing Missouri families and families all across
this country. Yet we are not acting on what most concerns folks about
our collective future, our economic future, the future for our
families. We must act.
The American people have a lot of sound common sense and they know
there is no single answer, there is no silver bullet, there is not one
thing that does everything, there is not one thing that can stabilize
and immediately lower gasoline prices.
They know we need to do a number of things. Most of the American
people, like me, are perfectly willing to look at speculation and act
on that issue. I support provisions to do that. But the American people
also want to look at supply and demand. They want to decrease demand
through conservation, through greater efficiency, through new
technology, but they also want to increase supply, including finding
more energy right here at home.
That includes a lot of oil and gas resources we have right here at
home that we need for the short term and medium term. We need to do a
number of these different things.
As I mentioned, I have introduced seven specific amendments. My
amendments do a number of different things, both on the demand side and
on the supply side, because we need to act on both sides of the
equation. But, again, the ground rules the majority leader has
established shut all that out so far. I certainly hope he reconsiders
and changes those ground rules.
Those ground rules are offensive, quite frankly, to the traditions of
the Senate. I came from the House. When I did, I heard the Senate was
fundamentally different from the House; that the Senate was about open
debate and open amendments and not controlled with limited debate and
limited amendments such as the House.
Well, I found out the Senate, under this leadership, is different
from the House. In the House we had a handful of amendments on every
bill. In the Senate, we are even denied that. That is not the tradition
of the Senate, and it is not how we have acted in the Senate on energy
legislation in the recent past.
The last two times we considered energy legislation were in 2007 and
in 2O05. In 2007, when the price at the pump, by the way, was about $3
a gallon, we spent 3 whole weeks on the bill, on the issue on the floor
of the Senate, 3 weeks, nothing but that.
We had rollcall votes on 16 amendments. We had 22 rollcall votes
total. We adopted a total of 49 amendments because several of those
amendments were accepted without a vote. There were a total of 331
amendments proposed. That is when gas was $3 a gallon.
A little further back, 2005, we also considered energy. By the way,
at that time, gas was $2.26 a gallon. We spent 2 whole weeks on the
Senate floor, 2 entire weeks focused on nothing other than that, even
though the price was almost $2 per gallon less than it is now.
We had 19 rollcall votes on amendments; 23 total rollcall votes on
the bill. We adopted 57 amendments and 235 were proposed. That is
serious legislating on a serious issue.
Yet has energy gotten less serious since then or more? Well, you can
track that with the price at the pump. It has gone from $2.26 during
that first debate, to $3.06 during the second debate, to $4, at least,
now. The issue is more important than ever and merits our attention
more than ever and merits a serious response more than ever.
That means real time on the floor and--more than time obviously--the
ability to have an open amendment process and to consider serious,
substantive legislative proposals.
Again, I have seven amendments offered. They attack both the demand
side, to lower demand, and also the supply side, to increase supply,
including in the short and medium term.
We need to attack both sides of the equation. We need to do both
those

[[Page 16153]]

things. But, fundamentally, we need to act. The American people are
sick and tired of our never acting on issues that are important to
their lives, never taking up what hits them in the pocketbook, what
their families are concerned about, what threatens their future.

Unanimous-Consent Request S. 3248

So we need to act. So in that vein, I again urge us to act. I ask
unanimous consent that the Senate consider S. 3248, in the following
manner: that the bill be subject to energy-related amendments only;
that amendments be considered in an alternating fair manner between the
two sides of the aisle.
I ask further unanimous consent that the bill remain the pending
business, to the exclusion of all other business other than privileged
matters or items agreed to jointly by the two leaders.
I ask further unanimous consent that the first seven amendments to be
offered on the Republican side of the aisle by either the Republican
leader or his designee be the following:
An Outer Continental Shelf amendment, including a conservation
provision; an oil shale amendment, including a conservation provision;
an Alaska energy production amendment, including a conservation
provision; the Gas Price Reduction Act, which has 44 cosponsors,
including myself; a clean nuclear energy amendment; a coal-to-liquid
fuel amendment, including a conservation provision; and a LIHEAP
amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. In my capacity as a Senator, I object.
The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. VITTER. I ask unanimous consent for an additional 30 seconds.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. VITTER. Again, I am very disappointed--not surprised, very
disappointed. The American people want action. The American people
deserve action on what is the single greatest threat and issue in their
lives right now.
I urge all of us to come together, not as Democrats or Republicans
but as Americans, to act.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
Mr. ENZI. Madam President, I am disappointed to be here and to have
to give this speech today. I am disappointed because I am, once again,
on the Senate floor discussing the fact that the majority leader has
decided to use the Senate parliamentary tactic to stop members from
offering amendments and to close off debate.
We are going to spend until tomorrow morning or whatever time
tomorrow we decide to have another vote on another cloture motion doing
nothing. While we can raise issues, we cannot get any votes on any
issues. This is all valuable time that we could be voting on issues for
the American people, issues that would actually solve some of the gas
price problems I hear about all over Wyoming and all over the country.
It is the No. 1 concern in this country right now.
The majority leader has a rain delay that has put a halt to this
match, but this game will get played. We will debate alternative
energy, finding more oil on American soil, deep sea exploration,
nuclear energy, oil shale. You cannot stop us forever because the
American people have told us the most important issue on their mind is
the issue of energy.
The majority leader has told the world's most deliberative body we
cannot have a real debate about this issue. But the American people are
telling him something else. Hopefully, soon he will listen. It is no
wonder Congress has an approval rating that is less than 10 percent.
Rather than working on the issues that are important to our
constituents, we continue to play ``gotcha'' politics. It is not
getting us anywhere. It is certainly not improving our Nation's energy
situation. This brand of nonlegislating that the majority continues to
peddle is not making a gallon of gas cheaper.
When will the leaders let us put real proposals on the table? This
body will take some and this body will leave some, but we should be
taking action. What we have now is not action, it is acting, acting in
the dramatic sense. We evidently think that if we can place blame on
speculators and get a vote on that and be done, we can check that box
off and say that we took care of energy for America. Americans are
smarter than that.
The majority leader is preventing a vote on an amendment that would
increase production on the Outer Continental Shelf. We cannot vote on
an amendment that will allow for more production of diesel fuel from
our Nation's most abundant energy source, coal. We cannot vote on
extending the wind production tax credit. We cannot vote on extending
tax credits for solar energy.
The majority leader has said we need to get an agreement on
amendments. Our side has agreed we need to work on energy amendments
because this is an energy debate. We have been willing to put aside all
the other kinds of amendments. But, no, that is not enough. We want to
be able to read each of them and decide whether they are meritorious
before they are put on the table.
I am not sure why that is the case. It does not match up with our
historical energy debates or, for that matter, any of our debates.
The Senate considered the Energy Independence and Security Act last
year. At that time, gas was $3.06 a gallon. I talked a little bit about
that bill because I called it the anti-energy bill and said there was
not anything in that that was going to bring down the price of gas.
Obviously, I was right. The price is up another dollar from that. But
even on that one, there were 331 amendments that were filed. Of those,
49 amendments were agreed to, and 16 amendments received rollcall
votes.
The Senate considered the Energy Policy Act of 2005, that is the
previous bill to the anti-energy bill. Gas was $2.26 a gallon then.
There were 235 amendments that were filed and, of those, 57 amendments
were agreed to and 19 amendments received rollcall votes.
The crisis is even greater now. So there ought to be amendments being
debated, considered. We should not have the parliamentary tactic that
keeps us from doing amendments.
Anytime a bill comes in here, and it is a take-it-or-leave-it
proposition, this body leaves it. So if you want to get something done,
want to be able to check off the box, we need to be able to do some
amendments.
Now, not only were both those bills fully amendable but both received
significant floor consideration. We spent 15 days on the floor on one
of them and 10 days on the other. Why? Because they are serious issues
that deserve serious debate. We wanted to make sure ideas from both
sides were considered.
As I recall, both sides lost some. But that is how it works. I have
an amendment that relates to State mineral royalties. That amendment
would encourage States to allow for energy production on their land by
giving them their fair share of mineral royalties. We are not going to
get to consider that. There are a number of other amendments that I
would support relating to energy development on the Outer Continental
Shelf in the States that want energy production and only those States
that want it.
I would support an amendment to improve our Nation's energy situation
by accelerating the development of coal-to-liquid fuels. That could be
coal to diesel and coal to jet fuel. Those are the most expensive fuels
in the United States right now. Those are the ones that have some great
potential for decreased costs using our most abundant energy source.
We have more Btu's in coal--in fact, we have more Btu's in the clean
coal in northeastern Wyoming than Saudi Arabia has in oil. It is an old
technique from World War II, from converting that to, say, diesel, and
also to convert it to jet fuel. Our military needs jet fuel. It can be
done from coal.
Unfortunately, the majority leader has stopped me from doing so by
using parliamentarian tactics to cut off the debate. He has also
stopped me from voting against a number of bad ideas I am sure we would
see. I will not have a chance to vote against lowering the

[[Page 16154]]

speed limit to 55 miles an hour. Why is that a bad idea? It actually
led to higher traffic fatalities.
When we were talking about eliminating the 55-mile-speed limit, the
argument was, if we do that, the number of fatalities in the United
States would go up. Well, we raised the speed limit. We went back to
where it was before.
Do you know what. Traffic fatalities went down. In Wyoming, the
reason they went down is we eliminated a lot of those single-car
accidents from driving the huge distances across our State at very slow
speeds.
My dad traveled on the road. He said: At 55 miles an hour, you could
watch a flower come up, grow, bloom, and wither before you got by it.
So he started reading while he drove. But it kept him awake. So he did
not have one of those single-car accidents where you roll your car.
Now, believe it or not, I agree with the majority party on some steps
we could make to help this country be more energy independent. Wind tax
credits are one example. By restricting Senators' participation,
stopping them from representing those who put them in office is not
going to get us any further than an empty gas tank, and that is what
this bill in its current form is.
The bill before us blames speculators for our energy situation. It
might be worth taking a moment to discuss exactly what speculators do.
We have turned that into a cuss word. Oil speculation is two people or
companies or organizations guessing what the price will be in the
months to come. One of those entities thinks the price will be higher
in the months to come, and so they buy the commodity now. Another
entity thinks the price will be lower, so they sell the commodity now.
The one who is right will make money; the one who is wrong will not.
You can't have this kind of a transaction without two people who
believe the exact opposite. Both are speculators. Both think they can
make money based on their knowledge of the world and the gas supply at
the current time.
What kind of entities do this? An airline might think the price of
oil will be higher in the months to come, and, to stabilize their fuel
costs, they will purchase oil futures for the next couple of months. If
the prices go up, they will have stabilized their fuel costs and saved
money. If they go down, of course, it will cost them what they bid it
at, and they will lose money compared to what they could have gotten it
for. But in order for them to have that market, there has to be
somebody willing to bet against them, willing to say: Yes, I think the
price is going to go down, and I am going to make that differential.
Those are speculators. Without the speculator part of the deal, the
airline doesn't have a deal. The airline cannot lock in a price for
what they are willing to pay to make sure they will know in the future
what their costs are going to be. That is speculation.
The market is a place where you anticipate what the cost will be in
the months to come so that you can have certainty for what you are
going to pay. Sometimes you guess right and you are paying below market
value. Sometimes your guess is wrong, and you end up paying more than
market value. What is commonly ignored in the debate about oil
speculators is that for every dollar made, a dollar is lost by someone
who would be called a speculator but without whom the market doesn't
work.
Oil is not the only commodity that is traded. We speculate on the
price of wheat, pork bellies, gold and silver, cattle--a number of
other things. Speculation allows producers and consumers of these
products the opportunity to manage the risk they have on buying and
selling products that don't have a set price. This helps prevent wild
fluctuations of price each and every day. That keeps major market
failures from happening.
Earlier this week, I spoke about how the majority leader's energy
speculation bill could have significant unintended consequences for
institutional investors accessing commodities, futures, and capital
markets. Today, America's largest pension funds wrote to me stating
their concern.
The American Benefits Council wrote:

The Council is very concerned that the serious implications
of S. 3268 on retirement plan participants have not been
sufficiently evaluated. We are concerned that legislation
relating to energy policy could unintentionally harm the
long-term security of American workers and families.

I ask unanimous consent to have the letter printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

American Benefits Council,

July 24, 2008.
Re: Adverse Retirement Plan Implications of Energy
Speculation Legislation (S. 3268)

Hon. Edward M. Kennedy,
Chairman, Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Michael B. Enzi,
Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Health, Education,
Labor and Pensions, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Max Baucus,
Chairman, Committee on Finance, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Charles E. Grassley,
Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Finance, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairmen Kennedy and Baucus and Ranking Members Enzi
and Grassley: I am writing today on behalf of the American
Benefits Council to express concerns about the implications
of S. 3268, the Stop Excessive Energy Speculation Act of
2008, on employer-sponsored retirement plans and the tens of
millions of American workers and retirees who rely on these
plans for their retirement security. The American Benefits
Council (the ``Council'') is a public policy organization
representing principally Fortune 500 companies and other
organizations that assist employers of all sizes in providing
benefits to employees. Collectively, the Council's members
either sponsor directly or provide services to retirement and
health plans that cover more than 100 million Americans.
The Council is very concerned that the serious implications
of S. 3268 on retirement plans and retirement plan
participants have not been sufficiently evaluated. We are
concerned that legislation relating to energy policy could
unintentionally harm the long-term financial security of
American workers and families.
Employer-sponsored retirement plans are long-term investors
that invest in a wide range of asset classes in order to
diversify plan investments and minimize the risk of large
losses, both of which are central to employers' fiduciary
obligations to act prudently and solely in the interest of
plan participants. As you know, fiduciaries are subject to
extremely demanding legal obligations under the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) but have flexibility
to select the investments that will allow them to carry out
their mission of providing retirement benefits to employees.
Commodities are one of the broad range of asset classes upon
which fiduciaries rely. Specifically, commodities serve as a
modest but important element of the investments held by
employer-sponsored defined benefit pensions because commodity
returns are uncorrelated with stocks and bonds and because
they provide an important hedge against inflation. For the
same reasons, commodities are used in many of the diversified
``single fund'' solutions (lifecycle funds, target retirement
date funds) that have been developed to simplify investing
for the tens of millions of Americans participating in
defined contribution plans such as 401(k)s. These single fund
solutions, which policymakers have encouraged through
legislation and regulation, make investing easier while
giving workers access to professionally managed, diversified
portfolios.
The restrictions imposed on commodities investing under S.
3268 would greatly restrict the ability of employer-sponsored
defined benefit and defined contribution plans to use this
important asset class. The result will be less ability to
diversify investments, manage investment volatility and be a
buffer against inflation. Unfortunately, it is the employees
and retirees who depend on employer retirement plans for
their income in retirement who will ultimately suffer. We
hope, with this in mind, that the implications for retirement
plans and plan participants will be examined more fully
before S. 3268 is considered further.
We sincerely appreciate your consideration of our views on
this important matter. Please let us know if we can provide
additional information or address any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
James A. Klein,
President.

Mr. ENZI. I also ask unanimous consent to have an article on
statistics on the 55-mile-an-hour speed limit printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

[[Page 16155]]

[From the Wall Street Journal, July 24, 2008]

The Insanity of Drive-55 Laws

(By Stephen Moore)

It didn't seem possible that politicians could think up a
sillier energy proposal than Barack Obama's windfall profits
tax on oil companies, but Republican Sen. John Warner of
Virginia has done just that.
Earlier this month, Mr. Warner suggested a return to the
federal 55-mile-per-hour speed limit on America's highways,
as a way to save on national gasoline consumption. ``I drive
over 55 miles an hour, . . . sometimes 65,'' he said on the
Senate floor. ``But I am willing to give up whatever
advantage to me to drive at those speeds with the fervent
hope that modest sacrifice on my part will help those people
across this land . . . dealing with this financial crisis.''
Meanwhile, environmental groups across the country are also
pushing a lower national speed limit to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. The notion here is that if people simply lift the
pedal off the metal on the highways, they will help avert an
environmental apocalypse.
Mr. Warner may be willing to drive slower to save gas. The
vast majority of Americans surely are not. The original 55
mph speed-limit law, enacted in October 1974 after the OPEC
oil embargo as a way to save energy, was probably the most
despised and universally disobeyed law in America since
Prohibition. In wide-open western states, driving at 70 mph
or even 80 mph on miles upon miles of straight, flat,
uncongested freeways is regarded as a God-given right. In the
1970s and '80s, the federal speed limit was a daily reminder
of the intrusiveness of nanny-state regulation.
States were bullied into complying. If they didn't, they
risked losing federal highway money--which came from the gas
taxes paid in part by their own residents. The law--``double
nickel,'' as it was called--was so hated in Montana that the
state legislature passed a law capping speeding tickets at
$5. In Wyoming, the highway patrol told speeders to hold on
to the tickets they issued because they were good for the
whole day.
In 1995, the newly ascendant Republican Congress repealed
the 55 mph limit. Most states acted quickly to allow speeds
of up to 65 mph or even 75 mph on their interstates, and for
good reason. As an energy saving policy, the double nickel
was a bust. The National Motorists Association reports that
about 95% of American drivers regularly exceeded the federal
speed limit. Does it make sense to resurrect a law that 19
out of every 20 Americans disobeyed?
In the first few years when the law was strictly enforced,
according to the Congressional Research Service, gasoline
consumption was reduced by about 167,000 barrels a day. But
over time the law was increasingly ignored, and average
speeds on the highway fell by only a few miles per hour. The
National Research Council estimated in 1984 that Americans
spent one billion additional hours a year in their cars
because of the speed limit law.
Mr. Warner repeats the myth that a lower federal speed
limit will increase traffic safety. Back in 1995, Naderite
groups argued that repealing the 55 mph limit would lead to
``6,400 more deaths and millions more injuries'' each year.
In reality, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
data reveal that in the decade after speed limits went up
(1995-2005), traffic fatalities fell by 17%, injuries by 33%,
and crashes by 38%. That's especially significant because in
1995 far fewer drivers were gabbing on their cell phones or
text messaging while driving.
In a study for the Cato Institute in 1999, I compared the
fatality rates in states that raised their speed limits to 70
mph or more (mostly in the South or West) with those that
didn't (mostly in the Northeast). There was little difference
in safety. Of the 31 states that raised their speed limits to
70 mph or more, only two (the Dakotas) experienced a slight
increase in highway deaths. The evidence is overwhelming that
traffic safety is based less on how fast the traffic is going
than on the variability in speeds that people are driving.
The granny who drives 20 mph below the pace of traffic on the
freeway is often as much a safety menace as the 20-year-old
hot rodder.
Retail gasoline stores report that Americans have already
reduced their gas purchases by about 5% this year--presumably
by driving less and buying more fuel-efficient cars. At $4.59
a gallon, motorists don't need to be lectured by politicians
on the financial savings from cutting back. Those who want to
stretch their dollars can drive 55 mph on their own (though
they are well advised to stay in the right lane).
But many liberal and green do-gooders want the double
nickel precisely because they want to force everyone to share
in the sacrifice required. As an egalitarian friend once told
me, he loves traffic jams because they are the ultimate form
of democracy.
To the left, fairness means we all suffer equally together.
In light of this alleged moral imperative, it doesn't matter
if a lower speed limit means Americans would spend two
billion extra hours on the road, or that, according to the
Labor Department, assuming a $15 per hour average wage means
the speed limit could cost the economy between $20 billion
and $30 billion a year in lost output.
Calls for a 55 mph speed limit--and for that matter most
other government energy conservation plans, such as urging
people to ride a bus or a bicycle rather than driving a car--
reflect a mindset that oil and gasoline are more valuable
than human time.
But America is not running out of energy. We have
potentially hundreds of years of oil and natural gas and coal
supplies in America alone, if Congress would only let us
drill for it. What is in short supply--the only truly finite
resource, as the late economist Julian Simon taught us--is
the time each of us spends on this earth. And most of us
don't want to spend it sitting longer than we have to in
traffic.

Mr. ENZI. I also have heard from other pension fund and institutional
investor representatives that the provisions in the majority leader's
bill have not been sufficiently vetted. Rather than pass a flawed bill
on energy speculation, we should wait until we read the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission's and the Interagency Task Force on
Commodity Markets' report due out later this year. This issue is too
important for us to act without all of the facts.
Few serious economists believe that this bill will do anything
substantial to decrease energy prices. Warren Buffett, the Nation's
wealthiest Democrat, doesn't think that it will make a difference.
Neither does oilman T. Boone Pickens. Even the Federal Reserve
Chairman, Ben Bernanke, believes that this bill will have little impact
on the price of gasoline. And yet we are still prohibited from offering
amendments. We are still prohibited from voting on amendments that will
have a real impact on the price of gasoline.
It is unfortunate that the debate is turning out this way, because I
agree that there should be more transparency in the market. That is why
I am the cosponsor of a bill that allows for more oversight by the
Commodities Futures Trading Commission. But in addition to that, the
bill does something more. The Gas Price Reduction Act includes a
provision to open up coastal waters in States where they want energy
production. It ends the ban on the development of promising oil shale
in Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah. At the same time it encourages
increases in supply, it promotes the development of better technology
so that we use less energy.
We should have the opportunity to vote on these proposals. We should
have the opportunity to have a real debate on energy. Instead, we are
going wrap up this debate and begin playing the blame game. It is
disappointing that the Senate is working this way, and I hope we can
stop playing politics and have a real debate in the near future. This
issue is too important for the Senate to ignore.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Montana.
Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, I rise today to call on the Senate to pass
commonsense legislation to lower gas prices. This week, possibly even
today, the Senate will vote on legislation that would create more
oversight on the financial markets that are helping to drive up the
cost of oil. I hope my colleagues will join me in voting to pass it. It
is the first step toward energy independence but certainly not the
last.
In my State of Montana, folks are hurting. The average price of a
gallon of gas is about $4.20. Diesel now costs on average $4.67 a
gallon in the Big Sky State. My constituents need and deserve effective
action from their national leaders to provide them with relief from
this energy crisis.
Across Montana, desperate times are producing desperate measures.
Driving to go to work or between cities is not a choice; it is a
necessity. Snow is on the ground for a good part of the year. You need
wheels to get around. Folks are paying with credit cards at the pump or
getting second or third jobs to get by. They are canceling vacations,
driving less, and buying smaller cars. But that is not enough.
The Senate must provide relief at the pump, and there is no silver
bullet. It is going to take a few commonsense ideas and a lot of hard
work to diversify our portfolio. I support a three-pronged plan: Crack
down on energy speculators manipulating the marketplace for a quick
buck; produce more fuel by drilling for oil where it makes

[[Page 16156]]

sense and invest in renewable energy for the long term; also, encourage
energy conservation--that is the low-hanging fruit--for long-term
energy sustainability.
The Senate will soon vote on a commonsense plan to crack down on oil
market speculators and hedgers who break the rules. We have seen these
guys before with Enron and the housing bust, folks on Wall Street who
manipulate the market and give themselves raises while gas prices are
choking regular folks. It is time to put a stop to this unfair
manipulation.
Let me be clear about two points. First, not all speculation is bad.
Well- regulated speculation can help markets set a fair price for a
commodity. Unfortunately, under this administration, speculation and
hedging have gotten way out of hand, driving up the price of oil to
record heights and squeezing the American consumer as never before.
When the price of oil skyrocketed this summer, it was not because of a
sudden increase in demand, nor because OPEC suddenly decided to pump
less. It was because of trading on Wall Street by folks who never
intended to own a barrel of oil.
We owe to it every family struggling to meet rising gas bills, every
farmer filling up his tractor, every trucker buying fuel to move
product to make sure this trading is fair and on the level. Folks in
Montana don't have a problem with anyone making a buck, but we do
believe in the American dream. We will not put up with folks who game
the system.
I call on my Senate colleagues, Democrats and Republicans alike, to
join together and pass the Stop Excessive Energy Speculation Act. This
bill will strengthen the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to crack
down on Wall Street speculators in the oil market. More watchdogs, more
transparency will stop people from gaming the system and artificially
and unnecessarily driving up prices at the pump. We need this bill.
When it comes to getting control of high gas prices, this is only the
beginning. Beyond speculation, we need to drill for oil in places that
make sense right here in America, and production of renewable fuels
must go hand in hand with drilling for more oil.
One of the places it makes sense to drill for oil is in the Bakken
Formation in eastern Montana and North Dakota. The Bakken field is a
place we will hear about again and again. New technology is allowing
smaller producers to extract more oil. There is more than 4 billion
barrels of oil in the Bakken field. It is hard work, but these are good
jobs, and the salaries are good too. And they are right here at home.
All you need is a strong back, a cattle stand, a good work ethic, and a
clean record, and you can find jobs that start for as much as $25 an
hour.
The Bakken field isn't the only place where drilling makes sense.
Last week, the Interior Department finally opened 2 million acres in
the Alaska National Petroleum Reserve, and it is about time. It is all
part of the puzzle to free America from the grip of foreign oil and
lower the price of gas at the pump.
However, anybody who tells you we can drill our way out of this
problem is not shooting straight. Congress has been debating whether to
extend tax credits for wind, solar, and other renewable energy sources,
and we ought to stop extending the production tax credit on an annual
basis. A long-term extension of these tax credits will really make a
difference.
Over the long haul, we know we cannot simply drill our way out of
this problem. We must invest in conservation and sustainable energy
such as biofuels. It is all part of the puzzle to free America from the
grip of foreign oil and lower prices of gas at the pump.
Earlier this summer, Congress passed the farm bill over the
President's veto. That bill included hundreds of millions of dollars
for advanced biofuels. The farm bill also contained a provision I was
able to offer to encourage the production of camelina. Camelina is a
crop that can be grown in Montana and other places and can be processed
into biodiesel to run tractors, combines, farm equipment, and diesel
engines. The byproduct of camelina makes a nutritious feed for
livestock. Camelina truly is a win-win solution for renewable energy.
We need to encourage more of these commonsense answers to our energy
crisis.
Finally, conservation must play a significant role in solving our
Nation's energy crisis. If we are ever going to free America from the
grip of foreign oil, we must find real ways for consumers to use less
fuel.
Last year, Congress increased auto fuel-efficiency standards for the
first time in a generation. But it took 20 years of fighting, and
eventually a Democratic Congress got it passed. Those new standards
will save about 1.1 million barrels of oil a day by 2020, or about as
much as produced by the State of Texas.
One hundred years ago, the Model T got 25 miles per gallon. Now a car
gets 28 miles per gallon. Since that time, we have split the atom, sent
a man to the Moon, developed computers, and mapped out the human
genome. Yet we get the same fuel efficiency? Come on. That is not
right. Conservation is the easiest and cheapest thing we can do to keep
energy costs down.
Part of the energy tax package will help homeowners and businesses
make those savings themselves. A partisan majority of the Senate
supports this bill, but a small minority keeps us from getting it done.
The State of Montana recently announced an initiative to help
citizens increase insulation in preparation for next winter's high
heating bills.
These are all steps in the right direction, but we have more work to
do to reduce energy consumption. The United States is the single
largest consumer of energy in the world. We cannot continue on this
unsustainable path. To do so would forfeit our national security to
countries such as Russia, Venezuela, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia. That
would be a tragic legacy to leave to our children. We need a
comprehensive approach to bring down the price of gas and address this
energy crisis in the long term. We need to crack down on speculation
and greedy hedging to manipulate the oil markets. We need to increase
production of fossil fuels where it makes sense and develop renewables
for the long haul, and we need innovative solutions to reduce our
overall energy consumption.
Some people think the economic pressure on the middle class is all in
their heads. We know better. Folks in Montana know this energy crisis
is real and it is bad. The Senate must act now to pass constructive
legislation to bring down the price of energy at the pump. It all
starts with passage of the Stop Excessive Energy Speculation Act.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Florida.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, as the Senate debates a bill
that will stop out-of-control speculation in the energy commodity
markets, I would like to make a brief statement on this legislation and
why it is essential that we act on it.
For weeks now, the Senate has heard testimony from experts, even oil
executives, who attribute the shocking increase in oil prices to the
influence of oil speculators.
Here are a few examples:

The [oil] fundamentals are no problem. They are the same as
they were when oil was selling for $60 a barrel, which is in
itself quite a unique phenomenon.

That was from Jeroen van der Veer, Chief Executive Officer, Royal
Dutch Shell, Washington Post Apr. 11, 2008.

$100 oil isn't justified by the physical demand in the
market. It has to be speculation on the futures market that
is fueling this.

That was from Clarence Cazalot Jr., Chief Executive Officer, Marathon
Oil, October 2007.

The price of oil should be about $50-$55 per barrel.

That is from Stephen Simon, Exxon Mobil Senior Vice President, Senate
Judiciary Committee April 1, 2008.
What has happened in our markets? Clearly, we are not suffering from
a supply and demand problem. Something else is happening.
In 2000, about 37 percent of the oil futures market was comprised of
speculators who include investment companies and investment banks as
well as

[[Page 16157]]

institutional investors, like pension funds. Eight years ago, 63
percent of the oil futures market was represented by companies that
were hedging the price of oil because they need oil to function, for
example, the airlines.
How has the market changed in the past 8 years? Seventy-one percent
of the oil futures market is in the hands of speculators who rarely
take control of the oil they are bidding on, and only 29 percent
represent companies that use it for the purpose that most of us would
agree it should be intended.
So we know speculation is growing when it comes to oil, and we know
the transactions have gone up 600 percent in the last 8 or 10 years.
What allowed this to happen? The infamous ``Enron Loophole,'' which
was slipped into must-pass legislation in late December of 2000.
This loophole allowed energy futures to be traded without Federal
oversight. Various investigations of the Enron collapse have pointed to
this loophole as crucial to Enron's manipulation of the California
energy market which provoked an energy crisis in the State in 2000 and
2001.
Last month, with passage of the farm bill, the Congress finally
succeeded in bringing a measure of oversight and transparency to this
market, requiring the Commodities Future Trading Commission, CFTC, to
review all contracts to determine which ones should be regulated as
though traded on a major public exchange.
While this was a step in the right direction, and the result of much
thoughtful discussion and debate, the farm bill provision can be
improved upon and strengthened. That is why I introduced a bill to shut
down the unregulated oil futures markets created by the now-infamous
``Enron loophole.'' It also removes energy from the list of exempt
commodities; requires energy to be traded on a regulated market; and
creates a new definition of what constitutes an energy commodity.
Senator Reid has introduced a leadership bill that reins in
speculation by imposing position limits ensure that legitimate
speculation doesn't get out of hand. It is a more complicated approach
that leaves the door open for unregulated trading, but if it is done
right, the approach taken by Senator Reid can get us where we need to
be. And I am interested in working with Senator Reid to ensure that his
bill gets at the problem.
I believe that some small but significant changes can significantly
improve the bill. If our approach to dealing with excessive speculation
is to impose speculation limits, then we must ensure that those limits
actually operate as limits, not as loopholes.
U.S. speculators should not be able to circumvent speculation limits
by trading on foreign exchanges, by setting up a subsidiary that would
not be subject to the limits, or by trading both on and off regulated
exchanges without aggregating the number of contracts so they count
against the overall speculation limit set by the CFTC.
If we pass a bill that allows speculators to evade these limits, the
bill's promise will remain unfulfilled, and we will have the worst of
all worlds--a bill that purports to tamp down on speculation but fails
to do so, and a bill that lets those who would dismiss the effect of
excessive speculation on the price of oil say ``I told you so.''
My friends on the other side of the aisle, the editorial page of the
Wall Street Journal and Wall Street financiers, call the effort to shut
down excessive speculation misguided and say that the spiking price of
the barrel of oil is just the market telling us that demand exceeds
supply.
But ask yourself whether this makes sense. When the Saudis agreed to
increase production, there was no drop in the price of oil. But the
price of oil keeps spiraling, and while there is no evidence of
dramatically increased demand, there is plenty of evidence that
speculative money is pouring into the energy futures market.
The airlines, which hedge against increases in the price of jet fuel
by participating in the energy futures market, are suffering. They are
the legitimate hedgers who actually use the futures, and they are
calling on us to take action against excessive speculation.
Meantime, the oil companies loudly will be claiming they need to
drill in new areas off the coasts of Florida and California. They have
a well financed campaign that says: Drill here; drill now; pay less.
This is cruelly misleading and deceitful. Drilling everything we have
in the waters below our coasts will do nothing to lower the price of
gas.
If we open all our shores and give away billions in tourism, fishing,
and all the economies of all the coastal States to boost oil
production, the first drop of oil wouldn't be seen until the year 2017,
and oil production would peak in the year 2030.
What could we get in the year 2030? We would get 200,000 barrels a
day.
To put that number another way, as expressed by my colleague, Senator
Menendez yesterday, ``the amount of gas we could get from offshore
drilling is equivalent to a few tablespoons per car per day.''
It is simply wrong to think that opening offshore drilling will lower
gas prices.
Yet the public relations machine of big oil continues to churn out
falsehoods. They insist they are trying to find new oil that might help
bring down gas prices, but the money they spend on exploration is
nothing compared with what they spend on stock buybacks and dividends.
This is good news for shareholders but offers no help to drivers to
offset the high cost of fuel.
Yesterday the Associated Press reported the 5 biggest international
oil companies plowed about 55 percent of the cash they made from their
businesses into stock buybacks and dividends last year, up from 30
percent in 2000 and just 1 percent in 1993, according to Rice
University's James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy.
The percentage they spend to find new deposits of fossil fuels has
remained flat for years, in the mid-single digits.
In the first 3 months of this year, ExxonMobil Corp., the world's
biggest publicly traded oil company, shelled out $8.8 billion on stock
buybacks alone, compared with $5.5 billion on exploration and other
capital projects.
ConocoPhillips has already told investors that its stock buybacks for
April to June of this year will come to about $2.5 billion, 9 times
what it spent on exploration.
This leads me to the conclusion of one oil expert who said, ``If
you're not spending your money finding and developing new oil, then
there's no new oil.''
Senator Reid has introduced a leadership bill that will rein in
speculation. Over and over, the Congress has heard testimony that the
question of supply and demand is not what is causing oil to be up at
$130 a barrel, as I referred to earlier, statements by oil company
executives that the price of a barrel of oil would be much less, given
the normal vagaries of the market of supply and demand, even though
there is a lot of demand out there in the world market. But as Senator
Reid pointed out, in the underlying bill that is before the Senate, it
is the speculators, unregulated after the law was changed to deregulate
the markets, where there are no controls on how much oil they can buy
on futures contracts or whether they have to use that oil, who continue
to speculate and drive up the price. That is what this underlying bill
is trying to address. They should not be able to circumvent speculation
limits by trading, for example, on foreign exchanges if those oil
contracts are for America.
I see my colleague from Pennsylvania is here, and I want him to have
the time to which he is entitled.
What is confronting us is an effort to get us off focusing on the
problem with this mindless statement that is out there, put out by the
oil companies--look at who is sponsoring the advertisements on TV and
in the newspapers; it is the only companies--and it is that statement:
Drill here, drill now, pay less.
Now, if we are going to solve this problem, we have to do a bunch of
things. But just drilling is not going to solve it because if you do
just that, it

[[Page 16158]]

is going to be years and years before the fruits of that effort come
in. In fact, it has been said over and over, there are 68 million acres
under lease that have not been drilled. There are plenty more acres out
in the Gulf of Mexico, without getting close to Florida, without
getting over the line into the military mission area, where the largest
testing and training area of the U.S. military in the world is, off the
coast of Florida in the Gulf of Mexico. There is plenty. So we ought to
drill.
But at the same time, let's go after what is causing these prices to
go through the roof. Speculation is a big part of it. If you want to
get down to it, let's strengthen the U.S. dollar against the world's
other currencies, by getting our fiscal house in order and starting to
balance the Federal budget. That would help a lot too.
So it is an extremely complicated issue that a simple slogan is not
going to solve. That is what this debate is trying to bring into focus.
The American people can see through the simplified slogans of ``drill
here, drill now.'' We need to get to a real solution.
Mr. President, I see my colleague from Pennsylvania is in the
Chamber, and I wish to yield the floor so we can hear from him.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Florida for making
the important points he made on the question of energy and how
difficult this challenge is for the country and that the sloganeering
will not do it. He made a very compelling argument about that, which we
need to hear in the Senate.
I wish to talk today for a few moments about the Low-Income Home
Energy Assistance Program, known by the acronym LIHEAP--L-I-H-E-A-P.
For those who follow the Senate and watch or listen, you know we use
a lot of acronyms. I know they can get a little tiresome. But this
particular acronym stands for a program that works. There is no debate
about that. There is no question about whether this program works. It
has worked for years. It has support in both parties--not enough
support, I don't think, on the other side of the aisle. I will get to
that in a moment.
But when we talk about that acronym LIHEAP, the Low-Income Home
Energy Assistance Program, we are talking about a program which this
winter can literally mean--and will literally mean--life or death for
some Americans. There is no drama and overstatement in that whatsoever
because unless we do the right thing on LIHEAP this year, people are
going to freeze to death. It is as simple as that.
I commend a lot of my colleagues: Senator Sanders has been a stalwart
on this issue, who has spoken on the floor and been a leading advocate;
Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, and so many other colleagues from
the Northeast-Midwest coalition who have fought for increased energy
assistance funding every year.
I am proud to be a cosponsor of the bill. It has a very simple title
but very important: Warm in Winter and Cool in Summer Act. That is what
the act is. The bill meets a critical and fundamental need by providing
an additional $2.53 billion in Low-Income Home Energy Assistance
Program assistance for this fiscal year.
It raises the funding to the fully authorized level of $5.1 billion.
For Pennsylvania, that means that if this bill is passed, our State
will get an additional--an additional--$210 million. If there is ever a
time the people of our State will need it, it will be this winter.
Similar to a lot of States in the Northeast, we have long winters. We
have a lot of vulnerable people: the second highest population over the
age of 65, a very large rural population that will be adversely
impacted if we do not get help and extra money for LIHEAP.
We have in our State home energy assistance grants that help
vulnerable people, the needy. Almost 33.5 percent of the grants help
older citizens. Almost 30 percent of the grants help disabled
Pennsylvanians. And 18.5 percent of the grants help young children.
These are people who need the help the most. They are vulnerable in
the cold months that are just around the corner for all of America and
for Pennsylvania. These are the people who made up the 1,000 who died
of hypothermia in their homes between 1999 and 2002--1,000 people dying
of hypothermia in just about 3 to 4 years. All of those deaths--every
one of them--was preventable. LIHEAP is the cornerstone to providing
assistance that keeps people healthy and safe.
LIHEAP is widely recognized as effective and successful, which is why
the bill we are considering, and that I am a cosponsor of, is
cosponsored by 49 Senators in total from both sides of the aisle. We
still have some problems, which we will talk about later.
The bill is necessary because LIHEAP has been chronically
underfunded--historically, at a rate of less than half the amount
authorized.
For people out there who watch our discussions, we know it is easy to
authorize. It is harder to make sure you appropriate what you
authorize. This is one of those examples where the authorization looked
real good, but the appropriation does not meet the authorization part
of our legislation.
So the need has never been greater. We have all talked a lot about
the struggle of working families who are forced to choose between the
need for heat and the need to eat. But the situation has gotten much
worse. This is not news to people who are living through this and
struggling in the nightmare of foreclosure, the difficulty with
watching wages flatten out, even as you are working harder, and your
food prices are going up, your gasoline prices are going up, college
tuition is going up, health care payments are going up. I could add
more to that. Families are being forced to choose between heating and
air-conditioning, food, medicine, gasoline, and mortgage payments--all
those difficult choices that our families are making.
Today, 15.6 million American families are at least 30 days behind on
paying their utility bills. In Pennsylvania, terminations of home
utility services are up over 51 percent.
According to a USA Today article, one of our energy companies in
Pennsylvania has disconnected 168 percent more--168 percent more--homes
than at this time last year.
So we have a major challenge in our State. The good news is that in
Pennsylvania we have had over 400,000 families--households, I should
say, in Pennsylvania--that have received assistance from LIHEAP this
year. But that is less than half of the 800,000 that are eligible.
There are 800,000 households in our State that are eligible. So we are
happy LIHEAP has done such a good job of helping 400,000 households,
but we have a doubling of that to 800,000 that are, in fact, eligible.
For those receiving assistance in Pennsylvania, the average grant was
$239, and it covered much less than a quarter of their need. So when
people hear these big numbers, they will say: Oh, my goodness, the
Federal Government wants to increase the Low-Income Home Energy
Assistance Program by $2.5 billion. That sounds like a lot of money,
doesn't it? Spread that out person by person. When it comes down to
Pennsylvania, we are talking about assistance, at last count--this
number is a few years old, but it is not much higher than this--of
$239. So if we increase it by several billion nationally, that means
individual Pennsylvanians will get some help, but they are not going to
be getting hundreds and hundreds of dollars more. They are going to be
getting more than that $239 or $250 or $260 in help. So it is not a lot
when it comes to that person. But it means a lot to that individual
person and their family.
Here is the scenario: In the dark of night, in the cold of winter, I
do not want to have a Pennsylvanian or an American in their home
freezing to death because a couple people in Washington did not think
that $2.53 billion was the right way to spend money--when we have an
administration which sent a budget here for 2009 which had $51 billion
in tax cuts for people making over $1 million and up. So for anyone
listening, if you are a millionaire, a multimillionaire or a
billionaire or beyond that, this administration sent

[[Page 16159]]

us a budget this year that gave that tiny sliver of America a $51
billion tax break.
Don't tell me we cannot afford a little bit of an increase for low-
income home energy assistance, especially when older citizens are faced
with the--``squeeze'' does not even begin to describe it--vice grip on
their head, the nightmare of trying to pay for gasoline and food and
oil in their tank, literally, to heat their homes. So we can afford
this. Ten times over we can afford it.
I wish to conclude. When we have the situation of an older citizen or
a young child who is living in a home that is not heated, or living
without adequate nutrition, that child, as well as that older citizen,
is harmed. The rate of growth and development are jeopardized. A child
is sicker, they miss more school, and they do not do as well in class.
A large percentage of LIHEAP energy assistance goes to not only older
citizens but those with a disability. This is important because someone
who is frail is more likely to be impacted by exposure if they are
unable to pay to heat or cool their home.
So I hope we pass this legislation before we leave in August. Why
should we wait? No one needs to have a crystal ball to know that in the
cold months ahead of us, a lot of vulnerable people are going to be put
at risk. So this is our chance to do something--not just to talk about
it but to do something--that will provide immediate assistance to the
most vulnerable in our society.
So I ask my colleagues to support the Warm in Winter and Cool in
Summer Act, which will help our families.
With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence
of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, might I inquire of the Chair: It is my
understanding now that the Republicans will have 30 minutes; is that
correct?
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator is correct.
Mr. INHOFE. All right. Mr. President, I am going to go ahead and take
the first 15 minutes. Then, it is my understanding that the Senator
from Georgia, Mr. Chambliss, wants 5 minutes, and Senator Craig wants
10 minutes after that. I would like to lock that in with a UC.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.

Energy

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I would like to draw the Senate's
attention to an editorial in today's Wall Street Journal and
particularly the first sentence. It says:

Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and other liberal leaders on
Capitol Hill are gripped by cold-sweat terror. If they permit
a vote on offshore drilling, they know they will lose. . . .

The editorial goes on to point out what the Democrats' plan of action
is for this problem: to cut off debate. We have been in session this
week. We have held one vote. We are considering a bill relating to
energy, but the Democrats are not allowing us to offer any amendments
to find new sources of energy, when the editorial points out that at
least 65 percent of America's recoverable oil and 40 percent of
America's natural gas is under moratorium.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at the end of my remarks
the editorial be printed in its entirety in the Record.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. INHOFE. What they are talking about are those areas where we have
huge supplies that we can access, except we cannot do it because there
are moratoria, such as exists right now in terms of the Rocky Mountain
oil shale, with 2 trillion barrels; the Outer Continental Shelf, for
which 85 percent of the Outer Continental Shelf is under an order that
the Democrats have on there, so we are not able to explore, to produce,
to drill in those areas. You hear the argument quite often that there
are 68 million acres that could be explored right now and they are not
doing it. They are not doing it for one reason, and that is because
there is no oil there.
Throughout this week I have heard a number of my Democratic
colleagues come to the floor and express their support for increased
drilling. Apparently, this has all been some kind of misunderstanding.
I have taken their consistent votes against increasing domestic
production as being against new drilling. If we all agreed that new
domestic production is part of what we need to do, then let's get on
with some votes and get them underway.
My Web site is epw.senate.gov. EPW stands for Environment and Public
Works. What I have done is gone back and gotten all of the votes we
have had that would cause us--allow us to expand our supply in America
in areas such as this. Right now on party lines they have been killed--
killed by the Democratic Party. This is a problem. Somehow, the
Democrats are trying to convince the American people that supply and
demand is not alive and well in America. It is interesting that the
other day in the newspaper, it was either an op-ed piece or it might
have been on the editorial page of the Washington Post, they said even
Congress is not going to be able to repeal the law of supply and
demand.
The American people understand the need for new domestic production.
Recent polling has shown 67 percent of the American people now support
offshore drilling with only 18 percent opposed. Sixty-four percent
believe that if offshore drilling is allowed, gas prices will go down.
Well, that is a natural conclusion you can come to.
Another poll found that 81 percent of Americans support greater use
of domestic energy sources. Both papers in my home State of Oklahoma
have weighed in on this issue with recent editorials. The Tulsa World
and the Oklahoman have weighed in, pointing to how new production can
be done in an environmental manner. The Tulsa World wrote:

President George W. Bush made the correct decision when he
lifted the White House's 18-year ban on offshore drilling . .
. No one wants the environment damaged. This work could be
done safely. It could be done over the long term only if
Congress had the good sense to act.

The Oklahoman wrote--this is in Oklahoma City:

Democrats reacted to President Bush's lifting of an
executive ban on offshore drilling by vowing to keep in place
congressional prohibitions dating to the 1980s. The debate
over energy policy just keeps getting better and better. For
years the Democratic Party has blocked efforts to
significantly increase production of America's sources of
offshore oil and natural gas, citing potential dangers to
beaches in California and Florida and dismissing any new oil
finds as too far in the future to help U.S. energy needs.
Both arguments have less persuasive steam with the current
oil prices. Certainly, if drilling offshore had gotten
underway a decade ago or more--instead of being stymied--
Americans know it would be online now and helping to absorb
some of the current price increase.

This is the interesting thing about it. We know what is happening in
Prudhoe Bay. We know what the reserves are in ANWR. We know we have a
pipeline. If we had a pipeline filled and if the President--at that
time Bill Clinton--had not vetoed the bill that would have allowed us
to go into ANWR.
New domestic production should happen and can be done in an
environmentally appropriate way. No country on Earth has exploration
technology as advanced and environmentally sound as ours. I have to say
also that we are the only country--I can't think of another country,
and I hope if someone has the name of a country that would be an
exception--there is not another country in the world that doesn't
exploit their own resources. Certainly, these resources alone are
enough to make us totally independent of any foreign importation of oil
and the prices would come down.
I have highlighted some of the amounts of domestic reserves
previously, but I think it is important to continue to point to the
amount of reserves in the United States. There they are, right there,
and we have actually enumerated them for the purposes of the Record.

[[Page 16160]]

The potential energy development from the Rocky Mountain oil shale is
truly massive with reports estimating up to 2 trillion barrels, but
once again, Democrats are blocking development. The Consolidated
Appropriations Act last year established a 1-year moratorium on the
necessary funding to complete the final regulations for commercial
leasing of oil shale.
Look at the size of this. We are talking about not 10 billion barrels
we would find in ANWR, not 14 billion barrels as we see on the Outer
Continental Shelf, but 2 trillion barrels. Without congressional
action, a 1-year delay could end up lasting much longer and, like the
Outer Continental Shelf appropriations moratorium, continue year after
year.
The RAND Corporation estimates that as many as 1.1 trillion barrels
are recoverable and at prices as low as $35 to $48 a barrel within the
first 12 years of commercial scale production. At current rates of
consumption, 1.1 trillion barrels equals more than 145 years of
domestic supply. This number would nearly double assuming the
Department of Energy's estimate of nearly 2 trillion potentially
recoverable barrels. Finally, development is ongoing in the Canadian
oil sands where proven reserves are about 179 billion barrels. We need
to continue to do that. Right now, they are in jeopardy. Congressman
Waxman has put on a prohibition in the Department of Defense using oil
from those oil sands. If anyone were tempted to try to expand that so
that no one else in the country could use it, that would be
devastating. So that effort could be underway as we speak.
In an effort to hide their true record of blocking access to
America's own resources, the Democrats are engaged in a campaign of
shifting blame, claiming there are 68 million acres in America where
oil and gas companies have the right to drill but are not drilling.
Some 44 percent of the leases that have been issued are already
producing oil and gas, and energy companies are in the process of
exploring the remaining leases to determine the energy potential of
those lands. Unfortunately, when you get out there and you explore and
you try to determine how much potential production is there, there are
some places in the United States and anywhere in the world where there
simply isn't any oil. This is the problem they have. We need to open
the other 85 percent that currently we are unable to access to allow us
to go after it. Again, we are talking about some 14 billion barrels
that are out there.
We are presently considering a bill to impose new rules on
speculating, claiming that speculators have been driving the price of
oil to record highs. Even if speculators are having a negative effect
on the price of fuels, I am concerned that the wrong congressional
action could actually exacerbate the problem. Rhetoric on the impact of
speculators simply lays the groundwork to once again implement price
controls. Looking back to the 1970s, we now know that price controls
lead to shortages, rationing, and long lines at gas stations. Over the
last few days, the name of Boone Pickens has been invoked many times.
When asked what he thought about the speculation, he recently said
that:

Speculation doesn't have anything to do with it. You have
85 million barrels of oil available in the world and the
demand is at 86.4. I don't think that guy over in China
paying $140 for oil is blaming Wall Street speculators for
what is happening to him. Everybody tries to place the blame.
And the blame is our own lack of leadership over the last 40
years on energy.

Now, I have a list of quotes I am going to actually, if there is a
little bit of time--I don't have time to read them, but a list of
quotes from people who are the knowledgeable people in this country
such as Walter Williams, the economist for George Mason University:

Congressional attacks on speculation do not alter the oil
market's fundamental demand and supply conditions. What would
lower the long-term price of oil is for Congress to permit
exploration for the estimated billions upon billions of
barrels.

The International Energy Agency says that:

Blaming speculation is an easy solution which avoids taking
the necessary steps to improve supply-side access and
investment.

So I ask unanimous consent that this list of economists be listed,
along with their statements concerning speculation, at the conclusion
of my remarks.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
(See exhibit 2.)
Mr. INHOFE. Republicans have consistently tried to do something about
the high prices. One of the things that people don't think about is if
we had all of the production, all of the crude oil, we would still have
to refine it to use it. We have a real refinery crisis in this country.
Right now we are looking at a situation where we would not be able to
refine it with the refining capability we have.
I introduced 3 years ago the Gas Price Act which is something that
would work very well. It actually took these closed military
installations that were BRAC closed--Base Realignment and Closing
Commission-closed installations--and allowed the surrounding
communities to apply for EDA grants so they would be able to attract
refineries. This would be a good idea because for one thing, those
closed bases, you would not have to actually have a cleanup to
playground standards, so the Federal Government has saved a lot of
money by doing this. I don't think there is any justification in the
world for people to oppose such an effort.
I have also introduced my Drive America On Natural Gas Act. This is
something that is very significant, because this is something that is
part of T. Boone Pickens' ideas. Let's keep in mind Boone Pickens said
we need to drill everywhere. We have to drill and we have to keep on
drilling, but we also need to explore all kinds of renewables. His idea
is to release some of the natural gas so we can use it for compressed
natural gas. The price today in my State of Oklahoma for compressed
natural gas is 90 cents a gallon. Ninety cents a gallon. In some places
it is as high as $2. Nonetheless, it does show that it is out there.
There are certain obstacles to being able to do what needs to be done
in allowing the conversions. One is we have to effect the regulations
of the EPA and the other one is we have to give the same benefit to
natural gas as we do to other renewables. If we were able to do that,
it would open it up very rapidly. In fact, yesterday, the Republican
leader offered a unanimous consent request that seven Republican energy
amendments be considered in order for consideration in this
legislation, and this was one of those.
I don't want to take up more time right now because I want to yield 5
minutes to the Senator from Georgia, but I will only say this: You can
stand on the floor and say over and over and over to the American
people that supply and demand doesn't work; you can say that Democrats
are not opposed to increasing the supply. Yet if you go to the Web site
I suggested--epw.senate.gov--we have looked at every vote that has
taken place since the middle 1990s, and in every case, every time we
tried to increase the supply of petroleum products for America, whether
it is drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf, ANWR, Rocky Mountain oil
shales, or preserving Canadian oil sands, the Democrats, to the very
last one, have voted against it.
We have to increase supply. We have to keep saying it. People
understand it. Even some people with basic educations know that supply
and demand is alive and well in America. It is just that we have too
much demand and not enough supply. We have to open it.
I yield the floor.

Exhibit 1

[From the Wall Street Journal, July 24, 2008]

Democrats Against Drilling

[[Page 16161]]

bill markup planned for today where Republicans intended to
press the issue. Mr. Byrd's counterpart in the House, David
Obey, is enforcing a similar lockdown. Speaker Pelosi says
she won't allow even a debate before Congress's August recess
begins in eight days.
She and Mr. Reid are cornered by substance. The upward
pressure on oil prices is caused by rising world-wide
consumption and limited growth in supplies. Yet at least 65%
of America's undiscovered, recoverable oil, and 40% of its
natural gas, is hostage to the Congressional drilling
moratorium.
The Democratic leadership is trying to smother any
awareness of their responsibility for high prices. They are
also trying to quash a revolt among Democrats who realize
that the country is still dependent on fossil fuels, no
matter how loudly quasimystical environmentalists like Al
Gore claim otherwise.

Exhibit 2

Dems Cite Speculation Stats That Don't Match the Facts

Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV): ``Academics, economists say that
the costs of oil is 20% to 50% speculation.'' (Sen. Harry
Reid, Remarks on the Senate Floor, 07/22/08

``Academics and Economists'' Actually Say ``It's Not Speculation, It Is
Supply and Demand''

Warren Buffett: ``It's not speculation, it is supply and
demand. . . . We don't have excess capacity in the world
anymore, and that's what you're seeing in oil prices.''
(Warren Buffett, Chairman & CEO, Berkshire Hathaway, 6/25/08)
Walter Lukken, Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission: ``We haven't evidence that speculators are
broadly driving these prices.'' (``Hitting Rock: Dems
Oblivious on Oil,'' Union Leader, 7/13/08)
Chairman Ben Bernanke: ``If financial speculation were
pushing all prices above the level consistent with the
fundamentals of supply and demand, we would expect
inventories of crude oil and petroleum products to increase
as supply rose and demand fell. But, in fact, available data
on oil inventories shows notable declines over the past
year.'' (Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, 7/15/
2008)
Craig Pirrong, Member of the CFTC Energy Markets Advisory
Committee: ``There's no evidence of speculative influence.
Speculators are not contributing to the demand for physical
oil as they almost always roll positions prior to delivery.''
(Craig Pirrong, Professor of Finance at the University Of
Houston, Member, CFTC Energy Markets Advisory Committee, 6/
24/08)
Walter Williams, Economist George Mason University:
``Congressional attacks on speculation do not alter the oil
market's fundamental demand and supply conditions. What would
lower the long-term price of oil is for Congress to permit
exploration for the estimated billions upon billions of
barrels of oil domestically available, not to mention the
estimated trillion-plus barrels of shale oil in Wyoming,
Colorado and Utah.'' (Williams, Walter E. ``Scapegoating
Speculators.'' The Washington Times 9 July 2008.) http://
www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jul/10/scapegoating-
speculators/
Paul Krugman, New York Times Columnist: ``On any given day,
expectations determine the price; but the spot market also
has to clear, and the way this happens is that excess supply
must be added to physical stocks. Even with fairly inelastic
supply and demand, any large speculative deviation from the
``fundamental'' price should show up in a noticeable increase
in inventories.'' (Paul Krugman, New York Times columnist, 6/
28/08)
International Energy Agency: ``There is little evidence
that large investment flows into the futures market are
causing an imbalance between supply and demand, and are
therefore contributing to high oil prices . . . Blaming
speculation is an easy solution which avoids taking the
necessary steps to improve supply-side access and investment
or to implement measures to improve energy efficiency.''
(International Energy Agency, Medium-Term Oil Market Report,
July 2008)
Daniel Yergin, Chairman of Cambridge Energy Research
Associates: ``When an issue is this hot, it would be so much
easier if there was a single reason to blame . . . But
calling it speculation is way too simplistic.'' (Daniel
Yergin, Chairman, Cambridge Energy Research Associates)
John Chapman, American Enterprise Institute: ``The truth is
that increased speculation in oil futures is not a cause of
rising oil prices, but rather an effect of those prices,
which have skyrocketed due to growth in global demand,
geopolitical instability, and constricted supply in several
producing countries. (John Chapman, Researcher at the
American Enterprise Institute, 7/16/08)

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Georgia is
recognized.
Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Oklahoma for
yielding me part of his time. He certainly makes a very convincing
case.
I rise to discuss the actions taken today by the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission to combat manipulation in the futures market
specifically relating to energy activity. At 11 o'clock this morning,
the Acting Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission at a
news conference announced that it was bringing an action against a
hedge fund for manipulating and attempting to manipulate the crude oil,
heating oil, and gasoline markets.
This proves that the CFTC is policing the market for suspicious
activity. They are not sitting back and allowing traders to run wild,
as some in Congress have suggested.
While this particular case is specific to manipulation, it only makes
sense that the surveillance efforts used to identify this activity are
also providing much needed additional data to the Commissioners for
ongoing monitoring efforts to detect excessive speculation--the subject
of much debate on the Senate floor. Unfortunately, some have even
confused these two terms. I want to clarify this. Manipulation is
illegal, while speculation is a normal occurrence in all of our futures
markets. That said, the Commission has recognized that more information
is necessary to ensure that speculation has not become excessive. I
happen to agree with them. We do need more information in order to make
an accurate assessment of the situation.
There have been many assertions made in the Senate not based on
factual information. It is never a good idea to propose a solution for
market conditions without carefully analyzing all of the facts. An
uninformed solution, no matter how well-intentioned it is, can easily
result in unintended counterproductive outcomes.
Many in this body have accused CFTC of timidly utilizing their
regulatory enforcement authorities or only utilizing these authorities
after extreme prompting from Congress. To the contrary, this particular
civil enforcement action that was filed today in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York was uncovered as part of an
investigation initiated by the CFTC for offenses that took place in
March 2007--long before some began blaming CFTC for the $4 gasoline.
Working proactively with the New York Mercantile Exchange, or NYMEX,
the CFTC was able to uncover wrongdoing and ensure that violators of
the Commodity Exchange Act are identified and brought to justice.
This particular case took place over an 11-day period. The New York
Mercantile Exchange--as they have the authority to do and the
information to carry out that authority--saw exactly what was happening
in the early part of what was happening, and they followed it and
immediately shut this hedge fund operator down. So this 11-day period
in March 2007 occurred over a year ago. The ongoing investigation has
taken a year to get it to where it is ready for prosecution.
Fortunately, the CFTC has been able to fulfill its regulatory
oversight responsibilities in spite of being horribly underfunded.
Today's announcement affirms the dedication and hard work exhibited by
the CFTC.
Furthermore, we should not continue to hold up the confirmation of
those--both Democrat and Republican--whom the President has nominated
to carry out this very important regulatory task. The American people
would be much better served with a fully seated Commission, a Senate-
confirmed Chairman, and more regulatory oversight staff than by the
baseless allegations made by some. If we are truly interested in a
fully functioning regulatory body, let's provide the agency with these
tools rather than wrongly condemning them for lack of enforcement.
I will close by simply saying that during the process of the passage
of the recent farm bill, which passed overwhelmingly in this body, we
took action relative to market regulation by closing the so-called
Enron loophole, which allowed for some sales on the market to take
place without the ability on the part of the regulators to get all of
the information relative to those particular trades. In addition to
allowing the market regulators to get the information, we also
increased the penalty for a manipulation--just like the

[[Page 16162]]

CFTC has filed this suit on today--from $100,000 per incident to $1
million per incident.
So we are in the process of giving the CFTC the tools it needs. We
need to continue down that road. Let's don't destroy the markets. Here
we are seeing a good example of how the tools in the hands of the
regulators are being used in the appropriate way. When someone tries to
take advantage of a system, the CFTC, as well as NYMEX, CME--all of the
boards of trade--has the ability to stop this type of manipulation and
prosecute wrongdoing.
With that, I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Idaho is
recognized.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, for the last 36 hours now, we in the Senate
have been attempting to move forward on substantive policy that would
produce more oil and bring it into our systems to offset and,
hopefully, lower the price our consumers are paying at the pump. But
nothing has happened. It is interesting, the majority leader says we
don't have time to do it, and yet we have been here 36 hours doing
nothing but talking when amendments could have been offered that might
have been substantive as it relates to taking down the Federal
moratorium that exists over many of these properties where we know
there are known oil reserves.
I find it fascinating that this morning in the Wall Street Journal,
an editorial speaks about Speaker Pelosi of the House and Harry Reid,
our majority leader, and other liberal leaders on Capitol Hill being
``gripped by cold-sweat terror. If they permit a vote on offshore
drilling, they know they will lose when Blue Dogs [Democrats that are
more conservative over in the House] and oil-patch Democrats defect to
the [Republican] position of increasing domestic energy production.''
What would be wrong with that? It would be an admission on the part
of Democratic leaders that their position of the last 20 years to deny
increased production, all in the name of environment and conservation,
hasn't worked. They simply cannot let that dirty little secret out.
Except there is one real problem: The American people are beginning to
figure out that it didn't work. Why have we gone from 30 percent
dependency in 1980 to 70 percent dependency today on someone other than
a U.S. producer, something other than a U.S. reserve? The reason is
because we quit producing.
The debate today, while it is embodied in S. 3268, called a
speculation bill, is really about production. Republicans have simply
said: Allow us to amend that. Allow us to bring to the floor amendments
that would, by potential of opportunity, produce increased production.
I wish to talk about one of those amendments that deal with offshore
drilling.
Several years ago, I introduced a term that is now being used by
many, called the ``no zone.'' By that, I simply meant that of these
areas around the coast, shown on this map here of the United States,
where we have geographical authority--meaning our territorial water--in
which we are denied the right to go and explore because of a political
decision, because of policy made out of politics, not substance, we
believe that within those areas there are literally billions of barrels
of oil. We don't know that for sure. We only know that, based on old
geological surveys, there is a great potential. We do know that where
we were allowed to drill down in the gulf, that is where a majority of
our current oil supplies are coming from, even in the deep water. But
on the coast of California, Oregon, and Washington, and off the coast
of Florida, the Carolinas, Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia, it
is: No, heck no. The politics won't let us go there. So we would like
to offer a few of those amendments. We would like to change the
character of the ``no zone.''
Let me tell you about an amendment I would offer if I were given the
chance to come to the floor on this bill and offer an amendment for
full debate. We think it is a constructive amendment. It is an
amendment we would call the Domestic Offshore Energy Security Act of
2008. It would take all of this yellow area on the map and allow it to
go out to bid for the purpose of production.
Just a year and a half ago, the Congress--when gas was at $2-plus a
gallon--decided we would let this little piece go into exploration and
development. It was called lease sale 181. We debated it for weeks,
negotiated for weeks. Finally, we brought all of us together to agree.
Well, we believe there is a substantial amount of product out there. We
don't know for sure, but the leases are going forward. It is believed
that there are 1.2 trillion cubic feet of gas and maybe between 185
million and 200 million barrels of oil. The advantage of this sale is
that it is very close to all of the known refineries and the
infrastructure that can bring it to the market very quickly.
My amendment would bring this whole area into play, where there
literally could be billions of barrels of oil and multitrillions of
cubic feet of gas. But the answer is no. The Democrat leader says: No,
can't do that, won't do that; politically, we are not going to go
there. The American consumer is asking: Why? In fact, I am told that
the polls in Florida, by a majority, are saying: Drill it. Do it right,
do it responsibly, do it cleanly, but drill it. We want the royalties
that would come to the State of Florida that would pay for our
education, but more importantly, we want to bring down the price of gas
because it is really breaking the family budget.
What happened when the President announced a few weeks ago he would
lift an Executive order on a moratorium, when the market began to show
that this year the American consumer was consuming less than last year
because of prices? Oil prices began to fall, from the high of $140 a
barrel down to, today, about $122 or $123 a barrel--nearly a $20 drop
per barrel--on the reality that the marketplace was working, demand was
going down.
If you keep allowing demand to slide but you work on bringing up
production, you bring the price down. You save the American family's
budget. But here on the floor of the Senate, it is: Oh, no, we can't go
there. The leader of the majority party will not admit that his
policy--their policy over the last 20 years of denying production has
now brought this crisis on. That is exactly what the editorial of the
Wall Street Journal basically said.
Why not let the debate go forward? Why not allow amendments to be
offered by anyone, for that matter? Why not allow those debates to go
forward?
There is another interesting article from this morning. I ask
unanimous consent to have the Wall Street Journal editorial and this
U.S. Geological Survey Report printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

Democrats Against Drilling

Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and other liberal leaders on
Capitol Hill are gripped by cold-sweat terror. If they permit
a vote on offshore drilling, they know they will lose when
Blue Dogs and oil-patch Democrats defect to the GOP position
of increasing domestic energy production. So the last
failsafe is to shut down Congress.
Majority Leader Reid has decided that deliberation is too
taxing for ``the world's greatest deliberative body.'' This
week he cut off serious energy amendments to his anti-
speculation bill. Then Senate Appropriations baron Robert
Byrd abruptly canceled a bill markup planned for today where
Republicans intended to press the issue. Mr. Byrd's
counterpart in the House, David Obey, is enforcing a similar
lockdown. Speaker Pelosi says she won't allow even a debate
before Congress's August recess begins in eight days.
She and Mr. Reid are cornered by substance. The upward
pressure on oil prices is caused by rising world-wide
consumption and limited growth in supplies. Yet at least 65%
of America's undiscovered, recoverable oil, and 40% of its
natural gas, is hostage to the Congressional drilling
moratorium.
The Democratic leadership is trying to smother any
awareness of their responsibility for high prices. They are
also trying to quash a revolt among Democrats who realize
that the country is still dependent on fossil fuels, no
matter how loudly quasi-mystical environmentalists like Al
Gore claim otherwise.
____

90 Billion Barrels of Oil and 1,670 Trillion Cubic Feet of Natural Gas
Assessed in the Arctic

The area north of the Arctic Circle has an estimated 90
billion barrels of undiscovered,

[[Page 16163]]

technically recoverable oil, 1,670 trillion cubic feet of
technically recoverable natural gas, and 44 billion barrels
of technically recoverable natural gas liquids in 25
geologically defined areas thought to have potential for
petroleum.
The U.S. Geological Survey assessment released today is the
first publicly available petroleum resource estimate of the
entire area north of the Arctic Circle.
These resources account for about 22 percent of the
undiscovered, technically recoverable resources in the world.
The Arctic accounts for about 13 percent of the undiscovered
oil, 30 percent of the undiscovered natural gas, and 20
percent of the undiscovered natural gas liquids in the world.
About 84 percent of the estimated resources are expected to
occur offshore.
``Before we can make decisions about our future use of oil
and gas and related decisions about protecting endangered
species, native communities and the health of our planet, we
need to know what's out there,'' said USGS Director Mark
Myers. ``With this assessment, we're providing the same
information to everyone in the world so that the global
community can make those difficult decisions.''
Of the estimated totals, more than half of the undiscovered
oil resources are estimated to occur in just three geologic
provinces--Arctic Alaska, the Amerasia Basin, and the East
Greenland Rift Basins. On an oil-equivalency basis,
undiscovered natural gas is estimated to be three times more
abundant than oil in the Arctic. More than 70 percent of the
undiscovered natural gas is estimated to occur in three
provinces--the West Siberian Basin, the East Barents Basins,
and Arctic Alaska.
The USGS Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal is part of a
project to assess the global petroleum basins using
standardized and consistent methodology and protocol. This
approach allows for an area's petroleum potential to be
compared to other petroleum basins in the world. The USGS
worked with a number of international organizations to
conduct the geologic analyses of these Artic provinces.
Technically recoverable resources are those producible
using currently available technology and industry practices.
For the purposes of this study, the USGS did not consider
economic factors such as the effects of permanent sea ice or
oceanic water depth in its assessment of undiscovered oil and
gas resources. The USGS is the only provider of publicly
available estimates of undiscovered, technically recoverable
oil and gas resources.
Exploration for petroleum has already resulted in the
discovery of more than 400 oil and gas fields north of the
Arctic Circle. These fields account for approximately 40
billion barrels of oil, more than 1,100 trillion cubic feet
of gas, and 8.5 billion barrels of natural gas liquids.
Nevertheless, the Arctic, especially offshore, is essentially
unexplored with respect to petroleum.

Mr. CRAIG. Here is the headline: ``90 Billion Barrels of Oil and
1,670 Trillion Cubic Feet of Natural Gas Accessed in the Arctic.'' That
is called ANWR, folks, and other areas in the Arctic. Once again, it is
politically off limits. The oil is there, but the law says you cannot
go there.
It is really quite that simple. Who are lawmakers? We are. We are the
policymakers. Why aren't we on the floor today debating the amendments?
Why aren't we offering those amendments in a responsible fashion? Why
don't we deal with what the American public needs at this moment; that
is, to see their Congress being responsive to their greatest problem,
the single greatest problem at this time, which is the price of oil and
the price of gas at the pump. It will create greater problems if we
don't deal with it quickly. It is permeating the economy and shoving up
the price of nearly everything we touch. Energy is the underlying force
of this economy. If energy prices continue to go higher, the economy
itself is weakened. Why isn't the Congress and the leadership of the
Senate moving forward? Why are we stalled out and wringing our hands
and saying there is no time? There is no time to fix the American
family's budget. There is only time to divert our attention to terms
like ``speculation.''
Let me tell you, here is the bill. Here is S. 1368. There is not one
drop of oil in it. See that. Not one drop of oil is in this
legislation. But in the amendment I would offer, there could be
millions, if not billions, of barrels of oil and trillions of cubic
feet of gas. That is the reality of what we are talking about.
Why, why, why, Mr. Leader, are you denying the Senate, the greatest
deliberative body in the world, the right to offer these amendments and
vote on them? We are stalled out because of the leadership. We are
stalled out and told we cannot go there. I don't think the American
public in any way understands the politics of this one.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. CRAIG. Politics is quite simple: If you for 20 years were wrong
and the market now shows it, how can you admit you were wrong? That is
the issue at hand.
Mr. Leader, it is time you admitted it and we got on with the
business of becoming once again a great and productive nation.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Nelson of Nebraska). The Senator from
North Dakota.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I have listened for the past 20 minutes or
so to the narrative on the floor of the Senate. My colleague from Idaho
and I have introduced legislation last year dealing with expanding
production in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico and in Cuban waters. We do not
disagree on the issue of whether we should expand production in this
region. In fact, we agree on that issue. But I have heard several of my
colleagues come to the floor to create false choices this afternoon,
and I want to talk about those false choices.
We are witnessing a time when it is very hard for people to figure
out how to scrape enough money together to put $70 worth of gas in
their tank when it is near ``e'' on the gauge. It is fascinating and
very disappointing to me how it's possible to fill your farm tank in
order to harvest your crop, how an airliner is going to be able to
afford fuel, or how is a family going to be able to afford enough money
to put gas in their tank to go to work. These decisions are being made
at a time when we face oil prices bouncing between $120 and $140 a
barrel and gasoline at $4, $4.50 a gallon. When that ought to invoke
and spark cooperation on the floor of the Senate, there is none.
My colleagues come to the floor of the Senate and say: Let's open up
the entire Outer Continental Shelf. The Energy Information
Administration carried out an assessment that shows what production
would look like without lifting the moratorium and with lifting the
moratorium. What it shows is that we get some extra production in the
year 2020. I understand talking about next week, next decade. What is
the impact going to be to families, to truckers, to farmers, to
airlines, and others if someone comes out here and says: You know what,
we have a real serious problem right now, but here is a solution for
2020.
Sign me up for the solution in the long term, although I might have a
different approach to it. I hope by 2020 we are not quite as addicted
to oil, particularly foreign oil from the Saudis, the Kuwaitis, Iraqis,
or Venezuelans. Maybe we can shed the some of that addiction in 10
years. Maybe that ought to be our strategy. Maybe we ought to do game
changing. The way to do away with our addiction is not to do more of
the same so that we are still addicted. That makes precious little
sense to me.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask the Senator from North Dakota to
yield.
Mr. DORGAN. I will be happy to yield.
Mr. DURBIN. I wish to ask him a question because he has been a leader
in the Senate on the question of speculation. I want to say that many
of our Republican colleagues have come to the floor over the last
several days saying virtually speculation is not the problem, not
speculation. I know the Senator from North Dakota has ample evidence
and many experts behind his position. He and I have joined with the
leadership in coming up with an approach which will try to dampen the
fires of speculation which may be driving up oil prices and creating
volatility not reflected in the market.
I want to make sure the Senator from North Dakota is aware of what
happened today with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. They have
charged an oil trading firm with manipulating oil prices, the first
complaint to be announced since regulators began a new investigation
into wrongdoing.

[[Page 16164]]

The CFTC accused Optiver Holding, two of its subsidiaries, and three
employees with manipulation and attempted manipulation of crude oil,
heating oil, and gasoline futures of the New York Mercantile Exchange,
which is a regulated exchange, I might add.

``Optiver traders amassed large trading positions, then
conducted trades in such a way to bully and hammer the
markets,'' CFTC Acting Chairman Walter Lukken said at a press
conference. ``These charges go to the heart of the CFTC's
core mission of detecting and rooting out illegal
manipulation of the markets.''

I say to the Senator from North Dakota that his leadership on this
issue and coming to the floor repeatedly to tell us about the
possibility this was occurring I think has sparked this commission to
come to life, at least today in terms of making these charges.
I am going to leave this story with the Senator because I want him to
be able to put it in the Record every time our Republican colleagues
come to the floor and say speculation is not an issue. It is enough of
an issue that there was a civil action filed today against a company
for hammering and bullying the market.
I know this is not in the nature of a question, but I wish to ask the
Senator if he feels this action by the CFTC is an indication of what he
has been saying over the last several months.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, it appears a Federal agency has arisen
from the dead. Good for the CFTC. I have been talking a long while
about the CFTC being dead from the neck up. This is, after all, the
regulatory agency that is supposed to wear the striped shirts, blow the
whistle, and call the fouls.
This apparently is manipulation of the market. We are talking about
manipulation. Good for them, if they have risen from the dead, if they
are taking action against someone manipulating the marketplace.
The acting CFTC Chairman, whom the Senator from Illinois described,
spent the last seven months saying there is no problem with the
marketplace, it is working fine. The doubling of the price of oil and
gas in the past 12 to 14 months has been because of supply and demand,
he says. About a month ago, the acting Chairman had an epiphany. He
must have had a good night's sleep, woke up from his dream saying: OK,
I have been saying supply and demand justifies the doubling in price,
but, in fact, we have been doing an investigation for seven months.
So which is it? Here is what it is. In the year 2000, 37 percent of
the trades in the oil futures market were speculation trades, having
nothing to do with hedging a physical product between consumers and
producers; 37 percent of the trades by speculators. Today 71 percent of
the trades are by speculators. They don't have any interest in buying
oil, taking delivery of oil, carrying a 5-gallon can of oil, or putting
a quart of oil in their car. They don't have the foggiest interest in
oil. They have interest in buying and selling contracts and making big
profits. They have taken over this marketplace and broken the market.
The proposition on the floor of the Senate is to try to wring out
this excessive, relentless speculation in this market. My colleagues
come to the floor of the Senate, and they have developed another
narrative of more drilling because they don't want to tackle this issue
of speculation. I said before, 47 Members of the Senate in the minority
have all indicated, in one form or another, that speculation is a
problem. If you believe that, help us get this bill to the President.
Yet, they come to the floor of the Senate and say we need more
drilling.
As I described in the year 2020, we will have more to bring on more
supply. I don't disagree with that point. Let's talk about it; offer
some amendments. In fact, the majority leader has offered to the
minority to bring your amendment to the floor. We will have a vote on
it.
But what about next month? What about 6 months from now? How about
let's do some things that are game changing in this country? How about
the next decade? Between now and then, let's work to change the game.
I said two days ago that, in the 1960s, John F. Kennedy did not say:
I would like to have us try to go to the Moon. I think we should think
about going to the Moon. I think we should make an effort to go to the
Moon. He didn't say that. He said by the end of the decade, we are
going to put a man on the Moon, and we did just that.
The plan of all of those who have come to the floor of the Senate
diminishing this legislation, degrading this legislation, saying we
shouldn't deal with speculation and getting this market right. We
shouldn't spend time on that. Let's instead focus on drilling. If that
is the only thing they focus on, then that is what I call a yesterday
forever strategy. If you want to wake up 10 years from now and keep the
same position, good for you. I don't.
I think what we ought to do is this: Let's at least address something
that has broken the marketplace and has doubled the price of oil and
gas in the last year, something that experts have come to the Congress
to testify about and some have said up to 40 percent of the current
price of oil is not and cannot be justified by the fundamentals of
supply and demand. It is because speculators have taken over this
marketplace.
Don't take it from me. Take it from the CEO of Royal Dutch Shell.
Here is what he said in April:

The [oil] fundamentals are no problem. They are the same as
they were when oil was selling for $60 a barrel.

If that is the case, what is the problem? The problem is, as I
described in the chart, this market has been taken over by the
speculators.
My colleague comes and says: NYMEX and ICE, describes all that is
going on, what an aggressive regulator we have. You know what, this
regulator has been sending out no action letters. Isn't that a
wonderful thing to perfectly describe a regulatory agency that wants to
take no action for anything? It said: Let me be willfully blind and not
see what is happening. By the way, because of these no action letters,
I can't see what is happening in the over-the-counter market, the
intercontinental exchange, and all of the unregulated trades because I
have decided I don't want to see it. Then let me go to the Congress and
testify, and with a straight face--I am sure suppressing a grin--at
least with a straight face say, I don't see anything that represents
anything other than supply and demand.
My question to them was: I understand you don't see that. Is it the
case you see very little because you have chosen, through no action
letters and other limitations, to decide you don't want to see it all?
We brought a bill to the floor of the Senate that says we have a lot
of problems. First and foremost, let's set this market straight,
putting pressure downward and preserving the oil futures market for
that which was intended in 1936. It was for the hedging of a physical
product between consumers and producers. That is what it was for. It
has now been taken over by the carnival of greed. Speculators control
these markets, have driven up the price despite the fact there has been
no change in the fundamentals.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle say drill. I have had a
bill in for a year and a half to say drill more in the eastern Gulf of
Mexico and allow U.S. companies to produce in Cuban waters. I am also
one of the four Senators who opened up lease 181 in the Gulf of Mexico
for drilling. I support that. I am fine with drilling. But if drilling
is your only answer, boy, that, in my judgment, is a pretty pathetic
future. Here is what Boone Pickens says. Boone Pickens and I have
disagreed on a lot of things, but he came to Congress this week:

I've been an oil man all my life, but this is one emergency
we can't drill our way out of. But if we can create a new
renewable energy network, we can break our addiction to
foreign oil.

Think of this. What if between now and 2020, if we start now we can
actually have a new barrel of oil by 2020, and you say to somebody down
the block: Cheer up, things are going to be better in 12 years--that is
one position to take, I guess.
What if the other position is as Mr. Pickens suggests? What if we did
this:

[[Page 16165]]

We are going to produce oil. We want to be less dependent, however, on
the Saudis, Kuwaitis, Venezuela, and so on, because if we didn't get
their oil for some reason, we would be flat on our back as an economy.
This makes our country vulnerable. We have to be less dependent on
them. We are going to use oil we produce.
How about if we decide to do something dramatically different? How
about in the wind belt from Texas to North Dakota where we produce a
massive quantity of wind and have the capability of taking the energy
from the wind and producing electricity? And how about in the Sun Belt
where we move dramatically to solar energy and create a superhighway of
transmission lines to be able to move that energy all around this
country? How about if we do that for a decade and then say: You know
what, all that natural gas we are using for coal-fired generating
plants, we can displace a fair amount of that with wind and solar and a
superhighway of transmission lines, and we can dramatically change
America's energy future.
We need more conservation and energy efficiency and dramatic
increases in renewables. There are so many exciting things we can do to
change America's future. Yet, my colleagues come to the floor of the
Senate for a different pursue. They plant their flag, and say: We want
our future to be the same as our past, and every 10 or 15 years, they
will be content to come here and say: Yes, we have an urgent problem
and what we ought to do is more of the same. That is not a future that
makes much sense to us.
Again, coming back to this issue, we are saying with this legislation
on the floor of the Senate requires that we do first things first. We
should do a lot of things, we agree with that. Senator Bingaman is
introducing a bill I fully support as a cosponsor. It deals with a
whole range of other issues with which we have to deal. First things
first. At least let's address this issue of excess speculation that has
broken the commodity futures market for oil.
To my colleagues who say, you know what, this is all about drilling,
I say to them: Come to the floor of the Senate and tell me what has
happened in the last year, what has happened in supply and demand that
justifies a doubling of the price of oil. They will not come and cannot
come because they don't have an answer to that.
I can give them a partial answer. If anything would have been
expected to happen to the price of oil and gas, it should have gone
down because we have driven nearly 6 billion fewer miles in America
than we did in the previous 6 months. So we are using less energy and
less gasoline. So one would expect, if you are using less, you would
put some downward pressure on prices. But that is not the case. Prices
go up like a Roman candle, double in a year.
The only conceivable reason given us is by the experts who don't have
a vested interest in this issue of the oil futures markets, and they
say that the market is now broken. Fidel Gheit has been an Oppenheimer
analyst for 30, 35 years--the top energy analyst for Oppenheimer--and
he says: Look, this is like a casino, open 24/7, like a highway with no
speed limit, he said, and no cops, and everybody is going 120 miles an
hour.
Is that really what we are willing to allow an oil futures market to
be, if it drives up the cost of oil and gas, doubles it in a year, and
imposes this kind of burden and financial penalty on every American
family and every American business; imposes this kind of burden on some
of our major industries, such as airlines and trucking companies and
farmers and others? That is a back breaker. Are we really willing to
stand on the floor of the Senate and say: Yeah, that is OK. It is OK.
Let's do something that will increase the production of a barrel of oil
in 2020.
That seems to me to be a false choice that we are being offered. I
think it was Will Rogers who once said:

It is not what he knows that bothers me, it's what he says
he knows for sure that just ain't so.

I think about that as I hear this debate on the floor of the Senate;
all this assertiveness about one answer. Do something now so we have
more oil in 2020. What about tomorrow, next week, or next month? What
do you want to do about that? What about a market that is broken; do
you ever care about fixing it? What about the fact that investment
banks and hedge funds have marched right directly into the oil futures
market?
The Wall Street Journal writes about investment banks that are
actually purchasing oil storage so they can purchase oil and keep it
off the market. Pension funds--CalPERS and others--are moving money
into the oil futures market as if it is just another share of stock.
That is just pure speculation. That massive quantity of money flooding
into this market has dramatically changed the market.
Now, I have had a lot of people come and see me about these issues
because some are very upset with what we are trying to do. They like
the speculation in the marketplace because a lot of people made a lot
of money by speculating in this marketplace. I think this marketplace
needs to exist. You have to have a market that represents a place for
legitimate hedging of a physical product. But when the market is
broken, you also have to have a regulator with the strength, the
capability, and the willingness to stand up and do what is necessary to
fix it.
The current regulator at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has
not done that, has not demonstrated a willingness to do that, and it
seems to me Congress must. Our legislation does a couple of things. It
says to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission: You determine who is
trading out there and distinguish between them. Those who are engaged
in legitimate hedging of a physical product between consumers and
producers, that is fine. That is what the market was created for. All
others are pure speculators, and we establish strong position limits on
those speculators to try to shut down that speculation, that excess
speculation in the marketplace. Relatively simple. But it does cause a
firestorm of protest by those who are making a lot of money having
broken this marketplace.
I suppose there is room--I shouldn't say I suppose. There is room for
disagreement. I respect those who disagree. But it seems to me that
this country will pay a very high price if we don't understand the need
to cooperate. There is no Republican or Democrat label on the fuel
gauge on a car. There is just ``full'' and ``empty.'' And all too often
these days it is empty because of what has happened to prices. I think
the American people expect and demand we do something that addresses
these issues.
The first step--the first step and most important step, in my
judgment--is to set this market straight and to distinguish between
excess speculation and legitimate hedging and establish position limits
in order to put downward pressure on gas and oil prices. We are told by
some very distinguished people who have testified before our committees
that we could see as much as a 40-percent decrease in the price of oil
and gas just by wringing the oil speculators out of the futures market.
If we did that, it would be a good thing, a good thing for our
country. Then, yes, we have much yet to do. I don't disagree at all
with that, and some of it is drilling. But as I said before, if our
future is just to continue down that road, without understanding the
need for a game-changing, moon-shot plan to make us less dependent on
the Saudis, less dependent on foreign oil, this country will have
missed an enormous opportunity and put its future in jeopardy.
I remain hopeful. It is now Thursday, and we have been largely at
parade rest most of the week. The minority has required us, in effect,
to spend 30 hours postcloture--30 hours postcloture--doing nothing,
which makes precious little sense. I think the country senses some
emergency here, but some of my colleagues in Congress sense no such
emergency. So we spend 30 hours largely doing nothing, and then we will
come to a cloture vote to shut off debate to see if we can perhaps get
to a vote to end this relentless speculation.
My hope is we will have sufficient votes to do that.
Mr. President, how much time have I consumed?

[[Page 16166]]

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has used 21 minutes.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I believe a couple of my colleagues are
coming, so I will reserve the remainder of my time.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record
for Senator Durbin a story that he described on the floor titled
``Traders Manipulated Oil Prices.''
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

Traders Manipulated Oil Prices--U.S.

(By Steve Hargreaves)

New York (CNNMoney.com)--The government charged an oil
trading firm Thursday with manipulating oil prices in the
first complaint to be announced since the regulators began a
new investigation into wrongdoings in the energy markets.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission accused Optiver
Holding, two of its subsidiaries and three employees with
manipulation and attempted manipulation of crude oil, heating
oil and gasoline futures on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
``Optiver traders amassed large trading positions, then
conducted trades in such a way to bully and hammer the
markets,'' CFTC Acting Chairman Walt Lukken said at a press
conference. ``These charges go to the heart of the CFTC's
core mission of detecting and rooting out illegal
manipulation of the markets.''
In May, under the backdrop of record oil prices and calls
from legislators to crack down on speculative oil trading and
market manipulation, the CFTC announced a wide-ranging probe
into oil price manipulation. The agency says it has dozens of
investigations ongoing.
The complaint filed Thursday names Bastiaan van Kempen,
chief executive; Christopher Dowson, a head trader; and
Randal Meijer, head of trading at an Optiver subsidiary.
The CFTC said the firm attempted to ``bang the close'' by
amassing large positions just before markets closed--forcing
prices up--then selling them quickly to drive prices down and
pocketing the difference.
The alleged manipulation was attempted 19 times on 11 days
in March 2007, the agency said. In at least five of those 19
times, traders succeeded in driving prices higher twice and
lower three times, according to the CFTC.
Calls to Optiver seeking comment were not answered, and an
email was not immediately returned.
CFTC stressed that the price changes were small and the
manipulation was isolated, and that the investigation has
nothing to do with the recent heat the agency has taken on
Capitol Hill over rising oil prices.

Traders in the spotlight

CFTC has repeatedly said that speculators are not to blame
for rising oil prices, and any cases of price manipulation--
such as the one brought Thursday--have only a small, if any,
effect on oil prices.
The CFTC is the government's main regulator of commodity
markets. Its officials have been hauled before Congress and
asked repeatedly whether manipulation or excessive
speculation is playing a role in record oil prices.
Repeatedly, CFTC experts have said they have found no
evidence that speculators--investors who do not ultimately
use crude oil--are to blame for the rising prices. They say
trading information shows no correlation between investment
activity and price swings.
Others, such as the International Energy Agency, have also
said speculators are not to blame. They've pointed to other
non-traded commodities that have risen in price even faster
than oil, and to the fact that there is no evidence of a
bubble, such as excess oil sitting around in storage.
Still, the correlation of a four-fold increase of
investment money into oil futures and a four-fold increase in
oil prices since 2004 has not gone unnoticed. Many lawmakers,
consumer rights advocates and even some oil industry analysts
say speculation is at least partly to blame.
Against that backdrop, the CFTC has been ordered to
investigate the matter more thoroughly and dozens of
investigations are underway. The agency may soon be given a
bigger staff and wider powers under bills being debated in
Congress.
Over the years, the CFTC has found isolated incidents of
price manipulation--when an oil producer controls products to
influence prices--or other cases of wrongdoing. Since 2002,
the agency has charged 66 defendants with energy market
violations.
In a recent case, BP settled a suit that alleged the
company tried to corner the propane market to inflate prices
in 2003 and 2004. BP agreed to pay a $303 million settlement.
But overall, most experts say the incidents are so
scattered, and the energy market so large, that it's unlikely
a single trader or group of traders can have substantial sway
over prices.
Correction: An earlier version of the story said
indictments have been brought against the company and some of
its employees. The charges are civil, not criminal.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the
absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

U.S. Troops Dying of Electrocution

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I believe the majority leader is coming
over, but I would like to speak until he arrives, at which point I will
continue later.
Mr. President, we had a hearing yesterday before the Senate
Appropriations Committee that I had requested. That followed a hearing
that I had conducted on the Democratic policy committee, the 17th
hearing I have conducted and chaired, looking into the issue of
contractor irregularities and waste, fraud, and abuse involving
contractors with respect to the war in Iraq.
I want to talk just for a moment about what is happening with respect
to these contractors.
We are shoveling money out the door. Three-quarters of $1 trillion
has been spent, and much of it ends up in the pockets of contractors,
and much of the work by contractors not only fleeces the American
taxpayer, but it represents, I think, the greatest waste, fraud, and
abuse in the history of this country. I think it is also the case that
it endangers the lives of American soldiers.
So what I would like to do for a moment is to describe the hearing
that I held recently and show a photograph of Cheryl Harris and her
son, SSG Ryan Maseth.
Ryan Maseth was an Army Ranger and a Green Beret. He was killed in
Iraq. He wasn't killed by an insurgent or killed by enemy fire. He was
killed because he was electrocuted while he was taking a shower at the
Army base. He was electrocuted while taking a shower.
It turns out the contractor that wired that particular area didn't
know how to wire and didn't properly attach ground wires. So when this
Army Ranger reached up and touched a pipe, he was electrocuted and
died.
The Army initially told Cheryl they thought perhaps her son had taken
an electrical appliance into the shower and, therefore, was
electrocuted. Not true. It is not true. Halliburton--or Kellogg, Brown
& Root, its former subsidiary--had been given the contract for wiring
these facilities at Army bases and were hiring, among others, third-
country nationals who had very little electrical experience. Two people
who were electricians and working there in Iraq and Afghanistan for
Kellogg, Brown & Root came and testified and said the work done by KBR
was the most shoddy, unbelievably sloppy work.
Thirteen people have been electrocuted in Iraq as a result of these
kinds of things. So I don't understand the recent order by the Defense
Contract Management Agency, and announced by General Petraeus, that the
Pentagon is going to have the same contractor that caused some of these
problems--the contractor that has in a number of instances failed to
fix faulty wiring--do a comprehensive review of these problems
throughout U.S. military installations in Iraq. It makes precious
little sense to me that would be the case.
This is Larraine McGee. Her son was killed as well. Larraine McGee's
son was killed while power washing a humvee. He was killed not by an
enemy combatant but power washing a humvee vehicle. Again, improper
wiring and grounding meant this soldier was electrocuted.
How do these things go unfixed? What kind of work is done by
contractors, and who cares about all this? We had testimony from Debbie
Crawford, who was an electrician who worked for the contractor in Iraq.
She described work by people who were not qualified. She described KBR
supervisors who said: Well, this is not the United States. There is no
OSHA here.

[[Page 16167]]

Mr. Jeffrey Bliss, an electrician for KBR, said there was pervasive
carelessness and disregard for quality electrical work at Kellogg,
Brown & Root.
Again, I say to you that we are told, with the news of all of these
problems, with 13 people, 11 of them soldiers, being electrocuted in
Iraq because of shoddy wiring by contractors, the Pentagon has asked
the same contractor to go out and review the work. It is nearly
unbelievable to me.
Mr. President, there are so many problems in Iraq contracting that I
am going to try to come tomorrow and talk about the 17 hearings I have
held and how much money the American taxpayers have been charged for
such shoddy work. It is not just fleecing the American taxpayers, it is
also injuring American soldiers when we have contractors not doing the
job for which they were contracted to do.
Again, this is a photograph of Larraine McGee, who is Sergeant
Everett's mother, and Sergeant Everett, as I indicated, was
electrocuted as a result of improper grounding. Ms. McGee learned from
a newspaper that 10 other soldiers were electrocuted in Iraq due to
faulty electrical grounding and faulty wiring. So she came to Congress
pleading for help, pleading that somebody do something. She said:

Anger has now taken over my grief. I plead with you to do
something to bring an end to this unnecessary cause of death
to our soldiers. They should not have to worry about stepping
into a shower or using a power washer in the safety of an
established base.

As I indicated, the Pentagon ordered there be a comprehensive
inspection of electrical installations at the Army bases in Iraq, but
it hired the same company to do the inspections, the same company who
had hired two electricians who came to this Congress to say the
electrical work was unbelievably shoddy and done, in some cases, by
people who didn't have the foggiest idea what they were doing.
I sent a letter to General Petraeus last Friday, signed by Senators
Casey, Cantwell, Klobuchar, and Whitehouse, urging him to replace KBR
in these inspections. The inspections should be done by objective,
qualified electricians. KBR has shown itself to be incapable of fixing
electrical hazards that had been known for years. It is an insult to
the memory of these soldiers that KBR has now been assigned to conduct
the inspections.
There is more to this story. I will, tomorrow, visit about a wider
range of these issues.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska is recognized.
(The remarks of Mr. Stevens pertaining to the introduction of S. 3333
are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills
and Joint Resolutions.'')
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Klobuchar). The Senator from Tennessee is
recognized.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to enter into
a colloquy with my Republican colleagues for the remaining 30 minutes
of our time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, if you have been watching television
lately, you have seen Boone Pickens. In the Democratic caucus, you have
seen Boone Pickens. In the Republican caucus, you have seen Boone
Pickens. Boone Pickens has said a lot of things, but the thing he says
that I think most of us agree with here is that we are in the midst of
the greatest transfer of wealth in our country's history as we pay for
foreign oil and that we do not need talk, we need action.
In these next few minutes, what we hope to do on the Republican side
of the aisle is make absolutely clear what we are trying to achieve
over the weekend and during this week.
What we see is that $4 gasoline prices are the single biggest problem
facing our country. What we know is that what the people of this
country want us to do is to take up this issue, give it our best ideas,
vote on it, and come up with a substantial result that increases the
supply of new energy and reduces the demand for energy, which is the
way you change the price of energy. That should be simple enough to do,
but the fact is that the Democratic leader has had us all tied up in
parliamentary knots since last Friday. We could have been doing this
every single day since last Friday.
Just to give an idea of what we have in mind, we have a real solution
in mind: conservation; deep-sea exploration; removing the moratorium on
oil shale so that, in an environmentally safe way, we can proceed with
that; Alaskan energy production; clean nuclear power; military coal-to-
liquid transportation fuels; home heating oil assistance. That is just
the beginning of the kind of debate we ought to be having. We could
have been having it since Friday.
I see my friend from Georgia in the Chamber. He has been a leader in
nuclear power. I ask the Senator from Georgia, isn't clean nuclear
power essential to any supply of new American energy?
Mr. ISAKSON. I thank the Senator from Tennessee. It absolutely is
essential. The Senator and I share a common border between the States
of Georgia and Tennessee, and along that border, Tennessee Valley
operates. They are a big producer of efficient, inexpensive, reliable
electric energy produced by nuclear power.
In the United States of America today, 19 percent of our electricity
is generated by nuclear, 81 percent by coal, gas, and a sliver by
hydro. That 19 percent that is nuclear does two things: No. 1, it is
reliable, and No. 2, it emits zero carbon. Carbon reduction is in the
best interests of our climate. It is also in the best interests
geopolitically of the United States of America, by reducing our
dependence on foreign imported oil.
I have offered an amendment to this bill, which has been filed, which
is a new nuclear title, which reenergizes the nuclear energy business
in the United States, which has basically been dormant since the mid-
1970s while other countries around the world have embraced nuclear
energy as the solution to their fossil fuel problem in terms of energy
production and electric production. Look at the nation of France.
Eighty-seven percent of their electricity is generated by nuclear. They
have developed a reprocessing MOX facility that reduces their waste by
90 percent. So they have almost eliminated the waste problem, and they
almost have total reliability on nuclear energy.
There is no silver bullet in this challenge of reducing gas prices
and reducing our dependence on foreign oil, but there are a lot of
bullets we have in our arsenal if we are only willing to put them in
the chamber. Nuclear is one of them.
One of the great things Senator Alexander advocated so much is the
plug-in car that we know is coming. You can plug it in at night,
recharge it, and the next day drive it and use it. At night, we are
generating a lot of electric power that goes to waste because everybody
is asleep and activity is slow. If you plug your car in at night, you
are making good, efficient use of the electricity you are generating
and wasting, and you are reducing totally, because you use electricity,
dependence on oil.
I say to the distinguished Senator from Tennessee, nuclear energy is
a piece of the puzzle--and this is a puzzle. I happen to know the
answer to the puzzle. It is all the resources the United States has at
its disposal to reduce its importing of foreign oil, increase our
conservation, and incentivize production of the energy we know we have
within our own capacity and within our own boundaries. I thank the
Senator for recognizing nuclear.
Mr. ALEXANDER. I thank the Senator from Georgia for his leadership on
nuclear power. If we care about global warming in any respect, there is
no way to deal with that in a generation without nuclear power, which
is free of carbon, free of mercury, free of nitrogen, and free of
sulfur. It is the best way we have to move ahead with that, and we
should, in this debate, be thinking of ways to make it possible for
this country to be building five or six new nuclear plants a year,
producing more American energy.
The Senator from Georgia spoke about a plug-in electric car. I know
when I first started speaking of that,

[[Page 16168]]

some of my friends in Tennessee thought I had been out in the Sun too
long. But I found out the Senator from Utah was way ahead of me. In
fact, an important part of the Republican proposal--and I know on the
Democratic side there are many who agree with this--is to make it
commonplace in America for us to reduce the amount of oil we use by
using electric cars and trucks that plug in.
As I move to the Senator from Utah, I hasten to add--I sat here last
night listening to the Democratic leader characterize the Republican
proposal as only drilling. I know the Democratic leader has a lot of
responsibilities, and he may not have had time to read our proposal
carefully. An important part of our proposal is to make it commonplace
for Americans to drive plug-in cars and trucks, thereby reducing the
amount of oil we use. That is the demand side of the equation. The
difference between us and the Democratic leader is we understand that
the law of supply and demand has both supply and demand.
I wonder if the Senator from Utah does not believe that plug-in
electric cars and trucks are an important way to reduce our use of oil?
Mr. HATCH. I thank my colleague and thank him for his leadership in
this matter.
Back to the nuclear thing, I drove a hydrogen vehicle not too long
ago. If we had these nuclear powerplants, we would have enough
hydrogen. We could do it. The problem is we only have 9 million tons
and we need 150 million tons just to start it.
But having raised the hybrid and plug-in hybrid issue, let me say
Americans are looking to Congress to address our current energy crisis,
and we should be pursuing every reasonable option to reducing our
addiction to foreign oil.
The distinguished Senator from Tennessee may be aware that I was the
sponsor of the CLEAR Act, which was signed into law as part of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 and as part of the transportation bill which
passed the same year.
The CLEAR Act has been providing tax credits to consumers who
purchase alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicles, including
battery electric and hybrid cars. It has also been providing incentives
for new alternative fuel stations and for the use of alternative fuels
in vehicles.
Our transportation sector is 97 percent dependent on oil. I am all
for oil. We certainly need more of it, but we also must find ways to
diversify our transportation fuels.
I have heard some argue we must promote solar, wind, and geothermal
as an answer to high gas prices. Well, obviously, cars and trucks don't
run on electricity. It is going to take us a little while to get there.
But what if we changed that?
Why not use plug-ins to apply hydroelectric, solar, wind, geothermal,
and nuclear to our transportation sector? Talk about adding diversity
to our transportation fuels.
Immediately after the CLEAR Act was signed into law, I began working
on legislation to promote plug-in hybrid vehicles. It was a bipartisan
effort, and I received strong and early assistance from Senators Maria
Cantwell and Barack Obama, of all persons. We introduced S. 1617, the
FREEDOM Act, which would provide four strong tax incentives promoting
plug-in hybrid vehicle purchases, and also the U.S. manufacture of
these vehicles and their technologies.
I am pleased that the plug-in hybrid idea has remained bipartisan. I
know that portions of the FREEDOM Act have been included in both the
Republican and Democrat energy extenders bills.
I believe we will see the day when the electric grid becomes a
significant new alternative transportation fuel. We should keep in mind
that our electric grid is a domestic resource. You won't see our
President flying to the Middle East begging the Saudis to send us more
electrons. We can do it right here.
Electrons are not only domestic, but they are much cheaper and much
cleaner than gasoline.
Best of all, the United States is well positioned to be the world
leader in the development of plug-in hybrid vehicles. We have already
seen the California-based Tesla Motors plug-in electric vehicle. Raser
Technologies based in Utah, has developed a very powerful and efficient
AC induction motor, and A123 Systems, based in Massachusetts, has
developed a very advanced lithium ion battery that has been configured
specifically for electric-drive vehicles.
Also, General Motors will soon offer a plug-in hybrid Saturn vehicle,
and that will be followed by the plug-in hybrid Volt. The Volt will be
one of the most exciting vehicle innovations of our lifetimes. It will
allow the average commuter to drive to work and back without using one
drop of oil. Our friends on the other side will be delighted. The
problem is we cannot do it right now. We have to have something to
power our trucks, planes, trains, and cars. The volt will run entirely
on electricity for up to 40 miles. For longer trips that exceed the
range of the battery, the vehicle will switch into a very efficient
hybrid vehicle. The U.S. is truly on the cutting-edge of technology in
developing commercial, electron powered vehicles.
Mr. President, I am aware that my good friend Senator Alexander has
also shown a great deal of leadership in promoting plug-in hybrids. And
I would ask him if it isn't true that our Nation is in position to lead
the world on the potential of shifting some of our transportation needs
over to the electric grid? Perhaps we are not quite willing to lead it
because it takes time to get that accomplished?
Mr. ALEXANDER. I thank the Senator from Utah for his leadership.
Before I answer his question, I wish to emphasize our point here. What
we are hoping to do is to show that, on the Republican side--and we
believe there are many Democrats who feel this way too--we believe the
solution to high gasoline prices is finding more American energy and
using less. We are willing to do both. The Democratic leader is not
willing to find more, for some reason.
But on Senator Hatch's point, the most promising opportunity I
believe for using less oil in the near term is the plug-in hybrid car
and truck by a confluence of two things: One is all the car companies
you talked about who are about to produce the car. I can add to that
Nissan, at the dedication of its new North American headquarters in
Nashville this week, announced it intends to market a plug-in pure
electric vehicle that will go 100 miles with a charge in 2010 for
fleets and for individuals in 2012.
One may say: Well, where are you going to get all this electricity?
We have plenty of electricity at night. In our region in Tennessee, the
Tennessee Valley Authority has the equivalent of seven or eight nuclear
powerplants of unused electricity at night, which could be used for
plug-in cars and trucks.
So I think there will be a great many people in Tennessee and in Utah
and across this country who very quickly will be plugging in at night
in a wall socket and filling up, so to speak, for a dollar or two,
instead of filing up for $80 at the gasoline pump.
Mr. HATCH. Can I mention to my colleague this little company, Raser
Technologies in Utah, now has developed an electric motor, not very
large, that has more thrust, more--I do not know what to call it, but
more actual energy than the gas combustion engines.
They are about to put one of those motors on a pickup truck that will
get, according to them, around 120 miles per gallon of gas. We can get
there, but it is going to take us a number of years to get there.
In the immediate future, we have to find more oil so we quit sending
$700 billion or more every year--and that is going to go up every
year--overseas that does not do us very much good. Because that is all
gone once it is gone. We should keep that money here so we can do all
the things we need to do for the American people.
I cannot, for the life of me, understand why the other side will not
get together with us and help us to put all these elements together and
recognize

[[Page 16169]]

it is going to take oil to get us over the next few years to where
these wonderful things can explode. They are doable. We can do them
now, except we cannot manufacture them fast enough or get the
manufacturing lines up in a short period of time.
But if we can, it will be amazing. I remember when I got into the
hybrid car business in the CLEAR Act. We found that hybrid cars could
be driven on HOV-2 lanes during the rush hour. Automatically, they sold
out. We knew just on that one little incentive, so we put incentives in
to develop hybrid cars in the CLEAR Act, we have them in the Freedom
Act as well, plus incentives for all kinds of other things. Frankly,
they have worked amazingly well. But in the interim time, we are going
to have to have oil. I hope we can find more and use less through these
other mechanisms.
Mr. ALEXANDER. I see the majority leader, who I think has some
remarks to make. We would be glad to suspend the colloquy if he would
like to do that now.

Capitol Police Officers John Gibson and Jacob Chestnut

Mr. REID. Madam President, some may know that when I attended George
Washington Law School many years ago, I worked full time on the swing--
or night shift--as a Capitol police officer.
My service as a Capitol policeman was not one where I did anything
courageous or notable.
But even then, before the heightened awareness to threat we have
today, we police officers knew if the call came to sacrifice to protect
this U.S. Capitol, our jobs meant answering the call.
Ten years ago, two officers did just that.
Special Agent John Gibson and Officer Jacob Chestnut were stationed
near the east entrance on the House side, mere steps from where we
stand.
When a gunman attempted to bypass metal detectors, Officer Chestnut
answered the call of duty and blocked his path.
The gunman shot Officer Chestnut point blank.
Hearing shots, Special Agent Gibson also answered the call of duty.
He warned nearby staffers to seek cover and confronted the attacker.
They exchanged fire.
Despite valiant efforts to keep both heroes alive, including efforts
by my predecessor, Senator Frist, Special Agent Gibson and Officer
Chestnut died from their wounds.
I knew Agent Gibson. During a congressional retreat to Virginia, he
came to care for my wife when she became ill during the night. I
remember how he ran to her side. I will never forget how kind and
gentle he was with her.
I knew Officer Chestnut only by face and in shared greetings whenever
we passed each other.
But I do know he was a veteran of the Vietnam war, had given 18 years
of service to the Capitol Police, and heartbreakingly, was just months
away from a hard-earned retirement.
We are honored to have Agent Gibson's wife Lyn and their children,
Kristen, Jack, and Danny; Officer Chestnut's wife Wen-Ling and their
children, Will and Karen; and their many cherished friends and family.
We hope that it has been some comfort to you--the ones they loved
most--to know that in the 10 years since that terrible day, some
measure of you burden has come to rest upon all of our shoulders.
So today we plant a tree in the name and memory of John Gibson and
Jacob Chestnut.
The tree is small now, but every day it will grow taller, stronger,
and broader. Its roots will grasp ever deeper for the American soil
that lies below, the American soil that both men defended so
heroically.
As this tree takes root and grows and flourishes, it will remind us
always of these two brave men.
And though it will shed its leaves in the fall, it will always bloom
when spring arrives again.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I thank the majority leader for his
comments. The Republican Leader would want me to say, he speaks for all
of us in expressing the respect for the families of the two fallen men
and our appreciation to the service of all the Capitol police officers
today. We will have an opportunity, within a few minutes, to honor the
fallen men.
Mr. Hatch was saying, the Senator from Utah, we have impressive ways
to use less oil. But we also have important ways to find more oil. One
of those ways would be to use technology to turn coal into aviation
fuel; a proven technology which is available, which in the past has had
some challenges, but there are some new techniques. One of the Senators
who is a leading advocate of coal-to-liquid technology understands it
well, the Senator from Wyoming. I ask the Senator from Wyoming: Would
it not be important for our national security to at least take steps
toward turning coal into liquid aviation fuel?
Mr. BARRASSO. Most certainly it would be very important to turn that
coal into liquid fuel for aviation. If you take a look at this
morning's Politico, an issue of the Pentagon, the Department of Defense
is the Nation's biggest oil consumer, burning 395,000 barrels per day,
about as much as the country of Greece.
The Air Force's thirsty planes burn more than half the fuel supplied
for the entire U.S. military. It did receive $1.5 billion in new relief
from Congress for fuel and still has $400 million left to go.
When you look at that and say: What else could we do to help lower
that cost, not just for the consumer who fills their tank at home but
also for your military, it is converting coal to liquid. The technology
is there. People ask: Is there enough coal and how would you do it?
There is an incredibly abundant supply of coal in this Nation. To me,
coal is the most available, affordable, reliable, and secure source of
energy we have in this Nation. Wyoming is the No. 1 coal producer in
the United States. There is enough coal in Wyoming alone to help our
Nation for centuries, for hundreds of years. Coal is there and the
technology is there.
Right now under the law, the military is not allowed to make a
contract long term to put that coal into liquid. But the technology is
there. We have an exciting company in Wyoming, near Medicine Bow,
building a plant to do this, to convert the coal to liquid. But it is
not only Wyoming
As the Presiding Officer knows, and the Senator from Tennessee knows,
there is coal all around the United States--coal in West Virginia, coal
in Kentucky, coal in Pennsylvania, coal in Illinois, coal in Wyoming,
coal in Montana. Everyplace we need energy we have coal.
Some folks are saying: What about the carbon dioxide? But the
technology is there to get the carbon dioxide, to sequester it, and
actually to use it for more oil development.
You take an old burned-out oil well where there is not a lot of oil
coming out. There is a way to inject the carbon dioxide and get out
more oil. So it is not only good because you can use the coal for the
liquids, you can also use this carbon dioxide to get even more oil. By
that, you are certainly finding more, with something we have here.
To me, this is so much about becoming, as a nation, energy self-
sufficient. The only way we can do that is to rely on American sources
of energy. We are sending hundreds of millions of dollars overseas to
people who are not our friends--hundreds of billions of dollars.
This is America's treasure going overseas. Why? Because we are not
energy self-sufficient. But with all the coal resources we have all
across this country, and the technology, we can today start converting
the coal to liquids to be used for aviation, to be used for our
military. The No. 1 user is our military in terms of the largest user
of our energy.
It seems to me, to the Senator from Tennessee, that when we have this
discussion--and I hear Senator Isakson talking about nuclear, finding
more energy that way, I hear Senator Hatch talking about the cars and
using less energy that way--this is one more way in this whole
portfolio of different ways to use energy as we find more and use less.

[[Page 16170]]

Because the American people are going to continue to use all the
energy, we need all the sources of energy. That is the way we can keep
down the price at the pump for people all across our country.
Mr. ALEXANDER. I thank the Senator from Wyoming for his leadership.
As he speaks, it reminds me of how much I wish, instead of our being in
a parliamentary position where all we can do is talk, the Democratic
leader would put us in a parliamentary position where we can act. I
mean, we are prepared to act. We have offered an amendment that has a
series of suggestions about how to find more American energy and use
less.
We may not be right in every case. But I believe the American people
expect us, expect us to take up these issues and debate them and use
them, whether it is plug-in electric cars, to use less oil, or, for
example, I see the Senator from Alaska is here, whether it is using
more of Alaskan energy.
Every time we talk about more American energy, we must think about
Alaska because so much energy is there. I wonder if the Senator would
not agree, that there is not one way, but a whole series of ways we
might change the law to improve our country's security, improve our
supply of oil and gas by using Alaskan energy?
Ms. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, I am pleased to respond to the
question from the senior Senator from Tennessee.
Alaska is blessed in its abundance of resources, whether it be oil or
natural gas, coal, to the timber, to the fisheries, we are absolutely
blessed. When it comes to those fossilized fuels, the abundance is
extraordinary.
Oftentimes people think we are making up the numbers because they are
as substantial as they are. We have the potential in the State of
Alaska right now, between our onshore assets and our known offshore
reserves, when it comes to oil, of an additional 65 billion barrels of
oil coming from the State of Alaska.
There is 390 trillion cubic feet of natural gas from the onshore
reserves and, from what we know, from the offshore. Yesterday there
were new numbers released from the USGS on the potential for oil and
gas in the Arctic region. This was a survey of the entire Arctic, not
only Alaska's resources. Of those resources, they indicated, in terms
of oil, it is about 90 billion barrels coming out of the Arctic. Of
that 90, a full third would be in the area in the waters off of the
State of Alaska, so about 30 billion barrels of oil in terms of
resource there. What we are talking about, in terms of the potential
for Alaska to contribute in a meaningful manner with increased
production, is nothing short of dramatic. When we talk about ANWR
specifically--and there has been great debate about whether we should
open ANWR--keep in mind, we are not allowed to explore.
Mr. ALEXANDER. If I may let the Senator know, we have about 3 minutes
remaining and I need 1 of those to make a unanimous consent request.
Ms. MURKOWSKI. I could go on all day talking about Alaska's
resources. What I wish to leave Members with is the knowledge that as a
mean estimate, we are looking at 10.6 billion barrels of oil out of
ANWR. This is not insignificant. We have been providing about close to
20 percent of the Nation's oil for the past 30 years from Prudhoe Bay.
We would like the opportunity to continue. We know we have the
resource. We have the opportunity. We have the technology, the smarts,
the know-how to make it happen and do it right while protecting the
environment.
I thank the Senator for his questions and recognizing that Alaska has
a great deal to offer us as a nation when it comes to energy
independence.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, our hope today is to show the Senate
that we are ready for full debate on finding more American energy and
using less. That is what we should be doing. We have our proposals and
would welcome debate and amendment on others.
I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate consider the pending
energy speculation measure in the following manner: that the bill be
subject to energy-related amendments only; provided further, that the
amendments be considered in an alternating manner between the two sides
of the aisle; I further ask consent that the bill remain the pending
business to the exclusion of all other business, other than privileged
matters or items that are agreed to jointly by the two leaders; I
further ask consent that the first seven amendments to be offered on
this side of the aisle by the Republican leader or his designee be the
following: Outer Continental Shelf exploration plus conservation; oil
shale plus conservation; Alaska energy production plus conservation;
the Gas Price Reduction Act, which includes plug-in electric cars and
trucks; clean nuclear energy; coal-to-liquid fuel plus conservation;
and an amendment involving LIHEAP.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. LEVIN. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, is there time remaining?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is no remaining time.
The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, yesterday the minority leader suggested
an analysis of the staff of my Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
ran counter to the legislation which has been offered by the majority
leader, the Stop Excessive Energy Speculation Act. In particular, the
minority leader cited a statement in the staff analysis that ``there is
no credible evidence that simply amending the [Commodity Exchange Act]
to regulate energy commodities as if they were agricultural commodities
will lead to lower energy prices.''
The minority leader was in error. The energy speculation act offered
by the majority leader does not ``regulate energy commodities as if
they were agricultural commodities.'' The proposal to do that was
offered by a law professor at the University of Maryland but is not
contained in the majority leader's bill. Rather, the energy speculation
act, which the majority leader did introduce and which is before us,
contains a number of other broader measures aimed at controlling and
limiting excessive speculation in the energy markets.
First, the energy speculation act would close the London loophole so
that traders in the United States would no longer be able to avoid
limits on speculation that apply to trading on U.S. exchanges by
routing their trades on to foreign exchanges through a U.S.-located
trading terminal or computer. The energy speculation act would also
close what is often called the ``swaps loophole'' so that traders in
the United States would not be able to avoid oversight and Commodity
Futures Trading Commission authority by trading in over-the-counter
markets because it would require the CFTC to be provided with the
information about large trades, and it authorizes the CFTC, if
appropriate, to order traders to reduce their holdings in the over-the-
counter market in order to prevent excessive speculation or price
manipulation.
The bill would also give the CFTC more resources to oversee the
energy markets in that it would require the CFTC to obtain and publish
better data on speculative trading in the futures markets.
Finally, the findings and recommendations of the subcommittee staff
reports on energy prices give strong support to the core premise of the
energy speculation act, that speculation has played a significant role
in high energy prices.
In June 2006, the PSI issued a report, ``The Role of Market
Speculation in Rising Oil and Gas Prices: A Need to Put a Cop on the
Beat,'' finding that the traditional forces of supply and demand didn't
account for sustained price increases and price volatility in the oil
and gasoline markets. The report concluded that in 2006, a growing
number of trades of contracts for future delivery of oil occurred
without regulatory oversight and found that market speculation had
contributed to rising oil and gasoline prices, perhaps accounting for
$20 out of a then-priced

[[Page 16171]]

$70 barrel of oil, in other words; speculation contributed from 25
percent to 30 percent of the prices.
So the work and reports of the Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations provides solid support for the legislation offered by
the majority leader. The subcommittee's work demonstrates the
significant role played by speculation in high energy prices and the
need to adopt measures to control that speculation.

____________________

MOMENT OF SILENCE TO HONOR OFFICER CHESTNUT AND DETECTIVE GIBSON

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois is recognized.
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, under a previous order, at 3:40, we will
observe a moment of silence. At the conclusion of that moment of
silence, Members are encouraged to exit the Chamber and proceed to the
tree planting on the east front of the Capitol. Staff from the Sergeant
at Arms office will be at the door exiting the Chamber near the
Republican cloakroom to direct Members.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum
call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Under the previous order, the Senate will now observe a moment of
silence in memory of Detective John Gibson and Officer Jacob Chestnut
who lost their lives on July 24, 1998.
(Moment of silence.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, July 24 always brings a sense of sadness
to the Capitol and a sense of gratitude. We feel sadness over the loss
of Officer J.J. Chestnut and Detective John Gibson who died 10 years
ago today on their posts doing jobs they loved in this great American
building. We also feel a deep sense of gratitude to Officer Chestnut
and Detective Gibson for their service and sacrifice and to the men and
women of the U.S. Capitol Police Department who continue to stand guard
every day to protect this Capitol and all who work and visit here.
Because of their dedication and professionalism, the doors of the
people's House have remained open, as they should be, and our Nation
owes them a debt of gratitude.
Officer Jacob Joseph Chestnut--``J.J.'' to all his friends--and
Detective John Michael Gibson were good men, good police officers,
husbands and fathers, who both gave 18 years of distinguished service
to the U.S. Capitol Police department.
For J.J. Chestnut, this was a second career, after 20 years in the
Air Force, including two tours in Vietnam.
He greeted everyone--Congress Members and visitors--with the same
warm smile. He treated everyone with dignity. After he died, we learned
that he used to take clothes to a political activist, whom many called
``homeless,'' who kept a daily vigil near the door where Officer
Chestnut was posted--just feet from where he died. He loved his work,
his friends, his vegetable garden--and most of all, his family.
John Gibson was a transplanted New Englander who loved hockey, the
Boston Bruins, the Red Sox and, most of all, his wife and their three
teenage children.
They died at their posts in the Capitol, at the hands of a deranged
man with a gun and a history of serious mental illness.
They lie today with other American heroes in Arlington National
Cemetery.
Their deaths have left an indelible mark on those of us who work in
this great symbol of our democracy.
Just now, as we observed a moment of silence in this chamber, the
Speaker of the House and the majority and minority leaders of both the
House and Senate--Democrats and Republicans--observed a moment of
silence at the Memorial Door of the Capitol.
The leaders will lay a wreath at the bronze plaque that bears the
names and likenesses of Officer Chestnut and Detective Gibson.
Then, together, they will walk outside and help plant a tree on the
grounds of the U.S. Capitol to honor these two fallen heroes. It is a
Valley Forge American Elm--a strong, sturdy, quintessentially American
tree. In the years to come, it will grow tall and shelter visitors from
the sun, just as J.J. Chestnut and John Gibson sheltered visitors from
harm.
In addition to their plaque and their new tree, there are other, more
personal reminders of Officer Chestnut and Detective Gibson in this
Capitol.
When John Gibson died, a woman who had taught both of his son's in
grade school wrote the boys a letter in which she said their father had
died a brave man and his legacy would always be a part of them. Jack
and Danny were teenagers then.
Today, Danny Gibson works for the Senate Sergeant at Arms.
Officer Jack Gibson is 2-year veteran of the U.S. Capitol Police
Department.
Officer Chestnut's son-in-law, Officer Jason Culpepper, is also a
U.S. Capitol Police officer.
That says a great deal about the dedication of these two families to
public service and safety.
To these fine men--to Wendy Chestnut and Lyn Gibson, and all of the
Chestnut and Gibson children and family members, and to their friends
and colleagues--we offer our condolences and respect on this sad 10-
year milestone.
Madam President, so Members may join in the planting of the tree on
the Capitol grounds, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SANDERS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

____________________

WARM IN WINTER AND COOL IN SUMMER ACT--MOTION TO PROCEED--Continued

Mr. SANDERS. Madam President, all of us recognize there are very
strong differences of opinion in Congress about how to resolve the
major energy crisis facing working families throughout our country. I
have my views on this issue, and other Members have different points of
view, and that is the way it is.
I am happy to report, however, that there is an increasing unanimity
of understanding around one very important fact regarding this energy
crisis; that is, if we do not dramatically increase funding for the
highly successful Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, usually
known as LIHEAP, senior citizens on fixed incomes, the disabled, and
working families with children are in serious danger of either freezing
to death this coming winter or perhaps dying of heat stroke this summer
because they are unable to pay their home energy bills. We cannot allow
that to happen.
I am happy to announce, in a tripartisan effort, that more and more
Senators understand that reality and are prepared to work together to
protect our citizens. S. 3186, the Warm in Winter and Cool in Summer
Act, the LIHEAP legislation that I recently introduced, now has 53
cosponsors--53 cosponsors--38 Democrats, 13 Republicans, and 2
Independents. I thank all of those cosponsors for their support. I am
absolutely confident that as soon as this bill gets on the Senate
floor, not only do we have the 50 votes, I am quite confident we are
going to have 60 votes and perhaps more.
I also thank majority leader Harry Reid for filing a cloture motion
last night on the motion to proceed to this very important legislation.
Senator Reid understands, as I think most of us do, that it is
absolutely essential for the health and well-being of millions of our
citizens that this bill be passed, and passed as soon as possible. My
hope is that after passage in the Senate, we can get it over to the
House before the August break and see it pass in that body as well.
That may be overly optimistic, but that is what I would like to see.

[[Page 16172]]

Let me say a few words about why this bill needs to be passed.
At a time when home energy bills are soaring, this legislation would
nearly double the funding for LIHEAP in fiscal year 2008, taking it
from a little more than $2.5 billion to $5.1 billion--a total increase
of $2.53 billion. This is, in fact, what Congress has authorized for
LIHEAP.
Let me say a few words about why we need to significantly increase
funding for LIHEAP.
In 2007, 5.8 million Americans--primarily senior citizens, working
families with kids, and people with disabilities--utilized this
program. These are the most vulnerable people in our country.
Unfortunately, these 5.8 million Americans are only 16 percent--16
percent--of the people who are eligible for the program. The vast
majority of the people who are eligible cannot get into the program
because we lack the funds to help them. Madam President, 94 percent of
the participants in the LIHEAP program were elderly, disabled, or had a
child in the family under 18.
From fiscal year 2003 to fiscal year 2008, the cost of the average
heating oil bill has increased by over 93 percent--almost doubled. The
estimated increase in an average natural gas bill during that same
period has gone up by about 50 percent. Unfortunately, LIHEAP funding
has lagged far behind these outrageously high increases in energy
costs. In fact, we are spending 23 percent less on LIHEAP today than we
did 2 years ago, and after adjusting for inflation, we spent more on
LIHEAP 20 years ago than we are spending right now.
Let's be very clear. What we are talking about now is a life-and-
death situation. Many people do not understand this, but more people
have died in our country from the extreme heat and extreme cold since
1998 than all natural disasters in this country combined, including
floods, fires, hurricanes, and tornadoes.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, over 1,000 Americans
from across the country died from hypothermia in their own homes just
between 1999 and 2002. Those are the latest figures we have available.
In other words, they froze to death because they could not afford to
adequately heat their homes. How many of these deaths were preventable?
All of them were, according to the CDC. We will probably not know for
several years how many Americans died last winter because they could
not afford to heat their homes, but clearly one death is too many.
I understand this country is struggling with an emergency situation
in terms of flooding in the Midwest and wildfires in California, but
there is another emergency which must be dealt with now while we also
deal with those emergencies.
At a time when the costs of home heating fuels and electricity are
soaring and when the economy is in decline, millions of Americans are
finding it harder and harder to stay warm in the winter or stay cool in
the summer.
In my State of Vermont and throughout New England and the Northeast,
people are extremely worried that they will not have enough money to
afford the price of heating oil next winter. A newspaper in my State,
the Stowe Reporter, recently editorialized that the lack of affordable
heating oil could turn into New England's version of Hurricane Katrina
next winter. We cannot allow that to happen.
I want all of my colleagues to understand that the home energy crisis
that is being faced throughout the northern part of our country is
something that is very imminent and is something that people are very
concerned about. But this program, LIHEAP, is not just a program for
cold-weather States; it is also a program for hot-weather States so
that the elderly, the sick, and the frail in hot-weather States can
afford to pay soaring electric bills to provide the air-conditioning
they need. In other words, this program is not just a life-and-death
program for the northern tier of our country; it is vitally important
for the South and Southwest and for people who are struggling to pay
for the skyrocketing price of electricity which has tripled in some
parts of the country. What we are concerned about there is that if you
are 90 years of age and you are sick and you cannot afford skyrocketing
electric bills and your electricity gets turned off, you are in serious
trouble.
According to the National Energy Assistance Directors' Association, a
recordbreaking 15.6 million American families, or nearly 15 percent of
all households, are at least 30 days overdue in paying their utility
bills. This is a crisis situation and a situation in which LIHEAP can
be of significant help.
To demonstrate how important LIHEAP is right now for Southern States
dealing with a major heat wave, let me give you a few examples of what
I am referring to. This is hard to believe, but it is true. Over the
past decade, the last 10 years, more than 400 people have died of heat
exposure in the State of Arizona, including 31 in July of 2005 alone.
All of these deaths could have been prevented if the people affected
had air-conditioning. Without increased support from the Federal
Government, Arizona will be out of LIHEAP funding before the end of
this month.
Let me quote from a letter I received on July 15--last week--from
Phil Gordon, the mayor of Phoenix, AZ. This is what he writes:

I am writing to express my support for the Warm in Winter
and Cool in Summer Act. Currently Arizona can only provide
assistance to 6 percent--

Six percent--

of eligible LIHEAP households. . . . To make matters worse,
Phoenix continues to experience extreme heat. In the past
month alone, we have had 15 days with temperatures at or
above 110 degrees. This extreme heat is especially hard on
the very young, the elderly and disabled who are on fixed
incomes and can no longer afford to cool their homes. . . .
Arizona Public Service--

That is the electric company there--

reported that there was a 36% increase in the number of
households having difficulty in paying utility bills and an
increase of 11,000 families being disconnected compared to a
year ago.

Imagine not having electricity, and day after day the temperature is
110 degrees. And imagine if you are 90 years of age. Imagine if you are
sick.

Rising energy and housing costs are placing enormous
strains on low-income households across Arizona.

So writes Mayor Phil Gordon of Phoenix, AZ.
Madam President, it is not just Arizona. Due to a lack of LIHEAP
funding, the State of Texas only provides air-conditioning assistance
to about 4 percent of those who qualify.
Let me quote from a letter I received on July 15 from Shawnee Bayer
from the Community Action Committee in Victoria, TX. She writes:

The temperatures in our area have been 100 to 110 degrees
for 16 consecutive days. I fear it is going to be very tragic
at the current pace we are going with so little LIHEAP
funding available. . . . There are so many who need our
assistance, like the elderly lady in her 80's who recently
almost died due to kidney failure; now she doesn't want to
use her air conditioner because she is afraid she won't be
able to pay the bill. . . .

That should not be taking place here in the United States of America.
This is in Victoria, TX.
I received an e-mail from DeAndra Baker from the Community Action
Agency in Giddings, TX, who writes:

We have a gentleman who is 78 years old and on a fixed
income of $770.00 a month. . . . Due to the extremely high
temperatures he is unable to afford to keep his home cool.
His doctor provided a statement that he must have his air
conditioner turned on at a minimum of 80 degrees to avoid
congestive heart failure and he is not even able to afford
that much. Sadly, he will not continue to run his A/C or fans
and will be at serious risk unless LIHEAP funding is
increased soon.

That is what is going on in the State of Texas.
Without additional support from the Federal Government, the State of
Georgia will not be able to offer any LIHEAP assistance whatsoever to
its residents this summer. Currently, Georgia has a waiting list of
28,000 people hoping to receive some relief from the hot weather this
summer.
Let me quote from a letter I received from the executive director of
the Community Action Agency in Gainesville, GA, Janice Riley. She
writes:

[[Page 16173]]

One family that came in after we ran out of LIHEAP funds
was the Jones family. . . . Mr. Jones, came to our office
requesting assistance with his electric bill. He has a wife
and five children. . . . They got behind with all their bills
when he was injured on the job six months ago. . . . Their
daughter is paralyzed from the neck down from a fall she had
at six months of age. I wish we could help them. Another
participant that did not receive LIHEAP funds and is now
facing disconnection or homelessness is Ms. O'Brien, a 33
year old, single parent with 5 children between the ages of
7-16, and a newborn grandchild which she has taken in. . . .
Her power was turned off last week because she was unable to
pay it. . . . Her need for assistance is based on the high
costs of living, not from her lack of work ethic and heroic
efforts to maintain her household.

In addition, unless this legislation is signed into law soon, the
State of Kentucky will not be able to keep any of its residents cool
this summer through the LIHEAP program.
According to the executive director of the Community Action Agency in
Kentucky, Kip Bowmar:

February of 2008 marked the first time in the program's
history that all 120 Counties in Kentucky ran out of LIHEAP
funds forcing us to close our doors as fuel prices were
soaring and people needed help.
In Florida, Hilda Frazier, the State director of the LIHEAP program,
has estimated they will serve 26,000 fewer households this year because
of the reduction of available LIHEAP funding and the rising cost of
energy.
Moving on to California, Joan Graham, the deputy director of the
Community Action Agency in Sacramento, CA, recently wrote that:

Every day we are turning away at least 50 families who
qualify for LIHEAP because we lack resources. Energy bills
have increased 30 percent over last year, yet our funding has
not increased. In 2006, there were 29 heat-related deaths in
Sacramento County. One senior who passed away due to extreme
heat was afraid to turn on his air-conditioner because he
knew he would be unable to pay the electric bill. We know
there are more like him out there at present.

Why is LIHEAP so important in the South in the summertime? From 1999
to 2003, over 3,400 deaths in this country were due to excessive heat.
All of these deaths were preventable, and air-conditioning is the best
way to prevent those deaths, according to CDC.
I relate the problems associated with high heat and lack of LIHEAP
funding not because that is necessarily an issue in my State. In our
State of Vermont, in the northern tier of this country, the fear
obviously is that when winter comes and weather becomes 20 below zero,
we are going to have many families who are going to go cold. Some may
freeze, some may be forced to vacate their homes and move in with other
relatives and friends. That is what our fear is. Again, this is not
just a fear of northern States, this is a concern that impacts every
State in this country, whether you are in the North or whether you are
in the South. It is imperative that we move on this issue and it is
imperative that we move as quickly as possible.
So once again, I am delighted that in the midst of all of the
differences of opinion we are hearing on energy policy in general,
there has been a coming together around the issue of LIHEAP. We now
have 52 cosponsors, including 13 Republicans. When this bill comes to
the floor--and it will come to the floor soon; we are going to pass
it--I am quite confident we are going to get at least 60 votes, if we
need that, and maybe a lot more than that. My hope is that we move it
on to the House to get it passed there as soon as possible and we get
this desperately needed funding out into the States. This is an issue
we are making some progress on and I look forward to the support of all
of my colleagues.
With that, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire is recognized.
Mr. GREGG. Madam President, I wish to pick up on what the Senator
from Vermont is saying because I feel very strongly that we do need to
move forward with additional funding for LIHEAP, the Low-Income Energy
Assistance Program. In fact, I have offered an amendment to this--or I
have filed it. I haven't offered it, because no amendments have been
allowed by the majority party, but I have filed an amendment to the
Energy bill, which is the logical place that we should put the LIHEAP
language, which would do three things. It would double the amount of
funding for low-income energy assistance, increasing it by $2.5
billion, which is the essence of the bill of the Senator from Vermont,
which is exactly what we need to take care of the increased prices for
energy according to the Energy Office in New Hampshire.
Secondly, it would add $25 million to the weatherization program. I
think weatherization makes a lot of sense because it takes homes which
lose a lot of their energy through lack of adequate windows or adequate
insulation and helps those homes, especially low-income individuals.
Further, it does something else which is important. LIHEAP is directed
to low-income people, but middle-income families today, with the cost
of energy doubling and tripling, have a serious problem. Folks who are
working for a living but are still on a fairly tight budget or a fixed
income are going to get hit hard this winter when their energy bills
double and triple. So this bill sets up a tax credit dealing with the
first $1,000 for an individual who is purchasing energy at fairly
moderate income levels, so it doesn't benefit high-income individuals,
and allows people, to the extent they buy oil to heat their home, to
take that tax credit to assist them in the effort of reducing the cost
of that oil.
All of this is paid for. My bill is entirely paid for. I think that
is also a critical element because what we are talking about here is
buying a consumable product for today--oil to heat your home--and then,
unfortunately, if you don't pay for it, you are passing the bill for
that oil on to our children and our grandchildren by adding to the debt
of the United States, and that is not fair. Our children and our
grandchildren are going to have their own tough time heating their
homes; they don't need to have the debt that is included in paying for
that program.
So my bill is entirely paid for by eliminating a tax--what I consider
to be an inappropriate tax break for basically large, integrated oil
companies known as section 199. This tax break was not directed at
those companies originally when it was passed--and it should be--but it
is being taken advantage of, and it is certainly not needed when oil is
selling at $120 or $130 a barrel, and the incentives to produce oil are
significant enough by the cost of the marketplace.
I feel very strongly--and I think this is an important point to
make--that we need to have a comprehensive approach relative to people
who are going to be impacted this winter, and it needs to be a paid-for
approach, and that is why I made this suggestion.
I also feel strongly that if the majority leader calls up the bill
which he filed, which is the bill from Senator Sanders, in an attempt
basically to take down the Energy bill so that we are not going to
debate it any longer, that is not the right approach. Because the real
way you get to the issue of energy and the cost of energy for low-
income people in New Hampshire this winter--or for moderate income
people in New Hampshire this winter--is to reduce the overall cost of
energy, to bring the price of energy down. How do you do that? You
produce more and you consume less.
We on our side of the aisle have a series of ideas as to how you
should produce more. Use the oil that is in the Outer Continental
Shelf, drill in the Outer Continental Shelf. Use shale oil. We have 2
trillion barrels of shale oil sitting there--more reserves than in all
of Saudi Arabia and many of the Middle Eastern countries combined. Use
those resources. Bring them on the market. Take away the impediments
which we as a Congress--the Democratic Congress specifically--have put
in the way of using Outer Continental Shelf oil.
There is language which has passed this Congress which was put in by
the Democratic Congress that says you can't drill in the Outer
Continental Shelf. There is language which says you can't use oil shale
from Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah--this huge reserve

[[Page 16174]]

of energy. That language should be removed so that those sources of oil
can be used.
Once you show the world we are willing to bring on line as a nation
additional production from our resources, that will reduce the price of
energy, because these prices which we are seeing today are speculative
prices based on what they expect to occur in the future, and they
expect demand to go up, but supply to stay stable--to not go up. Well,
if we prove we are willing to bring more supply on line, and we are
willing to use other sources such as nuclear power to reduce our
reliance on oil, that will cause these prices to come down. That is the
most significant thing we can do. If we could bring the price of a
barrel of oil down to $100, even, that would dramatically take pressure
off of people buying home heating oil this winter in New Hampshire.
So this bill we are debating right now, this energy bill, has to be
completed before we move on to Senator Sanders' bill. In the debate of
this bill, we should take up the LIHEAP amendment which will be
offered, I suspect, from our side of the aisle--probably by Senator
Sununu or myself. At the same time, we should take up these other ideas
of expanding the use of our reserves as a nation on the Outer
Continental Shelf, in the shale oil reserves, using nuclear power.
We should be expanding these reserves. Why? Because that will cause
the price of oil to come down. In addition, the secondary benefit of
this, of course, is that we won't be buying energy from people who
don't like us. We won't be buying as much energy from Venezuela if we
are producing American oil. We won't be buying energy from Iran if we
are producing more American oil.
So clearly this is what we should do. We should produce more and we
should consume less. At the same time, we should be promoting--and
there will be an amendment from our side of the aisle on this bill--
promoting the use of electric cars and development of electric
batteries, promoting more conservation ideas, promoting more renewable
ideas. These are initiatives which need to be pursued. More
importantly, they need to be discussed and a genuine bill needs to come
out of this Congress. A bill such as the majority leader has
presented--or the Democratic side has presented--which deals only with
one small sliver of the problem, which is the potential for
speculation, does nothing to increase supply and it does nothing to
increase conservation, the two things we need to do in order to get the
price of oil down.
The simple fact is this bill should be available and open to
amendment. In an attempt by the majority leader to basically sidetrack
this bill, to throw it in the ditch, so we can't go forward with
amendments which deal with addressing drilling on the Outer Continental
Shelf, which deal with bringing on more shale oil, which deal with
nuclear power, which deal with more conservation--I am not going to
vote for something that tries to accomplish that. I am going to vote to
try to make sure we come out of this debate with a comprehensive
policy, something that drives this country toward creating more supply
that is American-created while at the same time using less.
Madam President, how much time do I have remaining?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has used 8 minutes and there is 22
minutes left.
Mr. GREGG. I believe I have 10 minutes. If the Chair would advise me
when I have completed 10 minutes, I would appreciate it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. I will do that.

Housing

Mr. GREGG. On another topic, we are going to take up tomorrow
hopefully the housing bill. This is an extraordinarily important piece
of legislation. It is a big leap for those of us who are fiscal
conservatives to say the Government should step into this arena as
aggressively as this bill suggests we do but, unfortunately, it is a
necessary step. It accomplishes two things which are absolutely
critical in the present context of our economy.
Today there are a lot of people losing their homes through
foreclosure as a result of taking part in what was known as the
subprime lending process and having their ARMs reset, their mortgage
rates reset. This bill sets up a process where people who live in their
primary residence who have the wherewithal, the ability, to pay a
reasonable mortgage can restructure that mortgage so they can afford it
and so they don't lose their home, and so there isn't a foreclosure.
That is very important. It is important not only to those individuals,
but it is important to the marketplace to start some activity in the
marketplace in the area of mortgage lending and home sales.
Secondly, and equally important, this bill addresses the fundamental
strength of our financial institutions. We have some financial
institutions in this country which are a bit unstable--unstable. We
need to make sure they are stable. Why? Because these institutions,
such as Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, are essentially at the center of
the strength, whether we like it or not, of our banking industry. We
need to set up a process so the marketplace knows these institutions,
specifically Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, are going to survive and are
going to be stable and are going to be able to have the capital and the
wherewithal to continue to lend and to continue to have the market, to
turn over mortgages so you can have liquidity in the lending markets.
This is critical.
Some will argue it may be expensive. My argument is if we don't take
this step, we know it will be expensive. We know from the FDIC----
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has used 10 minutes.
Mr. GREGG. Insurance that we will incur--as a result of bank failures
that we will be paying a massive price. So although I don't like the
idea from a concept as a matter of practice, this is something we are
simply going to have to do in order to assure the fiscal solvency and
resilience of our credit markets.
Madam President, I appreciate the courtesy of the Chair and I yield
the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama is recognized.
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam President, I thank Senator Gregg for his insights
on housing and other matters. With regard to the potential LIHEAP
legislation, I respect the fact that he desires it to be paid for and
for it not to be one more addition to the public debt. However, as a
Senator who has believed for the last 12 years I have been here that
this Nation needed to produce more oil and gas at home, I have been
frustrated so often by my colleagues--frequently from the Northeast, I
have to say--who have opposed oil production offshore, have opposed oil
production in Alaska, have opposed coal to liquid, have opposed shale
oil production and other avenues of production. The junior Senator from
Vermont, my colleague on the Energy Committee, declared that we needed
more geothermal, we needed more wind and solar, we needed renewable
energy forms, which I certainly support in every way possible.
Yet it is odd to me that those very same persons now walk blithely
into the Senate and want the taxpayers of America to subsidize the
Northeast so they can buy more dirty fuel oil to heat their homes
with--the people who objected to the production of oil and gas year
after year. I have to say that. I know people in the Northeast are
hurting. People all over the country are hurting. The little county
where I grew up in Alabama, according to the New York Times and a
national survey, found that they spend a larger percentage of their
income on gasoline than any other county in America because incomes are
low in the rural areas and they have to drive a long distance to work.
Those were the primary factors cited. That makes sense to me. Are we
going to subsidize people in Wilcox County? Who gets subsidized?
What we need, without any doubt, colleagues, is an energy policy that
will bring down these prices. We need an energy policy that makes
sense--not subsidizing the dirtiest oil of all, burning heating oil in
individual homes. We ought to be thinking about things that could
actually work, such as cleaner natural gas, making those

[[Page 16175]]

pipelines available throughout the country, instead of blocking every
attempt to expand a pipeline. Or maybe we could expand nuclear power in
the Northeast and other places in the country so more of our homes
could be converted to clean electricity, produced by nuclear power,
which produces not one drop of global warming gases or atmospheric
pollution.
I have to say I am disappointed that the majority leader has decided
he did not have time--I believe those were his words--to deal with
energy. Therefore, he filled the tree, using a parliamentary procedure
that means we would go home a week earlier than we expected to go home
and not stay in session next week and talk about energy and the things
the American people care about. They care about energy and the economy.
The economy is adversely affected by high energy costs. That is what we
need to be doing right now.
I think this idea, that the majority leader can fill the tree and
control the amendments so we are not able to enter into a debate about
how to confront the energy crisis this Nation is experiencing, is a
very extraordinary departure from our classical history.
In 2005 and 2006, we had an energy debate and passed an important
energy bill. The Republicans had the majority at that time. I believe
there were 15 days of debate, 20 or 30 amendments were offered, and
many more were accepted without a full vote.
Then, last year, the Democratic majority allowed an energy debate
that improved our CAFE standards, and it passed overwhelmingly. I voted
for that. I think it was 10 full days of debate and many votes were
cast on amendments. At this time, quite a number of amendments were
accepted.
Why would we not do that now when we are facing an even more severe
crisis? That is my question. So I note to my colleagues that energy
prices are having a very real impact on the lives of our constituents.
According to AAA, the average price of regular unleaded gasoline was
$4.03 this morning. As a result, the typical American family, with two
cars, is paying approximately--we have calculated this out, according
to average miles driven--paying $1,260 more this year for the same
number of gallons of gasoline they were purchasing last year. That
amounts to a $105-per-month increase in expenditures for each family.
Remember, people have paid taxes, they have had Social Security
withheld, they have paid their insurance, their house payment, and all
their basic expenses. You only have a certain amount of money. The
American people are unhappy because they are paying an extra $105 per
month for the same amount of gasoline they were purchasing before. When
they realize that a big reason for that is because of a systematic
action by Congress to block production of clean American energy, I
think they are going to be unhappy with us. In fact, they are already
unhappy with us. The popularity of Congress is at an alltime low. I
think, on this energy question, we deserve the criticism. I have to say
I have promoted more production for years. I have warned against this
problem.
As a result of our policies, we are now importing over 60 percent of
our fuel. That amounts to $500 billion to $700 billion in American
wealth which has been transferred out of this country to foreign
nations. They are using it like Venezuela is right now, with Chavez in
Russia closing a $2 billion arms deal. He is basically doing that with
our money, with the high price of oil. He is off shopping to buy
weapons and--hopefully, he will not--possibly use them to destabilize
South America, since he sees himself as following in the steps of Fidel
Castro, his hero. That is not a good thing.
I have offered legislation that would open an area in the Gulf of
Mexico on Alabama's side of the Alabama-Florida line, called the
stovepipe, that has large amounts of oil and gas in it. It is in
shallower water, so the wells can be drilled in a fashion that they can
sit on the bottom. With the deep drilling we are doing today, you have
to have a ship. The waters are so deep, they cannot anchor the ship. It
has to sit in place by GPS and have propellers all around it to hold it
steady, so it doesn't move, and the drilling can go on. This would be
much cheaper and much quicker to bring onboard.
I have offered legislation that would require the Department of
Energy to examine the subsidies and incentives we have created and to
see which ones are working. This legislation would also have the
Department of Energy work on a recommendation of how to utilize our
subsidies, incentives, and prohibitions in a way that effectively
maximizes our energy capacity in this country, making us less dependent
upon foreign oil.
I believe strongly we need more efficiency. We need to use less
energy. We need to have a breakthrough. I believe we will. In my home
State, I believe we are going to see, within the next few months, a
breakthrough on the conversion of cellulose to biodiesel or ethanol,
and that could be a big help to us. It will certainly be more
productive than that ethanol we are getting from corn today.
I see my colleague, the distinguished Senator from Arizona. I wish to
say more, but I will conclude by saying that I believe we need to act.
Our soldiers in Iraq work 7 days a week, 12- to 15-hour days. Their
lives are at risk. The majority leader said we don't have time, that we
need to recess a week earlier than we projected, and we cannot possibly
spend more time during August--we need to be home on recess--dealing
with the No. 1 issue facing the American people in this country.
I believe that is the wrong policy. I think we need to say so. I
believe there are large numbers of Democratic Members of this Congress
who will support more production that is safe and carefully done, that
will help us deal with the crisis we are facing, but we cannot make
progress, unless we are able to vote and debate. That is being denied
at this time.
I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized.
Mr. KYL. Madam President, I associate myself with the remarks of my
colleague from Alabama a moment ago. I will speak to the reliance of
the United States on other countries around the world for too much of
our petroleum and natural gas supplies and what that does to the United
States to make us dependent, to cost us more money, to reduce our
flexibility and actions around the world, and also the point that every
time they want to rattle their sabers to create instability in the
world, what that does to the markets is to reflect that instability in
higher prices. So these very countries that we would like not to make
so much money off their oil supplies, if they want to make more, all
they have to do is create a little trouble in the world, and it raises
the price because the markets go higher for a while. I will talk about
that in a moment.
I have reflected on a comment a friend of mine made some time ago. I
don't mean disrespect to my friends on the other side. But he said: You
know, Democrats have three approaches to every problem: Taxation,
litigation, and regulation.
Sometimes we like to laugh about that because it is, unfortunately,
too true. But I thought how does this apply to energy. Sure enough, it
does. They, of course, tried taxation and failed, trying to raise taxes
on oil companies, under the notion it would never be reflected in
consumer prices we pay. But that is exactly what would happen. They
tried litigation against OPEC. There is no way you can sue the OPEC
countries. We ought to produce more of what we have, not tell them they
have to produce more. They are pretty strained, in terms of where they
are in production right now, in any event, and we are not, as the King
of Saudi Arabia reminded President Bush not too long ago.
Then, the third thing has to do with regulation. It is the bill that
is pending before us right now. This is the Democratic approach: Let's
regulate the people who buy and sell the contracts for oil and natural
gas and the like. Of course, we already have regulators--it is called
the CFTC--and today we have some news that demonstrates that this body
is doing its job and can do its job.

[[Page 16176]]

To the extent that there is illegal manipulation in the market, the
CFTC can stop it. They announced that, after a year of investigation,
they had stopped a company that was allegedly illegally manipulating
the market, and they are going to take legal action against them. The
Department of Justice may be looking at it from a criminal aspect, as
well.
Both Democrats and Republicans have agreed that one of the things we
need to do is ensure that the CFTC has all the money it needs and the
personnel it needs to continue to do the job we have given it to do, to
make sure people are not abusing the process. That is the good part of
regulation. The bad part would be to begin defining--as the Democratic
legislation does--who good traders are and who bad traders are and not
let the bad traders trade--something that was debunked yesterday in an
interagency study concluded by the CFTC, which concluded that
speculation wasn't the problem; that the reason for the price increases
at the pump is the law of supply and demand--not enough supply for the
demand that exists out there.
Today, another diversion was created. I wish to reiterate this. It
involves a friend of mine, my colleague, John McCain. He was grossly
misquoted this morning by Senator Reid and others, who have tried to
suggest he is not for offshore drilling. I think everybody knows John
McCain supports more offshore drilling. As a matter of fact, on this
chart, I will quote one of many things I could refer to from his Web
site. I have a great deal of information in which he makes it clear he
is for more offshore production.
Among other things, in June, he said this:

Opponents of domestic production cling to their position,
even as the price of foreign oil has doubled, and doubled
again . . . every year, we are sending hundreds of billions
of dollars out of the country for oil imports, much of it
from OPEC, while trillions of dollars of oil reserves in
America go unused.

He has also said the current Federal moratorium on drilling on the
Outer Continental Shelf stands in the way of energy exploration and
production. John McCain believes it is time for the Federal Government
to lift these restrictions and put our own reserves to use, and on and
on.
He obviously supports offshore production. So why did some of my
colleagues take a quotation of his, leave part of it out, and try to
create the impression that he did not support it and he did not think
it would do any good? He was responding to a question earlier about
whether more of this offshore production would produce immediate
results. All he did was to tell the truth. Here is what he said:

I don't see an immediate relief, but I do see that
exploitation of existing reserves, that may exist, and that--
in view of many experts--that do exist off our coasts, is
also a way that we need to provide relief, even though it may
take some years. The fact that we are exploiting those
reserves would have a psychological impact that I think is
beneficial.

I totally agree with him. My colleagues read this to suggest that he
believes offshore production would have no benefit except a
psychological benefit. As we can see, that is not what he said. But his
point is also valid--``is also a way we need to provide relief,'' it
will provide a psychological boost to the markets just as, in fact,
President Bush's lifting of the moratorium a week or so ago on some
offshore drilling caused prices to drop. Many analysts believe the drop
of about $25 per barrel was much because of the President's
announcement and the fact that Congress was taking up this subject with
the idea that perhaps we would actually get something done.
What the speculators are doing is simply placing a bet into the
future that there is either going to be enough oil to meet demand or
there is not. If there is not, then they are betting the price will go
up.
What Senator McCain is saying is the mere fact we would pass
legislation saying we are going to produce more oil offshore would
immediately have the impact on the markets to bring the prices down
because they would know in the future we would have enough supply to
meet our demands. John McCain was exactly correct on this, and I think
it serves no purpose to misquote him and suggest otherwise.
I also note that in the House of Representatives today, legislation
was defeated, as it was last week, by the Democratic majority there
that is very similar to, if not identical to, legislation that was
introduced by Democrats in the Senate.
For example, last week the House of Representatives defeated a
provision that says where leases have been let to oil producers, if
they do not drill on those leases after a period of time, then the
leases come back to the Federal Government.
As you probably know, that is already the law. The bottom line is you
get primarily 10-year leases. Some are shorter. You cannot obviously
immediately go out and drill on every one of several hundred thousand
acres, but what you do is try to figure out where it is most likely you
are going to get oil and you start drilling there first and keep going
until you drill in all the areas where you think there is potential. It
is obviously not going to be on every acre. Whatever you haven't done
in 10 years goes back to the Government. That bill failed because it is
already law.
Today another bill failed that is to drain the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve. This is our national security reserve of oil, in case of an
emergency, for our military primarily. We need reserve so the tanks can
drive, planes can fly, and the ships can sail. You don't want to reduce
that to affect very briefly the price of gas in the country. They would
reduce it by 10 percent. What would that do in terms of the oil supply
in the country? It would reduce the oil supply by 3\1/2\ days--3\1/2\
days. If it drove the prices down at all, which I doubt would happen,
it would be very temporary because everybody would know it is not a
permanent solution. So it is no wonder that failed in the House. Again,
to the extent that is part of the Democratic bill, it is obviously not
a solution to the problem.
I mentioned I would talk briefly about what Senator Sessions was
talking about, and that is the unintended consequences of not producing
our own energy, even though we have it in our country, and relying on
other countries to do it instead.
More than 60 percent of every dollar spent at the pump--I filled up
my tank last week, and it cost me over $70, and my tank wasn't even
empty when I filled it. More than 60 cents out of every dollar I paid
went to a foreign country. We could keep that money in the United
States if we produced our own energy.
I conclude by saying we can do ourselves a whole lot of good to take
advantage of the resources that exist right here in the United States
of America, reduce the cost of gasoline at the pump, and ensure our
future energy security.
I hope during the course of the next several days we will have an
opportunity to do that as we debate this important legislation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington is recognized.
Ms. CANTWELL. Madam President, I came to the floor yesterday to talk
about how our Nation must move forward on a new energy future and
explain how even if we drilled off all our coastlines it would still
meet only 1 percent of our future oil needs. Instead we should be
moving toward a renewable energy future and new energy technologies
that could actually reduce our dependence on foreign oil by over half.
But today I come to the floor to talk about the proper policing of
oil markets because we are in a crisis that is literally bankrupting
families and businesses and even threatening entire industries.
Now, I don't often agree with President George Bush, but I have to
say in his latest economic analysis, I actually agree with him, because
I think it explains part of the reason why we are in a crisis today.
That is right, the President said that ``Wall Street got drunk.''
That is right, the President acknowledged that something was wrong with
Wall Street and that ``Wall Street got drunk.''

[[Page 16177]]

Now, I don't know if the President meant to say that publically, but
it got captured on the Internet. I don't know if he plans to keep
saying that or all the intentions he has about trying to sober up Wall
Street. But I know elaborating on the President's point, White House
press secretary Dana Perino explained:

Well, you know, I actually haven't spoken to him about
this, but I imagine what he meant, as I have heard him
describe it before in both public and private, was that Wall
Street let themselves get carried away and that they did not
understand the risks that the newfangled financial
instruments would pose to markets.

That is what she said.
I don't know why the Bush administration and the regulatory team that
they put in place wasn't doing something about this situation. We do
know the administration supported deregulation of the financial
markets.
And to me, the issue is that while Wall Street was getting drunk,
it's really America and the American middle class that is feeling the
hangover.
Today the Federal Reserve is struggling to contain what is almost one
of the most severe credit crises since the Great Depression, and
American families and businesses are paying dearly for the poor
decisions and inactions of this administration.
During the past decade, the financial economy seems to have repeated
some of the excesses our country has gone through before. So I wonder
when we are going to learn the lessons of history and make sure that we
in Congress do our job and that regulatory agencies do theirs.
In many ways, today's situation is a repeat of the 1920s when too
much borrowing to underwrite too many speculative bets using too much
of other people's money set up an the entire economy up for a crash.
Well, in 1999, Congress repealed key parts of the Glass-Steagall Act
of 1933. It allowed banks to operate any kind of financial businesses
they desired. And it set up a situation where they had multiple
conflicts of interest. And several economists and analysts have cited
the repeal of this Act as contributing to the 2007 subprime mortgage
crisis. In fact, Robert Kuttner, cofounder and co-editor of the
American Prospect magazine wrote in September 2007:

Hedge funds, private equity companies, and the subprime
mortgage industries have two big things in common. First,
each represents financial middlemen unproductively extracting
wealth from the real economy. Second, each exploits loopholes
in what remains a financial regulation.

Then, in 2000 we also deregulated a new and volatile financial
derivative that is at the heart of today's housing credit crisis--
credit default swaps. As White House press secretary Dana Perino would
describe it, these newfangled financial instruments that posed a risk
to the market actually grew into a $62 trillion industry.
And Warren Buffett has called these credit-swaps financial weapons of
mass destruction. So the proliferation of these newfangled financial
instruments has resulted in huge profits and losses without any
physical goods changing hands.
So now, I come to the floor asking my colleagues when are we going to
learn the lessons of the past? When are we going to realize that the
the 1929 stock market crash has the same root cause as the recent
housing bubble? Both were financed by dangerously, highly leveraged
borrowing, and after the crash many banks failed causing a ripple
effect that devastated our Nation's economy. Well, after the 1929
crash, Congress stepped up and changed the banking laws to eliminate
some of the abuses that had led to the crash.
That is right, only after the crisis did Congress act. What I want to
know is whether we are going to learn that vital lesson and legislate
consumer protections in advance, or only after a bubble bursts.
The savings and loan crisis of the 1980s and 1990s when 747 savings
and loan associations went under provides a similar lesson. Like
before, much of the mess can be traced back to deregulation of the
savings and loans which gave them many of the capabilities of banks,
but failed to bring them under the same regulations as banks. Congress
eliminated regulations designed to prevent lending excesses and
minimize failures.
Deregulation allowed lending in a distant loan markets on the promise
of higher returns, and it also allowed associations to participate in
speculative construction activities with builders and developers who
had little or no financial stake in the projects.
The ultimate cost of this crisis is estimated to have totaled around
$160 billion, with U.S. taxpayers bailing out the institutions to the
tune of $125 billion. This, of course, added to our deficit of the
early 1990s.
So I ask my colleagues: When are we going to learn this lesson?
As George Soros wrote in his book documenting the credit crisis:

At the end of World War II, the financial industry--banks,
brokers, other financial institutions--played a very
different role in the economy than they do today. Banks and
markets were strictly regulated . . .

Unfortunately, today's banking and credit crisis teaches us we have
failed again to learn the hard lessons. We have failed to see that
oversight and transparency are always critical, and when Congress makes
reforms, they cannot disregard these important fundamentals.
The only encouraging news I have seen lately is that Treasury
Secretary Paulson is now working to increase regulation over investment
banks, hedge funds, and other financial institutions.
I could go on and on for my colleagues on my own personal experience
with the western energy crisis that happened in electricity in 2000 and
2001. We saw that during the electricity deregulation experience which
started in the mid 1990s, people argued that electricity was just
another commodity. But it is really a very vital element to our
economy. Many experts cautioned that electricity was too vital a part
of our economy and way of life to let these markets go without the
transparency and oversight that is essential.
We all know the rest of the story. We saw that deregulation set the
table for some of Enron's spectacular manipulation schemes of 2000 and
2001 among other bad actors, which all told caused more than $35
billion in economic loss and over 589,000 jobs were lost because of
this crisis.
Again, only after the crisis was over, Congress stepped in and gave
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and now the FTC more
regulatory authority on energy markets. But again, Congress is doing
its job after the fact.
So I ask my colleagues: When are we going to learn? When are we going
to quit deregulating these critical markets without much thought to the
transparency and oversight that is critical for markets to operate and
function correctly? When are we going to learn that when we give Wall
Street an inch, as the President says, Wall Street gets drunk?
We are here today. We are here today to talk about the oil futures
market and hopefully enact some meaningful legislation. But the real
reason we are here is that we deregulated the energy futures market in
2000, which helped spark today's price bubble that is driving our
markets to no longer be based on supply-and-demand fundamentals. In one
fell swoop, this deregulation did a number of things that enabled
today's perfect storm to brew.
We let newfangled financial instruments--called credit default
swaps--go unregulated and made it too easy to use bad debt to finance
home mortgages. We also let newfangled crude oil trading--called energy
swaps--go unregulated and essentially allow Wall Street to trade
without any transparency. And we allowed electronic trading of energy
commodities to emerge as a new form of trading. In a nutshell, we let
Wall Street rewrite the rule book for all the traditional exchanges,
like as NYMEX and the Chicago Merc, which were previously subject to
considerable CFTC oversight.
The consequences of allowing these energy speculators to move into
this market, as my colleagues on the floor have said, in spades, shows
it is similar to a casino game, instead of playing in the legitimate
trading market. And the consequences are the American people

[[Page 16178]]

paying hand over fist for our lack of regulatory oversight.
Why are we talking about the futures market? Because it should be a
key price discovery method to establish the true price based on supply
and demand. As the Government Accountability Office has said:

The prices for energy commodities in the futures and in the
spot or physical markets are closely linked because they are
influenced by the same market fundamentals in the long run.

That is right, the prices for the energy commodities in the futures
and in the spot or physical markets are closely linked because they are
influenced by the same market fundamentals in the long run. So why is
that so important? Well, it is important because the facts are clear:
Speculation, and excessive speculation, have driven up oil prices over
100 percent in a year, and energy market experts are telling us the
price should be more like $60 a barrel.
So people are questioning why the futures market is so high, driving
the price people pay at the pump today. Well, as Ed Wallace, with the
Dallas Star Telegram, said:

Record high prices without record low oil inventories,
analysts saying that so much money flows into the oil
commodities that it gives the impression of shortages, when
in fact no shortage exists.

So that is to say that when you have record-high prices without the
record-low inventories, and I note we haven't had a supply disruption,
so much money flows into the oil commodities it gives the impression of
a shortage when, in fact, a shortage doesn't actually exist.
Now, I learned this phenomenon the hard way because that's how Enron
manipulated the electricity markets coming up with various names for
these various schemes--Darth Vader, Get Shorty--where Enron created the
perception in the futures market that there was somehow not enough
supply and then went in the physical market and signed people up for
contracts at exorbitant rates. Thank God, through the hard work of
people in my office, a little utility in Washington state actually
recovered a tape of a trader talking to one of the individuals from
Enron doing a contract and actually saying on the phone: No, this isn't
true about the future price, but go ahead and tell your buyer it is so
they will sign this contract.
So now we are seeing the same thing happening again. To quote again
from the Dallas Star Telegram, in an article called ``ICE ICE BABY'':

Investors know that if they invest huge amounts in the
commodities futures, they can create a shortage on paper,
driving prices up just like an actual shortage.

That is right, investors know they can invest huge amounts in
commodities futures and they can create a shortage on paper and drive
up the price just like an actual shortage. So, yes, we are concerned.
In fact, that article goes on further, speaking about the
Intercontinental Exchange, better known as ICE--that this ICE platform
has been a big problem because we have allowed it to operate in the
dark without the same regulator oversight as other exchanges. Ed
Wallace is also quoted in that article as saying:

What kept traders from cornering the market in the past
where the government's anti-manipulation rules.

He is talking about what kept bad actors in check in the past, but
once we deregulated in 2000, they didn't have the same tools in place
to keep the manipulation from happening. So we are here today, on the
floor now, talking about whether we are going to move ahead on a
speculation bill to deal with this problem.
Compounding this problem is that we have a CFTC and an administration
that is watching out more for Wall Street than for Main Street. It is
up to us to make sure we are going to pass legislation that puts
transparency and tough rules in place to make sure the markets work for
consumers and that both the future price and physical price of oil
today are truly based on supply and demand.
Americans may be surprised to learn that our oil futures markets were
further deregulated--besides this 2000 Act. I am talking about a CFTC
decision made by staff behind closed doors who decided to take no
action against a London-based trading exchange that actually trades
U.S. oil products. As my colleague from Maryland likes to call it, the
London loophole. It is like driving on a U.S. highway but only applying
the same speed limits as the German Autobahn.
It is abundantly clear to me that the CFTC is doing everything it can
to continue to operate this way without thinking about its job, which
is to protect the American consumers from oil price manipulation. So
that's why I am making no secret of the fact that I am holding up the
renomination of CFTC commissioners. And I am holding up new
appointments to the CFTC until Congress gets to the bottom of this and
we can get Commissioners who are going to enforce the law on the books.
Hardworking Americans are counting on us and are suffering in this
crisis. Congress is their last resort as an oversight agency to make
sure there are functioning markets and not the manipulation of supply
based on the fact that we have created dark markets without proper
oversight. But don't just listen to me on this subject about the CFTC.
Listen to what other people have said about our CFTC, our Commodity
Futures Trading Commission. Others have been critical as well. In fact,
William Engdahl, who is an expert and an author on oil markets, wrote
in May of this year:

The CFTC seems to have deliberately walked away from their
mandated oversight responsibilities in the world's most
important traded commodity--oil.

So there is one expert who doesn't think the CFTC is doing its job.
Another expert, Steven Briese, who is a futures market analyst and
author of the ``Commitments of Traders Bible,'' which is a futures
market trade publication, wrote in May of this year as well:

Congress has provided the CFTC the power to control this
unlimited speculation--the law is very specific about
establishing position limits. The problem is they have
abdicated this role.

He is talking about the ``behind the closed door'' situation where
the CFTC said: We are not going to enforce the laws we have on the
books.
We have heard from other people, Mark Cooper, of the Consumer
Federation of America, recently testifying before Congress, because the
Consumer Federation of America focuses on protecting consumers. He had
something to say about the CFTC's poor performance. In fact, he said
the CFTC's poor performance is ``the regulatory equivalent to FEMA's
response to Hurricane Katrina.''
What he is basically saying is they dropped the ball, at least at the
beginning of this crisis, and have not responded.
So there are other people who have said things, like the trucking
industry. They have a big stake in making sure the markets function
properly. They say: ``There's oversight that's lacking or not taking
place--so the private market is taking advantage of that.''
So, Madam President, I am not the only person. I know The Washington
Post has also talked about this. They said, in an article: ``The CFTC
has exempted these firms from rules that limit speculative buying, a
prerogative traditionally reserved for airlines and trucking companies
that needed to lock in future fuel costs.''
So it is clear the CFTC has abdicated its authority and
responsibility. It has abdicated its authority and responsibility, and
we have been trying to clean this up and to push forward on important
efforts in this regard.
Madam President, I would like at this time to reference for the
record a document prepared by Professor Michael Greenberger that
responds to information from the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations. I know the SPI staff analysis of Professor
Greenberger's recent testimony before Congress on this topic has been
discussed on the floor, and I would like to make my colleagues aware of
his rebuttal to that PSI staff report.
Now, I am sure many of my colleagues probably didn't realize I was
going to come and talk so much about

[[Page 16179]]

the history of Congress deregulating markets, the crises that have
ensued--billions of dollars paid by taxpayers--and Congress finally
coming in and doing its job and making sure oversight agencies are
performing their proper role and responsibility. But I thought it was
important context so that we do not repeat the same mistakes.
Some of my colleagues today talked about the CFTC's recent
investigation that uncovered oil market manipulation, which underscores
the point. The CFTC could only take action against traders that are
using exchanges regulated under their purview. What we need to ask is:
what are we going to do about the dark markets, the markets that
operate within the United States with U.S.-traded products that have
been given an exemption and loophole in oil futures that we are not
regulating and are probably also causing the problem? We want to know
what they are doing about that.
So what is the American consumer saying about this? I know my
colleagues have been saying a lot about Americans and what their
preferences are. But it is clear to me that the American public wants
us to act. In fact, 80 percent of the American public believes that oil
commodities speculation and manipulation of the oil markets are taking
place. That is right. They want Congress to act. Eighty percent of
Americans polled said they believe oil commodities speculators are
manipulating the price of oil. So Americans are very concerned.
Two-thirds of Americans believe we should pass legislation that
creates new regulations governing all oil speculators. They want us to
put back in place the rules we had before we threw them out in 2000. So
two-thirds of Americans polled believe we should pass legislation that
creates the necessary regulations, and that is what we need to be doing
today.
I wish to make sure I am clear to my colleagues. We have done a great
service by having an open debate on these issues. And just this week,
experts said the Senate action is one of the reasons prices have fallen
$20 below where they were, because we have had this discussion what a
more regulated marketplace should look like. But I want to make sure my
colleagues are clear that we need to pass legislation that really will
crack down on excessive speculation. We cannot have a study bill, we
cannot punt this to the future. We have to pass a bill that really
addresses all areas of potential for excessive speculation. We need a
bill that has aggregate speculation limits across all exchanges. It has
to be transparent, and it has to be enforced on all markets.
We cannot have a bill on the Senate floor that has all the right
words in it but none of the important words in the proper places. That
is what I am going to continue to fight for. I am going to continue to
fight to make sure we put real teeth back into the law, to make sure
the American consumer is protected from the manipulation of oil markets
in the future.
We can give the CFTC the tools it needs, and we must insist that it
use them, but we will have to do our job here and pass this important
legislation. Wall Street may be drunk, but it is America that is
suffering the hangover, and we must help them recover. We need a new,
tough law on the books, and it is imperative that we learn from the
past mistakes of Congress in their attempt to lighten the load on some
of these financial institutions with tools, only to find it wreaking
havoc with housing oil speculation bubbles that is causing our country
great distress. I hope we get this right in the next couple of days,
and I am going to continue to fight until we do.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr. Whitehouse). The Senator from Iowa is
recognized.

Fiscal Policy

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, in a little over 3 months, Americans
will make a very important choice on the future direction of the
country. We will go to the polls, we will select a new President.
Americans will also vote on roughly one-third of the Senate and all the
Members of the House of Representatives.
According to public opinion polls, economic issues will be among the
most important matters voters will consider when they go to the voting
booth in November.
Everybody knows that the Federal Government affects economic issues,
and we do it through Federal fiscal policy. How we deal with Federal
fiscal policy can be viewed as two sides of a ledger: On one side is
tax policy, and on the other side is spending policy. The choices about
how we as a nation want to balance each side of the ledger will have
very important consequences and implications on our economic future.
Most economists agree that high taxes dampen economic growth. Too
much spending, just like too much taxation, can also dampen economic
growth. As elected representatives of the American people, we have an
obligation, as the Constitution directs us, to spend those tax dollars
for the common defense and also for the general welfare of the Nation.
We all have a stake in a growing economy, and we will all suffer from a
shrinking economy.
As ranking Republican on the tax-writing Senate Finance Committee, I
believe it is my obligation to explain the choices and the consequences
of those fiscal policy choices; therefore, I wish to focus on tax
policy as it relates to the choices Americans will face this fall.
In all of the discussion about vague notions of change and vague
notions of hope, there are some substantive issues Americans will be
facing in the fall. The big question will be how much is the Federal
Government going to take out of the American taxpayers' pocketbooks. We
will need to evaluate before the election what we are being told on the
campaign trail--not just what we are told, compare it with what is
likely to occur starting at high noon, January 20, 2009.
I think from history we have some pretty good indicators that tell us
what will happen based upon the choices of the American people in the
next election. To do that, we must look at our current tax burden. Then
we need to take a look at what Senators McCain and Obama are telling us
about how they will change the tax burden. Finally, we have to consider
the ability of each candidate to deliver on promises. Each taxpayer is
going to have to make choices, choices about what these candidates will
do on tax issues once they get into that position of power. Every
American taxpayer and every American family budget will be impacted by
the new President and the agenda of the Congress. Elections have
consequences.
Today, I wish to consider future tax policy and do it in the context
of the Congressional Record over the last 3 decades.
First, I want to compare the actions of Congress on tax hikes and tax
cuts in relation to each party's hold on the White House and do it from
the congressional as well as the White House basis. As a baseline, I
will show a scorecard of tax hikes and tax cuts for each 4-year
Presidential term since 1981.
I have a chart here. The chart shows three things. They start, as I
said, with the year 1981. As you will note, the years are divided into
Presidential terms, so we start with President Reagan's first term and
work our way through to the present, which is the last year of
President George W. Bush's second term. You see the bottom lines across
there, the ones that have red and blue, and the years there for the
Presidential terms.
Right above the line for the Presidential terms, we have a thick
line. It is a three-part line. The line shows relative power of
Democrats and Republicans. The top third of the line, if red, shows
Republicans holding the White House. The middle third of the line shows
who held the Senate majority for a certain period. If red, then
Republicans held the Senate; if blue, the Democrats held the Senate.
Then the bottom line, that is in regard to the House majority. Like the
other two lines, if red, it means the Republicans held the majority; if
blue, it means Democrats were in charge of the other body.

[[Page 16180]]

If you move up the chart, there is a running total of how much on a
yearly average that particular Congress and President agreed to raise
or reduce taxes. The lines going up or down are in regard to the tax
raises or tax decreases. This data is not mine; it was drawn from the
Treasury Office of Tax Analysis report that was released--the most
recent one in 2006. The amounts are derived from the nonpartisan Joint
Committee on Taxation revenue estimates of each of the enacted bills
Congress passed during that 26-year period of time.
Let's take a further look at the chart so you get some specifics.
President Reagan made tax relief a cornerstone of his successful 1980
campaign. His election helped Republicans attain a narrow majority for
the first time in over a generation. The House, of course, remained in
Democratic hands.
In 1981, President Reagan proposed and Congress agreed to a large tax
cut. So you have it. The first green line goes there. On average, if
fully implemented, it meant that you would have a tax cut of almost
$111 billion per year. Over time, the Democratic House pushed for and
President Reagan reluctantly agreed to some smaller tax increases, and
they are the second line where the tax increases come down toward the
zero line there.
For the 1984 campaign, President Reagan made revenue-neutral tax
reform a central part of his campaign for reelection. Republicans held
a majority in the Senate for that election, and President Reagan had
built a case for reform. Republicans in the Senate and Democrats in the
House agreed, and the chart reveals tax reform for 1986 of a small
amount, as you can see there, but still tax reform. It is significant,
I would say.
But in 1986, Republicans lost control of the Senate. I happen to
remember that because I was on the Finance Committee for my first 6
years in the Senate. We didn't have enough Republican seats after that,
I didn't have enough seniority, and so I lost my seat on the Finance
Committee.
Congressional Democrats insisted on and obtained, after their success
in that election, a tax increase in 1987. You can see that tax increase
there for 1987.
In 1988, as you recall, President Bush's father, George H.W. Bush
campaigned, in 1988, and included a pledge not to raise taxes.
President George H.W. Bush won that election, but congressional
Democrats solidified their majorities, and, as a part of a deficit-
reduction package, President George H.W. Bush forgot about his campaign
promise and agreed to a tax increase. And here it is. You can see the
big tax increase--in 1989-1990, it was. Shortly after that tax increase
went into effect--there are consequences of policy made here in
Congress--the American economy went into recession that year.
Then you get to the 1992 campaign. Bill Clinton, in response to the
recession, campaigned on a middle-income tax cut and tax increases on
higher income taxpayers. President Clinton was elected, and Congress
Democrats retained a very comfortable majority in the House and Senate,
as you can see by the blue lines there, during those years.
In 1993, less than a year later, on the force of the Democratic votes
alone, the largest tax increase of modern era was enacted. There you
can see it very definitely, a big tax increase at that period of time.
You will note it is at the highest point on the tax increase part of
the chart.
Republicans claimed majorities in the House and Senate in the 1994
election.
President Clinton agreed to a revenue-neutral small business tax
relief package in 1996. During that campaign, President Clinton
campaigned once again on middle-income tax relief. President Clinton
was reelected, Republicans increased their majority in the Senate, and
we retained a majority in the House.
In 1997, congressional Republicans and President Clinton agreed to a
significant tax relief package. It was the first tax relief law since
the President Reagan administration, and it averaged about $13 billion
a year. There you can see it in the year of 1997.
George W. Bush campaigned on a broad-based tax relief plan for 2000,
or in the 2000 campaign. He was elected then, obviously. The parties
split the Senate 50-50, with Republicans in control because of Vice
President Cheney's tie-breaking vote for organization. Republicans held
their House majority.
In 2001, President Bush and Congress agreed on the largest
comprehensive tax relief package since President Reagan. Here it is, as
you can see, the big tax reduction of 2001, averaging about $82 billion
per year.
As things happen around here, I was chairman of that committee for
only about 5 months because Senator Jeffords switched from being a
Republican to a Democrat, and in the wake of 9/11, corporate scandals,
and other events, President Bush, a Republican House, and a Democratic
Senate agreed on an economic stimulus package that averaged about $12
billion a year.
Republicans regained the Senate majority in 2002. So in 2003,
President Bush and the Republican Congress continued to significantly
reduce the overall tax burden.
So here you can see in the 2003 and 2004 tax bills a combined about
another $82 billion a year reduction in taxes. If you look at President
George W. Bush's first term, enacted legislation totaled roughly $174
billion per year, on average. Republicans held the House for all of
that term. Republicans held the Senate for most but not all of that
term.
In 2004, President Bush campaigned for reelection by emphasizing the
permanence of the lower tax burdens secured during his first term.
Republicans increased their House and Senate majorities.
So in 2006, President Bush and the Republican Congress extended the
tax relief in the first term through the year 2010. It is shown here.
It averages about $22 billion per year. In 2006, the situation now, as
a result of that election, Democrats gained majorities in both the
House and Senate.
Despite the opposition of the Democratic leadership in the House and
Senate, Congress passed and President Bush signed an ``unoffset''
alternative minimum tax. That legislation averaged $13 billion in tax
relief.
This year Congress and the President agreed to $34 billion in
temporary economic stimulus. At present, the Democratic Congress and
President Bush are in a stalemate on an AMT patch extension and other
expiring tax relief matters. The reason for the stalemate is the House
and Senate Democratic leadership's opposition to passing these bills
``unoffset.''
I want to use one chart to sum up today's discussion. This chart
shows a tax thermometer. We have got it up there. The heat side is the
tax increase side. This chart shows the relationship between party
control of Congress, Presidency, and tax hikes or tax relief.
If Republicans control the Presidency and Congress, then lowering the
tax burden, which is a tentative Republican philosophy, is virtually
certain to be put in place. So you can point to that point in the chart
there that demonstrates having both a Republican President and a
Republican Congress is a certainty to have a lower tax burden for the
American people.
If Democrats control both the Presidency and the Congress, then an
increase in the tax burden is certain to occur. That is what history of
the last 25 years shows. So it is a virtual certainty, regardless of
campaign rhetoric to the contrary.
If the parties split control of the Presidency and the Congress, the
record is, as you might expect, mixed, though generally against tax
relief.
So if you look at the median picture there, you see that we have
about three decades of history backing this up. I would encourage
everyone to take a look at this thermometer chart. When folks go to the
voting booth on November 4, they will need to consider the probability
of a change in fiscal policy. They will need to consider the potential
change to their family budget, from higher or lower taxes, because
elections have consequences. They will have to also think about the
broader economic effects of higher or lower tax

[[Page 16181]]

burdens on business or investment, because tax policies by the Congress
of the United States do have consequences, some ways good, some ways
bad. My view is, higher taxes are bad for the economy.
That change could be dramatic if the vote is for one party to control
the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. There would be consequences
then, lower taxes if that is House and Senate Republicans, Republican
President; House and Senate Democratic, Democratic President, higher
taxes.
In my next discussion, which will not be today, I will follow up this
one with a detailed examination of what happens in the last bit of
history most like the present. I am referring to the 1992 campaign and
the legislative record that followed in 1993.
The reason I do that is I think I see the same thing evolving in this
campaign. We ought to learn from history, and the voters need to take
that into consideration before November 4.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina is recognized.
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 15
minutes as in morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I commend Senator Grassley for focusing
again on the importance of lower taxes and promoting a better economy
and higher standard of living in America.
It is disturbing, as we talk about energy and high gas prices, to
hear from our Democratic colleagues in the House that they are actually
considering raising taxes on gasoline 10 cents or more per gallon at a
time when it is already a crushing cost to Americans on energy.
The energy debate has been very helpful. I think for years Americans
have known, at least many Americans, that the Democratic Party has
blocked the development of energy supplies, America's own energy
supplies, from the time of Jimmy Carter stopping nuclear generation to
President Clinton vetoing the legislation that would have opened some
oil reserves in Alaska, to constant votes by our Democratic colleagues
to stop the opening of oil and natural gas which is plentiful in
America.
Americans do not trust Congress to fix this because they know it is
the inaction by Congress that has caused the gas prices, and we see
that the Democratic leadership is going to do everything they can to
keep amendments and an open and honest debate about real energy
development in America from happening.

Housing

The same thing has happened on another bill that is going to be
interjected into this energy debate, this massive housing bill, this
massive mortgage bailout that is going to come back to the Senate floor
for a vote. This is another situation where the American people know
that the mortgage crisis, the foreclosure crisis, the problems with
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are caused by incompetence and gross
negligence by this Congress and past administrations.
We suspect, and there is every evidence, that part of that negligence
has come from the ability of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to spend
hundreds of millions of dollars to lobby Members of Congress and other
watchdog groups to keep them from focusing on the reforms that were
needed.
When this housing bill comes back, I have proposed one amendment. I
asked for one amendment in this process, that if the American taxpayers
put their money on the line to back these private companies, that these
private companies should no longer be able to spend millions of dollars
lobbying Members of Congress to keep them from implementing the reforms
that are so important.
Last night I made an offer to the majority leader. I suggested we
could have one vote under a time agreement to allow my amendment to
prohibit lobbying and political donations from Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac. We could have been done with the bill last night. If the majority
leader tabled the amendment, the bill would have been passed and sent
to the President last night. But I do not think he wanted his Members
to have to vote on that.
If the amendment had been adopted, the bill would have been
immediately sent to the House, passed and sent to the President,
probably today. The only thing that prevented this from happening was
the objection of the majority leader last night, because the majority
leader was intent on blocking this amendment to prohibit Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac from lobbying.
The bill will likely pass the Senate on Saturday and will not reach
the President until next week. So the argument that my one amendment is
slowing this down is not true. Let me state again one more time, to be
clear. This Senator was prepared to vote on the housing bill last
night. I do not support the bill. I do not think it should become law.
I simply wanted one amendment.
My constituents sent me here to Washington to clean up this place.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have spent hundreds of millions of dollars
over the past decade to block commonsense reform, which could have been
prevented. We could have prevented the debacle that we are faced with
now if Congress had not been blind to the problem. But because the
leader was intent on filibustering my amendment, blocking me from doing
what my constituents sent me here to do, the housing bill will be
delayed until next week. This is fine with me, because there is a lot
wrong with the bill. But the decision to delay the bill was made by the
majority leader and him alone.
I wish to offer one more opportunity here for the majority to
expedite the housing bill and to give me the one vote on this amendment
and then we can proceed to a final vote.

Unanimous Consent Request--H.R. 3221

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate resumes
the consideration of the housing bill, the pending Reid amendment be
withdrawn and the only amendment in order be a DeMint amendment which I
will send to the desk. This is a measure to address lobbying by Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Ms. STABENOW. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, the majority clearly will not permit this
or any other amendment on the bill. He says he does not want anything
to delay it. As I have already pointed out, however, I think his own
obstruction is delaying the bill.
I wish to make one more proposal. I will explain it, and if the
majority is willing, then I will read the technical language. But I am
very willing to offer a unanimous consent request to move immediately
to a final vote on the housing bill, and then once the energy debate is
completed, that my amendment, then in bill form, be allowed a straight-
up vote in the Senate.
This may be several weeks from now. But if the concern by the
majority is that my amendment would slow the bill down, they should
certainly agree that if we can move to housing and pass it straight up,
and finish the energy debate, whatever time that is finished, then we
could have a simple vote at the scheduling of the majority leader to
vote on this lobbying amendment.
I would be glad to put this in unanimous consent form if the majority
is interested in entertaining this. If I could get some indication from
the speaker or the leader over there. Would you be interested in that
unanimous consent request?
Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, in response to my colleague, I would
indicate that on behalf of the majority, if that were offered I would
object.
Mr. DeMINT. I thank the Senator. Clearly there is no need to continue
to try to get this housing bill expedited. It is clear my Democratic
colleagues do not support this reform, and apparently they are going to
do everything they can to protect their relationship with these
Government entities.
The majority leader suggested yesterday that he would be happy to
join me in sending a letter to these two entities, Freddie Mac and
Fannie Mae, to request that they be more transparent

[[Page 16182]]

in their lobbying. Well, I am not interested in sending a letter to the
management of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That would be as effective as
sending a letter, which has been suggested by my Democratic colleague,
to Saudi Arabia demanding lower gas prices. I am not interested in
transparency in their lobbying or political donations. The lobbying
contracts need to be terminated and their PACs should be disbanded.
The majority leader disagrees. In fact, his staff sent out a blast e-
mail to their lobbyist friends asking for help in defeating my
amendment.
I want to protect taxpayers and end the culture of corruption in
Washington, but I am afraid in this case, the majority clearly does not
want to join me.
All I am requesting is one amendment on a 694-page bill that spends
anywhere from $25 billion to hundreds of billions of dollars of
taxpayer money to bail out two companies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
I believe my amendment is essential to considering the way Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac have spread their wealth around Washington for years to
buy Government influence and to cover up their problems. The housing
legislation that will be before us authorizes the Secretary of the
Treasury to use taxpayer money to rescue Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,
but it does not include an immediate end to their lobbying and
political activities.
If American taxpayers are forced to bail out or buy out Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac, their lobbying and political activities should stop.
Our Nation has a longstanding tradition of preventing American tax
dollars from being used for lobbying and for soliciting and making
campaign contributions. There is no doubt that this housing legislation
crosses that line. Under current law, the Department of Treasury cannot
retain high-powered lobbyists or make political contributions to
candidates. This rule should apply to Fannie and Freddie. There may
have been some doubt as to whether a government guarantee existed for
Fannie and Freddie before, but now with this legislation, that
guarantee is made very explicit. They are, in effect, government
entities and should be treated as such.
The Politico newspaper recently reported on how Senators and
Congressmen are benefiting politically from propping up these two
mortgage giants. The article said:

If you want to know how Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have
survived scandal and crisis, consider this: Over the past
decade, they have spent nearly $200 million on lobbying and
campaign contributions. But the political tentacles of the
mortgage giants extend far beyond their checkbooks. The two
government-chartered companies run a highly sophisticated
lobbying operation with deep-pocketed lobbyists in Washington
and scores of local Fannie- and Freddie-sponsored homeowner
groups ready to pressure lawmakers back home.

One thing that should get our colleagues' attention, this chart is a
copy of an invitation by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and other groups
for a big party at the Democratic National Convention. There is one
very similar to this for the Republicans. They will continue to lavish
entertainment on those of us in Congress until we stop it.
National Public Radio reported that in the first 3 months of the year
alone, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac spent a combined total of $3.5
million on lobbying and hired 42 outside firms.
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac have been such prolific donors to political parties,
candidates, and PACs that they are the No. 1 and No. 3 top contributors
in the mortgage industry and rank in the top 100 political donors of
all time.
May I inquire as to how much time I have remaining?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has about 3 minutes remaining.
Mr. DeMINT. I thank the Chair. I can see I have more to say than I
have time to say it.
Let me close by encouraging my colleagues. There is no need for this
issue to be partisan. Clearly, if we are going to put hard-working
taxpayer dollars behind our bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, we
should not allow them to continue to throw millions of dollars around
for political activities. It just makes good common sense.
On a bill that is this large and this important and that probably not
one Senator has read even half of, the opportunity to have at least one
amendment and a limited time for debate seems to be a small request.
Unfortunately, the majority is not going to give us any amendments, and
apparently they are going to turn a blind eye to this obvious problem
on which the Wall Street Journal and news media all over the country
have been focusing. The American people know about it. I think they
would trust the Senate much more to make the proper reforms for housing
and mortgages and Fannie and Freddie Mac if they could see that we were
eliminating a conflict of interest that has clearly existed for a
number of years.
I thank the Presiding Officer and encourage my colleagues to ask the
majority leader to reconsider and give us the opportunity to have a
vote on this one amendment, and then we could speed the housing bill
through.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, let me indicate my strong support for
the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program and the motion to proceed
under which we are currently working. I hope we will have a strong
vote. We know regardless of the debate we are having on solutions or
causes for how we got here, seniors, families, those we represent are
being affected by this every single day.
Making sure that LIHEAP is increased and that we have support for
families in paying their heating bills is absolutely critical. I very
much appreciate our majority leader making this a top priority and
Senator Sanders for his advocacy. I look forward to what I hope will be
a strong bipartisan vote in support of improving and strengthening
LIHEAP.
I want to speak further today about the reality of what is happening
for families, businesses all across America, certainly in my great home
State of Michigan. Since President Bush and Vice President Cheney, two
oilmen, two people from the oil industry, took office, gas prices have
nearly tripled. Oil prices have gone up four times higher than before
the current administration came into office. The average family is
spending a record 6 percent of their income, and counting, paying for
gas to get to work, to get the kids to childcare, to try and maybe take
a little vacation up north in beautiful northern Michigan or Rhode
Island. I can't leave out beautiful Rhode Island, the State of our
Presiding Officer.
But the reality is, families are making incredibly tough choices. At
the same time, energy prices certainly are taking a toll on the
economy. We are seeing the level of unemployment going up. People are
losing their jobs or are underemployed or are working three jobs,
trying to get to work, paying more for gas. It is outrageous. I go home
every weekend, and it is amazing. It makes you want to scream as you
stand at the pump and the price goes $50, $60, $70, $80, to fill up a
gas tank. It is unbelievable. Families are trying to figure out what to
do about it.
Unemployment rises, and we have now 12 States with unemployment rates
over 6 percent. My State has an unemployment rate of 8.5 percent, 45
out of 50 States have seen job loss and unemployment numbers going up.
One of the challenges, if we are going to talk about what to do about
this, is we need to be talking about how we got here. How did we get
here? We have had 8 years and two oilmen leading us in the White House,
and it is not, unfortunately, a surprise, based on their agenda, that
we have ended up with $4 and higher per gallon of gasoline. That is the
shorthand way of talking about what has been happening.
For the folks they represent, for the folks who met with the Vice
President to put together his energy policy, what has been happening
for them, while families are seeing their wages go down, if they have a
job at all, every cost they have going up--what has

[[Page 16183]]

been happening to them? The total combined net profits of the big five
oil companies since this President took office are upwards of $556
billion. That is net profits. ExxonMobil alone has had, since this
President took office, $185 billion in profits.
One could say, well, businesses want to be profitable. I want them to
be profitable, and I am working hard to make sure our manufacturers
who, by the way, pay a lot of these costs and are impacted by gas
prices when it comes to what is happening in the economy, I want them
to be profitable as well. This is not about whether companies should be
profitable. This is about the fact that we have had an energy policy
put forward by two oilmen in the White House that has focused on
supporting an industry and their backers, their supporters, that has
now created a crisis in America, a crisis in the economy.
To add insult to injury, it is one thing if there are profits and
they are put back into creating more oil and gas exploration,
alternative energy exploration, if this was reinvested to strengthen
America, the folks who are helping to subsidize this, taxpayer money.
The folks I represent who have lost their jobs, they are subsidizing
this right now because of tax policy.
To add insult to injury, are they putting this back into the economy
to make us energy independent? No. The oil companies have spent $188
billion in stock buybacks over the last 5 years, instead of investing
in increasing supply at home or in supporting a man who has now become
very well known to everyone, T. Boone Pickens, an oilman his whole
life, who is now investing in alternative energy. Instead of going in
that direction because they care about America, the American people,
American businesses, American economy--no, that is not what is
happening. That is what adds such insult to injury about what is
happening to the people of Michigan and around the country. It is the
fact that people are taking this and having stock buybacks or adding
another corporate jet or putting it into their pockets as opposed to
investing in America and the ability for us to have energy
independence.
Then, on top of that, with what is being drilled for--and we know we
are in a global market. We understand that. We are in a global economy
where commodities move around the world. But it is important to know
that when our colleagues put forward the oil agenda of drill, drill,
drill, let's keep doing what we have always done and hope maybe
something will change, maybe we will get out of the hole we are in if
we just keep digging--when they talk about that, they are not
acknowledging the fact that a record 1.6 million barrels a day from
U.S. refineries, 1.6 million barrels a day in refined petroleum
products were exported in the first 4 months of this year, up 33
percent.
So we are paying more. We are being told the problem is we are not
drilling more, and then 33 percent more of the oil drilled in America
leaves America. Why? We are in a global marketplace. It goes to the
highest bidder. We understand that. We understand the fact that China
is using more, the fact that the weak dollar impacts that and oil
speculation, the whole question of energy speculation which, again, I
appreciate Senator Reid and all the leadership of my colleagues--
Senator Durbin, Senator Dorgan, so many people--who have been focused
on this as a piece of the problem, but we are being told: Use the old
solution over and over and over, knowing that we don't even know if
that oil is going to stay here.
I have supported drilling in the gulf. I have supported efforts to
add to our domestic supply. But this is not the way we are going to
create energy independence by only focusing on that. According to the
Department of Energy, shipments this February topped 1.8 million
barrels a day, shipments outside the country, the highest for the first
time in any given month.
We are being told that we should do the same old thing, add to it,
but do the same old strategy, and somehow we will get a different
result. I suggest that the same old strategy, first of all, has
achieved great results for friends of the administration, for friends
of my colleagues, the Republican leadership that has been fighting for
the oil agenda of this country. It has achieved a goal but not a goal
for the American people. This is a question of who you are fighting
for, whose side you are on.
These folks are doing well. We know whose side the current
administration and those who support the administration are on.
Unfortunately, it is not the side of the folks in Michigan who are
worrying about whether they can buy enough gas to get to work.
We have, in fact, a formula the Presiding Officer is very well aware
of: 8 years divided by 2 oilmen in the White House has gotten us this
result: $4 and counting.
So what has been the energy plan of the administration that has
gotten us to this situation? Well, for one thing, we have seen a free
ride for the oil companies. In January 2006, the New York Times
reported that the Bush administration was allowing oil and gas
companies to forego royalty payments--so they were not having to pay
their royalty payments they should be paying--on oil and gas leases in
Federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico. This decision by the Department
of Interior could cost American taxpayers more than $60 billion.
So to go back again to another chart--they are not paying oil and gas
leases, which costs American taxpayers up to $60 billion. I wonder how
much of these profits came from that decision. I wonder how much.
We all know that the administration and, unfortunately, those who
support the administration's policy, Republican colleagues, have joined
in supporting an effort to block the elimination of taxpayer subsidies
to the oil industry so we can take those precious dollars, hard-earned
dollars of people working every single day, money that has been going
to subsidize the oil companies--we wanted to move that over to real
energy independence, to focus on the priorities of the American people,
American families, American businesses that are having to pay for all
this. We tried to move over $12.5 billion that would be used for real
energy independence, for incentives for solar and wind and, yes, our
new hybrid and plug-in vehicles that are coming in the next couple
years that, frankly, provide a much quicker opportunity for us to be
able to get to energy independence than what we are talking about here
in terms of a long-term drilling strategy.
We have an opportunity to take precious taxpayer money and move it
over to invest in the future, to invest in the American people and in
the future, rather than in the past and the oil companies. We lost that
by one vote, not because we did not have enough to pass it, not that we
did not have 51 votes, but unfortunately the Bush administration and
the Senate Republican leadership blocked it, filibustered it: Let's
filibuster. Let's make sure nothing happens to this. So there was a
filibuster that then we were not able to overcome because we were
missing one vote.
So the solution that has come forward by this administration, the
solution that has come over the last 8 years of the leadership in the
White House--the two oilmen in the White House--has been simply to have
one solution, which is to continue drilling even if, in fact, that oil
does not stay in the United States. So between 2001 and 2007, the Bush
administration issued leases on over 26 million acres of onshore public
lands. There are already 44 million acres, as we know, of onshore
Federal lands under lease, but 31 million acres of those are currently
not being drilled upon. There are 2,200 producing leases on the Outer
Continental Shelf and 6,300 nonproducing leases at this time.
So that has been the strategy. That has been the strategy that has
gotten us to this--okaying more and more land and not even using it.
And in the first 4 months of this year, when we were drilling for
domestic production--because we are in a global economy--33 percent
more of that went out into the global marketplace.
Let me say there is a better way. In addition to supporting the
energy speculation bill that is in front of us and in

[[Page 16184]]

addition to supporting efforts, as I have done before, to have a
responsible drilling policy in this country, there is a quicker way to
get to where we want to go, and it is one that creates jobs, jobs right
now.
I am so appreciative of the fact that, through our budget resolution
in the Senate, our Democratic majority put jobs as No. 1 and green-
collar jobs in support of manufacturing and retooling our auto industry
at the top of the list. I am grateful for our leader's support, Senator
Reid, and Senator Dorgan, who has been such a leader on these issues,
chairing the Energy and Water Subcommittee in Appropriations. I am very
grateful for his support. But here is what we could be doing.
Oil exploration and drilling will take 7 to 10 years to bring new
supplies to market. Some people say longer. But there are technologies
we can bring to market in the next 2 years--in the next 2 years--for
advanced technology vehicles. The more we invest in technologies such
as advanced battery technologies, the quicker we are going to find
relief at the pump. That is the way we are going to do it, not by
rewarding the oil companies more but by investing in our own energy
independence, with innovation, American ingenuity, hard work that
allows us to not only create jobs but create a future for us here in
terms of energy independence and lowering costs.
The facts are simple. Advanced vehicles that run with new batteries
are much cheaper to drive than conventional automobiles, and we need to
be moving to them as quickly as possible. Currently, the average cost
to run a vehicle is 16 cents per mile--16 cents per mile--on the roads.
But the cost to run a plug-in hybrid car with advanced lithium-ion
batteries is only 3 or 4 cents a mile--a 75-percent reduction. Not only
does this save energy, but, as I said before, it creates jobs. This
technology is right around the corner.
Frankly, there is a huge competition going on in the world today to
see who is going to get to that plug-in battery, that lithium-ion
battery that is lightweight enough, small enough, with the technologies
that will allow it to be mass-produced on the assembly lines so
thousands can be produced a day. The prototypes are there. We have
probably all driven them. We have prototypes for a variety of different
vehicles. The question is not the prototype; the question is being able
to get something mass-produced so it is in the realm of price where
consumers can afford to buy it and it can be produced in the volumes we
need. We are really in a race right now to do that.
I am grateful there is support from our Senate Democratic leadership
to invest in advanced battery research, R&D, the next generation, to
provide low-interest credit to retool our plants, to keep the jobs here
in America, and to provide consumer tax credits for plug-ins and
hybrids to make sure the price is affordable. All of those things are
in legislation right now. They are before us in the tax package. They
are before us in Senator Bingaman's amendment, if he has the
opportunity to offer it, as it relates to the Energy bills. They are in
our appropriations. They are right now in front of us, and we have the
ability to act on this and quickly be able to move us to the next
generation of vehicles that go from a cost of 16 cents per mile on the
road down to 3 or 4 cents--much faster than what is being talked about
in terms of drilling.
Germany has announced the Great Battery Alliance, which will invest
over $650 million in advanced lithium-ion batteries for German
vehicles. The German automobile companies are receiving the support of
the German Government to be able to be the first ones that are able to
get to where we need to be in terms of the new battery technology.
South Korea, by 2010, will have spent $700 million on advanced
batteries and developing hybrid vehicles.
China has invested over $100 million in battery research and
development.
Over the next 5 years, Japan will spend $230 million on advanced
battery research. It is spending $278 million a year on hydrogen
research for zero-emission fuel-cell vehicles.
We are in a race. We are in a race as it relates to technology. We
have the engineers. We have the scientists. We have the skilled
workforce here in America to do this. We have not had an administration
or a willingness by our Republican colleagues to join with us to be
able to partner in the investments that need to be made in the
automotive industry of the future. That is just a reality. I believe it
was last year when I looked at the President's budget and it was
something like $22 million he was suggesting for advanced battery
technology research. Unfortunately, they just don't get it about what
is going on around us.
If we want to see prices go down and have energy independence and be
able to move to the future for our country, frankly, that is the
fastest way to do it. I am very proud our Democratic majority
understands that.
We know there is no silver bullet on any of this. But I can tell you
what I also know: a game show approach to battery technology research
is not the answer. Frankly, both the Republican alternative as well as
the candidate who we understand will be the Republican nominee for
President have put forward the idea of a prize at the end of the line,
a prize for whoever can create the new advanced battery technology
research.
Well, Mr. President, we do not need a prize. We do not need
motivation. We do not need the motivation to get there. We need the
capital to get there. We need the investment. We need the partnering.
We need the priority of investing in this innovation to get there. The
prize is going to be real easy. Whoever gets there first, they are
going to get a big enough prize without us in terms of the marketplace.
The question is, How do we invest up front? What is it that Germany
knows, Japan knows, South Korea knows, China knows that we do not know
about this, when they are all racing to put hundreds of millions of
dollars into this technology? It is very unfortunate that the approach
that has been taken--primarily in the Republican alternative; not
completely but primarily; and certainly by the Republican nominee--is
to treat our economy and certainly the industry that I care deeply
about somehow as a game show, and I find that really appalling.
As I conclude, as indicated before, there is no silver bullet to stop
the outrageous price increases at the pump. We know that. We have to
pass our legislation dealing with energy speculation. I hope we will be
able to proceed to do that. We all understand that a responsible
drilling policy is part of this. We have, frankly, supported that and
made those acres available. But we also know--we also know--if we want
America to be energy independent, we have to invest in the future.
We have seen this chart before, but I am going to show it again
because we have a lifelong oilman now running ads on television who is
so concerned about what is happening in our country and this constant
policy that has not been working that he has been presenting, through
commercials, a message that we should be paying attention to:

I've been an oilman all my life, but this is one emergency
we can't drill our way out of. . . .

``We can't drill our way out of.''

. . . But if we create a new RENEWABLE energy network, we can
break our addiction to foreign oil.

There are some folks who are making a lot of money by ignoring this
strategy, there is no question about it. There has been an energy
strategy in place that has worked for the oil companies. I understand
that when somebody comes out of a particular industry, their focus is
on that industry. I understand that. But the reality is, we have gone
too long--too long--with a strategy: 8 years of a Republican strategy,
with two oilmen at the head of this, creating $4-per-gallon gasoline.
That is the simple explanation for how we got where we are. We have to
stop digging. We have to stop doing more and more of the same and
hoping somehow we are going to get a different result. We need a new
strategy: Energy independence, investing in American ingenuity,
investing in a strategy for the future, and, most importantly, what we
need is to put the American

[[Page 16185]]

people first. That has not happened for the last 8 years. It is time to
make it happen. That is what our energy proposals are all about. That
is what we are fighting for, and we are going to continue to fight for
that until we make it happen.
The American people have had enough, and I don't blame them. I have
had enough too. It is time for a change, and we are going to work very
hard to get that change.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Menendez be the
next speaker following the remarks of Senator Snowe.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Maine is recognized.
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, today I rise in strong support of the Warm
In Winter and Cool In Summer Act as the lead Republican cosponsor,
along with 52 of my colleagues on both sides of the political aisle.
I first thank the Senator from Vermont, Senator Sanders, for his
tireless leadership on this vital issue of heating and cooling
assistance and for his steadfast vigilance throughout the last few
months in pressing for this debate on energy assistance when there is
not a moment to waste in preparing for what could be the worst winter
in a generation, given the historic cost of energy today. At a time
when skyrocketing energy prices are at the forefront of our national
agenda--when heating oil prices have increased from about $2.77 per
gallon a year ago in my home State of Maine to a staggering $4.81 cents
a gallon today, and when electricity has risen 3.6 percent in the last
12 months, and gas prices have jumped from $3.05 a gallon to $4.05 in
the last year--as we know, it should come as no surprise that countless
American families are faced with choices that, frankly, no family
should have to make. Indeed, as a direct result of spiraling energy
costs, 70 percent of low-income Americans are buying less at the
grocery store, 31 percent are purchasing less medicine, and 19 percent
say they have changed plans for the education of their children. Even
now, in the midst of July, in truth, Americans--and certainly Mainers
across my home State--are wondering how exactly they will pay for the
fundamental necessity of heating their homes this coming winter, just
as many others cannot afford the costs for critical cooling during
these dangerously hot summer months in so many States. In fact, in
South Carolina, electricity services have been suspended to 39,000
homes that are falling behind on their bills, leaving these individuals
with no assistance to alleviate the stifling heat. In Arizona there has
been a 40-percent spike in shutoffs for residential electricity users.
The bottom line is this issue knows no boundaries regionally or
politically.
The reality is the stunning effects of these astronomical energy
costs are not a regional problem, they are a national problem requiring
national attention and a national solution. In fact, as I think about
it, with the Low-Income Heating Assistance Program pending before the
Senate--at least the motion to proceed; and I hope we will proceed, Mr.
President and Members of this body, because I think we ought to be
translating words into action--I think there is no better place to
start than on this very crucial and vital program. In fact, if I
recall, it was back in 1979 and 1980 when we first had the debate on
whether to create this program called the Low-Income Fuel Assistance
Program, and it was my first term in the House of Representatives. I,
along with the late Speaker O'Neill, testified before the then House
Appropriations Committee to create such a program. It was born out of
the energy crisis that was engulfing our Nation at that time when we
had gas lines here in the District of Columbia and across this country.
It was interesting to think that at that time, in the midst of an
energy crisis, that previously--6 years previously or 7 years
previously--we had another energy crisis and, unfortunately, didn't
learn from that event. Out of that crisis in 1979 and 1980, we created
the Low-Income Fuel Assistance Program in order to give low-income
families the ability to heat their homes and to cool their homes in
other parts of the country. That is how this program was created. So I
think this program was created as a result of a crisis--as a result of
the failure of this country to create and enact a comprehensive energy
plan. I think too today, 30 years later, we are in the same
circumstance, regrettably and tragically, and the people who rely on
this program should not be the victims of our inability, or our
unwillingness, to address the energy problem. That is what we should
come to terms with here in the Senate, that we should proceed to
consider this legislation and have it become law. I think absolutely it
is our responsibility and obligation to give peace of mind to our
constituency as they are despairing about the oncoming winter and how
they are going to meet the costs of home heating oil that is now close
to $5 per gallon.
I think we do have an obligation to continue to support this social
safety net that is so essential. It is a matter of life and death, and
I don't think they should be the victims of our political failure or
our failure to address a comprehensive energy policy. That should
happen. No doubt it should. Frankly, I hope we can reconcile our
rhetoric here on the floor of the Senate with legislative action that
becomes law that has an actual, direct impact on people's daily lives.
They deserve that. They deserve for us to take action. Irrespective of
the time or place we are in, in the Senate--whether or not it is a
political year--we ought to reconcile our differences to do what is
right for America on this mighty challenge that is facing so many
across this country, including my constituency.
Here we are in the third energy crisis of recent times, and we see
that the program was at least designed to minimize the burden for the
least fortunate for years and has provided a level of funding. However,
as you can see, with the historically high home heating oil prices you
see over time, and yet, even though we have provided funding for low-
income fuel assistance basically on a consistent basis, it never
addressed the gap between the level of funding and the costs for home
heating oil. So we are seeing, as you can see in the recent times, in
the recent months, what has happened to the cost of home heating oil.
Yet at the same time the level of funding for low-income fuel
assistance has leveled off.
That is why we need the legislation that is pending before the
Senate. My colleague Senator Sanders is absolutely right, we need to
double this funding. I thank the chairman of the Budget Committee as
well for doubling the authorization. I appreciate his leadership on
this question because we are in very different times, and that is the
reason why we need to increase the level of support for this valuable
program.
This program is for the most vulnerable. We are talking about income
limits of $17,680 for an individual, and the average individual
recipient earns around $13,000 per year. Think about it. The assistance
we are providing is for those who have income eligibility of somewhere
between $17,000 and $13,000 on an individual basis. That is who we are
talking about when it comes to the income eligibility standards for
low-income fuel assistance--$13,000 for an individual and as high as
$17,000, and for a family of four the limit is $36,000. In Maine, in
terms of the projected costs for paying for a household for home
heating oil during the course of a winter, based on today's prices, is
close to $5,000, just to keep warm this winter--$5,000. So if the
eligibility standards are $33,000--$36,000 for a family of four, and
for an individual it is anywhere from $13,000 to $17,000, it costs
$5,000 to heat one's home or residence for a winter. These are hard-
working individuals and families who, quite frankly, were in desperate
need of assistance back in 2006 when we witnessed the first major
increase in home heating oil. So we were able to provide additional
funding at that time of $1 billion for a total of $3.1 billion. At that
point, again, it was a crisis that, given the sharp hike, New
Englanders were paying about $2.39 per

[[Page 16186]]

gallon. Well, fast forward 2 years to today and you will see, based on
our charts we have provided, that oil costs $4.81. That is a 75-percent
increase in only 2 years--75 percent.
So we augmented the funding back in 2006 up to $3.1 billion when home
heating oil was $2.39. Today, it is at $4.81, and of course we are in
July, so we have no idea in terms of what we can anticipate or expect
for home heating oil costs when it comes to winter. So a 75-percent
increase as we know it today. So when winter actually arrives, New
England could spend, under today's prices, more than $19 billion on
home heating oil--$19 billion on home heating oil alone. That is a
staggering price increase compared to back in 2006 when it was
approximately $9 billion. That gives us a dimension of the escalation
of the problem as we face it today and still not knowing what we can
expect when winter approaches.
As we see on this other chart I have presented, here is the cost of
home heating oil, and as we have seen, it has increased 147 percent
since 2004. So basically, in the last 3\1/2\ years, we have seen an
increase in home heating oil of 147 percent. Yet when you look at the
wage increase, it has only been 17.1 percent. So you see that the cost
of home heating oil in Maine has outpaced wages by 174 percent. Prices
are now well ensconced in the stratosphere, with the legitimate fears
that the sky may not, in fact, be the limit. It is a huge disparity
when you see how little wages have grown over the last 3\1/2\ years and
what has happened with a basic commodity such as home heating oil
having increased 147 percent.
Yet given all of these alarming numbers, what has happened to the
level of low-income fuel assistance? It has actually dropped. It has
actually declined to $2.5 billion from the $3.1 billion that we
provided and that I sought, very actively, back in 2006, when the
prices had spiked. So we were able to augment, as I said, that funding
by an additional billion dollars to reach $3.1 billion, but
unfortunately, the funding for low-income fuel assistance fell back to
$2.5 billion. So it obviously doesn't make sense. We are actually
regressing in terms of a level of funding at a time when home heating
oil is actually skyrocketing and we don't know where the boundaries
are, we don't know where the limitations are. As I said, the sky could
be the limit, given what the unknown presents for the future with
respect to home heating oil.
In testimony before the Senate Committee on Small Business that
Senator Kerry and I convened last month to discuss the dimensions
involving small businesses and home heating oil and what the impact
would be in our region, I had an individual from my State--her name is
Jennifer Brooks--who is the community relations manager at Penquis
Community Action Program. They are on the front lines of providing
critical services to Maine in multiple counties during these difficult
times.
Last year, the community action program provided fuel assistance to
more than 9,000 Maine households. The average benefit received by each
household was $736. In order to qualify for low-income fuel assistance
this upcoming heating season, a family of four must earn less than
$31,800. So under the best case scenario, if a household does qualify
for LIHEAP and benefits remain constant, a household on average can
expect to receive 158 gallons of oil for the season, which isn't even
enough to fill a 250-gallon tank one time.
We know it takes, on average, to get through a Maine winter, 850
gallons of heating oil--850 to 1,000 gallons--and it costs $4.81, which
we know is the price today. When you look at what is available in the
low-income fuel assistance program, if we fail to take action and
increase funding, as this legislation would prescribe, to $5.1 billion,
our lowest income families will receive a mere 19 percent of their home
heating oil costs through this program--the lowest in the program's
history.
Now, it is unbelievable to think people can anticipate this winter
facing, at the minimum, spending close to $5,000 for home heating oil.
Yet given the dimensions of this program, we will only be able to
provide support for 19 percent of the entire cost for the entire
winter. As you can see from the previous support of this program, the
percentages have declined over the years. Over the last 25 years, the
average Maine low-income fuel assistance recipient received assistance
that provided 41 percent of their heating oil costs. Last year, that
started eroding, and it declined from $3.1 billion to $2.5 billion. For
the nearly 50,000 Maine households that received benefits, they were
only provided 35 percent of the entire cost for the season.
At today's prices, if we fail to increase or double the funding of
the low-income fuel assistance program to $5.1 billion, then we can
only provide 19 percent of the entire cost of winter for home heating
oil. Obviously, I think that speaks volumes, in terms of the dimension
of the problem we are facing and what families are facing in my State,
in New England, and across the country. Whether you are living in a
cold- or hot-weather region, you depend on this program either for air-
conditioning or heating during the winter. It is a basic social safety
net program.
I think it is absolutely incumbent upon us to do everything we can to
double funding for this program and to do it now and provide the
assurances, instead of the rhetoric about what we will do sometime down
the road. I think we do have a responsibility, individually and
collectively, to make the process work in the Senate and in the
Congress, with the President, to do what is right for this country, for
these families who are agonizing over the anticipation of what next
winter will bring in terms of costs. Here, with this program, we are
talking about the lowest of incomes. When it comes to $13,000, $17,000
for a family of four, or even $31,000 or $33,000, we need to help these
families and these individuals, without question.
As my constituent Jennifer Brooks said in her testimony before the
Small Business Committee:

If the average person on fuel assistance makes about
$14,000 a year and the benefit only pays for 158 gallons of
oil, I don't know how they come up with any more money . . .
they can't, with the cost of food and the cost of gas and
everything else. There is no money left over to pay even in
the summer months . . . there is talk [of having] ``warming
places'' so people can shut their furnaces down real low
during the day and go to libraries and stay warm during the
day . . . we are in a crisis.

Last year, I heard many stories. After we were expecting $2.50 to
$2.70 a gallon for home heating oil, I heard stories of desperation
then. One TV station, channel 13, in Portland, ME, decided they would
initiate a program where they would provide a few hundred gallons of
heating oil to four families requiring assistance. They were asked to
submit e-mails or letters if they believe they qualified for this
assistance. They received an astounding response, with more than 2,000
requests.
Again, there is no doubt as to the magnitude of the problem. That was
for last winter. One hesitates to think about what we can expect for
this winter, when prices have increased by more than $2 since last
winter. Here we are in July. So we must step up to our responsibilities
in this crisis and fully fund the low-income fuel assistance program at
the $5.1 billion. That is the least we can do. It is not that it will
address all the problems or fulfill the needs for all those individuals
who rely on this program, but certainly it will be a very important
step forward. We must do it now. We should be proactive and preemptive
and prescriptive in our measures, not reactive, and not wait until
after the August recess and continue to dither and talk but fail to
take action.
We have a responsibility to provide assurances to those people we
represent in this country, to take the strong measures, and to take
those actions that are so vital and instrumental to providing peace of
mind during these very difficult times when people are facing these
mighty challenges.
There are many ways to debate this energy problem. Certainly, we
should have a comprehensive energy solution, no doubt. I don't think we
should place

[[Page 16187]]

the burden on those individuals who rely on this program, who are
concerned--deeply concerned--and anguishing about the future because of
our failure to reconcile our differences to reach out across the
political aisle. I question as to why we cannot do it. I don't think we
should live in an all-or-nothing world because that is not the world
our constituents live in. These issues are not mutually exclusive. It
is not that we cannot do one because we were haven't done the other.
How about starting someplace? We can start with this program, which was
born because of an energy crisis 30 years ago. We are in a similar
circumstance today.
These people should not bear the brunt of our political failures or
unwillingness or inability to resolve these differences.
I think the Senate should not be a roadblock to results but a pathway
to hope. What I see here today, regrettably, is, again, my way or the
highway. Here, at a time when we are dealing with monumental challenges
confronting this Nation--and they are affecting our country
simultaneously. Look at our economy and the job picture, the housing,
energy, and we are in a war in Iraq and in Afghanistan and we continue
to dither, to remain intractable, intransigent about achieving results.
Truly, it is not in keeping with the legacy of this institution, which
has done so much throughout our history.
That is why Senator Nelson, from Nebraska, and I sent a letter to the
President, along with 14 other colleagues, asking the President for a
bipartisan summit. After all, we think these times demand it. The
President should convene a national energy summit, bringing together
the congressional leadership, on a bipartisan basis, and other Members
of the House and Senate from the committees of jurisdiction,
environmental leaders, industry leaders and scientists, to sit around a
table to see what we can do for the good of this country now.
It is immaterial that we are in an election year, that we are 7
months away from the election. The American people deserve to have us
honor our obligations as elected officials. After all, there was an
election in 2006, as I recall. We promised our constituents we would
work on the problems facing this country. Here we are today with an
abysmal 14 percent approval rating. I don't know, that may be the
lowest approval rating in the history of Gallup Polls.
We all bear a responsibility, individually and collectively. We
should care how Americans feel about this institution and what can we
do every day to make it better. Some days, I wonder if we wake up and
say: Well, this is going to be another ``can't do'' day. We are not
going to achieve anything for the people. We are going to see if we can
continue to be a roadblock to results and action. We are going to do
everything we can to be a barrier to solutions. We will wait for the
next election or next year or maybe some other time.
Yet people are suffering. They are losing their jobs. They are
wondering how to heat their homes next winter. They are losing their
homes. This is a time for us to step up to the plate and demonstrate to
the American people that we can do it. Frankly, we are experiencing a
crisis in confidence in America, in a variety of institutions, not the
least of which is Congress. People are not only despairing about their
individual situations, they are also despairing about the inability of
elected officials in our political institutions to address these
problems. It is not so much that America has these problems, it is the
question of our inability to address them and to reach across the
political aisle.
I hope we can find a way to extricate ourselves from this
confrontational morass and not constantly engage in all-or-nothing
politics and scoring political points, making it all about the
election, and not live up to the expectations the people rightfully
have of their elected officials and political institutions to address
the mighty challenges confronting this Nation.
Without question, we can and we must have answers to this national
emergency. That is why I thought it would be an important step forward
if the President convened an emergency energy summit. There are short-
term and long-term solutions. There are many pieces to the energy pie.
The low-income energy assistance program is a critical aspect of that
in terms of mitigating the impact on the most vulnerable in our
society. We have an obligation, at a very minimum, to address that for
these individuals. It is not their burden and it should not be; they
should not have the responsibility of our failure to address the energy
problem. That is why we need to double the funding for this critical
program.
Yes, we should pass legislation with respect to speculation. It is
something most of us agree on. Why can't we do it? There are other
aspects to energy policy we have failed to address. Everybody is
agreeing we should extend the tax credit for renewables. So why haven't
we done that? It should have been part of the stimulus package--and it
was, to a point. But, regrettably, again, there were those who opposed
it. Yet it could have very well been stimulative to this economy. It
would have created up to 100,000 jobs. In Maine, we get $1.5 billion
for wind projects, but we didn't extend the tax credits for renewables
beyond this year. Why couldn't we do it? Everybody talks about it. Yet
we failed to address that problem. We keep postponing, deferring,
delaying, and denying that the problem exists. Yet this is something
that could be readily accomplished.
My constituents are looking into alternatives; for example, wood
pellet stoves or other energy-efficient means of heating our homes. Yet
the tax credits for those have expired. They expired at the end of last
year. So they cannot even resort to that as an alternative because,
regrettably, we have not extended that tax credit.
The question is, Why? Why are we at an impasse on those issues upon
which we agree? I think that is the most startling dimension to the
problems facing this country--that in the Senate, where we should be
taking and adopting the can-do approach, why can't we do the right
thing and address this energy crisis? We all agree extending tax
credits for renewables is something we should do. So why aren't we
doing it? Because individuals or companies or entities aren't going to
make investments in renewables if they don't have the assurance of tax
credits. That is abundantly clear. They have no way of knowing how long
or whether they are going to be extended. They are not going to put
themselves on the line financially without the certainty of knowing
they will be extended.
Why are we not doing that? It will create jobs and, certainly, we
need job creation in America, at a time when unemployment is rising at
high levels.
We should be concerned about creating jobs, and that is one
dimension. We should be concerned about creating alternatives, creating
incentives, inspiring innovation, entrepreneurial spirit. We should do
all of that and more, and we hesitate and fail to take action on issues
on which we agree, which is truly dismaying and disconcerting, most
certainly to the American people who depend on us to take those
measures and those steps that can begin to resolve effectively the
problems that are at hand.
We can do all of these things. We are certainly capable of doing
them, unless we are stuck in the status quo and the gridlock that
constantly is where we try to score the political points time and time
again to no avail.
I hope we can proceed and take action on this very basic social
safety net program for the most vulnerable in our society and
demonstrate that we do have the opportunity, these rare moments, to
reach across the political aisle and proceed to double the funding for
this program at this moment in time because, certainly, it is one
program that is of immense value to the people of my State and
throughout this country, and it is certainly at the very least, at the
minimal, what we should be able to accomplish.
I hope we can do more. I hope we can find the political wherewithal
to search within ourselves to reach across the political aisle so the
monkey wrenches

[[Page 16188]]

don't continue to grind down the deliberative process with polarization
and partisanship that yields no achievements, no accomplishments, no
opportunity, and provides no hope for the people we represent.
The American people deserve more than what they are receiving today.
Frankly, I cannot believe that we would adjourn for the August recess
without addressing the energy crisis--this program, speculation, and
much more. The American people do deserve to have a comprehensive
approach. They do deserve to have their elected officials stay here as
long as it takes, as much time as it requires for bold action that will
be so essential and can measure it with the problems we are facing in
this country today.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I wish to start off by saying how much I
agree with my distinguished colleague from Maine. I think the LIHEAP
program is one that is essential. There is a real possibility if we do
not deal with the LIHEAP program, fellow Americans across the landscape
of this country will find themselves in the cold, literally and
figuratively, and they will be in such a situation where they will have
to make desperate choices in their lives.
So this is something, among other things, on which we should be
reaching across the aisle. As one Democratic Senator, I want the
Senator from Maine to know that we are absolutely in agreement with
her, and we believe this is essential to move forward.
I appreciate her comments about coming to common ground and common
cause on those things on which, in fact, we can agree. There is much,
at least from listening to the speeches on the Senate floor, that, in
fact, we supposedly can agree on. We see there are elements of the
Republican package that deal with market speculation. That is the
essence of the underlying bill we are debating. Let's come together on
that. Let's come together on the renewable energy tax credit extenders,
something that we began, that existed, and we need to extend if we want
to get the marketplace not depending on oil, whether it be foreign or
domestic. Let's agree on that. That is apparently something we can
agree on from speeches I heard. We should come together in that
respect.
I heard conservation about using less. We agree on that issue. Let's
come together on that. I agree with the Senator from Maine that while
there may be differences, there are a lot of elements together that we
do agree on, and if we can begin to move on those elements, maybe we
could come to a point in which we could move forward on other items as
well.
But why not allow those things that ultimately can make a difference
in the short term and in the long term for our collective constituents?
When you are cold, it doesn't have a Republican or Democratic label to
it. When you have to make a choice between a gallon of gas or putting a
gallon of milk on the table, it doesn't have a Democratic or Republican
label on it.
I agree with the Senator from Maine. I am glad to have been on the
floor to listen to her. She is a voice of reason, and I appreciate
where she stands on these issues, and I agree with her. Hopefully, we
can move in that direction.

Coastal Drilling

Mr. President, I have come to the floor various times over the last
couple of weeks to discuss opening our coastline to drilling. This is
part of one of the marvelous beaches in New Jersey. You have to get off
the New Jersey Turnpike to understand.
I had some colleagues say: Why are you so fixated on this drilling
issue? Isn't your State one big refining place? They obviously never
got off the New Jersey Turnpike.
If you get off the New Jersey Turnpike, you will see one of the most
incredible parts of the United States coastline where not only millions
of New Jerseyans go, which they consider a birthright, but people from
throughout the region. Canadians come down and contribute to our
economy because they want to go to the New Jersey shore.
The Presiding Officer, the distinguished senior Senator from Florida,
understands what that Florida coastline means to his State and his
economy. That is why he has been such a vigorous voice on the floor of
the Senate.
Ever since I have been having to come down to the floor, ever since
we have had these two oilmen in the White House, the Presidential
candidate they support, and many on the other side of the aisle--not
all but many on the other side of the aisle--have begun a very hard
sell to the American people over an absurd notion that opening our
coastlines to drilling will ever lower gas prices. They have grabbed on
to a source of fear and frustration among American families, and there
is no question that there is frustration and pain for our American
families. But they are using that frustration and pain to pull a fast
one on the American people.
Exploitation of pain at the pump to grab more land to build up stock
prices, that is what this is all about. They are using it to sell a
plan that in reality will bring absolutely zero relief to Americans but
instead represents one last great big handout to oil companies that are
already making astronomically staggering profits.
We just saw the beginning of that parade with ConocoPhillips, an
incredible increase in profits. On one hand, you have American families
who are getting absolutely slammed by high gas prices. On the other
hand, you have oil companies counting their money, sitting on 68
million acres of public land that are not being put to use and focusing
way more on taking that money and using it on stock buybacks that
ultimately drive up the value of their shares than exploration or
innovation.
It is not because I say that. Listen to what the President of the
American Petroleum Institute said when he was asked: Why can't you
create more production?
He said: We don't have the infrastructure and the rigs and the drills
and all the pipeline and everything that is necessary to create more
production. He didn't say why. One of the reasons is they haven't been
investing the money to do that.
So all the suggestions to lift the moratoria and tomorrow out sprouts
oil and, therefore, gasoline and prices plunge is simply not true. They
cannot even pursue the 68 million acres, the extra area in the gulf,
the extra area off the Outer Continental Shelf in Alaska that is not
subject to any moratoria right now. They cannot even do that and
haven't done it. What an incredible falsehood perpetuated on the
American people. But I believe the American people know better.
If we listen to these proposals, you would think--I have seen some of
my colleagues shake the legislation and say: There is no oil in here.
Guess what. There is no oil in their proposals either. That is really
laughable.
Who do our colleagues on the other side of the aisle choose to help?
The oil companies have more money than the eye can see, and you don't
even hear them talk about the oil companies. They never invoke their
name unless it is to say: Oh, we need to give them more. We need to do
more for them. We need to do everything for them. The average American
wishes they were in the role of the oil companies--record profits, huge
amounts of money. Let's give them more. Let's give them more.
We never hear from our Republican friends talking about the oil
companies having any responsibility--I am not saying the
responsibility, any responsibility--for some of our lack of production.
I have just heard one too many speeches that are apologies for the oil
companies. Multibillion profits--I am not going to be an apologist for
the oil companies.
As we try to pass legislation to crack down on greedy oil speculation
which could lower gas prices quicker than anything, they just say no,
even though they include it as part of their proposals.
Back at home, people who are hearing these debates say: They keep
talking about speculation. I know what speculation generally means.
What does it mean in the context to the average person? What it means
is

[[Page 16189]]

traders buy huge quantities of oil online, many times intentionally
inflating prices. They then turn around and sell those very orders to
other traders at even higher prices. These traders never intend to use
the oil. This is not a purchase of oil because they are going to
ultimately use it in distribution in the country and make sure people
have, for example, home heating oil or they are going to refine it and
have gasoline. No, they use these constant trades bidding up the price
so they can ultimately cash in.
But who gets stuck with the bill every time we have to pay to fill
our tanks and heat our homes? It is the American consumer.
We Democrats want to do something about it. For those who keep
saying--even though it is part of their plan--oh, no, this is really
not a problem, let me read to you from an article that appeared today,
July 25, in the New York Times:

Firm said to manipulate oil market. Commodity regulators in
Washington have accused a Dutch trading company of making
roughly a million dollars in illegal profits by manipulating
the prices of crude oil, heating oil--

What we are going to be using this winter--

and gasoline--

Over what period of time?

over an 11 day period of time.

One million dollars in 11 days in illegal profits. Oh, it is not a
problem; speculation is not a problem.

In audio tapes uncovered in their investigation, regulators
said one defendant described the scheme as an effort to
``bully the market''--

Bully the market--

by making a large number of trades at or near the end of the
trading day to move closing prices.

But this is a marketplace that cannot be bullied. Therefore, we don't
need to do anything about the speculative nature and unbridled
speculation. Well, guess what. One million dollars in 11 days, with
their own voices saying that this is an effort to ``bully the market.''
Moreover, unlike many manipulation cases, this one accuses the
defendants of actually succeeding in moving prices that were used as
benchmarks for consumer markets--actually moving the benchmarks that
are used for consumer markets, in essence, saying not only is it our
intention to bully the market, but the regulators are saying yes, and
they did bully the markets. They did bully the markets.
Now, the complaint that was filed in the Federal District Court in
Manhattan says at least two of those attempts resulted in, guess what,
higher prices for gasoline and crude oil. But our Republican friends
say: Oh, no, market manipulation and speculation isn't a problem. But
here is only one example, and this has been a reluctant regulator to
pursue this. When they have heard the speeches on the floor and they
have heard this going on for some time now, all of a sudden we grab one
of these companies, 11 days, $1 million, bullying the market and doing
it successfully.
That is why we need the legislation Senator Reid and the Democratic
majority brought to the floor and that others only talk about, saying
it is part of our package. Well, join us. Join us before more market
speculation takes place.
What are Democrats trying to do about it? We are trying to add 100
new cops on the beat to the commission that oversees these traders. We
are trying to create greater transparency, for the first time
requiring--for the first time--detailed reporting of previously
undisclosed trades. And oversight--stopping speculators from inflating
oil prices by playing domestic and foreign markets off of each other.
We had testimony before the Congress, sworn testimony, as a matter of
fact--and it is not often we have sworn testimony--from oil company
executives. They were challenged as to why we are having these high
prices. You tell us, in fact, it is the demand and the supply side. We
said we have heard a lot of talk about supply and demand, and that
largely over the last 2 years they have traced each other pretty
closely together. Well then, what is the issue? And what is their
response, these very oil company executives? Their response is: market
speculation. But no, we don't have to go after that. It is not one of
the most important issues, something that can be done now. So they say
no.
I have to hand it to my colleagues for their political talent, to
take an issue so vital to the daily lives of Americans and convince
them they want to do something about it with a proposal that is more
about oil company stock prices than gas prices. That is quite a feat,
if you can pull it off. That is talent. But here is the problem. The
facts always come out, and the facts ultimately always win.
It has been tremendously important to me, as a Senator from New
Jersey, to come down here and give the facts about coastline drilling.
It is not just the facts about drilling and gas prices, although that
is how they initially make their plan popular, it is also the facts
about oil spills, which they say are virtually impossible with today's
drilling technology, virtually impossible.
That is exactly what they told us about the tanker industry that
carries the oil. We don't have any rigs that I know of in the country,
along the coastal waters of the United States, where there is drilling,
that either don't have a pipeline system or don't ultimately have a
vessel. And we were told: Don't worry about our tanker system. In fact,
it is impossible to have any spills.
This is what happened with that impossibility. Workers there are
cleaning up after the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound--a
lot of oil there, obviously, a huge disaster. So if we could say that,
and if it were true, that would surely be nice for the eastern and
western coastlines of the United States. If it were true, in fact, that
it is virtually impossible to have no spills, that surely would be nice
for the $200 billion that our coasts generate each and every year in
fishing and tourism revenues--$200 billion. And it surely would be nice
if it were true for my home State of New Jersey and the millions of
people who end up on the Jersey shore each summer and the half a
million jobs in the State of New Jersey supported by the economy there
between recreation, tourism, and the commercial and recreational
fishermen.
It surely would be nice if an oil spill off the coast of Virginia
didn't have the potential to affect the coastline from South Carolina
up to New York. That surely would be nice, if it were true. But the
facts always come out, and at the end of the day, the facts always win.
Earlier this month, the distinguished minority leader made this
statement, echoed by several of his colleagues as part of their hard
sell to the American people: ``Not a drop of oil was spilled during
Katrina.'' Not a drop of oil. Well, that surely would be nice, if it
were true. But the fact is, we can see here from this U.S. Coast Guard
photo that was published in the Washington Post on July 14 of 2008 what
was happening with this spill and how they were trying to burn the
spill up in order to try to deal with the disaster. Oh, but not a drop
of oil was spilled during Katrina. I guess this picture must be a
fabrication of the Coast Guard.
Last month Senator McCain said: ``Not even Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita could cause significant spillage.'' Well, the same picture from
the U.S. Coast Guard. That surely would be nice, if it were true. Last
time I checked, 7.7 million gallons of oil is pretty significant,
pretty significant.
And then in the last 24 hours, there was a stroke of poetic justice.
Senator McCain was ready to fly out to an oil platform in the Gulf of
Mexico to stage a photo opportunity. He was ready to show how safe it
is to drill for and transport oil these days. Nothing to worry about.
Unfortunately, he should have known better, because the facts always
come out, and the facts always win. Just as he was set to do this
yesterday, there was an accident on the Mississippi near New Orleans in
which a freighter rammed a barge and spilled 419,000 gallons of fuel
oil. Next thing you know, the McCain photo-op was postponed. It seems
they realized it is hard to make the case that oil drilling

[[Page 16190]]

and oil transportation is completely safe when there are 419,000
gallons of oil floating around and washing up on the shore nearby.
Of course, now his representatives are saying it was postponed
because of the hurricane that hit the southern tip of Texas yesterday
that this event was cancelled. I thought: Well, that might be a
legitimate reason. But then I checked the National Weather Service
forecast. And what did the National Weather Service's detailed forecast
say, which I have right here--satellite images?
The National Weather Service made the following forecast today for
the Louisiana gulf coast: Partly cloudy. Scattered thunderstorms,
mainly in the afternoon. Highs in the lower 90s. Southeast winds 5 to
10 miles per hour. Chance of thunderstorms, 30 percent.
I think the Presiding Officer has a pretty good sense that this is
pretty tame weather conditions for this time of the year--certainly not
hurricane weather.
So if you look up ``irony'' in the dictionary, I think you will find
possibly that it might describe cancelling an oil drilling photo-op
because a massive nearby oil spill took place. Having to cancel your
big oil drilling photo-op because of a massive oil spill is like
cancelling a crime safety photo-op because the house next door got
robbed. In selling this absurd coastline drilling plan to the American
people, Senator McCain and others have time and time again pointed to
advanced technology that would supposedly eliminate the threat of
massive oil spills. Well, this is the oil fire after Katrina. As he can
now personally attest to, even with the most modern technology, we
can't prevent massive oil spills such as the one currently devastating
the Mississippi, just as we couldn't prevent a 7.7 million gallon oil
spill after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. And that is the type of
straight talk we need about oil drilling and the type of talk the
American people need to hear and that they deserve.
As to the claim that coastline drilling will lower gas prices, we
know it simply won't. That is clear when we realize there are millions
of acres already subject to oil exploration that aren't being pursued.
In fact, the American Petroleum Institute president says: Well, we
don't have the infrastructure and the rigs and the drills to pursue it.
We can't do that overnight.
We know we have reduced 800,000 barrels a day in demand because of
high gas prices. The Saudis have produced 500,000 barrels a day in
extra production--a 1.3 million barrel a day shift in barrels of oil--
and yet gas prices have done what? They have gone up. We opened the
gulf--181--and gas prices have gone up.
So if 1.3 million barrels in either reduced demand or increased
production haven't done anything about gas prices, imagine the very
large sum of 200,000 barrels in the year 2030 at this risk. If 1.3
million barrels can't do it, how does 200,000 do it, and yet accept
this risk? Accept this risk to this environment and to the $200 billion
that is generated by the coasts of the east and west.
And, by the way, that 200,000 would mean that every State would have
to agree, assuming we would give States an option, and we have already
heard the Governor of California say: No way. They are one of the
biggest parts of the coastline. I doubt you will get Oregon and
Washington in that respect. We have heard some of their distinguished
colleagues say that is not going to happen. New Jersey won't do it. So
by the time you are finished, you are nowhere near even the 200,000.
Now, what is it we can do? Well, I agree with the comments of the
distinguished Senator from Maine, who said: Let's do what is possible
and what we agree to. And what is possible and what we agree to is very
significant.
The Republicans say they are for a renewable energy source, and are
providing the tax credits that existed and expired and should be
brought back to life. They say they are for that. Well, they have said
``no'' twice, though. Twice we have brought that forward, and twice
they have said ``no.''
The fact is that passing the tax credit extenders would create the
incentives that are necessary to move us in a direction in which oil is
not the issue, and risking the coastlines and the $200 billion economy
is not the issue, and where we could do things in a tighter timeframe
and better timeframe than the year 2030. That would move us toward
renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar, biomass, and cellulosic
ethanol, plug-in hybrids, which are critical. All of these things would
move us in a direction long before 2030, which is when all of this
production would take place, if it takes place.
We supposedly agree on moving forward on that, but our Republican
friends have said ``no'' twice. Republicans say that speculation is
part of their package. I talked about that earlier. We saw already one
company being pursued--$1 million, 11 days, bullying the market and
succeeding in doing it. Well, it is time to move on speculation. Yet
that is the very essence of the underlying bill. We can't seem to get
them to agree on that. Most of the speeches I have been hearing is that
they pooh-pooh speculation. When it made a difference in oil and gas
prices, as that case suggests, I would simply say that is certainly not
anything to be pooh-poohed. It is real and it is consequential, and
even the testimony of the oil company executives says it could produce
anywhere up to $50 per barrel more.
Republicans say that conservation is part of their package. We agree.
So why not join us in that respect as well, with the conservation
proposals we have put forward?
There are three very significant areas: renewable energy tax credits,
speculation, conservation. Let's move forward. But instead, what we
have is a series of noes. Then we have 18 amendments filed by
Republicans, all to do what? To open the coastline of our country,
which, as I have already discussed, will not achieve anything. But do
you need 18 different amendments even to pursue what you think is an
appropriate energy policy to open the coastline to drilling, to risk
the consequences of this? OK, the majority leader said: Go ahead, we
will give you an amendment. But you cannot take yes for an answer. We
have to have 18 different amendments to do virtually the same thing.
You can repeat a big lie over and over. We have seen that in the
history of the world, that you can take something that is not quite
true, repeat it over and over, and try to give it the life it otherwise
does not deserve--try to make it true. But saying it over and over
doesn't make it true, saying over and over that drilling is the
panacea, the solution to bring down gas prices.
The way I hear it, I hear: Pass the legislation, have the President
sign it, tomorrow oil sprouts up, gas gets made, prices go down. I give
a lot more credit to the American people than that.
The truth, crushed down to the floor, springs back up. The truth is
that, in fact, we have the wherewithal to move our country in a much
different direction. It is the can-do spirit of America. It is the
pioneer spirit of America. It is the spirit that gets going--the tough
get going when the going gets tough. That is the spirit we have. That
is the spirit we should pursue. That is the renewable energy from tax
credits. That is the conservation. That is stopping the speculation in
the marketplace. That is ensuring that, in fact, we move to necessary
renewable energy sources. That makes for a great America, a new
economy--and do something about global warming all at the same time
that we deal with the challenges of gas prices in the short term and
liberate ourselves in the long term. That is what the debate is all
about.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. MENENDEZ. I will be happy to yield.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. The Senator has given an excellent exposition
and debunking of a number of these myths. As to his recitation
debunking the statements made by a number of Senators on this floor
that there was no oilspill in the Gulf of Mexico after Hurricane
Katrina and Hurricane Rita, I want to ask the Senator whether he

[[Page 16191]]

had seen this particular report from the White House, ``The Federal
Response to Hurricane Katrina, Lessons Learned,'' February of 2006,
after Katrina, in August of 2005.
I want to find out whether the Senator had seen this report:

In fact, Hurricane Katrina caused at least 10 oil spills
releasing the same quantity of oil as some of the worst oil
spills in U.S. history. Louisiana reported at least six major
spills of over 100,000 gallons and four medium spills of over
10,000 gallons. All told, more than 7.4 million gallons
poured into the Gulf Coast region's waterways, over two-
thirds of the amount that spilled out during America's worst
oil disaster, the rupturing of the Exxon Valdez tanker off
the Alaskan coast in 1989.

That is the end of the quote from the very report on Katrina from the
White House. Has the Senator seen that report?
Mr. MENENDEZ. I have. I appreciate the distinguished Senator from
Florida pointing it out. The words are powerful because there it is not
a Member of the Senate saying this, not a Democrat saying this. This is
the official report. I have used the pictures because a picture speaks
better than a thousand words, and you cannot deny it as you cannot deny
the report. The fact is that we had massive oilspills after Katrina and
Rita.
This is a Coast Guard picture. That is the reality. The fact is, we
were told we have the most highly technologically advanced--it is
impossible to have any spills as a result of tankers.
The Exxon Valdez.
It simply is not true to suggest that there was not. How is it that
it has been quoted here--

Not even Hurricanes Katrina and Rita could cause
significant spillage . . .

At least that says ``significant spillage.''

Not a drop of oil was spilled during Katrina . . .

It is pretty tough to say that not a drop of oil was spilled during
Katrina. This is why we have to be so cautious about risking the
coastlines, the economy, the environment, when it will not produce a
drop of oil for over a decade, it will not do anything about gas prices
now or in the future, but can create an enormous consequence.
We need to be honest with the American people, and I hope this
opportunity to get to the floor and talk about some of the facts and
show some of the photos from the Coast Guard will make it very clear.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sanders). The Senator from Pennsylvania is
recognized.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, this is an unusual day in the Senate. I
have been in this body for a while. I have never seen the floor so
crowded. I have sought, since early morning, to find a little floor
time and have waited more than an hour at the present time, past the
time I was scheduled to speak. I am glad to listen.
I am beginning, on my consideration of the pending legislation, the
energy speculation bill, to note what is happening on the Senate floor.
There has been a lot of talk, a lot of talk in the Senate for the last
4 days, and really no action--only one vote on Tuesday morning on a
procedural matter to invoke cloture to proceed to the consideration of
the bill. What has happened? We have been talking a great deal but not
considering anything which would advance an energy policy for the
United States.
We are engaged in a process which is a little difficult to
understand, but I think it is important for the American people to know
what is happening. A procedure has been utilized recently--the past
couple of decades--where the majority leader exercises his rights as
leader to take a procedural step which precludes anybody from offering
amendments to the bill.
This is an opportunity. The Senate Chamber is empty, which it is
frequently, certainly past 7 o'clock on a Thursday evening, but it is
very hard to convey this information so that people would understand
why no action is being taken in the Senate. There is no doubt that it
is a do-nothing Senate and has been for some time as a result of
political gridlock. That is why the ratings of the Senate have
plummeted.
We have a situation which really started to percolate back in 1992,
and it has been a practice of both Democrats and Republicans.
Customarily--really invariably--when there is political blame in this
body, it is attributable to both political parties. You can divide it
right down the center aisle, and it is evenly split. But this procedure
to preclude amendments is of fairly recent origin.
In the 101st Congress of 1989 to 1990, where Senator Mitchell was the
leader, he did not use this procedure on any occasion. But by the 103rd
Congress, 1993 to 1994, Senator Mitchell employed it on nine occasions.
Then it was picked up in the Republican tenure of Senator Lott in the
106th Congress, in 1999 to 2000, when Senator Lott used it nine times.
Then, in the 109th Congress, 2005 to 2006, Senator Frist, the majority
leader, used it nine times. In this Congress, the 110th, 2007 and
partly through 2008, Senator Reid has used it 13 times.
What does this mean so that it can be understood by the American
people who have such a vital interest in having the Senate function?
Let me illustrate it with a bill on climate change which was called up
in June of this year.
As soon as the bill was called up, Senator Reid exercised his rights
as leader to get first recognition. In the Senate, Senators are
recognized in terms of who first seeks recognition, but in case of a
tie it goes to the leader. He then offers an amendment and then another
amendment so that procedurally no other of the 99 Senators can offer
any amendment.
The global warming bill was a very important bill. There has been a
demand to deal with this issue which poses great threats to our
environment. There was legislation pending, legislation which Senator
Bingaman and I had introduced, the Bingaman-Specter bill, legislation
introduced by Senator Lieberman and Senator Warner on a very complex
subject.
Early in the week of June 2, I came to the floor and spoke about some
amendments which I wanted to offer. I wanted to offer an amendment on
emission caps. I wanted to offer another amendment on cost-containment
safety valve--a price cap. I wanted to offer a third amendment on
energy-intensive manufacturing competitiveness and a fourth amendment
on steel process gas emissions. Of course, that was only one Senator,
at the beginning of what I wanted to have considered. But I was
foreclosed from offering any of those amendments by the procedure which
Senator Reid used to fill the tree.
Then Senator Reid moved for what is called cloture; that means to cut
off debate in order to proceed to final passage of the bill.
I wanted to consider the global warming issue, but I certainly was
not about to agree to cutting off debate and proceeding to final
passage before I or others had had an opportunity to offer amendments.
Now, what happens as a result? The result is that Republicans
complain about what Senator Reid has done on precluding amendments, and
Senator Reid complains about it being another Republican filibuster in
response to the Republican's inability to offer amendments.
So there is finger-pointing. That is what we are really good at these
days. And the American people do not understand anything except that
nothing is being done. Now, we have had consideration this week on a
bill called the energy speculation bill. We all wonder why the cost of
oil has gone through the roof, causing gasoline prices of more than $4
a gallon.
There is no doubt about the anguish and difficulties that the
American people are suffering as a result of these costs, of these
prices. And there is concern about the speculators who may be involved.
Maybe they are. There are some indicators that part of the problem is
caused by speculation.
Well, we haven't dealt with the issue in a logical, factual way; that
is, for Senators to come to the floor and address the substance of the
bill which is pending or offer amendments to modify the bill which is
pending.
Now, Senator Reid, the majority leader, has followed the same course
of

[[Page 16192]]

action. He has filed cloture. We are going to have a cloture vote
tomorrow. It takes 60 votes for cloture to cut off debate. It will not
happen. When the motion for cloture fails, Senator Reid is going to go
to his podium over there, and he is going to blast the Republicans for
shutting down the bill at a time when the American people need relief,
at a time when the American people need a decision as to what the
speculators are doing.
I want to offer an amendment on bringing OPEC within our antitrust
laws; something that I have been pushing for years. Right now, the OPEC
combine has an exemption under our antitrust laws. The OPEC nations get
into a room, they decide how much the production is going to be, they
limit supply, and the price of oil goes up.
They have what is called sovereign immunity. Well, they ought not to
have it. The Congress of the United States has the authority to change
that. We can bring them within our antitrust laws so that the Attorney
General can take action against them.
They are subject to jurisdiction in the United States because they do
business here, and they have a lot of assets here. If we brought OPEC
within our antitrust laws, you would see a change in their policy. They
have argued for a long time--Saudi Arabia--that they cannot have any
greater production. But about a month ago, when there were some signs
of change in our consumption of oil, some fear that their preeminent
position in their monopoly was in some jeopardy, somehow they increased
their production.
If they increase their production, if the supply goes up, prices will
come down--the inexorable law of supply and demand, one of the few laws
that works.
So here we are, with an enormously serious problem with what is
happening with the issue of oil prices and gasoline prices, and here we
have a bill on the floor which addresses an issue of grave concern to
the American people, and my hands are tied. My hands are tied with 99
other Senators because procedurally we are blocked.
Then the next move is going to be to invoke cloture. It is not going
to be invoked. Debate is not going to be cut off; 60 votes will not be
received. Then the majority leader will remove the bill from the floor,
and he is going to blame Republicans for obstructing, and the American
people are not going to have any opportunity to understand what went
on, except for the few who were watching on C-SPAN.
I made this speech during the consideration of the global warming
bill. There was not a word in the newspapers about it. Why? Well, it is
too complicated. It is too arcane. It is too ``inside the beltway.''
But until the American people understand it and send a message to
Washington that they are not going to tolerate it, we are going to have
to continue to have this gridlock.
When the shoe was on the other foot and Republicans controlled the
Senate, during the time when Senator Frist was the majority leader, he
invoked this procedure on nine occasions. Senator Reid and the
Democrats were very unhappy about it, as well as Senator Durbin and
Senator Dodd.
This is what Senator Dodd had to say about it:

This chamber historically is the place where debate occurs.

And what Senator Dodd is referring to is that the Senate, unlike the
House of Representatives, Senators have been able to offer any
amendment on any subject at any time. And that is one of the great
beauties about the Senate because any one of us can bring up an issue
and call the attention of the American people to it, and with
sufficient public backing, sufficient newspaper coverage, radio, TV, a
little broader than C-SPAN2, there can be some action. But that has
been foreclosed.
Senator Dodd was very emphatic about it back on May 11, 2006, when
the Republican leader, Senator First, had filled the tree. Senator Dodd
had this to say:

To basically lock out any amendments that might be offered
to this proposal runs contrary to the very essence of this
body. When the amendment tree has been entirely filled--

He called it filling the tree when the procedure is used--

when the amendment tree has been entirely filled, obviously
we are dealing with a process that ought not to be. The
Senate ought to be a place where we can offer amendments,
have healthy debate over a reasonable time, and then come to
closure on the subject matter.

Well, what did Senator Reid have to say about this subject on March
2, 2006, when we were debating the PATRIOT Act? Senator Reid said:

Do not fill the tree. That is a bad way, in my opinion, to
run this Senate.

What did Senator Reid have to say about the subject on February 28,
2006, on the PATRIOT Act reauthorization, speaking about filling the
tree.

This is a very bad practice. It runs against the basic
nature of the Senate. The hallmark of the Senate is free
speech and open debate.

What did Senator Durbin have to say about it, the assistant majority
leader for the Democrats, on May 11, 2006, when the Republican majority
leader had filled the tree and precluded amendments?

The Republican majority brings a bill to the Senate, fills
the tree so no amendments can be offered, and then files
cloture which stops debate; we cannot offer amendments.

So Senator Durbin outlines it as I did: The Republican majority
leader fills the tree and then files cloture. Well, cloture was not
adopted, and then these important issues are not considered and the
American people wonder what is going on.
Well, I have taken a little longer to explain the subject, but it is
very hard to get it across. I am going to keep trying. I have acted
within the Senate to try to get the rule changed. A year and a half
ago, I filed a rule amendment to try to get the rule changed. On
February 15, 2007, I introduced S. Res. 83, and so far, I have not been
able to get an answer from the chairman of the Rules Committee about
what action she intends to take.
I might say to my colleague from Washington that I have been waiting
an hour. I have limited time. But I am always a little wary when I see
a colleague waiting. But there are some other subjects I want to talk
about, so I want to give you some advance notice.
May the record show that Senator Murray has graciously given me a
hand signal, sort of like the Patriots used in the Jets game, a hand
signal, understanding that I am going to talk a little more. I will try
to be brief, but there are some subjects I do want to address.

Iran

I am very encouraged by what the administration has done as noted in
the Washington Post within the past few days. The President has sent
his first high-level emissary to sit down with Iran and has agreed for
the first time to set a time horizon for withdrawing troops from Iraq
and has authorized the Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, to join
the North Korean diplomats at the Six Party talks about ending that
country's nuclear weapons program.
I would urge the President, in the course of these talks, to exercise
flexibility in the dealings with Iran. There is no doubt that on the
international scene the possibility of Iran developing a nuclear weapon
is the most serious international threat there is in the world today.
No doubt about that. It is intolerable for Iran to have a nuclear
weapon when its President talks about wiping Israel off the face of the
Earth. And when Iran flouts international law by supporting
international terrorists, no doubt about the threat that would pose.
It has been my urging of the administration that the United States
not impose a precondition on the talks. The object of the talks is to
stop Iran from continuing to process nuclear weapons and to abandon
their effort to get nuclear weapons. They should stop their activities
on processing uranium.
It seems to me where the object of the talks is to stop Iran from
processing nuclear materials, that ought not to be a precondition of
the talks. It is very difficult to go to a sovereign nation, it seems
to me, and say: Before we begin the talks, we want you to

[[Page 16193]]

have a freeze on processing nuclear materials, which is the object of
our talks.
We have to approach anybody in any situation with a certain amount of
dignity, with a certain amount of understanding about the other
person's position, if we are to find some way to solve the problem. The
administration talks about a freeze for freeze, but the freezes are
very different. The freeze demanded by Iran is for them to stop a
process which they have been engaged in, which they have asserted they
have a right to as a sovereign nation. We don't like what they are
doing. If they become a sufficient threat under the U.N. charter,
article 51, there are circumstances where the threat is sufficiently
imminent to take preemptive action. We all hope we never get to that
stage. But until you have that situation, they are a sovereign nation,
and they are engaging in activities which sovereign nations do.
The freeze we are offering is a freeze to not impose sanctions to
take negative action against Iran. It is the projection of the six
powers, led by the United States, that we have suggestions to make to
Iran on a package of economic, political, a variety of incentives to
stop Iran from processing nuclear material. It seems to me the best way
to get on with it is to start to discuss with Iran what we have to
offer specifically, to see if what we have to offer will be sufficient
on the talks or to engage in the discussions and in the negotiations.
We do know that notwithstanding the grave difficulties in dealing with
North Korea, that when the United States was willing to engage in
bilateral talks with North Korea, we made some progress. We thought the
North Korean leadership was impossible, but we were able to work
through it.
Similarly, in dealing with Libya and Qadhafi, we were able to work
out an arrangement where Libya, Qadhafi, stopped the development of
nuclear weapons. Qadhafi is the greatest terrorist in the history of
the world; with very heavy competition, the greatest terrorist in the
history of the world. He blew up Pan Am 103. It was proved that he did
it. He made reparations to the passengers. He blew up a discotheque in
Germany, killed American soldiers. Yet through discussions, through
talks, he has been brought back into the so-called family of nations.
Libya has a seat on the Security Council. It is hard for me, frankly,
to understand how we have gone that far with Libya, but that goes to
show how far we can go.
As these talks proceed, it would be my hope the United States would
show flexibility. When the Secretary of State talks about their having
2 weeks to respond, I don't think that is the way negotiators deal in
putting on time limits. Iran responded, apparently, according to the
media reports, with a long written statement which was not
understandable. But they have quite a number of points which they want
to make. I have had the opportunity, and have discussed this on the
Senate floor at some length, of having a number of discussions with the
current Iranian Ambassador to the U.N. and the previous two
Ambassadors. There are people from Iran whom you can talk to in a
sensible way. But a demand on a precondition that they stop processing
nuclear material, which is the object of the talks, seems to me to be
totally counterproductive.
I have raised these issues at some considerable length over the
course of the past year and a half, going back to an appropriations
hearing on February 27, 2007, when Secretary of State Rice was before
the committee, posing the issue with her as to why the precondition. I
had an extensive discussion with her, similarly, with Secretary of
Defense Gates, in hearings before the Department of Defense
Appropriations Subcommittee. It is worth noting that when Secretary of
Defense Gates was on the Commission evaluating United States-Iranian
relations, he was a party to recommending discussions with Iran. These
discussions, these lines of questioning and responses are lengthy.
I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the statement be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

Statement of Senator Arlen Specter, U.S.-Iranian Relations

Mr. President. I have sought recognition to compliment
President Bush and Secretary Rice on their initiative to
dispatch Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs
William Burns to meet directly with Iranian officials this
past weekend in Geneva, Switzerland.
On Saturday, July 19, Secretary Burns joined
representatives of Russia, China, the United Kingdom, France,
Germany and the European Union in negotiations with Iran's
chief negotiator, Saeed Jalili, over Iran's nuclear program.
This was one of the highest level meetings between a
representative of the U.S. and Iran since the American
Embassy was seized in Tehran in 1979, and represents the
highest level of American engagement with Tehran during the
Bush administration's tenure.
The meeting followed a June 12, 2008 letter from Secretary
Rice, European Union foreign minister Javier Solana, and the
foreign ministers of China, France, Germany, Russia, and the
United Kingdom to Iranian Foreign Minister Manuchehr Mottaki
outlining a new set of incentives to encourage Iran to stop
enriching uranium. The letter proposed that the six world
powers ``will refrain from any new action in the Security
Council,'' while Iran ``will refrain from any new nuclear
activity, including the installation of any new
centrifuges.'' The formula was called ``freeze-for-freeze.''
The letter and accompanying proposal was notable in that it
concentrated on incentives rather than proposing new punitive
measures.
I spoke with Secretary Burns this week who briefed me on
the meeting. While I will not detail our conversation, I
commended Secretary Burns for his efforts.
The Administration has long held they would not sit down
with the Iranians prior to them agreeing to suspend their
nuclear activities. The meeting this weekend at Geneva's City
Hall represents a welcomed flexibility in that policy--a
flexibility I strongly support and hope will continue.
I have consistently, both publically and privately, urged
President Bush, Secretary Rice and Secretary Gates, for the
U.S. to have direct talks with the Iranians without
preconditions.
During the May 20, 2008 hearing before the Defense
Appropriations Subcommittee, I made the following statement:
``I would like to focus on the future and most specifically
on Iran and on the critical issue of talks with Iran and
whether talking with Iran is really feasible. We have seen
our talks with North Korea bear fruition. We have seen the
talks with Libya--Qadhafi--bear fruition. Qadhafi, arguably
the worst terrorist in the history of the world in a very
tough competition with Pan Am 103 and the bombing of the
Berlin discotheque, and yet he has given up his nuclear
weapons.'' I further stated, ``We have seen the president's
comment about appeasement of terrorists, but if we do not
have dialogue with Iran, at least in one man's opinion, we're
missing a great opportunity to avoid a future conflict.''
This hearing afforded me the opportunity to engage
Secretary Gates on the matter. It is important to note that
Secretary Gates, prior to his tenure at the Department of
Defense, co-chaired a Council on Foreign Relations task force
which concluded, ``it is in the interests of the United
States to engage selectively with Iran to promote regional
stability, dissuade Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons,
preserve reliable energy supplies, reduce the threat of
terror, and address the `democracy deficit' that pervades the
Middle East as a whole.'' When asked about dialogue and Iran
in a questionnaire submitted by members of the Armed Services
Committee, Secretary Gates responded that, ``no option that
could potentially benefit U.S. policy should be off the
table'' and noted that ``in the worst days of the cold war
the U.S. maintained a dialogue with the Soviet Union and
China.''
Picking up on Secretary Gates' comments about the Soviet
Union, I discussed the applicability to Iran:
``Secretary Gates, we have seen that President Reagan
identified the Soviet Union as the `evil empire' and shortly
thereafter engaged in direct bilateral negotiations and very,
very successfully. As noted before, we have seen President
Bush authorize bilateral talks with North Korea, as well as
multilateral talks, which produced results. As noted with
Libya, on Gadhafi, the talks have produced very positive
results. I note that there have been three rounds of
bilateral talks where United States Ambassador Crocker has
had direct contact with Iranian Ambassador Qomi. So we are
not really saying, in practice, that we will not talk to
them. The question is to what extent will we talk? I'm very
much encouraged, Mr. Secretary, by the statement you made on
May 14th of this year that, ``We need to figure out a way to
develop some leverage and then sit down and talk with them.
If there is to be a discussion then they need something too.
We can't go to a discussion and be completely the demander
with them not feeling that they need anything from us.''
Continuing with Secretary Gates, I said, ``Now the position
taken by the Secretary of

[[Page 16194]]

State has been `we won't talk to Iran unless, as a
precondition, they stop enriching Uranium.' It seems to me
that it is unrealistic to try to have discussions but to say
to the opposite party, `as a precondition to discussions we
want the principal concession that we're after.' Do you think
it made sense to insist on a concession like stopping
enriching Uranium, which is what our ultimate objective is,
before we even sit down and talk to them on a broader range
of issues?''
I further questioned, ``Isn't it sensible to engage in
discussion with somebody to try to find out what it is they
are after? We sit apart from them and we speculate. We have
all of these learned op-ed pieces and speeches made and we're
searching for leverage. But wouldn't it make sense to talk to
the Iranians and try to find out what they need as at least
one step on the process? We only have one government to deal
with. Let me put it to you very bluntly, Mr. Secretary: is
President Bush correct when he says that it is appeasement to
talk to Iran?''
Secretary Gates responded, ``Well, I don't know--I don't
know exactly what the president said. I believe he said it
was appeasement to talk to terrorists, to negotiate with
terrorists . . .''
I interjected, ``He said in his May 15 address to the
members of the Knesset he said, `some seem to believe that we
should negotiate with terrorists and radicals.' He does not
say specifically Iran, but I think the inference is
unmistakable in light of the entire policy of the
administration.''
I concluded by telling Secretary Gates, ``I've had an
opportunity to talk to the President about it directly, and I
believe he needs to hear more from people like you than
people like me, but from both of us and that it's not
appeasement and that the analogy to Neville Chamberlain is
wrong. We've only got one government to deal with there, and
they were receptive in 2003. I've had a chance to talk to the
last three Iranian ambassadors to the U.N. and I think there
is an opportunity for dialogue. I think we have to be a
little courageous about it and take a chance because the
alternatives are very, very, very bleak.''
A month prior to my engagement with Secretary Gates, I
posed a similar question to Secretary Rice during the April
9, 2008 Foreign Operations Subcommittee hearing:
I told Secretary Rice, ``I want to visit with you a couple
of subjects that you and I have talked about extensively both
on and off the record, and that is the Iranian issue and
later the Syrian issue. We have talked about the initiative
of 2003, which has been confirmed by a number of people in
the administration, on Iran's effort to initiate bilateral
talks with the United States. And I have discussed this with
you urging you to do so. We all know that among the many
pressing problems the United States faces, none is more
important than our relation with Iran and the threat of Iran
getting a nuclear weapon. And the multilateral talks and the
sanctions in the United Nations are very, very important. But
I would again take up and urge the bilateral talks. You were
successful on the bilateral talks with North Korea in
structuring an agreement. There had to be multilateral talks
with China involved and Japan and South Korea and other
nations. But Madam Secretary, in the waning days of the
administration, in light of the intensity of the problems,
why not use the approach taken in North Korea and engage Iran
in bilateral talks to try to find some way of coming together
with them on the critical issue of their building a nuclear
weapon?''
Secretary Rice responded, ``Senator, I think we've made
clear that we don't have a problem with the idea of talking
to the Iranians. I said at one point in a recent speech that
we don't have any permanent enemies, so we don't--''
I told Secretary Rice I was referring to dialogue, ``but
without preconditions.''
Secretary Rice replied, ``But I think the problem of doing
this, and we do talk with North Korea bilaterally but, of
course, in the context of a six-party framework, and we have
a six-party framework really for Iran. The reason that the
precondition is there--and it's not just an American
precondition, it is one that the Europeans set well before we
entered this six-party arrangement some two years ago--it's
to not allow the Iranians to continue to improve their
capabilities while using negotiations as a cover. They have
only one thing to do, which is to suspend their enrichment
and reprocessing efforts, and then everybody will talk to
them. And I've been clear that we're prepared to talk to them
about anything, not just about their nuclear.''
I followed up with Secretary Rice, ``They don't need talks
to have a cover to proceed with whatever it is they're doing.
They're proceeding with that now. I've had some experience. I
haven't been secretary of State and I haven't been in the
State Department, but I've been on this committee--
subcommittee for 28 years and chaired the Intelligence
Committee, talked to many foreign leaders, and frankly, I
think it's insulting to go to another person or another
country and say we're not going to talk to you unless you
agree to something in advance. What we want them to do is
stop enriching uranium. That's the object of the talks. How
can we insist on their agreeing to the object that we want as
a precondition to having the talks?''
Secretary Rice replied, ``Well, Senator, we've not told
them that we--the talks would be in fact about how to get
Iran civil nuclear energy and a whole host of other trade and
political benefits, by the way, because the package that the
six parties have put forward is actually very favorable to
Iran. But they do need to stop--suspend until those talks can
begin and those talks can have some substance. They need to
stop doing what they're doing, because to allow them to just
continue to do it, to say well, we're in negotiations while
they continue to do it, I think sends the wrong signal to
them and frankly would erode our ability to continue the kind
of efforts at sanctions that we're also engaged in.''
On February 27, 2007, I questioned Secretary Rice when she
appeared before the Appropriations Committee. I stated that,
``It would be my hope, as you know from our correspondence in
the past and our discussion, that there would be more intense
one on one negotiations with the Iranians. . . . And the most
famous illustration is President Nixon going to China--used
really as an example. If that can be done, that's the way to
do it.'' While Undersecretary Burns' recent meeting is not of
the same magnitude, it still represents a step in the right
direction and perhaps is the initial building block or
stepping stone to enhanced bilateral discussions.
Perhaps one of the best opportunities to engage in serious
dialogue with Iran came during 2003. Press reports have
suggested the existence a document that was passed to the
United States through the Swiss Ambassador to Iran and later
rejected by the Administration. The document laid out issues
for the U.S. and Iran to discuss and parameters for dialogue.
Knowledge of the memorandum existed in the State Department
and the National Security Council. However, according to
Michael Hirsh of the Washington Post, the memorandum ``was
ignored.''
During my May 20, 2008 questioning of Secretary Gates, he
appeared to allude to the fact that the U.S. may have missed
an opportunity following the 2003 memorandum. I asked
Secretary Gates, ``Mr. Secretary, we had leverage in 2003
when we were successful in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the
record is pretty clear that we wasted an opportunity to
respond to their initiatives.'' Secretary Gates stated, ``I
think it was one of the things [Khatami's tenure as
President] that created perhaps an opportunity that may or
may not have been lost in 2003 and 2004.''
While I believe it is clear that an opportunity to engage
Iran was lost in 2003, I agree with Secretary Gates that we
need to find ways to generate leverage in dealing with Iran
and need to continue to work on a resolution. One proposal
which I find promising is the Russian proposal to enrich
uranium for Iran's civil nuclear program. It would provide
Tehran with the nuclear power it claims is the sole intention
of its nuclear program, but would prevent Iran from turning
the lowly enriched uranium needed for civil nuclear reactors
to the highly enriched uranium needed for nuclear weapons.
During the April 9, 2008 Foreign Operations Subcommittee
hearing I raised this issue with Secretary Rice, ``Let me
move to another subject, and that is President Putin's
proposal to have the Russians enrich their uranium. . . . To
what extent has the Putin proposal been pressed? In a sense,
if we join with Putin and they refuse what is really a good
offer to have somebody else enrich their uranium so they have
it for peaceful purposes, but there is a check on using it
for military purposes--why hasn't that worked?''
Secretary Rice responded, ``Well, we are fully supportive
of it, and the president just told President Putin that again
at Shchuchye, that he is fully supportive of the Russian
proposal. And in fact, not only did President Putin himself
put that proposal to the Iranians when he was in Tehran, his
foreign minister went back within a few days and put the same
proposition to the Iranians, which makes people suspicious,
Senator, that this is not about civil nuclear power but
rather about the development of the capabilities for a
nuclear weapon . . . Not only did we support the Russians in
making their offer, but when the Russians decided to go ahead
and shift the fuel for Bushehr saying to the Iranians now
that we've shipped the fuel, you certainly have no reason to
enrich, we supported that effort too. So I think this really
speaks to the intentions of the Iranians.''
I concurred with Secretary Rice, but urged her to press
this idea at the highest levels: ``My suggestion would be to
try to elevate it. It's been in the media and the press a
little, but not very much. So if we could elevate that, I
think you'd really put Iran on the spot that they deserve to
be on.'' Secretary Rice responded favorably to the
suggestion: ``It's a very good idea, Senator. We'll try to do
that.''
I have engaged senior Administration officials in meetings,
phone conversations and via letters on the Iranian issue. On
January 14, 2007, I met Secretary Rice in her office and
urged her to undertake an aggressive diplomatic initiative in
the Middle East and to engage all regional actors including
Iran. One month later during her February 27, 2007

[[Page 16195]]

testimony before the Senate Appropriations Committee, she
announced an initiative to enhance regional engagement. When
I spoke to Secretary Rice via phone on August 14, 2007, she
indicated there had been no significant movement on this
front. After learning of the lackluster progress, I wrote to
Secretary Rice that, ``The U.S. should be willing to engage
in dialogue with those whom we consider to be our enemies in
order to advance our goals of peace and security. As I have
expressed to you in the past, I believe that talks with
people--even our most ardent adversaries--hold the potential
to yield positive results.''
On September 10, 2007, I wrote a six page letter to
Secretary Rice in which I noted, ``Terrorism, military
nuclear capabilities, energy security, and the Israeli-
Palestinian dilemma are all major issues confronting the U.S.
and indeed the world. These challenges cannot be confronted
without engaging Iran . . .''
In a March 28, 2007 letter to Secretary Rice, I wrote ``In
my view, a renewed focus on dialogue with North Korea and
recent participation of the U.S. in an international
conference attended by Iran and Syria, hold open the
possibility of easing the tensions that exist in our
relationship with those countries through diplomacy. . . . On
a carefully selective basis, I believe dialogue should be
pursued with our adversaries.''
On August 1, 2007, I stated on the Senate floor, ``While we
can't be sure that dialogue will succeed, we can be sure that
without dialogue there will be failure.''
As the clock runs out on this administration, I urge it to
push for resolution of this matter through direct, bilateral,
unconditional negotiations with Tehran. The recent talks in
Geneva were significant, but I continue to believe that
bilateral negotiations may aid in resolving this issue of
tremendous importance.
I yield the floor.

Syria-Israeli Negotiations

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, there is one further subject I wish to
discuss. This will be not relatively brief, but brief. That is a
discussion which is pending between Syria and Israel with Turkey acting
as an intermediary. It would be my hope and suggestion to the President
that he extend the flexibility which he is now showing as to Iran and
North Korea and Iraq to assist in the Israeli-Syrian negotiations. The
United States was instrumental in negotiations back in 1995, when Prime
Minister Rabin almost came to terms with Syria on the Golan Heights. It
is a very difficult subject that I don't believe anybody should tell
Israel or suggest to Israel or in any way pressure Israel as to what to
do about the Golan Heights. It is a decision Israel has to make for
itself on their security. But it is a different world than it was in
1967, when Israel took the Golan Heights. Now we have a world of
rockets, and security matters are entirely different.
Again, the United States participated extensively in the Syrian-
Israeli talks in the year 2000. I have made many trips to Syria since
1984. I got to know President Hafez al-Asad and traveled to the Middle
East extensively and recommended to a number of Israeli Prime Ministers
the desirability of my view--at least in one man's opinion--to have the
negotiations. Right now there is a unique opportunity which could
impact on Lebanon. Syria is opening an embassy in Lebanon, treating
Lebanon as a sovereign nation which is quite a shift. Syria has
enormous influence on Hezbollah. It is a very complex subject in
Lebanon, with Hezbollah having significant power in the government, a
veto in their Parliament. Syria has considerable influence with Hamas.
If the circumstances were right, there is a great opportunity to
separate Syria from Iran, a great opportunity to get some assistance
with Syria on some major problems. It is unknowable whether that can
happen. But I do believe dialog is the way. It would be my hope the
President would show he still has muscle. He is going to be in the
White House for 6 months. What he has done with respect to North Korea
and Iran and Iraq shows he is not taking his last 6 months with a view
that there are things he can accomplish. I refer to an extensive
article I have written on this subject which summarizes a good many of
my activities and views in the Washington Quarterly for 2006-2007.
I thank my colleague from Washington for her patience, if, in fact,
she has been patient. It is always difficult with Senators having the
right to speak. But it took me more than an hour to get the floor after
waiting most of the day. As usual, Senator Murray is gracious and
nodding in the affirmative. I thank her and the Chair.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
Mrs. MURRAY. I assure my colleague from Pennsylvania, I was listening
carefully to his comments. He has traveled worldwide, and I am
certainly interested in his viewpoints. I hope I didn't make him feel
rushed at all, and I appreciate what he had to say.

Housing

Mr. President, this week, tens of thousands of homeowners traveled
here to the Nation's Capital, and lined up for hours--and even days--in
hopes of taking advantage of a mortgage counseling workshop through the
Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America.
These homeowners came from as far away as Boston or Miami--all
because they are struggling to hold onto their homes, and they need
help with their mortgages. Many others are now steps away from
foreclosure because they have seen their mortgage rates rise out of
control, or because their mortgage now exceeds the value of their home
because property values have plummeted.
Now, while many of the homeowners who came to DC this week were able
to get help, there are millions more across this country in the same
position who are still in need of assistance. Nearly 8,500 families
file for foreclosure each day. And as many as 2 million homeowners
could lose their homes this year. Fortunately, we will have a bill
before us soon that will enable the Federal Government to lend a
helping hand to many of those families.
The housing package that passed the House on Wednesday includes a
variety of provisions that would restore stability to the housing
market, provide assistance to communities hurt by this crisis, and help
prevent thousands of foreclosures. We have considered much of this
package before, but it has been blocked by Republicans who have
preferred to drag their feet than to address this crisis. We now have
another chance, and I have come to the floor today to urge my
colleagues to support this legislation and get help into the hands of
the homeowners and communities that need it.
Those of us who go home each weekend to talk to their constituents
know how worried our families are about the economy--and about whether
something will happen to threaten their ability to keep their homes.
It is hard to overstate how serious the housing crisis has become.
There are communities across this country where people are literally
abandoning their homes because they can't afford their mortgages, and
they can't find a willing buyer. As I said, as many as 2 million
families could lose their homes to foreclosure this year. And reports
estimate the number of families facing foreclosure is higher than at
any time since the Great Depression.
At the beginning of this crisis, many of those people were subprime
borrowers who received adjustable-rate loans or who were the victims of
loan scams. But as home values have dropped across the country, the
problem has spread. Families with strong credit, who received fixed-
rate mortgages, have seen their homes drop in value by tens or hundreds
of thousands of dollars over the past couple of years. Their mortgages
are now under water, and thousands of them are at risk for foreclosure
too.
This is a problem even in regions that have been relatively healthy,
like my home state of Washington--where more and more people tell me
they are worried that they will be stuck with homes they can't afford.
The housing legislation that we will consider soon may be one of the
most important steps we take this year to help our faltering economy
because it addresses the root of the problem--the housing crisis. So I
want to take the next couple of moments to talk about three of the main
provisions of this bill to explain why we must act now.
First, the bill provides $180 million to give counseling agencies the
resources to reach out and help struggling homeowners. Counseling is
one of the most cost-effective tools we have to help

[[Page 16196]]

families who are on the verge of foreclosure. Counselors can help
families negotiate with their lenders, readjust their payments, or
learn how to budget their expenses better.
And it is incredibly important that we provide the resources now so
that we can help families before they reach the crisis point.
Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to meet a single mother from
Ohio who had fallen on hard times, which in turn led her to fall behind
on her mortgage. Luckily she was able to talk to a counselor, and she
and her children were able to stay in their home. She explained that
when she got behind, she was overwhelmed. She told me she didn't know
what to do. She said, ``This isn't something they teach you in
school.''
This bill would help more families like hers get help. Despite the
numbers who traveled to Washington, DC for help this week, far too many
homeowners still don't know they have options when they get behind on
their mortgages.
I fought alongside Senators Mikulski, Schumer, and Brown to include
this counseling funding back when this bill was first debated in April.
It comes on top of a $180 million initiative that my ranking member,
Senator Bond, and I included in the 2008 Transportation-Housing
Appropriations Act. And I want to thank Chairman Dodd and Ranking
Member Shelby for helping to protect the funding in the most recent
package.
Next, the bill makes some important changes to help modernize the
Federal Housing Administration and enable it to help more homeowners
refinance their mortgages. First, it raises the loan limit to take into
account the increase in home prices over the last several years. This
is very important because in many communities, home prices are higher
than the current loan limits, meaning FHA mortgages aren't an option.
It also provides $300 billion to enable the FHA to back loans and
help as many as 400,000 homeowners at risk of foreclosure get more
affordable--and less risky--mortgages. These changes will help
stabilize the housing market and encourage more mortgage holders to
give borrowers a more affordable loan that will enable them to keep
their homes.
Now, while I support these measures, I want to add--as chairman of
the Transportation and Housing Appropriations Subcommittee--that this
bill is also putting a lot of new responsibility into the hands of the
FHA. That agency currently has close to 300 vacancies and it has the
money to fill them. Unfortunately, it has been burdened by the
painfully slow hiring processes at HUD.
It is my understanding that FHA Commissioner Montgomery, and our new
HUD Secretary, Steve Preston, are determined to reverse this hiring
record and get more people on board soon. I certainly hope they
succeed. But I also recognize that as we head into the new fiscal year,
we may need to take measures to boost the salary and expense funds
provided to the FHA as well as get money to the agency to improve its
computing capabilities. I intend to address those needs when the
Appropriations Committee marks up the next Supplemental Appropriations
bill in September.
Finally, I want to caution my colleagues on the Banking Committee
that we will all need to continually monitor the lending activity and
the funding balance of the FHA's existing mutual mortgage insurance
account as well as the new homeownership preservation entity fund
established in this bill. None of us wants to saddle taxpayers with
unnecessary risk as we try to help homeowners. This bill establishes a
new board that will face the daunting challenge of deciding which
homeowners can and can't be helped under this new program.
But Congress will also need to do its part to monitor the fiscal
health of both the new and old FHA accounts to ensure that the taxpayer
isn't guaranteeing loans that have no hope of being repaid. The whole
hope of this legislation is about calming the housing markets and using
the FHA guarantee to entice mortgage holders to give borrowers a better
break--an affordable loan that will keep them in their home. But we
must ensure that taxpayers don't end up holding the bill for
unsalvageable loans.
Finally, the bill would take important steps to strengthen Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac by establishing a new regulator. It also provides
temporary authority to allow the Treasury Department to take action
when needed to keep them stable. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are the
foundation of our system to finance homeownership in the U.S., and it
is absolutely critical that we take decisive action to help quickly
restore confidence in them.
We started work on this bill in February because Democrats wanted to
get help into the hands of homeowners who need it. But despite the
desperation people feel in communities across this country, some
Republicans have preferred up to this point to stall and block this
bill. Now, I was very happy to see President Bush finally drop his
opposition this week. And I hope my Republican colleagues will help us
get this bill to his desk as quickly as possible.
Especially when it comes to helping people keep their homes, timing
is everything. A family that gets access to housing counseling before
they start missing mortgage payments can still save their home. And I
hope we will finally be able to make that possible for thousands more
families in need.
I hope when we finally get this bill out of here, we will be able to
make it possible for more families to feel secure in this country
again.
Mr. President, I thank the Presiding Officer and look forward to the
vote tomorrow morning.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

____________________

MORNING BUSINESS

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to
speak for up to 10 minutes each.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

____________________

TRIBUTE TO JEROME HOLTZMAN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to a
remarkable and legendary Illinoisan, Jerome Holtzman. Mr. Holtzman was
a pioneer of baseball writing and renowned for his numerous
accomplishments. He passed away on July 19 at the age of 81.
The first official historian of Major League Baseball, Holtzman wrote
about the game, but truly he cared about the people. He was known for
spending time with umpires before games and was able to bring
generations of fans together through his columns.
Jerome Holtzman was a true American success story. In 1943, at the
youthful age of 17, he started his newspaper career as a copy boy for
the Chicago Times. After 2 years in the U.S. Marine Corps during World
War II, he covered high school sports at the Times and Sun-Times.
He started at the bottom, but he impressed many along the way.
Holtzman stayed on as a baseball beat writer and columnist at the
Chicago Sun-Times for 30 years. It was at the Sun-Times where Holtzman
met his wife Marilyn Ryan. With their five children, they lived in
Evanston--in a home frequented by baseball fans and Jerome Holtzman
fans. He spent the last 10 years of his career writing for the Chicago
Tribune.
One of the most distinguished honors Holtzman achieved over his
remarkable career was the induction into the writers' wing of the
Baseball Hall of Fame in 1989. His colleagues knew him as ``the Dean,''
a nickname given to him by fellow Hall of Famer Billy Williams. The
nickname reflects his stature as a baseball-writing ``lifer'' and his
loyal dedication to the game.

[[Page 16197]]

Among his accomplishments was the creation of the save. Holtzman's
save rule became an official Major League Baseball statistic that
acknowledges effective relief pitching. Acknowledging his profound
influence, former Sun-Times columnist Bill Gleason stated, ``The
reality is, he revolutionized baseball.''
In addition to his columns, Holtzman was the author of six books,
including a classic titled ``No Cheering in the Press Box.'' Many
columnists considered his book required reading and a foundation to
baseball writing. Cubs Chairman Crane Kenney remembered Holtzman as
``an accomplished writer who earned respect from both his readers and
from those whom he covered.''
Jerome Holtzman will be remembered as a great friend and mentor.
Chicago and baseball fans across the Nation have lost a celebrated
sportswriter and icon, but future generations will continue to remember
his great legacy and influential contributions to the game.

____________________

CAPTURE OF RADOVAN KARADZIC

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition today to
commend Serbian authorities for apprehending former Republika Srpska
president Radovan Karadzic. Earlier this month we marked the 13th
anniversary of the genocide at Srebrenica. The arrest this week of
Radovan Karadzic, in connection with that crime, shows that it is never
too late to seek justice for the terrible crimes committed during the
1992-95 war in Bosnia. Over a decade after being indicted for genocide,
crimes against humanity, and war crimes by the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, ICTY, at The Hague, Radovan
Karadzic was arrested on Monday, July 21, outside Belgrade.
Radovan Karadzic's arrest represents a significant breakthrough for
international jurisprudence. Serge Brammertz, prosecutor of the war
crimes tribunal in The Hague, said, ``This is a very important day for
the victims who have waited for this arrest for over a decade.'' ``It
is also an important day for international justice because it clearly
demonstrates that nobody is beyond the reach of the law and that sooner
or later all fugitives will be brought to justice.''
Richard Holbrooke, who brokered the Dayton Accords in 1995 which
ended the war in Bosnia, said, ``This is a historic event.'' ``Of the
three most evil men of the Balkans, Milosevic, Karadzic and Mladic, I
thought Karadzic was the worst. The reason was that Karadzic was a real
racist believer. Karadzic really enjoyed ordering the killing of
Muslims. . . .
Richard Dicker, director of Human Rights Watch's International
Justice Program, said, ``Radovan Karadzic personified impunity for more
than a decade, but his efforts to run the clock on justice have
failed.'' ``This arrest offers hope to the victims of the horrific
crimes that occurred here. We welcome this long-overdue arrest and look
forward to his fair trial in The Hague.''
I commend the Serbian Government for the resolve it has demonstrated
in arresting Mr. Karadzic. I think it is vital that Mr. Karadzic be
transferred to The Hague in due course, and that the search for
Republika Srpska military commander General Ratko Mladic continue. It
is vital that the international community, including the United States,
continue to support efforts to bring justice for these crimes, not just
in The Hague, but also at the local level in Bosnia, where lack of
resources and other obstacles mean that many victims continue to wait
for justice for the crimes committed against them. To that end, local
war crimes trials for thousands of other suspected perpetrators from
the Bosnia atrocities must receive support to overcome the challenges
they face in order to seal any remaining impunity gaps in Bosnia.
To echo a statement I made on the Senate floor on February 11, 1998,
it is my sense that if the war crimes tribunal at The Hague is
successful, if we can bring the rule of law into the international
arena, we may have the most important institutional change in
international relations of the past century.

____________________

ADVANCING AMERICA'S PRIORITIES ACT

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. Presdient, earlier this week, I joined the majority
leader in the introduction of S. 3297, the Advancing America's
Priorities Act. The majority leader selected 35 legislative items from
the jurisdiction of seven Senate committees, including eight bills from
that of the Senate Judiciary Committee, for this effort. These are all
measures with bipartisan support and, we believe, the support of a
strong bipartisan majority of the Senate. I have moved several through
the Judiciary Committee, and several have already passed the House. All
have the support of all Democratic Senators, and all were cleared for
unanimous Senate passage, but each has been stalled on the Senate floor
by Republican objection.
One key bill included in this package is the Emmett Till Unsolved
Civil Rights Crime Act. I thank Senator Dodd and Congressman Lewis for
their tireless work on this bill over the last 4 years. It will
strengthen the ability of the Federal Government to investigate and
prosecute unsolved murders from the civil rights era. It would create
new cold case units in the Justice Department and FBI dedicated to
investigating and prosecuting unsolved cases involving violations of
criminal civil rights statutes which resulted in death and occurred
before January 1, 1970. The Senate legislation was introduced on
February 8, 2007. I was proud to cosponsor Senator Dodd's bill. The
Judiciary Committee reported it by unanimous consent as amended on June
20, 2007, more than a year ago. The House legislation passed the House
on June 20, 2007, more than a year ago, by a vote of 422 to 2. Its
Republican cosponsors include Senator Cochran, Senator Hatch, Senator
Alexander, and Senator Cornyn.
Yesterday I had the privilege of meeting Emmett Till's cousin, Simeon
Wright, who was with him that terrible night. The brutal killing of
Emmett Till galvanized this Nation. I want to acknowledge Mr. Wright's
courage and his commitment to fight for justice for all these years.
The primary purpose of the Till bill is to track down those whose
violent acts during a period of national turmoil remain unpunished. By
passing this legislation, we honor Emmett Till and all those who
sacrificed their lives advancing civil rights. It is disgraceful that
it has taken us so long to take this basic step to pursue justice too
long delayed. It is incredible to me that some continue to obstruct
these efforts. It reminds me of those who so adamantly opposed a
national holiday to recognize the contributions of Dr. Martin Luther
King, Jr., and the progress this country has made toward equal justice.
Another important piece of legislation in this bill is the
reauthorization of the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act. Many Vermonters
have told me how much that act is needed to help young people in
Vermont and around the country. I held a hearing in Rutland this year
on crime in small cities and towns, which emphasized the need for
programs to help young people in difficult circumstances, and held
another here in Washington on this measure before the Judiciary
Committee reported it in April. The companion House bill passed in
June.
In addition, the eight Judiciary Committee related bills include
several concerning child pornography, exploitation and drugs. The
Effective Child Pornography Prosecution Act passed the House 409 to 0
last November; the Enhancing the Effective Prosecution of Child
Pornography provision passed the House 416 to 0 last November; the
PROTECT Our Children Act passed the House 415 to 2 last November; the
Drug Endangered Children Act passed the House last September 389 to 4.
All of these bills have been cleared by all Democratic Senators.
Thus, the Judiciary Committee components in S. 3297 are all measures
that should have passed the Senate long ago. Two of the eight have
Republican Senators as their lead sponsors. Others have Republican
cosponsors.

[[Page 16198]]

People are rightly worried about keeping their communities safe and
protecting their children. The Judiciary Committee has worked
throughout this Congress to advance these priorities of Americans.
Sadly, these important efforts have been obstructed by Republican
objections. I hope that all Senators will join together tomorrow to
pass S. 3297 without further delay.
The bill we will consider tomorrow contains eight Judiciary
Committee-related pieces. There were selected from many more bills that
have been reported favorably by the Senate Judiciary Committee and that
have passed the House. All these bills have the support of every
Democratic Senator, and it is Republican objections, usually anonymous
objections, that are keeping them from passing.
Let me mention some of the others:
S. 879, No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act of 2007--this bill
would make it illegal for any foreign state or any instrumentality or
agent of a foreign state to act collectively with another foreign state
to limit the production, set the price, or take any other action to
restrain trade of oil, natural gas, or any petroleum product. The
actions of OPEC to limit production of oil, natural gas, and other
petroleum products result in higher prices of crude oil and, thus,
gasoline in the United States. These actions are having a harmful
effect on American consumers. This legislation will make clear that the
actions of nations and their agents to limit supply and fix prices of
oil, natural gas, and other petroleum products to affect the U.S.
market violates U.S. antitrust law, and it will authorize the Attorney
General to enforce antitrust law against such nations and prevent
technical legal doctrines such as sovereign immunity and act of state
from preventing actions for redress.
S. 368, COPS Improvements Act of 2007--this bill would reauthorize
and improve the Department of Justice's Office of Community Oriented
Policing Services, COPS. Since 1994, the programs created by the COPS
initiative have helped drive down crime rates. The COPS Program would
restore vital programs that have been cut at a time when our law
enforcement officers need it most. S. 368 would authorize $600 million
to hire officers to engage in community policing, intelligence
gathering and antiterror initiatives, and to serve as school resource
officers. It would authorize $350 million per year for technology
grants and $200 million per year to help local district attorneys hire
community prosecutors. Also, it would establish the COPS office as an
entity within the Department of Justice to carry out these functions
and activities under the COPS Program in order to eliminate duplication
of efforts.
S. 119/H.R. 400, War Profiteering Prevention Act of 2007--this
legislation would strengthen the tools available to Federal law
enforcement to combat contracting fraud during times of war, military
action, or relief or reconstruction activities. It would also extend
extraterritorial jurisdiction in an attempt to reach fraudulent conduct
wherever it occurs. The bill would create a new criminal fraud offense
in title 18 of the U.S. Code to prohibit fraudulent acts involving the
provision of goods or services in connection with a war, military
action, or relief or reconstruction activities.
S. 185, Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007--this bill would repeal
provisions of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 that eliminated the
jurisdiction of any court to hear or consider applications for a writ
of habeas corpus filed by aliens who have been determined by the United
States to have been properly detained as enemy combatants. Passage of
this bill would restore the basic and essential right to challenge
arbitrary detention by the Government to noncitizens, including the 12
million lawful permanent residents currently in this country, who under
current law may be held forever with no recourse to challenge their
detention in court. This legislation will contribute to renewed global
respect for American values and the rule of law.
S. 2511, a bill to amend the grant program for law enforcement armor
vests to provide for a waiver of or reduction in the matching funds
requirement in the case of fiscal hardship--this bill would amend the
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to authorize the
Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance to waive, in whole or in
part, matching fund requirements applicable to the grant program for
the purchase of armor vests for law enforcement officers.
S. 2344, Internet Safety Education Act of 2007--this bill would
create a competitive grant program for eligible organizations to carry
out free, age-appropriate programs that promote Internet safety for
children. This would give educators and parents the tools necessary to
teach proper online interactions and promote safe Internet usage to
their students and children in an age-appropriate manner.
H.R. 3095, to amend the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of
2006 to modify a deadline relating to a certain election by Indian
tribes--this bipartisan bill would provide Indian tribes a 1-year
extension in which to decide how to comply with the requirements of the
Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. The Adam Walsh Act
enacted new requirements for States and Indian tribes to maintain sex
offender registration information, post such information on the
Internet, and share such information among States and other Indian
tribes. The Justice Department proposed detailed regulations for States
and Indian tribes to comply with the Adam Walsh Act, but those
regulations are not yet final. The Indian tribes cannot make an
informed decision on how to comply with the act until those regulations
are final. This 1-year extension would give Indian tribes sufficient
time to make appropriate choices.
S. 267/H.R. 545, Native American Methamphetamine Enforcement and
Treatment Act--this bill would ensure that Indian tribes are able to
apply for grant programs authorized by the Combat Methamphetamine
Epidemic Act. When Congress passed the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic
Act, tribes were unintentionally left out as eligible applicants in
some of these programs. This bill would clarify that territories and
Indian communities are eligible to receive the resources they need to
fight methamphetamine use.
S. 877, Controlling the Abuse of Prescriptions Act of 2007--this bill
seeks to crack down on performance-enhancing drugs by putting human
growth hormone on the same list of controlled substances as anabolic
steroids. Classifying human growth hormone, HGH, as a schedule III
controlled substance would subject the drug to more Government
regulation and stiffer penalties for illegal distribution.
S. 1027, PACT Act--this bill would help combat cigarette trafficking
by updating existing antitrafficking laws and introducing new tools to
combat illegal remote sales, such as those conducted over the Internet.
The legislation closes loopholes in current tobacco trafficking laws,
enhances penalties for violations, and provides law enforcement with
new tools to combat the innovative new methods being used by cigarette
traffickers to distribute their products. By strengthening criminal
laws governing cigarette trafficking and empowering Federal, State, and
local law enforcement with the powers to investigate and prosecute the
cigarette traffickers of the 21st century, the PACT Act can help
disrupt terrorist groups and other organized criminal enterprises.
S. 627, Safe Babies Act of 2007--this bill would amend the Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 to require the Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention to award a grant to a
national early childhood development organization to establish a
National Court Teams Resource Center. The goals of the Center would be
to promote the well-being of maltreated infants and toddlers and their
families, help prevent the recurrence of abuse and neglect of children,
and promote timely reunification of families.
H.R. 5569, to extend for 5 years the EB-5 Regional Center Pilot
Program, and for other purposes--this bill would extend the EB-5
Regional Center Program for 5 years. This program allows

[[Page 16199]]

entrepreneurs from around the country to apply for Regional Center
designation with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which
in turn allows project managers to attract foreign investment to
discrete projects within specified geographic areas, many of which are
rural areas in need of economic stimulation. Over the years, this
program has resulted in foreign capital investment of billions of
dollars and the creation of thousands of jobs in American communities.
This important program is set to expire on September 30, 2008, and its
reauthorization is critical for the many Americans who depend upon this
program to make positive economic changes to their communities.
S. 442, John R. Justice Prosecutors and Defenders Incentive Act of
2007--this bill would establish a student loan repayment program for
qualified attorneys who agree to remain employed for at least 3 years
in certain public sector employment. This targeted student loan
repayment assistance program will bolster the ranks of attorneys in the
criminal justice system, enhancing the quality of that system and the
public's confidence in it.
S. 3296, to extend the authority of the U.S. Supreme Court Police to
protect court officials off the Supreme Court grounds and change the
title of the Administrative Assistant to the Chief Justice--this bill
would extend for 5 years the authority of the U.S. Supreme Court Police
to protect Supreme Court Justices when they leave the Supreme Court
grounds. In January of this year, the Court Security Improvement Act
was signed into law to authorize additional resources to protect
Federal judges, personnel, and courthouses. This additional legislation
would extend the authority of the U.S. Supreme Court Police to protect
the Supreme Court Justices on and off Court grounds. It would also
change the title of the Chief Justice's senior advisor from
``Administrative Assistant'' to ``Counselor.''
S. 3106, a bill to amend chapter 13 of title 17, United States Code,
relating to the vessel hull design protection, to clarify the
definitions of a hull and a deck--this bill would give the Department
of Defense full assurance that Government and defense designs will not
be subject to unwarranted restrictions. In 1998, Congress passed the
Vessel Hull Design Protection Act to recognize the significant time,
effort, and innovation that figure into ship design. Recent action in
the courts has made it clear that in order to be effective, this law
needs to be clarified and refined. This bill does exactly that by
clarifying the definition of ``hull'' and ``deck,'' to ensure that the
intellectual property rights of vessel hull designers would be
protected.
H.R. 6344, Responsive Government Act of 2008--this bill would provide
the Federal courts and the Director of the Patent and Trademark Office,
PTO, with needed emergency authority to delay judicial proceedings or
statutory deadlines in the event of a natural disaster or other
emergency situation which makes it impractical for parties, including
the United States, to comply with certain filing conditions or to
protect the rights and privileges of people affected by certain
emergencies or a major disaster. We have recently observed how the
ravages of natural disasters disrupt the lives of our fellow citizens,
which can impede the ability to comply with strict statutory deadlines.
Thus the Responsive Government Act provides critical flexibility to the
courts and the PTO to help ameliorate the practical difficulties caused
by these emergency situations.
S. 621, Wartime Treatment Study Act--this bill would establish two
factfinding commissions to supplement the work done in the 1980s by the
Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians, which
studied the treatment of Japanese Americans during World War II. The
act would create one commission to review the U.S. Government's
treatment of German Americans, Italian Americans, and European Latin
Americans during World War II, and another commission to review the
U.S. Government's treatment of Jewish refugees fleeing Nazi persecution
during World War II.
S. 2942, a bill to authorize funding for the National Advocacy
Center--this bill would authorize the National District Attorneys
Association to use the National Advocacy Center in Columbia, SC, for a
national training program to improve the professional skills of State
and local prosecutors and to enhance the ability of Federal, State, and
local prosecutors to work together.
I hope that those Republican Senators who are holding up these
measures will work with me by coming forward and letting me know what
it is in the bill that they find objectionable. That way, we might be
able to work something out to accommodate them. But when they object
anonymously and do not come forward to work with us, it seems they are
only interested in obstruction.

____________________

NOMINATION OF JAMES A. WILLIAMS

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today I rise to express my opposition to
the nomination of Mr. James A. Williams to be the Administrator of the
General Services Administration, GSA. My concerns are based on my
investigation of a dubious GSA contract with Sun Microsystems. In 2006
and 2007, my oversight staff conducted a thorough inquiry into the GSA
Multiple Award Schedule contract with Sun Microsystems for computer
products and services. GSA inspector general, IG, auditors had alerted
GSA's top management of alleged fraud on this contract as early as
2005.
In 2006, Mr. Williams became the Commissioner of the GSA Federal
Acquisition Service, FAS. His office was directly responsible for this
questionable contract with Sun Microsystems. He and Administrator Doan
were alterted to the alleged fraud and the referral of the matter to
the Department of Justice, DOJ.
I previously made the findings of my inquiry known in a floor
statement on October 17, 2007.
In a nutshell, all the evidence developed in my oversight
investigation appears to indicate that top-level GSA management,
including Administrator Doan and FAS Commissioner Williams, may have
improperly interfered in the ongoing contract negotiations with Sun
Microsystems in May-September 2006; and Administrator Doan and Mr.
Williams pressured the GSA contracting officer to approve the new Sun
contract even though they both knew that the IG had detected alleged
fraud on the existing Sun contract and had referred the matter to the
DOJ for possible prosecution/litigation. This case is now pending in
Federal court.
The facts appear to show Mr. Williams, as FAS Commissioner, failed to
act in the best interest of the American taxpayer. He had the
opportunity to put an end to or bring into compliance a contract that
was allegedly fraudulent, but in the end he could not do it. Instead,
he sided with former Administrator Doan by taking steps to remove the
GSA contracting officer. When the final contract was signed with Sun
Microsystems by a newly appointed contracting officer, he chose to look
the other way. He didn't even try to have the IG audit or examine the
terms of the proposed contract. At the very least, this was a very poor
management decision by Mr. Williams. It was a deplorable error in
judgment that he probably regrets today.
We need a strong leader at GSA. The responsibilities of GSA
Administrator require an individual who will stand up to anyone to
protect the financial interests of hard-working American taxpayers.
Although I agree he is well qualified and a devoted civil servant, I
don't believe Mr. Williams has the bureaucratic and intestinal
fortitude to make the tough decisions at GSA when it matters.
Reports of alleged fraud on the Sun contract surfaced on his watch.
He knew about the alleged fraud. The taxpayers may have been cheated
out of tens of millions of dollars. As FAS Commissioner, he was the top
GSA official responsible for making the tough calls, and he chose not
to protect the taxpayers. He made the wrong choice. He is now
accountable for that decision. Because he failed to protect the
taxpayers at a crucial moment, we

[[Page 16200]]

should not elevate Mr. Williams to high office.
For all these reasons, I oppose his nomination to be GSA
Administrator.
Mr. Williams's nomination is now before the Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs Committee. On July 22, I wrote to the chairman,
Senator Lieberman, laying out the reasons behind my opposition to this
nomination.
I ask unanimous consent to have that letter printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

U.S. Senate,

Committee on Finance,

Washington, DC, July 22, 2008.
Hon. Joseph I. Lieberman,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Lieberman, I am writing to express opposition
to the nomination of Mr. Jim Williams to be the Administrator
of the General Services Administration (GSA).
My opposition to Mr. Williams' nomination is rooted in an
in-depth oversight investigation conducted by my staff in
2006-2007. This investigation focused on the re-negotiation
of a Multiple Award Schedule contract with Sun Microsystems,
Inc. for computer products and services. The contract was
initially awarded to the company in 1999. Sales on this
contract totaled $268,987,689.00.
The results of this investigation were presented in three
separate reports in October 2007. These reports were provided
to your committee, Administrator Doan, the House Oversight
Committee, the White House Chief of Staff, and GSA Inspector
General (IG). In addition, there was a follow-up report
issued by the U.S. Postal Service in May 2008. None of these
reports have been released to the public. However, on October
17, 2007, I spoke about the findings in these reports in very
general terms on the floor of the Senate. My remarks appear
on pages S12952-12954 of the Congressional Record.
At the time of my investigation, Mr. Williams was the
Commissioner of GSA's Federal Acquisition Service (FAS).
In a nutshell, all the evidence developed in my oversight
investigation appears to indicate that: 1) top-level GSA
management, including Administrator Doan and FAS Commissioner
Williams, may have improperly interfered in the ongoing
contract negotiations with Sun Microsystems in May-September
2006; and 2) Administrator Doan and Mr. Williams pressured
the GSA contracting officer to approve the new Sun contract
even though they both knew that the IG had detected alleged
fraud on existing Sun contract and had referred the matter to
the Department of Justice (DOJ) for possible prosecution/
litigation.
The IG auditors first blew the whistle on alleged fraud on
the Sun contract in 2005--at least a year before Mr. Williams
became FAS Commissioner.
The GSA IG auditors had the Sun contract under a microscope
for several years. They had uncovered extensive contract
violations, including potential civil and criminal fraud.
These problems were first reported to GSA acquisition
management in February 2005. The IG auditors briefed DOJ on
the alleged fraud on April 20, 2006. In April 2007, DOJ
charged Sun in a False Claims Act suit. That case is now
pending in the Arkansas Federal Court District (Norman Rille
and Neal Roberts vs Sun Microsystems, Inc.).
The GSA IT Acquisition Center staff was briefed on these
issues on May 2, 2006. FAS Commissioner Williams ``grilled''
the IG auditors about the alleged fraud and DOJ referral
during the contract ``Impasse'' briefing on August 14, 2006.
On August 29, 2006, Administrator Doan was briefed by the IG
audit team on the decision to refer the Sun contract to DOJ
for possible prosecution/litigation. Mr. Williams and Ms.
Doan discussed the alleged fraud on the Sun contract on
several different occasions in August 2006.
Despite the red warning flags raised by the IG auditors,
according to my findings, Administrator Doan and Mr. Williams
pressured the GSA contracting officer to sign the contract.
When that person refused to sign the contract, they had the
contracting officer removed and replaced under duress.
The record shows that Mr. Williams played a key role in the
removal of the contracting officer as follows:
A high-level meeting--known as the ``Baltimore Conference
Call''--was held on August 31, 2006. All the key players
participated, including Commissioner Williams. According to
interviews with a number of participants, Mr. Williams made
it very clear that the Sun contract was of ``strategic
importance'' in Administrator Doan's view, and it had to be
awarded. Still, the contracting officer refused to back down
in the face of mounting pressure from the very top. He had
dug in his heels and refused to sign what he considered a bad
contract. During interviews, the contracting officer told my
staff that he thought the price reduction clause, discounts,
and maintenance deals offered by Sun were ``essentially
worthless,'' and he said he was equally concerned about the
alleged fraud referral to DOJ. Mr. Williams then asked the
contracting officer if he wished to step down, and the
contracting officer accepted the offer.
Under standard GSA procedures, contracting officers make
the final decision on whether or not to sign a contract. They
have ``Go No Go'' authority. No other person is authorized to
preempt or otherwise interfere with that authority. So when
the contracting officer said ``No'' on the Sun contract, why
didn't that mean ``No''? Why didn't the story end there?
One of Mr. Williams' directors suggested that the
``Impasse'' in the negotiations was caused by the
intimidation of the contracting officer by IG auditors. On
September 5, 2006, in response to that complaint, Mr.
Williams lodged a quasi-formal complaint with the IG,
alleging that the IG auditors had made threatening statements
to GSA contracting officers.
Mr. Williams' complaint of IG auditor intimidation came
just five days after the contracting officer was removed and
four days before the new contract was signed. Mr. Williams
also passed these allegations to Administrator Doan.
Mr. Williams' allegations of IG auditor intimidation were
examined in detail by the GSA IG, by my staff, and by the
U.S. Postal Service IG. There is not one shred of evidence to
support those allegations. They appear to have been bogus
allegations. A senior official in the IG's office suggested
that Mr. Williams' allegations regarding IG auditor
intimidation were ``a smokescreen for things going on in the
agency itself.''
After forcing the contracting officer to step down, GSA
management appointed a new one. It took her just nine days to
negotiate a final deal with Sun. In interviews, the new
contracting officer claimed that she did not need to talk to
the IG auditors who had years of knowledge on the contract.
She said that she could solve the impasse in the negotiations
by listening to the contractor. Many of the provisions she
accepted were ones steadfastly opposed by the previous
contracting officer--the very same terms that led to the so-
called ``impasse'' and the removal of the previous
contracting officer. She even admitted during questioning
that she did not fully understand key provisions in the
contract she signed. She admitted making ``big oversights''
in some of the contract terms. I found these revelations very
disturbing. They raised questions about the motives behind
her appointment. She later received a $1,400 cash award for
signing off on the Sun contract.
Following my staff's interview of the new contracting
officer, I had grave concerns about the new contract. Was Sun
continuing to cheat on government discounts mandated by the
price reduction clause--as feared by the IG auditors? I
thought I would be remiss in not asking more questions.
Consequently, on June 5, 2007, I asked the IG to conduct an
audit of the new contract. Since Sun claimed it was such a
``good deal for America,'' I felt sure the company would rush
to cooperate. How wrong I was! For three months straight, Sun
stonewalled and procrastinated. Sun withheld information. Sun
fought the audit tooth and nail every step of the way. They
even lashed out at the GSA IG. Then suddenly and
unexpectedly, on September 13, 2008, Sun canceled the
contract. What happened? Why would Sun cancel a contract it
had fought so hard to get? Was Sun trying to avoid the audit?
Did Sun have something to hide? Something about this just
does not smell right.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Williams was the Commissioner of GSA's
Federal Acquisition Service at the time of the Sun/GSA
contract debacle. That made him the top dog overseeing and
managing the procurement of computer equipment and services
for the whole government. The Sun Microsystems contract was
being re-negotiated right under his nose. He was the top
official accountable for that contract. When he was informed
in August 2006 by IG auditors about the alleged fraud on the
Sun contract and the DOJ referral decision, he should have
brought the Sun contract negotiations to a screeching halt.
He should have called for a comprehensive, independent review
and/or audit and assessment of Sun's corrective action plan.
He should have carefully weighed the gravity of the fraud
allegations before proceeding any further.
Mr. Chairman, instead of heeding all the IG's warning
signals, Mr. Williams pushed the throttle to the firewall at
Administrator Doan's direction. The record shows pressure was
put on the contracting officer to sign a potentially bad
contract. When the contracting officer refused to bend under
pressure, Mr. Williams involved himself directly in the
contracting process. He participated in the decision to
remove that contracting officer from the Sun contract
negotiations. His actions eliminated the last standing
barrier to contract approval. In doing these things, he may
have improperly interfered in the contracting process and
hurt the taxpayers.
The alleged contract violations and alleged fraud on the
Sun contract, which supposedly occurred over a long period of
time, may have wasted tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer
money. Mr. Chairman, there must be more accountability in the
government contracting process. Elevating those who have been
detrimental to this process would

[[Page 16201]]

certainly be anti-accountability and anti-taxpayer. That
would clearly send the wrong message to the whole contracting
community.
For these reasons, I intend to oppose the nomination of Mr.
Williams to be the next Administrator at GSA, and would
expect your Committee to do so, too.
Your careful consideration of my concerns would be
appreciated.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Grassley,
Ranking Member.

____________________

CYPRUS

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, on July 20, 1974, Turkey invaded Cyprus.
Thirty four years later, Turkish troops continue to occupy 37 percent
of the land on Cyprus. During the occupation, some 180,000 Cypriots
became refugees and over 5,000 Cypriots were murdered.
The European Court of Human Rights recently found Turkey guilty of
violating the European Convention on Human Rights. Notably, 26 year-old
Solomos Solomou, was killed on August, 14, 1996 after being shot three
times by Turkish snipers while trying to climb a pole in order to
remove a Turkish flag from its mast. The killing happened after the
funeral of his cousin, Tassos Isaak, who was himself beaten to death on
August 11, 1996 by a Turkish mob while taking part in an anti-
occupation demonstration.
On March 12th of this year, I sent a congratulatory letter to the
newly elected Cypriot President Christofias. In addition to a new
President in the Republic of Cyprus, his election represents a new
direction for the Republic of Cyprus. I commend President Christofias
for the intensification of efforts to reach a just, viable, and
functional solution to the Cyprus problem. I believe this is a unique
time to capitalize on the commitment made to find a solution and I am
optimistic that the working groups and technical committees will
prepare the necessary groundwork for full-fledged negotiation. However,
I also believe that any solution that will reunite the island, its
people, its institutions and its economy and must come from the
Cypriots themselves.
On September 25, 2007, I introduced S. Res. 331, which calls on the
United States Government to initiate a new effort to help Turkey
understand the benefits that will accrue to it as a result of ending
its military occupation of Cyprus. In addition, the resolution urges
the Government of Turkey to immediately begin the withdrawal of its
military occupation forces. Ultimately, it is on their shoulders to
prove their good will and I hope they do so promptly.
As Cypriot-Americans join with Cypriots from throughout the world to
help to rebuild their homeland, and as they seek to secure an
economically prosperous state free of illegal occupation, I will stand
by them. I will work to ensure that the Turkish occupation comes to an
end.
This week, we remember those who perished on Cyprus, and honor those
who survived and who continue to live under Turkish occupation. We have
not forgotten and our thoughts and prayers are with them and their
families.
Remembering together the events of July 20, 1974 in solidarity gives
reverence to historical events we cannot afford to forget as we move
forward to a peaceful, just solution and a hopeful tomorrow.

____________________

REMEMBERING SENATOR JESSE HELMS

Mr. CORKER. Mr. Presdient, today we remember and celebrate the life
of the great Senator from North Carolina, Jesse Helms.
Senator Helms dedicated much of his life to serving his country and
the people of North Carolina. He developed a lasting legacy as a man
who held to his convictions and championed the causes he believed in so
deeply.
He began his career in the U.S. Navy during World War II, where he
was assigned as a recruiter. After the war, he became involved in North
Carolina politics and campaigned for Senator Willis Smith, later
serving on his staff. Senator Helms continued to establish himself,
working as a political commentator for local Raleigh newspapers and
radio stations. In 1957, Senator Helms was elected to the Raleigh city
council, where he served with the same conviction that he would later
bring to the Senate.
He was first elected to the Senate in 1972 and was reelected four
more times, making him the longest serving U.S. Senator in North
Carolina history. He quickly became known for his unfailing dedication
to uphold traditional American values and protect freedom. He said,
``The challenge is always before us. Whenever we lose sight of the
principles that mattered to our founders we run into trouble.''
During his tenure in the Senate, Helms served on the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee and was chairman from 1995 to 2001. Under his
leadership, the committee played a powerful role in setting U.S.
foreign policy.
Senator Helms will be greatly missed and remembered as one of the
most influential Senators of his time.

____________________

TRIBUTE TO DON MITCHELL

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, last week marked the end of a distinguished
and honorable career in Government service for one of the most widely
respected professional staff members on the Senate Select Committee on
Intelligence. Today, I wish to pay tribute to this gentleman--Mr. Don
Mitchell.
For over 24 years, Don Mitchell devoted his life to public service.
Remarkably, except for a 2-year period when he served as the Director
of Intelligence Programs for the National Security Council, 22 of those
years were spent here in the Senate, first as a national security
legislative assistant for Senator John Glenn and then as a professional
staff member for the Intelligence Committee. Senator Glenn knew a good
thing when he saw it, so in 1989, he asked Don to move to the
Intelligence Committee staff. As they say, the rest is history .
In a world where politics often seems to define who we are and with
whom we associate, Don transcended those barriers. He earned the
respect of Members and colleagues on both sides of the aisle. His work
ethic--often evidenced by long days and late nights--was admired by
all. It comes as no surprise that Don's reputation is well known not
only here in the Senate but throughout the intelligence community with
whom he worked so closely through the years. During my tenure on the
Intelligence Committee, and in particular since becoming the vice
chairman, I have benefited from Don's expertise and seasoned judgment
in analyzing some of our most sensitive national security programs. We
have been fortunate to have him for so many years.
We all know that the demands of working here in Congress often take
the greatest toll on those who support us and sustain us in life--our
families. For selflessly giving Don to us for so many years, his wife
Grace, son Logan, and daughter Ella deserve our gratitude. We thank
them for their sacrifices through these many years.
Ensuring our great Nation's security is a high calling and one of
tremendous responsibility. Through his service to the Intelligence
Committee, the Senate, and the United States of America, Don Mitchell
has answered this call with characteristic professionalism, integrity,
and perseverance. We wish him the very best in his future pursuits. May
God bless him and his family.

____________________

``PLANET'S'' WORK AT ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY

Mr. BURR. Mr. President, this week marked the 11th anniversary of the
Professional Landcare Network's ``Renewal and Remembrance'' event. Each
year for more than a decade, hundreds of lawn care, landscape and tree
care specialists from the Professional Landcare Network, PLANET, donate
their time and expertise to refurbish the grounds of Arlington National
Cemetery.
Arlington National Cemetery is one of the most hallowed places in all
of America. President Lincoln established the grounds at Arlington as a
military cemetery in 1864. By the end of the Civil War, Arlington
housed 16,000

[[Page 16202]]

graves. It now serves as the final resting place for over 300,000 of
our Nation's most distinguished service personnel and public officials,
including hundreds of distinguished North Carolinians. Veterans from
all of the Nation's wars are interred at Arlington, from the American
Revolution through the present wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The
gravesites of these men and women span an area of 624 acres.
The beauty and simple elegance of Arlington's grounds is renowned
throughout the world, drawing hundreds of thousands of visitors,
mourners, and tourists every year. The work that goes into maintaining
Arlington is a reflection of the honor and reverence that America has
for our veterans and leaders. The members of PLANET share in this
reverence. Through their work at Arlington each year, they have
demonstrated a special level of commitment to the memory of our
countrymen who have made some of the greatest sacrifices.
Many PLANET members who volunteered their time and expertise this
past week have a personal connection to Arlington, either through
relatives or friends who are buried there or through their own military
service. But whether or not they have a family or service connection to
the cemetery, all of the volunteers care deeply about maintaining
Arlington as a place of dignity and respect in recognition of those who
have served the public good and those who have made the ultimate
sacrifice.
Their work does not go unnoticed by the family members of those who
are buried at Arlington, nor does it go unnoticed by the membership of
the U.S. Senate. I applaud the generosity of the PLANET members who
devoted their work to honor our Nation's servicemembers.

____________________

IDAHOANS SPEAK OUT ON HIGH ENERGY PRICES

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, in mid-June, I asked Idahoans to share with
me how high energy prices are affecting their lives, and they responded
by the hundreds. The stories, numbering over 1,000, are heartbreaking
and touching. To respect their efforts, I am submitting every e-mail
sent to me through [email protected] .gov to the Congressional
Record. This is not an issue that will be easily resolved, but it is
one that deserves immediate and serious attention, and Idahoans deserve
to be heard. Their stories not only detail their struggles to meet
everyday expenses, but also have suggestions and recommendations as to
what Congress can do now to tackle this problem and find solutions that
last beyond today. I ask unanimous consent that today's letters be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

Not affected much yet. But then we operate on a CASH basis
around here, so we are not drowning in credit card debt while
the cost of gas and food skyrockets. Do not drive 45 miles to
Sandpoint just to shop anymore.
Dorothy.
____

I want to thank you for keeping us informed of what is
going on from your point of view. I, myself, am very
disappointed in the lack of positive actions that affect the
``people'' of this great nation with regards to fuel. We have
been listening to lots of talk and promises for years since
the shot across the bow by foreign oil in the seventies. We
are the father of nuclear power and seem to be last in the
world to take advantage of it. Let us get with the program.
There are far too many environmental laws that do not allow
us to develop as we should. Let us look at these laws or,
better yet, suspend all environmental considerations during
this emergency until the economy and prices get back to
normal. Let us start tomorrow and take advantage of our own
resources in this country and get away from foreign oil, we
can do it and do it fast. Let private industry do what they
are capable of and let the government get out of the way
other than to remove regulations that stop progress. There
are too many regulations on the books now and, in many cases,
they contradict each other.
[Some examples:] hydrogen fuel cells for housing and
transportation, and solar energy for heating water and
electricity. Every new house built in this nation should be
required from now on to use solar and wind power as much as
possible and be capable of upgrade as new technologies come
on line. The power grid as we now know it is in big trouble,
so let us start getting off of it. Do not even think about
getting rid of hydroelectric power from our dams. We should
be adding more as we should to supply the growing demands and
not buckle under to a handful of tree huggers as was the case
in Boise County on the Payette River a few years ago.
I think your estimate of $200 a month for fuel is real
conservative; in many cases, it is double that. I have
watched mushroom soup go from $.32 a can to $1.50+, and that
is totally unacceptable. To me, making fuel out of our food
supply is a little crazy. Let us not get carried away with
the biofuel stuff until we know more about it. As I
understand ethanol, it is not good for the environment and it
takes more fuel to make it than it will produce. Petroleum
and corn are the main ingredients in many, many, many
everyday items I do not think most Americans are aware of; we
can do better.
I have been personally hit by this fuel and food crisis as
I just retired from my state job to be able to visit my
grandkids and relatives and peruse our family tree and to get
a break. I joined the U.S. Navy in 1963 when I was seventeen
and have been going like hell ever since. I was medically
retired from the US Navy with a medical discharge and VA
disability. I am now one of the folks on a fixed income, and
these prices did not appear on the horizon when the plans to
retire were made. I am not sure how this will affect the big
picture, but I do know I cannot travel as I had planned, and
that is sad for the whole family. I have folks from Wisconsin
to all the states in the Northwest to California. I did a
short trip to Winnemucca, Nevada, from Boise, Idaho, for a
softball game my granddaughter was in; round trip gas was
$225 for my camper; it used to be $50. Where will it stop? I
thank you for your letter and please put pressure on whoever
is in the way to immediate progress to get out of the way.
Remember the Manhattan Project and the first moon shot; it
CAN be done.
Hal, Boise.
____

My husband is a logger and, because of the high price of
gas, he has been off from work for six months. I wish every
Congressman had to live on the same amount of money a week
that we have tried to live on $300. We only go into town once
every 8 to 10 days, and when we do go to town, we never go
anywhere that is not on our list. Last month it cost us over
$100 just to go into town four times. It [seems that Congress
doesn't have] regard for the working man's life. [Perhaps]
they should [try living the same way] we do and I am sure
their outlook on our future would be different. We need to
drill for oil in our own country and then do not let the gas
companies sell the oil to other countries. It is time for a
change and please let the change start soon.
Ruby.
____

I do not like the high gas prices, but what I detest is
that, for years, it seems that many have preferred to posture
and bicker about drilling/not drilling for oil, expanding/
limiting refinery growth, paying lip service to yet-to-be-
available alternative energy sources, and demonizing the oil
companies rather than making adult, farsighted decisions
about our energy needs and creating a responsible policy to
meet our needs.
The same actions that could have--and should have--been
taken 10, 15, 20 years ago to put us in a better place today
are still being proposed today and ignored again, often by
the same people who made the faulty decisions about them
originally. It is something that wouldn't be tolerated in the
private sector, where leadership would have been fired long
ago for such incompetence. Congress needs to put the energy
needs and associated security aspects of our country first
and take prompt, forceful action or have the decency to get
out of the way for someone who will.
If we are not currently knowledgeable enough or committed
enough to quickly develop a full-blown, workable energy
policy, here's a temporary policy until we do:
Drilling may not be the answer, but it is what we need to
do while we discover or develop the answer.
Spread the word, Senator, and leave behind the short-term
thinking of the past!
Gregory.
____

The fuel prices are totally out of control. My husband and
I run a charter fishing business, which means we have to use
hundreds of gallons of fuel every day. The most disappointing
part of the whole process is that the government could change
things in a heartbeat. I am tired of hearing that car
manufacturers have until 2015 to come up with vehicles which
will be improved to give around 35 miles per gallon. That is
the way the government tries to ``ease'' the citizens'
concerns of skyrocketing fuel prices and allay fears of
global warming. Right now, as I type this, there is a
solution to the problem, an almost immediate solution, and I
know there is not only one of them out there. One gentleman
in Idaho has invented a carburetor which can be used on any
type of vehicle and will increase fuel efficiency to around
70 miles to the gallon. So why, I ask with tears in my eyes,
does the government

[[Page 16203]]

not take a stand and mass produce the carburetors? Is not
that a novel idea. . . . . imagine what effect that would
have on the demand for fuel and therefore the quantity of
fuel we would need to purchase from price gougers? The USA
can put people on the moon but coming up with fuel efficient
transportation is just way beyond their scope of
capabilities. Why not take a stand and insist on an immediate
improvement in fuel efficiency standards? That would at least
be a start. Maybe it wouldn't solve our demand for fuel but
it might cut the demand in half. What about this story
below--that explains how the government manipulates the
public--it is a joke:
Ron Brandt: 90 MPG Carburetor--Ron Brandt is the inventor
of the perm-mag motor. He is of retirement age. When he was a
young man, he invented a 90-mpg carburetor. He was paid a
visit by a man from Standard Oil, another man, and two men
wearing U.S. Marshal uniforms. They told him that if he ever
made another carburetor, they would kill him, his wife, and
two young children. He was quickly persuaded that his life
wasn't worth a ``damn'' carburetor. He happened to think to
memorize the badge numbers of the two U.S. Marshals, and so
had an attorney in Washington, DC check with the U.S.
Marshal's office. They had no record of the two badge
numbers.
Rene.
____

I normally go to Colorado to get my grandchildren for the
summer; however, this year I have had to put it off for a
while. Because my parents are both in their late 80s and my
mother had cancer last year, I go to Florida every year
around Thanksgiving. Having to save more for airline tickets
means I do not have money for the local trips I normally take
during the summer. I have even had to curtail my fishing. I
have had to stop or go less often to my various camping
spots. We generally have a family get together, but we are
not this year because of the expense some would experience in
traveling here. In short, we are traveling less, going less
distance when we do travel and spending less at hotels and
restaurants, but we are seeing less of our extended family.
Sheila.
____

I am not surprised by the ``high'' prices for fuel. Most of
Europe has paid these prices for years; when I was in Germany
in the mid-80s the price was about $4/gallon. We have kept
the fuel prices artificially low here in the U.S. for various
reasons. This has led to waste (Hummers, Escalades, etc.) and
disincentive for change/improvements in our fuel/
transportation situation. I am happy to see the prices climb,
as this will force conservation, alternative energy types and
improvements in fuel mileage, etc. We declared that this
situation would never occur again in the early 70s with the
OPEC slowdown on oil production--seems that our collective
memories are rather short.
Gustaf, Moscow.
____

All of my family is being hit very hard by the gas prices.
I do not understand why anyone would stand against us
drilling oil on our own land and/or working towards any type
of energy that would make us self-sufficient against our
enemies. I am ready to drill here in the U.S. Please support
us. Another question: why, if we are spending billions of
dollars supporting and rebuilding IRAQ, are we not getting
some of their oil?
Cindi.
____

As soon as the price of fossil fuels, and the electorate's
reaction to it, drives the political will in Washington and
the rest of the world's capitals to get serious about making
policy that threatens to bring about the conversion of our
energy paradigm to self-renewing, non polluting, less
profitable energy sources, which are available, simple,
plentiful and inexhaustible, look for oil to drop to $30 and
gasoline prices to drop back below $2/gallon. Through long
experience, those who put profits above the health and well-
being of future generations have learned how to milk the most
possible money out of the market without killing the milk
cow. The reason [some have] always been opposed to the REAL
emphasis on self-renewing energy technologies that is needed
to help those burgeoning industries get a level playing field
with the fossil fuels powerhouses is that they are
[financially connected to the oil, gas and coal industries.
Recent presidential administrations have not set an example,
regardless of the party affiliation of the president.] And
THAT, Senator, is why you now have a special email address
for remarks about fossil fuel prices. Thanks for your
concern. Wish it had come many years earlier!
William, Tetonia.
____

Thank you for your email information on your stand on the
economy and its ever-
increasing price increases.
I am a business owner and self employed. I care for two
adult handicapped women and I am a co-partner in our painting
business with my husband. We know that the increase of one
major product strongly affects all products and services,
specifically oil and electricity. I grew up in Alaska, and
lived there for 18 years, especially at the time the Alaska
Pipeline was put in place. My husband worked in the oil
fields of Wyoming in the early 1980s. We have personally seen
the expansion and development of natural resources. We now
reside in Eastern Idaho. We have seen the increased use of
wind towers to generate wind electricity. Knowing the days of
wind compared to the days of no wind in Eastern Idaho, we
appreciate the justification of tapping this source of
energy.
I have seen inventions that create more economical use of
the gasoline powered vehicles, and then the invention is
halted, or made to disappear, because it gets people too good
gas mileage. Hydro engines are an example, and gasoline
engines that get 50 or more miles to the gallon. I witnessed
the electrical price increases every year for the last 15
years. While the average citizen just has to sit by and take
it, I think it is criminal how those who govern the sources
of electricity and oil consider their resources a priceless
commodity, and are encouraged to increase the price of them
at a drop of a suggestion. It is interesting how we create
the need and dependency for electricity and oil, only to have
created a destructive power to control the price and supply
of the need.
Sometimes I consider the foresight of our forefathers
recognizing the impact that greed and pride which puts one's
value above another, how this concept seems to be the ever-
increasing normal opinion of controlling business, and how
they can take advantage of those who contribute to their
wealth. I believe the answers are already there, the
solutions of resource and need have already been developed,
but the pride of those who control outweighs the circumstance
of financial availability for the everyday person.
It is great to acknowledge that gas prices went
ridiculously high, but the reasons for them are at best made
to protect those who imposed the increases. I am constantly
reminded of the gas shortage of the late 1970s. People lined
up, only being allowed to purchase a few dollars of gas to
get to work. The biggest pretense for the reasoning power
behind this was to increase gas prices; there was NO shortage
then, there is NO shortage now. Those who have seen and know
the process of control understand how a little information is
necessary, but the full puzzle pieces kept from being put in
place can create loopholes and safety nets for those in the
controlling power of supply and demand. The public of America
does not know the amount of capped off and reserved oil wells
drilled 20, 30 or more years ago, here in America. We, as a
public, are not informed as to the actual amount of oil that
truly goes out of Alaska. One could surmise to the extent,
because of the `dividend' cash given to its residents for
over 20 years now.
America's, Idaho citizens see what is really going on; we
have just been conditioned to have the feeling we have no
power or say in how it goes in our favor. We have been taught
by the public system that government and its process are left
to elected officials; that supply and demand concepts are in
the control of those with the most material wealth and power.
If our elected officials really want to help make a
difference, then say what needs to be done and the process to
make it happen. The power of wealth may be strong, but the
power of numbers may overturn that philosophy one day.
History repeats itself often. America became America because
a repressed people sought to be free of ``tyranny.'' It is a
process of greed and power that creates tyranny, and so the
process will continue until the greed and power of those who
impose it on others cease.
I appreciate your time in hearing my thoughts on the
matter.
Sincerely,
Annette.
____

We are on fixed income (retired). Our annual income is
about $50,000. All our vehicles are debt-free, but they are
1999 models. Our car gets 31 mpg, and the pickup gets 16 mpg.
We cannot afford to buy new more energy-efficient vehicles,
so if the auto industry suddenly produces a car that gets 40
mpg, we cannot afford to buy it.
We have family in Denver and Alaska. We had planned to
travel to both places periodically, but cannot due to the
energy prices.
We do not have a choice to buy our gas at a reduction in
that all the stations in our town are basically at the same
rate per gallon (price fixing??).
Our house cost and household energy costs are rather stable
at this time so the excess funds needed for gas/diesel has to
be taken from our grocery bill and optional health care
elections that we may need.
The rhetoric about how Congress is going to fix matters--it
is not as simple as waving a magic wand. Nothing I have heard
thus far is immediate unless our Middle East ``friends''
decide to be compassionate toward a country that has
volunteered to free them from the enslaving control of
dictators.
We need immediate relief . . . not platitudes about ``plans
on the horizon.'' Unfortunately, no one has made long range
energy plans and now we are paying for it.
Congress has succumbed to the environmentalists and has
forgotten ``Joe Average Citizen.'' This is my opinion, but
nevertheless is true.
Robert, Idaho Falls.

[[Page 16204]]

____________________

ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS

______

TRIBUTE TO HERBERT R. FISCHER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am pleased to ask my colleagues
to join me in recognizing Herb Fischer as he retires from a long and
distinguished career in education. His service and commitment to
California's schoolchildren, and to his community, have provided an
example for us all.
Dr. Fischer received his undergraduate degree in business
administration from California Polytechnic San Luis Obispo. He later
earned his teaching credential, master's degree, and doctorate from the
University of California, Riverside. Dr. Fischer served his 38-year
career in education in San Bernardino County, beginning as a classroom
teacher. He later served as a principal and district administrator in
the San Bernardino City Unified School District, where he remained for
22 years. One of his chief accomplishments was his administrative
support for San Bernardino City Unified's Desegregation and Integration
Magnet School Program. This has been a model in providing quality
programs for all students and offers parents and students more
educational choices. Dr. Fischer also served as superintendent of the
Colton Joint Unified School District for 7 years. There he directed a
staff of over 2,500 employees. In 1998 Dr. Fischer was elected to serve
as County Superintendent, where he oversees the programs and operations
of the County Superintendent of Schools Office, which has an annual
operating budget of $250 million.
Under Dr. Fischer's leadership, the County Superintendent of Schools
Office has prioritized services to support school districts' efforts to
improve student performance and accountability. This has included
closing achievement and access gaps for underperforming schools and
underrepresented students, improving postsecondary education and career
readiness, and ensuring safe school campuses.
Among other accomplishments during Dr. Fischer's tenure, the County
Superintendent of Schools Office lead a county-wide emphasis to improve
student performance collectively with district superintendents,
resulting in increased scores on the State Academic Performance Index
for 7 consecutive years. He also was responsible for the construction
of the county's first permanent school site, the Dorothy Gibson County
High School in Ontario, and six additional schools to improve housing
for the 6,000-plus special and alternate education students served by
the county. Dr. Fischer also established three regional councils to
provide seamless education, and close access and achievement gaps for
students, and launched the Alliance for Education initiative that has
over 1,500 business, labor, community, and faith-based partners working
with public schools to improve the college, career, and labor readiness
of students.
For his outstanding leadership and contributions to education and the
community, Dr. Fischer has been recognized by many organizations. He
was awarded the University of California, Riverside Alumni
Association's prestigious Alumni Public Service Award for his service
to the public sector. He has been recognized by the Rialto/Fontana
Chapter of the NAACP, the Victor Valley African American, and Inland
Empire Hispanic Chambers of Commerce for building collaborative
relationships to benefit the education of all students throughout San
Bernardino County. Most recently, the Mount Baldy Chapter of the
Building Industry Association recognized Dr. Fischer for his leadership
in developing partnerships with business leaders.
Throughout his long career in education and public service, Dr.
Herbert R. Fischer has consistently provided for stronger communities
and higher educational attainment, and he has provided a model of
exemplary service to us all. I am pleased to ask my colleagues to join
me in congratulating him on his retirement.

____________________

PRAISE FOR THANKSUSA AND TENNESSEE SONGWRITERS

Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, today I praise the efforts of
ThanksUSA and two of Tennessee's outstanding songwriters, Leslie
Satcher and Monty Holmes. This weekend, these parties will join
together to perform a charity concert for our country's Armed Forces.
ThanksUSA is a nonpartisan charitable endeavor to encourage Americans
of all ages to ``thank'' the men and women of the United States Armed
Forces by providing academic scholarships for their children and
spouses. ThanksUSA offers two interconnected programs: the national
treasure hunt and the military family scholarship program. The treasure
hunt raises awareness and money for the scholarship program.
This weekend's charity concert would not be possible without the
talent and performances of Ms. Leslie Satcher and Mr. Monty Holmes. In
the traditional Tennessee spirit, Ms. Satcher and Mr. Holmes have
volunteered to perform their own country music hits to entertain the
attendees.
With dreams of making it big in country music, Satcher moved to
Nashville to put her song writing skills to the test. After a church
friend encouraged her to show her work to Larry Strickland and Naomi
Judd, Satcher's career in country music officially began, and her
dreams became a reality. Leslie is no stranger to charity concerts as
she is frequently found on stage performing for benefits with other
country music celebrities.
Another gifted songwriter and performer, Monty Holmes, will join
Satcher in the evening's benefit concert. At a young age, country music
was instilled in Monty Holmes. With a grandfather who played the
fiddle, guitar and piano, Monty grew up with a love of music. As a
young adult, Holmes moved to Nashville and quickly gained a reputation
for both his voice and his words. Writing songs for some of country
music's greatest artists, Holmes quickly earned a prominent place in
country music.
It is a privilege to serve in the Senate on behalf of Tennesseans
such as Leslie Satcher and Monty Holmes, who personify the voluntarism
and patriotism of Tennessee. Leslie and Monty have shared many stories,
memories, and inspirations through the mouthpiece of country music. I
thank them and ThanksUSA for their efforts. I cannot think of a more
valuable way to express our gratitude for our troops than with the gift
of education.

____________________

TRIBUTE TO JUDY GORMAN

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, today I wish to offer my heartfelt
congratulations to a South Dakotan who has been very committed to the
educational well-being of the young people in my State.
For the past 6 years, Judy Gorman has served as executive director of
the Department of Defense program, STARBASE. Exclusively designed for
young adults, STARBASE provides science, math, technology and
engineering skills through hands-on experience in aviation and space-
related fields. She has served as an effective liaison with schools,
military, community, and business leaders and has worked tirelessly to
develop a superb curriculum in the community of the Black Hills.
In early August, Judy will retire from the program she has worked so
hard to promote and foster. While executive director she has overseen
191 STARBASE classes of over 4,800 students, 2 manufacturing classes of
35 students, and 5 ``Feel the Power'' graduate classes. Her dedication
to the STARBASE program was grounded in a 23-year career as an
elementary counselor, special educator, and fourth grade teacher in the
Rapid City Area Schools and Meade School District. She also has served
as the administrator for Project Achieve, a summer youth program for
at-risk teens in the Rapid City area. For many years she supported and
guided her husband, Mike Gorman, in his excellent leadership as the
Adjutant General of the South Dakota National Guard.
I commend Judy for her years of great stewardship with the STARBASE
program. I had the privilege of touring

[[Page 16205]]

the facilities a few years ago, witnessing first-hand the importance of
the program and commitment Judy brings to her students. There are few
better rewards for an educator than witnessing countless students
expanding their horizons, applying science, math, and engineering in
aviation and space-related fields of study. You may expect this from
high school, college, or graduate students, but Judy has been able to
``plant the seeds of learning'' in the minds of fourth graders. Those
seeds will undoubtedly result in a bright future as these youngsters
grow up to pursue their dreams and goals. Many will look fondly to
Judy's great guidance and tutorship.
On the occasion of her retirement, I want to wish Judy all the best.
I want to thank her for her tireless work and dedication to the
STARBASE program and her commitment to the youth of South Dakota. The
legacy of her work will rest in the minds of these young people, for
which I thank her for her service on behalf of all South Dakotans, and
wish her well in her retirement.

____________________

HONORING COUNCILMAN KEVIN KINGSTON

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I wish to acknowledge Councilman
Kevin Kingston, Sr. of Slidell for his dedicated service to the State
of Louisiana. I would like to take a few moments to remark on his
accomplishments.
Mr. Kingston was born in Bay St. Louis, Mississippi, but resided in
Slidell since 1979. His nickname was ``Kingfish,'' and he was truly a
man of the people. He owned Kingfish Seafood Market on Pontchartrain
Drive and also ran Lil' Ray's Seafood Restaurant for 18 years until the
1990s. Mr. Kingston had gusto for life and food; however, it was his
service on the City Council that gave him his greatest pleasure. He was
elected in 1998 in District D representing west-northwest Slidell and
in 2006 was elected to serve as Councilman-at-Large representing the
entire city. In the past year, he took a special interest in helping a
handful of residents replace their storm-damaged mobile homes. His
measure, which passed on the council's third try in almost 2 years,
amended a section in the city's zoning code that prohibited people from
placing new trailers in the city even if the old ones were destroyed by
an act of God. A popular public servant and caregiver, he would often
pay people's water and light bills, gestures that displayed his big
heart and kind spirit.
Kevin Kingston passed away Thursday, July 3, after a long battle with
liver disease that included a liver transplant in 2003. He is survived
by not only family members but also the grateful city of Slidell and
council who have lost a great man and great leader. Mr. Kingston opened
his heart to everyone he came in contact with and his generosity and
friendship will be deeply missed.
Thus, today, I honor a fellow Louisianan, Kevin Kingston, Sr., and
thank him and his family for his dedicated service to our State and
Nation.

____________________

MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT

Messages from the President of the United States were communicated to
the Senate by Mr. Williams, one of his secretaries.

____________________

EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED

As in executive session the Presiding Officer laid before the Senate
messages from the President of the United States submitting sundry
nominations and withdrawals which were referred to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
(The nominations received today are printed at the end of the Senate
proceedings.)

____________________

MESSAGES FROM THE HOUSE

At 11:16 a.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered
by Mrs. Cole, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House has
agreed to the following concurrent resolution, in which it requests the
concurrence of the Senate:

H. Con. Res. 364. Concurrent resolution recognizing the
Significance of National Caribbean-American Heritage Month.

The message also announced that pursuant to section 214(a) of the
Help America Vote Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 15344), the Minority Leader
reappoints the following member to the Election Assistance Commission
Board of Advisors: Mr. Thomas A. Fuentes of Lake Forest, California.
____

At 2:39 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered
by Mrs. Cole, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House has
passed the following bills, in which it requests the concurrence of the
Senate:

H. R. 6532. An act to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to restore the Highway Trust Fund balance.
H. R. 6545. An act to require the Director of National
Intelligence to conduct a national intelligence assessment on
national security and energy security Issues.

The message also announced that the House has agreed to the following
concurrent resolution, in which it requests the concurrence of the
Senate:

H. Con. Res. 395. Concurrent resolution authorizing the
printing of an additional number of copies of the 23rd
edition of the pocket version of the United States
Constitution.
____

At 7:25 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered
by Ms. Niland, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House has
agreed to the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 5501) to
authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to provide
assistance to foreign countries to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria, and for other purposes.

____________________

MEASURES REFERRED

The following bills were read the first and the second times by
unanimous consent, and referred as indicated:

H.R. 5235. An act to establish the Ronald Reagan Centennial
Commission; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
H.R. 6532. An act to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to restore the Highway Trust Fund balance; to the
Committee on Finance.
H.R. 6545. An act to require the Director of National
Intelligence to conduct a national intelligence assessment on
national security and energy security issues; to the
Committee on Intelligence.

The following concurrent resolution was read, and referred as
indicated:

H. Con. Res. 364. Concurrent resolution recognizing the
Significance of National Caribbean-American Heritage Month;
to the Committee on the Judiciary.

____________________

MEASURES READ THE FIRST TIME

The following bill was read the first time:

S. 3335. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other
purposes.

____________________

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

The following reports of committees were submitted:

By Mr. AKAKA, from the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, with
an amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment
to the title:
S. 2617. A bill to increase, effective as of December 1,
2008, the rates of compensation for veterans with service-
connected disabilities and the rates of dependency and
indemnity compensation for the survivors of certain disabled
veterans (Rept. No. 110-430).

____________________

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the
first and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated:

By Mr. GREGG (for himself and Mr. Sununu):
S. 3323. A bill to provide weatherization and home heating
assistance to low income households, and to provide a heating
oil tax credit for middle income households; to the Committee
on Finance.
By Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself and Mr. Coleman):
S. 3324. A bill to provide leadership regarding science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics education programs,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Specter, Mr. Bayh, Mr.
Voinovich, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr. Cornyn):

[[Page 16206]]

S. 3325. A bill to enhance remedies for violations of
intellectual property laws, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. DURBIN:
S. 3326. A bill to authorize the Secretary of Education to
award grants to local education agencies to improve college
access; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions.
By Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. Grassley):
S. 3327. A bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security
Act to improve the State plan amendment option for providing
home and community-based services under the Medicaid program,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
By Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Lieberman):
S. 3328. A bill to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002
to provide for a one-year extension of other transaction
authority; to the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs.
By Mr. SALAZAR:
S. 3329. A bill to amend the Energy Employees Occupational
Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 to expand the
category of individuals eligible for compensation, to improve
the procedures for providing compensation, and to improve
transparency, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Smith):
S. 3330. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to modify the deduction for domestic production activities
for film and television productions, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself and Mr. Crapo):
S. 3331. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to require that the payment of the manufacturers' excise tax
on recreational equipment be paid quarterly; to the Committee
on Finance.
By Mr. BAYH (for himself and Mr. Lugar):
S. 3332. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to
direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide
comprehensive health care to children of Vietnam veterans
born with Spina Bifida, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
By Mr. STEVENS (for himself and Ms. Murkowski):
S. 3333. A bill to amend the Whaling Convention Act so that
it expressly applies to aboriginal subsistence whaling, and
in particular, authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to set
bowhead whale catch limits in the event that the IWC fails to
adopt such limits; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
By Mrs. CLINTON:
S. 3334. A bill to strengthen communities through English
literacy, civic education, and immigrant integration
programs; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself and Mr. Reid):
S. 3335. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other
purposes; read the first time.

____________________

SUBMISSION OF CONCURRENT AND SENATE RESOLUTIONS

The following concurrent resolutions and Senate resolutions were
read, and referred (or acted upon), as indicated:

By Mr. GRAHAM (for himself, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Bayh,
Mr. Biden, Mr. Bond, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Brown, Mr.
Brownback, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Burr, Mr. Byrd, Mr.
Cardin, Mr. Casey, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Coburn, Mr.
Cochran, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Dole,
Mr. Durbin, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Isakson, Ms.
Landrieu, Mr. Levin, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Martinez, Mr.
McCain, Mrs. McCaskill, Mr. Menendez, Ms. Mikulski,
Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. Obama, Mr. Rockefeller,
Mr. Salazar, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Specter, Mr. Vitter,
Mr. Warner, and Mr. Wicker):
S. Res. 622. A resolution designating the week beginning
September 7, 2008, as ``National Historically Black Colleges
and Universities Week''; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. ENZI (for himself and Mr. Barrasso):
S. Res. 623. A resolution recognizing the importance of the
role of the Lander Trail in the settlement of the American
West on the 150th anniversary of the Lander Trail; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.

____________________

ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS

S. 439

At the request of Mr. Reid, the name of the Senator from Arizona (Mr.
McCain) was added as a cosponsor of S. 439, a bill to amend title 10,
United States Code, to permit certain retired members of the uniformed
services who have a service-connected disability to receive both
disability compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs for
their disability and either retired pay by reason of their years of
military service or Combat-Related Special Compensation.

S. 535

At the request of Mr. Dodd, the name of the Senator from Michigan
(Mr. Levin) was added as a cosponsor of S. 535, a bill to establish an
Unsolved Crimes Section in the Civil Rights Division of the Department
of Justice, and an Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Investigative Office in
the Civil Rights Unit of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and for
other purposes.

S. 573

At the request of Ms. Stabenow, the name of the Senator from Oregon
(Mr. Wyden) was added as a cosponsor of S. 573, a bill to amend the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Public Health Service Act
to improve the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of heart disease,
stroke, and other cardiovascular diseases in women.

S. 604

At the request of Mr. Lautenberg, the name of the Senator from Rhode
Island (Mr. Reed) was added as a cosponsor of S. 604, a bill to amend
title 10, United States Code, to limit increases in the certain costs
of health care services under the health care programs of the
Department of Defense, and for other purposes.

S. 638

At the request of Mr. Roberts, the names of the Senator from Maine
(Ms. Collins) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) were added
as cosponsors of S. 638, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to provide for collegiate housing and infrastructure grants.

S. 785

At the request of Mr. Dodd, the name of the Senator from Maine (Ms.
Snowe) was added as a cosponsor of S. 785, a bill to amend title 4 of
the United States Code to limit the extent to which States may tax the
compensation earned by nonresident telecommuters.

S. 803

At the request of Mr. Rockefeller, the name of the Senator from
Vermont (Mr. Sanders) was added as a cosponsor of S. 803, a bill to
repeal a provision enacted to end Federal matching of State spending of
child support incentive payments.

S. 999

At the request of Mr. Cochran, the name of the Senator from Arkansas
(Mrs. Lincoln) was added as a cosponsor of S. 999, a bill to amend the
Public Health Service Act to improve stroke prevention, diagnosis,
treatment, and rehabilitation.

S. 1512

At the request of Mrs. Boxer, the name of the Senator from Michigan
(Mr. Levin) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1512, a bill to amend part E
of title IV of the Social Security Act to expand Federal eligibility
for children in foster care who have attained age 18.

S. 1638

At the request of Mr. Leahy, the name of the Senator from Hawaii (Mr.
Akaka) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1638, a bill to adjust the
salaries of Federal justices and judges, and for other purposes.

S. 1942

At the request of Mr. Harkin, the name of the Senator from South
Dakota (Mr. Johnson) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1942, a bill to
amend part D of title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
of 1965 to provide grants for the renovation of schools.

S. 2140

At the request of Mr. Dorgan, the names of the Senator from New York
(Mrs. Clinton) and the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Wyden) were added as
cosponsors of S. 2140, a bill to award a Congressional Gold Medal to
Francis Collins, in recognition of his outstanding contributions and
leadership in the fields of medicine and genetics.

S. 2270

At the request of Ms. Stabenow, the name of the Senator from Michigan
(Mr. Levin) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2270, a bill to include
health centers

[[Page 16207]]

in the list of entities eligible for mortgage insurance under the
National Housing Act.

S. 2369

At the request of Mr. Baucus, the name of the Senator from Arkansas
(Mrs. Lincoln) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2369, a bill to amend
title 35, United States Code, to provide that certain tax planning
inventions are not patentable, and for other purposes.

S. 2433

At the request of Ms. Stabenow, her name was added as a cosponsor of
S. 2433, a bill to require the President to develop and implement a
comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy
objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination
of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium
Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people
worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.
At the request of Mr. Webb, his name was added as a cosponsor of S.
2433, supra.

S. 2668

At the request of Mr. Ensign, the name of the Senator from Texas
(Mrs. Hutchison) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2668, a bill to amend
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to remove cell phones from listed
property under section 280F.

S. 2681

At the request of Mr. Inhofe, the names of the Senator from Tennessee
(Mr. Alexander) and the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Nelson) were added
as cosponsors of S. 2681, a bill to require the issuance of medals to
recognize the dedication and valor of Native American code talkers.

S. 2720

At the request of Mr. Byrd, his name was added as a cosponsor of S.
2720, a bill to withhold Federal financial assistance from each country
that denies or unreasonably delays the acceptance of nationals of such
country who have been ordered removed from the United States and to
prohibit the issuance of visas to nationals of such country.

S. 2908

At the request of Mr. Brown, the names of the Senator from Michigan
(Ms. Stabenow) and the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson) were
added as cosponsors of S. 2908, a bill to amend title II of the Social
Security Act to prohibit the display of Social Security account numbers
on Medicare cards.

S. 3070

At the request of Mr. Sessions, the name of the Senator from South
Carolina (Mr. Graham) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3070, a bill to
require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of
the centennial of the Boy Scouts of America, and for other proposes.

S. 3080

At the request of Mr. Martinez, his name was added as a cosponsor of
S. 3080, a bill to ensure parity between the temporary duty imposed on
ethanol and tax credits provided on ethanol.

S. 3114

At the request of Mr. Lieberman, the name of the Senator from Hawaii
(Mr. Inouye) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3114, a bill to provide
safeguards against faulty asylum procedures, to improve conditions of
detention for detainees, and for other purposes.

S. 3142

At the request of Mr. Johnson, his name was added as a cosponsor of
S. 3142, a bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to enhance
public health activities related to stillbirth and sudden unexpected
infant death.

S. 3186

At the request of Mr. Sanders, the names of the Senator from Iowa
(Mr. Grassley), the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter), the
Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr.
Pryor), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson) and the Senator
from Arkansas (Mrs. Lincoln) were added as cosponsors of S. 3186, a
bill to provide funding for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance
Program.

S. 3287

At the request of Mr. Durbin, the name of the Senator from Rhode
Island (Mr. Whitehouse) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3287, a bill to
amend the Truth in Lending Act to establish a national usury rate for
consumer credit transactions.

S. 3291

At the request of Mr. Johnson, his name was added as a cosponsor of
S. 3291, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat
certain income and gains relating to fuels as qualifying income for
publicly traded partnerships.

S. 3310

At the request of Mr. Wyden, the names of the Senator from Minnesota
(Mr. Coleman) and the Senator from Iowa (Mr. Harkin) were added as
cosponsors of S. 3310, a bill to provide benefits under the Post-
Development/Mobilization Respite Absence program for certain periods
before the implementation of the program.

S. 3311

At the request of Mr. Durbin, the names of the Senator from Rhode
Island (Mr. Whitehouse) and the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Levin) were
added as cosponsors of S. 3311, a bill to amend the Public Health
Service Act to improve mental and behavioral health services on college
campuses.

S.J. RES. 44

At the request of Mr. Rockefeller, the name of the Senator from Maine
(Ms. Collins) was added as a cosponsor of S.J. Res. 44, a joint
resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of
title 5, United States Code, of the rule set forth as requirements
contained in the August 17, 2007, letter to State Health Officials from
the Director of the Center for Medicaid and State Operations in the
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the State Health Official
Letter 08-003, dated May 7, 2008, from such Center.

S. CON. RES. 93

At the request of Mr. Dorgan, the name of the Senator from Illinois
(Mr. Durbin) was added as a cosponsor of S. Con. Res. 93, a concurrent
resolution supporting the goals and ideals of ``National Sudden Cardiac
Arrest Awareness Month''.

S. RES. 502

At the request of Mr. Allard, the name of the Senator from Colorado
(Mr. Salazar) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 502, a resolution
commemorating the 25th anniversary of the Space Foundation.

S. RES. 618

At the request of Mr. Lugar, the name of the Senator from Minnesota
(Mr. Coleman) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 618, a resolution
recognizing the tenth anniversary of the bombings of the United States
embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and
memorializing the citizens of the United States, Kenya, and Tanzania
whose lives were claimed as a result of the al Qaeda led terrorist
attacks.

AMENDMENT NO. 4979

At the request of Mr. Nelson of Florida, the names of the Senator
from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry), the Senator from New Mexico (Mr.
Domenici), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) and the Senator from
Colorado (Mr. Salazar) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 4979
intended to be proposed to S. 3001, an original bill to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2009 for military activities of the
Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense
activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel
strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.

AMENDMENT NO. 5105

At the request of Ms. Snowe, the name of the Senator from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 5105
intended to be proposed to S. 3268, a bill to amend the Commodity
Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with respect to
energy commodities, and for other purposes.

AMENDMENT NO. 5108

At the request of Mr. McConnell, the name of the Senator from New
Mexico (Mr. Domenici) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 5108
intended to be proposed to S. 3268, a bill to amend the Commodity
Exchange

[[Page 16208]]

Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy
commodities, and for other purposes.
At the request of Mr. Sununu, his name was added as a cosponsor of
amendment No. 5108 intended to be proposed to S. 3268, supra.

____________________

STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Specter, Mr. Bayh, Mr. Voinovich,
Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr. Cornyn):
S. 3325. A bill to enhance remedies for violations of intellectual
property laws, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, before I was a Senator, I was a prosecutor,
as the Chittenden County State's Attorney for 8 years, I prosecuted all
varieties of crime in Vermont. I know first hand how important it is
for criminal investigators, and the lawyers who prosecute those cases,
to have a full arsenal of legal tools to ensure that justice is done. I
also know how important the intellectual property industries are to our
economy, and to our position as a global leader. In Vermont, Hubbardton
Forge makes beautiful, trademarked lamps. The Vermont Teddy Bear
Company relies heavily on its patented products. Likewise, SB
Electronics needs patents for its film capacitor products. Burton's
snowboards and logo are protected by trademarks and patents.
While Vermont is closest to my heart, every state in the Nation has
such companies, and every community in the United States is home to
creative and productive people. Intellectual property--copyrights,
patents, and trademarks--is critical to our fiscal health and to our
continuing dominance of the world economy. This valuable property is
also terribly vulnerable; by its very nature, it is subject to numerous
types of thievery and misappropriation. The Internet has brought great
and positive change to all our lives, but it is also an unparalleled
tool for piracy. The increasing inter-connectedness of the globe, and
the efficiencies of sharing information quickly and accurately between
continents, has made foreign piracy and counterfeiting operations
profitable in numerous countries. Americans suffer when their
intellectual property is stolen, they suffer when those counterfeit
goods displace sales of the legitimate products, and they suffer when
counterfeit products actually harm them, as is sometimes the case with
fake pharmaceuticals and faulty electrical products.
The time has come to bolster the Federal effort to protect this most
valuable and vulnerable property, to give law enforcement the resources
and the tools it needs to combat piracy and counterfeiting, and to make
sure that the many agencies that deal with intellectual property
enforcement have the opportunity and the incentive to talk with each
other, to coordinate their efforts, and to achieve the maximum effects
for their efforts. The Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Act
of 2008 does just that.
First, it gives the Department of Justice the ability to bring civil
actions against anyone whose conduct constitutes criminal copyright
infringement. Many times, a criminal sanction is simply too severe for
the harm done. This provision, the concept of which has passed the
Senate on three separate occasions as the PIRATE Act, gives the
Department of Justice an extra tool.
Second, the bill enhances civil intellectual property rights law by
eliminating unnecessary burdens to instituting a suit; improving
remedies; and applying the copyright and trademark laws not only to
imported goods, but also to exported and transshipped items.
Third, the bill improves and harmonizes the forfeiture provisions in
copyright and counterfeiting cases.
Fourth, the bill addresses concerns that the current governmental
structure to coordinate intellectual property rights enforcement among
agencies and departments is impeding the Government from reaching its
full potential. It creates a Coordinator within the Executive Office of
the President to chair an inter-agency committee that will produce a
Joint Strategic Plan to combat piracy and counterfeiting.
Finally, the bill will increase the resources available to Federal,
state and local law enforcement.
We are not addressing theoretical concerns with this bill, nor are we
making grandiose policy proclamations. We are synthesizing the real-
world experiences of our many constituents who develop and monetize
intellectual property--the individuals and companies that turn their
creative and innovative efforts into jobs, goods, and services--with
the daily frustrations of law enforcement agents who lack the laws, and
the resources, to vindicate those property rights.
I was once a prosecutor. I am now a Senator. But I have always been a
fan of movies. My cameo in the latest Batman movie, The Dark Knight,
was priceless to me, but we can put real numbers on the value of that
production to the economy. The Dark Knight shot for 65 days in Chicago,
pouring almost $36 million into the local economy. Seventeen million
dollars went to nearly 800 local vendors that were critical to the
production of the movie. For example, one local lumber supplier
employing 40 people played a central role in the set construction that
helped transform Chicago into the mythical ``Gotham City.'' In order to
fulfill the production needs of the film, the lumber company worked
closely with 15 other Illinois-based companies. Those 15 suppliers
employed an additional 350 workers.
All of that value is threatened by piracy. Just in the movie
industry, piracy costs 140,000 U.S. jobs and $5.5 billion in wages each
year. Piracy costs cities, towns and states an estimated $837 million
in additional tax revenue each year. The movie industry alone produces
$30.2 billion each year in revenue for 160,000 vendors all across the
Nation, and 85 percent of those vendors employ 10 people or fewer.
This is a well balanced bill, drawn from numerous conversations with
all manner of interested parties. It brings together the best of
numerous proposals, including important legislation I introduced
earlier this year with Senator Cornyn. His support on intellectual
property matters is critical to our success moving forward. I thank
him, and all the cosponsors of this legislation for their efforts and
support. This bill will improve the enforcement of our Nation's
intellectual property laws, bolster our intellectual property-based
economy, and protect American jobs.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:

S. 3325

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the
``Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Act of 2008''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents is as
follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Reference.
Sec. 3. Definition.

TITLE I--AUTHORIZATION OF CIVIL COPYRIGHT ENFORCEMENT BY ATTORNEY
GENERAL

Sec. 101. Civil penalties for certain violations.

TITLE II--ENHANCEMENTS TO CIVIL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS

Sec. 201. Registration of claim.
Sec. 202. Civil remedies for infringement.
Sec. 203. Treble damages in counterfeiting cases.
Sec. 204. Statutory damages in counterfeiting cases.
Sec. 205. Transshipment and exportation of goods bearing infringing
marks.
Sec. 206. Importation, transshipment, and exportation.

TITLE III--ENHANCEMENTS TO CRIMINAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS

Sec. 301. Criminal copyright infringement.
Sec. 302. Trafficking in counterfeit labels, illicit labels, or
counterfeit documentation or packaging for works that can
be copyrighted.
Sec. 303. Unauthorized fixation.

[[Page 16209]]

Sec. 304. Unauthorized recording of motion pictures.
Sec. 305. Trafficking in counterfeit goods or services.
Sec. 306. Forfeiture, destruction, and restitution.
Sec. 307. Forfeiture under Economic Espionage Act.
Sec. 308. Technical and conforming amendments.

TITLE IV--COORDINATION AND STRATEGIC PLANNING OF FEDERAL EFFORT AGAINST
COUNTERFEITING AND PIRACY

Sec. 401. Intellectual property enforcement coordinator.
Sec. 402. Definition.
Sec. 403. Joint strategic plan.
Sec. 404. Reporting.
Sec. 405. Savings and repeals.
Sec. 406. Authorization of appropriations.

TITLE V--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS

Sec. 501. Local law enforcement grants.
Sec. 502. Improved investigative and forensic resources for enforcement
of laws related to intellectual property crimes.
Sec. 503. Additional funding for resources to investigate and prosecute
criminal activity involving computers.
Sec. 504. International intellectual property law enforcement
coordinators.
Sec. 505. Annual reports.
Sec. 506. Authorization of appropriations.

SEC. 2. REFERENCE.

Any reference in this Act to the ``Trademark Act of 1946''
refers to the Act entitled ``An Act to provide for the
registration of trademarks used in commerce, to carry out the
provisions of certain international conventions, and for
other purposes'', approved July 5, 1946 (15 U.S.C. 1051 et
seq.).

SEC. 3. DEFINITION.

In this Act, the term ``United States person'' means--
(1) any United States resident or national,
(2) any domestic concern (including any permanent domestic
establishment of any foreign concern), and
(3) any foreign subsidiary or affiliate (including any
permanent foreign establishment) of any domestic concern that
is controlled in fact by such domestic concern,
except that such term does not include an individual who
resides outside the United States and is employed by an
individual or entity other than an individual or entity
described in paragraph (1), (2), or (3).

TITLE I--AUTHORIZATION OF CIVIL COPYRIGHT ENFORCEMENT BY ATTORNEY
GENERAL

SEC. 101. CIVIL PENALTIES FOR CERTAIN VIOLATIONS.

(a) In General.--Chapter 5 of title 17, United States Code,
is amended by inserting after section 506 the following:

``SEC. 506A. CIVIL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF SECTION 506.

``(a) In General.--In lieu of a criminal action under
section 506, the Attorney General may commence a civil action
in the appropriate United States district court against any
person who engages in conduct constituting an offense under
section 506. Upon proof of such conduct by a preponderance of
the evidence, such person shall be subject to a civil penalty
under section 504 which shall be in an amount equal to the
amount which would be awarded under section 3663(a)(1)(B) of
title 18 and restitution to the copyright owner aggrieved by
the conduct.
``(b) Other Remedies.--
``(1) In general.--Imposition of a civil penalty under this
section does not preclude any other criminal or civil
statutory, injunctive, common law, or administrative remedy,
which is available by law to the United States or any other
person.
``(2) Offset.--Any restitution received by a copyright
owner as a result of a civil action brought under this
section shall be offset against any award of damages in a
subsequent copyright infringement civil action by that
copyright owner for the conduct that gave rise to the civil
action brought under this section.''.
(b) Damages and Profits.--Section 504 of title 17, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the first sentence--
(i) by inserting ``, or the Attorney General in a civil
action,'' after ``The copyright owner''; and
(ii) by striking ``him or her'' and inserting ``the
copyright owner''; and
(B) in the second sentence by inserting ``, or the Attorney
General in a civil action,'' after ``the copyright owner'';
and
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``, or the Attorney
General in a civil action,'' after ``the copyright owner'';
and
(B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``, or the Attorney
General in a civil action,'' after ``the copyright owner''.
(c) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of
sections for chapter 5 of title 17, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 506
the following:

``Sec. 506a. Civil penalties for violations of section 506.''.

TITLE II--ENHANCEMENTS TO CIVIL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS

SEC. 201. REGISTRATION OF CLAIM.

(a) Limitation to Civil Actions; Harmless Error.--Section
411 of title 17, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in the section heading, by inserting ``CIVIL'' before
``INFRINGEMENT'';
(2) in subsection (a)--
(A) in the first sentence, by striking ``no action'' and
inserting ``no civil action''; and
(B) in the second sentence, by striking ``an action'' and
inserting ``a civil action'';
(3) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c);
(4) in subsection (c), as so redesignated by paragraph (3),
by striking ``506 and sections 509 and'' and inserting ``505
and section''; and
(5) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
``(b)(1) A certificate of registration satisfies the
requirements of this section and section 412, regardless of
whether the certificate contains any inaccurate information,
unless--
``(A) the inaccurate information was included on the
application for copyright registration with knowledge that it
was inaccurate; and
``(B) the inaccurate information, if known, would have
caused the Register of Copyrights to refuse registration.
``(2) In any case in which inaccurate information described
under paragraph (1) is alleged, the court shall request the
Register of Copyrights to advise the court whether the
inaccurate information, if known, would have caused the
Register of Copyrights to refuse registration.''.
(b) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 412 of title 17, United States Code, is amended
by striking ``411(b)'' and inserting ``411(c)''.
(2) The item relating to section 411 in the table of
sections for chapter 4 of title 17, United States Code, is
amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 411. Registration and civil infringement actions.''.

SEC. 202. CIVIL REMEDIES FOR INFRINGEMENT.

(a) In General.--Section 503(a) of title 17, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``and of all plates'' and inserting ``, of
all plates''; and
(2) by striking the period and inserting ``, and of records
documenting the manufacture, sale, or receipt of things
involved in such violation. The court shall enter, if
appropriate, a protective order with respect to discovery of
any records that have been seized. The protective order shall
provide for appropriate procedures to ensure that
confidential information contained in such records is not
improperly disclosed to any party.''.
(b) Protective Orders for Seized Records.--Section
34(d)(1)(A) of the Trademark Act (15 U.S.C. 1116(d)(1)(A)) is
amended by adding at the end the following: ``The court shall
enter, if appropriate, a protective order with respect to
discovery of any records that have been seized. The
protective order shall provide for appropriate procedures to
ensure that confidential information contained in such
records is not improperly disclosed to any party.''.

SEC. 203. TREBLE DAMAGES IN COUNTERFEITING CASES.

Section 35(b) of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C.
1117(b)) is amended to read as follows:
``(b) In assessing damages under subsection (a) for any
violation of section 32(1)(a) of this Act or section 220506
of title 36, United States Code, in a case involving use of a
counterfeit mark or designation (as defined in section 34(d)
of this Act), the court shall, unless the court finds
extenuating circumstances, enter judgment for three times
such profits or damages, whichever amount is greater,
together with a reasonable attorney's fee, if the violation
consists of--
``(1) intentionally using a mark or designation, knowing
such mark or designation is a counterfeit mark (as defined in
section 34(d) of this Act), in connection with the sale,
offering for sale, or distribution of goods or services; or
``(2) providing goods or services necessary to the
commission of a violation specified in paragraph (1), with
the intent that the recipient of the goods or services would
put the goods or services to use in committing the violation.
In such a case, the court may award prejudgment interest on
such amount at an annual interest rate established under
section 6621(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
beginning on the date of the service of the claimant's
pleadings setting forth the claim for such entry of judgment
and ending on the date such entry is made, or for such
shorter time as the court considers appropriate.''.

SEC. 204. STATUTORY DAMAGES IN COUNTERFEITING CASES.

Section 35(c) of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C. 1117)
is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``$500'' and inserting ``$1,000''; and
(B) by striking ``$100,000'' and inserting ``$200,000'';
and
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``$1,000,000'' and
inserting ``$2,000,000''.

[[Page 16210]]

SEC. 205. TRANSSHIPMENT AND EXPORTATION OF GOODS BEARING
INFRINGING MARKS.

Title VII of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C. 1124) is
amended--
(1) in the title heading, by inserting after
``IMPORTATION'' the following: ``TRANSSHIPMENT, OR
EXPORTATION''; and
(2) in section 42--
(A) by striking ``imported''; and
(B) by inserting after ``customhouse of the United States''
the following: ``, nor shall any such article be transshipped
through or exported from the United States''.

SEC. 206. IMPORTATION, TRANSSHIPMENT, AND EXPORTATION.

(a) In General.--The heading for chapter 6 of title 17,
United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

``CHAPTER 6--MANUFACTURING REQUIREMENTS, IMPORTATION, TRANSSHIPMENT,
AND EXPORTATION''.

(b) Amendment on Exportation.--Section 602(a) of title 17,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (3) as
subparagraphs (A) through (C), respectively, and moving such
subparagraphs 2 ems to the right;
(2) by striking ``(a)'' and inserting ``(a) Infringing
Importation, Transshipment, or Exportation.--
``(1) Importation.--'';
(3) by striking ``This subsection does not apply to--'' and
inserting the following:
``(2) Importation, transhipment, or exportation of
infringing items.--Importation into the United States,
transshipment through the United States, or exportation from
the United States, without the authority of the owner of
copyright under this title, of copies or phonorecords, the
making of which either constituted an infringement of
copyright or would have constituted an infringement of
copyright if this title had been applicable, is an
infringement of the exclusive right to distribute copies or
phonorecords under section 106, actionable under sections 501
and 506.
``(3) Exceptions.--This subsection does not apply to--'';
(4) in paragraph (3)(A) (as redesignated by this
subsection) by inserting ``or exportation'' after
``importation''; and
(5) in paragraph (3)(B) (as redesignated by this
subsection)--
(A) by striking ``importation, for the private use of the
importer'' and inserting ``importation or exportation, for
the private use of the importer or exporter''; and
(B) by inserting ``or departing from the United States''
after ``United States''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Section 602 of title 17,
United States Code, is further amended--
(A) in the section heading, by inserting ``OR EXPORTATION''
after ``IMPORTATION''; and
(B) in subsection (b)--
(i) by striking ``(b) In a case'' and inserting ``(b)
Import Prohibition.--In a case'';
(ii) by striking ``the United States Customs Service'' and
inserting ``United States Customs and Border Protection'';
and
(iii) by striking ``the Customs Service'' and inserting
``United States Customs and Border Protection''.
(2) Section 601(b)(2) of title 17, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``the United States Customs Service'' and
inserting ``United States Customs and Border Protection''.
(3) The item relating to chapter 6 in the table of chapters
for title 17, United States Code, is amended to read as
follows:

``6. Manufacturing Requirements, Importation, and Exportation ........
601''.

TITLE III--ENHANCEMENTS TO CRIMINAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS

SEC. 301. CRIMINAL COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT.

(a) Forfeiture and Destruction; Restitution.--Section
506(b) of title 17, United States Code, is amended to read as
follows:
``(b) Forfeiture, Destruction, and Restitution.--
Forfeiture, destruction, and restitution relating to this
section shall be subject to section 2323 of title 18, to the
extent provided in that section, in addition to any other
similar remedies provided by law.''.
(b) Seizures and Forfeitures.--
(1) Repeal.--Section 509 of title 17, United States Code,
is repealed.
(2) Technical and conforming amendment.--The table of
sections for chapter 5 of title 17, United States Code, is
amended by striking the item relating to section 509.

SEC. 302. TRAFFICKING IN COUNTERFEIT LABELS, ILLICIT LABELS,
OR COUNTERFEIT DOCUMENTATION OR PACKAGING FOR
WORKS THAT CAN BE COPYRIGHTED.

Section 2318 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) through (G) as
clauses (i) through (vii), respectively;
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as
subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively; and
(C) by striking ``Whoever'' and inserting ``(1) Whoever'';
(2) by amending subsection (d) to read as follows:
``(d) Forfeiture and Destruction of Property;
Restitution.--Forfeiture, destruction, and restitution
relating to this section shall be subject to section 2323, to
the extent provided in that section, in addition to any other
similar remedies provided by law.''; and
(3) by striking subsection (e) and redesignating subsection
(f) as subsection (e).

SEC. 303. UNAUTHORIZED FIXATION.

(a) Section 2319A(b) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended to read as follows:
``(b) Forfeiture and Destruction of Property;
Restitution.--Forfeiture, destruction, and restitution
relating to this section shall be subject to section 2323, to
the extent provided in that section, in addition to any other
similar remedies provided by law.''.
(b) Section 2319A(c) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by striking the second sentence and inserting: ``The
Secretary of Homeland Security shall issue regulations by
which any performer may, upon payment of a specified fee, be
entitled to notification by United States Customs and Border
Protection of the importation of copies or phonorecords that
appear to consist of unauthorized fixations of the sounds or
sounds and images of a live musical performance.''.

SEC. 304. UNAUTHORIZED RECORDING OF MOTION PICTURES.

Section 2319B(b) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended to read as follows:
``(b) Forfeiture and Destruction of Property;
Restitution.--Forfeiture, destruction, and restitution
relating to this section shall be subject to section 2323, to
the extent provided in that section, in addition to any other
similar remedies provided by law.''.

SEC. 305. TRAFFICKING IN COUNTERFEIT GOODS OR SERVICES.

(a) In General.--Section 2320 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking ``Whoever'' and inserting ``Offense.--''
``(1) In general.--Whoever;'';
(B) by moving the remaining text 2 ems to the right; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Serious bodily harm or death.--
``(A) Serious bodily harm.--If the offender knowingly or
recklessly causes or attempts to cause serious bodily injury
from conduct in violation of paragraph (1), the penalty shall
be a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than
20 years, or both.
``(B) Death.--If the offender knowingly or recklessly
causes or attempts to cause death from conduct in violation
of paragraph (1), the penalty shall be a fine under this
title or imprisonment for any term of years or for life, or
both.''.
(b) Forfeiture and Destruction of Property; Restitution.--
Section 2320(b) of title 18, United States Code, is amended
to read as follows:
``(b) Forfeiture and Destruction of Property;
Restitution.--Forfeiture, destruction, and restitution
relating to this section shall be subject to section 2323, to
the extent provided in that section, in addition to any other
similar remedies provided by law.''.

SEC. 306. FORFEITURE, DESTRUCTION, AND RESTITUTION.

(a) In General.--Chapter 113 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 2323. FORFEITURE, DESTRUCTION, AND RESTITUTION.

``(a) Civil Forfeiture.--
``(1) Property subject to forfeiture.--The following
property is subject to forfeiture to the United States
Government:
``(A) Any article, the making or trafficking of which is,
prohibited under section 506 or 1204 of title 17, or section
2318, 2319, 2319A, 2319B, or 2320, or chapter 90, of this
title.
``(B) Any property used, or intended to be used, in any
manner or part to commit or facilitate the commission of an
offense referred to in subparagraph (A), except that property
is subject to forfeiture under this subparagraph only if the
United States Government establishes that there was a
substantial connection between the property and the violation
of an offense referred to in subparagraph (A).
``(C) Any property constituting or derived from any
proceeds obtained directly or indirectly as a result of the
commission of an offense referred to in subparagraph (A).
``(2) Procedures.--The provisions of chapter 46 relating to
civil forfeitures shall extend to any seizure or civil
forfeiture under this section. At the conclusion of the
forfeiture proceedings, unless otherwise requested by an
agency of the United States, the court shall order that any
property forfeited under paragraph (1) be destroyed, or
otherwise disposed of according to law.
``(b) Criminal Forfeiture.--
``(1) Property subject to forfeiture.--The court, in
imposing sentence on a person convicted of an offense under
section 506 or 1204 of title 17, or section 2318, 2319,
2319A, 2319B, or 2320, or chapter 90, of this title, shall
order, in addition to any other sentence imposed, that the
person forfeit to the United States Government any property
subject to forfeiture under subsection (a) for that offense.
``(2) Procedures.--
``(A) In general.--The forfeiture of property under
paragraph (1), including any seizure and disposition of the
property and any

[[Page 16211]]

related judicial or administrative proceeding, shall be
governed by the procedures set forth in section 413 of the
Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970
(21 U.S.C. 853), other than subsection (d) of that section.
``(B) Destruction.--At the conclusion of the forfeiture
proceedings, the court, unless otherwise requested by an
agency of the United States shall order that any--
``(i) forfeited article or component of an article bearing
or consisting of a counterfeit mark be destroyed or otherwise
disposed of according to law; and
``(ii) infringing items or other property described in
subsection (a)(1)(A) and forfeited under paragraph (1) of
this subsection be destroyed or otherwise disposed of
according to law.
``(c) Restitution.--When a person is convicted of an
offense under section 506 or 1204 of title 17 or section
2318, 2319, 2319A, 2319B, or 2320, or chapter 90, of this
title, the court, pursuant to sections 3556, 3663A, and 3664
of this title, shall order the person to pay restitution to
any victim of the offense as an offense against property
referred to in section 3663A(c)(1)(A)(ii) of this title.''.
(b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of
sections for chapter 113 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 2323. Forfeiture, destruction, and restitution.''.

SEC. 307. FORFEITURE UNDER ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE ACT.

Section 1834 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to
read as follows:

``SEC. 1834. CRIMINAL FORFEITURE.

``Forfeiture, destruction, and restitution relating to this
chapter shall be subject to section 2323, to the extent
provided in that section, in addition to any other similar
remedies provided by law.''.

SEC. 308. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

(a) Amendments to Title 17, United States Code.--
(1) Section 109 (b)(4) of title 17, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``505, and 509'' and inserting ``and
505''.
(2) Section 111 of title 17, United States Code, is
amended--
(A) in subsection (b), by striking ``and 509'';
(B) in subsection (c)--
(i) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and 509'';
(ii) in paragraph (3), by striking ``sections 509 and 510''
and inserting ``section 510''; and
(iii) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and section 509'';
and
(C) in subsection (e)--
(i) in paragraph (1), by striking ``sections 509 and 510''
and inserting ``section 510''; and
(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and 509''.
(3) Section 115(c) of title 17, United States Code, is
amended--
(A) in paragraph (3)(G)(i), by striking ``and 509''; and
(B) in paragraph (6), by striking ``and 509''.
(4) Section 119(a) of title 17, United States Code, is
amended--
(A) in paragraph (6), by striking ``sections 509 and 510''
and inserting ``section 510'';
(B) in paragraph (7)(A), by striking ``and 509'';
(C) in paragraph (8), by striking ``and 509''; and
(D) in paragraph (13), by striking ``and 509''.
(5) Section 122 of title 17, United States Code, is
amended--
(A) in subsection (d), by striking ``and 509'';
(B) in subsection (e), by striking ``sections 509 and 510''
and inserting ``section 510''; and
(C) in subsection (f)(1), by striking ``and 509''.
(6) Section 411(b) of title 17, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``sections 509 and 510'' and inserting
``section 510''.
(b) Other Amendments.--Section 596(c)(2)(c) of the Tariff
Act of 1950 (19 U.S.C. 1595a(c)(2)(c)) is amended by striking
``or 509''.

TITLE IV--COORDINATION AND STRATEGIC PLANNING OF FEDERAL EFFORT AGAINST
COUNTERFEITING AND PIRACY

SEC. 401. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ENFORCEMENT COORDINATOR.

(a) Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator.--The
President shall appoint, by and with the advice and consent
of the Senate, an Intellectual Property Enforcement
Coordinator (in this title referred to as the ``IPEC'') to
serve within the Executive Office of the President. As an
exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate, any
nomination of the IPEC submitted to the Senate for
confirmation, and referred to a committee, shall be referred
to the Committee on the Judiciary.
(b) Duties of IPEC.--
(1) In general.--The IPEC shall--
(A) chair the interagency intellectual property enforcement
advisory committee established under subsection (b)(3)(A);
(B) coordinate the development of the Joint Strategic Plan
against counterfeiting and piracy by the advisory committee
under section 403;
(C) assist in the implementation of the Joint Strategic
Plan by the departments and agencies listed in subsection
(b)(3)(A);
(D) report directly to the President and Congress regarding
domestic and international intellectual property enforcement
programs;
(E) report to Congress, as provided in section 404, on the
implementation of the Joint Strategic Plan, and make
recommendations to Congress for improvements in Federal
intellectual property enforcement efforts; and
(F) carry out such other functions as the President may
direct.
(2) Limitation on authority.--The IPEC may not control or
direct any law enforcement agency in the exercise of its
investigative or prosecutorial authority.
(3) Advisory committee.--
(A) Establishment.--There is established an interagency
intellectual property enforcement advisory committee composed
of the IPEC, who shall chair the committee, and Senate-
confirmed representatives of the following departments and
agencies who are involved in intellectual property
enforcement, and who are, or are appointed by, the respective
heads of those departments and agencies:
(i) The Office of Management and Budget.
(ii) The Department of Justice.
(iii) The United States Patent and Trademark Office and
other relevant units of the Department of Commerce.
(iv) The Office of the United States Trade Representative.
(v) The Department of State, the United States Agency for
International Development, and the Bureau of International
Narcotics Law Enforcement.
(vi) The Department of Homeland Security, United States
Customs and Border Protection, and United States Immigration
and Customs Enforcement.
(vii) The Food and Drug Administration of the Department of
Health and Human Services.
(viii) The United States Copyright Office.
(ix) Any such other agencies as the President determines to
be substantially involved in the efforts of the Federal
Government to combat counterfeiting and piracy.
(B) Functions.--The advisory committee established under
subparagraph (A) shall develop the Joint Strategic Plan
against counterfeiting and piracy under section 403.
(c) Compensation.--Section 5312 of title 5, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: ``United
States Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator.''.

SEC. 402. DEFINITION.

For purposes of this title, the term ``intellectual
property enforcement'' means matters relating to the
enforcement of laws protecting copyrights, patents,
trademarks, other forms of intellectual property, and trade
secrets, both in the United States and abroad, including in
particular matters relating to combating counterfeit and
pirated goods.

SEC. 403. JOINT STRATEGIC PLAN.

(a) Purpose.--The objectives of the Joint Strategic Plan
against counterfeiting and piracy that is referred to in
section 401(b)(1)(B) (in this section referred to as the
``joint strategic plan'') are the following:
(1) Reducing counterfeit and pirated goods in the domestic
and international supply chain.
(2) Identifying and addressing structural weaknesses,
systemic flaws, or other unjustified impediments to effective
enforcement action against the financing, production,
trafficking, or sale of counterfeit or pirated goods.
(3) Ensuring that information is identified and shared
among the relevant departments and agencies, to the extent
permitted by law and consistent with law enforcement
protocols for handling information, to aid in the objective
of arresting and prosecuting individuals and entities that
are knowingly involved in the financing, production,
trafficking, or sale of counterfeit or pirated goods.
(4) Disrupting and eliminating domestic and international
counterfeiting and piracy networks.
(5) Strengthening the capacity of other countries to
protect and enforce intellectual property rights, and
reducing the number of countries that fail to enforce laws
preventing the financing, production, trafficking, and sale
of counterfeit and pirated goods.
(6) Working with other countries to establish international
standards and policies for the effective protection and
enforcement of intellectual property rights.
(7) Protecting intellectual property rights overseas by--
(A) working with other countries and exchanging information
with appropriate law enforcement agencies in other countries
relating to individuals and entities involved in the
financing, production, trafficking, or sale of pirated or
counterfeit goods;
(B) using the information described in subparagraph (A) to
conduct enforcement activities in cooperation with
appropriate law enforcement agencies in other countries; and
(C) building a formal process for consulting with
companies, industry associations, labor unions, and other
interested groups in other countries with respect to
intellectual property enforcement.
(b) Timing.--Not later than 12 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and not later than December 31 of
every third year thereafter, the IPEC shall submit the joint
strategic plan to the Committee on the Judiciary and the
Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, and to the
Committee on

[[Page 16212]]

the Judiciary and the Committee on Appropriations of the
House of Representatives.
(c) Responsibility of the IPEC.--During the development of
the joint strategic plan, the IPEC--
(1) shall provide assistance to, and coordinate the
meetings and efforts of, the appropriate officers and
employees of departments and agencies represented on the
advisory committee appointed under section 401(b)(3) who are
involved in intellectual property enforcement; and
(2) may consult with private sector experts in intellectual
property enforcement in furtherance of providing assistance
to the members of the advisory committee appointed under
section 401(b)(3).
(d) Responsibilities of Other Departments and Agencies.--In
the development and implementation of the joint strategic
plan, the heads of the departments and agencies identified
under section 401(b)(3) shall--
(1) designate personnel with expertise and experience in
intellectual property enforcement matters to work with the
IPEC and other members of the advisory committee; and
(2) share relevant department or agency information with
the IPEC and other members of the advisory committee,
including statistical information on the enforcement
activities of the department or agency against counterfeiting
or piracy, and plans for addressing the joint strategic plan.
(e) Contents of the Joint Strategic Plan.--Each joint
strategic plan shall include the following:
(1) A detailed description of the priorities identified for
carrying out the objectives in the joint strategic plan,
including activities of the Federal Government relating to
intellectual property enforcement.
(2) A detailed description of the means and methods to be
employed to achieve the priorities, including the means and
methods for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the
Federal Government's enforcement efforts against
counterfeiting and piracy.
(3) Estimates of the resources necessary to fulfill the
priorities identified under paragraph (1).
(4) The performance measures to be used to monitor results
under the joint strategic plan during the following year.
(5) An analysis of the threat posed by violations of
intellectual property rights, including the costs to the
economy of the United States resulting from violations of
intellectual property laws, and the threats to public health
and safety created by counterfeiting and piracy.
(6) An identification of the departments and agencies that
will be involved in implementing each priority under
paragraph (1).
(7) A strategy for ensuring coordination between the IPEC
and the departments and agencies identified under paragraph
(6), including a process for oversight by the executive
branch of, and accountability among, the departments and
agencies responsible for carrying out the strategy.
(8) Such other information as is necessary to convey the
costs imposed on the United States economy by, and the
threats to public health and safety created by,
counterfeiting and piracy, and those steps that the Federal
Government intends to take over the period covered by the
succeeding joint strategic plan to reduce those costs and
counter those threats.
(f) Enhancing Enforcement Efforts of Foreign Governments.--
The joint strategic plan shall include programs to provide
training and technical assistance to foreign governments for
the purpose of enhancing the efforts of such governments to
enforce laws against counterfeiting and piracy. With respect
to such programs, the joint strategic plan shall--
(1) seek to enhance the efficiency and consistency with
which Federal resources are expended, and seek to minimize
duplication, overlap, or inconsistency of efforts;
(2) identify and give priority to those countries where
programs of training and technical assistance can be carried
out most effectively and with the greatest benefit to
reducing counterfeit and pirated products in the United
States market, to protecting the intellectual property rights
of United States persons and their licensees, and to
protecting the interests of United States persons otherwise
harmed by violations of intellectual property rights in those
countries;
(3) in identifying the priorities under paragraph (2), be
guided by the list of countries identified by the United
States Trade Representative under section 182(a) of the Trade
Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2242(a)); and
(4) develop metrics to measure the effectiveness of the
Federal Government's efforts to improve the laws and
enforcement practices of foreign governments against
counterfeiting and piracy.
(g) Dissemination of the Joint Strategic Plan.--The joint
strategic plan shall be posted for public access on the
website of the White House, and shall be disseminated to the
public through such other means as the IPEC may identify.

SEC. 404. REPORTING.

(a) Annual Report.--Not later than December 31 of each
calendar year beginning in 2009, the IPEC shall submit a
report on the activities of the advisory committee during the
preceding fiscal year. The annual report shall be submitted
to Congress, and disseminated to the people of the United
States, in the manner specified in subsections (b) and (g) of
section 403.
(b) Contents.--The report required by this section shall
include the following:
(1) The progress made on implementing the strategic plan
and on the progress toward fulfillment of the priorities
identified under section 403(e)(1).
(2) The progress made in efforts to encourage Federal,
State, and local government departments and agencies to
accord higher priority to intellectual property enforcement.
(3) The progress made in working with foreign countries to
investigate, arrest, and prosecute entities and individuals
involved in the financing, production, trafficking, and sale
of counterfeit and pirated goods.
(4) The manner in which the relevant departments and
agencies are working together and sharing information to
strengthen intellectual property enforcement.
(5) An assessment of the successes and shortcomings of the
efforts of the Federal Government, including departments and
agencies represented on the committee established under
section 401(b)(3).
(6) Recommendations for any changes in enforcement
statutes, regulations, or funding levels that the advisory
committee considers would significantly improve the
effectiveness or efficiency of the effort of the Federal
Government to combat counterfeiting and piracy and otherwise
strengthen intellectual property enforcement, including
through the elimination or consolidation of duplicative
programs or initiatives.
(7) The progress made in strengthening the capacity of
countries to protect and enforce intellectual property
rights.
(8) The successes and challenges in sharing with other
countries information relating to intellectual property
enforcement.
(9) The progress made under trade agreements and treaties
to protect intellectual property rights of United States
persons and their licensees.

SEC. 405. SAVINGS AND REPEALS.

(a) Repeal of Coordination Council.--Section 653 of the
Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2000 (15
U.S.C. 1128) is repealed.
(b) Current Authorities Not Affected.--Except as provided
in subsection (a), nothing in this title shall alter the
authority of any department or agency of the United States
(including any independent agency) that relates to--
(1) the investigation and prosecution of violations of laws
that protect intellectual property rights;
(2) the administrative enforcement, at the borders of the
United States, of laws that protect intellectual property
rights; or
(3) the United States trade agreements program or
international trade.
(c) Register of Copyrights.--Nothing in this title shall
derogate from the duties and functions of the Register of
Copyrights.

SEC. 406. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated
for each fiscal year such sums as may be necessary to carry
out this title.

TITLE V--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS

SEC. 501. LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT GRANTS.

(a) Authorization.--Section 2 of the Computer Crime
Enforcement Act (42 U.S.C. 3713) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b), by inserting after ``computer
crime'' each place it appears the following: ``, including
infringement of copyrighted works over the Internet''; and
(2) in subsection (e)(1), relating to authorization of
appropriations, by striking ``fiscal years 2001 through
2004'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through 2013''.
(b) Grants.--The Office of Justice Programs of the
Department of Justice shall make grants to eligible State or
local law enforcement entities, including law enforcement
agencies of municipal governments and public educational
institutions, for training, prevention, enforcement, and
prosecution of intellectual property theft and infringement
crimes (in this subsection referred to as ``IP-TIC grants''),
in accordance with the following:
(1) Use of ip-tic grant amounts.--IP-TIC grants may be used
to establish and develop programs to do the following with
respect to the enforcement of State and local true name and
address laws and State and local criminal laws on anti-
piracy, anti-counterfeiting, and unlawful acts with respect
to goods by reason of their protection by a patent,
trademark, service mark, trade secret, or other intellectual
property right under State or Federal law:
(A) Assist State and local law enforcement agencies in
enforcing those laws, including by reimbursing State and
local entities for expenses incurred in performing
enforcement operations, such as overtime payments and storage
fees for seized evidence.
(B) Assist State and local law enforcement agencies in
educating the public to prevent, deter, and identify
violations of those laws.
(C) Educate and train State and local law enforcement
officers and prosecutors to conduct investigations and
forensic analyses of evidence and prosecutions in matters
involving those laws.

[[Page 16213]]

(D) Establish task forces that include personnel from State
or local law enforcement entities, or both, exclusively to
conduct investigations and forensic analyses of evidence and
prosecutions in matters involving those laws.
(E) Assist State and local law enforcement officers and
prosecutors in acquiring computer and other equipment to
conduct investigations and forensic analyses of evidence in
matters involving those laws.
(F) Facilitate and promote the sharing, with State and
local law enforcement officers and prosecutors, of the
expertise and information of Federal law enforcement agencies
about the investigation, analysis, and prosecution of matters
involving those laws and criminal infringement of copyrighted
works, including the use of multijurisdictional task forces.
(2) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive an IP-TIC
grant, a State or local government entity shall provide to
the Attorney General--
(A) assurances that the State in which the government
entity is located has in effect laws described in paragraph
(1);
(B) an assessment of the resource needs of the State or
local government entity applying for the grant, including
information on the need for reimbursements of base salaries
and overtime costs, storage fees, and other expenditures to
improve the investigation, prevention, or enforcement of laws
described in paragraph (1); and
(C) a plan for coordinating the programs funded under this
section with other federally funded technical assistance and
training programs, including directly funded local programs
such as the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant
Program authorized by subpart 1 of part E of title I of the
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C.
3750 et seq.).
(3) Matching funds.--The Federal share of an IP-TIC grant
may not exceed 90 percent of the costs of the program or
proposal funded by the IP-TIC grant, unless the Attorney
General waives, in whole or in part, the 90 percent
requirement.
(4) Authorization of appropriations.--
(A) Authorization.--There is authorized to be appropriated
to carry out this subsection the sum of $25,000,000 for each
of fiscal years 2009 through 2013.
(B) Limitation.--Of the amount made available to carry out
this subsection in any fiscal year, not more than 3 percent
may be used by the Attorney General for salaries and
administrative expenses.

SEC. 502. IMPROVED INVESTIGATIVE AND FORENSIC RESOURCES FOR
ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS RELATED TO INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY CRIMES.

(a) In General.--Subject to the availability of
appropriations to carry out this subsection, the Attorney
General, in consultation with the Director of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation, shall, with respect to crimes
related to the theft of intellectual property--
(1) create an operational unit of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation--
(A) to work with the Computer Crime and Intellectual
Property section of the Department of Justice on the
investigation and coordination of intellectual property
crimes that are complex, committed in more than 1 judicial
district, or international;
(B) that consists of at least 10 agents of the Bureau; and
(C) that is located at the headquarters of the Bureau;
(2) ensure that any unit in the Department of Justice
responsible for investigating computer hacking or
intellectual property crimes is assigned at least 2 agents of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (in addition to any agent
assigned to such unit as of the date of the enactment of this
Act) to support such unit for the purpose of investigating or
prosecuting intellectual property crimes; and
(3) implement a comprehensive program--
(A) the purpose of which is to train agents of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation in the investigation and prosecution
of such crimes and the enforcement of laws related to
intellectual property crimes;
(B) that includes relevant forensic training related to
investigating and prosecuting intellectual property crimes;
and
(C) that requires such agents who investigate or prosecute
intellectual property crimes to attend the program annually.
(b) Organized Crime Task Force.--Subject to the
availability of appropriations to carry out this subsection,
and not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act, the Attorney General, through the United States
Attorneys' Offices, the Computer Crime and Intellectual
Property section, and the Organized Crime and Racketeering
section of the Department of Justice, and in consultation
with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other Federal
law enforcement agencies, shall create a Task Force to
develop and implement a comprehensive, long-range plan to
investigate and prosecute international organized crime
syndicates engaging in or supporting crimes relating to the
theft of intellectual property.
(c) Authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated
to carry out this section $12,000,000 for each of fiscal
years 2009 through 2013.

SEC. 503. ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR RESOURCES TO INVESTIGATE AND
PROSECUTE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY INVOLVING
COMPUTERS.

(a) Additional Funding for Resources.--
(1) Authorization.--In addition to amounts otherwise
authorized for resources to investigate and prosecute
criminal activity involving computers, there are authorized
to be appropriated for each of the fiscal years 2009 through
2013--
(A) $10,000,000 to the Director of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation; and
(B) $10,000,000 to the Attorney General for the Criminal
Division of the Department of Justice.
(2) Availability.--Any amounts appropriated under paragraph
(1) shall remain available until expended.
(b) Use of Additional Funding.--Funds made available under
subsection (a) shall be used by the Director of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation and the Attorney General, for the
Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Criminal Division of
the Department of Justice, respectively, to--
(1) hire and train law enforcement officers to--
(A) investigate crimes committed through the use of
computers and other information technology, including through
the use of the Internet; and
(B) assist in the prosecution of such crimes; and
(2) procure advanced tools of forensic science to
investigate, prosecute, and study such crimes.

SEC. 504. INTERNATIONAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW ENFORCEMENT
COORDINATORS.

(a) Deployment of Additional Coordinators.--Subject to the
availability of appropriations to carry out this section, the
Attorney General shall, within 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, deploy 5 Intellectual Property Law
Enforcement Coordinators, in addition to those serving in
such capacity on such date of enactment. Such deployments
shall be made to those countries and regions where the
activities of such a coordinator can be carried out most
effectively and with the greatest benefit to reducing
counterfeit and pirated products in the United States market,
to protecting the intellectual property rights of United
States persons and their licensees, and to protecting the
interests of United States persons otherwise harmed by
violations of intellectual property rights in those
countries. The mission of all International Intellectual
Property Law Enforcement Coordinators shall include the
following:
(1) Acting as liaison with foreign law enforcement agencies
and other foreign officials in criminal matters involving
intellectual property rights.
(2) Performing outreach and training to build the
enforcement capacity of foreign governments against
intellectual property-related crime in the regions in which
the coordinators serve.
(3) Coordinating United States law enforcement activities
against intellectual property-related crimes in the regions
in which the coordinators serve.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated for each fiscal year such sums as may be
necessary for the deployment and support of all International
Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinators of the
Department of Justice, including those deployed under
subsection (a).

SEC. 505. ANNUAL REPORTS.

Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of
this Act, and annually thereafter, the Attorney General shall
submit to the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and
the House of Representatives a report on actions taken to
carry out this title.

SEC. 506. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated for each fiscal
year such sums as may be necessary to carry out this title.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I am pleased to speak today on the
introduction of the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Act of
2008, which I am sponsoring with Senator Leahy.
The United States has always placed a high value on creativity and
innovation. As a result, we rank number 1 for innovation in the World
Economic Forum's Global Competition Report. Yet, the U.S. does not even
make it into the ``top 20'' countries when it comes to the protection
of intellectual property. When you consider that intellectual property
contributes over $5 trillion annually to our national economy, this is
not acceptable.
If we want to profit from our intellectual property, then we must
protect it. Counterfeiting and piracy, though, are on the rise.
Counterfeiting, which at one time involved mainly ``knocking off'
products in the high end and luxury goods markets, is now much more
pervasive. According to FBI, Interpol, World Customs Organization and
International Chamber of Commerce estimates, roughly 7-8 percent of
world trade every year is in counterfeit goods. That is the equivalent
of as

[[Page 16214]]

much as $512 billion in global lost sales. Of that amount, U.S.
companies annually lose between $200 billion and $250 billion in sales.
Counterfeiting, piracy, and the theft of intellectual property, are
not victimless crimes. Exporters face unfair competition abroad. Non-
exporters face counterfeit imports at home. Businesses face legal,
health and safety risks from the threat of counterfeit goods entering
their supply chains. Consumers, too, face serious health and safety
risks.
For every legitimate product on the market, one can find a
counterfeit version, being passed off as the same quality at a fraction
of the cost. Counterfeit products run the gamut from low end products
such as razor blades, shampoos, batteries, and cigarettes to more
specialized products like auto and plane parts. Although these products
may look real, they are not subjected to the same quality protocols as
their legitimate counterparts and a consumer--be they knowing or not--
uses the product at their own risk. Counterfeit products that are
substandard goods have been the subject of public recalls and seizures
in industries ranging from food products both human and pet
consumables, pharmaceuticals both lifestyle and life-saving drugs,
aircraft or automobile parts, toys and baby furniture, and building and
manufacturing components. The potential for harm is very serious. Every
day, our newspapers are filled with stories of the damage that
counterfeit products have caused.
Further, each counterfeit item that is manufactured overseas and
distributed in the United States costs American workers their jobs.
According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, overall intellectual
property theft costs 750,000 U.S. jobs a year. These are losses that
directly impact each and every person listening to my voice by
inhibiting the growth of the American economy. Although private
industry is more vigilant than ever in pursuing infringers civilly and
devoting enormous amounts of human and financial capital to combat
violations of their intellectual property rights, the U.S. Government
must do its part to protect one of our Nation's most valuable assets.
Building on the work of the House with the Prioritizing Resources and
Organization of Intellectual Property Act of 2007, better known as the
PRO-IP Act, and Senators Bayh and Voinovich with the Intellectual
Property Rights Enforcement Act, Senators Leahy and I have crafted a
comprehensive intellectual property that responds to that need.
This bill will provide the current and future administrations with
the additional tools it needs to combat intellectual property theft by,
amongst other things: Giving the Attorney General the authority, in
lieu of a criminal action, to pursue a civil action for intellectual
property infringement and collect damages and profits resulting from
infringement; enhancing the civil and criminal penalties for
intellectual property violations in order to deter new criminal
organizations from entering into ``the business'' of counterfeiting and
piracy; elevating the intergovernmental coordination of intellectual
property enforcement efforts; and authorizing funding for State and
local governments for pursuing intellectual property related
investigations.
Alan Greenspan stated in ``The Age of Turbulence'' that, ``Arguably,
the single most important economic decision our lawmakers and courts
will face in the next twenty-five years is to clarify the rules of
intellectual property.''
Great legislation does not happen overnight--nor should it. When
considering any reforms to something as valuable as our intellectual
property assets--whether it is reforms to our Nations patents,
trademarks, or more relevantly to this group, copyright laws--we must
act cautiously and with a careful understanding of the effects that any
such changes will have on the interested industries. That said, I
believe that we can work together in the few remaining days that is
left in this Congress in not just a bipartisan but a nonpartisan manner
to pass and send this bill to the President this Congress.
______

By Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself and Mr. Coleman):
S. 3324. A bill to provide leadership regarding science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics education programs, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, the United States has been the most
innovative, technologically capable economy in the world. Yet our
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, STEM, education
system is failing to ensure that children in our great Nation are
entering the workforce with the skills and knowledge required for
success in the global economy of the 21st century. Meanwhile, the rest
of the world is catching up. I rise today on behalf of myself and
Senator Coleman to introduce the Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics Education for the 21st Century Act. This legislation seeks
to promote and coordinate existing science and technology education
efforts and to improve the communication among various stakeholders so
that tomorrow's workforce will be prepared to continue the American
tradition of innovation and enterprise. There are three pieces to this
legislation, which is based largely on the recommendations found in the
National Science Board's action plan on STEM education.
First, this legislation charters a new, independent, and non-Federal
National Council for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
Education, which will coordinate and facilitate STEM education
initiatives across the Nation and inform policymakers and the public on
the state of STEM education across the United States. This council will
be housed in the National Academy of Sciences and will have a Board of
Directors comprised of representatives from the various State and local
governments, organizations, businesses, and industries that have a
stake in the success of STEM education. This includes current and
former governors, chief State school officers, representatives from
local school boards, classroom teachers, school administrators,
representatives from institutions of higher education, private
foundations, and representatives of businesses and industries.
Much of the innovation and success in improving STEM education
throughout the country is being done locally, in the State's counties,
and school systems, often partnering with businesses and industry in
need of a STEM-educated workforce. The Council will bring together
these various stakeholders to facilitate and coordinate the flow of
information on STEM education systems to various stakeholders; to
independently evaluate the success of Federal and non-Federal STEM
initiatives; to fairly determine and promote best STEM classroom
practices; to encourage the acquisition and retention of highly
effective STEM teachers; and to inform policymakers and the general
public on the state of STEM education across the United States. More
specifically, the Council will also be responsible for issuing an
annual report on the state of STEM education in America to the States,
Congress, the Federal Government, and the general public; disseminating
results from research on teaching and learning in STEM fields to State
educational agencies; helping the States establish their own Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education boards or councils;
proposing models for the effective professional development of teachers
in STEM fields; and launching and updating a publicly available website
that hosts a database consisting of information on scholarships,
fellowships, grants, internships, and summer programs for both students
and teachers.
Second, this bill authorizes a full standing Committee on Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education within the National
Science and Technology Council, NSTC, which is part of the Executive
Office of the President. This committee would be responsible for
coordinating STEM education across all the Federal agencies involved in
such efforts, including the National Laboratories, the Department of
Commerce, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Science

[[Page 16215]]

Foundation, and NASA. Currently, the NSTC Committee on Science has a
Subcommittee on Education and Workforce Development with jurisdiction
over issues relating to STEM education. However, this subcommittee has
been largely inactive: it rarely meets and has not been effective in
coordinating the efforts of these different agencies. Senator Coleman
and I believe that the state of STEM education in the Nation today
warrants a full committee at the NSTC that will meet regularly to
assess the effectiveness of such Federal efforts.
Finally in this legislation we direct the Secretary of Education to
undergo a comprehensive review of all programs within the Department of
Education relating to education in science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics fields, and to evaluate them for their effectiveness.
We want to make sure that the current panoply of such programs are
effective, target the students they are intended to target, are not
unnecessarily redundant, complement State and local educational
agencies, and are promoted effectively so that students, teachers, and
parents know about these efforts. We also direct the Department to
submit to Congress a plan for addressing the challenges they identify
in this review.
I believe this legislation will help science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics education in this country, and will help
students, parents, teachers, and other educators as we strive to
prepare tomorrow's workforce for the global economy of the 21st
century.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:

S. 3324

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 ``Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics Education for the 21st Century
Act of 2008''.

SEC. 2. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY,
ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION.

(a) Establishment.--There is established a federally
chartered corporation to be known as the National Council for
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education
(referred to in this section as the ``STEM Council'') which
shall be incorporated under the laws of the District of
Columbia and which shall have the powers granted in this
section. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the STEM
Council is a private entity and is not an agency,
instrumentality, authority, entity, or establishment of the
United States Government.
(b) Mission.--The mission of the STEM Council is to--
(1) provide guidance and coordinate and facilitate the flow
of information about science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (referred to in this section as ``STEM'')
education among State, local, and private entities, as well
as the general public;
(2) provide leadership by identifying critical deficiencies
in the Nation's STEM education systems and proposing
strategies for members of the STEM Council to collaborate to
address such deficiencies;
(3) serve as a primary focal point for Federal agencies to
improve their coordination with, and service to, State and
local school systems; and
(4) promote STEM fields and educate the general public
about the value of a STEM education.
(c) Board of Directors.--
(1) In general.--The management of the STEM Council shall
be vested in a Board of Directors composed of 23 voting
members and 10 nonvoting members, who shall meet not less
frequently than quarterly.
(2) Initial appointments.--The Director of the National
Science Foundation, in consultation with the Chairmen and
Ranking Members of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions of the Senate, the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate, the Committee on
Education and Labor of the House of Representatives, and the
Committee on Science and Technology of the House of
Representatives, shall appoint, in accordance with this
subsection, the initial voting members of the Board of
Directors of the STEM Council.
(3) Appointments.--The Director of the National Science
Foundation, in consultation with the STEM Council, shall
appoint, in accordance with this subsection, a new voting
member of the Board of Directors of the STEM Council after a
voting member has completed service on the STEM Council.
(4) Representatives on the stem council.--
(A) Voting seats.--The Board of Directors of the STEM
Council shall consist of the following voting members:
(i) Two State Governors or former Governors.
(ii) Two chief State school officers.
(iii) One local school board representative.
(iv) One representative from the National Science Board.
(v) One active classroom teacher in science or mathematics.
(vi) One active classroom teacher in engineering.
(vii) One school administrator.
(viii) One representative from organizations representing
community colleges.
(ix) One representative from organizations representing
research universities.
(x) One representative from technological institutes or
organizations representing technological institutes.
(xi) One representative from informal STEM education
organizations.
(xii) Three representatives from local school boards, State
legislatures, and other State and local officials.
(xiii) Two representatives from various teacher, parent-
teacher, and STEM education organizations.
(xiv) Three representatives from various organizations
representing industry and business associations with an
interest in hiring a STEM-educated workforce.
(xv) Two representatives from various organizations that
support educational initiatives, the Nation's global
competitiveness, or STEM education specifically.
(B) Nonvoting seats.--The Board of Directors of the STEM
Council shall consist of nonvoting members for the following
seats:
(i) The two co-chairs of the STEM Committee established
under section 3.
(ii) One representative from the majority party and 1
representative from the minority party from each of the
following committees:

(I) The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
of the Senate.
(II) The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
of the Senate.
(III) The Committee on Education and Labor of the House of
Representatives.
(IV) The Committee on Science and Technology of the House
of Representatives.

(C) Co-chairs.--The Board of Directors of the STEM Council
shall have 2 co-chairs who shall be a Governor, or former
Governor, and a chief State school officer appointed by the
Director of the National Science Foundation in consultation
with the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate, the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate, the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of
Representatives, and the Committee on Science and Technology
of the House of Representatives.
(5) National academy of sciences support.--The Director of
the National Science Foundation shall enter into an agreement
with the National Academy of Sciences--
(A) to provide staff support to the Board of Directors of
the STEM Council; and
(B) to carry out any projects proposed by the Board of
Directors or required under this Act.
(d) Activities.--
(1) Mandatory activities.--
(A) In general.--The STEM Council shall carry out the
following activities:
(i) Provide leadership by identifying critical deficiencies
in the Nation's STEM education systems and proposing
strategies for members of the STEM Council to collaborate to
address such deficiencies.
(ii) Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment
of this Act, and annually thereafter, the STEM Council shall
submit a report that highlights the status of STEM education
in the Nation and the States to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate, the Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, the
Committee on Education and Labor of the House of
Representatives, the Committee on Science and Technology of
the House of Representatives, the Governor of each of the 50
States, and the STEM Committee established in section 3. Each
report submitted under this clause shall be widely available
to the public and posted on the website of the STEM Council.
(iii) Evaluate progress toward the goals described in the
National Action Plan of the National Science Board on a
regular and sustained basis, including the effectiveness of
the STEM Committee, established under section 3, in
coordinating kindergarten through graduate-level Federal STEM
education programs.
(iv) Serve as a national resource by disseminating through
the Department of Education to State and local educational
agencies information on research on teaching and learning,
including best educational practices, and encouraging the
adoption of such practices.
(v) Help States establish or strengthen existing P-16 or P-
20 STEM councils and serve as a technical resource center for
P-16 or P-20 STEM councils.
(vi) Utilize scientifically valid studies to determine
programs that raise student achievement or interest in STEM
fields.

[[Page 16216]]

(vii) Direct the Department of Education to promote the
programs described in clause (vi) to State educational
agencies and local educational agencies.
(viii) Work with all stakeholders to address--

(I) the removal of barriers that exist throughout the
Nation in recruiting and retaining effective STEM educators;
and
(II) the removal of barriers imposed by local educational
agencies on the movement of STEM educators between local
educational agencies both within and across States.

(ix) Propose models for effective teacher professional
development.
(x) Launch a public education initiative to--

(I) promote STEM fields to the general public, especially
to stakeholders that represent individuals identified in
section 33 or 34 of the Science and Engineering Equal
Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a, 1885b); and
(II) raise awareness that STEM education is essential for
the Nation's success.

(B) Database on federal and non-federal science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics educational
initiatives.--
(i) Establishment and maintenance of database.--

(I) Database.--The STEM Council shall establish and
maintain, on a public website of the STEM Council, a database
consisting of information on Federal scholarships,
fellowships, and other Federal STEM and relevant non-STEM
education programs recommended by the STEM Committee
established under section 3, as well as non-Federal STEM and
relevant non-STEM programs that have been recommended by the
Board of Directors of the STEM Council. The database may
include information on grants, fellowships, internships, and
summer programs at the primary through graduate levels.
(II) Specific information.--The database established under
subclause (I) shall include specific information on any
programs of financial assistance that are targeted to
individuals of a particular gender, ethnicity, or other
demographic group, especially individuals identified in
section 33 or 34 of the Science and Engineering Equal
Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 1885b)

(ii) Dissemination of information on database.--The STEM
Council shall take such actions as may be necessary on an
ongoing basis, including sending notices to educational
institutions, to disseminate information on the database
established and maintained under this subparagraph.
(iii) Listing direct contact information.--The database
established under clause (i) shall provide contact
information for awards, including the sponsor's website.
(iv) Approval.--The STEM Council shall review submissions
for inclusion on the database established under clause (i)
from prospective sponsors to exclude fraudulent scholarship
offers and scholarship programs that require the payment of
an application fee or other charge. The STEM Council may--

(I) remove information from the database if the STEM
Council determines the information is not in accordance with
the purpose of the database; or
(II) promote those programs most effective at improving
student achievement or interest in STEM fields.

(v) Accuracy.--Information on scholarships included in the
database established under clause (i) shall be updated not
less often than quarterly in order to provide current and
accurate information regarding available scholarships.
(vi) Links.--The database established under clause (i) may
have links to other privately operated online tools designed
to help students find scholarships and educational
opportunities that are approved by the STEM Council.
(2) Permissive activities.--The STEM Council may carry out
any of the following activities:
(A) Coordinate the development and maintenance of
integrated data management systems to consolidate and share
information among States on STEM educational practices,
research, and outcomes, including student assessment results,
teacher quality measures, and high school graduation
requirements.
(B) Assemble a database of opportunities for teachers
interested in summer research in a STEM field in a Government
research laboratory, institution of higher education, or
STEM-related business or industry.
(C) Assemble a database of grants and other funding
opportunities for STEM classroom resources to be used by
teachers and local educational agencies.
(e) Corporate Powers.--Not later than 1 year after the date
of enactment of this Act, the STEM Council shall become a
body corporate and as such shall have the authority to do the
following:
(1) To adopt and use a corporate seal.
(2) To have succession until dissolved by an Act of
Congress.
(3) To appoint, through the actions of its Board of
Directors, officers and employees of the STEM Council, to
define their duties and responsibilities, fix their
compensations, and to dismiss at will such officers or
employees.
(4) To prescribe, through the actions of its Board of
Directors, bylaws not inconsistent with Federal law and the
laws of the District of Columbia, regulating the manner in
which its general business may be conducted and the manner in
which the privileges granted to it by law may be exercised.
(5) To exercise, through the actions of its Board of
Directors, all powers specifically granted by the provisions
of this section, and such incidental powers as shall be
necessary.
(6) To develop a source of revenue that is in addition to
Federal funds provided under this section and that extends
later than fiscal year 2013.
(7) To pay for a small personnel staff, office space,
equipment, and travel, including employing not less than 1
executive staff member and 2 professional staff members.
(f) Corporate Funds.--
(1) Deposit of funds.--The Board of Directors shall deposit
all funds of the STEM Council in federally chartered and
insured depository institutions until such funds are
disbursed under paragraph (2).
(2) Disbursement of funds.--Funds of the STEM Council may
be disbursed only for purposes that are--
(A) approved by the chief executive of the STEM Council;
and
(B) in accordance with the mission of the STEM Council as
specified in subsection (b).
(g) Use of Mails.--The STEM Council may use the United
States mails in the same manner and under the same conditions
as the departments and agencies of the United States.
(h) Federal Advisory Committee Act.--Section 14 of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App) shall not apply
to the STEM Council.
(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the STEM Council to carry out this
section $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through
2013.

SEC. 3. COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND
MATHEMATICS EDUCATION.

(a) Establishment.--There is established within the
National Science and Technology Council a standing committee
on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
education (referred to in this section as the ``STEM
Committee'').
(b) Members.--
(1) In general.--The STEM Committee shall be composed of
representatives from all Federal departments and agencies
involved in STEM education, including the National
Laboratories.
(2) Co-chairs.--The STEM Committee shall have 2 co-chairs--
(A) one of whom shall be a representative from the National
Science Foundation; and
(B) one of whom shall be the Secretary of Education or a
designee of the Secretary.
(c) Duties and Responsibilities.--The STEM Committee
shall--
(1) coordinate all programs related to education in
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (referred
to in this section as ``STEM'') fields funded or administered
by the Federal Government;
(2) conduct an ongoing inventory and assessment of the
effectiveness of all Federal education initiatives related to
STEM fields, especially with regard to how the initiatives
are serving those individuals identified in section 33 or 34
of the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42
U.S.C. 1885a, 1885b);
(3) disseminate the annual report received from the STEM
Council under section 2(d)(1)(A)(ii) to each Federal Agency
engaged in STEM education efforts;
(4) coordinate among all Federal departments and agencies
involved in STEM education research and programs to inventory
and assess the effectiveness and coherence of Federally
funded STEM education programs; and
(5) represent all Federal agencies on the National Council
for STEM Education and coordinate the STEM education efforts
of the Federal government with State and local governments
through the National Council for STEM Education.
(d) Meetings.--The STEM Committee shall meet not less
frequently than quarterly.

SEC. 4. EVALUATION OF SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND
MATHEMATICS PROGRAMS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of Education shall conduct,
directly or though contract, a comprehensive evaluation of
all science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
education (referred to in this section as ``STEM education'')
programs of the Department of Education.
(b) Programs to Evaluate.--The STEM education programs that
shall be evaluated under subsection (a) shall include the
following:
(1) The Mathematics and Science Partnerships program.
(2) The Math Now for Elementary School and Middle School
Students program.
(3) The Math Skills for Secondary School Students program.
(4) The Minority Science and Engineering Improvement
program.
(5) The Teachers for a Competitive Tomorrow program.
(6) The National Science and Mathematics Access to Retain
Talent grant program (the National SMART grant program).
(7) The Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher
Education Grants program (the TEACH Grants program).

[[Page 16217]]

(8) The Academic Competitiveness Grant program.
(9) Grant programs authorized under the Carl D. Perkins
Career and Technical Education Act of 2006.
(c) Content of Evaluation.--The evaluation conducted under
subsection (a) shall--
(1) examine the coherence of the Department of Education in
administering STEM education programs, including identifying
unnecessary or harmful overlap;
(2) identify the unmet State and local education needs that
could be filled with reorganization or expansion of STEM
education programs existing on the date of the evaluation;
(3) evaluate the ease of access to information on STEM
education programs by students, educators, and others target
populations;
(4) evaluate the ability of the Department of Education to
disseminate information from the STEM Council established
under section 2; and
(5) propose how the Department of Education can address any
needs or problems identified in paragraphs (2), (3), and (4).
(d) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Education, or the
entity with whom the Secretary contracts to conduct the
evaluation under subsection (a), shall submit to Congress a
report of such evaluation.
______

By Mr. DURBIN:
S. 3326. A bill to authorize the Secretary of Education to award
grants to local education agencies to improve college access; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation
designed to make it easier for students to reach college and to succeed
in college. An educated workforce is crucial to the success of the
American economy, but too many students are not receiving a college
education. Of students who were in eighth grade in 2000, only 20
percent of the lowest-income students will earn a college degree by
2012, compared to 68 percent of the highest income group. Every student
who wants to go to college should have that opportunity, and we should
provide them with the tools they need. Today, I am introducing the
Pathways to College Act, which creates grants for school districts to
help them increase the number of low-income students who are entering
and succeeding in college.
Lack of guidance and information about college has a real effect on
students in poor schools. The Consortium on Chicago School Research
recently released a report called ``Potholes on the Road to College.''
This report examines the difficulties faced by Chicago Public School
students during the college application process. The Consortium
discovered that only 41 percent of Chicago Public School students who
wanted to go to college took the steps necessary to apply to and enroll
in a 4-year college. Only one-third of students enrolled in a college
that matched their qualifications. Of the students who had the grades
and test scores to attend a selective college, 29 percent went to a
community college or skipped college entirely.
But the most heartbreaking parts of this report are the profiles of
smart, ambitious students who find themselves helplessly lost in the
college admissions process. One student, Amelia, worked hard in her
classes at Silverstein High School and dreamed of studying criminal
justice. Amelia never received the help she needed to achieve her goal.
The wait was two weeks to see a guidance counselor, and so Amelia
learned about the process on her own. She did not apply for federal
financial aid and ended up at a local community college where she
described the classes as easy and ``just like high school.''
The Pathways to College Act would create a grant program for school
districts serving low-income students to increase their college-
enrollment rates. The Consortium's ``Potholes'' report found that the
most important factor in whether students enroll in a four-year college
is if they attended a school where teachers create a strong college-
going culture and help students with the process of applying. The
Pathways to College Act would provide the funding to help school
districts improve the college-going culture in schools and guide
students through the college admissions process.
A school with a strong college culture is a school where the
expectation throughout the school is that every single student will go
to college. Administrators, teachers, and staff members embrace and act
on that goal every day. With a grant through the Pathways to College
Act, schools could train student leaders, integrate college planning
into the curriculum, and provide opportunities for college fairs,
college tours, and workplace visits. Most importantly, teachers and
counselors would be trained in post-secondary advising so that they can
motivate their students to reach for high goals. Every school in the
school district would incorporate these elements and others into a
school-wide plan of action to strengthen the college-going culture.
KIPP Ascend Charter School in Chicago is a school that does this
well. A few weeks ago, a group of eighth grade students from KIPP came
to my constituent coffee here in Washington. Each one was wearing a
shirt that said ``I am college bound.'' Every child and each teacher
believed the message on those shirts, and I did too. The facts prove we
are all right. Eighty percent of students in the KIPP program nation-
wide attend college. KIPP accomplishes this by training teachers to
constantly reinforce high college expectations. If you walk into a KIPP
classroom, you see college posters on the walls and hear college
discussed as part of the day's lesson. If you ask the students about
going to college, they will answer without hesitation and might tell
you about their last field trip to a local university. When you combine
those clear, high expectations with KIPP's rigorous college-preparatory
curriculum, you can understand their enormous success.
The Pathways to College Act will also give school districts the tools
they need to help students meet their high aspirations. Participating
school districts would provide each high school freshman with at least
one meeting with an advisor to discuss their goals post-graduation and
create a plan to reach those goals. School districts would also educate
students and families about the intricacies of the college application
process and the federal financial aid application process. The average
student-to-counselor ratio in high schools is 315 to one, but schools
could use grant money to hire more counselors and form partnerships
with community groups to help students with college applications and
financial aid forms. School districts also consider could create
college planning classes or establish a college access center in their
school.
The Pathways to College Act provides flexibility to school districts
to achieve higher college enrollment rates, but requires that each
school accurately track their results so we can learn from what works.
Chicago Public Schools is doing a great job--both in tackling the
problem and in documenting progress. Under the leadership of CEO Arne
Duncan, Chicago Public Schools responded aggressively to the
``Potholes'' report. A team of postsecondary coaches were deployed in
high schools to work with students and counselors. To ensure that
financial aid is not a roadblock, FAFSA completion rates are tracked so
that counselors can follow-up with students. A spring-break college
tour took 500 students to see colleges across the country. Because
Chicago Public Schools tracks its college enrollment rates, we know
that their efforts are working. Half of the 2007 graduating class
enrolled in college, an increase of 6.5 percent in four years. The
national increase was less than one percent in the same time-frame.
Nationally, the number of African-American graduates going to college
has decreased by six percent over the last four years while the Chicago
rate has increased by almost eight percent.
Applying to college is not easy. Low-income students often need the
most help to achieve their college dreams. When schools focus on
college and provide the tools to get there, students make the
connection between the work they are doing now and their future goals
in college and life. Students in those schools are more likely enroll
in college and are also more likely to work hard in high school to be
prepared for college when they arrive. The

[[Page 16218]]

bill I am introducing today tries to ensure that lack of information
never prevents a student from achieving his or her college dream.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:

S. 3326

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 ``Pathways to College Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:
(1) An educated workforce is crucial to the success of the
United States economy. Access to higher education for all
students is critical to maintaining an educated workforce.
More than 80 percent of the 23,000,000 jobs that will be
created in the next 10 years will require postsecondary
education. Only 36 percent of all 18- to 24-year olds are
currently enrolled in postsecondary education.
(2) Workers with bachelor's degrees earn on average $17,000
more annually than workers with only high school diplomas.
Workers who earn bachelor's degrees can be expected to earn
$1,000,000 more over a lifetime than those who only finished
high school.
(3) The ACT recommends that schools--
(A) provide student guidance to engage students in college
and career awareness; and
(B) ensure that students enroll in a rigorous curriculum to
prepare for postsecondary education.
(4) The Department of Education reports that the average
student-to-counselor ratio in high schools is 315:1. This
falls far above the ratio recommended by the American School
Counselor Association, which is 250:1. While school
counselors at private schools spend an average of 58 percent
of their time on postsecondary education counseling,
counselors in public schools spend an average of 25 percent
of their time on postsecondary education counseling.
(5) While just 57 percent of students from the lowest
income quartile enroll in college, 87 percent of students
from the top income quartile enroll. Of students who were in
eighth grade in 2000, only 20 percent of the lowest-income
students are projected to attain a bachelor's degree by 2012,
compared to 68 percent of the highest income group, according
to the Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance in
2006.
(6) A recent report by the Consortium on Chicago School
Research found that only 41 percent of Chicago public school
students who aspire to go to college took the steps necessary
to apply to and enroll in a 4-year institution of higher
education. The report also reveals that only \1/3\ of Chicago
students who want to attend a 4-year institution of higher
education enroll in a school that matches their
qualifications. Even among students qualified to attend a
selective college, 29 percent enrolled in a community college
or did not enroll at all.
(7) The Consortium found that many Chicago public school
students do not complete the Free Application for Federal
Student Aid, even though students who apply for Federal
financial aid are 50 percent more likely to enroll in
college. Sixty-five percent of public secondary school
counselors at low-income schools believe that students and
parents are discouraged from considering college as an option
due to lack of knowledge about financial aid.
(8) Low-income and first-generation families often
overestimate the cost of tuition and underestimate available
aid; students from these backgrounds have access to fewer
college application resources and financial aid resources
than other groups, and are less likely to fulfill their
postsecondary plans as a result.
(9) College preparation intervention programs can double
the college-going rates for at-risk youth, can expand
students' educational aspirations, and can boost college
enrollment and graduation rates.

SEC. 3. GRANT PROGRAM.

(a) Definitions.--In this Act:
(1) ESEA definitions.--The terms ``local educational
agency'' and ``Secretary'' have the meanings given the terms
in section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
(2) Eligible local educational agency.--The term ``eligible
local educational agency'' means a local educational agency
in which a majority of the secondary schools served by the
agency are high-need secondary schools.
(3) High-need secondary school.--The term ``high-need
secondary school'' means a secondary school in which not less
than 50 percent of the students enrolled in the school are--
(A) eligible for a school lunch program under the Richard
B. Russell National School Lunch Act;
(B) eligible to be counted under section 1124(c) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6333(c)); or
(C) in families eligible for assistance under the State
program funded under part A of title IV of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
(b) Competitive Grants to Eligible Local Educational
Agencies.--The Secretary is authorized to award grants, on a
competitive basis, to eligible local educational agencies to
carry out the activities described in this section.
(c) Duration.--Grants awarded under this section shall be 5
years in duration.
(d) Distribution.--In awarding grants under this section,
the Secretary shall ensure that the grants are distributed
among the different geographic regions of the United States,
and among eligible local educational agencies serving urban
and rural areas.
(e) Applications.--
(1) In general.--Each eligible local educational agency
desiring a grant under this section shall submit an
application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner,
and accompanied by such information as the Secretary may
reasonably require.
(2) Contents.--Each application submitted under paragraph
(1) shall include a description of the program to be carried
out with grant funds and--
(A) a description of the secondary school population to be
targeted by the program, the particular college-access needs
of such population, and the resources available for meeting
such needs;
(B) an outline of the objectives of the program, including
goals for increasing the number of college applications
submitted by each student, increasing Free Application for
Federal Student Aid completion rates, and increasing school-
wide college enrollment rates across the local educational
agency;
(C) a description of the local educational agency's plan to
work cooperatively with programs funded under chapters 1 and
2 of subpart 2 of part A of title IV of the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a-11 et seq. and 1070a-21 et
seq.), including the extent to which the agency commits to
sharing facilities, providing access to students, and
developing compatible record-keeping systems;
(D) a description of the activities, services, and training
to be provided by the program, including a plan to provide
structure and support for all students in the college search,
planning, and application process;
(E) a description of the methods to be used to evaluate the
outcomes and effectiveness of the program;
(F) an assurance that grant funds will be used to
supplement, and not supplant, any other Federal, State, or
local funds available to carry out activities of the type
carried out under the grant;
(G) an explanation of the method used for calculating
college enrollment rates for each secondary school served by
the eligible local educational agency that is based on
externally verified data, and, when possible, aligned with
existing State or local methods; and
(H) a plan to make the program sustainable over time,
including the use of matching funds from non-Federal sources.
(3) Method of calculating enrollment rates.--
(A) In general.--A method included in an application under
paragraph (2)(G)--
(i) shall, at a minimum, track students' first-time
enrollment in institutions of higher education; and
(ii) may track progress toward completion of a
postsecondary degree.
(B) Development in conjunction.--An eligible local
educational agency may develop a method pursuant to paragraph
(2)(G) in conjunction with an existing public or private
entity that currently maintains such a method.
(f) Special Consideration.--In awarding grants under this
section, the Secretary shall give special consideration to
applications from eligible local educational agencies serving
schools with the highest percentages of poverty.
(g) Use of Funds.--
(1) In general.--An eligible local educational agency that
receives a grant under this section shall develop and
implement, or expand, a program to increase the number of
low-income students who enroll in postsecondary educational
institutions, including institutions with competitive
admissions criteria.
(2) Required use of funds.--Each program funded under this
section shall--
(A) provide professional development to secondary school
teachers and counselors in postsecondary education advising;
(B) ensure that each student has not less than 1 meeting,
not later than the first semester of the first year of
secondary school, with a school counselor, college access
personnel (including personnel involved in programs funded
under chapters 1 and 2 of subpart 2 of part A of title IV of
the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a-11 et seq.
and 1070a-21 et seq.)), trained teacher, or other
professional or organization, such as a community-based
organization, approved by the school, to discuss
postsecondary options, outline postsecondary goals, and
create a plan to achieve those goals;
(C) provide information to all students enrolled in the
secondary schools served by the eligible local educational
agency and parents beginning in the first year of secondary
school on--

[[Page 16219]]

(i) the economic and social benefits of higher education;
(ii) college expenses, including information about expenses
by institutional type, differences between sticker price and
net price, and expenses beyond tuition;
(iii) paying for college, including the availability,
eligibility, and variety of financial aid; and
(iv) the forms and processes associated with applying for
financial aid; and
(D) ensure that each secondary school served by the
eligible local educational agency develops a comprehensive,
school-wide plan of action to strengthen the college-going
culture within the school.
(3) Allowable use of funds.--Each program funded under this
section may--
(A) establish mandatory postsecondary planning classes for
secondary school seniors to assist the seniors in the college
preparation and application process;
(B) hire and train postsecondary coaches with expertise in
the college-going process;
(C) increase the number of counselors who specialize in the
college-going process serving students;
(D) train student leaders to assist in the creation of a
college-going culture in their schools;
(E) provide opportunities for students to explore
postsecondary opportunities outside of the school setting,
such as college fairs, career fairs, college tours, workplace
visits, or other similar activities;
(F) assist students with test preparation, college
applications, Federal financial aid applications, and
scholarship applications;
(G) establish partnerships with programs funded under
chapters 1 and 2 of subpart 2 of part A of title IV of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a-11 et seq. and
1070a-21 et seq.)), and with community and nonprofit
organizations to increase college-going rates at secondary
schools served by the eligible local educational agency;
(H) provide long-term postsecondary follow up with
graduates of the secondary schools served by the eligible
local educational agencies, including increasing alumni
involvement in mentoring and advising roles within the
secondary school;
(I) create and maintain a postsecondary access center in
the school setting that provides information on colleges and
universities, career opportunities, and financial aid options
and provide a setting in which professionals working in
programs funded under chapters 1 and 2 of subpart 2 of part A
of title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1070a-11 et seq. and 1070a-21 et seq.)), can meet with
students;
(J) deliver college and career planning curriculum as a
stand-alone course, or embedded in other classes, for all
students in secondary school; and
(K) increase parent involvement in preparing for
postsecondary opportunities.
(h) Supplement, Not Supplant.--Funds made available under
this section shall be used to supplement, and not supplant,
other Federal, State, and local funds available to carry out
the activities described in this section.
(i) Technical Assistance.--The Secretary, directly or
through contracting through a full and open process with 1 or
more organizations that have demonstrated experience
providing technical assistance to raise school-wide college
enrollment rates in local educational agencies in not less
than 3 States, shall provide technical assistance to grantees
in carrying out this section. The technical assistance
shall--
(1) provide assistance in the calculation and analysis of
college-going rates for all grant recipients;
(2) provide semi-annual analysis to each grant recipient
recommending best practices based on a comparison of the
recipient's data with that of secondary schools with similar
demographics; and
(3) provide annual best practices conferences for all grant
recipients.
(j) Evaluation and Reporting Requirements.--
(1) Measure enrollment and track data.--Each eligible local
educational agency that receives a grant under this section
shall--
(A) measure externally verified school-wide college
enrollment; and
(B) track data that leads to increased college going,
including college applications sent and Free Application for
Federal Student Aid forms filed.
(2) Evaluations by grantees.--Each eligible local
educational agency that receives a grant under this section
shall--
(A) conduct periodic evaluations of the effectiveness of
the activities carried out under the grant toward increasing
school-wide college-going rates;
(B) use such evaluations to refine and improve activities
conducted with the grant and the performance measures for
such activities; and
(C) make the results of such evaluations publicly
available, including by providing public notice of such
availability.
(3) Report.--Not later than 3 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
appropriate committees of Congress a report concerning the
results of--
(A) the evaluations conducted under paragraph (2); and
(B) an evaluation conducted by the Secretary to analyze the
effectiveness and efficacy of the activities conducted with
grants under this section.
______

By Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. Grassley):
S. 3327. A bill amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to improve
the State plan amendment option for providing home and community-based
services under the Medicaid program, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Finance.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, every day millions of Americans are faced
with significant challenges when it comes to meeting their own personal
needs or caring for a loved one who needs significant support. Many
elderly Americans and individuals of all ages with disabilities need
long-term services and supports, such as assistance with dressing,
bathing, preparing meals, and managing chronic conditions. They prefer
to live and work in their community, and it is time that the Federal
Government and states act as better partners to provide improved access
to home- and community-based long-term care services HCBS.
The Medicaid program, administered by the states but jointly financed
with the Federal Government, is our Nation's largest payer for long-
term care services. Medicaid spends about $100 billion per year on
long-term services. Despite recognizing that per person spending is
much lower in community settings, and that people generally prefer
community services, Medicaid still spends 61 percent of its long-term
services spending in institutional settings. This disparity is due, in
large part, to a strong access and payment bias in the program for
institutional care.
Where Medicaid does offer HCBS, it is often in short supply, with
more than 280,000 Medicaid beneficiaries on waiting lists for HCBS
waiver services. Further, eligibility for HCBS waiver services requires
beneficiaries to already have a very significant level of disability
before gaining access they must meet a level of functional need that
qualifies them for a nursing home. This not only contributes to the
unmet needs of those in the community but it also prevents states from
providing services that can help prevent beneficiaries from one day
requiring high-cost institutional care. While institutionalized care
may be an appropriate choice for some, it should be just that: a choice
that individuals and families are allowed to make about the most
appropriate setting for their own care.
The result of Medicaid's ``institutional bias'' is that, according to
the Georgetown Health Policy Institute, ``one in five persons living in
the community with a need for assistance from others has unmet needs,
endangering their health and demeaning their quality of life.'' This is
simply unacceptable.
The lack of long-term care options available to families has a
significant impact on their lives. Many of my constituents are
affected, as are countless Americans across the country. Take the
parents living in Newton who continue to wait for their physically
disabled daughter, Julia, to have the opportunity to live
independently. Julia is a young adult and instead of starting out on
her own, she must watch as her peers move away and begin their
independent lives- something she yearns to do as well. Growing up,
Julia was able to attend Newton schools and keep a similar schedule to
other children in the community but now has limited social interaction,
as there is no other option but to live at home with her parents.
Julia's parents are her full time caregivers and would like to see her
able to live in an environment more conducive to both her needs and
their own. Community based care or home based care in an apartment she
could share with a roommate are options Julia and her parents would
mutually benefit from. As the opportunities for the future grow for her
peers, Julia's options continue to shrink because housing and home
based supports for adults with disabilities are limited at best. I have
heard many stories similar to that of Julia, which emphasizes the
urgency in which HCBS is needed. In addition to individual lives being
put on hold, entire families must

[[Page 16220]]

deal with the consequences of inadequate services available to their
family members.
Access to HCBS affects individuals in all stages of life, including
Americans dealing with conditions such as Alzheimer's. Take Ann Bowers
and Jay Sweatman for example. Without access to HCBS services, Jay, who
suffers from early onset Alzheimer's, was forced to first move into
assisted living and then a nursing home. By the time Jay was approved
for HCBS it was too late and he was no longer able to live
independently. Ann had worked tirelessly to coordinate her husband's
care and get additional HCBS support but the process was so difficult
that by the time help came, it was simply too late. This is just one
case of many where early HCBS intervention would have not only saved
time, money, and stress for family members, but would have made a
significant impact on the quality of life and personal independence for
Jay and Ann.
So today, I am introducing with my colleague from the Finance
Committee, Senator Grassley, the Empowered at Home Act, a bill that
increases access to home and community based services by giving states
new tools and incentives to make these services more available to those
in need. It has four basic parts.
First, it will improve the Medicaid HCBS State Plan Amendment Option
by giving states more flexibility in determining eligibility for which
services they can offer under the program, which will create greater
options for individuals in need of long-term supports. In return we ask
that states no longer cap enrollment and that services be offered
throughout the entire state.
Second, the bill ensures that the same spousal impoverishment
protections offered for new nursing home beneficiaries will be in place
for those opting for home and community based services. In addition,
low-income recipients of home and community based services will be able
to keep more of their assets when they become eligible for Medicaid,
allowing them to stay in their community as long as possible.
Third, the Empowered at Home Act addresses the financial needs of
spouses and family members caring for a loved one by offering tax-
related provisions to support family caregivers and promote the
purchase of meaningful private long-term care insurance.
Finally, the bill seeks to improve the overall quality of home and
community based services available by providing grants for states to
invest in organizations and systems that can help to ensure a
sufficient supply of high quality workers, promote health, and
transform home and community based care to be more consumer-centered.
I want to say a word about the Community Choice Act, legislation
long-championed by Senator Harkin that would make HCBS a mandatory
benefit in Medicaid. I am a strong supporter and co-sponsor of this
landmark legislation, and look forward to working for its enactment as
soon as possible. The legislation I am introducing today seeks to
supplement--not supplant--the Community Choice Act by increasing access
to HCBS for those who are disabled but not at a sufficient level of
need to qualify for nursing home services. These two complimentary
bills will finally make HCBS a right while vastly improving HCBS
availability to vulnerable citizens of varying levels of disability.
I would also like to thank a number of organizations who have been
integral to the development of the Empowered at Home Act and who have
endorsed it today, including the National Council on Aging, the Arc of
the United States, United Cerebral Palsy, the American Association of
Homes and Services for the Aging, the Alzheimer's Association, the
National Association of Area Agencies on Aging, the American Geriatrics
Society, ANCOR, the Trust for America's Health, and SEIU.
Improving access to a range of long term care services for the
elderly and Americans of all ages with disabilities is an issue that
must not stray from the top of our Nation's health care priorities. I
believe this legislation can move forward in a bi-partisan manner to
dramatically improve access to high-quality home- and community-based
care for the millions of Americans who are not receiving the
significant supports and services they need.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:

S. 3327

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Empowered
at Home Act of 2008''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

TITLE I--STRENGTHENING THE MEDICAID HOME AND COMMUNITY-BASED STATE PLAN
AMENDMENT OPTION

Sec. 101. Removal of barriers to providing home and community-based
services under State plan amendment option for
individuals in need.
Sec. 102. State option to provide home and community-based services to
individuals for whom such services are likely to prevent,
delay, or decrease the likelihood of an individual's need
for institutionalized care.
Sec. 103. Implementation assistance grants for States electing to
provide home and community-based services under Medicaid
through the State plan amendment option.

TITLE II--STATE GRANTS TO FACILITATE HOME AND COMMUNITY-BASED SERVICES
AND PROMOTE HEALTH

Sec. 201. Reauthorization of medicaid transformation grants and
expansion of permissible uses in order to facilitate the
provision of home and community-based and other long-term
care services.
Sec. 202. Health promotion grants.

TITLE III--LONG TERM CARE INSURANCE

Sec. 301. Treatment of premiums on qualified long-term care insurance
contracts.
Sec. 302. Credit for taxpayers with long-term care needs.
Sec. 303. Treatment of premiums on qualified long-term care insurance
contracts.
Sec. 304. Additional consumer protections for long-term care insurance.

TITLE IV--PROMOTING AND PROTECTING COMMUNITY LIVING

Sec. 401. Mandatory application of spousal impoverishment protections
to recipients of home and community-based services.
Sec. 402. State authority to elect to exclude up to 6 months of average
cost of nursing facility services from assets or
resources for purposes of eligibility for home and
community-based services.

TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 501. Improved data collection.
Sec. 502. GAO report on Medicaid home health services and the extent of
consumer self-direction of such services.

TITLE I--STRENGTHENING THE MEDICAID HOME AND COMMUNITY-BASED STATE PLAN
AMENDMENT OPTION

SEC. 101. REMOVAL OF BARRIERS TO PROVIDING HOME AND
COMMUNITY-BASED SERVICES UNDER STATE PLAN
AMENDMENT OPTION FOR INDIVIDUALS IN NEED.

(a) Parity With Income Eligibility Standard for
Institutionalized Individuals.--Paragraph (1) of section
1915(i) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396n(i)) is
amended by striking ``150 percent of the poverty line (as
defined in section 2110(c)(5))'' and inserting ``300 percent
of the supplemental security income benefit rate established
by section 1611(b)(1)''.
(b) Additional State Option to Provide Home and Community-
Based Services to Individuals Eligible for Services Under a
Waiver.--Section 1915(i) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1396n(i)) is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(6) State option to provide home and community-based
services to individuals eligible for services under a
waiver.--
``(A) In general.--A State that provides home and
community-based services in accordance with this subsection
to individuals who satisfy the needs-based criteria for the
receipt of such services established under paragraph (1)(A)
may, in addition to continuing to provide such services to
such individuals, elect to provide home and community-based
services in accordance with the requirements of this
paragraph to individuals who are eligible for home and
community-based services under a waiver approved

[[Page 16221]]

for the State under subsection (c), (d), or (e) or under
section 1115 to provide such services, but only for those
individuals whose income does not exceed 300 percent of the
supplemental security income benefit rate established by
section 1611(b)(1).
``(B) Application of same requirements for individuals
satisfying needs-based criteria.--Subject to subparagraph
(C), a State shall provide home and community-based services
to individuals under this paragraph in the same manner and
subject to the same requirements as apply under the other
paragraphs of this subsection to the provision of home and
community-based services to individuals who satisfy the
needs-based criteria established under paragraph (1)(A).
``(C) Authority to offer different type, amount, duration,
or scope of home and community-based services.--A State may
offer home and community-based services to individuals under
this paragraph that differ in type, amount, duration, or
scope from the home and community-based services offered for
individuals who satisfy the needs-based criteria established
under paragraph (1)(A), so long as such services are within
the scope of services described in paragraph (4)(B) of
subsection (c) for which the Secretary has the authority to
approve a waiver and do not include room or board.''.
(c) Removal of Limitation on Scope of Services.--Paragraph
(1) of section 1915(i) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1396n(i)), as amended by subsection (a), is amended by
striking ``or such other services requested by the State as
the Secretary may approve''
(d) Optional Eligibility Category to Provide Full Medicaid
Benefits to Individuals Receiving Home and Community-Based
Services Under a State Plan Amendment.--
(1) In general.--Section 1902(a)(10)(A)(ii) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)(10)(A)(ii)) is amended--
(A) in subclause (XVIII), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(B) in subclause (XIX), by adding ``or'' at the end; and
(C) by inserting after subclause (XIX), the following new
subclause:

``(XX) who are eligible for home and community-based
services under needs-based criteria established under
paragraph (1)(A) of section 1915(i), or who are eligible for
home and community-based services under paragraph (6) of such
section, and who will receive home and community-based
services pursuant to a State plan amendment under such
subsection;''.

(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Section 1903(f)(4) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1396b(f)(4)) is amended in the matter preceding
subparagraph (A), by inserting ``1902(a)(10)(A)(ii)(XX),''
after ``1902(a)(10)(A)(ii)(XIX),''.
(B) Section 1905(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1396d(a)) is amended in the matter preceding paragraph (1)--
(i) in clause (xii), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(ii) in clause (xiii), by adding ``or'' at the end; and
(iii) by inserting after clause (xiii) the following new
clause:
``(xiv) individuals who are eligible for home and
community-based services under needs-based criteria
established under paragraph (1)(A) of section 1915(i), or who
are eligible for home and community-based services under
paragraph (6) of such section, and who will receive home and
community-based services pursuant to a State plan amendment
under such subsection,''.
(e) Elimination of Option to Limit Number of Eligible
Individuals or Length of Period for Grandfathered Individuals
if Eligibility Criteria Is Modified.--Paragraph (1) of
section 1915(i) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1396n(i)) is amended--
(1) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following:
``(C) Projection of number of individuals to be provided
home and community-based services.--The State submits to the
Secretary, in such form and manner, and upon such frequency
as the Secretary shall specify, the projected number of
individuals to be provided home and community-based
services.''; and
(2) in subclause (II) of subparagraph (D)(ii), by striking
``to be eligible for such services for a period of at least
12 months beginning on the date the individual first received
medical assistance for such services'' and inserting ``to
continue to be eligible for such services after the effective
date of the modification and until such time as the
individual no longer meets the standard for receipt of such
services under such pre-modified criteria''.
(f) Elimination of Option to Waive Statewideness.--
Paragraph (3) of section 1915(i) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1396n(3)) is amended by striking ``section 1902(a)(1)
(relating to statewideness) and''.
(g) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
take effect on the first day of the first fiscal year quarter
that begins after the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 102. STATE OPTION TO PROVIDE HOME AND COMMUNITY-BASED
SERVICES TO INDIVIDUALS FOR WHOM SUCH SERVICES
ARE LIKELY TO PREVENT, DELAY, OR DECREASE THE
LIKELIHOOD OF AN INDIVIDUAL'S NEED FOR
INSTITUTIONALIZED CARE.

(a) State Plan Amendment Required.--
(1) In general.--Section 1915 of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1396n) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(k) State Plan Amendment Option to Provide Home and
Community-Based Services to Individuals for Whom Such
Services Are Likely to Prevent, Delay, or Decrease the
Likelihood of an Individual's Need for Institutionalized
Care.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to the succeeding provisions of
this subsection, a State that has an approved State plan
amendment under subsection (i) may provide, through a State
plan amendment for the provision of medical assistance for
home and community-based services that are within the scope
of services described in paragraph (4)(B) of subsection (c)
for which the Secretary has the authority to approve a waiver
and do not include room or board to individuals--
``(A) who are not otherwise eligible for medical assistance
under the State plan or under a waiver of such plan;
``(B) whose income does not exceed 300 percent of the
supplemental security income benefit rate established by
section 1611(b)(1); and
``(C) who satisfy such needs-based criteria for determining
eligibility for medical assistance for such services as the
State shall establish in accordance with paragraph (2).
``(2) Requirement for needs-based criteria.--In
establishing needs-based criteria for purposes of determining
eligibility for medical assistance for home and community-
based services under this subsection, a State shall specify
the specific physical, mental, cognitive, or intellectual
impairments, or the inability of an individual to perform 1
or more specific activities of daily living (as defined in
section 7702B(c)(2)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986)
or the need for significant assistance to perform such
activities, for which the State determines that the provision
of home and community-based services are reasonably expected
to prevent, delay, or decrease the likelihood of an
individual's need for institutionalized care.
``(3) Application of same requirements for providing home
and community-based services under subsection (i).--Subject
to paragraphs (4) and (5), a State shall provide home and
community-based services to individuals under this paragraph
in the same manner and subject to the same requirements as
apply to the provision of home and community-based services
to individuals under subsection (i).
``(4) Authority to limit number of individuals.--A State
may limit the number of individuals who are eligible to
receive home and community-based services under this
subsection and may establish waiting lists for the receipt of
such services.
``(5) Authority to offer different type, amount, duration,
or scope of home and community-based services.--A State may
offer home and community-based services to individuals under
this subsection that differ in type, amount, duration, or
scope from the home and community-based services offered for
individuals under paragraph (1)(A) of subsection (i) and, if
applicable, under paragraph (6) of such subsection.''.
(2) Optional categorically needy group; state option to
limit benefits to home and community-based services or to
provide full medical assistance.--
(A) In general.--Section 1902(a)(10) of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)(10)) is amended--
(i) in subparagraph (A)(ii), as amended by section
101(d)(1)--

(I) in subclause (XIX), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(II) in subclause (XX), by adding ``or'' at the end; and
(III) by inserting after subclause (XX), the following new
subclause:
``(XXI) who are eligible for home and community-based
services under section 1915(k) and who will receive home and
community-based services pursuant to a State plan amendment
under such subsection;''; and

(ii) in the matter following subparagraph (G)--

(I) by striking ``and (XIV)'' and inserting ``(XIV)''; and
(II) by inserting ``, and (XV) at the option of the State,
the medical assistance made available to an individual
described in section 1915 (k) who is eligible for medical
assistance only because of subparagraph (A)(ii)(XXI) may be
limited to medical assistance for home and community-based
services described in a State plan amendment submitted under
that section'' before the semicolon.

(B) Conforming amendments.--
(i) Section 1903(f)(4) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1396b(f)(4)), as amended by section 101(d)(2)(A), is
amended in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by
inserting ``1902(a)(10)(A)(ii)(XXI),'' after
``1902(a)(10)(A)(ii)(XX),''.
(ii) Section 1905(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1396d(a)), as amended by section 101(d)(2)(B), is amended in
the matter preceding paragraph (1)--

(I) in clause (xiii), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(II) in clause (xiv), by adding ``or'' at the end; and

(iii) by inserting after clause (xiv) the following new
clause:

[[Page 16222]]

``(xv) who are eligible for home and community-based
services under section 1915(k) and who will receive home and
community-based services pursuant to a State plan amendment
under such subsection,''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
take effect on the first day of the first fiscal year quarter
that begins after the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 103. IMPLEMENTATION ASSISTANCE GRANTS FOR STATES
ELECTING TO PROVIDE HOME AND COMMUNITY-BASED
SERVICES UNDER MEDICAID THROUGH THE STATE PLAN
AMENDMENT OPTION.

(a) Authority to Award Grants.--The Secretary of Health and
Human Services (in this section referred to as the
``Secretary'') shall award grants to eligible States to
provide incentives to States for the implementation of State
plan amendments that meet the requirements of section 1915(i)
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396n(i)).
(b) Eligible State.--For purposes of this section, an
eligible State is a State that--
(1) has an approved State plan amendment described in
subsection (a); and
(2) submits an application to the Secretary, in such form
and manner as the Secretary shall require, specifying the
costs the State will incur in implementing such amendment and
such additional information as the Secretary may require.
(c) Amount and Duration of Grants.--
(1) Amount.--The Secretary shall determine the amount to be
awarded all eligible States under this section for a fiscal
year based on the applications submitted by such States and
the amount available for such fiscal year under subsection
(d).
(2) Limitation on duration of award.--A State may receive a
grant under this section for not more than 3 consecutive
fiscal years.
(d) Appropriations.--There are appropriated, from any funds
in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $40,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013 for making grants to
States under this section. Funds appropriated under this
subsection for a fiscal year shall remain available for
expenditure through September 30, 2013.

TITLE II--STATE GRANTS TO FACILITATE HOME AND COMMUNITY-BASED SERVICES
AND PROMOTE HEALTH

SEC. 201. REAUTHORIZATION OF MEDICAID TRANSFORMATION GRANTS
AND EXPANSION OF PERMISSIBLE USES IN ORDER TO
FACILITATE THE PROVISION OF HOME AND COMMUNITY-
BASED AND OTHER LONG-TERM CARE SERVICES.

(a) 2-Year Reauthorization; Increased Funding.--Section
1903(z)(4)(A) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1396b(z)(4)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by inserting after clause (ii), the following new
clauses:
``(iii) $150,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
``(iv) $150,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.''.
(b) Expansion of Permissible Uses.--Section 1903(z)(2) of
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396b(z)(2)) is amended by
adding at the end the following new subparagraphs:
``(G)(i) Methods for ensuring the availability and
accessibility of home and community-based services in the
State, recognizing multiple delivery options that take into
account differing needs of individuals, through the creation
or designation (in consultation with organizations
representing elderly individuals and individuals of all ages
with physical, mental, cognitive, or intellectual
impairments, and organizations representing the long-term
care workforce, including organized labor, and health care
and direct service providers) of one or more statewide or
regional public entities or non-profit organizations (such as
fiscal intermediaries, agencies with choice, home care
commissions, public authorities, worker associations,
consumer-owned and controlled organizations (including
representatives of individuals with severe intellectual or
cognitive impairment), area agencies on aging, independent
living centers, aging and disability resource centers, or
other disability organizations) which may --
``(I) develop programs where qualified individuals provide
home- and community-based services while solely or jointly
employed by recipients of such services;
``(II) facilitate the training and recruitment of qualified
health and direct service professionals and consumers who use
services;
``(III) recommend or develop a system to set wages and
benefits, and recommend commensurate reimbursement rates;
``(IV) with meaningful ongoing involvement from consumers
and workers (or their respective representatives), develop
procedures for the appropriate screening of workers, create a
registry or registries of available workers, including
policies and procedures to ensure no interruption of care for
eligible individuals;
``(V) assist consumers in identifying workers;
``(VI) act as a fiscal intermediary;
``(VII) assist workers in finding employment, including
consumer-directed employment;
``(VIII) provide funding for disability organizations,
aging organizations, or other organizations, to assume roles
that promote consumers' ability to acquire the necessary
skills for directing their own services and financial
resources; or
``(IX) create workforce development plans on a regional or
statewide basis (or both), to ensure a sufficient supply of
qualified home and community-based services workers,
including reviews and analyses of actual and potential worker
shortages, training and retention programs for home and
community-based services workers (which may include, as
determined appropriate by the State, allowing participation
in such training to count as an allowable work activity under
the State temporary assistance for needy families program
funded under part A of title IV), and plans to assist
consumers with finding and retaining qualified workers.
``(ii) Nothing in clause (i) shall be construed as
prohibiting the use of funds made available to carry out this
subparagraph for start-up costs associated with any of the
activities described in subclauses (I) through (IX), as
requiring any consumer to hire workers who are listed in a
worker registry developed with such funds, or to limit the
ability of consumers to hire or fire their own workers.
``(H) Methods for providing an integrated and efficient
system of long-term care through a review of the Federal,
State, local, and private long-term care resources, services,
and supports available to elderly individuals and individuals
of all ages with physical, mental, cognitive, or intellectual
impairments and the development and implementation of a plan
to fully integrate such resources, services, and supports by
aggregating such resources, services, and supports to create
a consumer-centered and cost-effective resource and delivery
system and expanding the availability of home and community-
based services, and that is designed to result in
administrative savings, consolidation of common activities,
and the elimination of redundant processes.''.
(c) Allocation of Funds.--
(1) Elimination of current law requirements for allocation
of funds.--Section 1903(z)(4)(B) of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1396b(z)(4)(B)) is amended by striking the second
and third sentences.
(2) Assurance of funds to facilitate the provision of home
and community-based services and integrated systems of long-
term care.--Section 1903(z)(4)(B) of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1396b(z)(4)(B)), as amended by paragraph (1), is
amended by inserting after the first sentence the following
new sentence: ``Such method shall provide that 50 percent of
such funds shall be allocated among States that design
programs to adopt the innovative methods described in
subparagraph (G) or (H) (or both) of paragraph (2).''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
take effect on October 1, 2008.

SEC. 202. HEALTH PROMOTION GRANTS.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Eligible medicaid beneficiary.--The term ``eligible
Medicaid beneficiary'' means an individual who is enrolled in
the State Medicaid plan under title XIX of the Social
Security Act and--
(A) has attained the age of 60 and is not a resident of a
nursing facility; or
(B) is an adult with a physical, mental, cognitive, or
intellectual impairment.
(2) Eligible state.--The term ``eligible State'' means a
State that submits an application to the Secretary for a
grant under this section, in such form and manner as the
Secretary shall require.
(3) Evidence- and community-based health promotion
program.--The term ``evidence- and community-based health
promotion program'' means a community-based program (such as
a program for chronic disease self-management, physical or
mental activity, falls prevention, smoking cessation, or
dietary modification) that has been objectively evaluated and
found to improve health outcomes or meet health promotion
goals by preventing, delaying, or decreasing the severity of
physical, mental, cognitive, or intellectual impairment and
that meets generally accepted standards for best professional
practice.
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Health and Human Services.
(b) Authority to Conduct Demonstration Project.--The
Secretary shall award grants on a competitive basis to
eligible States to conduct in accordance with this section an
evidence- and community-based health promotion program that
is designed to achieve the following objectives with respect
to eligible Medicaid beneficiaries:
(1) Lifestyle changes.--To empower eligible Medicaid
beneficiaries to take more control over their own health
through lifestyle changes that have proven effective in
reducing the effects of chronic disease and slowing the
progression of disability.
(2) Diffusion.--To mobilize the Medicaid, aging,
disability, public health, and nonprofit networks at the
State and local levels to accelerate the translation of
credible research into practice through the deployment of
low-cost evidence-based health promotion and disability
prevention programs at the community level.

[[Page 16223]]

(c) Selection and Amount of Grant Awards.--In awarding
grants to eligible States under this section and determining
the amount of the awards, the Secretary shall--
(1) take into consideration the manner and extent to which
the eligible State proposes to achieve the objectives
specified in subsection (b); and
(2) give preference to eligible States proposing--
(A) programs through public service provider organizations
or other organizations with expertise in serving eligible
Medicaid beneficiaries;
(B) strong State-level collaboration across, Medicaid
agencies, State units on aging, State independent living
councils, State associations of Area Agencies on Aging, and
State agencies responsible for public health; or
(C) interventions that have already demonstrated
effectiveness and replicability in a community-based, non-
medical setting.
(d) Use of Funds.--An eligible State awarded a grant under
this section shall use the funds awarded to develop,
implement, and sustain high quality evidence- and community-
based health promotion programs. As a condition of being
awarded such a grant, an eligible State shall agree to--
(1) implement such programs in at least 3 geographic areas
of the State; and
(2) develop the infrastructure and partnerships that will
be necessary over the long-term to effectively embed
evidence-and community-based health promotion programs for
eligible Medicaid beneficiaries within the statewide health,
aging, disability, and long-term care systems.
(e) Technical Assistance.--The Secretary shall provide
assistance to eligible States awarded grants under this
section, sub-grantees and their partners, program organizers,
and others in developing evidence- and community-based health
promotion programs.
(f) Payments to Eligible States; Carryover of Unused Grant
Amounts.--
(1) Payments.--For each calendar quarter of a fiscal year
that begins during the period for which an eligible State is
awarded a grant under this section, the Secretary shall pay
to the State from its grant award for such fiscal year an
amount equal to the lesser of--
(A) the amount of qualified expenditures made by the State
for such quarter; or
(B) the total amount remaining in such grant award for such
fiscal year (taking into account the application of paragraph
(2)).
(2) Carryover of unused amounts.--Any portion of a State
grant award for a fiscal year under this section remaining
available at the end of such fiscal year shall remain
available for making payments to the State for the next 4
fiscal years, subject to paragraph (3).
(3) Reawarding of certain unused amounts.--In the case of a
State that the Secretary determines has failed to meet the
conditions for continuation of a demonstration project under
this section in a succeeding year, the Secretary shall
rescind the grant award for each succeeding year, together
with any unspent portion of an award for prior years, and
shall add such amounts to the appropriation for the
immediately succeeding fiscal year for grants under this
section.
(4) Preventing duplication of payment.--The payment under a
demonstration project with respect to qualified expenditures
shall be in lieu of any payment with respect to such
expenditures that would otherwise be paid to the State under
section 1903(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1396a(a)). Nothing in the previous sentence shall be
construed as preventing a State from being paid under such
section for expenditures in a grant year for which payment is
available under such section 1903(a) after amounts available
to pay for such expenditures under the grant awarded to the
State under this section for the fiscal year have been
exhausted.
(g) Evaluation.--Not later than 3 years after the date on
which the first grant is awarded to an eligible State under
this section, the Secretary shall, by grant, contract, or
interagency agreement, conduct an evaluation of the
demonstration projects carried out under this section that
measures the health-related, quality of life, and cost
outcomes for eligible Medicaid beneficiaries and includes
information relating to the quality, infrastructure,
sustainability, and effectiveness of such projects.
(h) Appropriations.--There are appropriated, from any funds
in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the following
amounts to carry out this section:
(1) Grants to states.--For grants to States, to remain
available until expended--
(A) $4,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
(B) $6,000,000 for fiscal year 2010;
(C) $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
(D) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2012; and
(E) $12,000,000 for fiscal year 2013.
(2) Technical assistance.--For the provision of technical
assistance through such center in accordance with subsection
(e)--
(A) $800,000 for fiscal year 2009;
(B) $1,200,000 for fiscal year 2010;
(C) $1,600,000 for fiscal year 2011;
(D) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2012; and
(E) $2,400,000 for fiscal year 2013.
(3) Evaluation.--For conducting the evaluation required
under subsection (g), $4,000,000 for fiscal year 2011.

TITLE III--LONG TERM CARE INSURANCE

SEC. 301. TREATMENT OF PREMIUMS ON QUALIFIED LONG-TERM CARE
INSURANCE CONTRACTS.

(a) In General.--Part VII of subchapter B of chapter 1 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to additional
itemized deductions) is amended by redesignating section 224
as section 225 and by inserting after section 223 the
following new section:

``SEC. 224. PREMIUMS ON QUALIFIED LONG-TERM CARE INSURANCE
CONTRACTS.

``(a) In General.--In the case of an individual, there
shall be allowed as a deduction an amount equal to the
applicable percentage of the amount of eligible long-term
care premiums (as defined in section 213(d)(10)) paid during
the taxable year for coverage for the taxpayer and the
taxpayer's spouse and dependents under a qualified long-term
care insurance contract (as defined in section 7702B(b)).
``(b) Applicable Percentage.--For purposes of subsection
(a), the applicable percentage shall be determined in
accordance with the following table:

``For taxable years beginning in calendar year-- The ap-
plicable
percent-
age is--
2010 or 2011......................................................25
2012..............................................................35
2013..............................................................65
2014 or thereafter...............................................100.

``(c) Coordination With Other Deductions.--Any amount paid
by a taxpayer for any qualified long-term care insurance
contract to which subsection (a) applies shall not be taken
into account in computing the amount allowable to the
taxpayer as a deduction under section 162(l) or 213(a).''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 62(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by inserting before the last sentence at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(22) Premiums on qualified long-term care insurance
contracts.--The deduction allowed by section 224.''.
(2) The table of sections for part VII of subchapter B of
chapter 1 of such Code is amended by striking the last item
and inserting the following new items:

``Sec. 224. Premiums on qualified long-term care insurance contracts.
``Sec. 225. Cross reference.''.

SEC. 302. CREDIT FOR TAXPAYERS WITH LONG-TERM CARE NEEDS.

(a) In General.--Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
nonrefundable personal credits) is amended by inserting after
section 25D the following new section:

``SEC. 25E. CREDIT FOR TAXPAYERS WITH LONG-TERM CARE NEEDS.

``(a) Allowance of Credit.--
``(1) In general.--There shall be allowed as a credit
against the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year
an amount equal to the applicable credit amount multiplied by
the number of applicable individuals with respect to whom the
taxpayer is an eligible caregiver for the taxable year.
``(2) Applicable credit amount.--For purposes of paragraph
(1), the applicable credit amount shall be determined in
accordance with the following table:

``For taxable years beginning in calendar year-- The ap-
plicable
credit
amount
is--
2010..........................................................$1,000
2011...........................................................1,500
2012...........................................................2,000
2013...........................................................2,500
2014 or thereafter.............................................3,000.

``(b) Limitation Based on Adjusted Gross Income.--
``(1) In general.--The amount of the credit allowable under
subsection (a) shall be reduced (but not below zero) by $100
for each $1,000 (or fraction thereof) by which the taxpayer's
modified adjusted gross income exceeds the threshold amount.
For purposes of the preceding sentence, the term `modified
adjusted gross income' means adjusted gross income increased
by any amount excluded from gross income under section 911,
931, or 933.
``(2) Threshold amount.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the
term `threshold amount' means--
``(A) $150,000 in the case of a joint return, and
``(B) $75,000 in any other case.
``(3) Indexing.--In the case of any taxable year beginning
in a calendar year after 2010, each dollar amount contained
in paragraph (2) shall be increased by an amount equal to the
product of--
``(A) such dollar amount, and
``(B) the medical care cost adjustment determined under
section 213(d)(10)(B)(ii) for the calendar year in which the
taxable year begins, determined by substituting `August

[[Page 16224]]

2009' for `August 1996' in subclause (II) thereof.
If any increase determined under the preceding sentence is
not a multiple of $50, such increase shall be rounded to the
next lowest multiple of $50.
``(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) Applicable individual.--
``(A) In general.--The term `applicable individual' means,
with respect to any taxable year, any individual who has been
certified, before the due date for filing the return of tax
for the taxable year (without extensions), by a physician (as
defined in section 1861(r)(1) of the Social Security Act) as
being an individual with long-term care needs described in
subparagraph (B) for a period--
``(i) which is at least 180 consecutive days, and
``(ii) a portion of which occurs within the taxable year.
Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, a certification shall
not be treated as valid unless it is made within the 39\1/2\
month period ending on such due date (or such other period as
the Secretary prescribes).
``(B) Individuals with long-term care needs.--An individual
is described in this subparagraph if the individual meets any
of the following requirements:
``(i) The individual is at least 6 years of age and--

``(I) is unable to perform (without substantial assistance
from another individual) at least 3 activities of daily
living (as defined in section 7702B(c)(2)(B)) due to a loss
of functional capacity, or
``(II) requires substantial supervision to protect such
individual from threats to health and safety due to severe
cognitive impairment and is unable to perform, without
reminding or cuing assistance, at least 1 activity of daily
living (as so defined) or to the extent provided in
regulations prescribed by the Secretary (in consultation with
the Secretary of Health and Human Services), is unable to
engage in age appropriate activities.

``(ii) The individual is at least 2 but not 6 years of age
and is unable due to a loss of functional capacity to perform
(without substantial assistance from another individual) at
least 2 of the following activities: eating, transferring, or
mobility.
``(iii) The individual is under 2 years of age and requires
specific durable medical equipment by reason of a severe
health condition or requires a skilled practitioner trained
to address the individual's condition to be available if the
individual's parents or guardians are absent.
``(2) Eligible caregiver.--
``(A) In general.--A taxpayer shall be treated as an
eligible caregiver for any taxable year with respect to the
following individuals:
``(i) The taxpayer.
``(ii) The taxpayer's spouse.
``(iii) An individual with respect to whom the taxpayer is
allowed a deduction under section 151(c) for the taxable
year.
``(iv) An individual who would be described in clause (iii)
for the taxable year if section 151(c) were applied by
substituting for the exemption amount an amount equal to the
sum of the exemption amount, the standard deduction under
section 63(c)(2)(C), and any additional standard deduction
under section 63(c)(3) which would be applicable to the
individual if clause (iii) applied.
``(v) An individual who would be described in clause (iii)
for the taxable year if--

``(I) the requirements of clause (iv) are met with respect
to the individual, and
``(II) the requirements of subparagraph (B) are met with
respect to the individual in lieu of the support test under
subsection (c)(1)(D) or (d)(1)(C) of section 152.

``(B) Residency test.--The requirements of this
subparagraph are met if an individual has as his principal
place of abode the home of the taxpayer and--
``(i) in the case of an individual who is an ancestor or
descendant of the taxpayer or the taxpayer's spouse, is a
member of the taxpayer's household for over half the taxable
year, or
``(ii) in the case of any other individual, is a member of
the taxpayer's household for the entire taxable year.
``(C) Special rules where more than 1 eligible caregiver.--
``(i) In general.--If more than 1 individual is an eligible
caregiver with respect to the same applicable individual for
taxable years ending with or within the same calendar year, a
taxpayer shall be treated as the eligible caregiver if each
such individual (other than the taxpayer) files a written
declaration (in such form and manner as the Secretary may
prescribe) that such individual will not claim such
applicable individual for the credit under this section.
``(ii) No agreement.--If each individual required under
clause (i) to file a written declaration under clause (i)
does not do so, the individual with the highest adjusted
gross income shall be treated as the eligible caregiver.
``(iii) Married individuals filing separately.--In the case
of married individuals filing separately, the determination
under this subparagraph as to whether the husband or wife is
the eligible caregiver shall be made under the rules of
clause (ii) (whether or not one of them has filed a written
declaration under clause (i)).
``(d) Identification Requirement.--No credit shall be
allowed under this section to a taxpayer with respect to any
applicable individual unless the taxpayer includes the name
and taxpayer identification number of such individual, and
the identification number of the physician certifying such
individual, on the return of tax for the taxable year.
``(e) Taxable Year Must Be Full Taxable Year.--Except in
the case of a taxable year closed by reason of the death of
the taxpayer, no credit shall be allowable under this section
in the case of a taxable year covering a period of less than
12 months.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 6213(g)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph
(L), by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (M)
and inserting ``, and'', and by inserting after subparagraph
(M) the following new subparagraph:
``(N) an omission of a correct TIN or physician
identification required under section 25E(d) (relating to
credit for taxpayers with long-term care needs) to be
included on a return.''.
(2) The table of sections for subpart A of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 25D the
following new item:

``Sec. 25E. Credit for taxpayers with long-term care needs.''.

SEC. 303. TREATMENT OF PREMIUMS ON QUALIFIED LONG-TERM CARE
INSURANCE CONTRACTS.

(a) In General.--
(1) Cafeteria plans.--The last sentence of section 125(f)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining qualified
benefits) is amended by inserting before the period at the
end ``; except that such term shall include the payment of
premiums for any qualified long-term care insurance contract
(as defined in section 7702B) to the extent the amount of
such payment does not exceed the eligible long-term care
premiums (as defined in section 213(d)(10)) for such
contract''.
(2) Flexible spending arrangements.--Section 106 of such
Code (relating to contributions by an employer to accident
and health plans) is amended by striking subsection (c) and
redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (c).
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 6041 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(h) Flexible Spending Arrangement Defined.--For purposes
of this section, a flexible spending arrangement is a benefit
program which provides employees with coverage under which--
``(1) specified incurred expenses may be reimbursed
(subject to reimbursement maximums and other reasonable
conditions), and
``(2) the maximum amount of reimbursement which is
reasonably available to a participant for such coverage is
less than 500 percent of the value of such coverage.
In the case of an insured plan, the maximum amount reasonably
available shall be determined on the basis of the underlying
coverage.''.
(2) The following sections of such Code are each amended by
striking ``section 106(d)'' and inserting ``section 106(c)'':
sections 223(b)(4)(B), 223(d)(4)(C), 223(f)(3)(B),
3231(e)(11), 3306(b)(18), 3401(a)(22), 4973(g)(1), and
4973(g)(2)(B)(i).
(3) Section 6041(f)(1) of such Code is amended by striking
``(as defined in section 106(c)(2))''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2009.

SEC. 304. ADDITIONAL CONSUMER PROTECTIONS FOR LONG-TERM CARE
INSURANCE.

(a) Additional Protections Applicable to Long-Term Care
Insurance.--Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 7702B(g)(2)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
requirements of model regulation and Act) are amended to read
as follows:
``(A) In general.--The requirements of this paragraph are
met with respect to any contract if such contract meets--
``(i) Model regulation.--The following requirements of the
model regulation:

``(I) Section 6A (relating to guaranteed renewal or
noncancellability), other than paragraph (5) thereof, and the
requirements of section 6B of the model Act relating to such
section 6A.
``(II) Section 6B (relating to prohibitions on limitations
and exclusions) other than paragraph (7) thereof.
``(III) Section 6C (relating to extension of benefits).
``(IV) Section 6D (relating to continuation or conversion
of coverage).
``(V) Section 6E (relating to discontinuance and
replacement of policies).
``(VI) Section 7 (relating to unintentional lapse).
``(VII) Section 8 (relating to disclosure), other than
sections 8F, 8G, 8H, and 8I thereof.
``(VIII) Section 11 (relating to prohibitions against post-
claims underwriting).
``(IX) Section 12 (relating to minimum standards).

[[Page 16225]]

``(X) Section 13 (relating to requirement to offer
inflation protection).
``(XI) Section 25 (relating to prohibition against
preexisting conditions and probationary periods in
replacement policies or certificates).
``(XII) The provisions of section 28 relating to contingent
nonforfeiture benefits, if the policyholder declines the
offer of a nonforfeiture provision described in paragraph (4)
of this subsection.

``(ii) Model act.--The following requirements of the model
Act:

``(I) Section 6C (relating to preexisting conditions).
``(II) Section 6D (relating to prior hospitalization).
``(III) The provisions of section 8 relating to contingent
nonforfeiture benefits, if the policyholder declines the
offer of a nonforfeiture provision described in paragraph (4)
of this subsection.

``(B) Definitions.--For purposes of this paragraph--
``(i) Model regulation.--The term `model regulation' means
the long-term care insurance model regulation promulgated by
the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (as
adopted as of December 2006).
``(ii) Model act.--The term `model Act' means the long-term
care insurance model Act promulgated by the National
Association of Insurance Commissioners (as adopted as of
December 2006).
``(iii) Coordination.--Any provision of the model
regulation or model Act listed under clause (i) or (ii) of
subparagraph (A) shall be treated as including any other
provision of such regulation or Act necessary to implement
the provision.
``(iv) Determination.--For purposes of this section and
section 4980C, the determination of whether any requirement
of a model regulation or the model Act has been met shall be
made by the Secretary.''.
(b) Excise Tax.--Paragraph (1) of section 4980C(c) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to requirements of
model provisions) is amended to read as follows:
``(1) Requirements of model provisions.--
``(A) Model regulation.--The following requirements of the
model regulation must be met:
``(i) Section 9 (relating to required disclosure of rating
practices to consumer).
``(ii) Section 14 (relating to application forms and
replacement coverage).
``(iii) Section 15 (relating to reporting requirements).
``(iv) Section 22 (relating to filing requirements for
marketing).
``(v) Section 23 (relating to standards for marketing),
including inaccurate completion of medical histories, other
than paragraphs (1), (6), and (9) of section 23C.
``(vi) Section 24 (relating to suitability).
``(vii) Section 26 (relating to policyholder
notifications).
``(viii) Section 27 (relating to the right to reduce
coverage and lower premiums).
``(ix) Section 31 (relating to standard format outline of
coverage).
``(x) Section 32 (relating to requirement to deliver
shopper's guide).
``(B) Model act.--The following requirements of the model
Act must be met:
``(i) Section 6F (relating to right to return).
``(ii) Section 6G (relating to outline of coverage).
``(iii) Section 6H (relating to requirements for
certificates under group plans).
``(iv) Section 6J (relating to policy summary).
``(v) Section 6K (relating to monthly reports on
accelerated death benefits).
``(vi) Section 7 (relating to incontestability period).
``(vii) Section 9 (relating to producer training
requirements).
``(C) Definitions.--For purposes of this paragraph, the
terms `model regulation' and `model Act' have the meanings
given such terms by section 7702B(g)(2)(B).''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to policies issued more than 1 year after the
date of the enactment of this Act.

TITLE IV--PROMOTING AND PROTECTING COMMUNITY LIVING

SEC. 401. MANDATORY APPLICATION OF SPOUSAL IMPOVERISHMENT
PROTECTIONS TO RECIPIENTS OF HOME AND
COMMUNITY-BASED SERVICES.

(a) In General.--Section 1924(h)(1)(A) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396r-5(h)(1)(A)) is amended by
striking ``(at the option of the State)is described in
section 1902(a)(10)(A)(ii)(VI)'' and inserting ``is eligible
for medical assistance for home and community-based services
under subsection (c), (d), (e), (i), or (k) of section
1915''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
takes effect on October 1, 2008.

SEC. 402. STATE AUTHORITY TO ELECT TO EXCLUDE UP TO 6 MONTHS
OF AVERAGE COST OF NURSING FACILITY SERVICES
FROM ASSETS OR RESOURCES FOR PURPOSES OF
ELIGIBILITY FOR HOME AND COMMUNITY-BASED
SERVICES.

(a) In General.--Section 1917 of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1396p) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(i) State Authority To Exclude Up to 6 Months of Average
Cost of Nursing Facility Services From Home and Community-
Based Services Eligibility Determinations.--Nothing in this
section or any other provision of this title, shall be
construed as prohibiting a State from excluding from any
determination of an individual's assets or resources for
purposes of determining the eligibility of the individual for
medical assistance for home and community-based services
under subsection (c), (d), (e), (i), or (k) of section 1915
(if a State imposes an limitation on assets or resources for
purposes of eligibility for such services), an amount equal
to the product of the amount applicable under subsection
(c)(1)(E)(ii)(II) (at the time such determination is made)
and such number, not to exceed 6, as the State may elect.''.
(b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in the amendment made by
subsection (a) shall be construed as affecting a State's
option to apply less restrictive methodologies under section
1902(r)(2) for purposes of determining income and resource
eligibility for individuals specified in that section.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
takes effect on October 1, 2008.

TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

SEC. 501. IMPROVED DATA COLLECTION.

(a) Secretarial Requirement To Revise Data Reporting Forms
and Systems To Ensure Uniform and Consistent Reporting by
States.--Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services,
acting through the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare
& Medicaid Services, shall revise CMS Form 372, CMS Form 64,
and CMS Form 64.9 (or any successor forms) and the Medicaid
Statistical Information Statistics (MSIS) claims processing
system to ensure that, with respect to any State that
provides medical assistance to individuals under a waiver or
State plan amendment approved under subsection (c), (d), (e),
(i), (j), or (k) of section 1915 of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1396n), the State reports to the Secretary, not
less than annually and in a manner that is consistent and
uniform for all States (and, in the case of medical
assistance provided under a waiver or State plan amendment
under any such subsection for home and community-based
services, in a manner that is consistent and uniform with the
data required to be reported for purposes of monitoring or
evaluating the provision of such services under the State
plan or under a waiver approved under section 1115 of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1315) to provide such
services) the following data:
(1) The total number of individuals provided medical
assistance for such services under each waiver to provide
such services conducted by the State and each State plan
amendment option to provide such services elected by the
State.
(2) The total amount of expenditures incurred for such
services under each such waiver and State plan amendment
option, disaggregated by expenditures for medical assistance
and administrative or other expenditures.
(3) The types of such services provided by the State under
each such waiver and State plan amendment option.
(4) The number of individuals on a waiting list (if any) to
be enrolled under each such waiver and State plan amendment
option or to receive services under each such waiver and
State plan amendment option.
(5) With respect to home health services, private duty
nursing services, case management services, and
rehabilitative services provided under each such waiver and
State plan amendment option, the total number of individuals
provided each type of such services, the total amount of
expenditures incurred for each type of services, and whether
each such service was provided for long-term care or acute
care purposes.
(b) Public Availability.--Not later than 6 months after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and
Human Services, acting through the Administrator of the
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, shall make publicly
available, in a State identifiable manner, the data described
in subsection (a) through an Internet website and otherwise
as the Secretary determines appropriate.

SEC. 502. GAO REPORT ON MEDICAID HOME HEALTH SERVICES AND THE
EXTENT OF CONSUMER SELF-DIRECTION OF SUCH
SERVICES.

(a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States
shall study the provision of home health services under State
Medicaid plans under title XIX of the Social Security Act.
Such study shall include an examination of the extent to
which there are variations among the States with respect to
the provision of home health services in general under State
Medicaid plans, including the extent to which such plans
impose limits on the types of services that a home health
aide may provide a Medicaid beneficiary and the extent to
which States offer consumer self-direction of such services
or allow for other consumer-oriented policies with respect to
such services.
(b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit a
report to Congress on the results of the study conducted

[[Page 16226]]

under subsection (a), together with such recommendations for
legislative or administrative changes as the Comptroller
General determines appropriate in order to provide home
health services under State Medicaid plans in accordance with
identified best practices for the provision of such services.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague
Senator Kerry today to introduce the Empowered at Home Act. This bill
is a continuation of efforts that I undertook in 2005 to improve access
to home and community based services for those needing long-term care.
This is an important piece of legislation that continues our efforts to
make cost-effective home and community based care options more
available to those who need it.
In 2005, I introduced the Improving Long-term Care Choices Act with
Senator Bayh. That legislation set forth a series of proposals aimed at
improving the accessibility of long-term care insurance and promoting
awareness about the protection that long-term care insurance can offer.
It also sought to broaden the availability of the types of long-term
care services such as home and community-based care, which many people
prefer to institutional care.
The year 2005 ended up being a very important year for health policy
as it relates to Americans who need extensive care. In the Deficit
Reduction Act of 2005, Congress passed into law the Family Opportunity
Act, the Money Follows the Person initiative, and many critical pieces
of the Improving Long-term Care Choices Act. With the bill I am
introducing today with Senator Kerry, I hope to set us on the path to
completing the work we started in 2005.
Making our long-term care system more efficient is a critical goal as
we consider the future of health care. There are more than 35 million
Americans, roughly 12 percent of the U.S. population, over the age of
65. This number is expected to increase dramatically over the next few
decades as the baby boomers age and life expectancy increases.
According to the U.S. Administration on Aging, by the year 2030, there
will be more than 70 million elderly persons in the United States. As
the U.S. population ages, more and more Americans will require long-
term care services.
The need for long-term care will also be affected by the number of
individuals under the age of 65 who may require a lifetime of care.
Currently, almost half of all Americans who need long-term care
services are individuals with disabilities under the age of 65. This
number includes over 5 million working-age adults and approximately
400,000 children.
Long-term care for elderly and disabled individuals, including care
at home and in nursing homes, represents almost 40 percent of Medicaid
expenditures. Contrary to general assumptions, it is Medicaid, not
Medicare, that pays for the largest portion of long-term care for the
elderly. Over 65 percent of Medicaid long-term care expenditures
support elderly and disabled individuals in nursing facilities and
institutions. Although most people who need long-term care prefer to
remain at home, Medicaid spending for long-term care remains heavily
weighted toward institutional care.
Section 6086 of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA, P.L. 109-171)
was based on the Improving Long-term Care Choices Act. The DRA
provision authorized a new optional benefit under Medicaid that allows
States to extend home and community-based services to Medicaid
beneficiaries under the section 1915(i) Home and Community-Based
Services State Option. Under this authority, States can offer Medicaid-
covered home and community-based services under a State's Medicaid plan
without obtaining a section 1915(c) home and community-based waiver.
Eligibility for these section 1915(i) services may be extended only to
Medicaid beneficiaries already enrolled in the program whose income
does not exceed 150 percent of the Federal poverty level.
To date, only one State, my own State of Iowa, has sought to take
advantage of the provision authorized through the DRA. While we had
hoped far more States would participate, we know that the relatively
low income cap, 150 percent, in the DRA provision creates an
administrative complexity that has not made the option appealing for
States.
In this bill we are introducing today, the income eligibility
standard would be raised for access to covered services under section
1915(i) to persons who qualify for Medicaid because their income does
not exceed a specified level established by the State up to 300 percent
of the maximum Supplemental Security Income, SSI, payment applicable to
a person living at home. This will significantly increase the number of
people eligible for these services. States will be able to align their
institutional and home and community-based care income eligibility
levels.
The bill would also establish two new optional eligibility pathways
into Medicaid. These groups would be eligible for section 1915(i) home
and community-based services as well as services offered under a
State's broader Medicaid program. Under this bill, States with an
approved 1915(k) State plan amendment would have the option to extend
Medicaid eligibility to individuals: (1) who are not otherwise eligible
for medical assistance; (2) whose income does not exceed 300 percent of
the supplemental security income benefit rate; and (3) who would
satisfy State-established needs-based criteria based upon a State's
determination that the provision of home and community-based services
would reasonably be expected to prevent, delay, or decrease the need
for institutionalized care. Under this new eligibility pathway, States
could choose to either limit Medicaid benefits to those home and
community-based services offered under section 1915(k) or allow
eligibles to access services available under a State's broader Medicaid
program in addition to the 1915(k) benefits. These changes will give
the States the option of exploring the use of an interventional use of
home and community-based services. If States have the flexibility to
provide the benefit as contemplated in the bill, they can try to delay
the need for institutional care and people in their homes longer.
As the number of Americans reaching retirement age grows
proportionally larger, ultimately the number of Americans needing more
extensive care will grow. Many of those Americans will look to Medicaid
for assistance. States need more tools to provide numerous options to
people in need so that they can stay in their own homes as long as
possible.
The cost of providing long-term care in an institutional setting is
far more expensive care than providing care in the home. States will
benefit from having options before them that allow them to keep people
appropriately in home settings longer. The more States learn how to use
those tools, the more states and ultimately the Federal taxpayer will
benefit from reduced costs for institutional care.
I am also pleased that this bill will include key provisions from S.
2337, the Long-Term Care Affordability and Security Act of 2007. The
bill includes important tax provisions that I introduced in previous
Congresses as well--most recently, the Improving Long-term Care Choices
Act of 2005, introduced in the 109 Congress.
Research shows that the elderly population will nearly double by
2030. By 2050, the population of those aged 85 and older will have
grown by more than 300 percent. Research also shows that the average
age at which individuals need long-term care services, such as home
health care or a private room at a nursing home, is 75. Currently, the
average annual cost for a private room at a nursing home is more than
$75,000. This cost is expected to be in excess of $140,000 by 2030.
Based on these facts, we can see that our Nation needs to prepare its
citizens for the challenges they may face in old age. One way to
prepare for these challenges is by encouraging more Americans to obtain
long-term care insurance coverage. To date, only 10 percent of seniors
have long-term care insurance policies, and only 7 percent of all
private-sector employees are offered long-term care insurance as a
voluntary benefit.

[[Page 16227]]

Under current law, employees may pay for certain health-related
benefits, which may include health insurance premiums, co-pays, and
disability or life insurance, on a pre-tax basis under cafeteria plans
and flexible spending arrangements, ``FSAs''. Essentially, an employee
may elect to reduce his or her annual salary to pay for these benefits,
and the employee doesn't pay taxes on the amounts used to pay these
costs. Employees, however, are explicitly prohibited from paying for
the cost of long-term care insurance coverage tax free.
Our bill would allow employers, for the first time, to offer
qualified long-term care insurance to employees under FSAs and
cafeteria plans. This means employees would be permitted to pay for
qualified long-term care insurance premiums on a tax-free basis. This
would make it easier for employees to purchase long-term care
insurance, which many find unaffordable. This should also encourage
younger individuals to purchase long-term care insurance. The younger
the person is at the time the long-care insurance contract is
purchased, the lower the insurance premium.
Our bill also allows an individual taxpayer to deduct the cost of
their long-term care insurance policy. In other words, the individual
can reduce their gross income by the premiums that they pay for a long-
term care policy, and therefore, pay less in taxes. This tax benefit
for long-term care insurance should encourage more individuals to
purchase these policies. It certainly makes a policy more affordable,
especially for younger individuals. This would allow a middle-aged
taxpayer to start planning for the future now.
Finally, a provision that is included in our bill that I am really
proud of is one that provides a tax credit to long-term caregivers.
Long-term caregivers could include the taxpayer, him- or herself.
Senator Kerry and I recognize that these taxpayers--who have long-term
care needs, yet are taking care of themselves--should be provided extra
assistance. Also, taxpayers taking care of a family member with long-
term care needs would also be eligible for the tax credit. These
taxpayers should be given a helping hand. As our population continues
to age, the least that we can do is provide a tax benefit for these
struggling individuals.
______

By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Smith):
S. 3330. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify
the deduction for domestic production activities for film and
television productions, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Finance.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation
to stimulate domestic film production and create jobs. I am pleased to
be joined by my colleague from Oregon, Senator Gordon Smith.
Our bill, the Domestic Film Production Equity Act of 2008, would
expand a tax deduction, known as the section 199 domestic production
incentive, for qualifying U.S. film producers.
In 2008, this deduction will be worth 6 percent of a domestic
manufacturer's qualifying production activities. It will increase to
nine percent in 2010.
Specifically, our bill would expand the production incentive to allow
studios to include wages paid to full-time short-term employees,
including U.S. actors, writers, directors, and production personnel in
determining the limit on the deduction amount.
The bill will treat films produced by partnerships between several
studios as qualified property, each partner must have at least 20
percent interest in a project to qualify.
The bill will deduct income from the licensing of copyrights and
trademarks relating to films; and lastly, the bill will deduct income
from films and TV programs broadcast over the Internet.
Most film production companies receive only a limited benefit from
the production incentive because the industry relies heavily on short-
term contract work, and because many films are produced by multiple
studios through partnerships.
As a matter of fairness, these domestic production incentives should
be extended to fully benefit an industry that employs over 1.3 million
Americans.
Filming a movie is different than traditional domestic manufacturing
because short-term contract workers, including actors, writers,
directors, and production personnel often work full-time on projects;
multiple studios often produce one project; studios generate
significant licensing fees associated with copyrights and trademarks
related to films; and a number of media, including the Internet may be
used to view each film or production.
Our bill takes these circumstances into account to modernize this
section of the tax code.
The film industry is an important asset to the American economy.
More than 1.3 million Americans work in motion picture and television
production.
In 2005, these jobs provided $30.24 billion in wages, with employees
earning an average salary of $73,000.
Of these employees, 231,000 were short-term contractors, often
working multiple projects each year.
California was the primary location for 365 film productions in 2005.
This generated $42.2 billion in economic activity for my State.
Our bill would help studios continue to provide opportunities to
these talented actors, writers, directors, and production personnel in
America.
Expanding the Section 199 deduction to include these four categories
is also a response to the competitive business of captivating an
increasingly technology-adept viewing audience.
The film industry, like the music industry, is increasingly seeing
their sales move to digital formats via the internet. On iTunes--an
online digital music store operated by Apple--around 50,000 movies are
rented or sold each day.
Moreover, by not allowing film studios to take advantage of domestic
production tax incentives, we risk losing more operations abroad.
For example, Canada currently provides domestic film producers with a
tax credit worth 15 percent of qualifying production costs. Foreign
studios with operations in Canada may also receive a tax credit worth
up to 16 percent of wages paid to Canadian residents.
The film industry plays a unique role in our society.
The world recognizes Hollywood as the center of the entertainment
industry. Millions of tourists annually travel from across the globe to
visit the sites that embody the golden age of film.
Hollywood film studios are American institutions that continue to
produce some of the finest films in the world.
Needless to say, it is critical that studios continue to film in my
State and across the country. If not, the golden age of Hollywood and
the economic activity it brings may be a part of the past.
We are fortunate to have a vibrant domestic film industry.
This legislation will help ensure that the U.S. entertainment
industry continues to be the world leader.
American workers and our economy stand to benefit.
Efforts to expand the production incentive for domestic films have
enjoyed broad bi-partisan support. Our bill is similar to a provision
included in the tax extenders package which passed the House
overwhelmingly by a vote of 263-160 in May.
I am hopeful that the Senate will move quickly to enact this much-
needed modernization of the tax code.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:

S. 3330

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 ``Domestic Film Production
Equity Act of 2008''.

SEC. 2. PROVISIONS RELATED TO FILM AND TELEVISION
PRODUCTIONS.

(a) Modifications to Deduction for Domestic Activities.--
(1) Determination of w-2 wages.--Paragraph (2) of section
199(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to W-2
wages)

[[Page 16228]]

is amended by adding at the end the following new
subparagraph:
``(D) Special rule for qualified film.--In the case of a
qualified film, such term shall include compensation for
services performed in the United States by actors, production
personnel, directors, and producers.''.
(2) Definition of qualified film.--Paragraph (6) of section
199(c) of such Code (relating to qualified film) is amended
by adding at the end the following: ``A qualified film shall
include any copyrights, trademarks, or other intangibles with
respect to such film. The methods and means of distributing a
qualified film shall not affect the availability of the
deduction under this section.''.
(3) Partnerships.--Subparagraph (A) of section 199(d)(1) of
such Code (relating to partnerships and S corporations) is
amended by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ii), by
striking the period at the end of clause (iii) and inserting
``, and'', and by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(iv) in the case of each partner of a partnership, or
shareholder of an S corporation, who owns (directly or
indirectly) at least 20 percent of the capital interests in
such partnership or of the stock of such S corporation--

``(I) such partner or shareholder shall be treated as
having engaged directly in any film produced by such
partnership or S corporation, and
``(II) such partnership or S corporation shall be treated
as having engaged directly in any film produced by such
partner or shareholder.''.

(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2007.
______

By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself and Mr. Crapo):
S. 3331. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require
that the payment of the manufacturers' excise tax on recreational
equipment be paid quarterly; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I am pleased today to join with my friend
Senator Crapo to introduce an important piece of legislation that would
help to strengthen the financial health of America's firearm and
ammunition manufacturers, who in turn support wildlife conservation in
America.
The firearm and ammunition industry pays a Federal excise tax of 11
percent on long guns and ammunition and 10 percent on handguns. The Tax
and Trade Bureau in the Treasury Department collects this tax. The
Bureau sends the proceeds to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, where
they are deposited into the Wildlife Restoration Trust Fund, also known
as the Pittman-Robertson Trust Fund.
The tax is a major source of conservation funding in America. Since
1991, the firearm and ammunition industry has contributed about $3
billion to the Pittman-Robertson Fund.
Of all the industries that pay excise taxes on the sale of their
products to support wildlife conservation efforts, firearms and
ammunition manufacturers are the only ones that have to pay excise
taxes every 2 weeks. Other industries, such as archery and fishing, pay
their tax every 3 months.
This frequent payment obligation imposes a costly and inequitable
burden on the firearms and ammunition industry. Manufacturers spend
thousands of additional man-hours just to administer the paperwork
associated with making the bi-weekly excise payments.
According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, changing the
deposit schedule from a bi-weekly to quarterly payment would save the
industry an estimated $21.6 million dollars a year. That's money that
the industry could use for investment in researching and developing new
products, purchasing new manufacturing plants and equipment, and
communicating with the hunting and shooting sports community.
Let me take a moment to explain what this legislation does not do. It
does not reduce the firearm and ammunition industry's excise tax rates.
It simply adds fairness to the tax code.
It is important for my Colleagues to understand the history and
nature of the firearm and ammunition excise tax. During the Great
Depression, hunters and conservationists recognized that overharvesting
of wildlife would destroy America's treasured wildlife and natural
habitats. Sportsmen, state wildlife agencies, and the firearm and
ammunition industries lobbied Congress to extend the existing 10
percent excise tax and impose a new 11 percent excise tax to create a
new fund. The fund was called the Pittman-Robertson Trust Fund after
Senator Key Pittman of Nevada and Representative A. Willis Robertson of
Virginia. President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the legislation into
law in 1937.
The industry, hunters, and conservationists came together to create
this structure. They recognized the importance of conservation. And
they encouraged Congress to impose a tax on their guns and ammo. It is
a rare thing when taxpayers ask to be taxed. But preserving our
country's wildlife habitat was and continues to be that important.
Today, more than $700 million each year is generated and used
exclusively to establish, restore, and protect wildlife habitats.
Now let me explain the effect that the bill we are introducing today
would have on the Pittman-Robertson Trust Fund. As the Joint Committee
on Taxation explained in its revenue estimate, the net budget effect to
the fund is $4 million. This is purely a result of the shift in the
timing of collections, from bi-weekly to quarterly, over a 10-year
budget window. Consumers of firearms and ammunition would still pay the
exact same amount of tax.
The firearm and ammunition industry recognizes the 10-year $4 million
loss to the trust fund. The industry developed a comprehensive 5-year
proposal to ease this effect. Under the proposal, the industry would
contribute $150,000 a year for the next 5 years, a total of $750,000,
to the fund.
These actions again show the partnership between hunters,
conservation groups, and the firearm and ammunition industry to protect
conservation programs and initiatives. That is why this legislation is
supported by the following groups: Archery Trade Association;
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies; Boon and Young;
Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation; Delta Waterfowl; Ducks Unlimited;
National Rifle Association; National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc.;
National Wild Turkey Federation; North American Wetlands Conservation
Council; Pheasants Forever; Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation; Safari Club
International; Wildlife Management Institute; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance.
I urge my Colleagues to support this legislation. I hope that we can
come together, just as the industry, hunters, and conservation groups
have, to pass this legislation. It's a matter of tax fairness. Let us
do our part to correct this inequity in the tax code. Let us do our
part to support an American business that in turn supports wildlife
habitat restoration and conservation.
______

By Mr. STEVENS (for himself and Ms. Murkowski):
S. 3333. A bill to amend the Whaling Convention Act so that it
expressly applies to aboriginal subsistence whaling, and in particular,
authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to set bowhead whale catch limits
in the event that the IWC fails to adopt such limits; to the Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, currently, annual catch limits for
subsistence whaling by Alaskan natives is set through periodic
negotiations of the international whaling commission. In setting the
quota, the IWC has tremendous power to influence the lives--even the
survival--of these aboriginal communities.
For over 30 years I have worked with the International Whaling
Commission to secure the right for native Alaskans to hunt bowhead
whales and preserve their subsistence lifestyle. Currently, native
Alaskans living in 10 villages on Alaska's north slope and St. Lawrence
Island carry forward an ancient tradition of harvesting small numbers
of bowhead whales. Not only do these whales serve as a primary source
of food for the communities, but they define their very identity and
culture.
The Alaska natives who rely on this subsistence hunt have complied
with the mandates passed down from the IWC to ensure a sustainable and
humane harvest. In fact, since the IWC began regulating these catches,
the number of bowhead whales in the Arctic has risen substantially.
The IWC, however, may not always produce the bowhead quota upon which

[[Page 16229]]

Alaska natives depend due to political games. Over the last several
years, I have seen other nations attempt to influence the U.S. position
on other whaling issues at the IWC by specifically interfering with the
native Alaskans bowhead quota votes. This is unacceptable. Any
positions on whaling issues under IWC's purview need to be debated on
their own merits. It is unthinkable to allow other countries to use The
health and welfare of our Alaska natives, whose lives depend on this
hunt, as leverage for influencing U.S. positions on other IWC matters.
The legislation I am introducing will ensure that native Alaskans
maintain their rights to engage in subsistence whaling--an ancient
practice vital to their culture and survival. This bill would amend the
Whaling Convention Act of 1949 to authorize the Secretary of Commerce
to issue bowhead whale catch limits for aboriginal subsistence whaling
in Alaska native communities.
This bill ensures that the U.S. will continue to seek and negotiate
bowhead whaling quota through the IWC. But if the IWC is unable to
issue bowhead whaling quota, the Secretary of Commerce could then issue
domestic aboriginal subsistence whaling permits. Such action would need
to ensure consistency with IWC rules on subsistence whaling ensuring
safe, sustainable, and humane hunts, and the harvest must not exceed
the original subsistence needs recommended by the U.S.
The IWC has the great responsibility of ensuring that any subsistence
whaling, now or in the future, is carried out in a scientifically sound
and sustainable manner. I continue to support the IWC's efforts on this
vital issue. yet the United States must also protect the rights of our
native communities to continue their ancient subsistence bowhead
harvesting. This bill strikes the proper balance between supporting IWC
work and protecting our Alaska native communities. I thank my
colleagues for considering this important legislation.

____________________

SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS

______

SENATE RESOLUTION 622--DESIGNATING THE WEEK BEGINNING SEPTEMBER 7,
2008, AS ``NATIONAL HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES WEEK''

Mr. GRAHAM (for himself, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Bayh, Mr. Biden, Mr.
Bond, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Brown, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Burr, Mr.
Byrd, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Casey, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Cochran,
Mr. Cornyn, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Dole, Mr. Durbin, Mrs.
Hutchison, Mr. Isakson, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Levin, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr.
Martinez, Mr. McCain, Mrs. McCaskill, Mr. Menendez, Ms. Mikulski, Mr.
Nelson of Florida, Mr. Obama, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Salazar, Mr.
Sessions, Mr. Specter, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Warner, and Mr. Wicker)
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee
on the Judiciary:

S. Res. 622

Whereas there are 103 historically Black colleges and
universities in the United States;
Whereas historically Black colleges and universities
provide the quality education essential to full participation
in a complex, highly technological society;
Whereas historically Black colleges and universities have a
rich heritage and have played a prominent role in the history
of the United States;
Whereas historically Black colleges and universities have
allowed many underprivileged students to attain their full
potential through higher education; and
Whereas the achievements and goals of historically Black
colleges and universities are deserving of national
recognition: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates the week beginning September 7, 2008, as
``National Historically Black Colleges and Universities
Week''; and
(2) calls on the people of the United States and interested
groups to observe the week with appropriate ceremonies,
activities, and programs to demonstrate support for
historically Black colleges and universities in the United
States.

____________________

SENATE RESOLUTION 623--RECOGNIZING THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ROLE OF THE
LANDER TRAIL IN THE SETTLEMENT OF THE AMERICAN WEST ON THE 150TH
ANNIVERSARY OF THE LANDER TRAIL

Mr. ENZI (for himself and Mr. Barrasso) submitted the following
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary:

S. Res. 623

Whereas Frederick W. Lander first surveyed and supervised
construction of the Lander Trail in 1858 to provide emigrants
with a travelable link between the Oregon and California
Trails;
Whereas 13,000 emigrants traveled on the Lander Trail
during the settlement of the Western United States;
Whereas the Lander Trail was the first Federal road west of
the Mississippi River;
Whereas travelers in the American West used the Lander
Trail for 54 years until 1912; and
Whereas people can still experience the Lander Trail in the
same setting that Frederick W. Lander first began
construction in 1858: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate honors the important role of the
Lander Trail in the settlement of the Western United States
on the sesquicentennial anniversary of the Lander Trail.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize a part of
Wyoming's history that is celebrating its one hundred and fiftieth
anniversary this year. The Lander Trail, which runs for 256 miles from
South Pass, WY, to Fort Hall, ID, was an important part of the
expansion of the American West in the 1800s when people took up the
challenge to ``go west'' and settle new territory. In 1858, Frederick
W. Lander began surveying and construction for the first federally
funded road west of the Mississippi to provide a better route for
emigrants headed to California, Oregon, and a new life on the frontier.
Today, I would like to recognize the historical role the Lander Trail
played in Wyoming and the American West.
It was tough going for emigrants going west in the 1850s. The
dangerous journey halfway across the country could take 6 months or
more. After the Lander Trail was completed, it was a better road
through easier territory. Emigrants headed to California or Oregon
could cut 7 days off their journey by following the Lander Trail, and
there were good sources of food, water, and forage for livestock along
the way. Thirteen thousand people traveled the Lander Trail on their
way to homestead in western territories or to pan for gold in
California. The Lander Trail is part of the National Historic Trails
system and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
The Lander Trail can still be seen today in Wyoming and the land
looks almost the same as it did when Frederick Lander first started
surveying it. The work of groups in Wyoming like the Lander Trail
Foundation have ensured that the history of this unique piece of my
State is being preserved and that people today can go and see and
experience the Lander Trail. I would like to take this opportunity to
recognize the role that the Lander Trail has played in the history of
my State of Wyoming and the settlement of the American West.

____________________

AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED AND PROPOSED

SA 5114. Mr. DOMENICI submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity
Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which
was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5115. Mr. DOMENICI (for himself, Mr. Voinovich, and Mr.
Inhofe) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the
table.
SA 5116. Mr. DOMENICI submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5117. Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. McConnell)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5118. Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Voinovich)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5119. Mr. GRAHAM (for himself, Mr. Kyl, and Mr. McCain)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the

[[Page 16230]]

bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5120. Mr. GRAHAM submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5121. Mr. BOND submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5122. Mr. BOND submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5123. Mr. BOND submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5124. Mr. KOHL submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5125. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5126. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5127. Ms. SNOWE submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by her to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5128. Mr. ALLARD submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5129. Mr. ALEXANDER submitted an amendment intended to
be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5130. Mr. ENSIGN (for himself and Mr. Sununu) submitted
an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S.
3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5131. Mr. BUNNING (for himself and Mr. McConnell)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5132. Ms. LANDRIEU submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by her to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5133. Ms. MURKOWSKI submitted an amendment intended to
be proposed by her to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5134. Ms. MURKOWSKI submitted an amendment intended to
be proposed by her to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5135. Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. Reid, Mr. Schumer,
Mr. Salazar, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Durbin , Mr. Kerry, Ms.
Stabenow, Mr. Whitehouse, Mrs. Clinton, Mrs. Murray, Mr.
Lieberman, Mr. Nelson, of Florida, and Ms. Klobuchar)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5136. Mr. GREGG (for himself and Mr. Sununu) submitted
an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S.
3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5137. Mr. COLEMAN (for himself, Mr. Domenici, Mrs.
Hutchison, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Allard, Mr.
Bond, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Burr, Mr. Cochran, Mr.
Cornyn, Mr. Craig, Mr. Crapo, Mrs. Dole, Mr. Enzi, Mr.
Graham, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Martinez, Mr. Roberts,
Mr. Vitter, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. Wicker, and Mr. Sununu)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5138. Mr. BARRASSO (for himself, Mr. Bunning, and Mr.
Enzi) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the
table.
SA 5139. Mr. BARRASSO submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5140. Mr. SHELBY submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5141. Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Lieberman)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the
bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5142. Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Lieberman)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the
bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5143. Mr. CORKER submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5144. Mr. MARTINEZ (for himself, Ms. Collins, Mrs.
Feinstein, and Mr. Sununu) submitted an amendment intended to
be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5145. Mr. VITTER submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5146. Mr. VITTER submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5147. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5148. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5149. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5150. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5151. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5152. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5153. Mr. CRAIG (for himself, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Bond, Mr.
Vitter, and Mr. Inhofe) submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5154. Mr. COBURN submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5155. Mr. CRAPO submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5156. Mr. CRAPO submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5157. Mr. ENZI (for himself and Mr. Barrasso) submitted
an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S.
3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5158. Mr. ENZI submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5159. Mr. ENZI submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5160. Mr. STEVENS (for himself and Ms. Murkowski)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5161. Mr. CORNYN submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5162. Mr. WARNER (for himself and Mr. Webb) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268,
supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5163. Mr. WARNER (for himself and Mr. Lieberman)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5164. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5165. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5166. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5167. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5168. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5169. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5170. Mr. SMITH (for himself, Mr. Craig, Mr. Stevens,
and Ms. Murkowski) submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5171. Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself, Mr. Roberts, and Mr.
Sununu) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the
table.
SA 5172. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5173. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5174. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5175. Mr. INHOFE (for himself and Mr. Domenici)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5176. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the

[[Page 16231]]

bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5177. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5178. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5179. Mr. GRAHAM (for himself, Mr. Kyl, Mr. McCain, and
Mr. Inhofe) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on
the table.
SA 5180. Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself and Ms. Collins)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5181. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5182. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5183. Mr. SMITH submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5184. Mr. REED (for himself and Ms. Snowe) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268,
supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5185. Mr. CARDIN submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5186. Ms. CANTWELL (for herself, Mr. Lieberman, and Mr.
Nelson, of Florida) submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by her to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5187. Mrs. DOLE submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by her to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5188. Mr. LAUTENBERG submitted an amendment intended to
be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5189. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5181 submitted by Mr. Thune and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5190. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5171 submitted by Mr. Voinovich (for
himself, Mr. Roberts, and Mr. Sununu) and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie
on the table.
SA 5191. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5166 submitted by Mr. Burr and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5192. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5162 submitted by Mr. Warner (for
himself and Mr. Webb) and intended to be proposed to the bill
S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5193. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5161 submitted by Mr. Cornyn and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5194. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5154 submitted by Mr. Coburn and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5195. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5153 submitted by Mr. Craig (for
himself, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Bond, Mr. Vitter, and Mr. Inhofe) and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5196. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5147 submitted by Mr. DeMint and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5197. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5137 submitted by Mr. Coleman (for
himself, Mr. Domenici, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. McConnell, Mr.
Alexander, Mr. Allard, Mr. Bond, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Bunning,
Mr. Burr, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Craig, Mr. Crapo, Mrs.
Dole, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Graham, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Isakson, Mr.
Martinez, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. Wicker,
and Mr. Sununu) and intended to be proposed to the bill S.
3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5198. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5132 submitted by Ms. Landrieu and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5199. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5123 submitted by Mr. Bond and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5200. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5121 submitted by Mr. Bond and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5201. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5116 submitted by Mr. Domenici and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5202. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5110 submitted by Mr. Vitter and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5203. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5090 submitted by Mr. Vitter and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5204. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5097 submitted by Mr. Coleman and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5205. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5108 submitted by Mr. McConnell and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5206. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5109 submitted by Mr. Vitter and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5207. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5110 submitted by Mr. Vitter and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5208. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5116 submitted by Mr. Domenici and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5209. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5121 submitted by Mr. Bond and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5210. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5123 submitted by Mr. Bond and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5211. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5132 submitted by Ms. Landrieu and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5212. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5137 submitted by Mr. Coleman (for
himself, Mr. Domenici, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. McConnell, Mr.
Alexander, Mr. Allard, Mr. Bond, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Bunning,
Mr. Burr, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Craig, Mr. Crapo, Mrs.
Dole, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Graham, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Isakson, Mr.
Martinez, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. Wicker,
and Mr. Sununu) and intended to be proposed to the bill S.
3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5213. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5147 submitted by Mr. DeMint and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5214. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5153 submitted by Mr. Craig (for
himself, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Bond, Mr. Vitter, and Mr. Inhofe) and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5215. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5154 submitted by Mr. Coburn and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5216. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5161 submitted by Mr. Cornyn and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5217. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5162 submitted by Mr. Warner (for
himself and Mr. Webb) and intended to be proposed to the bill
S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5218. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5166 submitted by Mr. Burr and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.

[[Page 16232]]

SA 5219. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5171 submitted by Mr. Voinovich (for
himself, Mr. Roberts, and Mr. Sununu) and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie
on the table.
SA 5220. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5181 submitted by Mr. Thune and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5221. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5090 submitted by Mr. Vitter and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5222. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5092 submitted by Mr. Vitter and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5223. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5097 submitted by Mr. Coleman and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5224. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5108 submitted by Mr. McConnell and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5225. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5109 submitted by Mr. Vitter and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5226. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5090 submitted by Mr. Vitter and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5227. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5092 submitted by Mr. Vitter and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5228. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5097 submitted by Mr. Coleman and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5229. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5108 submitted by Mr. McConnell and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5230. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5109 submitted by Mr. Vitter and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5231. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5110 submitted by Mr. Vitter and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5232. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5116 submitted by Mr. Domenici and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5233. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5121 submitted by Mr. Bond and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5234. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5123 submitted by Mr. Bond and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5235. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5132 submitted by Ms. Landrieu and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5236. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5137 submitted by Mr. Coleman (for
himself, Mr. Domenici, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. McConnell, Mr.
Alexander, Mr. Allard, Mr. Bond, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Bunning,
Mr. Burr, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Craig, Mr. Crapo, Mrs.
Dole, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Graham, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Isakson, Mr.
Martinez, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. Wicker,
and Mr. Sununu) and intended to be proposed to the bill S.
3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5237. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5147 submitted by Mr. DeMint and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5238. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5153 submitted by Mr. Craig (for
himself, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Bond, Mr. Vitter, and Mr. Inhofe) and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5239. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5154 submitted by Mr. Coburn and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5240. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5161 submitted by Mr. Cornyn and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5241. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5161 submitted by Mr. Cornyn and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5242. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5166 submitted by Mr. Burr and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5243. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5171 submitted by Mr. Voinovich (for
himself, Mr. Roberts, and Mr. Sununu) and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was ordered to lie
on the table.
SA 5244. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5181 submitted by Mr. Thune and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5245. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5092 submitted by Mr. Vitter and
intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5246. Ms. CANTWELL submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed to amendment SA 5135 submitted by Mr. Bingaman (for
himself, Mr. Reid, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Salazar, Mr. Dorgan, Mr.
Durbin, Mr. Kerry, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Whitehouse, Mrs.
Clinton, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Nelson of Florida,
and Ms. Klobuchar) and intended to be proposed to the bill S.
3268, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.

____________________

TEXT OF AMENDMENTS

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. FUNDING FOR SCIENTIFIC INVENTORY OF OIL AND GAS
RESERVES.

Section 604 of the Energy Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 6217) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Funding.--On October 1, 2008, out of any funds in the
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the Secretary of the
Treasury shall transfer to the Secretary of the Interior
$500,000,000 to carry out this section, without further
appropriation or fiscal year limitation.''.
______

SA 5115. Mr. DOMENICI (for himself, Mr. Voinovich, and Mr. Inhofe)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S.
3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price
speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. PROCUREMENT AND ACQUISITION OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS.

Section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007 (42 U.S.C. 17142) is repealed.

SEC. __. REMOVAL OF PROHIBITION ON FINAL REGULATIONS FOR
COMMERCIAL LEASING PROGRAM FOR OIL SHALE
RESOURCES ON PUBLIC LAND.

Section 433 of the Department of the Interior, Environment,
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law
110-161; 121 Stat. 2152) is repealed.
______

SA 5116. Mr. DOMENICI submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``American
Energy Production Act of 2008''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:

[[Page 16233]]

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definition of Secretary.

TITLE I--TRADITIONAL RESOURCES

Subtitle A--Outer Continental Shelf

Sec. 101. Publication of projected State lines on outer Continental
Shelf.
Sec. 102. Production of oil and natural gas in new producing areas.
Sec. 103. Conforming amendment.

Subtitle B--Leasing Program for Land Within Coastal Plain

Sec. 111. Definitions.
Sec. 112. Leasing program for land within the Coastal Plain.
Sec. 113. Lease sales.
Sec. 114. Grant of leases by the Secretary.
Sec. 115. Lease terms and conditions.
Sec. 116. Coastal Plain environmental protection.
Sec. 117. Expedited judicial review.
Sec. 118. Rights-of-way and easements across Coastal Plain.
Sec. 119. Conveyance.
Sec. 120. Local government impact aid and community service assistance.
Sec. 121. Prohibition on exports.
Sec. 122. Allocation of revenues.

Subtitle C--Permitting

Sec. 131. Refinery permitting process.
Sec. 132. Removal of additional fee for new applications for permits to
drill.

Subtitle D--Restoration of State Revenue

Sec. 141. Restoration of State revenue.

TITLE II--ALTERNATIVE RESOURCES

Subtitle A--Renewable Fuel and Advanced Energy Technology

Sec. 201. Definition of renewable biomass.
Sec. 202. Advanced battery manufacturing incentive program.
Sec. 203. Biofuels infrastructure and additives research and
development.
Sec. 204. Study of increased consumption of ethanol-blended gasoline
with higher levels of ethanol.
Sec. 205. Study of diesel vehicle attributes.

Subtitle B--Clean Coal-Derived Fuels for Energy Security

Sec. 211. Short title.
Sec. 212. Definitions.
Sec. 213. Clean coal-derived fuel program.

Subtitle C--Oil Shale

Sec. 221. Removal of prohibition on final regulations for commercial
leasing program for oil shale resources on public land.

Subtitle D--Department of Defense Facilitation of Secure Domestic Fuel
Development

Sec. 231. Procurement and acquisition of alternative fuels.
Sec. 232. Multiyear contract authority for the Department of Defense
for the procurement of synthetic fuels.

SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY.

In this Act, the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of
Energy.

TITLE I--TRADITIONAL RESOURCES

Subtitle A--Outer Continental Shelf

SEC. 101. PUBLICATION OF PROJECTED STATE LINES ON OUTER
CONTINENTAL SHELF.

Section 4(a)(2)(A) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
(43 U.S.C. 1333(a)(2)(A)) is amended--
(1) by designating the first, second, and third sentences
as clause (i), (iii), and (iv), respectively;
(2) in clause (i) (as so designated), by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of the American Energy Production
Act of 2008''; and
(3) by inserting after clause (i) (as so designated) the
following:
``(ii)(I) The projected lines shall also be used for the
purpose of preleasing and leasing activities conducted in new
producing areas under section 32.
``(II) This clause shall not affect any property right or
title to Federal submerged land on the outer Continental
Shelf.
``(III) In carrying out this clause, the President shall
consider the offshore administrative boundaries beyond State
submerged lands for planning, coordination, and
administrative purposes of the Department of the Interior,
but may establish different boundaries.''.

SEC. 102. PRODUCTION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS IN NEW PRODUCING
AREAS.

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 32. PRODUCTION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS IN NEW PRODUCING
AREAS.

[[Page 16234]]

under for the fiscal year under paragraph (1)(B)(i).
``(4) Timing.--The amounts required to be deposited under
subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) for the applicable fiscal
year shall be made available in accordance with that
subparagraph during the fiscal year immediately following the
applicable fiscal year.
``(5) Authorized uses.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), each new
producing State and coastal political subdivision shall use
all amounts received under paragraph (2) in accordance with
all applicable Federal and State laws, only for 1 or more of
the following purposes:
``(i) Projects and activities for the purposes of coastal
protection, including conservation, coastal restoration,
hurricane protection, and infrastructure directly affected by
coastal wetland losses.
``(ii) Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, or natural
resources.
``(iii) Implementation of a federally approved marine,
coastal, or comprehensive conservation management plan.
``(iv) Mitigation of the impact of outer Continental Shelf
activities through the funding of onshore infrastructure
projects.
``(v) Planning assistance and the administrative costs of
complying with this section.
``(B) Limitation.--Not more than 3 percent of amounts
received by a new producing State or coastal political
subdivision under paragraph (2) may be used for the purposes
described in subparagraph (A)(v).
``(6) Administration.--Amounts made available under
paragraph (1)(B) shall--
``(A) be made available, without further appropriation, in
accordance with this subsection;
``(B) remain available until expended; and
``(C) be in addition to any amounts appropriated under--
``(i) other provisions of this Act;
``(ii) the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16
U.S.C. 460l-4 et seq.); or
``(iii) any other provision of law.
``(d) Disposition of Qualified Outer Continental Shelf
Revenues From Other Areas.--Notwithstanding section 9, for
each applicable fiscal year, the terms and conditions of
subsection (c) shall apply to the disposition of qualified
outer Continental Shelf revenues that--
``(1) are derived from oil or gas leasing in an area that
is not included in the current 5-year plan of the Secretary
for oil or gas leasing; and
``(2) are not assumed in the budget of the United States
Government submitted by the President under section 1105 of
title 31, United States Code.''.

SEC. 103. CONFORMING AMENDMENT.

Sections 104 through 105 of the Department of the Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008
(Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2118) are repealed.

Subtitle B--Leasing Program for Land Within Coastal Plain

SEC. 111. DEFINITIONS.

In this subtitle:
(1) Coastal plain.--The term ``Coastal Plain'' means that
area identified as the ``1002 Coastal Plain Area'' on the
map.
(2) Federal agreement.--The term ``Federal Agreement''
means the Federal Agreement and Grant Right-of-Way for the
Trans-Alaska Pipeline issued on January 23, 1974, in
accordance with section 28 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30
U.S.C. 185) and the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act
(43 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.).
(3) Final statement.--The term ``Final Statement'' means
the final legislative environmental impact statement on the
Coastal Plain, dated April 1987, and prepared pursuant to
section 1002 of the Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3142) and section 102(2)(C) of
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(C)).
(4) Map.--The term ``map'' means the map entitled ``Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge'', dated September 2005, and
prepared by the United States Geological Survey.
(5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior (or the designee of the Secretary), acting
through the Director of the Bureau of Land Management in
consultation with the Director of the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service and in coordination with a State coordinator
appointed by the Governor of the State of Alaska.

SEC. 112. LEASING PROGRAM FOR LAND WITHIN THE COASTAL PLAIN.

(a) In General.--
(1) Authorization.--Congress authorizes the exploration,
leasing, development, production, and economically feasible
and prudent transportation of oil and gas in and from the
Coastal Plain.
(2) Actions.--The Secretary shall take such actions as are
necessary--
(A) to establish and implement, in accordance with this
subtitle, a competitive oil and gas leasing program that will
result in an environmentally sound program for the
exploration, development, and production of the oil and gas
resources of the Coastal Plain while taking into
consideration the interests and concerns of residents of the
Coastal Plain, which is the homeland of the Kaktovikmiut
Inupiat; and
(B) to administer this subtitle through regulations, lease
terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, stipulations,
and other provisions that--
(i) ensure the oil and gas exploration, development, and
production activities on the Coastal Plain will result in no
significant adverse effect on fish and wildlife, their
habitat, subsistence resources, and the environment; and
(ii) require the application of the best commercially
available technology for oil and gas exploration,
development, and production to all exploration, development,
and production operations under this subtitle in a manner
that ensures the receipt of fair market value by the public
for the mineral resources to be leased.
(b) Repeal.--
(1) Repeal.--Section 1003 of the Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3143) is repealed.
(2) Conforming amendment.--The table of contents contained
in section 1 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 3101 note) is amended by
striking the item relating to section 1003.
(c) Compliance With Requirements Under Certain Other
Laws.--
(1) Compatibility.--For purposes of the National Wildlife
Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et
seq.)--
(A) the oil and gas pre-leasing and leasing program, and
activities authorized by this section in the Coastal Plain,
shall be considered to be compatible with the purposes for
which the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was established;
and
(B) no further findings or decisions shall be required to
implement that program and those activities.
(2) Adequacy of the department of the interior's
legislative environmental impact statement.--The Final
Statement shall be considered to satisfy the requirements
under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) that apply with respect to pre-leasing
activities, including exploration programs and actions
authorized to be taken by the Secretary to develop and
promulgate the regulations for the establishment of a leasing
program authorized by this subtitle before the conduct of the
first lease sale.
(3) Compliance with nepa for other actions.--
(A) In general.--Before conducting the first lease sale
under this subtitle, the Secretary shall prepare an
environmental impact statement in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) with respect to the actions authorized by this subtitle
that are not referred to in paragraph (2).
(B) Identification and analysis.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, in carrying out this paragraph, the
Secretary shall not be required--
(i) to identify nonleasing alternative courses of action;
or
(ii) to analyze the environmental effects of those courses
of action.
(C) Identification of preferred action.--Not later than 18
months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall--
(i) identify only a preferred action and a single leasing
alternative for the first lease sale authorized under this
subtitle; and
(ii) analyze the environmental effects and potential
mitigation measures for those 2 alternatives.
(D) Public comments.--In carrying out this paragraph, the
Secretary shall consider only public comments that are filed
not later than 20 days after the date of publication of a
draft environmental impact statement.
(E) Effect of compliance.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, compliance with this paragraph shall be
considered to satisfy all requirements for the analysis and
consideration of the environmental effects of proposed
leasing under this subtitle.
(d) Relationship to State and Local Authority.--Nothing in
this subtitle expands or limits any State or local regulatory
authority.
(e) Special Areas.--
(1) Designation.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary, after consultation with the
State of Alaska, the North Slope Borough, Alaska, and the
City of Kaktovik, Alaska, may designate not more than 45,000
acres of the Coastal Plain as a special area if the Secretary
determines that the special area would be of such unique
character and interest as to require special management and
regulatory protection.
(B) Sadlerochit spring area.--The Secretary shall designate
as a special area in accordance with subparagraph (A) the
Sadlerochit Spring area, comprising approximately 4,000 acres
as depicted on the map.
(2) Management.--The Secretary shall manage each special
area designated under this subsection in a manner that--
(A) respects and protects the Native people of the area;
and
(B) preserves the unique and diverse character of the area,
including fish, wildlife, subsistence resources, and cultural
values of the area.
(3) Exclusion from leasing or surface occupancy.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary may exclude any special area
designated under this subsection from leasing.
(B) No surface occupancy.--If the Secretary leases all or a
portion of a special area for the purposes of oil and gas
exploration, development, production, and related

[[Page 16235]]

activities, there shall be no surface occupancy of the land
comprising the special area.
(4) Directional drilling.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this subsection, the Secretary may lease all or
a portion of a special area under terms that permit the use
of horizontal drilling technology from sites on leases
located outside the special area.
(f) Limitation on Closed Areas.--The Secretary may not
close land within the Coastal Plain to oil and gas leasing or
to exploration, development, or production except in
accordance with this subtitle.
(g) Regulations.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 15 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, in consultation with appropriate
agencies of the State of Alaska, the North Slope Borough,
Alaska, and the City of Kaktovik, Alaska, the Secretary shall
issue such regulations as are necessary to carry out this
subtitle, including rules and regulations relating to
protection of the fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife
habitat, and subsistence resources of the Coastal Plain.
(2) Revision of regulations.--The Secretary may
periodically review and, as appropriate, revise the rules and
regulations issued under paragraph (1) to reflect any
significant scientific or engineering data that come to the
attention of the Secretary.

SEC. 113. LEASE SALES.

(a) In General.--Land may be leased pursuant to this
subtitle to any person qualified to obtain a lease for
deposits of oil and gas under the Mineral Leasing Act (30
U.S.C. 181 et seq.).
(b) Procedures.--The Secretary shall, by regulation,
establish procedures for--
(1) receipt and consideration of sealed nominations for any
area in the Coastal Plain for inclusion in, or exclusion (as
provided in subsection (c)) from, a lease sale;
(2) the holding of lease sales after that nomination
process; and
(3) public notice of and comment on designation of areas to
be included in, or excluded from, a lease sale.
(c) Lease Sale Bids.--Bidding for leases under this
subtitle shall be by sealed competitive cash bonus bids.
(d) Acreage Minimum in First Sale.--For the first lease
sale under this subtitle, the Secretary shall offer for lease
those tracts the Secretary considers to have the greatest
potential for the discovery of hydrocarbons, taking into
consideration nominations received pursuant to subsection
(b)(1), but in no case less than 200,000 acres.
(e) Timing of Lease Sales.--The Secretary shall--
(1) not later than 22 months after the date of enactment of
this Act, conduct the first lease sale under this subtitle;
(2) not later than September 30, 2012, conduct a second
lease sale under this subtitle; and
(3) conduct additional sales at appropriate intervals if
sufficient interest in exploration or development exists to
warrant the conduct of the additional sales.

SEC. 114. GRANT OF LEASES BY THE SECRETARY.

(a) In General.--Upon payment by a lessee of such bonus as
may be accepted by the Secretary, the Secretary may grant to
the highest responsible qualified bidder in a lease sale
conducted pursuant to section 113 a lease for any land on the
Coastal Plain.
(b) Subsequent Transfers.--
(1) In general.--No lease issued under this subtitle may be
sold, exchanged, assigned, sublet, or otherwise transferred
except with the approval of the Secretary.
(2) Condition for approval.--Before granting any approval
described in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consult with
and give due consideration to the opinion of the Attorney
General.

SEC. 115. LEASE TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

(a) In General.--An oil or gas lease issued pursuant to
this subtitle shall--
(1) provide for the payment of a royalty of not less than
16\1/2\ percent of the amount or value of the production
removed or sold from the lease, as determined by the
Secretary in accordance with regulations applicable to other
Federal oil and gas leases;
(2) provide that the Secretary may close, on a seasonal
basis, such portions of the Coastal Plain to exploratory
drilling activities as are necessary to protect caribou
calving areas and other species of fish and wildlife;
(3) require that each lessee of land within the Coastal
Plain shall be fully responsible and liable for the
reclamation of land within the Coastal Plain and any other
Federal land that is adversely affected in connection with
exploration, development, production, or transportation
activities within the Coastal Plain conducted by the lessee
or by any of the subcontractors or agents of the lessee;
(4) provide that the lessee may not delegate or convey, by
contract or otherwise, that reclamation responsibility and
liability to another person without the express written
approval of the Secretary;
(5) provide that the standard of reclamation for land
required to be reclaimed under this subtitle shall be, to the
maximum extent practicable--
(A) a condition capable of supporting the uses that the
land was capable of supporting prior to any exploration,
development, or production activities; or
(B) upon application by the lessee, to a higher or better
standard, as approved by the Secretary;
(6) contain terms and conditions relating to protection of
fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, subsistence
resources, and the environment as required under section
112(a)(2);
(7) provide that each lessee, and each agent and contractor
of a lessee, use their best efforts to provide a fair share
of employment and contracting for Alaska Natives and Alaska
Native Corporations from throughout the State of Alaska, as
determined by the level of obligation previously agreed to in
the Federal Agreement; and
(8) contain such other provisions as the Secretary
determines to be necessary to ensure compliance with this
subtitle and regulations issued under this subtitle.
(b) Project Labor Agreements.--The Secretary, as a term and
condition of each lease under this subtitle, and in
recognizing the proprietary interest of the Federal
Government in labor stability and in the ability of
construction labor and management to meet the particular
needs and conditions of projects to be developed under the
leases issued pursuant to this subtitle (including the
special concerns of the parties to those leases), shall
require that each lessee, and each agent and contractor of a
lessee, under this subtitle negotiate to obtain a project
labor agreement for the employment of laborers and mechanics
on production, maintenance, and construction under the lease.

SEC. 116. COASTAL PLAIN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.

(a) No Significant Adverse Effect Standard To Govern
Authorized Coastal Plain Activities.--In accordance with
section 112, the Secretary shall administer this subtitle
through regulations, lease terms, conditions, restrictions,
prohibitions, stipulations, or other provisions that--
(1) ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that oil and
gas exploration, development, and production activities on
the Coastal Plain will result in no significant adverse
effect on fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, and
the environment;
(2) require the application of the best commercially
available technology for oil and gas exploration,
development, and production on all new exploration,
development, and production operations; and
(3) ensure that the maximum surface acreage covered in
connection with the leasing program by production and support
facilities, including airstrips and any areas covered by
gravel berms or piers for support of pipelines, does not
exceed 2,000 acres on the Coastal Plain.
(b) Site-Specific Assessment and Mitigation.--The Secretary
shall require, with respect to any proposed drilling and
related activities on the Coastal Plain, that--
(1) a site-specific environmental analysis be made of the
probable effects, if any, that the drilling or related
activities will have on fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife
habitat, subsistence resources, subsistence uses, and the
environment;
(2) a plan be implemented to avoid, minimize, and mitigate
(in that order and to the maximum extent practicable) any
significant adverse effect identified under paragraph (1);
and
(3) the development of the plan occur after consultation
with--
(A) each agency having jurisdiction over matters mitigated
by the plan;
(B) the State of Alaska;
(C) North Slope Borough, Alaska; and
(D) the City of Kaktovik, Alaska.
(c) Regulations To Protect Coastal Plain Fish and Wildlife
Resources, Subsistence Users, and the Environment.--Before
implementing the leasing program authorized by this subtitle,
the Secretary shall prepare and issue regulations, lease
terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, stipulations,
or other measures designed to ensure, to the maximum extent
practicable, that the activities carried out on the Coastal
Plain under this subtitle are conducted in a manner
consistent with the purposes and environmental requirements
of this subtitle.
(d) Compliance With Federal and State Environmental Laws
and Other Requirements.--The proposed regulations, lease
terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, and
stipulations for the leasing program under this subtitle
shall require--
(1) compliance with all applicable provisions of Federal
and State environmental law (including regulations);
(2) implementation of and compliance with--
(A) standards that are at least as effective as the safety
and environmental mitigation measures, as described in items
1 through 29 on pages 167 through 169 of the Final Statement,
on the Coastal Plain;
(B) seasonal limitations on exploration, development, and
related activities, as necessary, to avoid significant
adverse effects during periods of concentrated fish and
wildlife breeding, denning, nesting, spawning, and migration;
(C) design safety and construction standards for all
pipelines and any access and service roads that minimize, to
the maximum extent practicable, adverse effects on--
(i) the passage of migratory species (such as caribou); and

[[Page 16236]]

(ii) the flow of surface water by requiring the use of
culverts, bridges, or other structural devices;
(D) prohibitions on general public access to, and use of,
all pipeline access and service roads;
(E) stringent reclamation and rehabilitation requirements
in accordance with this subtitle for the removal from the
Coastal Plain of all oil and gas development and production
facilities, structures, and equipment on completion of oil
and gas production operations, except in a case in which the
Secretary determines that those facilities, structures, or
equipment--
(i) would assist in the management of the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge; and
(ii) are donated to the United States for that purpose;
(F) appropriate prohibitions or restrictions on--
(i) access by all modes of transportation;
(ii) sand and gravel extraction; and
(iii) use of explosives;
(G) reasonable stipulations for protection of cultural and
archaeological resources;
(H) measures to protect groundwater and surface water,
including--
(i) avoidance, to the maximum extent practicable, of
springs, streams, and river systems;
(ii) the protection of natural surface drainage patterns
and wetland and riparian habitats; and
(iii) the regulation of methods or techniques for
developing or transporting adequate supplies of water for
exploratory drilling; and
(I) research, monitoring, and reporting requirements;
(3) that exploration activities (except surface geological
studies) be limited to the period between approximately
November 1 and May 1 of each year and be supported, if
necessary, by ice roads, winter trails with adequate snow
cover, ice pads, ice airstrips, and air transport methods
(except that those exploration activities may be permitted at
other times if the Secretary determines that the exploration
will have no significant adverse effect on fish and wildlife,
fish and wildlife habitat, subsistence resources, and the
environment of the Coastal Plain);
(4) consolidation of facility siting;
(5) avoidance or reduction of air traffic-related
disturbance to fish and wildlife;
(6) treatment and disposal of hazardous and toxic wastes,
solid wastes, reserve pit fluids, drilling muds and cuttings,
and domestic wastewater, including, in accordance with
applicable Federal and State environmental laws (including
regulations)--
(A) preparation of an annual waste management report;
(B) development and implementation of a hazardous materials
tracking system; and
(C) prohibition on the use of chlorinated solvents;
(7) fuel storage and oil spill contingency planning;
(8) conduct of periodic field crew environmental briefings;
(9) avoidance of significant adverse effects on subsistence
hunting, fishing, and trapping;
(10) compliance with applicable air and water quality
standards;
(11) appropriate seasonal and safety zone designations
around well sites, within which subsistence hunting and
trapping shall be limited; and
(12) development and implementation of such other
protective environmental requirements, restrictions, terms,
or conditions as the Secretary, after consultation with the
State of Alaska, North Slope Borough, Alaska, and the City of
Kaktovik, Alaska, determines to be necessary.
(e) Considerations.--In preparing and issuing regulations,
lease terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, or
stipulations under this section, the Secretary shall take
into consideration--
(1) the stipulations and conditions that govern the
National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska leasing program, as set
forth in the 1999 Northeast National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska
Final Integrated Activity Plan/Environmental Impact
Statement;
(2) the environmental protection standards that governed
the initial Coastal Plain seismic exploration program under
parts 37.31 through 37.33 of title 50, Code of Federal
Regulations (or successor regulations); and
(3) the land use stipulations for exploratory drilling on
the KIC-ASRC private land described in Appendix 2 of the
agreement between Arctic Slope Regional Corporation and the
United States dated August 9, 1983.
(f) Facility Consolidation Planning.--
(1) In general.--After providing for public notice and
comment, the Secretary shall prepare and periodically update
a plan to govern, guide, and direct the siting and
construction of facilities for the exploration, development,
production, and transportation of oil and gas resources from
the Coastal Plain.
(2) Objectives.--The objectives of the plan shall be--
(A) the avoidance of unnecessary duplication of facilities
and activities;
(B) the encouragement of consolidation of common facilities
and activities;
(C) the location or confinement of facilities and
activities to areas that will minimize impact on fish and
wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, subsistence resources,
and the environment;
(D) the use of existing facilities, to the maximum extent
practicable; and
(E) the enhancement of compatibility between wildlife
values and development activities.
(g) Access to Public Land.--The Secretary shall--
(1) manage public land in the Coastal Plain in accordance
with subsections (a) and (b) of section 811 of the Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3121);
and
(2) ensure that local residents shall have reasonable
access to public land in the Coastal Plain for traditional
uses.

SEC. 117. EXPEDITED JUDICIAL REVIEW.

(a) Filing of Complaints.--
(1) Deadline.--A complaint seeking judicial review of a
provision of this subtitle or an action of the Secretary
under this subtitle shall be filed--
(A) except as provided in subparagraph (B), during the 90-
day period beginning on the date on which the action being
challenged was carried out; or
(B) in the case of a complaint based solely on grounds
arising after the 90-day period described in subparagraph
(A), during the 90-day period beginning on the date on which
the complainant knew or reasonably should have known about
the grounds for the complaint.
(2) Venue.--A complaint seeking judicial review of a
provision of this subtitle or an action of the Secretary
under this subtitle shall be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
(3) Scope.--
(A) In general.--Judicial review of a decision of the
Secretary under this subtitle (including an environmental
analysis of such a lease sale) shall be--
(i) limited to a review of whether the decision is in
accordance with this subtitle; and
(ii) based on the administrative record of the decision.
(B) Presumptions.--Any identification by the Secretary of a
preferred course of action relating to a lease sale, and any
analysis by the Secretary of environmental effects, under
this subtitle shall be presumed to be correct unless proven
otherwise by clear and convincing evidence.
(b) Limitation on Other Review.--Any action of the
Secretary that is subject to judicial review under this
section shall not be subject to judicial review in any civil
or criminal proceeding for enforcement.

SEC. 118. RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS ACROSS COASTAL PLAIN.

For purposes of section 1102(4)(A) of the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3162(4)(A)), any
rights-of-way or easements across the Coastal Plain for the
exploration, development, production, or transportation of
oil and gas shall be considered to be established incident to
the management of the Coastal Plain under this section.

SEC. 119. CONVEYANCE.

Notwithstanding section 1302(h)(2) of the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3192(h)(2)), to
remove any cloud on title to land, and to clarify land
ownership patterns in the Coastal Plain, the Secretary
shall--
(1) to the extent necessary to fulfill the entitlement of
the Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation under sections 12 and 14 of
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1611,
1613), as determined by the Secretary, convey to that
Corporation the surface estate of the land described in
paragraph (1) of Public Land Order 6959, in accordance with
the terms and conditions of the agreement between the
Secretary, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the
Bureau of Land Management, and the Kaktovik Inupiat
Corporation, dated January 22, 1993; and
(2) convey to the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation the
remaining subsurface estate to which that Corporation is
entitled under the agreement between that corporation and the
United States, dated August 9, 1983.

SEC. 120. LOCAL GOVERNMENT IMPACT AID AND COMMUNITY SERVICE
ASSISTANCE.

(a) Establishment of Fund.--
(1) In general.--As a condition on the receipt of funds
under section 122(2), the State of Alaska shall establish in
the treasury of the State, and administer in accordance with
this section, a fund to be known as the ``Coastal Plain Local
Government Impact Aid Assistance Fund'' (referred to in this
section as the ``Fund'').
(2) Deposits.--Subject to paragraph (1), the Secretary of
the Treasury shall deposit into the Fund, $35,000,000 each
year from the amount available under section 122(2)(A).
(3) Investment.--The Governor of the State of Alaska
(referred to in this section as the ``Governor'') shall
invest amounts in the Fund in interest-bearing securities of
the United States or the State of Alaska.
(b) Assistance.--The Governor, in cooperation with the
Mayor of the North Slope Borough, shall use amounts in the
Fund to provide assistance to North Slope Borough, Alaska,
the City of Kaktovik, Alaska, and any other borough,
municipal subdivision, village, or other community in the
State of Alaska that is directly impacted by exploration for,
or the production of, oil or gas on the Coastal Plain under
this subtitle, or any Alaska Native Regional Corporation
acting

[[Page 16237]]

on behalf of the villages and communities within its region
whose lands lie along the right of way of the Trans Alaska
Pipeline System, as determined by the Governor.
(c) Application.--
(1) In general.--To receive assistance under subsection
(b), a community or Regional Corporation described in that
subsection shall submit to the Governor, or to the Mayor of
the North Slope Borough, an application in such time, in such
manner, and containing such information as the Governor may
require.
(2) Action by north slope borough.--The Mayor of the North
Slope Borough shall submit to the Governor each application
received under paragraph (1) as soon as practicable after the
date on which the application is received.
(3) Assistance of governor.--The Governor shall assist
communities in submitting applications under this subsection,
to the maximum extent practicable.
(d) Use of Funds.--A community or Regional Corporation that
receives funds under subsection (b) may use the funds--
(1) to plan for mitigation, implement a mitigation plan, or
maintain a mitigation project to address the potential
effects of oil and gas exploration and development on
environmental, social, cultural, recreational, and
subsistence resources of the community;
(2) to develop, carry out, and maintain--
(A) a project to provide new or expanded public facilities;
or
(B) services to address the needs and problems associated
with the effects described in paragraph (1), including
firefighting, police, water and waste treatment, first
responder, and other medical services;
(3) to compensate residents of the Coastal Plain for
significant damage to environmental, social, cultural,
recreational, or subsistence resources; and
(4) in the City of Kaktovik, Alaska--
(A) to develop a mechanism for providing members of the
Kaktovikmiut Inupiat community an opportunity to--
(i) monitor development on the Coastal Plain; and
(ii) provide information and recommendations to the
Governor based on traditional aboriginal knowledge of the
natural resources, flora, fauna, and ecological processes of
the Coastal Plain; and
(B) to establish a local coordination office, to be managed
by the Mayor of the North Slope Borough, in coordination with
the City of Kaktovik, Alaska--
(i) to coordinate with and advise developers on local
conditions and the history of areas affected by development;
(ii) to provide to the Committee on Resources of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate annual reports on the status of the
coordination between developers and communities affected by
development;
(iii) to collect from residents of the Coastal Plain
information regarding the impacts of development on fish,
wildlife, habitats, subsistence resources, and the
environment of the Coastal Plain; and
(iv) to ensure that the information collected under clause
(iii) is submitted to--

(I) developers; and
(II) any appropriate Federal agency.

SEC. 121. PROHIBITION ON EXPORTS.

An oil lease issued under this subtitle shall prohibit the
exportation of oil produced under the lease.

SEC. 122. ALLOCATION OF REVENUES.

Notwithstanding the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et
seq.) or any other provision of law, of the adjusted bonus,
rental, and royalty receipts from Federal oil and gas leasing
and operations authorized under this subtitle:
(1) 50 percent shall be deposited in the general fund of
the Treasury.
(2) The remainder shall be available as follows:
(A) $35,000,000 shall be deposited by the Secretary of the
Treasury into the fund created under section 120(a)(1).
(B) The remainder shall be disbursed to the State of
Alaska.

Subtitle C--Permitting

SEC. 131. REFINERY PERMITTING PROCESS.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
(2) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the
meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
(3) Permit.--The term ``permit'' means any permit, license,
approval, variance, or other form of authorization that a
refiner is required to obtain--
(A) under any Federal law; or
(B) from a State or Indian tribal government agency
delegated authority by the Federal Government, or authorized
under Federal law, to issue permits.
(4) Refiner.--The term ``refiner'' means a person that--
(A) owns or operates a refinery; or
(B) seeks to become an owner or operator of a refinery.
(5) Refinery.--
(A) In general.--The term ``refinery'' means--
(i) a facility at which crude oil is refined into
transportation fuel or other petroleum products; and
(ii) a coal liquification or coal-to-liquid facility at
which coal is processed into synthetic crude oil or any other
fuel.
(B) Inclusions.--The term ``refinery'' includes an
expansion of a refinery.
(6) Refinery expansion.--The term ``refinery expansion''
means a physical change in a refinery that results in an
increase in the capacity of the refinery.
(7) Refinery permitting agreement.--The term ``refinery
permitting agreement'' means an agreement entered into
between the Administrator and a State or Indian tribe under
subsection (b).
(8) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Commerce.
(9) State.--The term ``State'' means--
(A) a State;
(B) the District of Columbia;
(C) the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and
(D) any other territory or possession of the United States.
(b) Streamlining of Refinery Permitting Process.--
(1) In general.--At the request of the Governor of a State
or the governing body of an Indian tribe, the Administrator
shall enter into a refinery permitting agreement with the
State or Indian tribe under which the process for obtaining
all permits necessary for the construction and operation of a
refinery shall be streamlined using a systematic
interdisciplinary multimedia approach as provided in this
section.
(2) Authority of administrator.--Under a refinery
permitting agreement--
(A) the Administrator shall have authority, as applicable
and necessary, to--
(i) accept from a refiner a consolidated application for
all permits that the refiner is required to obtain to
construct and operate a refinery;
(ii) in consultation and cooperation with each Federal,
State, or Indian tribal government agency that is required to
make any determination to authorize the issuance of a permit,
establish a schedule under which each agency shall--

(I) concurrently consider, to the maximum extent
practicable, each determination to be made; and
(II) complete each step in the permitting process; and

(iii) issue a consolidated permit that combines all permits
issued under the schedule established under clause (ii); and
(B) the Administrator shall provide to State and Indian
tribal government agencies--
(i) financial assistance in such amounts as the agencies
reasonably require to hire such additional personnel as are
necessary to enable the government agencies to comply with
the applicable schedule established under subparagraph
(A)(ii); and
(ii) technical, legal, and other assistance in complying
with the refinery permitting agreement.
(3) Agreement by the state.--Under a refinery permitting
agreement, a State or governing body of an Indian tribe shall
agree that--
(A) the Administrator shall have each of the authorities
described in paragraph (2); and
(B) each State or Indian tribal government agency shall--
(i) in accordance with State law, make such structural and
operational changes in the agencies as are necessary to
enable the agencies to carry out consolidated project-wide
permit reviews concurrently and in coordination with the
Environmental Protection Agency and other Federal agencies;
and
(ii) comply, to the maximum extent practicable, with the
applicable schedule established under paragraph (2)(A)(ii).
(4) Deadlines.--
(A) New refineries.--In the case of a consolidated permit
for the construction of a new refinery, the Administrator and
the State or governing body of an Indian tribe shall approve
or disapprove the consolidated permit not later than--
(i) 360 days after the date of the receipt of the
administratively complete application for the consolidated
permit; or
(ii) on agreement of the applicant, the Administrator, and
the State or governing body of the Indian tribe, 90 days
after the expiration of the deadline established under clause
(i).
(B) Expansion of existing refineries.--In the case of a
consolidated permit for the expansion of an existing
refinery, the Administrator and the State or governing body
of an Indian tribe shall approve or disapprove the
consolidated permit not later than--
(i) 120 days after the date of the receipt of the
administratively complete application for the consolidated
permit; or
(ii) on agreement of the applicant, the Administrator, and
the State or governing body of the Indian tribe, 30 days
after the expiration of the deadline established under clause
(i).
(5) Federal agencies.--Each Federal agency that is required
to make any determination to authorize the issuance of a
permit shall comply with the applicable schedule established
under paragraph (2)(A)(ii).
(6) Judicial review.--Any civil action for review of any
permit determination under a refinery permitting agreement
shall be

[[Page 16238]]

brought exclusively in the United States district court for
the district in which the refinery is located or proposed to
be located.
(7) Efficient permit review.--In order to reduce the
duplication of procedures, the Administrator shall use State
permitting and monitoring procedures to satisfy substantially
equivalent Federal requirements under this title.
(8) Severability.--If 1 or more permits that are required
for the construction or operation of a refinery are not
approved on or before any deadline established under
paragraph (4), the Administrator may issue a consolidated
permit that combines all other permits that the refiner is
required to obtain other than any permits that are not
approved.
(9) Savings.--Nothing in this subsection affects the
operation or implementation of otherwise applicable law
regarding permits necessary for the construction and
operation of a refinery.
(10) Consultation with local governments.--Congress
encourages the Administrator, States, and tribal governments
to consult, to the maximum extent practicable, with local
governments in carrying out this subsection.
(11) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this subsection.
(12) Effect on local authority.--Nothing in this subsection
affects--
(A) the authority of a local government with respect to the
issuance of permits; or
(B) any requirement or ordinance of a local government
(such as a zoning regulation).
(c) Fischer-Tropsch Fuels.--
(1) In general.--In cooperation with the Secretary of
Energy, the Secretary of Defense, the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration, Secretary of Health and
Human Services, and Fischer-Tropsch industry representatives,
the Administrator shall--
(A) conduct a research and demonstration program to
evaluate the air quality benefits of ultra-clean Fischer-
Tropsch transportation fuel, including diesel and jet fuel;
(B) evaluate the use of ultra-clean Fischer-Tropsch
transportation fuel as a mechanism for reducing engine
exhaust emissions; and
(C) submit recommendations to Congress on the most
effective use and associated benefits of these ultra-clean
fuel for reducing public exposure to exhaust emissions.
(2) Guidance and technical support.--The Administrator
shall, to the extent necessary, issue any guidance or
technical support documents that would facilitate the
effective use and associated benefit of Fischer-Tropsch fuel
and blends.
(3) Requirements.--The program described in paragraph (1)
shall consider--
(A) the use of neat (100 percent) Fischer-Tropsch fuel and
blends with conventional crude oil-derived fuel for heavy-
duty and light-duty diesel engines and the aviation sector;
and
(B) the production costs associated with domestic
production of those ultra clean fuel and prices for
consumers.
(4) Reports.--The Administrator shall submit to the
Committee on Environment and Public Works and the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the
Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives--
(A) not later than 1 year, an interim report on actions
taken to carry out this subsection; and
(B) not later than 2 years, a final report on actions taken
to carry out this subsection.

SEC. 132. REMOVAL OF ADDITIONAL FEE FOR NEW APPLICATIONS FOR
PERMITS TO DRILL.

The second undesignated paragraph of the matter under the
heading ``management of lands and resources'' under the
heading ``Bureau of Land Management'' of title I of the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2098)
is amended by striking ``to be reduced'' and all that follows
through ``each new application,''.

Subtitle D--Restoration of State Revenue

SEC. 141. RESTORATION OF STATE REVENUE.

The matter under the heading ``administrative provisions''
under the heading ``Minerals Management Service'' of title I
of the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-161; 121
Stat. 2109) is amended by striking ``Notwithstanding'' and
all that follows through ``Treasury.''.

TITLE II--ALTERNATIVE RESOURCES

Subtitle A--Renewable Fuel and Advanced Energy Technology

SEC. 201. DEFINITION OF RENEWABLE BIOMASS.

Section 211(o)(1) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7545(o)(1)) is amended by striking subparagraph (I) and
inserting the following:
``(I) Renewable biomass.--The term `renewable biomass'
means--
``(i) nonmerchantable materials or precommercial thinnings
that--

``(I) are byproducts of preventive treatments, such as
trees, wood, brush, thinnings, chips, and slash, that are
removed--

``(aa) to reduce hazardous fuels;
``(bb) to reduce or contain disease or insect infestation;
or
``(cc) to restore forest health;

``(II) would not otherwise be used for higher-value
products; and
``(III) are harvested from National Forest System land or
public land (as defined in section 103 of the Federal Land
Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702))--

``(aa) where permitted by law; and
``(bb) in accordance with applicable land management plans
and the requirements for old-growth maintenance, restoration,
and management direction of paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) of
subsection (e) and the requirements for large-tree retention
of subsection (f) of section 102 of the Healthy Forests
Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6512); or
``(ii) any organic matter that is available on a renewable
or recurring basis from non-Federal land or from land
belonging to an Indian tribe, or an Indian individual, that
is held in trust by the United States or subject to a
restriction against alienation imposed by the United States,
including--

``(I) renewable plant material, including--

``(aa) feed grains;
``(bb) other agricultural commodities;
``(cc) other plants and trees; and
``(dd) algae; and

``(II) waste material, including--

``(aa) crop residue;
``(bb) other vegetative waste material (including wood
waste and wood residues);
``(cc) animal waste and byproducts (including fats, oils,
greases, and manure); and
``(dd) food waste and yard waste.''.

SEC. 202. ADVANCED BATTERY MANUFACTURING INCENTIVE PROGRAM.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Advanced battery.--The term ``advanced battery'' means
an electrical storage device suitable for vehicle
applications.
(2) Engineering integration costs.--The term ``engineering
integration costs'' includes the cost of engineering tasks
relating to--
(A) incorporation of qualifying components into the design
of advanced batteries; and
(B) design of tooling and equipment and developing
manufacturing processes and material suppliers for production
facilities that produce qualifying components or advanced
batteries.
(b) Advanced Battery Manufacturing Facility.--The Secretary
shall provide facility funding awards under this section to
advanced battery manufacturers to pay not more than 30
percent of the cost of reequipping, expanding, or
establishing a manufacturing facility in the United States to
produce advanced batteries.
(c) Period of Availability.--An award under subsection (b)
shall apply to--
(1) facilities and equipment placed in service before
December 30, 2020; and
(2) engineering integration costs incurred during the
period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act and
ending on December 30, 2020.
(d) Direct Loan Program.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, and subject to the availability of
appropriated funds, the Secretary shall carry out a program
to provide a total of not more than $25,000,000 in loans to
eligible individuals and entities (as determined by the
Secretary) for the costs of activities described in
subsection (b).
(2) Selection of eligible projects.--The Secretary shall
select eligible projects to receive loans under this
subsection in cases in which, as determined by the Secretary,
the award recipient--
(A) is financially viable without the receipt of additional
Federal funding associated with the proposed project;
(B) will provide sufficient information to the Secretary
for the Secretary to ensure that the qualified investment is
expended efficiently and effectively; and
(C) has met such other criteria as may be established and
published by the Secretary.
(3) Rates, terms, and repayment of loans.--A loan provided
under this subsection--
(A) shall have an interest rate that, as of the date on
which the loan is made, is equal to the cost of funds to the
Department of the Treasury for obligations of comparable
maturity;
(B) shall have a term equal to the lesser of--
(i) the projected life, in years, of the eligible project
to be carried out using funds from the loan, as determined by
the Secretary; and
(ii) 25 years;
(C) may be subject to a deferral in repayment for not more
than 5 years after the date on which the eligible project
carried out using funds from the loan first begins
operations, as determined by the Secretary; and
(D) shall be made by the Federal Financing Bank.
(e) Fees.--The cost of administering a loan made under this
section shall not exceed $100,000.
(f) Set Aside for Small Manufacturers.--
(1) Definition of covered firm.--In this subsection, the
term ``covered firm'' means a firm that--
(A) employs fewer than 500 individuals; and
(B) manufactures automobiles or components of automobiles.
(2) Set aside.--Of the amount of funds used to provide
awards for each fiscal year under

[[Page 16239]]

subsection (b), the Secretary shall use not less than 10
percent to provide awards to covered firms or consortia led
by a covered firm.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this section for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013.

SEC. 203. BIOFUELS INFRASTRUCTURE AND ADDITIVES RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT.

(a) In General.--The Assistant Administrator of the Office
of Research and Development of the Environmental Protection
Agency (referred to in this section as the ``Assistant
Administrator''), in consultation with the Secretary and the
National Institute of Standards and Technology, shall carry
out a program of research and development of materials to be
added to biofuels to make the biofuels more compatible with
infrastructure used to store and deliver petroleum-based
fuels to the point of final sale.
(b) Requirements.--In carrying out the program described in
subsection (a), the Assistant Administrator shall address--
(1) materials to prevent or mitigate--
(A) corrosion of metal, plastic, rubber, cork, fiberglass,
glues, or any other material used in pipes and storage tanks;
(B) dissolving of storage tank sediments;
(C) clogging of filters;
(D) contamination from water or other adulterants or
pollutants;
(E) poor flow properties relating to low temperatures;
(F) oxidative and thermal instability in long-term storage
and use; and
(G) microbial contamination;
(2) problems associated with electrical conductivity;
(3) alternatives to conventional methods for refurbishment
and cleaning of gasoline and diesel tanks, including tank
lining applications;
(4) strategies to minimize emissions from infrastructure;
(5) issues with respect to certification by a nationally
recognized testing laboratory of components for fuel-
dispensing devises that specifically reference compatibility
with alcohol-blended fuels and other biofuels that contain
greater than 15 percent alcohol;
(6) challenges for design, reforming, storage, handling,
and dispensing hydrogen fuel from various feedstocks,
including biomass, from neighborhood fueling stations,
including codes and standards development necessary beyond
that carried out under section 809 of the Energy Policy Act
of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16158);
(7) issues with respect to at which point in the fuel
supply chain additives optimally should be added to fuels;
and
(8) other problems, as identified by the Assistant
Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary and the
National Institute of Standards and Technology.

SEC. 204. STUDY OF INCREASED CONSUMPTION OF ETHANOL-BLENDED
GASOLINE WITH HIGHER LEVELS OF ETHANOL.

(a) In General.--The Secretary, in cooperation with the
Secretary of Agriculture, the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, and the Secretary of
Transportation, and after providing notice and an opportunity
for public comment, shall conduct a study of the feasibility
of increasing consumption in the United States of ethanol-
blended gasoline with levels of ethanol that are not less
than 10 percent and not more than 40 percent.
(b) Study.--The study under subsection (a) shall include--
(1) a review of production and infrastructure constraints
on increasing consumption of ethanol;
(2) an evaluation of the economic, market, and energy-
related impacts of State and regional differences in ethanol
blends;
(3) an evaluation of the economic, market, and energy-
related impacts on gasoline retailers and consumers of
separate and distinctly labeled fuel storage facilities and
dispensers;
(4) an evaluation of the environmental impacts of mid-level
ethanol blends on evaporative and exhaust emissions from on-
road, off-road, and marine engines, recreational boats,
vehicles, and equipment;
(5) an evaluation of the impacts of mid-level ethanol
blends on the operation, durability, and performance of on-
road, off-road, and marine engines, recreational boats,
vehicles, and equipment;
(6) an evaluation of the safety impacts of mid-level
ethanol blends on consumers that own and operate off-road and
marine engines, recreational boats, vehicles, or equipment;
and
(7) an evaluation of the impacts of increased use of
renewable fuels derived from food crops on the price and
supply of agricultural commodities in both domestic and
global markets.
(c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report describing the results of the study conducted under
this section.

SEC. 205. STUDY OF DIESEL VEHICLE ATTRIBUTES.

(a) In General.--The Secretary, in consultation with the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and the
Secretary of Transportation, shall conduct a study to
identify--
(1) the environmental and efficiency attributes of diesel-
fueled vehicles as the vehicles compare to comparable
gasoline fueled, E-85 fueled, and hybrid vehicles;
(2) the technical, economic, regulatory, environmental, and
other obstacles to increasing the usage of diesel-fueled
vehicles;
(3) the legislative, administrative, and other actions that
could reduce or eliminate the obstacles identified under
paragraph (2); and
(4) the costs and benefits associated with reducing or
eliminating the obstacles identified under paragraph (2).
(b) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and
the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives a report describing the results of the study
conducted under subsection (a).
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this section.

Subtitle B--Clean Coal-Derived Fuels for Energy Security

SEC. 211. SHORT TITLE.

This subtitle may be cited as the ``Clean Coal-Derived
Fuels for Energy Security Act of 2008''.

SEC. 212. DEFINITIONS.

In this subtitle:
(1) Clean coal-derived fuel.--
(A) In general.--The term ``clean coal-derived fuel'' means
aviation fuel, motor vehicle fuel, home heating oil, or
boiler fuel that is--
(i) substantially derived from the coal resources of the
United States; and
(ii) refined or otherwise processed at a facility located
in the United States that captures up to 100 percent of the
carbon dioxide emissions that would otherwise be released at
the facility.
(B) Inclusions.--The term ``clean coal-derived fuel'' may
include any other resource that is extracted, grown,
produced, or recovered in the United States.
(2) Covered fuel.--The term ``covered fuel'' means--
(A) aviation fuel;
(B) motor vehicle fuel;
(C) home heating oil; and
(D) boiler fuel.
(3) Small refinery.--The term ``small refinery'' means a
refinery for which the average aggregate daily crude oil
throughput for a calendar year (as determined by dividing the
aggregate throughput for the calendar year by the number of
days in the calendar year) does not exceed 75,000 barrels.

SEC. 213. CLEAN COAL-DERIVED FUEL PROGRAM.

(a) Program.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the President shall promulgate
regulations to ensure that covered fuel sold or introduced
into commerce in the United States (except in noncontiguous
States or territories), on an annual average basis, contains
the applicable volume of clean coal-derived fuel determined
in accordance with paragraph (4).
(2) Provisions of regulations.--Regardless of the date of
promulgation, the regulations promulgated under paragraph
(1)--
(A) shall contain compliance provisions applicable to
refineries, blenders, distributors, and importers, as
appropriate, to ensure that--
(i) the requirements of this subsection are met; and
(ii) clean coal-derived fuels produced from facilities for
the purpose of compliance with this subtitle result in life
cycle greenhouse gas emissions that are not greater than
gasoline; and
(B) shall not--
(i) restrict geographic areas in the contiguous United
States in which clean coal-derived fuel may be used; or
(ii) impose any per-gallon obligation for the use of clean
coal-derived fuel.
(3) Relationship to other regulations.--Regulations
promulgated under this paragraph shall, to the maximum extent
practicable, incorporate the program structure, compliance
and reporting requirements established under the final
regulations promulgated to implement the renewable fuel
program established by the amendment made by section
1501(a)(2) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-
58; 119 Stat. 1067).
(4) Applicable volume.--
(A) Calendar years 2015 through 2022.--For the purpose of
this subsection, the applicable volume for any of calendar
years 2015 through 2022 shall be determined in accordance
with the following table:

(B) Calendar year 2023 and thereafter.--Subject to
subparagraph (C), for the purposes

[[Page 16240]]

of this subsection, the applicable volume for calendar year
2023 and each calendar year thereafter shall be determined by
the President, in coordination with the Secretary and the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, based
on a review of the implementation of the program during
calendar years 2015 through 2022, including a review of--
(i) the impact of clean coal-derived fuels on the energy
security of the United States;
(ii) the expected annual rate of future production of clean
coal-derived fuels; and
(iii) the impact of the use of clean coal-derived fuels on
other factors, including job creation, rural economic
development, and the environment.
(C) Minimum applicable volume.--For the purpose of this
subsection, the applicable volume for calendar year 2023 and
each calendar year thereafter shall be equal to the product
obtained by multiplying--
(i) the number of gallons of covered fuel that the
President estimates will be sold or introduced into commerce
in the calendar year; and
(ii) the ratio that--

(I) 6,000,000,000 gallons of clean coal-derived fuel; bears
to
(II) the number of gallons of covered fuel sold or
introduced into commerce in calendar year 2022.

(b) Applicable Percentages.--
(1) Provision of estimate of volumes of certain fuel
sales.--Not later than October 31 of each of calendar years
2015 through 2021, the Administrator of the Energy
Information Administration shall provide to the President an
estimate, with respect to the following calendar year, of the
volumes of covered fuel projected to be sold or introduced
into commerce in the United States.
(2) Determination of applicable percentages.--
(A) In general.--Not later than November 30 of each of
calendar years 2015 through 2022, based on the estimate
provided under paragraph (1), the President shall determine
and publish in the Federal Register, with respect to the
following calendar year, the clean coal-derived fuel
obligation that ensures that the requirements of subsection
(a) are met.
(B) Required elements.--The clean coal-derived fuel
obligation determined for a calendar year under subparagraph
(A) shall--
(i) be applicable to refineries, blenders, and importers,
as appropriate;
(ii) be expressed in terms of a volume percentage of
covered fuel sold or introduced into commerce in the United
States; and
(iii) subject to paragraph (3)(A), consist of a single
applicable percentage that applies to all categories of
persons specified in clause (i).
(3) Adjustments.--In determining the applicable percentage
for a calendar year, the President shall make adjustments--
(A) to prevent the imposition of redundant obligations on
any person specified in paragraph (2)(B)(i); and
(B) to account for the use of clean coal-derived fuel
during the previous calendar year by small refineries that
are exempt under subsection (f).
(c) Volume Conversion Factors for Clean Coal-Derived Fuels
Based on Energy Content.--
(1) In general.--For the purpose of subsection (a), the
President shall assign values to specific types of clean
coal-derived fuel for the purpose of satisfying the fuel
volume requirements of subsection (a)(4) in accordance with
this subsection.
(2) Energy content relative to diesel fuel.--For clean
coal-derived fuels, 1 gallon of the clean coal-derived fuel
shall be considered to be the equivalent of 1 gallon of
diesel fuel multiplied by the ratio that--
(A) the number of British thermal units of energy produced
by the combustion of 1 gallon of the clean coal-derived fuel
(as measured under conditions determined by the Secretary);
bears to
(B) the number of British thermal units of energy produced
by the combustion of 1 gallon of diesel fuel (as measured
under conditions determined by the Secretary to be comparable
to conditions described in subparagraph (A)).
(d) Credit Program.--
(1) In general.--The President, in consultation with the
Secretary and the clean coal-derived fuel requirement of this
section.
(2) Market transparency.--In carrying out the credit
program under this subsection, the President shall facilitate
price transparency in markets for the sale and trade of
credits, with due regard for the public interest, the
integrity of those markets, fair competition, and the
protection of consumers.
(e) Waivers.--
(1) In general.--The President, in consultation with the
Secretary and the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, may waive the requirements of subsection
(a) in whole or in part on petition by 1 or more States by
reducing the national quantity of clean coal-derived fuel
required under subsection (a), based on a determination by
the President (after public notice and opportunity for
comment), that--
(A) implementation of the requirement would severely harm
the economy or environment of a State, a region, or the
United States; or
(B) extreme and unusual circumstances exist that prevent
distribution of an adequate supply of domestically produced
clean coal-derived fuel to consumers in the United States.
(2) Petitions for waivers.--The President, in consultation
with the Secretary and the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, shall approve or disapprove a State
petition for a waiver of the requirements of subsection (a)
within 90 days after the date on which the petition is
received by the President.
(3) Termination of waivers.--A waiver granted under
paragraph (1) shall terminate after 1 year, but may be
renewed by the President after consultation with the
Secretary and the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency.
(f) Small Refineries.--
(1) Temporary exemption.--
(A) In general.--The requirements of subsection (a) shall
not apply to small refineries until calendar year 2018.
(B) Extension of exemption.--
(i) Study by secretary.--Not later than December 31, 2013,
the Secretary shall submit to the President and Congress a
report describing the results of a study to determine whether
compliance with the requirements of subsection (a) would
impose a disproportionate economic hardship on small
refineries.
(ii) Extension of exemption.--In the case of a small
refinery that the Secretary determines under clause (i) would
be subject to a disproportionate economic hardship if
required to comply with subsection (a), the President shall
extend the exemption under subparagraph (A) for the small
refinery for a period of not less than 2 additional years.
(2) Petitions based on disproportionate economic
hardship.--
(A) Extension of exemption.--A small refinery may at any
time petition the President for an extension of the exemption
under paragraph (1) for the reason of disproportionate
economic hardship.
(B) Evaluation of petitions.--In evaluating a petition
under subparagraph (A), the President, in consultation with
the Secretary, shall consider the findings of the study under
paragraph (1)(B) and other economic factors.
(C) Deadline for action on petitions.--The President shall
act on any petition submitted by a small refinery for a
hardship exemption not later than 90 days after the date of
receipt of the petition.
(3) Opt-in for small refineries.--A small refinery shall be
subject to the requirements of subsection (a) if the small
refinery notifies the President that the small refinery
waives the exemption under paragraph (1).
(g) Penalties and Enforcement.--
(1) Civil penalties.--
(A) In general.--Any person that violates a regulation
promulgated under subsection (a), or that fails to furnish
any information required under such a regulation, shall be
liable to the United States for a civil penalty of not more
than the total of--
(i) $25,000 for each day of the violation; and
(ii) the amount of economic benefit or savings received by
the person resulting from the violation, as determined by the
President.
(B) Collection.--Civil penalties under subparagraph (A)
shall be assessed by, and collected in a civil action brought
by, the Secretary or such other officer of the United States
as is designated by the President.
(2) Injunctive authority.--
(A) In general.--The district courts of the United States
shall have jurisdiction to--
(i) restrain a violation of a regulation promulgated under
subsection (a);
(ii) award other appropriate relief; and
(iii) compel the furnishing of information required under
the regulation.
(B) Actions.--An action to restrain such violations and
compel such actions shall be brought by and in the name of
the United States.
(C) Subpoenas.--In the action, a subpoena for a witness who
is required to attend a district court in any district may
apply in any other district.
(h) Effective Date.--Except as otherwise specifically
provided in this section, this section takes effect on
January 1, 2016.

Subtitle C--Oil Shale

SEC. 221. REMOVAL OF PROHIBITION ON FINAL REGULATIONS FOR
COMMERCIAL LEASING PROGRAM FOR OIL SHALE
RESOURCES ON PUBLIC LAND.

Section 433 of the Department of the Interior, Environment,
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law
110-161; 121 Stat. 2152) is repealed.

Subtitle D--Department of Defense Facilitation of Secure Domestic Fuel
Development

SEC. 231. PROCUREMENT AND ACQUISITION OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS.

Section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007 (42 U.S.C. 17142) is repealed.

SEC. 232. MULTIYEAR CONTRACT AUTHORITY FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF SYNTHETIC FUELS.

(a) Multiyear Contracts for the Procurement of Synthetic
Fuels Authorized.--

[[Page 16241]]

(1) In general.--Chapter 141 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``Sec. 2410r. Multiyear contract authority: purchase of
synthetic fuels

``(a) Multiyear Contracts Authorized.--The head of an
agency may enter into contracts for a period not to exceed 25
years for the purchase of synthetic fuels.
``(b) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `head of an agency' has the meaning given
that term in section 2302(1) of this title.
``(2) The term `synthetic fuel' means any liquid, gas, or
combination thereof that--
``(A) can be used as a substitute for petroleum or natural
gas (or any derivative thereof, including chemical
feedstocks); and
``(B) is produced by chemical or physical transformation of
domestic sources of energy.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 141 of such title is amended by adding
at the end the following new item:

``2410r. Multiyear contract authority: purchase of synthetic fuels.''.

(b) Regulations.--Not later than 120 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
prescribe regulations providing that the head of an agency
may initiate a multiyear contract as authorized by section
2410r of title 10, United States Code (as added by subsection
(a)), only if the head of the agency has determined in
writing that--
(1) there is a reasonable expectation that throughout the
contemplated contract period the head of the agency will
request funding for the contract at the level required to
avoid contract cancellation;
(2) the technical risks associated with the technologies
for the production of synthetic fuel under the contract are
not excessive; and
(3) the contract will contain appropriate pricing
mechanisms to minimize risk to the Government from
significant changes in market prices for energy.
(c) Limitation on Use of Authority.--No contract may be
entered into under the authority in section 2410r of title
10, United States Code (as so added), until the regulations
required by subsection (b) are prescribed.
______

SA 5117. Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend
the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end, add the following:

TITLE II--CLEAN COAL-DERIVED FUELS FOR ENERGY SECURITY

SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Clean Coal-Derived Fuels
for Energy Security Act of 2008''.

SEC. 202. DEFINITIONS.

In this title:
(1) Clean coal-derived fuel.--
(A) In general.--The term ``clean coal-derived fuel'' means
aviation fuel, motor vehicle fuel, home heating oil, or
boiler fuel that is--
(i) substantially derived from the coal resources of the
United States; and
(ii) refined or otherwise processed at a facility located
in the United States that captures up to 100 percent of the
carbon dioxide emissions that would otherwise be released at
the facility.
(B) Inclusions.--The term ``clean coal-derived fuel'' may
include any other resource that is extracted, grown,
produced, or recovered in the United States.
(2) Covered fuel.--The term ``covered fuel'' means--
(A) aviation fuel;
(B) motor vehicle fuel;
(C) home heating oil; and
(D) boiler fuel.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.
(4) Small refinery.--The term ``small refinery'' means a
refinery for which the average aggregate daily crude oil
throughput for a calendar year (as determined by dividing the
aggregate throughput for the calendar year by the number of
days in the calendar year) does not exceed 75,000 barrels.

SEC. 203. CLEAN COAL-DERIVED FUEL PROGRAM.

(a) Program.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the President shall promulgate
regulations to ensure that covered fuel sold or introduced
into commerce in the United States (except in noncontiguous
States or territories), on an annual average basis, contains
the applicable volume of clean coal-derived fuel determined
in accordance with paragraph (4).
(2) Provisions of regulations.--Regardless of the date of
promulgation, the regulations promulgated under paragraph
(1)--
(A) shall contain compliance provisions applicable to
refineries, blenders, distributors, and importers, as
appropriate, to ensure that--
(i) the requirements of this subsection are met; and
(ii) clean coal-derived fuels produced from facilities for
the purpose of compliance with this title result in life
cycle greenhouse gas emissions that are not greater than
gasoline; and
(B) shall not--
(i) restrict geographic areas in the contiguous United
States in which clean coal-derived fuel may be used; or
(ii) impose any per-gallon obligation for the use of clean
coal-derived fuel.
(3) Relationship to other regulations.--Regulations
promulgated under this paragraph shall, to the maximum extent
practicable, incorporate the program structure, compliance
and reporting requirements established under the final
regulations promulgated to implement the renewable fuel
program established by the amendment made by section
1501(a)(2) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-
58; 119 Stat. 1067).
(4) Applicable volume.--
(A) Calendar years 2015 through 2022.--For the purpose of
this subsection, the applicable volume for any of calendar
years 2015 through 2022 shall be determined in accordance
with the following table:

Applicable volume of clean coal-derived fuel
Calendar year: (in billions of gallons):
2015............................................................0.75
2016.............................................................1.5
2017............................................................2.25
2018............................................................3.00
2019............................................................3.75
2020.............................................................4.5
2021............................................................5.25
2022.............................................................6.0.
(B) Calendar year 2023 and thereafter.--Subject to
subparagraph (C), for the purposes of this subsection, the
applicable volume for calendar year 2023 and each calendar
year thereafter shall be determined by the President, in
coordination with the Secretary and the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, based on a review of the
implementation of the program during calendar years 2015
through 2022, including a review of--
(i) the impact of clean coal-derived fuels on the energy
security of the United States;
(ii) the expected annual rate of future production of clean
coal-derived fuels; and
(iii) the impact of the use of clean coal-derived fuels on
other factors, including job creation, rural economic
development, and the environment.
(C) Minimum applicable volume.--For the purpose of this
subsection, the applicable volume for calendar year 2023 and
each calendar year thereafter shall be equal to the product
obtained by multiplying--
(i) the number of gallons of covered fuel that the
President estimates will be sold or introduced into commerce
in the calendar year; and
(ii) the ratio that--

(I) 6,000,000,000 gallons of clean coal-derived fuel; bears
to
(II) the number of gallons of covered fuel sold or
introduced into commerce in calendar year 2022.

[[Page 16242]]

requirements of subsection (a)(4) in accordance with this
subsection.
(2) Energy content relative to diesel fuel.--For clean
coal-derived fuels, 1 gallon of the clean coal-derived fuel
shall be considered to be the equivalent of 1 gallon of
diesel fuel multiplied by the ratio that--
(A) the number of British thermal units of energy produced
by the combustion of 1 gallon of the clean coal-derived fuel
(as measured under conditions determined by the Secretary);
bears to
(B) the number of British thermal units of energy produced
by the combustion of 1 gallon of diesel fuel (as measured
under conditions determined by the Secretary to be comparable
to conditions described in subparagraph (A)).
(d) Credit Program.--
(1) In general.--The President, in consultation with the
Secretary and the clean coal-derived fuel requirement of this
section.
(2) Market transparency.--In carrying out the credit
program under this subsection, the President shall facilitate
price transparency in markets for the sale and trade of
credits, with due regard for the public interest, the
integrity of those markets, fair competition, and the
protection of consumers.
(e) Waivers.--
(1) In general.--The President, in consultation with the
Secretary and the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, may waive the requirements of subsection
(a) in whole or in part on petition by 1 or more States by
reducing the national quantity of clean coal-derived fuel
required under subsection (a), based on a determination by
the President (after public notice and opportunity for
comment), that--
(A) implementation of the requirement would severely harm
the economy or environment of a State, a region, or the
United States; or
(B) extreme and unusual circumstances exist that prevent
distribution of an adequate supply of domestically produced
clean coal-derived fuel to consumers in the United States.
(2) Petitions for waivers.--The President, in consultation
with the Secretary and the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, shall approve or disapprove a State
petition for a waiver of the requirements of subsection (a)
within 90 days after the date on which the petition is
received by the President.
(3) Termination of waivers.--A waiver granted under
paragraph (1) shall terminate after 1 year, but may be
renewed by the President after consultation with the
Secretary and the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency.
(f) Small Refineries.--
(1) Temporary exemption.--
(A) In general.--The requirements of subsection (a) shall
not apply to small refineries until calendar year 2018.
(B) Extension of exemption.--
(i) Study by secretary.--Not later than December 31, 2013,
the Secretary shall submit to the President and Congress a
report describing the results of a study to determine whether
compliance with the requirements of subsection (a) would
impose a disproportionate economic hardship on small
refineries.
(ii) Extension of exemption.--In the case of a small
refinery that the Secretary determines under clause (i) would
be subject to a disproportionate economic hardship if
required to comply with subsection (a), the President shall
extend the exemption under subparagraph (A) for the small
refinery for a period of not less than 2 additional years.
(2) Petitions based on disproportionate economic
hardship.--
(A) Extension of exemption.--A small refinery may at any
time petition the President for an extension of the exemption
under paragraph (1) for the reason of disproportionate
economic hardship.
(B) Evaluation of petitions.--In evaluating a petition
under subparagraph (A), the President, in consultation with
the Secretary, shall consider the findings of the study under
paragraph (1)(B) and other economic factors.
(C) Deadline for action on petitions.--The President shall
act on any petition submitted by a small refinery for a
hardship exemption not later than 90 days after the date of
receipt of the petition.
(3) Opt-in for small refineries.--A small refinery shall be
subject to the requirements of subsection (a) if the small
refinery notifies the President that the small refinery
waives the exemption under paragraph (1).
(g) Penalties and Enforcement.--
(1) Civil penalties.--
(A) In general.--Any person that violates a regulation
promulgated under subsection (a), or that fails to furnish
any information required under such a regulation, shall be
liable to the United States for a civil penalty of not more
than the total of--
(i) $25,000 for each day of the violation; and
(ii) the amount of economic benefit or savings received by
the person resulting from the violation, as determined by the
President.
(B) Collection.--Civil penalties under subparagraph (A)
shall be assessed by, and collected in a civil action brought
by, the Secretary or such other officer of the United States
as is designated by the President.
(2) Injunctive authority.--
(A) In general.--The district courts of the United States
shall have jurisdiction to--
(i) restrain a violation of a regulation promulgated under
subsection (a);
(ii) award other appropriate relief; and
(iii) compel the furnishing of information required under
the regulation.
(B) Actions.--An action to restrain such violations and
compel such actions shall be brought by and in the name of
the United States.
(C) Subpoenas.--In the action, a subpoena for a witness who
is required to attend a district court in any district may
apply in any other district.
(h) Effective Date.--Except as otherwise specifically
provided in this section, this section takes effect on
January 1, 2016.

SEC. 204. STUDY OF DIESEL VEHICLE ATTRIBUTES.

TITLE III--ADVANCED BATTERIES FOR ELECTRIC DRIVE VEHICLES

SEC. 301. ADVANCED BATTERIES FOR ELECTRIC DRIVE VEHICLES.

[[Page 16243]]

individual or entity under this subsection would--
(i) reduce manufacturing time;
(ii) reduce manufacturing energy intensity;
(iii) reduce negative environmental impacts or byproducts;
or
(iv) increase spent battery or component recycling
(3) Rates, terms, and repayment of loans.--A loan provided
under this subsection--
(A) shall have an interest rate that, as of the date on
which the loan is made, is equal to the cost of funds to the
Department of the Treasury for obligations of comparable
maturity;
(B) shall have a term that is equal to the lesser of--
(i) the projected life, in years, of the eligible project
to be carried out using funds from the loan, as determined by
the Secretary; or
(ii) 25 years; and
(C) may be subject to a deferral in repayment for not more
than 5 years after the date on which the eligible project
carried out using funds from the loan first begins
operations, as determined by the Secretary.
(4) Period of availability.--A loan under this subsection
shall be available for--
(A) facilities and equipment placed in service before
December 30, 2020; and
(B) engineering integration costs incurred during the
period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act and
ending on December 30, 2020.
(5) Fees.--The cost of administering a loan made under this
subsection shall not exceed $100,000.
(6) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this subsection for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013.
(d) Sense of the Senate on Purchase of Plug-in Electric
Drive Vehicles.--It is the sense of the Senate that, to the
maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government should
implement policies to increase the purchase of plug-in
electric drive vehicles by the Federal Government.
______

SA 5118. Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Voinovich) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend
the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. MULTIYEAR CONTRACT AUTHORITY FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF SYNTHETIC FUELS.

(a) Multiyear Contracts for the Procurement of Synthetic
Fuels Authorized.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 141 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``Sec. 2410r. Multiyear contract authority: purchase of
synthetic fuels

``2410r. Multiyear contract authority: purchase of synthetic fuels.''.

SA 5119. Mr. GRAHAM (for himself, Mr. Kyl, and Mr. McCain) submitted
an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to
amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price
speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

TITLE _--NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION

Subtitle A--Nuclear Power Technology and Manufacturing

SEC. _01. DEFINITIONS.

In this subtitle:
(1) Engineering integration costs.--The term ``engineering
integration costs'' includes the costs of engineering tasks
relating to--
(A) the redesign of manufacturing processes to produce
qualifying components and nuclear power generation
technologies;
(B) the design of new tooling and equipment for production
facilities that produce qualifying components and nuclear
power generation technologies; and
(C) the establishment or expansion of manufacturing
operations for qualifying components and nuclear power
generation technologies.
(2) Nuclear power generation.--The term ``nuclear power
generation'' means generation of electricity by an electric
generation unit that--
(A) emits no carbon dioxide into the atmosphere;
(B) uses uranium as its fuel source; and
(C) was placed into commercial service after the date of
enactment of this Act.
(3) Nuclear power generation technology.--The term
``nuclear power generation technology'' means a technology
used to produce nuclear power generation.
(4) Qualifying component.--The term ``qualifying
component'' means a component that the Secretary of Energy
determines to be specially designed for nuclear power
generation technology.
(5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.

SEC. _02. FINANCIAL INCENTIVES PROGRAM.

(a) In General.--For each fiscal year beginning on or after
October 1, 2010, the Secretary shall competitively award
financial incentives under this subtitle in the following
technology categories:
(1) The production of electricity from new nuclear power
generation.
(2) Facility establishment or conversion by manufacturers
and suppliers of nuclear power generation technology and
qualifying components.
(b) Requirements.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall make awards under this
section to--
(A) domestic producers of new nuclear power generation;
(B) manufacturers and suppliers of nuclear power generation
technology and qualifying components; and
(C) owners or operators of existing nuclear power
generation facilities.
(2) Basis for awards.--The Secretary shall make awards
under this section--
(A) in the case of producers of new nuclear power
generation, based on the bid of each producer in terms of
dollars per megawatt-hour of electricity generated;
(B) in the case of manufacturers and suppliers of nuclear
power generation technology and qualifying components, based
on the criteria described in section _04; and
(C) in the case of owners or operators of existing nuclear
power generating facilities, based upon criteria described in
section _04.
(3) Acceptance of bids.--In making awards under this
subsection, the Secretary shall--
(A) solicit bids for reverse auction from appropriate
producers, manufacturers, and suppliers, as determined by the
Secretary; and
(B) award financial incentives to the producers,
manufacturers, and suppliers that submit the lowest bids that
meet the requirements established by the Secretary.

SEC. _03. FORMS OF AWARDS.

(a) Nuclear Power Generators.--
(1) In general.--An award for nuclear power generation
under this subtitle shall be in the form of a contract to
provide a production payment for commercial service of the
generation unit in an amount equal to the product obtained by
multiplying--
(A) the amount bid by the producer of the nuclear power
generation; and
(B) except as provided in paragraph (2), the net megawatt-
hours generated by the nuclear power generation unit each
year during the first 10 years following the end of the
calendar year of the award.
(2) First year.--For purposes of paragraph (1)(B), the
first year of commercial service of the generating unit shall
be within 5 years of the end of the calendar year of the
award.
(b) Manufacturing of Nuclear Power Generation Technology.--
(1) In general.--An award for facility establishment or
conversion costs for nuclear power generation technology
under this subtitle shall be in an amount equal to not more
than 30 percent of the cost of--
(A) establishing, reequipping, or expanding a manufacturing
facility to produce--
(i) qualifying nuclear power generation technology; or

[[Page 16244]]

(ii) qualifying components;
(B) engineering integration costs of nuclear power
generation technology and qualifying components; and
(C) property, machine tools, and other equipment acquired
or constructed primarily to enable the recipient to test
equipment necessary for the construction or operation of a
nuclear power generation facility.
(2) Amount.--The Secretary shall use the amounts made
available to carry out this section to make awards to
entities for the manufacturing of nuclear power generation
technology.

SEC. _04. SELECTION CRITERIA.

In making awards under this subtitle to producers,
manufacturers, and suppliers of nuclear power generation
technology and qualifying components, the Secretary shall
select producers, manufacturers, and suppliers that--
(1) document the greatest use of domestically-sourced parts
and components;
(2) return to productive service existing idle
manufacturing capacity;
(3) are located in States with the greatest availability of
unemployed manufacturing workers;
(4) demonstrate a high probability of commercial success;
and
(5) meet other appropriate criteria, as determined by the
Secretary.

Subtitle B--Accelerated Depreciation

SEC. _11. 5-YEAR ACCELERATED DEPRECIATION PERIOD FOR NEW
NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS.

(a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 168(e)(3) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking
``and'' at the end of clause (v), by striking the period at
the end of clause (vi)(III) and inserting ``, and'', and by
inserting after clause (vi) the following new clause:
``(vii) any advanced nuclear power facility (as defined in
section 45J(d)(1), determined without regard to subparagraph
(B) thereof) the original use of which commences with the
taxpayer after December 31, 2008.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 168(e)(3)(E)(vii) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting ``and
not described in subparagraph (B)(vii) of this paragraph''
after ``section 1245(a)(3)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after December 31,
2008.

Subtitle C--Next Generation Nuclear Plant Project Modifications

SEC. _21. NEXT GENERATION NUCLEAR PLANT PROJECT
MODIFICATIONS.

(a) Project Establishment.--Section 641 of the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16021) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking the subsection designation and heading and
all that follows through ``The Secretary'' and inserting the
following:
``(a) Establishment and Objective.--
``(1) Establishment.--The Secretary''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Objective.--
``(A) Definition of high-temperature, gas-cooled nuclear
energy technology.--In this paragraph, the term `high-
temperature, gas-cooled nuclear energy technology' means any
nongreenhouse gas-emitting nuclear energy technology that
provides--
``(i) an alternative to the burning of fossil fuels for
industrial applications; and
``(ii) process heat to generate, for example, electricity,
steam, hydrogen, and oxygen for activities such as--

``(I) petroleum refining;
``(II) petrochemical processes;
``(III) converting coal to synfuels and other hydrocarbon
feedstocks; and
``(IV) desalination.

``(B) Description of objective.--The objective of the
Project shall be to carry out demonstration projects for the
development, licensing, and operation of high-temperature,
gas-cooled nuclear energy technologies to support
commercialization of those technologies.
``(C) Requirements.--The functional, operational, and
performance requirements for high-temperature, gas-cooled
nuclear energy technologies shall be determined by the needs
of marketplace industrial end-users (such as owners and
operators of nuclear energy facilities, petrochemical
entities, and petroleum entities), as projected for the 40-
year period beginning on the date of enactment of this
paragraph.''; and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting
``licensing,'' after ``design,'';
(B) in paragraph (1), by striking ``942(d)'' and inserting
``952(d)''; and
(C) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
``(2) demonstrates the capability of the nuclear energy
system to provide high-temperature process heat to produce--
``(A) electricity, steam, and other heat transport fluids;
and
``(B) hydrogen and oxygen, separately or in combination.''.
(b) Project Management.--Section 642 of the Energy Policy
Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16022) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 642. PROJECT MANAGEMENT.

``(a) Departmental Management.--
``(1) In general.--The Project shall be managed in the
Department by the Office of Nuclear Energy.
``(2) Generation iv nuclear energy systems initiative.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the Project
may be carried out in coordination with the Generation IV
Nuclear Energy Systems Initiative.
``(B) Requirement.--Regardless of whether the Project is
carried out in coordination with the Generation IV Nuclear
Energy Systems Initiative under subparagraph (A), the
Secretary shall establish a separate budget line-item for the
Project.
``(3) Interaction with industry.--Any activity to support
the Project by an individual or entity in the private
industry shall be carried out pursuant to a competitive
cooperative agreement or other assistance agreement (such as
a technology investment agreement) between the Department and
the industry group established under subsection (c).
``(b) Laboratory Management.--
``(1) In general.--The Idaho National Laboratory shall be
the lead National Laboratory for the Project.
``(2) Collaboration.--The Idaho National Laboratory shall
collaborate regarding research and development activities
with other National Laboratories, institutions of higher
education, research institutes, representatives of industry,
international organizations, and Federal agencies to support
the Project.
``(c) Industry Group.--
``(1) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a group
of appropriate industrial partners in the private sector to
carry out cost-shared activities with the Department to
support the Project.
``(2) Cooperative agreement.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall offer to enter into
a cooperative agreement or other assistance agreement with
the industry group established under paragraph (1) to manage
and support the development, licensing, construction, and
initial operation of the Project.
``(B) Requirement.--The agreement under subparagraph (A)
shall contain a provision under which the industry group may
enter into contracts with entities in the public sector for
the provision of services and products to that sector that
reflect typical commercial practices, including (without
limitation) the conditions applicable to sales under section
2563 of title 10, United States Code.
``(C) Project management.--
``(i) In general.--The industry group shall use commercial
practices and project management processes and tools in
carrying out activities to support the Project.
``(ii) Interface requirements.--The requirements for
interface between the project management requirements of the
Department (including the requirements contained in the
document of the Department numbered DOE O 413.3A and entitled
`Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of
Capital Assets') and the commercial practices and project
management processes and tools described in clause (i) shall
be defined in the agreement under subparagraph (A).
``(3) Cost sharing.--Activities of industrial partners
funded by the Project shall be cost-shared in accordance with
section 988.
``(4) Preference.--Preference in determining the final
structure of industrial partnerships under this part shall be
given to a structure (including designating as a lead
industrial partner an entity incorporated in the United
States) that retains United States technological leadership
in the Project while maximizing cost sharing opportunities
and minimizing Federal funding responsibilities.
``(d) Reactor Test Capabilities.--The Project shall use, if
appropriate, reactor test capabilities at the Idaho National
Laboratory.
``(e) Other Laboratory Capabilities.--The Project may use,
if appropriate, facilities at other National Laboratories.''.
(c) Project Organization.--Section 643 of the Energy Policy
Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16023) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(2), by inserting ``transport and''
before ``conversion'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by striking subparagraph (C); and
(ii) by redesignating subparagraphs (A), (B), and (D) as
clauses (i), (ii), and (iii), respectively, and indenting the
clauses appropriately;
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``, through a
competitive process,'';
(ii) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``reactor'' and
inserting ``energy system'';
(iii) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``hydrogen or
electricity'' and inserting ``energy transportation,
conversion, and''; and
(iv) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) through (D) as
clauses (i) through (iv), respectively, and indenting the
clauses appropriately;
(C) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as
subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively, and indenting the
subparagraphs appropriately;
(D) by striking ``The Project shall be'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--The Project shall be''; and
(E) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Overlapping phases.--The phases described in
paragraph (1) may overlap for the

[[Page 16245]]

Project or any portion of the Project, as necessary.''; and
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``powerplant'' and
inserting ``power plant'';
(B) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the following:
``(E) Industry group.--The industry group established under
section 642(c) may enter into any necessary contracts for
services, support, or equipment in carrying out an agreement
with the Department.''; and
(C) in paragraph (3)--
(i) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``research'';
(ii) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking
``Research'';
(iii) by striking ``NERAC'' each place it appears and
inserting ``NEAC'';
(iv) in subparagraph (A)--

(I) by striking clause (i) and inserting the following:

``(i) review program plans for the Project prepared by the
Office of Nuclear Energy and all progress under the Project
on an ongoing basis;'';

(II) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(III) by adding at the end the following:

``(iii) ensure that industrial support for the first
project phase under subsection (b)(1)(A) is continued before
initiating the second project phase under subsection
(b)(1)(B).'';
(v) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``or appoint'' and
inserting ``by appointing''; and
(vi) in subparagraph (D)--

(I) by striking ``On a determination'' and inserting the
following:

``(i) In general.--On a determination'';

(II) in clause (i) (as designated by subclause (I))--

(aa) by striking ``subsection (b)(1)'' and inserting
``subsection (b)(1)(A)''; and
(bb) by striking ``subsection (b)(2)'' and inserting
``subsection (b)(1)(B)''; and

(III) by adding at the end the following:

``(ii) Scope.--The scope of the review conducted under
clause (i) shall be in accordance with an applicable
cooperative agreement or other assistance agreement (such as
a technology investment agreement) between the Secretary and
the industry group established under section 642(c).''.
(d) Nuclear Regulatory Commission.--Section 644 of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16024) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (4) as
subparagraphs (A) through (D), respectively, and indenting
the subparagraphs appropriately;
(B) by striking ``Not later than'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--Not later than''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Requirement.--To the maximum extent practicable, in
carrying out subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (1), the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission shall independently review and,
as appropriate, use the results of analyses conducted for or
by the license applicant.''; and
(2) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
``(c) Ongoing Interaction.--The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission shall establish a separate program office for
advanced reactors--
``(1) to develop and implement regulatory requirements
consistent with the safety bases of the type of nuclear
reactor developed by the Project, with the specific objective
that the requirements shall be applied to follow-on
commercialized high-temperature, gas-cooled nuclear reactors;
``(2) to avoid conflicts in the availability of resources
with licensing activities for light water reactors;
``(3) to focus and develop resources of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission for the review of advanced reactors;
``(4) to support the effective and timely review of
preapplication activities and review of applications to
support applicant needs; and
``(5) to provide for the timely development of regulatory
requirements, including through the preapplication process,
and review of applications for advanced technologies, such as
high-temperature, gas-cooled nuclear technology systems.''.
(e) Project Timelines and Authorization of
Appropriations.--Section 645 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(42 U.S.C. 16025) is amended--
(1) by striking subsections (a) and (b) and inserting the
following:
``(a) Summary of Agreement.--Not later than December 31,
2009, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report that
contains a summary of each cooperative agreement or other
assistance agreement (such as a technology investment
agreement) entered into between the Secretary and the
industry group under section 642(a)(3), including a
description of the means by which the agreement will provide
for successful completion of the development, design,
licensing, construction, and initial operation and
demonstration period of the prototype facility of the
Project.
``(b) Overall Project Plan.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than December 31, 2009, the
Secretary shall submit to Congress an overall plan for the
Project, to be prepared jointly by the Secretary and the
industry group established under section 642(c), pursuant to
a cooperative agreement or other assistance agreement (such
as a technology investment agreement).
``(2) Inclusions.--The plan under paragraph (1) shall
include--
``(A) a summary of the schedule for the design, licensing,
construction, and initial operation and demonstration period
for the nuclear energy system prototype facility and hydrogen
production prototype facility of the Project;
``(B) the process by which a specific design for the
prototype nuclear energy system facility and hydrogen
production facility will be selected;
``(C) the specific licensing strategy for the Project,
including--
``(i) resource requirements of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission; and
``(ii) the schedule for the submission of a preapplication,
the submission of an application, and application review for
the prototype nuclear energy system facility of the Project;
``(D) a summary of the schedule for each major event
relating to the Project; and
``(E) a time-based cost and cost-sharing profile to support
planning for appropriations.''; and
(2) in subsection (d), in the matter preceding paragraph
(1), by striking ``research and construction activities'' and
inserting ``research and development, design, licensing,
construction, and initial operation and demonstration
activities''.
______

SA 5120. Mr. GRAHAM submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

On page 43, after line 17, insert the following:

SEC. 17. HYDROGEN INFRASTRUCTURE AND FUEL COSTS.

(a) In General.--Subpart B of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
other credits) is amended by adding at the end the following
new section:

``SEC. 30D. HYDROGEN INFRASTRUCTURE AND FUEL COSTS.

``(a) Allowance of Credit.--There shall be allowed as a
credit against the tax imposed by this chapter for the
taxable year an amount equal to the sum of--
``(1) the hydrogen infrastructure costs credit determined
under subsection (b), and
``(2) the hydrogen fuel costs credit determined under
subsection (c).
``(b) Hydrogen Infrastructure Costs Credit.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a), the
hydrogen infrastructure costs credit determined under this
subsection with respect to each eligible hydrogen production
and distribution facility of the taxpayer is an amount equal
to 30 percent of so much of the infrastructure costs for the
taxable year as does not exceed $200,000 with respect to such
facility.
``(2) Eligible hydrogen production and distribution
facility.--For purposes of this subsection, the term
`eligible hydrogen production and distribution facility'
means a hydrogen production and distribution facility which
is placed in service after December 31, 2007.
``(c) Hydrogen Fuel Costs Credit.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a), the
hydrogen fuel costs credit determined under this subsection
with respect to each eligible hydrogen device of the taxpayer
is an amount equal to the qualified hydrogen expenditure
amount with respect to such device.
``(2) Qualified hydrogen expenditure amount.--For purposes
of this subsection--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified hydrogen expenditure
amount' means, with respect to each eligible hydrogen energy
conversion device of the taxpayer with a production capacity
of not more than 25 kilowatts of electricity, the lesser of--
``(i) 30 percent of the amount paid or incurred by the
taxpayer during the taxable year for hydrogen which is
consumed by such device, and
``(ii) $2,000.

In the case of any device which is not owned by the taxpayer
at all times during the taxable year, the $2,000 amount in
clause (ii) shall be reduced by an amount which bears the
same ratio to $2,000 as the portion of the year which such
device is not owned by the taxpayer bears to the entire year.
``(B) Higher limitation for devices with more production
capacity.--In the case of any eligible hydrogen energy
conversion device with a production capacity of--
``(i) more than 25 but less than 100 kilowatts of
electricity, subparagraph (A) shall be applied by
substituting `$4,000' for `$2,000' each place it appears, and
``(ii) not less than 100 kilowatts of electricity,
subparagraph (A) shall be applied by substituting `$6,000'
for `$2,000' each place it appears.
``(3) Eligible hydrogen energy conversion devices.--For
purposes of this subsection--
``(A) In general.--The term `eligible hydrogen energy
conversion device' means,

[[Page 16246]]

with respect to any taxpayer, any hydrogen energy conversion
device which--
``(i) is placed in service after December 31, 2004, and
``(ii) is wholly owned by the taxpayer during the taxable
year.

If an owner of a device (determined without regard to this
subparagraph) provides to the primary user of such device a
written statement that such user shall be treated as the
owner of such device for purposes of this section, then such
user (and not such owner) shall be so treated.
``(B) Hydrogen energy conversion device.--The term
`hydrogen energy conversion device' means--
``(i) any electrochemical device which converts hydrogen
into electricity, and
``(ii) any combustion engine which burns hydrogen as a
fuel.
``(d) Reduction in Basis.--For purposes of this subtitle,
if a credit is allowed under this section for any expenditure
with respect to any property, the increase in the basis of
such property which would (but for this paragraph) result
from such expenditure shall be reduced by the amount of the
credit so allowed.
``(e) Application With Other Credits.--
``(1) Business credit treated as part of general business
credit.--So much of the credit which would be allowed under
subsection (a) for any taxable year (determined without
regard to this subsection) that is attributable to amounts
which (but for subsection (g)) would be allowed as a
deduction under section 162 shall be treated as a credit
listed in section 38(b) for such taxable year (and not
allowed under subsection (a)).
``(2) Personal credit.--The credit allowed under subsection
(a) (after the application of paragraph (1)) for any taxable
year shall not exceed the excess (if any) of--
``(A) the regular tax liability (as defined in section
26(b)) reduced by the sum of the credits allowable under
subpart A and sections 27, 30, 30B, and 30C, over
``(B) the tentative minimum tax for the taxable year.
``(f) Denial of Double Benefit.--The amount of any
deduction or other credit allowable under this chapter for
any cost taken into account in determining the amount of the
credit under subsection (a) shall be reduced by the amount of
such credit attributable to such cost.
``(g) Recapture.--The Secretary shall, by regulations,
provide for recapturing the benefit of any credit allowable
under subsection (a) with respect to any property which
ceases to be property eligible for such credit.
``(h) Election Not To Take Credit.--No credit shall be
allowed under subsection (a) for any property if the taxpayer
elects not to have this section apply to such property.
``(i) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such
regulations as necessary to carry out the provisions of this
section.
``(j) Termination.--This section shall not apply to any
costs paid or incurred after the end of the 3-year period
beginning on the date of the enactment of this section.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 38(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by striking ``plus'' at the end of paragraph (31), by
striking the period at the end of paragraph (32) and
inserting ``plus'', and by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(33) the portion of the hydrogen infrastructure and fuel
credit to which section 30D(e)(1) applies.''.
(2) Section 55(c)(3) of such Code is amended by inserting
``30D(e)(2),'' after ``30C(d)(2),''.
(3) Section 1016(a) of such Code is amended by striking
``and'' at the end of paragraph (36), by striking the period
at the end of paragraph (37) and inserting ``, and'', and by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(38) to the extent provided in section 30D(d).''.
(4) Section 6501(m) of such Code is amended by inserting
``30D(h),'' after ``30C(e)(5),''.
(5) The table of sections for subpart B of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 30C the
following new item:

``Sec. 30D. Hydrogen infrastructure and fuel costs.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to amounts paid or incurred after December 31,
2007, in taxable years ending after such date.
______

SA 5121. Mr. BOND submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end, add the following:

SEC. __. OFFSHORE OIL PRODUCTION.

(a) Publication of Projected State Lines on Outer
Continental Shelf.--Section 4(a)(2)(A) of the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1333(a)(2)(A)) is
amended--
(1) by designating the first, second, and third sentences
as clause (i), (iii), and (iv), respectively;
(2) in clause (i) (as so designated), by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of the Stop Excessive Energy
Speculation Act of 2008''; and
(3) by inserting after clause (i) (as so designated) the
following:
``(ii)(I) The projected lines shall also be used for the
purpose of preleasing and leasing activities conducted in new
producing areas under section 32.
``(II) This clause shall not affect any property right or
title to Federal submerged land on the outer Continental
Shelf.
``(III) In carrying out this clause, the President shall
consider the offshore administrative boundaries beyond State
submerged lands for planning, coordination, and
administrative purposes of the Department of the Interior,
but may establish different boundaries.''.
(b) Production of Oil and Natural Gas in New Producing
Areas.--The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331
et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 32. PRODUCTION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS IN NEW PRODUCING
AREAS.

[[Page 16247]]

``(c) Disposition of Qualified Outer Continental Shelf
Revenues From New Producing Areas.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 9 and subject to
the other provisions of this subsection, for each applicable
fiscal year, the Secretary of the Treasury shall deposit--
``(A) 50 percent of qualified outer Continental Shelf
revenues in the general fund of the Treasury; and
``(B) 50 percent of qualified outer Continental Shelf
revenues in a special account in the Treasury from which the
Secretary shall disburse--
``(i) 75 percent to new producing States in accordance with
paragraph (2); and
``(ii) 25 percent to provide financial assistance to States
in accordance with section 6 of the Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l -8), which
shall be considered income to the Land and Water Conservation
Fund for purposes of section 2 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 460l-
5).
``(2) Allocation to new producing states and coastal
political subdivisions.--
``(A) Allocation to new producing states.--Effective for
fiscal year 2008 and each fiscal year thereafter, the amount
made available under paragraph (1)(B)(i) shall be allocated
to each new producing State in amounts (based on a formula
established by the Secretary by regulation) proportional to
the amount of qualified outer Continental Shelf revenues
generated in the new producing area offshore each State.
``(B) Payments to coastal political subdivisions.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall pay 20 percent of
the allocable share of each new producing State, as
determined under subparagraph (A), to the coastal political
subdivisions of the new producing State.
``(ii) Allocation.--The amount paid by the Secretary to
coastal political subdivisions shall be allocated to each
coastal political subdivision in accordance with the
regulations promulgated under subparagraph (A).
``(3) Minimum allocation.--The amount allocated to a new
producing State for each fiscal year under paragraph (2)
shall be at least 5 percent of the amounts available for the
fiscal year under paragraph (1)(B)(i).
``(4) Timing.--The amounts required to be deposited under
subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) for the applicable fiscal
year shall be made available in accordance with that
subparagraph during the fiscal year immediately following the
applicable fiscal year.
``(5) Authorized uses.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), each new
producing State and coastal political subdivision shall use
all amounts received under paragraph (2) in accordance with
all applicable Federal and State laws, only for 1 or more of
the following purposes:
``(i) Projects and activities for the purposes of coastal
protection, including conservation, coastal restoration,
hurricane protection, and infrastructure directly affected by
coastal wetland losses.
``(ii) Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, or natural
resources.
``(iii) Implementation of a federally approved marine,
coastal, or comprehensive conservation management plan.
``(iv) Funding of onshore infrastructure projects.
``(v) Planning assistance and the administrative costs of
complying with this section.
``(B) Limitation.--Not more than 3 percent of amounts
received by a new producing State or coastal political
subdivision under paragraph (2) may be used for the purposes
described in subparagraph (A)(v).
``(6) Administration.--Amounts made available under
paragraph (1)(B) shall--
``(A) be made available, without further appropriation, in
accordance with this subsection;
``(B) remain available until expended; and
``(C) be in addition to any amounts appropriated under--
``(i) other provisions of this Act;
``(ii) the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16
U.S.C. 460l-4 et seq.); or
``(iii) any other provision of law.
``(d) Disposition of Qualified Outer Continental Shelf
Revenues From Other Areas.--Notwithstanding section 9, for
each applicable fiscal year, the terms and conditions of
subsection (c) shall apply to the disposition of qualified
outer Continental Shelf revenues that--
``(1) are derived from oil or gas leasing in an area that
is not included in the current 5-year plan of the Secretary
for oil or gas leasing; and
``(2) are not assumed in the budget of the United States
Government submitted by the President under section 1105 of
title 31, United States Code.''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--Sections 104 and 105 of the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2118)
are amended by striking ``No funds'' each place it appears
and inserting ``Except as provided in section 32 of the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act, no funds''.

SEC. __. OIL CONSERVATION THROUGH ADVANCED VEHICLE BATTERIES
AND HYBRID AND PLUG-IN VEHICLES.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Advanced vehicle battery.--The term ``advanced vehicle
battery'' means an electrochemical energy storage system
powered directly by electrical current that provides motive
power to an electric vehicle, hybrid electric vehicle, or
plug-in hybrid electric vehicle.
(2) Electric vehicle.--The term ``electric vehicle'' means
an on-road light-duty or non-road vehicle that uses an
advanced vehicle battery or a fuel cell (as defined in
section 803 of the Spark M. Matsunaga Hydrogen Act of 2005
(42 U.S.C. 16152)).
(3) Hybrid electric vehicle.--The term ``hybrid electric
vehicle'' means a new qualified hybrid motor vehicle (as
defined in section 30B(d)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986).
(4) Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle.--The term ``plug-in
hybrid electric vehicle'' means a hybrid electric vehicle
that--
(A) draws motive power from a battery with a capacity of at
least 4 kilowatt-hours;
(B) can be recharged from an external source of electricity
for motive power; and
(C) is a light-, medium-, or heavy-duty motor vehicle or
nonroad vehicle (as those terms are defined in section 216 of
the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7550)).
(5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.
(b) Statement of Policy.--It is the policy of the United
States to conserve oil by aggressively promoting advanced
vehicle battery technology and the domestic manufacturing
capability of the Unites States necessary for widespread
commercial viability of hybrid electric vehicles, plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles, and electric vehicles.
(c) Advanced Vehicle Battery Research and Development.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall--
(A) expand and accelerate research and development efforts
for advanced vehicle batteries; and
(B) emphasize lower cost enablers for abuse-tolerant
batteries with the appropriate balance of power and energy
capacity to meet market requirements.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $100,000,000
for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014.
(d) Advanced Vehicle Battery Domestic Manufacturing Process
Improvements.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a program to
provide grants to improve domestic manufacturing equipment
and assembly process capabilities for advanced vehicle
batteries and components that--
(A) reduce manufacturing time;
(B) reduce manufacturing energy intensity;
(C) reduce negative environmental impact or byproducts; or
(D) increase spent battery or component recycling.
(2) Inclusion.--The Secretary shall include in the program
established under paragraph (1) grants to support the
development and deployment of domestic high-speed, automated,
production-scale advanced vehicle battery and component
manufacturing equipment.
(3) Cost sharing.--The Secretary shall require that not
less than 20 percent of the cost of a project funded by a
grant under this subsection be provided by a non-Federal
source.
(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $250,000,000
for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014.
(e) Advanced Vehicle Battery Domestic Manufacturing Supply
Base Expansion.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a program to
provide grants to expand the domestic manufacturing supply
base for advanced vehicle batteries, battery cell materials,
and battery system components.
(2) Use of funds.--The Secretary may provide grants under
paragraph (1) to reequip, expand, or establish manufacturing
facilities in the United States.
(3) Cost sharing.--The Secretary shall require that not
less than 20 percent of the cost of a project funded by a
grant under this subsection be provided by a non-Federal
source.
(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $750,000,000
for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014.
______

SA 5122. Mr. BOND submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end, insert the following:

SEC. ___. OIL CONSERVATION THROUGH ADVANCED VEHICLE BATTERIES
FOR HYBRID, PLUG-IN HYBRID AND ELECTRIC
VEHICLES.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Avanced vehicle battery.--The term ``advanced vehicle
battery'' means an electrochemical energy storage system
powered directly by electrical current that provides motive
power to an electric vehicle, hybrid electric vehicle, or
plug-in hybrid electric vehicle.
(2) Electric vehicle.--The term ``electric vehicle'' means
an on-road light-duty or non-road vehicle that uses either an
advanced vehicle battery or a fuel cell (as defined in
section 803 of the Spark M. Matsunaga Hydrogen Act of 2005
(42 U.S.C. 16152)).

[[Page 16248]]

(3) Hybrid electric vehicle.--The term ``hybrid electric
vehicle'' means a new qualified hybrid motor vehicle (as
defined in section 30B(d)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986).
(4) Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle.--The term ``plug-in
hybrid electric vehicle'' means a hybrid electric vehicle
that--
(A) draws motive power from a battery with a capacity of at
least 4 kilowatt-hours;
(B) can be recharged from an external source of electricity
for motive power; and
(C) is a light-, medium-, or heavy-duty motor vehicle or
nonroad vehicle (as those terms are defined in section 216 of
the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7550)).
(b) Policy.--It is the policy of the United States to
conserve oil by aggressively promoting advanced vehicle
battery technology and U.S. domestic manufacturing capability
necessary for widespread commercial viability of hybrid
electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and
electric vehicles.
(c) Advanced Vehicle Battery Research and Development.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall expand and accelerate
research and development efforts for advanced vehicle
batteries with an emphasis on lowering costs and increasing
abuse tolerance with the appropriate balance of power and
energy capacity to meet market requirements.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $100,000,000
for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014.
(d) Advanced Vehicle Battery Domestic Manufacturing Process
Improvements.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a program to
provide grants to improve domestic manufacturing equipment
and assembly process capabilities for advanced vehicle
batteries and components that--
(A) reduce manufacturing time;
(B) reduce manufacturing energy intensity;
(C) reduce negative environmental impact or byproducts; or
(D) increase spent battery or component recycling.
(2) Inclusion.--The Secretary shall include in the program
established under subsection (c) grants to support the
development and deployment of domestic high-speed, automated,
production-scale advanced vehicle battery and component
manufacturing equipment.
(3) Cost sharing.--The Secretary shall require that not
less than 20 percent of the cost of a project funded by a
grant under this section be provided by a non-Federal source.
(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $250,000,000
for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014.
(e) Advanced Vehicle Battery Domestic Manufacturing Supply
Base Expansion.
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a program to
provide grants to expand the domestic manufacturing supply
base for advanced vehicle batteries, battery cell materials
and battery system components.
(2) Use of funds.--The Secretary may provide grants under
paragraph (1) to reequip, expand or establish manufacturing
facilities in the United States.
(3) Cost sharing.--The Secretary shall require that not
less than 20 percent of the cost of a project funded by a
grant under this section be provided by a non-Federal source.
(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $750,000,000
for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014.
______

SA 5123. Mr. BOND submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end, insert the following:

SEC.--. OFFSHORE OIL PRODUCTION.

(a) Publication of Projected State Lines on Outer
Contential Shelf.--Section 4(a)(2)(A) of the Outer Contential
Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1333 (a)(2)(A)) is amended--
(1) by designating the first, second, and third sentences
as clause (i), (iii), and (iv), respectively;
(2) in clause (i) (as so designated), by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of the Stop Excessive Energy
Speculation Act of 2008''; and
(3) by inserting after clause (i) (as so designated) the
following:
``(ii)(I) The projected lines shall also be used for the
purpose of preleasing and leasing activities conducted in new
producing areas under section 32.
``(II) This clause shall not affect any property right or
title to Federal submerged land on the outer Continental
Shelf.
``(III) In carrying out this clause, the President shall
consider the offshore administrative boundaries beyond State
submerged lands for planning, coordination, and
administrative purposes of the Department of the Interior,
but may establish different boundaries.''.
(b) Production of Oil and Natural Gas in New Producing
Areas.--The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331
et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 32. PRODUCTION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS IN NEW PRODUCING
AREAS.

[[Page 16249]]

the amount of qualified outer Continental Shelf revenues
generated in the new producing area offshore each State.
``(B) Payments to coastal political subdivisions.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall pay 20 percent of
the allocable share of each new producing State, as
determined under subparagraph (A), to the coastal political
subdivisions of the new producing State.
``(ii) Allocation.--The amount paid by the Secretary to
coastal political subdivisions shall be allocated to each
coastal political subdivision in accordance with the
regulations promulgated under subparagraph (A).
``(3) Minimum allocation.--The amount allocated to a new
producing State for each fiscal year under paragraph (2)
shall be at least 5 percent of the amounts available for the
fiscal year under paragraph (1 )(B)(i).
``(4) Timing.--The amounts required to be deposited under
subparagraph (B) ofparagraph (1) for the applicable fiscal
year shall be made available in accordance with that
subparagraph during the fiscal year immediately following the
applicable fiscal year.
``(5) Authorized uses.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), each new
producing State and coastal political subdivision shall use
all amounts received under paragraph (2) in accordance with
all applicable Federal and State laws, only for 1 or more of
the following purposes:
``(i) Projects and activities for the purposes of coastal
protection, including conservation, coastal restoration,
hurricane protection, and infrastructure directly affected by
coastal wetland losses.
``(ii) Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, or natural
resources.
``(iii) Implementation of a federally approved marine,
coastal, or comprehensive conservation management plan.
``(iv) Funding of onshore infrastructure projects.
``(v) Planning assistance and the administrative costs of
complying with this section.
``(B) Limitation.--Not more than 3 percent of amounts
received by a new producing State or coastal political
subdivision under paragraph (2) may be used for the purposes
described in subparagraph (A) (v).
``(6) Administration.--Amounts made available under
paragraph (1) (B) shall
``(A) be made available, without further appropriation, in
accordance with this subsection;
``(B) remain available until expended; and ``(C) be in
addition to any amounts appropriated under-
``(i) other provisions of this Act;
``(ii) the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16
U.S.C. 4601-4 et seq.); or ``(iii) any other provisions of
law.
``(d) Disposition of Qualified Outer Contential Shelf
Revenues From Other Areas.--Not withstanding section 9, for
each applicable fiscal year, the terms and conditions of
subsection (c) shall apply to the disposition of qualified
outer Continental Shelf revenues that--
``(1) are derived from oil or gas leasing in an area that
is not included in the current 5-year plan of the Secretary
for oil or gas leasing; and
``(2) are not assumed in the budget of the United States
Government submitted by the President under section 1105 of
title 31, United States Code.''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--Sections 104 and 105 of the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2118)
are amended by striking ``No funds'' each place it appears
and inserting ``Except as provided in section 32 of the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act, no funds''.
______

SA 5124. Mr. KOHL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the bill, insert the following:

TITLE __--NO OIL PRODUCING AND EXPORTING CARTELS ACT OF 2008

SEC. __. NO OIL PRODUCING AND EXPORTING CARTELS ACT OF 2008.

(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``No Oil
Producing and Exporting Cartels Act of 2008'' or ``NOPEC''.
(b) Sherman Act.--The Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. 1 et seq.) is
amended by adding after section 7 the following:

``SEC. 7A. OIL PRODUCING CARTELS.

``(a) In General.--It shall be illegal and a violation of
this Act for any foreign state, or any instrumentality or
agent of any foreign state, to act collectively or in
combination with any other foreign state, any instrumentality
or agent of any other foreign state, or any other person,
whether by cartel or any other association or form of
cooperation or joint action--
``(1) to limit the production or distribution of oil,
natural gas, or any other petroleum product;
``(2) to set or maintain the price of oil, natural gas, or
any petroleum product; or
``(3) to otherwise take any action in restraint of trade
for oil, natural gas, or any petroleum product;
when such action, combination, or collective action has a
direct, substantial, and reasonably foreseeable effect on the
market, supply, price, or distribution of oil, natural gas,
or other petroleum product in the United States.
``(b) Sovereign Immunity.--A foreign state engaged in
conduct in violation of subsection (a) shall not be immune
under the doctrine of sovereign immunity from the
jurisdiction or judgments of the courts of the United States
in any action brought to enforce this section.
``(c) Inapplicability of Act of State Doctrine.--No court
of the United States shall decline, based on the act of state
doctrine, to make a determination on the merits in an action
brought under this section.
``(d) Enforcement.--The Attorney General of the United
States may bring an action to enforce this section in any
district court of the United States as provided under the
antitrust laws.''.
(c) Sovereign Immunity.--Section 1605(a) of title 28,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (6), by striking ``or'' after the
semicolon;
(2) in paragraph (7), by striking the period and inserting
``; or''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(8) in which the action is brought under section 7A of
the Sherman Act.''.
______

SA 5125. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

On page 43, after line 17, add the following:

SEC. 17. BAN ON EXPORTING PETROLEUM EXTRACTED FROM PUBLIC
LANDS.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Petroleum product.--The term ``petroleum product''
means any of the following:
(A) Finished reformulated or conventional motor gasoline.
(B) Finished aviation gasoline.
(C) Kerosene-type jet fuel.
(D) Kerosene.
(E) Distillate fuel oil.
(F) Residual fuel oil.
(G) Lubricants.
(H) Waxes.
(I) Petroleum coke.
(J) Asphalt and road oil.
(2) Public lands.--The term ``public lands'' means any land
and interest in land owned by the United States within the
several States and administered by the Secretary of the
Interior through the Bureau of Land Management or the
Minerals Management Service, without regard to how the United
States acquired ownership.
(b) Ban.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, except as provided in paragraph (2), petroleum extracted
from public lands in the United States (including lands
located on the outer continental shelf), or a petroleum
product produced from such petroleum, may not be exported
from the United States.
(2) Application.--The prohibition on exportation described
in paragraph (1) shall apply to petroleum, or petroleum
products produced from such petroleum, extracted from public
lands leased after the date of the enactment of this Act.
______

SA 5126. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

On page 43, after line 17, add the following:

SEC. 17. BAN ON EXPORTING PETROLEUM EXTRACTED FROM PUBLIC
LANDS.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, petroleum extracted from public lands in the United
States (including lands located on the outer continental
shelf), or a petroleum product produced from such petroleum,
may not be exported from the United States.
(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Petroleum product.--The term ``petroleum product''
means any of the following:
(A) Finished reformulated or conventional motor gasoline.
(B) Finished aviation gasoline.
(C) Kerosene-type jet fuel.
(D) Kerosene.
(E) Distillate fuel oil.
(F) Residual fuel oil.
(G) Lubricants.
(H) Waxes.
(I) Petroleum coke.
(J) Asphalt and road oil.
(2) Public lands.--The term ``public lands'' means any land
and interest in land owned by the United States within the
several States and administered by the Secretary of the
Interior through the Bureau of Land Management or the
Minerals Management Service, without regard to how the United
States acquired ownership.

[[Page 16250]]

______

SA 5127. Ms. SNOWE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
her to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

DIVISION B--EXTENSION OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY INITIATIVES

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT OF 1986 CODE.

Except as otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this
division an amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an
amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other provision, the
reference shall be considered to be made to a section or
other provision of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

TITLE I--NON-BUSINESS ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS

SEC. 101. PERFORMANCE BASED ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS FOR NON-
BUSINESS PROPERTY.

(a) In General.--Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 is amended by inserting after section 25D the
following new section:

``SEC. 25E. PERFORMANCE BASED ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS.

``(a) In General.--In the case of an individual, there
shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this
chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to the amount of
qualified energy efficiency expenditures paid or incurred by
the taxpayer during the taxable year.
``(b) Limitations.--
``(1) In general.--The amount allowed as a credit under
subsection (a) shall not exceed the product of--
``(A) the qualified energy savings achieved, and
``(B) $4,000.
``(2) Minimum amount of qualified energy savings.--No
credit shall be allowed under subsection (a) with respect to
any principal residence which achieves a qualified energy
savings of less than 20 percent.
``(3) Limitation based on amount of tax.--In the case of
taxable years to which section 26(a)(2) does not apply, the
credit allowed under subsection (a) for any taxable year
shall not exceed the excess of--
``(A) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in
section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
``(B) the sum of the credit allowable under this subpart
(other than this section and sections 23, 24, and 25B) and
section 27 for the taxable year.
``(c) Qualified Energy Efficiency Expenditures.--For
purposes of this section:
``(1) In general.--The term `qualified energy efficiency
expenditures' means any amount paid or incurred which is
related to producing qualified energy savings in a principal
residence of the taxpayer which is located in the United
States.
``(2) No double benefit for certain expenditures.--The term
`qualified energy efficiency expenditures' shall not include
any expenditure for which a deduction or credit is otherwise
allowed to the taxpayer under this chapter.
``(3) Principal residence.--The term `principal residence'
has the same meaning as when used in section 121, except
that--
``(A) no ownership requirement shall be imposed, and
``(B) the period for which a building is treated as used as
a principal residence shall also include the 60-day period
ending on the 1st day on which it would (but for this
subparagraph) first be treated as used as a principal
residence.
``(d) Qualified Energy Savings.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) In general.--The term `qualified energy savings'
means, with respect to any principal residence, the amount
(measured as a percentage) by which--
``(A) the annual energy use with respect to the principal
residence after qualified energy efficiency expenditures are
made, as certified under paragraph (2), is less than
``(B) the annual energy use with respect to the principal
residence before the qualified energy efficiency expenditures
were made, as certified under paragraph (2).
In determining annual energy use under subparagraph (B), any
energy efficiency improvements which are not attributable to
qualified energy efficiency expenditures shall be
disregarded.
``(2) Certification.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary, in consultation with the
Secretary of Energy, shall prescribe the procedures and
methods for the making of certifications under this paragraph
based on the Residential Energy Services Network (RESNET)
Technical Guidelines in effect on the date of the enactment
of this section.
``(B) Qualified individuals.--Any certification made under
this paragraph may only be made by an individual who is
recognized by an organization certified by the Secretary for
such purposes.
``(e) Special Rules.--For purposes of this section rules
similar to the rules under paragraphs (4), (5), (6), (7),
(8), and (9) of section 25D(e) and section 25C(e)(2) shall
apply.
``(f) Basis Adjustments.--For purposes of this subtitle, if
a credit is allowed under this section with respect to any
expenditure with respect to any property, the increase in the
basis of such property which would (but for this subsection)
result from such expenditure shall be reduced by the amount
of the credit so allowed.
``(g) Termination.--This section shall not apply with
respect to any property placed in service after December 31,
2011.''.
(b) Interim Guidance on Certification.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury, in
consultation with the Secretary of Energy, shall issue
interim guidance on--
(A) the procedures and methods for making certifications
under sections 25E(d)(2)(A) and 179F(d)(2)(A) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as added by subsection (a) and section
203, respectively;
(B) the recognition of qualified individuals under sections
25E(d)(2)(B) and 179F(d)(2)(B) of such Code for the purpose
of making such certifications; and
(C) how participation in State energy efficiency programs
can be used in the procedures and methods described in
subparagraph (A).
(2) Consultation with stakeholders.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary of the Treasury, in issuing
guidance pursuant to paragraph (1), shall consider comments
from energy efficiency experts and other interested parties.
(B) Other considerations.--In the case of guidance issued
pursuant to paragraph (1)(B), the Secretary of the Treasury
shall also consider--
(i) the Residential Energy Services Network Technical
Guidelines and other pertinent guidelines for evaluating
energy savings;
(ii) energy modeling software, including software
accredited through the Residential Energy Services Network;
and
(iii) quality assurance procedures of the Building
Performance Institute, Home Performance through Energy Star,
and the Residential Energy Services Network.
(c) Alternative Certification Methods.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall
establish a procedure for individuals and businesses to
petition for the approval of alternative methods of
certification under sections 25E(d)(2)(A) and 179F(d)(2)(A)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by subsection
(a) and section 203, respectively.
(2) Determination.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall
make a determination on the approval or disapproval of such
alternative methods of certification not later than 90 days
after receiving a petition under paragraph (1).
(d) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 26(a)(1) is amended by striking ``and 25B'' and
inserting ``25B, and 25E''.
(2) Section 1016(a) is amended by striking ``and'' at the
end of paragraph (36), by striking the period at the end of
paragraph (37) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
``(38) to the extent provided in section 25E(f).''.
(3) The table of sections for subpart A of part IV of
subchapter A chapter 1 is amended by inserting after the item
relating to section 25D the following new item:

``Sec. 25E. Performance based energy improvements.''.

(e) Effective Dates.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to amounts paid or incurred in taxable years
beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 102. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF CREDIT FOR
NONBUSINESS ENERGY PROPERTY.

(a) Extension.--Subsection (g) of section 25C (relating to
termination) is amended by striking ``December 31, 2007'' and
inserting ``December 31, 2011''.
(b) Labor Costs for Qualified Energy Efficiency
Improvements.--Section 25C(c)(1) is amended by adding at the
end the following new flush sentence:
``The amount taken into account under subsection (a)(1) with
respect to qualified energy efficiency improvements shall
include expenditures for labor costs properly allocable to
the onsite preparation, assembly, or original installation of
any component described in this paragraph.''.
(c) Modifications for Residential Energy Efficiency
Property Expenditures.--
(1) Increased limitation for oil furnaces and natural gas,
propane, and oil hot water boilers.--
(A) In general.--Subparagraphs (B) and (C) of section
25C(b)(3) are amended to read as follows:
``(B) $150 for any qualified natural gas furnace or
qualified propane furnace, and
``(C) $300 for--
``(i) any item of energy-efficient building property, and
``(ii) any qualified oil furnace, qualified natural gas hot
water boiler, qualified propane hot water boiler, or
qualified oil hot water boiler.''.
(B) Conforming amendment.--Clause (ii) of section
25C(d)(2)(A) is amended to read as follows:
``(ii) any qualified natural gas furnace, qualified propane
furnace, qualified oil furnace, qualified natural gas hot
water boiler, qualified propane hot water boiler, or
qualified oil hot water boiler, or''.

[[Page 16251]]

(2) Modifications of standards for energy-efficient
building property.--
(A) Electric heat pumps.--Subparagraph (B) of section
25C(d)(3) is amended to read as follows:
``(A) an electric heat pump which achieves the highest
efficiency tier established by the Consortium for Energy
Efficiency, as in effect on January 1, 2008.''.
(B) Central air conditioners.--Section 25C(d)(3)(D) is
amended by striking ``2006'' and inserting ``2008''.
(C) Water heaters.--Subparagraph (E) of section 25C(d) is
amended to read as follows:
``(E) a natural gas, propane, or oil water heater which has
either an energy factor of at least 0.80 or a thermal
efficiency of at least 90 percent.''.
(D) Oil furnaces and hot water boilers.--Paragraph (4) of
section 25C(d) is amended to read as follows:
``(4) Qualified natural gas, propane, and oil furnaces and
hot water boilers.--
``(A) Qualified natural gas furnace.--The term `qualified
natural gas furnace' means any natural gas furnace which
achieves an annual fuel utilization efficiency rate of not
less than 95.
``(B) Qualified natural gas hot water boiler.--The term
`qualified natural gas hot water boiler' means any natural
gas hot water boiler which achieves an annual fuel
utilization efficiency rate of not less than 90.
``(C) Qualified propane furnace.--The term `qualified
propane furnace' means any propane furnace which achieves an
annual fuel utilization efficiency rate of not less than 95.
``(D) Qualified propane hot water boiler.--The term
`qualified propane hot water boiler' means any propane hot
water boiler which achieves an annual fuel utilization
efficiency rate of not less than 90.
``(E) Qualified oil furnaces.--The term `qualified oil
furnace' means any oil furnace which achieves an annual fuel
utilization efficiency rate of not less than 90.
``(F) Qualified oil hot water boiler.--The term `qualified
oil hot water boiler' means any oil hot water boiler which
achieves an annual fuel utilization efficiency rate of not
less than 90.''.
(3) Elimination of lifetime limitation.--Paragraph (1) of
section 25C(b) is amended by inserting ``by reason of
subsection (a)(1)'' after ``under this section''.
(d) Modification of Qualified Energy Efficiency
Improvements.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 25C(c) is amended
by inserting ``, or an asphalt roof with appropriate cooling
granules,'' before ``which meet the Energy Star program
requirements''.
(2) Building envelope component.--Subparagraph (D) of
section 25C(c)(2) is amended--
(A) by inserting ``or asphalt roof'' after ``metal roof'',
and
(B) by inserting ``or cooling granules'' after ``pigmented
coatings''.
(e) Natural Gas Fired Heat Pumps.--Section 25C(d)(3), as
amended by this section, is amended by striking ``and'' at
the end of subparagraph (D), by striking the period at the
end of subparagraph (E) and inserting ``, and'', and by
adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(F) a natural gas fired heat pump with a heating
coefficient of performance (COP) of at least 1.1.''.
(f) Elimination of Credit for Qualified Energy Efficiency
Improvements in 2010.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (a) of section 25C is amended
to read as follows:
``(a) Allowance of Credit.--In the case of an individual,
there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by
this chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to the
amount of residential energy property expenditures paid or
incurred by the taxpayer during the taxable year.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Section 25C(b), as amended by subsection (b), is
amended by striking paragraphs (1) and (2) and by
redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (1).
(B) Section 25C(b)(1), as redesignated by subparagraph (A),
is amended by striking ``by reason of subsection (a)(2)''.
(C) Section 25C is amended by striking subsection (c).
(g) Clarification of Eligibility of Standards for Qualified
Energy Property.--Section 25C(d)(2)(C) is amended by striking
``and'' at the end of clause (i), by striking the period at
the end of clause (ii) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding
at the end the following new clause:
``(iii) shall allow for the testing of products regardless
of the size or capacity of the product.''.
(h) Effective Dates.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and
(3), the amendments made by this section shall apply to
property placed in service after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
(2) Standards for electric heat pumps and central air
conditioners.--The amendments made by subparagraphs (A) and
(B) subsection (c)(2) shall apply to property placed in
service after December 31, 2007.
(3) Elimination of credit for qualified energy efficiency
improvements.--The amendments made by subsection (f) shall
apply to property placed in service after December 31, 2009.

SEC. 103. MODIFICATION OF CREDIT FOR SOLAR ELECTRIC PROPERTY
AND SOLAR HOT WATER PROPERTY.

(a) In General.--Subsection (a) of section 25D (relating to
allowance of credit) is amended by striking paragraphs (1)
and (2) and inserting the following:
``(1) 100 percent of the qualified solar electric property
expenditures made by the taxpayer during such year,
``(2) 100 percent of the qualified solar hot water property
expenditures made by the taxpayer during such year, and''.
(b) Limitations.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 25D(b) is amended
by striking subparagraphs (A) and (B) and inserting the
following:
``(A) $2 with respect to each peak watt of capacity of
qualified solar electric property for which qualified solar
electric property expenditures are made,
``(B) in the case of qualified solar water heating property
expenditures, an amount equal to--
``(i) in the case of a dwelling unit which uses electricity
to heat water, $0.35 with respect to each kilowatt per year
of savings of qualified solar hot water property for which
qualified solar water heating property expenditures are made,
or
``(ii) in the case of a dwelling unit which uses natural
gas to heat water, $7 with respect to each annual Therm of
natural gas savings of qualified solar hot water property for
which qualified solar water heating property expenditures are
made, and''.
(2) Determination of savings.--Paragraph (1) of section
25D(b) is amended by adding at the end the following new
flush sentence:
``For purposes of subparagraph (B), savings shall be
determined under regulations prescribed by the Secretary
based on the OG-300 Standard for the Annual Performance of
OG-300 Certified Systems of the Solar Rating and
Certification Corporation.''.
(c) Definitions.--
(1) In general.--Section 25D(d) is amended--
(A) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (5), and
(B) by striking paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting the
following:
``(1) Qualified solar electric property expenditures.--The
term `qualified solar electric property expenditures' means
any amount paid or incurred for qualified solar electric
property.
``(2) Qualified solar electric property.--The term
`qualified solar electric property' means solar electric
property (as defined in section 179G(c)(2)(B)) installed on
or in connection with a dwelling unit located in the United
States and used as a residence by the taxpayer.
``(3) Qualified solar water heating property
expenditures.--The term `qualified solar water heating
property expenditures' means any amount paid or incurred for
qualified solar hot water property.
``(4) Qualified solar hot water property.--The term
`qualified solar hot water property' means solar hot water
property (as defined in section 179G(c)(2)(C)) installed on
or in connection with a dwelling unit located in the United
States and used as a residence by the taxpayer.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Section 25D(e)(2) is amended by striking ``property
described in paragraph (1) and (2) of subsection (d)'' and
inserting ``qualified solar electric property or qualified
solar hot water property''.
(B) Section 25D(e)(4)(C) is amended by striking
``paragraphs (1), (2), and (3)'' and inserting ``paragraphs
(1),(3), and (5)''.
(d) Dollar Amounts in Case of Joint Occupancy.--Clauses (i)
and (ii) of section 25D(e)(4)(A) are amended to read as
follows:
``(i) $2 in the case of each peak watt of capacity of
qualified solar electric property for which qualified solar
electric property expenditures are made,
``(ii) in the case of qualified solar water heating
property expenditures, an amount equal to--

``(I) in the case of a dwelling unit which uses electricity
to heat water, $0.35 with respect to each kilowatt per year
of savings of qualified solar hot water property for which
qualified solar water heating property expenditures are made,
or
``(II) in the case of a dwelling unit which uses natural
gas to heat water, $7 with respect to each annual Therm of
natural gas savings of qualified solar hot water property for
which qualified solar water heating property expenditures are
made, and''.

(e) Extension of Credit.--Subsection (g) of section 25D is
amended by striking ``2007'' and inserting ``2010''.
(f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after the date of
the enactment of this Act.

TITLE II--BUSINESS-RELATED ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS

SEC. 201. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF NEW ENERGY EFFICIENT
HOME CREDIT.

(a) Extension.--Subsection (g) of section 45L (relating to
termination), as amended by section 205 of division A of the
Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006, is amended by
striking ``December 31, 2008'' and inserting ``December 31,
2011''.

[[Page 16252]]

(b) Modification.--
(1) In general.--Subparagraph (B) of section 45L(a)(1) is
amended to read as follows:
``(B)(i) acquired by a person from such eligible contractor
and used by any person as a residence during the taxable
year, or
``(ii) used by such eligible contractor as a residence
during the taxable year.''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection
shall take effect as if included in section 1332 of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005.

SEC. 202. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF DEDUCTION FOR ENERGY
EFFICIENT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS.

(a) Extension.--Subsection (h) of section 179D (relating to
termination) is amended to read as follows:
``(h) Termination.--This section shall not apply with
respect to property--
``(1) which is certified under subsection (d)(6) after
December 31, 2012, or
``(2) which is placed in service after December 31, 2014.

A provisional certification shall be treated as meeting the
requirements of paragraph (1) if it is based on the building
plans, subject to inspection and testing after
installation.''.
(b) Increase in Maximum Amount of Deduction.--
(1) In general.--Subparagraph (A) of section 179D(b)(1) is
amended by striking ``$1.80'' and inserting ``$2.25''.
(2) Partial allowance.--Paragraph (1) of section 179D(d) is
amended--
(A) by striking ``$.60'' and inserting ``$0.75'', and
(B) by striking ``$1.80'' and inserting ``$2.25''.
(c) Modifications to Certain Special Rules.--
(1) Methods of calculating energy savings.--
(A) In general.--Paragraph (2) of section 179D(d) is
amended--
(i) by striking ``based on'' and inserting ``in accordance
with'',
(ii) by inserting ``, except as necessary to carry out the
requirements of this section, to accommodate a reference to
Standard 90.1-2001, to extend the applicability of such
manual to national conditions, or to update technical
standards based on new information'' before the period at the
end, and
(iii) by adding at the end the following new sentence:
``The calculation methods contained in such regulations shall
also provide for the calculation of appropriate energy
savings for design methods and technologies not otherwise
credited in such manual or standard, including energy savings
associated with natural ventilation, evaporative cooling,
automatic lighting controls (such as occupancy sensors,
photocells, and timeclocks), daylighting, designs utilizing
semi-conditioned spaces which maintain adequate comfort
conditions without air conditioning or without heating,
improved fan system efficiency (including reductions in
static pressure), advanced unloading mechanisms for
mechanical cooling (such as multiple or variable speed
compressors), on-site generation of electricity (including
combined heat and power systems, fuel cells, and renewable
energy generation such as solar energy), and wiring with
lower energy losses than wiring satisfying Standard 90.1-2001
requirements for building power distribution systems.''.
(B) Requirements for computer software used in calculating
energy and power consumption costs.--Paragraph (3)(B) of
section 179D(d) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of
clause (ii), by striking the period at the end of clause
(iii) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the
following:
``(iv) which automatically--

``(I) generates the features, energy use, and energy and
power consumption costs of a reference building which meets
Standard 90.1-2001,
``(II) generates the features, energy use, and energy and
power consumption costs of a compliant building or system
which reduces the annual energy and power costs by 50 percent
compared to Standard 90.1-2001, and
``(III) compares such features, energy use, and consumption
costs to the features, energy use, and consumption costs of
the building or system with respect to which the calculation
is being made.''.

(2) Targets for partial allowance of credit.--Paragraph
(1)(B) of section 179D(d) is amended--
(A) by striking ``The Secretary'' and inserting the
following:
``(i) In general.--The Secretary'', and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(ii) Additional requirements.--For purposes of clause
(i)--

``(I) the Secretary shall determine prescriptive criteria
that can be modeled explicitly for reference buildings which
meet the requirements of subsection (c)(1)(D) for different
building types and regions,
``(II) a system may be certified as meeting the target
under subparagraph (A)(ii) if the appropriate reference
building either meets the requirements of subsection
(c)(1)(D) with such system rather than the comparable
reference system (using the calculation under paragraph (2))
or meets the relevant prescriptive criteria under subclause
(I), and
``(III) the lighting system target shall be based on
lighting power density, except that it shall allow lighting
controls credits that trade off for lighting power density
savings based on Section 3.2.2 of the 2005 California
Nonresidential Alternative Calculation Method Approval
Manual.

``(iii) Publication.--The Secretary shall publish in the
Federal Register the bases for the target levels established
in the regulations under clause (i).''.
(d) Alternative Standards.--Section 179D(d) is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(7) Alternative standards pending final regulations.--
Until such time as the Secretary issues final regulations
under paragraph (1)(B)--
``(A) in the case of property which is part of a building
envelope, the building envelope system target under paragraph
(1)(A)(ii) shall be a 7 percent reduction in total annual
energy and power costs (determined in the same manner as
under subsection (c)(1)(D)), and
``(B) in the case of property which is part of the heating,
cooling, ventilation, and hot water systems, the heating,
cooling, ventilation, and hot water system shall be treated
as meeting the target under paragraph (1)(A)(ii) if it would
meet the requirement in subsection (c)(1)(D) if combined with
a building envelope system and lighting system which met
their respective targets under paragraph(1)(A)(ii) (including
interim targets in effect under subsections (f) and
subparagraph (A)).''.
(e) Modifications to Lighting Standards.--
(1) Standards to be alternate standards.--Subsection (f) of
section 179D is amended by--
(A) striking ``Interim'' in the heading and inserting
``Alternative'', and
(B) inserting ``, or, if the taxpayer elects, in lieu of
the target set forth in such final regulations'' after
``lighting system'' at the end of the matter preceding
paragraph (1).
(2) Qualified individuals.--Section 179D(d)(6)(C) is
amended by adding at the end the following: ``For purposes of
certification of whether the alternative target for lighting
systems under subsection (f) is met, individuals qualified to
determine compliance shall include individuals who are
certified as Lighting Certified (LC) by the National Council
on Qualifications for the Lighting Professions, Certified
Energy Managers (CEM) by the Association of Energy Engineers,
and LEED Accredited Professionals (AP) by the U.S. Green
Buildings Council.''.
(3) Requirement for bilevel switching.--Section 179D(f)(2)
is amended by adding at the end the following new
subparagraph:
``(3) Application of subsection to bilevel switching.--
``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (2)(C)(i),
this subsection shall apply to a system which does not
include provisions for bilevel switching if the reduction in
lighting power density is at least 37.5 percent of the
minimum requirements in Table 9.3.1.1 or Table 9.3.1.2. (not
including additional interior lighting allowances) of
Standard 90.1-2001.
``(B) Reduction in deduction.--In the case of a system to
which this subsection applies by reason of subparagraph (A),
paragraph (2) shall be applied--
``(i) by substituting `50 percent' for `40 percent' in
subparagraph (A) thereof, and
``(ii) in subparagraph (B)(ii) thereof--

``(I) by substituting `37.5 percentage points' for `25
percentage points', and
``(II) by substituting `12.5' for `15'.''.

(f) Public Property.--Paragraph (4) of section 179(d) is
amended by striking ``the Secretary shall promulgate a
regulation to allow the allocation of the deduction'' and
inserting ``the deduction under this section shall be
allowed''.
(g) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service in taxable years
beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 203. DEDUCTION FOR ENERGY EFFICIENT LOW-RISE BUILDINGS.

(a) In General.--Part VI of subchapter B of chapter 1, as
amended by section 404 of division A of the Tax Relief and
Health Care Act of 2006, is amended by inserting after
section 179E the following new section:

``SEC. 179F. ENERGY EFFICIENT LOW-RISE BUILDINGS DEDUCTION.

``(a) In General.--There shall be allowed as a deduction an
amount equal to the amount of qualified energy efficiency
expenditures paid or incurred by the taxpayer during the
taxable year.
``(b) Limitations.--
``(1) In general.--The amount allowed as a credit under
subsection (a) with respect to any dwelling unit shall not
exceed the product of--
``(A) the qualified energy savings achieved, and
``(B) $12,000.
``(2) Minimum amount of qualified energy savings.--No
credit shall be allowed under subsection (a) with respect to
any dwelling unit in a qualified low-rise building which
achieves a qualified energy savings of less than 20 percent.
``(c) Qualified Energy Efficiency Expenditures.--For
purposes of this section--
``(1) In general.--The term `qualified energy efficiency
expenditures' means any amount paid or incurred which is
related to producing qualified energy savings in any dwelling
unit located in a qualified low-rise building of the taxpayer
which is located in the United States.

[[Page 16253]]

``(2) No double benefit for certain expenditures.--The term
`qualified energy efficiency expenditures' shall not include
any expenditure for any property for which a deduction has
been allowed to the taxpayer under section 179F.
``(3) Qualified low-rise building.--The term `qualified
low-rise building' means a building--
``(A) with respect to which depreciation is allowable under
section 167,
``(B) which is used for multifamily housing, and
``(C) which is not within the scope of Standard 90.1-2001
(as defined under section 179D(c)(2)).
``(d) Qualified Energy Savings.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) In general.--The term `qualified energy savings'
means, with respect to any dwelling unit in a qualified low-
rise building, the amount (measured as a percentage) by
which--
``(A) the annual energy use with respect to such dwelling
unit after qualified energy efficiency expenditures are made,
as certified under paragraph (2), is less than
``(B) the annual energy use with respect to such dwelling
unit before the qualified energy efficiency expenditures were
made, as certified under paragraph (2).
In determining annual energy use under subparagraph (B), any
energy efficiency improvements which are not attributable to
qualified energy efficiency expenditures shall be
disregarded.
``(2) Certification.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary, in consultation with the
Secretary of Energy, shall prescribe the procedures and
method for the making of certifications under this paragraph
based on the Residential Energy Services Network (RESNET)
Technical Guidelines in effect on the date of the enactment
of this Act.
``(B) Qualified individuals.--Any certification made under
this paragraph may only be made by an individual who is
recognized by an organization certified by the Secretary for
such purposes.
``(e) Special Rules.--For purposes of this section, rules
similar to the rules under paragraphs (8) and (9) of section
25D(e) shall apply.
``(f) Basis Adjustments.--For purposes of this subtitle, if
a credit is allowed under this section with respect to any
expenditure with respect to any property, the increase in the
basis of such property which would (but for this subsection)
result from such expenditure shall be reduced by the amount
of the credit so allowed.
``(g) Termination.--This section shall not apply with
respect to any property placed in service after December 31,
2011.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 263(a)(1), as amended by section 404 of
division A of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006, the
is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (K),
by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (L) and
inserting ``, or'', and by inserting after subparagraph (L)
the following new subparagraph:
``(M) expenditures for which a deduction is allowed under
section 179F.''.
(2) Section 312(k)(3)(B) is amended by striking ``179,
179A, 179B, 179C, 179D, or 179E'' each place it appears in
the heading and text and inserting ``179, 179A, 179B, 179C,
179D, 179E, or 179F''.
(3) Section 1016(a), as amended by section 101, is amended
by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (37), by striking
the period at the end of paragraph (38) and inserting ``,
and'', and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(39) to the extent provided in section 179F(f).''.
(4) Section 1245(a) is amended by inserting ``179F,'' after
``179E,'' both places it appears in paragraphs (2)(C) and
(3)(C).
(5) The table of sections for part VI of subchapter B is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 179E
the following new item:

``Sec. 179F. Energy efficient low-rise buildings deduction.''.

(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to amounts paid or incurred in taxable years
beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 204. ENERGY EFFICIENT PROPERTY DEDUCTION.

(a) In General.--Part VI of subchapter B of chapter 1, as
amended by section 203, is amended by inserting after section
179F the following new section:

``SEC. 179G. ENERGY EFFICIENT PROPERTY.

``(a) Allowance of Deduction.--There shall be allowed as a
deduction an amount equal to the energy efficient property
expenditures paid or incurred by the taxpayer during the
taxable year.
``(b) Limitation.--The amount of the deduction allowed
under subsection (a) for any taxable years shall not exceed--
``(1) $150 for any advanced main air circulating fan,
``(2) $450 for any qualified natural gas furnace or
qualified propane furnace,
``(3) $900 for--
``(A) any item of energy-efficient building property, and
``(B) any qualified oil furnace, qualified natural gas hot
water boiler, qualified propane hot water boiler, or
qualified oil hot water boiler,
``(4) $9 with respect to each peak watt of capacity of
solar electric property,
``(5) in the case of solar hot water property, an amount
equal to--
``(A) in the case of a dwelling unit which uses electricity
to heat water, $1 with respect to each kilowatt per year of
savings of such solar hot water property, or
``(B) in the case of a dwelling unit which uses natural gas
to heat water, $21 with respect to each annual Therm of
natural gas savings of such solar hot water property.
For purposes of paragraph (5), savings shall be determined
under regulations prescribed by the Secretary based on the
OG-300 Standard for the Annual Performance of OG-300
Certified Systems of the Solar Rating and Certification
Corporation.
``(c) Energy Efficient Property Expenditures.--For purposes
of this section--
``(1) In general.--The term `energy efficient property
expenditures' means expenditures paid by the taxpayer for
qualified energy property which is--
``(A) of a character subject to the allowance for
depreciation, and
``(B) originally placed in service by the taxpayer.
``(2) Qualified energy property.--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified energy property' has
the meaning given such term by section 25C(d)(2), except that
such term shall include solar electric property and solar hot
water property.
``(B) Solar electric property.--The term `solar electric
property' means property which uses solar energy to generate
electricity.
``(C) Solar hot water property.--The term `solar hot water
property' means property used to heat water if at least half
of the energy used by such property for such purpose is
derived from the sun.
``(d) Basis Adjustments.--For purposes of this subtitle, if
a credit is allowed under this section with respect to any
expenditure with respect to any property, the increase in the
basis of such property which would (but for this subsection)
result from such expenditure shall be reduced by the amount
of the credit so allowed.
``(e) Termination.--This section shall not apply with
respect to any property placed in service after December 31,
2010.''.
(b) No Double Benefit.--Section 179D(c) is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) Certain property excluded.--The term `energy
efficient commercial building property' does not include any
property with respect to which a credit has been allowed to
the taxpayer under section 179G.''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 263(a)(1), as amended by section 203, is
amended by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (K), by
striking the period at the end of subparagraph (L) and
inserting ``, or'', and by inserting after subparagraph (L)
the following new subparagraph:
``(M) expenditures for which a deduction is allowed under
section 179G.''.
(2) Section 312(k)(3)(B), as amended by section 203, is
amended by striking ``179, 179A, 179B, 179C, 179D, 179E, or
179F'' each place it appears in the heading and text and
inserting ``179, 179A, 179B, 179C, 179D, 179E, 179F, or
179G''.
(3) Section 1016(a), as amended by section 203, is amended
by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (38), by striking
the period at the end of paragraph (39) and inserting ``,
and'', and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(40) to the extent provided in section 179G(e).''.
(4) Section 1245(a), as amended by section 203 is amended
by inserting ``179G,'' after ``179F,'' both places it appears
in paragraphs (2)(C) and (3)(C).
(5) The table of sections for part VI of subchapter B is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 179F
the following new item:

``Sec. 179G. Energy efficient property.''.

(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service in taxable years
beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 205. EXTENSION OF INVESTMENT TAX CREDIT WITH RESPECT TO
SOLAR ENERGY PROPERTY AND QUALIFIED FUEL CELL
PROPERTY.

(a) Solar Energy Property.--Paragraphs (2)(A)(i)(II) and
(3)(A)(ii) of section 48(a), as amended by section 207 of
division A of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006, are
each amended by striking ``2009'' and inserting ``2012''.
(b) Eligible Fuel Cell Property.--Paragraph (1)(E) of
section 48(c), as so amended, is amended by striking ``2008''
and inserting ``2011''.

TITLE III--INCENTIVES FOR ENERGY SAVINGS CERTIFICATIONS

SEC. 301. CREDIT FOR ENERGY SAVINGS CERTIFICATIONS.

(a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1, as amended by section 405 of division A of the Tax
Relief and Health Care Act of 2006, is amended by adding at
the end the following new section:

[[Page 16254]]

``SEC. 45O. ENERGY SAVINGS CERTIFICATION CREDIT.

``(a) In General.--For purposes of section 38, the energy
savings certification credit determined under this section
for any taxable year is an amount equal to the sum of--
``(1) the qualified training and certification costs paid
or incurred by the taxpayer which may be taken into account
for such taxable year, plus
``(2) the qualified certification equipment expenditures
paid or incurred by the taxpayer which may be taken into
account for such taxable year.
``(b) Qualified Training and Certification Costs.--
``(1) In general.--The term `qualified training and
certification costs' means costs paid or incurred for
training which is required for the taxpayer or employees of
the taxpayer to be certified by the Secretary under section
25D(d)(2)(B) or 179F(d)(2)(B) for the purpose of certifying
energy savings.
``(2) Limitation.--The qualified training and certification
costs taken into account under subsection (a)(1) for the
taxable year with respect to any individual shall not exceed
$500 reduced by the amount of the credit allowed under
subsection (a)(1) to the taxpayer (or any predecessor) with
respect to such individual for all prior taxable years.
``(3) Year costs taken into account.--Qualified training
and certifications costs with respect to any individual shall
not be taken into account under subsection (a)(1) before the
taxable year in which the individual with respect to whom
such costs are paid or incurred has performed 25
certifications under sections 25E(d)(2)(A) and 179F(d)(2)(A).
``(c) Qualified Certification Equipment Expenditures.--
``(1) In general.--The term `qualified training equipment
expenditures' means costs paid or incurred for--
``(A) blower doors,
``(B) duct leakage testing equipment,
``(C) flue gas combustion equipment, and
``(D) digital manometers.
``(2) Limitation.--
``(A) In general.--The qualified certification equipment
expenditures taken into account under subsection (a)(2) with
respect to any taxpayer for any taxable year shall not exceed
$1,000.
``(B) Limitation on individual items.--The qualified
certification equipment expenditures taken into account under
subsection (a)(2) shall not exceed--
``(i) $500 with respect to any blower door or duct leakage
testing equipment, and
``(ii) $100 with respect to any flue gas combustion
equipment or digital manometer.
``(3) Year expenditures taken into account.--The qualified
certification equipment expenditures of any taxpayer shall
not be taken into account under subsection (a)(2) before the
taxable year in which the taxpayer has performed 25
certifications under sections 25E(d)(2)(A) and 179F(d)(2)(A).
``(d) Special Rules.--
``(1) Aggregation rules.--For purposes of this section, all
persons treated as a single employer under subsections (a)
and (b) of section 52 shall be treated as 1 person.
``(2) Basis reduction.--The basis of any property shall be
reduced by the portion of the cost of such property taken
into account under subsection (a).
``(3) Denial of double benefit.--
``(A) In general.--No deduction shall be allowed for that
portion of the expenses otherwise allowable as a deduction
for the taxable year which is equal to the amount taken into
account under subsection (a) for such taxable year.
``(B) Amount previously deducted.--No credit shall be
allowed under subsection (a) with respect to any amount for
which a deduction has been allowed in any preceding taxable
year.''.
(b) Credit Treated as Part of General Business Credit.--
Section 38(b) is amended by striking ``plus'' at the end of
paragraph (30), by striking the period at the end of
paragraph (31) and inserting ``plus'', and by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
``(32) the energy savings certification credit determined
under section 45O(a).''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 1016(a), as amended by this Act, is amended by
striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (39), by striking
the period at the end of paragraph (40) and inserting
``and'', and by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(41) to the extent provided in section 45O(d)(2).''.
(2) The table of sections for subpart D of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 45N the following new item:

``Sec. 45O. Energy savings certification credit.''.

(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to amounts paid or incurred after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
______

SA 5128. Mr. ALLARD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end, add the following:

SEC. __. DOMESTIC PRODUCTION.

(a) Repeal.--Section 433 of the Department of the Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008
(Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2152) is repealed.
(b) Commencement of Commercial Leasing.--Section 369(e) of
the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15927(e)) is amended
in the second sentence by inserting ``, not earlier than
December 31, 2011,'' before ``conduct''.

SEC. __. ENERGY SAVINGS REPORT.

Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this
Act and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Energy shall--
(1) conduct an analysis of all policies of the Federal
Government (including mandates, subsidies, tariffs, the use
of hydrogen and tax policy) that encourage, or have the
potential to encourage, the reduction of fossil fuel energy
consumption in the United States; and
(2) submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the
House of Representatives a report that contains
recommendations for the adjustment of the policies described
in paragraph (1) to reduce--
(A) the dependence of the United States on fossil fuel;
(B) the quantity of air pollutants in the environment;
(C) greenhouse gas emissions; and
(D) the cost of energy.
______

SA 5129. Mr. ALEXANDER submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

On page 43, after line 17, insert the following:

TITLE II--INCENTIVES FOR PLUG-IN ELECTRIC DRIVE VEHICLES

SEC. 21. CREDIT FOR NEW QUALIFIED PLUG-IN ELECTRIC DRIVE
MOTOR VEHICLES.

(a) In General.--Subpart B of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
other credits) is amended by adding at the end the following
new section:

``SEC. 30D. PLUG-IN ELECTRIC DRIVE MOTOR VEHICLE CREDIT.

``(a) Allowance of Credit.--
``(1) In general.--There shall be allowed as a credit
against the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year
an amount equal to the applicable amount with respect to each
new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle placed in
service by the taxpayer during the taxable year.
``(2) Applicable amount.--For purposes of paragraph (1),
the applicable amount is the sum of--
``(A) $2,000, plus
``(B) $400 for each kilowatt hour of traction battery
capacity in excess of 2.5 kilowatt hours.
``(b) Limitations.--
``(1) Limitation based on weight.--The amount of the credit
allowed under subsection (a) by reason of subsection
(a)(2)(A) shall not exceed--
``(A) $7,500, in the case of any new qualified plug-in
electric drive motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight
rating of not more than 10,000 pounds,
``(B) $10,000, in the case of any new qualified plug-in
electric drive motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight
rating of more than 10,000 pounds but not more than 14,000
pounds,
``(C) $15,000, in the case of any new qualified plug-in
electric drive motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight
rating of more than 14,000 pounds but not more than 26,000
pounds, and
``(D) $20,000, in the case of any new qualified plug-in
electric drive motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight
rating of more than 26,000 pounds.
``(2) Limitation based on amount of tax.--The credit
allowed under subsection (a) for any taxable year shall not
exceed the excess of--
``(A) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in
section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
``(B) the sum of the credits allowable under subpart A and
section 27 for the taxable year.
``(3) Limitation on number of passenger vehicles and light
trucks eligible for credit.--No credit shall be allowed under
subsection (a) for any new qualified plug-in electric drive
motor vehicle which is a passenger vehicle or light truck in
any calendar year following the calendar year which includes
the first date on which the total number of such new
qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicles sold for use
in the United States after December 31, 2007, is at least
250,000.
``(c) New Qualified Plug-in Electric Drive Motor Vehicle.--
For purposes of this section, the term `new qualified plug-in
electric drive motor vehicle' means a motor vehicle--

[[Page 16255]]

``(1) which draws propulsion using one or more traction
batteries with an aggregate capacity of not less than 2.5
kilowatt hours,
``(2) which uses an offboard source of electricity to
recharge one or more such batteries,
``(3) which, where required for the applicable make and
model, has received a certificate of conformity under the
Clean Air Act, or which meets all Federal safety and
emissions requirements for on-road use,
``(4) the original use of which commences with the
taxpayer,
``(5) which is acquired for use or lease by the taxpayer
and not for resale, and
``(6) which is made by a manufacturer.
``(d) Other Definitions and Special Rules.--For purposes of
this section--
``(1) Motor vehicle.--The term `motor vehicle' means any
vehicle which is manufactured primarily for use on public
streets, roads, and highways (not including a vehicle
operated exclusively on a rail or rails).
``(2) Other terms.--The terms `passenger automobile',
`light truck', and `manufacturer' have the meanings given
such terms in regulations prescribed by the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency for purposes of the
administration of title II of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7521 et seq.).
``(3) Traction battery capacity.--Traction battery capacity
shall be measured in kilowatt hours from a 100 percent state
of charge to a zero percent state of charge.
``(4) Reduction in basis.--For purposes of this subtitle,
the basis of any property for which a credit is allowable
under subsection (a) shall be reduced by the amount of such
credit so allowed.
``(5) No double benefit.--The amount of any deduction or
other credit allowable under this chapter for a new qualified
plug-in electric drive motor vehicle shall be reduced by the
amount of credit allowed under subsection (a) for such
vehicle for the taxable year.
``(6) Property used by tax-exempt entity.--In the case of a
vehicle the use of which is described in paragraph (3) or (4)
of section 50(b) and which is not subject to a lease, the
person who sold such vehicle to the person or entity using
such vehicle shall be treated as the taxpayer that placed
such vehicle in service, but only if such person clearly
discloses to such person or entity in a document the amount
of any credit allowable under subsection (a) with respect to
such vehicle (determined without regard to subsection
(b)(2)).
``(7) Property used outside united states, etc., not
qualified.--No credit shall be allowable under subsection (a)
with respect to any property referred to in section 50(b)(1)
or with respect to the portion of the cost of any property
taken into account under section 179.
``(8) Recapture.--The Secretary shall, by regulations,
provide for recapturing the benefit of any credit allowable
under subsection (a) with respect to any property which
ceases to be property eligible for such credit (including
recapture in the case of a lease period of less than the
economic life of a vehicle).
``(9) Election to not take credit.--No credit shall be
allowed under subsection (a) for any vehicle if the taxpayer
elects not to have this section apply to such vehicle.
``(10) Interaction with air quality and motor vehicle
safety standards.--Unless otherwise provided in this section,
a motor vehicle shall not be considered eligible for a credit
under this section unless such vehicle is in compliance
with--
``(A) the applicable provisions of the Clean Air Act for
the applicable make and model year of the vehicle (or
applicable air quality provisions of State law in the case of
a State which has adopted such provision under a waiver under
section 209(b) of the Clean Air Act), and
``(B) the motor vehicle safety provisions of sections 30101
through 30169 of title 49, United States Code.
``(e) Regulations.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
Secretary shall promulgate such regulations as necessary to
carry out the provisions of this section.
``(2) Coordination in prescription of certain
regulations.--The Secretary of the Treasury, in coordination
with the Secretary of Transportation and the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency, shall prescribe such
regulations as necessary to determine whether a motor vehicle
meets the requirements to be eligible for a credit under this
section.''.
(b) Coordination With Other Motor Vehicle Credits.--
(1) Electric drive motor vehicles.--Paragraph (1) of
section 30(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended
by adding at the end the following new flush sentence:

``Such term shall not include any motor vehicle which is a
new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle (as
defined by section 30D(c)).''
(2) New qualified fuel cell motor vehicles.--Paragraph (3)
of section 30B(b) of such Code is amended by adding at the
end the following new flush sentence:
``Such term shall not include any motor vehicle which is a
new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle (as
defined by section 30D(c)).''
(3) New qualified hybrid motor vehicles.--Paragraph (3) of
section 30B(d) of such Code is amended by adding at the end
the following new flush sentence:

``Such term shall not include any motor vehicle which is a
new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle (as
defined by section 30D(c)).''
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 1016(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (36), by
striking the period at the end of paragraph (37) and
inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(38) to the extent provided in section 30D(d)(5).''
(2) Section 6501(m) of such Code is amended by inserting
``30D(d)(10)'' after ``30C(e)(5)''.
(3) The table of sections for subpart B of part IV of such
Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``Sec. 30D. Plug-in electric drive motor vehicle credit.''

(d) Conversion Kits.--
(1) In general.--Section 30B of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 (relating to alternative motor vehicle credit) is
amended by redesignating subsections (i) and (j) as
subsections (j) and (k), respectively, and by inserting after
subsection (h) the following new subsection:
``(i) Plug-in Conversion Credit.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a), the
plug-in conversion credit determined under this subsection
with respect to any motor vehicle which is converted to a
qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle is the lesser
of--
``(A) an amount equal to--
``(i) $2,000, plus
``(ii) $400 for each kilowatt hour of capacity of the plug-
in traction battery module installed in such vehicle in
excess of 2.5 kilowatt hours, or
``(B) 50 percent of the cost of the plug-in traction
battery module installed in such vehicle as part of such
conversion.
``(2) Limitations.--The amount of the credit allowed under
this subsection shall not exceed $4,000 with respect to the
conversion of any motor vehicle.
``(3) Definitions and special rules.--For purposes of this
subsection--
``(A) Qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle.--The
term `qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle' means
any new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle (as
defined in section 30D(c), determined without regard to
paragraphs (4) and (6) thereof).
``(B) Plug-in traction battery module.--The term `plug-in
traction battery module' means an electro-chemical energy
storage device which--
``(i) has a traction battery capacity of not less than 2.5
kilowatt hours,
``(ii) is equipped with an electrical plug by means of
which it can be energized and recharged when plugged into an
external source of electric power,
``(iii) consists of a standardized configuration and is
mass produced,
``(iv) has been tested and approved by the National Highway
Transportation Safety Administration as compliant with
applicable motor vehicle and motor vehicle equipment safety
standards when installed by a mechanic with standardized
training in protocols established by the battery manufacturer
as part of a nationwide distribution program, and
``(v) is certified by a battery manufacturer as meeting the
requirements of clauses (i) through (iv).
``(C) Credit allowed to lessor of battery module.--In the
case of a plug-in traction battery module which is leased to
the taxpayer, the credit allowed under this subsection shall
be allowed to the lessor of the plug-in traction battery
module.
``(D) Credit allowed in addition to other credits.--The
credit allowed under this subsection shall be allowed with
respect to a motor vehicle notwithstanding whether a credit
has been allowed with respect to such motor vehicle under
this section (other than this subsection) in any preceding
taxable year.
``(4) Termination.--This subsection shall not apply to
conversions made after December 31, 2010.''.
(2) Credit treated as part of alternative motor vehicle
credit.--Section 30B(a) of such Code is amended by striking
``and'' at the end of paragraph (3), by striking the period
at the end of paragraph (4) and inserting ``, and'', and by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) the plug-in conversion credit determined under
subsection (i).''.
(3) No recapture for vehicles converted to qualified plug-
in electric drive motor vehicles.--Paragraph (8) of section
30B(h) of such Code is amended by adding at the end the
following: ``, except that no benefit shall be recaptured if
such property ceases to eligible for such credit by reason of
conversion to a qualified plug-in electric drive motor
vehicle.''
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after December 31,
2007, in taxable years beginning after such date.

[[Page 16256]]

SEC. 22. CLASSIFICATION OF SMART METERS AS 5-YEAR PROPERTY.

(a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 168(e)(3) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 5-year
property) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (v),
(2) by redesignating clause (vi) as clause (vii), and
(3) by inserting after clause (v) the following new clause:
``(vi) any advanced electricity time-based meter that--

``(I) measures and records electricity usage data on a time
differentiated basis,
``(II) has 2-way communications capability,
``(III) provides data that enables the electricity supplier
to provide usage information to customers electronically, and
``(IV) is placed in service before January 1, 2014, and''.

(b) Conforming Amendment.--Paragraph (3) of section 168(e)
of such Code (relating to classification of certain property)
is amended by striking ``clause (vi)(I)'' in the last
sentence and inserting ``clause (vii)(I)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2007.

SEC. 23. ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLE REFUELING PROPERTY CREDIT.

(a) Increase in Credit Amount.--Section 30C of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking ``30 percent'' in subsection (a) and
inserting ``50 percent'', and
(2) by striking ``$30,000'' in subsection (b)(1) and
inserting ``$50,000''.
(b) Expansion of Electric Property.--Subsection (c) of
section 30C of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
qualified alternative fuel vehicle refueling property) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1),
(2) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3),
(3) by striking ``Any mixture--'' and all that follows in
paragraph (3)(B), as so redesignated, and inserting ``Any
mixture of biodiesel (as defined in section 40A(d)(1)) and
diesel fuel (as defined in section 4083(a)(3)), determined
without regard to any use of kerosene and containing at least
20 percent biodiesel.'', and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new
paragraph:
``(2) paragraph (3)(B) of section 179A(d) applied to all
electric property used to support the charging of electric
vehicles, neighborhood electric vehicles, or plug-in hybrids,
without regard to the gross vehicle weight rating of such
vehicles, and''.
(c) Extension of Credit.--Section 30C(g) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by inserting ``electric property and'' before
``property relating to hydrogen'' in paragraph (1), and
(2) by striking ``December 31, 2009'' in paragraph (2) and
inserting ``December 31, 2010''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after the date of
the enactment of this Act, in taxable years ending after such
date.

SEC. 24. INCENTIVES FOR MANUFACTURING FACILITIES PRODUCING
PLUG-IN ELECTRIC DRIVE MOTOR VEHICLE AND
COMPONENTS.

(a) Deduction for Manufacturing Facilities.--Part VI of
subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (relating to itemized deductions for individuals and
corporations) is amended by inserting after section 179E the
following new section:

``SEC. 179F. EXPENSING FOR MANUFACTURING FACILITIES PRODUCING
PLUG-IN ELECTRIC DRIVE MOTOR VEHICLE AND
COMPONENTS.

``(a) Treatment as Expenses.--A taxpayer may elect to treat
the applicable percentage of the cost of any qualified plug-
in electric drive motor vehicle manufacturing facility
property as an expense which is not chargeable to a capital
account. Any cost so treated shall be allowed as a deduction
for the taxable year in which the qualified manufacturing
facility property is placed in service.
``(b) Applicable Percentage.--For purposes of subsection
(a), the applicable percentage is--
``(1) 100 percent, in the case of qualified plug-in
electric drive motor vehicle manufacturing facility property
which is placed in service before January 1, 2013, and
``(2) 50 percent, in the case of qualified plug-in electric
drive motor vehicle manufacturing facility property which is
placed in service after December 31, 2012, and before January
1, 2015.
``(c) Election.--
``(1) In general.--An election under this section for any
taxable year shall be made on the taxpayer's return of the
tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year. Such
election shall be made in such manner as the Secretary may by
regulations prescribe.
``(2) Election irrevocable.--Any election made under this
section may not be revoked except with the consent of the
Secretary.
``(d) Qualified Plug-in Electric Drive Motor Vehicle
Manufacturing Facility Property.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) In general.--The term `qualified plug-in electric
drive motor vehicle manufacturing facility property' means
any qualified property--
``(A) the original use of which commences with the
taxpayer,
``(B) which is placed in service by the taxpayer after the
date of the enactment of this section and before January 1,
2015, and
``(C) no written binding contract for the construction of
which was in effect on or before the date of the enactment of
this section.
``(2) Qualified property.--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified property' means any
property which is a facility or a portion of a facility used
for the production of--
``(i) any new qualified plug-in electric drive motor
vehicle (as defined by section 30D(c)), or
``(ii) any eligible component.
``(B) Eligible component.--The term `eligible component'
means any battery, any electric motor or generator, or any
power control unit which is designed specifically for use in
a new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle (as so
defined).
``(e) Special Rule for Dual Use Property.--In the case of
any qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle
manufacturing facility property which is used to produce both
qualified property and other property which is not qualified
property, the amount of costs taken into account under
subsection (a) shall be reduced by an amount equal to--
``(1) the total amount of such costs (determined before the
application of this subsection), multiplied by
``(2) the percentage of property expected to be produced
which is not qualified property.''.
(b) Refund of Credit for Prior Year Minimum Tax
Liability.--Section 53 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(relating to credit for prior year minimum tax liability) is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) Election To Treat Amounts Attributable to Qualified
Manufacturing Facility.--
``(1) In general.--In the case of an eligible taxpayer, the
amount determined under subsection (c) for the taxable year
(after the application of subsection (e)) shall be increased
by an amount equal to the applicable percentage of any
qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle manufacturing
facility property which is placed in service during the
taxable year.
``(2) Applicable percentage.--For purposes of paragraph
(1), the applicable percentage is--
``(A) 35 percent, in the case of qualified plug-in electric
drive motor vehicle manufacturing facility property which is
placed in service before January 1, 2013, and
``(B) 17.5 percent, in the case of qualified plug-in
electric drive motor vehicle manufacturing facility property
which is placed in service after December 31, 2012, and
before January 1, 2015.
``(3) Eligible taxpayer.--For purposes of this subsection,
the term `eligible taxpayer' means any taxpayer--
``(A) who places in service qualified plug-in electric
drive motor vehicle manufacturing facility property during
the taxable year,
``(B) who does not make an election under section 179F(c),
and
``(C) who makes an election under this subsection.
``(4) Other definitions and special rules.--
``(A) Qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle
manufacturing facility property.--The term `qualified plug-in
electric drive motor vehicle manufacturing facility property'
has the meaning given such term under section 179F(d).
``(B) Special rule for dual use property.--In the case of
any qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle
manufacturing facility property which is used to produce both
qualified property (as defined in section 179F(d)) and other
property which is not qualified property, the amount of costs
taken into account under paragraph (1)shall be reduced by an
amount equal to--
``(i) the total amount of such costs (determined before the
application of this subparagraph), multiplied by
``(ii) the percentage of property expected to be produced
which is not qualified property.
``(C) Election.--
``(i) In general.--An election under this subsection for
any taxable year shall be made on the taxpayer's return of
the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year. Such
election shall be made in such manner as the Secretary may by
regulations prescribe.
``(ii) Election irrevocable.--Any election made under this
subsection may not be revoked except with the consent of the
Secretary.
``(5) Credit refundable.--For purposes of this title (other
than this section), the credit allowed by reason of this
subsection shall be treated as if it were allowed under
subpart C.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
______

SA 5130. Mr. ENSIGN (for himself and Mr. Sununu) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him

[[Page 16257]]

to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

TITLE II--CLEAN ENERGY TAX STIMULUS

SEC. 21. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Clean Energy Tax Stimulus
Act of 2008''.

Subtitle A--Extension of Clean Energy Production Incentives

SEC. 22. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY
PRODUCTION TAX CREDIT.

(a) Extension of Credit.--Each of the following provisions
of section 45(d) (relating to qualified facilities) is
amended by striking ``January 1, 2009'' and inserting
``January 1, 2010'':
(1) Paragraph (1).
(2) Clauses (i) and (ii) of paragraph (2)(A).
(3) Clauses (i)(I) and (ii) of paragraph (3)(A).
(4) Paragraph (4).
(5) Paragraph (5).
(6) Paragraph (6).
(7) Paragraph (7).
(8) Paragraph (8).
(9) Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (9).
(b) Production Credit for Electricity Produced From Marine
Renewables.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 45(c) (relating
to resources) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of
subparagraph (G), by striking the period at the end of
subparagraph (H) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at
the end the following new subparagraph:
``(I) marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy.''.
(2) Marine renewables.--Subsection (c) of section 45 is
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(10) Marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy.--
``(A) In general.--The term `marine an*d hydrokinetic
renewable energy' means energy derived from--
``(i) waves, tides, and currents in oceans, estuaries, and
tidal areas,
``(ii) free flowing water in rivers, lakes, and streams,
``(iii) free flowing water in an irrigation system, canal,
or other man-made channel, including projects that utilize
nonmechanical structures to accelerate the flow of water for
electric power production purposes, or
``(iv) differentials in ocean temperature (ocean thermal
energy conversion).
``(B) Exceptions.--Such term shall not include any energy
which is derived from any source which utilizes a dam,
diversionary structure (except as provided in subparagraph
(A)(iii)), or impoundment for electric power production
purposes.''.
(3) Definition of facility.--Subsection (d) of section 45
is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(11) Marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy
facilities.--In the case of a facility producing electricity
from marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy, the term
`qualified facility' means any facility owned by the
taxpayer--
``(A) which has a nameplate capacity rating of at least 150
kilowatts, and
``(B) which is originally placed in service on or after the
date of the enactment of this paragraph and before January 1,
2010.''.
(4) Credit rate.--Subparagraph (A) of section 45(b)(4) is
amended by striking ``or (9)'' and inserting ``(9), or
(11)''.
(5) Coordination with small irrigation power.--Paragraph
(5) of section 45(d), as amended by subsection (a), is
amended by striking ``January 1, 2010'' and inserting ``the
date of the enactment of paragraph (11)''.
(c) Sales of Electricity to Regulated Public Utilities
Treated as Sales to Unrelated Persons.--Section 45(e)(4)
(relating to related persons) is amended by adding at the end
the following new sentence: ``A taxpayer shall be treated as
selling electricity to an unrelated person if such
electricity is sold to a regulated public utility (as defined
in section 7701(a)(33).''.
(d) Trash Facility Clarification.--Paragraph (7) of section
45(d) is amended--
(1) by striking ``facility which burns'' and inserting
``facility (other than a facility described in paragraph (6))
which uses'', and
(2) by striking ``combustion''.
(e) Effective Dates.--
(1) Extension.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall
apply to property originally placed in service after December
31, 2008.
(2) Modifications.--The amendments made by subsections (b)
and (c) shall apply to electricity produced and sold after
the date of the enactment of this Act, in taxable years
ending after such date.
(3) Trash facility clarification.--The amendments made by
subsection (d) shall apply to electricity produced and sold
before, on, or after December 31, 2007.

SEC. 23. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF SOLAR ENERGY AND FUEL
CELL INVESTMENT TAX CREDIT.

(a) Extension of Credit.--
(1) Solar energy property.--Paragraphs (2)(A)(i)(II) and
(3)(A)(ii) of section 48(a) (relating to energy credit) are
each amended by striking ``January 1, 2009'' and inserting
``January 1, 2017''.
(2) Fuel cell property.--Subparagraph (E) of section
48(c)(1) (relating to qualified fuel cell property) is
amended by striking ``December 31, 2008'' and inserting
``December 31, 2016''.
(3) Qualified microturbine property.--Subparagraph (E) of
section 48(c)(2) (relating to qualified microturbine
property) is amended by striking ``December 31, 2008'' and
inserting ``December 31, 2016''.
(b) Allowance of Energy Credit Against Alternative Minimum
Tax.--Subparagraph (B) of section 38(c)(4) (relating to
specified credits) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end
of clause (iii), by striking the period at the end of clause
(iv) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the
following new clause:
``(v) the credit determined under section 46 to the extent
that such credit is attributable to the energy credit
determined under section 48.''.
(c) Repeal of Dollar Per Kilowatt Limitation for Fuel Cell
Property.--
(1) In general.--Section 48(c)(1) (relating to qualified
fuel cell), as amended by subsection (a)(2), is amended by
striking subparagraph (B) and by redesignating subparagraphs
(C), (D), and (E) as subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D),
respectively.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 48(a)(1) is amended by
striking ``paragraphs (1)(B) and (2)(B) of subsection (c)''
and inserting ``subsection (c)(2)(B)''.
(d) Public Electric Utility Property Taken Into Account.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (3) of section 48(a) is amended
by striking the second sentence thereof.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Paragraph (1) of section 48(c), as amended by this
section, is amended by striking subparagraph (C) and
redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (C).
(B) Paragraph (2) of section 48(c), as amended by
subsection (a)(3), is amended by striking subparagraph (D)
and redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (D).
(e) Effective Dates.--
(1) Extension.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall
take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) Allowance against alternative minimum tax.--The
amendments made by subsection (b) shall apply to credits
determined under section 46 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 in taxable years beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act and to carrybacks of such credits.
(3) Fuel cell property and public electric utility
property.--The amendments made by subsections (c) and (d)
shall apply to periods after the date of the enactment of
this Act, in taxable years ending after such date, under
rules similar to the rules of section 48(m) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (as in effect on the day before the date
of the enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990).

SEC. 24. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF RESIDENTIAL ENERGY
EFFICIENT PROPERTY CREDIT.

(a) Extension.--Section 25D(g) (relating to termination) is
amended by striking ``December 31, 2008'' and inserting
``December 31, 2009''.
(b) No Dollar Limitation for Credit for Solar Electric
Property.--
(1) In general.--Section 25D(b)(1) (relating to maximum
credit) is amended by striking subparagraph (A) and by
redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as subparagraphs (A)
and (B), respectively.
(2) Conforming amendments.--Section 25D(e)(4) is amended--
(A) by striking clause (i) in subparagraph (A),
(B) by redesignating clauses (ii) and (iii) in subparagraph
(A) as clauses (i) and (ii), respectively, and
(C) by striking ``, (2),'' in subparagraph (C).
(c) Credit Allowed Against Alternative Minimum Tax.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (c) of section 25D is amended
to read as follows:
``(c) Limitation Based on Amount of Tax; Carryforward of
Unused Credit.--
``(1) Limitation based on amount of tax.--In the case of a
taxable year to which section 26(a)(2) does not apply, the
credit allowed under subsection (a) for the taxable year
shall not exceed the excess of--
``(A) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in
section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
``(B) the sum of the credits allowable under this subpart
(other than this section) and section 27 for the taxable
year.
``(2) Carryforward of unused credit.--
``(A) Rule for years in which all personal credits allowed
against regular and alternative minimum tax.--In the case of
a taxable year to which section 26(a)(2) applies, if the
credit allowable under subsection (a) exceeds the limitation
imposed by section 26(a)(2) for such taxable year reduced by
the sum of the credits allowable under this subpart (other
than this section), such excess shall be carried to the
succeeding taxable year and added to the credit allowable

[[Page 16258]]

under subsection (a) for such succeeding taxable year.
``(B) Rule for other years.--In the case of a taxable year
to which section 26(a)(2) does not apply, if the credit
allowable under subsection (a) exceeds the limitation imposed
by paragraph (1) for such taxable year, such excess shall be
carried to the succeeding taxable year and added to the
credit allowable under subsection (a) for such succeeding
taxable year.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Section 23(b)(4)(B) is amended by inserting ``and
section 25D'' after ``this section''.
(B) Section 24(b)(3)(B) is amended by striking ``and 25B''
and inserting ``, 25B, and 25D''.
(C) Section 25B(g)(2) is amended by striking ``section 23''
and inserting ``sections 23 and 25D''.
(D) Section 26(a)(1) is amended by striking ``and 25B'' and
inserting ``25B, and 25D''.
(d) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2007.
(2) Application of egtrra sunset.--The amendments made by
subparagraphs (A) and (B) of subsection (c)(2) shall be
subject to title IX of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief
Reconciliation Act of 2001 in the same manner as the
provisions of such Act to which such amendments relate.

SEC. 25. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF CREDIT FOR CLEAN
RENEWABLE ENERGY BONDS.

(a) Extension.--Section 54(m) (relating to termination) is
amended by striking ``December 31, 2008'' and inserting
``December 31, 2009''.
(b) Increase in National Limitation.--Section 54(f)
(relating to limitation on amount of bonds designated) is
amended--
(1) by inserting ``, and for the period beginning after the
date of the enactment of the Clean Energy Tax Stimulus Act of
2008 and ending before January 1, 2010, $400,000,000'' after
``$1,200,000,000'' in paragraph (1),
(2) by striking ``$750,000,000 of the'' in paragraph (2)
and inserting ``$750,000,000 of the $1,200,000,000'', and
(3) by striking ``bodies'' in paragraph (2) and inserting
``bodies, and except that the Secretary may not allocate more
than \1/3\ of the $400,000,000 national clean renewable
energy bond limitation to finance qualified projects of
qualified borrowers which are public power providers nor more
than \1/3\ of such limitation to finance qualified projects
of qualified borrowers which are mutual or cooperative
electric companies described in section 501(c)(12) or section
1381(a)(2)(C)''.
(c) Public Power Providers Defined.--Section 54(j) is
amended--
(1) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(6) Public power provider.--The term `public power
provider' means a State utility with a service obligation, as
such terms are defined in section 217 of the Federal Power
Act (as in effect on the date of the enactment of this
paragraph).'', and
(2) by inserting ``; Public Power Provider'' before the
period at the end of the heading.
(d) Technical Amendment.--The third sentence of section
54(e)(2) is amended by striking ``subsection (l)(6)'' and
inserting ``subsection (l)(5)''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to bonds issued after the date of the enactment
of this Act.

SEC. 26. EXTENSION OF SPECIAL RULE TO IMPLEMENT FERC
RESTRUCTURING POLICY.

(a) Qualifying Electric Transmission Transaction.--
(1) In general.--Section 451(i)(3) (defining qualifying
electric transmission transaction) is amended by striking
``January 1, 2008'' and inserting ``January 1, 2010''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection
shall apply to transactions after December 31, 2007.
(b) Independent Transmission Company.--
(1) In general.--Section 451(i)(4)(B)(ii) (defining
independent transmission company) is amended by striking
``December 31, 2007'' and inserting ``the date which is 2
years after the date of such transaction''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection
shall take effect as if included in the amendments made by
section 909 of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004.

Subtitle B--Extension of Incentives to Improve Energy Efficiency

SEC. 27. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF CREDIT FOR ENERGY
EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING HOMES.

(a) Extension of Credit.--Section 25C(g) (relating to
termination) is amended by striking ``December 31, 2007'' and
inserting ``December 31, 2009''.
(b) Qualified Biomass Fuel Property.--
(1) In general.--Section 25C(d)(3) is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (D),
(B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (E)
and inserting ``, and'', and
(C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(F) a stove which uses the burning of biomass fuel to
heat a dwelling unit located in the United States and used as
a residence by the taxpayer, or to heat water for use in such
a dwelling unit, and which has a thermal efficiency rating of
at least 75 percent.''.
(2) Biomass fuel.--Section 25C(d) (relating to residential
energy property expenditures) is amended by adding at the end
the following new paragraph:
``(6) Biomass fuel.--The term `biomass fuel' means any
plant-derived fuel available on a renewable or recurring
basis, including agricultural crops and trees, wood and wood
waste and residues (including wood pellets), plants
(including aquatic plants), grasses, residues, and fibers.''.
(c) Modifications of Standards for Energy-Efficient
Building Property.--
(1) Electric heat pumps.--Subparagraph (B) of section
25C(d)(3) is amended to read as follows:
``(A) an electric heat pump which achieves the highest
efficiency tier established by the Consortium for Energy
Efficiency, as in effect on January 1, 2008.''.
(2) Central air conditioners.--Section 25C(d)(3)(D) is
amended by striking ``2006'' and inserting ``2008''.
(3) Water heaters.--Subparagraph (E) of section 25C(d) is
amended to read as follows:
``(E) a natural gas, propane, or oil water heater which has
either an energy factor of at least 0.80 or a thermal
efficiency of at least 90 percent.''.
(4) Oil furnaces and hot water boilers.--Paragraph (4) of
section 25C(d) is amended to read as follows:
``(4) Qualified natural gas, propane, and oil furnaces and
hot water boilers.--
``(A) Qualified natural gas furnace.--The term `qualified
natural gas furnace' means any natural gas furnace which
achieves an annual fuel utilization efficiency rate of not
less than 95.
``(B) Qualified natural gas hot water boiler.--The term
`qualified natural gas hot water boiler' means any natural
gas hot water boiler which achieves an annual fuel
utilization efficiency rate of not less than 90.
``(C) Qualified propane furnace.--The term `qualified
propane furnace' means any propane furnace which achieves an
annual fuel utilization efficiency rate of not less than 95.
``(D) Qualified propane hot water boiler.--The term
`qualified propane hot water boiler' means any propane hot
water boiler which achieves an annual fuel utilization
efficiency rate of not less than 90.
``(E) Qualified oil furnaces.--The term `qualified oil
furnace' means any oil furnace which achieves an annual fuel
utilization efficiency rate of not less than 90.
``(F) Qualified oil hot water boiler.--The term `qualified
oil hot water boiler' means any oil hot water boiler which
achieves an annual fuel utilization efficiency rate of not
less than 90.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made this section shall
apply to expenditures made after December 31, 2007.

SEC. 28. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF TAX CREDIT FOR ENERGY
EFFICIENT NEW HOMES.

(a) Extension of Credit.--Subsection (g) of section 45L
(relating to termination) is amended by striking ``December
31, 2008'' and inserting ``December 31, 2010''.
(b) Allowance for Contractor's Personal Residence.--
Subparagraph (B) of section 45L(a)(1) is amended to read as
follows:
``(B)(i) acquired by a person from such eligible contractor
and used by any person as a residence during the taxable
year, or
``(ii) used by such eligible contractor as a residence
during the taxable year.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to homes acquired after December 31, 2008.

SEC. 29. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF ENERGY EFFICIENT
COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS DEDUCTION.

(a) Extension.--Section 179D(h) (relating to termination)
is amended by striking ``December 31, 2008'' and inserting
``December 31, 2009''.
(b) Adjustment of Maximum Deduction Amount.--
(1) In general.--Subparagraph (A) of section 179D(b)(1)
(relating to maximum amount of deduction) is amended by
striking ``$1.80'' and inserting ``$2.25''.
(2) Partial allowance.--Paragraph (1) of section 179D(d) is
amended--
(A) by striking ``$.60'' and inserting ``$0.75'', and
(B) by striking ``$1.80'' and inserting ``$2.25''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after the date of
the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 30. MODIFICATION AND EXTENSION OF ENERGY EFFICIENT
APPLIANCE CREDIT FOR APPLIANCES PRODUCED AFTER
2007.

[[Page 16259]]

``(B) $75 in the case of a dishwasher which is manufactured
in calendar year 2008, 2009, or 2010 and which uses no more
than 307 kilowatt hours per year and 5.0 gallons per cycle
(5.5 gallons per cycle for dishwashers designed for greater
than 12 place settings).
``(2) Clothes washers.--The applicable amount is--
``(A) $75 in the case of a residential top-loading clothes
washer manufactured in calendar year 2008 which meets or
exceeds a 1.72 modified energy factor and does not exceed a
8.0 water consumption factor,
``(B) $125 in the case of a residential top-loading clothes
washer manufactured in calendar year 2008 or 2009 which meets
or exceeds a 1.8 modified energy factor and does not exceed a
7.5 water consumption factor,
``(C) $150 in the case of a residential or commercial
clothes washer manufactured in calendar year 2008, 2009, or
2010 which meets or exceeds 2.0 modified energy factor and
does not exceed a 6.0 water consumption factor, and
``(D) $250 in the case of a residential or commercial
clothes washer manufactured in calendar year 2008, 2009, or
2010 which meets or exceeds 2.2 modified energy factor and
does not exceed a 4.5 water consumption factor.
``(3) Refrigerators.--The applicable amount is--
``(A) $50 in the case of a refrigerator which is
manufactured in calendar year 2008, and consumes at least 20
percent but not more than 22.9 percent less kilowatt hours
per year than the 2001 energy conservation standards,
``(B) $75 in the case of a refrigerator which is
manufactured in calendar year 2008 or 2009, and consumes at
least 23 percent but no more than 24.9 percent less kilowatt
hours per year than the 2001 energy conservation standards,
``(C) $100 in the case of a refrigerator which is
manufactured in calendar year 2008, 2009, or 2010, and
consumes at least 25 percent but not more than 29.9 percent
less kilowatt hours per year than the 2001 energy
conservation standards, and
``(D) $200 in the case of a refrigerator manufactured in
calendar year 2008, 2009, or 2010 and which consumes at least
30 percent less energy than the 2001 energy conservation
standards.''.
(b) Eligible Production.--
(1) Similar treatment for all appliances.--Subsection (c)
of section 45M (relating to eligible production) is amended--
(A) by striking paragraph (2),
(B) by striking ``(1) In general'' and all that follows
through ``the eligible'' and inserting ``The eligible'', and
(C) by moving the text of such subsection in line with the
subsection heading and redesignating subparagraphs (A) and
(B) as paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively.
(2) Modification of base period.--Paragraph (2) of section
45M(c), as amended by paragraph (1) of this section, is
amended by striking ``3-calendar year'' and inserting ``2-
calendar year''.
(c) Types of Energy Efficient Appliances.--Subsection (d)
of section 45M (defining types of energy efficient
appliances) is amended to read as follows:
``(d) Types of Energy Efficient Appliance.--For purposes of
this section, the types of energy efficient appliances are--
``(1) dishwashers described in subsection (b)(1),
``(2) clothes washers described in subsection (b)(2), and
``(3) refrigerators described in subsection (b)(3).''.
(d) Aggregate Credit Amount Allowed.--
(1) Increase in limit.--Paragraph (1) of section 45M(e)
(relating to aggregate credit amount allowed) is amended to
read as follows:
``(1) Aggregate credit amount allowed.--The aggregate
amount of credit allowed under subsection (a) with respect to
a taxpayer for any taxable year shall not exceed $75,000,000
reduced by the amount of the credit allowed under subsection
(a) to the taxpayer (or any predecessor) for all prior
taxable years beginning after December 31, 2007.''.
(2) Exception for certain refrigerator and clothes
washers.--Paragraph (2) of section 45M(e) is amended to read
as follows:
``(2) Amount allowed for certain refrigerators and clothes
washers.--Refrigerators described in subsection (b)(3)(D) and
clothes washers described in subsection (b)(2)(D) shall not
be taken into account under paragraph (1).''.
(e) Qualified Energy Efficient Appliances.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 45M(f) (defining
qualified energy efficient appliance) is amended to read as
follows:
``(1) Qualified energy efficient appliance.--The term
`qualified energy efficient appliance' means--
``(A) any dishwasher described in subsection (b)(1),
``(B) any clothes washer described in subsection (b)(2),
and
``(C) any refrigerator described in subsection (b)(3).''.
(2) Clothes washer.--Section 45M(f)(3) (defining clothes
washer) is amended by inserting ``commercial'' before
``residential'' the second place it appears.
(3) Top-loading clothes washer.--Subsection (f) of section
45M (relating to definitions) is amended by redesignating
paragraphs (4), (5), (6), and (7) as paragraphs (5), (6),
(7), and (8), respectively, and by inserting after paragraph
(3) the following new paragraph:
``(4) Top-loading clothes washer.--The term `top-loading
clothes washer' means a clothes washer which has the clothes
container compartment access located on the top of the
machine and which operates on a vertical axis.''.
(4) Replacement of energy factor.--Section 45M(f)(6), as
redesignated by paragraph (3), is amended to read as follows:
``(6) Modified energy factor.--The term `modified energy
factor' means the modified energy factor established by the
Department of Energy for compliance with the Federal energy
conservation standard.''.
(5) Gallons per cycle; water consumption factor.--Section
45M(f) (relating to definitions), as amended by paragraph
(3), is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(9) Gallons per cycle.--The term `gallons per cycle'
means, with respect to a dishwasher, the amount of water,
expressed in gallons, required to complete a normal cycle of
a dishwasher.
``(10) Water consumption factor.--The term `water
consumption factor' means, with respect to a clothes washer,
the quotient of the total weighted per-cycle water
consumption divided by the cubic foot (or liter) capacity of
the clothes washer.''.
(f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to appliances produced after December 31, 2007.
______

SA 5131. Mr. BUNNING (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend
the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end, add the following:

SEC. __. TAX CREDIT FOR ALTERNATIVE JET FUEL.

(a) Credit.--
(1) Allowance of credit.--Section 6426 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating subsections
(f) through (h) as subsections (h) through (i), respectively,
and by inserting after subsection (e) the following new
subsections:
``(f) Alternative Jet Fuel Credit.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of this section, the
alternative jet fuel credit is the product of $1.00 and the
number of gallons of alternative jet fuel or gasoline gallon
equivalents (as defined in subsection (d)(3)) of a nonliquid
alternative jet fuel sold by the taxpayer for use as a fuel
in an aircraft, or so used by the taxpayer.
``(2) Alternative jet fuel.--For purposes of this section,
the term `alternative jet fuel' means an alternative fuel--
``(A) which meets the requirements of a Department of
Defense specification for military jet fuel or an American
Society of Testing and Materials specification for aviation
turbine fuel, and
``(B) the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions associated
with the production and combustion of which are less than or
equal to such emissions associated with the production and
combustion of aviation fuel produced from conventional
petroleum sources, as determined by peer-reviewed research
conducted or reviewed by a National Laboratory or as
determined by the head of a Federal agency.
``(3) Termination.--This subsection shall not apply to any
sale or use for any period after September 30, 2014.
``(g) Alternative Jet Fuel Mixture Credit.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of this section, the
alterative jet fuel mixture credit is the product of $1.00
and the number of gallons of alternative jet fuel used by the
taxpayer in producing any alternative jet fuel mixture for
sale or use in a trade or business of the taxpayer.
``(2) Alternative jet fuel mixture.--For purposes of this
section, the term `alternative jet fuel mixture' means a
mixture of alternative jet fuel and aviation gasoline or
kerosene which--
``(A) is sold by the taxpayer producing such mixture to any
person for use as a fuel in an aircraft, or
``(B) is used as a fuel in an aircraft by the taxpayer
producing such mixture
``(3) Termination.--This subsection shall not apply to any
sale or use for any period after September 30, 2014.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Section 6426(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended--
(i) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and (e)'' and inserting
``(e), and (g)'',
(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking ``subsection (d)'' and
inserting ``subsections (d) and (f)'', and
(iii) in the second sentence, by striking ``subsections (d)
and (e)'' and inserting ``subsections (d), (e), (f), and
(g)''.
(B) Section 6426(e)(2) of such Code is amended by adding at
the end the following new flush sentence:
``Such term does not include any alternative jet fuel
mixture.''.

[[Page 16260]]

(C) Section 6426(i) of such Code, as redesignated by
paragraph (1), is amended by striking ``subsections (d) and
(e)'' and inserting ``subsections (d), (e), (f), and (g)''.
(b) Payments.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (2) of section 6427(e) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(A) by inserting ``, or if such person sells or uses an
alternative jet fuel (as defined in section 6526(f)(2)) for a
purpose described in section 6426(f)(1) in such person's
trade or business'' after ``trade or business'', and
(B) in the heading, by inserting ``; alternative jet fuel''
after ``fuel''.
(2) Registration.--Paragraph (4) of section 6427(e) of such
Code is amended by striking ``or alternative fuel mixture
credit'' and inserting ``, alternative fuel mixture credit,
alternative jet fuel credit, or alternative jet fuel mixture
credit''.
(3) Termination.--Paragraph (5) of section 6427(e) of such
Code is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of
subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end of
subparagraph (D) and inserting ``and'', and by adding at the
end the following new subparagraph:
``(E) any alternative jet fuel or alternative jet fuel
mixture (as defined in subsection (f)(2) or (g)(2) of section
6426) sold or used after December 31, 2014.''.
(c) Time for Filing Claims.--Section 6427(i)(3)(A) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting ``or an
alternative jet fuel (as defined in section 6426(f)(2))''
after ``6426(d)(2))''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to fuel sold or used after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

SEC. __. ADVANCED BATTERIES FOR ELECTRIC DRIVE VEHICLES.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Advanced battery.--The term ``advanced battery'' means
an electrical storage device that is suitable for a vehicle
application.
(2) Engineering integration costs.--The term ``engineering
integration costs'' includes the cost of engineering tasks
relating to--
(A) the incorporation of qualifying components into the
design of an advanced battery; and
(B) the design of tooling and equipment and the development
of manufacturing processes and material for suppliers of
production facilities that produce qualifying components or
advanced batteries.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.
(b) Advanced Battery Research and Development.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall--
(A) expand and accelerate research and development efforts
for advanced batteries; and
(B) emphasize lower cost means of producing abuse-tolerant
advanced batteries with the appropriate balance of power and
energy capacity to meet market requirements.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $100,000,000
for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014.
(c) Direct Loan Program.--
(1) In general.--Subject to the availability of
appropriated funds, not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall carry out a
program to provide a total of not more than $250,000,000 in
loans to eligible individuals and entities for not more than
30 percent of the costs of 1 or more of--
(A) reequipping a manufacturing facility in the United
States to produce advanced batteries;
(B) expanding a manufacturing facility in the United States
to produce advanced batteries; or
(C) establishing a manufacturing facility in the United
States to produce advanced batteries.
(2) Eligibility.--
(A) In general.--To be eligible to obtain a loan under this
subsection, an individual or entity shall--
(i) be financially viable without the receipt of additional
Federal funding associated with a proposed project under this
subsection;
(ii) provide sufficient information to the Secretary for
the Secretary to ensure that the qualified investment is
expended efficiently and effectively; and
(iii) meet such other criteria as may be established and
published by the Secretary.
(B) Consideration.--In selecting eligible individuals or
entities for loans under this subsection, the Secretary may
consider whether the proposed project of an eligible
individual or entity under this subsection would--
(i) reduce manufacturing time;
(ii) reduce manufacturing energy intensity;
(iii) reduce negative environmental impacts or byproducts;
or
(iv) increase spent battery or component recycling
(3) Rates, terms, and repayment of loans.--A loan provided
under this subsection--
(A) shall have an interest rate that, as of the date on
which the loan is made, is equal to the cost of funds to the
Department of the Treasury for obligations of comparable
maturity;
(B) shall have a term that is equal to the lesser of--
(i) the projected life, in years, of the eligible project
to be carried out using funds from the loan, as determined by
the Secretary; or
(ii) 25 years; and
(C) may be subject to a deferral in repayment for not more
than 5 years after the date on which the eligible project
carried out using funds from the loan first begins
operations, as determined by the Secretary.
(4) Period of availability.--A loan under this subsection
shall be available for--
(A) facilities and equipment placed in service before
December 30, 2020; and
(B) engineering integration costs incurred during the
period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act and
ending on December 30, 2020.
(5) Fees.--The cost of administering a loan made under this
subsection shall not exceed $100,000.
(6) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this subsection for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013.
(d) Sense of the Senate on Purchase of Plug-in Electric
Drive Vehicles.--It is the sense of the Senate that, to the
maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government should
implement policies to increase the purchase of plug-in
electric drive vehicles by the Federal Government.
______

SA 5132. Mr. LANDRIEU submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by her to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end, add the following:

TITLE II--IDENTIFICATION OF MOST PROSPECTIVE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF
OIL AND NATURAL GAS AREAS UNDER MORATORIA

SEC. 21. DEFINITIONS.

In this title:
(1) Moratorium area.--
(A) In general.--The term ``moratorium area'' means any
area on the Outer Continental Shelf covered by--
(i) sections 104 through 106 of the Department of the
Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act, 2006 (Public Law 109-54; 119 Stat. 521);
(ii) section 104 of the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act
of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 note; Public Law 109-432); or
(iii) any area withdrawn from disposition by leasing by the
memorandum entitled ``Memorandum on Withdrawal of Certain
Areas of the United States Outer Continental Shelf from
Leasing Disposition'' (34 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1111), and
dated June 12, 1998, as modified by the President on January
9, 2007.
(B) Exclusions.--The term ``moratorium area'' does not
include an area of the outer Continental Shelf designated by
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration as a
national marine sanctuary.
(2) Prospective area.--The term ``prospective area'' means
a portion of any moratorium area that may contain recoverable
oil or gas.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.

SEC. 22. IDENTIFICATION OF MOST PROSPECTIVE OUTER CONTINENTAL
SHELF OIL AND NATURAL GAS AREAS UNDER
MORATORIA.

(a) Inventory.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall identify the 10 most
prospective areas for recoverable oil and gas accumulations,
including if appropriate the 5 most prospective areas for oil
and the 5 most prospective areas for natural gas in the
prospective areas that industry would likely explore if
allowed.
(2) Information.--In identifying the prospective areas, the
Secretary shall take into account any existing information on
the geological potential for oil and gas or acquire new data
as appropriate to assist in narrowing down prospective areas.
(3) Technology.--The Secretary may use any available
geological, geophysical, economic, engineering, and other
scientific technology to obtain accurate estimates of
resource potential.
(b) Acquisition of Geological and Geophysical Data.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary may acquire and process new
geological and geophysical data or use existing geological
and geophysical data for any moratorium area if the Secretary
determines that additional information is needed to identify
and assess potential prospective areas.
(2) Technology.--In carrying out this subsection, the
Secretary shall use any available technology (other than
drilling), including 3-D seismic technology, to obtain an
accurate estimate of resource potential.
(3) Availability of data.--The Secretary may make available
newly acquired geological and geophysical data under this
subsection on a cost recovery basis to recover the full costs
expended for acquisition and processing of new geological and
geophysical data.

[[Page 16261]]

(c) Administration.--
(1) In general.--As soon as practicable, but not later than
1 year, after the date of enactment of this Act, to expedite
collection of geological and geophysical data under this
section, each Federal agency shall conduct and complete any
analyses or consultations that are required to carry out this
section.
(2) Protected species.--Before conducting any geological
and geophysical survey required under this title in any
prospective area, the Secretary shall, at a minimum,
implement the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures
that are used for protected species in the Gulf of Mexico
region.
(d) Environmental and Socioeconomic Studies.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary may conduct, directly or by
contract, environmental or socioeconomic studies for any
prospective area identified under subsection (a).
(2) Interagency action.--The Secretary, acting through the
Minerals Management Service, may work jointly with the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, or other relevant agencies--
(A) to compile existing environmental and socioeconomic
information on prospective areas; or
(B) obtain new environmental or socioeconomic studies for
identified prospective areas.

SEC. 23. SHARING INFORMATION WITH STATES AND OTHER
STAKEHOLDERS.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish a process--
(1) to share information identified by actions taken under
section 22 to identify 10 most prospective areas; and
(2) to obtain input from States or other stakeholders on
the prospective areas.
(b) Process.--The process shall include workshops or
meetings with--
(1) the public;
(2) Governors or designated officials from appropriate
States; and
(3) other relevant user groups.

SEC. 24. REPORTS.

(a) Identification of Prospective Areas.--Not later than 90
days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall submit to Congress a report that includes--
(1) an identification of the 10 most prospective oil and
gas areas within the moratorium areas using existing
information;
(2) a summary of environmental and socioeconomic
information relating to the 10 prospective areas; and
(3) a schedule for completion of any environmental or
socioeconomic impact studies or consultations planned for
those prospective areas.
(b) Potential of Prospective Areas.--Not later than 42
months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall submit to Congress a report that includes--
(1) a summary of the potential oil and gas resources in the
10 most prospective areas based on all available and newly
acquired information;
(2) a description of the consultation process under section
23 that will be used to share information and obtain input
from stakeholders concerning the 10 most prospective areas;
and
(3) recommendations on approaches for recovery of costs
expended for acquisition and processing of new geological and
geophysical data or conducting other studies for the report.
(c) Input.--Not later than 180 days after submission of the
report required under subsection (b), the Secretary shall
submit to Congress a summary of the input from the process
required under section 23.

SEC. 25. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to
carry out this title $450,000,000, to remain available until
expended.
______

SA 5133. Ms. MURKOWSKI submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by her to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end, add the following:

TITLE __--AMERICAN ENERGY INDEPENDENCE AND SECURITY

SEC. __01. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``American Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2008''.

SEC. __02. DEFINITIONS.

In this title:
(1) Coastal plain.--The term ``Coastal Plain'' means that
area identified as the ``1002 Coastal Plain Area'' on the
map.
(2) Federal agreement.--The term ``Federal Agreement''
means the Federal Agreement and Grant Right-of-Way for the
Trans-Alaska Pipeline issued on January 23, 1974, in
accordance with section 28 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30
U.S.C. 185) and the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act
(43 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.).
(3) Final statement.--The term ``Final Statement'' means
the final legislative environmental impact statement on the
Coastal Plain, dated April 1987, and prepared pursuant to
section 1002 of the Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3142) and section 102(2)(C) of
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(C)).
(4) Map.--The term ``map'' means the map entitled ``Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge'', dated September 2005, and
prepared by the United States Geological Survey.
(5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior (or the designee of the Secretary), acting
through the Director of the Bureau of Land Management in
consultation with the Director of the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service and in coordination with a State coordinator
appointed by the Governor of the State of Alaska.

SEC. __03. LEASING PROGRAM FOR LAND WITHIN THE COASTAL PLAIN.

(a) In General.--
(1) Authorization.--Subject to section __14, Congress
authorizes the exploration, leasing, development, production,
and economically feasible and prudent transportation of oil
and gas in and from the Coastal Plain.
(2) Actions.--Subject to section __14, the Secretary shall
take such actions as are necessary--
(A) to establish and implement, in accordance with this
title, a competitive oil and gas leasing program that will
result in an environmentally sound program for the
exploration, development, and production of the oil and gas
resources of the Coastal Plain while taking into
consideration the interests and concerns of residents of the
Coastal Plain, which is the homeland of the Kaktovikmiut
Inupiat; and
(B) to administer this title through regulations, lease
terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, stipulations,
and other provisions that--
(i) ensure the oil and gas exploration, development, and
production activities on the Coastal Plain will result in no
significant adverse effect on fish and wildlife, their
habitat, subsistence resources, and the environment; and
(ii) require the application of the best commercially
available technology for oil and gas exploration,
development, and production to all exploration, development,
and production operations under this title in a manner that
ensures the receipt of fair market value by the public for
the mineral resources to be leased.
(b) Repeal.--
(1) Repeal.--Section 1003 of the Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3143) is repealed.
(2) Conforming amendment.--The table of contents contained
in section 1 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 3101 note) is amended by
striking the item relating to section 1003.
(c) Compliance With Requirements Under Certain Other
Laws.--
(1) Compatibility.--For purposes of the National Wildlife
Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et
seq.)--
(A) the oil and gas pre-leasing and leasing program, and
activities authorized by this section in the Coastal Plain,
shall be considered to be compatible with the purposes for
which the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was established;
and
(B) no further findings or decisions shall be required to
implement that program and those activities.
(2) Adequacy of the department of the interior's
legislative environmental impact statement.--The Final
Statement shall be considered to satisfy the requirements
under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) that apply with respect to pre-leasing
activities, including exploration programs and actions
authorized to be taken by the Secretary to develop and
promulgate the regulations for the establishment of a leasing
program authorized by this title before the conduct of the
first lease sale.
(3) Compliance with nepa for other actions.--
(A) In general.--Before conducting the first lease sale
under this title, the Secretary shall prepare an
environmental impact statement in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) with respect to the actions authorized by this title
that are not referred to in paragraph (2).
(B) Identification and analysis.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, in carrying out this paragraph, the
Secretary shall not be required--
(i) to identify nonleasing alternative courses of action;
or
(ii) to analyze the environmental effects of those courses
of action.
(C) Identification of preferred action.--Not later than 18
months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall--
(i) identify only a preferred action and a single leasing
alternative for the first lease sale authorized under this
title; and
(ii) analyze the environmental effects and potential
mitigation measures for those 2 alternatives.
(D) Public comments.--In carrying out this paragraph, the
Secretary shall consider only public comments that are filed
not later than 20 days after the date of publication of a
draft environmental impact statement.

[[Page 16262]]

(E) Effect of compliance.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, compliance with this paragraph shall be
considered to satisfy all requirements for the analysis and
consideration of the environmental effects of proposed
leasing under this title.
(d) Relationship to State and Local Authority.--Nothing in
this title expands or limits any State or local regulatory
authority.
(e) Special Areas.--
(1) Designation.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary, after consultation with the
State of Alaska, the North Slope Borough, Alaska, and the
City of Kaktovik, Alaska, may designate not more than 45,000
acres of the Coastal Plain as a special area if the Secretary
determines that the special area would be of such unique
character and interest as to require special management and
regulatory protection.
(B) Sadlerochit spring area.--The Secretary shall designate
as a special area in accordance with subparagraph (A) the
Sadlerochit Spring area, comprising approximately 4,000 acres
as depicted on the map.
(2) Management.--The Secretary shall manage each special
area designated under this subsection in a manner that--
(A) respects and protects the Native people of the area;
and
(B) preserves the unique and diverse character of the area,
including fish, wildlife, subsistence resources, and cultural
values of the area.
(3) Exclusion from leasing or surface occupancy.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary may exclude any special area
designated under this subsection from leasing.
(B) No surface occupancy.--If the Secretary leases all or a
portion of a special area for the purposes of oil and gas
exploration, development, production, and related activities,
there shall be no surface occupancy of the land comprising
the special area.
(4) Directional drilling.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this subsection, the Secretary may lease all or
a portion of a special area under terms that permit the use
of horizontal drilling technology from sites on leases
located outside the special area.
(f) Limitation on Closed Areas.--The Secretary may not
close land within the Coastal Plain to oil and gas leasing or
to exploration, development, or production except in
accordance with this title.
(g) Regulations.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 15 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, in consultation with appropriate
agencies of the State of Alaska, the North Slope Borough,
Alaska, and the City of Kaktovik, Alaska, the Secretary shall
issue such regulations as are necessary to carry out this
title, including rules and regulations relating to protection
of the fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, and
subsistence resources of the Coastal Plain.
(2) Revision of regulations.--The Secretary may
periodically review and, as appropriate, revise the rules and
regulations issued under paragraph (1) to reflect any
significant scientific or engineering data that come to the
attention of the Secretary.

SEC. __04. LEASE SALES.

(a) In General.--Land may be leased pursuant to this title
to any person qualified to obtain a lease for deposits of oil
and gas under the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et
seq.).
(b) Procedures.--The Secretary shall, by regulation,
establish procedures for--
(1) receipt and consideration of sealed nominations for any
area in the Coastal Plain for inclusion in, or exclusion (as
provided in subsection (c)) from, a lease sale;
(2) the holding of lease sales after that nomination
process; and
(3) public notice of and comment on designation of areas to
be included in, or excluded from, a lease sale.
(c) Lease Sale Bids.--Bidding for leases under this title
shall be by sealed competitive cash bonus bids.
(d) Acreage Minimum in First Sale.--For the first lease
sale under this title, the Secretary shall offer for lease
those tracts the Secretary considers to have the greatest
potential for the discovery of hydrocarbons, taking into
consideration nominations received pursuant to subsection
(b)(1), but in no case less than 200,000 acres.
(e) Timing of Lease Sales.--The Secretary shall--
(1) not later than 22 months after the date of enactment of
this Act, conduct the first lease sale under this title;
(2) not later than September 30, 2010, conduct a second
lease sale under this title; and
(3) conduct additional sales at appropriate intervals if
sufficient interest in exploration or development exists to
warrant the conduct of the additional sales.

SEC. __05. GRANT OF LEASES BY THE SECRETARY.

(a) In General.--Upon payment by a lessee of such bonus as
may be accepted by the Secretary, the Secretary may grant to
the highest responsible qualified bidder in a lease sale
conducted pursuant to section __04 a lease for any land on
the Coastal Plain.
(b) Subsequent Transfers.--
(1) In general.--No lease issued under this title may be
sold, exchanged, assigned, sublet, or otherwise transferred
except with the approval of the Secretary.
(2) Condition for approval.--Before granting any approval
described in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consult with
and give due consideration to the opinion of the Attorney
General.

SEC. __06. LEASE TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

(a) In General.--An oil or gas lease issued pursuant to
this title shall--
(1) provide for the payment of a royalty of not less than
12\1/2\ percent of the amount or value of the production
removed or sold from the lease, as determined by the
Secretary in accordance with regulations applicable to other
Federal oil and gas leases;
(2) provide that the Secretary may close, on a seasonal
basis, such portions of the Coastal Plain to exploratory
drilling activities as are necessary to protect caribou
calving areas and other species of fish and wildlife;
(3) require that each lessee of land within the Coastal
Plain shall be fully responsible and liable for the
reclamation of land within the Coastal Plain and any other
Federal land that is adversely affected in connection with
exploration, development, production, or transportation
activities within the Coastal Plain conducted by the lessee
or by any of the subcontractors or agents of the lessee;
(4) provide that the lessee may not delegate or convey, by
contract or otherwise, that reclamation responsibility and
liability to another person without the express written
approval of the Secretary;
(5) provide that the standard of reclamation for land
required to be reclaimed under this title shall be, to the
maximum extent practicable--
(A) a condition capable of supporting the uses that the
land was capable of supporting prior to any exploration,
development, or production activities; or
(B) upon application by the lessee, to a higher or better
standard, as approved by the Secretary;
(6) contain terms and conditions relating to protection of
fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, subsistence
resources, and the environment as required under section
__03(a)(2);
(7) provide that each lessee, and each agent and contractor
of a lessee, use their best efforts to provide a fair share
of employment and contracting for Alaska Natives and Alaska
Native Corporations from throughout the State of Alaska, as
determined by the level of obligation previously agreed to in
the Federal Agreement; and
(8) contain such other provisions as the Secretary
determines to be necessary to ensure compliance with this
title and regulations issued under this title.
(b) Project Labor Agreements.--The Secretary, as a term and
condition of each lease under this title, and in recognizing
the proprietary interest of the Federal Government in labor
stability and in the ability of construction labor and
management to meet the particular needs and conditions of
projects to be developed under the leases issued pursuant to
this title (including the special concerns of the parties to
those leases), shall require that each lessee, and each agent
and contractor of a lessee, under this title negotiate to
obtain a project labor agreement for the employment of
laborers and mechanics on production, maintenance, and
construction under the lease.

SEC. __07. COASTAL PLAIN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.

(a) No Significant Adverse Effect Standard to Govern
Authorized Coastal Plain Activities.--In accordance with
section __03, the Secretary shall administer this title
through regulations, lease terms, conditions, restrictions,
prohibitions, stipulations, or other provisions that--
(1) ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that oil and
gas exploration, development, and production activities on
the Coastal Plain will result in no significant adverse
effect on fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, and
the environment;
(2) require the application of the best commercially
available technology for oil and gas exploration,
development, and production on all new exploration,
development, and production operations; and
(3) ensure that the maximum surface acreage covered in
connection with the leasing program by production and support
facilities, including airstrips and any areas covered by
gravel berms or piers for support of pipelines, does not
exceed 2,000 acres on the Coastal Plain.
(b) Site-Specific Assessment and Mitigation.--The Secretary
shall require, with respect to any proposed drilling and
related activities on the Coastal Plain, that--
(1) a site-specific environmental analysis be made of the
probable effects, if any, that the drilling or related
activities will have on fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife
habitat, subsistence resources, subsistence uses, and the
environment;
(2) a plan be implemented to avoid, minimize, and mitigate
(in that order and to the maximum extent practicable) any
significant adverse effect identified under paragraph (1);
and
(3) the development of the plan occur after consultation
with--
(A) each agency having jurisdiction over matters mitigated
by the plan;

[[Page 16263]]

(B) the State of Alaska;
(C) North Slope Borough, Alaska; and
(D) the City of Kaktovik, Alaska.
(c) Regulations To Protect Coastal Plain Fish and Wildlife
Resources, Subsistence Users, and the Environment.--Before
implementing the leasing program authorized by this title,
the Secretary shall prepare and issue regulations, lease
terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, stipulations,
or other measures designed to ensure, to the maximum extent
practicable, that the activities carried out on the Coastal
Plain under this title are conducted in a manner consistent
with the purposes and environmental requirements of this
title.
(d) Compliance With Federal and State Environmental Laws
and Other Requirements.--The proposed regulations, lease
terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, and
stipulations for the leasing program under this title shall
require--
(1) compliance with all applicable provisions of Federal
and State environmental law (including regulations);
(2) implementation of and compliance with--
(A) standards that are at least as effective as the safety
and environmental mitigation measures, as described in items
1 through 29 on pages 167 through 169 of the Final Statement,
on the Coastal Plain;
(B) seasonal limitations on exploration, development, and
related activities, as necessary, to avoid significant
adverse effects during periods of concentrated fish and
wildlife breeding, denning, nesting, spawning, and migration;
(C) design safety and construction standards for all
pipelines and any access and service roads that minimize, to
the maximum extent practicable, adverse effects on--
(i) the passage of migratory species (such as caribou); and
(ii) the flow of surface water by requiring the use of
culverts, bridges, or other structural devices;
(D) prohibitions on general public access to, and use of,
all pipeline access and service roads;
(E) stringent reclamation and rehabilitation requirements
in accordance with this title for the removal from the
Coastal Plain of all oil and gas development and production
facilities, structures, and equipment on completion of oil
and gas production operations, except in a case in which the
Secretary determines that those facilities, structures, or
equipment--
(i) would assist in the management of the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge; and
(ii) are donated to the United States for that purpose;
(F) appropriate prohibitions or restrictions on--
(i) access by all modes of transportation;
(ii) sand and gravel extraction; and
(iii) use of explosives;
(G) reasonable stipulations for protection of cultural and
archaeological resources;
(H) measures to protect groundwater and surface water,
including--
(i) avoidance, to the maximum extent practicable, of
springs, streams, and river systems;
(ii) the protection of natural surface drainage patterns
and wetland and riparian habitats; and
(iii) the regulation of methods or techniques for
developing or transporting adequate supplies of water for
exploratory drilling; and
(I) research, monitoring, and reporting requirements;
(3) that exploration activities (except surface geological
studies) be limited to the period between approximately
November 1 and May 1 of each year and be supported, if
necessary, by ice roads, winter trails with adequate snow
cover, ice pads, ice airstrips, and air transport methods
(except that those exploration activities may be permitted at
other times if the Secretary determines that the exploration
will have no significant adverse effect on fish and wildlife,
fish and wildlife habitat, subsistence resources, and the
environment of the Coastal Plain);
(4) consolidation of facility siting;
(5) avoidance or reduction of air traffic-related
disturbance to fish and wildlife;
(6) treatment and disposal of hazardous and toxic wastes,
solid wastes, reserve pit fluids, drilling muds and cuttings,
and domestic wastewater, including, in accordance with
applicable Federal and State environmental laws (including
regulations)--
(A) preparation of an annual waste management report;
(B) development and implementation of a hazardous materials
tracking system; and
(C) prohibition on the use of chlorinated solvents;
(7) fuel storage and oil spill contingency planning;
(8) conduct of periodic field crew environmental briefings;
(9) avoidance of significant adverse effects on subsistence
hunting, fishing, and trapping;
(10) compliance with applicable air and water quality
standards;
(11) appropriate seasonal and safety zone designations
around well sites, within which subsistence hunting and
trapping shall be limited; and
(12) development and implementation of such other
protective environmental requirements, restrictions, terms,
or conditions as the Secretary, after consultation with the
State of Alaska, North Slope Borough, Alaska, and the City of
Kaktovik, Alaska, determines to be necessary.
(e) Considerations.--In preparing and issuing regulations,
lease terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, or
stipulations under this section, the Secretary shall take
into consideration--
(1) the stipulations and conditions that govern the
National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska leasing program, as set
forth in the 1999 Northeast National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska
Final Integrated Activity Plan/Environmental Impact
Statement;
(2) the environmental protection standards that governed
the initial Coastal Plain seismic exploration program under
parts 37.31 through 37.33 of title 50, Code of Federal
Regulations (or successor regulations); and
(3) the land use stipulations for exploratory drilling on
the KIC-ASRC private land described in Appendix 2 of the
agreement between Arctic Slope Regional Corporation and the
United States dated August 9, 1983.
(f) Facility Consolidation Planning.--
(1) In general.--After providing for public notice and
comment, the Secretary shall prepare and periodically update
a plan to govern, guide, and direct the siting and
construction of facilities for the exploration, development,
production, and transportation of oil and gas resources from
the Coastal Plain.
(2) Objectives.--The objectives of the plan shall be--
(A) the avoidance of unnecessary duplication of facilities
and activities;
(B) the encouragement of consolidation of common facilities
and activities;
(C) the location or confinement of facilities and
activities to areas that will minimize impact on fish and
wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, subsistence resources,
and the environment;
(D) the use of existing facilities, to the maximum extent
practicable; and
(E) the enhancement of compatibility between wildlife
values and development activities.
(g) Access to Public Land.--The Secretary shall--
(1) manage public land in the Coastal Plain in accordance
with subsections (a) and (b) of section 811 of the Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3121);
and
(2) ensure that local residents shall have reasonable
access to public land in the Coastal Plain for traditional
uses.

SEC. __08. EXPEDITED JUDICIAL REVIEW.

(a) Filing of Complaints.--
(1) Deadline.--A complaint seeking judicial review of a
provision of this title or an action of the Secretary under
this title shall be filed--
(A) except as provided in subparagraph (B), during the 90-
day period beginning on the date on which the action being
challenged was carried out; or
(B) in the case of a complaint based solely on grounds
arising after the 90-day period described in subparagraph
(A), by not later than 90 days after the date on which the
complainant knew or reasonably should have known about the
grounds for the complaint.
(2) Venue.--A complaint seeking judicial review of a
provision of this title or an action of the Secretary under
this title shall be filed in the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia.
(3) Scope.--
(A) In general.--Judicial review of a decision of the
Secretary under this title (including an environmental
analysis of such a lease sale) shall be--
(i) limited to a review of whether the decision is in
accordance with this title; and
(ii) based on the administrative record of the decision.
(B) Presumptions.--Any identification by the Secretary of a
preferred course of action relating to a lease sale, and any
analysis by the Secretary of environmental effects, under
this title shall be presumed to be correct unless proven
otherwise by clear and convincing evidence.
(b) Limitation on Other Review.--Any action of the
Secretary that is subject to judicial review under this
section shall not be subject to judicial review in any civil
or criminal proceeding for enforcement.

SEC. __09. RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS ACROSS COASTAL PLAIN.

SEC. __10. CONVEYANCE.

[[Page 16264]]

Public Land Order 6959, in accordance with the terms and
conditions of the agreement between the Secretary, the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land
Management, and the Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation, dated
January 22, 1993; and
(2) convey to the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation the
remaining subsurface estate to which that Corporation is
entitled under the agreement between that corporation and the
United States, dated August 9, 1983.

SEC. __11. LOCAL GOVERNMENT IMPACT AID AND COMMUNITY SERVICE
ASSISTANCE.

(a) Establishment of Fund.--
(1) In general.--There is established in the Treasury of
the United States a fund to be known as the ``Coastal Plain
Local Government Impact Aid Assistance Fund'' (referred to in
this section as the ``Fund'').
(2) Deposits.--Subject to paragraph (1), the Secretary of
the Treasury (referred to in this section as the
``Secretary'') shall deposit in the Fund, $35,000,000 each
year from the amount available under section __13(1).
(3) Investment.--The Secretary shall invest amounts in the
Fund in interest-bearing securities of the United States or
the State of Alaska.
(b) Assistance.--The Secretary, in cooperation with the
Mayor of the North Slope Borough, shall use amounts in the
Fund to provide assistance to North Slope Borough, Alaska,
the City of Kaktovik, Alaska, and any other borough,
municipal subdivision, village, or other community in the
State of Alaska that is directly impacted by exploration for,
or the production of, oil or gas on the Coastal Plain under
this title, or any Alaska Native Regional Corporation acting
on behalf of the villages and communities within its region
whose lands lie along the right of way of the Trans Alaska
Pipeline System, as determined by the Secretary.
(c) Application.--
(1) In general.--To receive assistance under subsection
(b), a community or Regional Corporation described in that
subsection shall submit to the Secretary, or to the Mayor of
the North Slope Borough, an application in such time, in such
manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may
require.
(2) Action by north slope borough.--The Mayor of the North
Slope Borough shall submit to the Secretary each application
received under paragraph (1) as soon as practicable after the
date on which the application is received.
(3) Assistance of secretary.--The Secretary shall assist
communities in submitting applications under this subsection,
to the maximum extent practicable.
(d) Use of Funds.--A community or Regional Corporation that
receives funds under subsection (b) may use the funds--
(1) to plan for mitigation, implement a mitigation plan, or
maintain a mitigation project to address the potential
effects of oil and gas exploration and development on
environmental, social, cultural, recreational, and
subsistence resources of the community;
(2) to develop, carry out, and maintain--
(A) a project to provide new or expanded public facilities;
or
(B) services to address the needs and problems associated
with the effects described in paragraph (1), including
firefighting, police, water and waste treatment, first
responder, and other medical services;
(3) to compensate residents of the Coastal Plain for
significant damage to environmental, social, cultural,
recreational, or subsistence resources; and
(4) in the City of Kaktovik, Alaska--
(A) to develop a mechanism for providing members of the
Kaktovikmiut Inupiat community an opportunity to--
(i) monitor development on the Coastal Plain; and
(ii) provide information and recommendations to the
Governor based on traditional aboriginal knowledge of the
natural resources, flora, fauna, and ecological processes of
the Coastal Plain; and
(B) to establish a local coordination office, to be managed
by the Mayor of the North Slope Borough, in coordination with
the City of Kaktovik, Alaska--
(i) to coordinate with and advise developers on local
conditions and the history of areas affected by development;
(ii) to provide to the Committee on Resources of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate annual reports on the status of the
coordination between developers and communities affected by
development;
(iii) to collect from residents of the Coastal Plain
information regarding the impacts of development on fish,
wildlife, habitats, subsistence resources, and the
environment of the Coastal Plain; and
(iv) to ensure that the information collected under clause
(iii) is submitted to--

(I) developers; and
(II) any appropriate Federal agency.

SEC. __12. PROHIBITION ON EXPORTS.

An oil or gas lease issued under this title shall prohibit
the exportation of oil or gas produced under the lease.

SEC. __13. ALLOCATION OF REVENUES.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, all adjusted bonus, rental, and royalty receipts from
Federal oil and gas leasing and operations authorized under
this title, plus an appropriated amount equal to the amount
of Federal income tax attributable to sales of oil and gas
produced from those operations, shall be deposited in an
account in the Treasury which shall be available, without
further appropriation or fiscal year limitation, each fiscal
year as follows:
(1) $35,000,000 shall be deposited by the Secretary of the
Treasury into the fund created under section __11(a)(1).
(2) The remainder shall be available as follows:
(A) 50 percent shall be available to the Department of
Energy to carry out alternative energy programs established
under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15801 et
seq.), the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (42
U.S.C. 17001 et seq.), or an amendment made by either of
those Acts, as determined by the Secretary of Energy.
(B) 16.67 percent shall be available to the Department of
Health and Human Services to provide low-income home energy
assistance under title XXVI of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1981 (42 U.S.C. 8621 et seq.).
(C) 16.67 percent shall be available to the Department of
Energy to carry out the Weatherization Assistance Program for
Low-Income Persons established under part A of title IV of
the Energy Conservation and Production Act (42 U.S.C. 6861 et
seq.)).
(D) 16.66 percent shall be available for use in accordance
with subsection (b)(2).
(b) Grants for Improvement in Energy Efficiency.--The
Secretary of Energy shall establish a program within the
Department of Energy under which the Secretary of Energy
shall--
(1) conduct a study to determine, to the maximum extent
practicable, the greatest economically feasible percentage by
which each State may decrease energy use within the State
through the significant modification of residential and
commercial building codes to promote energy efficiency; and
(2) using amounts made available under subsection
(a)(2)(D), provide grants to States for use in making the
significant modifications to building codes and decreasing
energy use in the States as described in paragraph (1).

SEC. __14. SEVERABILITY.

If any provision of this title, or the application of such
provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be
unconstitutional, the remainder of this title and the
application of such provisions to any person or circumstance
shall not be affected thereby.
______

SA 5134. Ms. MURKOWSKI submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by her to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end, add the following:

SEC. ___. OCS JOINT PERMITTING OFFICES.

(a) Establishment.--The Secretary of the Interior (referred
to in this section as the ``Secretary'') shall establish
Federal OCS Joint Regional Permitting Offices (referred to in
this section as the ``Regional Permitting Offices'') in
accordance with this section.
(b) Memorandum of Understanding.--Not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall
enter into a memorandum of understanding for purposes of this
section with--
(1) the Secretary of Commerce;
(2) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency; and
(3) the Chief of Engineers.
(c) Designation of Qualified Staff.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
the signing of the memorandum of understanding under
subsection (b), all Federal signatory parties shall assign to
each of the Regional Permitting Offices identified in
subsection (d) a sufficient number of employees with
expertise to address the full spectrum of agency regulatory
issues relating to the Regional Permitting Office in which
the employee is employed, including, as applicable,
particular expertise in--
(A) the consultations and the preparation of biological
opinions under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973 (16 U.S.C. 1536);
(B) permits under section 404 of Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1344);
(C) regulatory matters under the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7401 et seq.);
(D) the consultations and preparation of documents under
the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1361 et
seq.); and
(E) the preparation of analyses under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
(2) Duties.--Each employee assigned under paragraph (1)
shall--
(A) not later than 90 days after the date of assignment,
report to the Minerals Management Service Regional Director
in the Regional Permitting Office to which the employee is
assigned;
(B) be responsible for all issues relating to the
jurisdiction of the home office or agency of the employee;
and

[[Page 16265]]

(C) participate as part of the team of personnel working on
proposed energy projects, planning, and environmental
analyses.
(d) Regional Permitting Offices.--The following Minerals
Management Service Regional Headquarters shall serve as the
Regional Permitting Offices:
(1) Anchorage, Alaska.
(2) New Orleans, Louisiana.
(3) MMS Pacific Regional Headquarters.
(4) MMS Atlantic Regional Headquarters.
(e) Reports.--Not later than 3 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report that describes the results of the Regional
Permitting Offices.
(f) Transfer of Fund.--For the purposes of coordination and
processing of oil and gas use authorizations on the Federal
outer Continental Shelf under the administration of the
Regional Permitting Offices identified in subsection (d), the
Secretary may authorize the expenditure or transfer of such
funds as are necessary to--
(1) the United States Fish and Wildlife Service;
(2) the Bureau of Indian Affairs;
(3) the Environmental Protection Agency;
(4) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration;
and
(5) the Corps of Engineers.
______

SA 5135. Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. Reid, Mr. Schumer, Mr.
Salazar, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Kerry, Ms. Stabenow, Mr.
Whitehouse, Mrs. Clinton, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Nelson of
Florida and Ms. Klobuchar) submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange
Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy
commodities, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the
table; as follows:

At the end of the bill, add the following:

TITLE II--OIL SUPPLY AND MANAGEMENT

Subtitle A--Diligent Development

SEC. 201. DILIGENT DEVELOPMENT OF FEDERAL OIL AND GAS LEASES.

(a) Clarification of Existing Law.--Each lease that
authorizes the exploration for or production of oil or
natural gas under a provision of law described in subsection
(b) shall be diligently developed by the person holding the
lease in order to ensure timely production from the lease.
(b) Covered Provisions.--Subsection (a) shall apply to--
(1) section 17 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 226);
(2) section 107 of the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production
Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6506a); and
(3) the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331
et seq.).
(c) Regulations.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall promulgate
regulations that--
(1) set forth requirements and benchmarks for oil and gas
development that will ensure that leaseholders--
(A) diligently develop each lease; and
(B) to the maximum extent practicable, produce oil and gas
from each lease during the primary term of the lease;
(2) require each leaseholder to submit to the Secretary a
diligent development plan describing how the lessee will meet
the benchmarks; and
(3) take into account differences in development conditions
and circumstances in the areas to be developed.

SEC. 202. DILIGENT DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL PETROLEUM RESERVE
IN ALASKA.

(a) Length of Lease.--Section 107(i) of the Naval Petroleum
Reserves Production Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6506a(i)) is
amended by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the
following:
``(1) Length of lease.--
``(A) In general.--Leases issued under this section shall
be for a primary term to be determined by the Secretary by
regulation of not less than 8 years and not more than 10
years.
``(B) Diligent production.--In determining the length of
the lease term, the Secretary shall seek to maximize the
timely production of oil and gas and diligent development of
the lease.
``(C) Continuation of lease.--Each lease issued under this
section shall continue so long after the primary term of the
lease as oil or gas is produced in paying quantities.
``(D) Actual drilling operations commenced.--Any lease
issued under this section for land on which, or for which
under an approved cooperative or unit plan of development or
operation, actual drilling or reworking operations were
commenced prior to the end of the primary term of the lease
and are being diligently prosecuted at that time shall be
extended for 5 years and so long thereafter as oil or gas is
produced in paying quantities.''.
(b) Repeal and Rental.--Section 107(i) of the Naval
Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C.
6506a(i)) is amended--
(1) in the subsection heading, by inserting ``; annual
rental payment'' after ``Terms''; and
(2) by striking paragraphs (2) through (6) and inserting
the following:
``(2) Annual rental payment.--
``(A) In general.--Each lease issued under this section
shall be conditioned on a payment by the lessee of an annual
rental payment.
``(B) Amount.--The Secretary shall establish the rental
payment at a rate determined by the Secretary that maximizes
the timely production of oil and gas and diligent development
of the lease.
``(C) Escalating rate.--The rent shall--
``(i) be established at a fixed rate for the first year of
the lease which shall be not less than $3.00 per acre; and
``(ii) escalate annually in an increment of not less than
$1.00 per acre per year.''.

SEC. 203. LENGTH OF LEASE TERMS.

Section 17(e) of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 226(e))
is amended--
(1) by striking ``(e)'' and all that follows through the
end of the first sentence and inserting the following:
``(e) Primary Terms.--
``(1) In general.--Leases issued under this section shall
be for a primary term to be determined by the Secretary by
regulation of not less than 5 years and not more than 10
years.
``(2) Diligent production.--In determining the length of
the lease term, the Secretary shall seek to maximize the
timely production of oil and gas and diligent development of
the lease.'';
(2) by striking ``Each such lease'' and inserting the
following:
``(3) Continuation of lease.--Each lease issued under this
section''; and
(3) by striking ``Any lease issued'' and inserting the
following:
``(4) Actual drilling operations commenced.--Any lease
issued''.

SEC. 204. RENTALS.

(a) Leases Under Mineral Leasing Act.--Section 17(d) of the
Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 226(d)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(d) All leases'' and all that follows
through the end of the first sentence and inserting the
following:
``(d) Annual Rentals; Minimum Royalty.--
``(1) Annual rental payment.--
``(A) In general.--Each lease issued under this section
shall be conditioned on a payment by the lessee of an annual
rental payment.
``(B) Amount.--The Secretary shall establish the rental
payment at a rate determined by the Secretary that maximizes
the timely production of oil and gas and diligent development
of the lease.
``(C) Escalating rate.--The rent shall--
``(i) be not less than $1.50 per acre for the first year of
the lease; and
``(ii) escalate annually through the last year of the
primary term of the lease in an increment of not less than
$1.00 per acre per year.''; and
(2) by striking ``A minimum royalty'' and inserting the
following:
``(2) Minimum royalty.--A minimum royalty''.
(b) Leases on Outer Continental Shelf.--Section 8(b) of the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1337(b)) is
amended by striking paragraph (6) and inserting the
following:
``(6) contain such other provisions as the Secretary may
prescribe at the time of offering the area for lease,
including annual rental payments that--
``(A) are established at a rate determined by the Secretary
to maximize the timely production of oil and gas and diligent
development of the lease;
``(B) escalate annually; and
``(C) may be established to reflect differences in
development conditions and circumstances in areas to be
developed; and''.

Subtitle B--Leasing on Outer Continental Shelf Not Subject to Moratoria

SEC. 211. OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS LEASING IN PORTION OF 181 AREA
AUTHORIZED TO BE LEASED UNDER THE GULF OF
MEXICO ENERGY SECURITY ACT OF 2006.

Section 103(a) of the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of
2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 note; Public Law 109-432) is amended--
(1) by striking ``shall offer'' and inserting ``shall--
``(1) offer'';
(2) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``;
and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) offer unleased areas of the 181 Area for oil and gas
leasing pursuant to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1301 et seq.) as soon as practicable, but not later
than 1 year, after the date of enactment of this
paragraph.''.

SEC. 212. ACCELERATION OF LEASE SALES IN WESTERN AND CENTRAL
PLANNING AREAS OF GULF OF MEXICO.

Section 8(a) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1337(a)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(9) Frequency of lease sales in gulf of mexico.--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
at least once every 180 days, the Secretary shall conduct
lease sales under paragraph (1) for land in the Western and
Central Planning Areas of the Gulf of Mexico.
``(B) Exception.--Subparagraph (A) shall not apply if the
Secretary--

[[Page 16266]]

``(i) determines it is not practicable to conduct lease
sales with the frequency required under subparagraph (A); and
``(ii) provides to Congress a report that--

``(I) describes the reasons for the determination under
clause (i); and
``(II) certifies that, in the judgment of the Secretary,
holding lease sales less frequently will not adversely affect
the production of oil and gas from the areas described in
subparagraph (A).

``(C) Leasing program.--The lease sales required under this
paragraph shall be conducted notwithstanding the omission of
those sales from the outer Continental Shelf Leasing Program
for 2007-2012 prepared by the Secretary under section 18.''.

SEC. 213. LEASE SALES FOR AREAS OFFSHORE ALASKA.

(a) Survey.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, in the case of each outer Continental
Shelf planning area that is offshore of the State of Alaska
and is not covered by the Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas
Leasing Program for 2007-2012, the Secretary of the Interior
(referred to in this section as the ``Secretary'') shall
conduct a survey of oil and gas industry interest in oil and
gas leasing and development in the planning area.
(b) Evaluation.--In the case of any planning area described
in subsection (a) in which there is a high level of interest
in oil and gas leasing and development, as determined by the
Secretary, the Secretary shall evaluate--
(1) the oil and gas potential of the area;
(2) the environmental and natural values of the area; and
(3) the importance of the area for subsistence use, after
consulting with interested Native Alaskan communities.
(c) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and
the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of
Representatives a report containing--
(A) the results of the survey; and
(B) the evaluation and the conclusions of the Secretary as
to whether leasing should be pursued in any portion of a
planning area described in subsection (a).
(2) Leasing to be pursued in area.--If the Secretary
concludes that leasing should be pursued in any planning area
described in subsection (a), the Secretary shall describe in
the report--
(A) the further determinations and actions required by law
to be taken by the Secretary; and
(B) the time line leading up to any lease sale in the
planning area.
(3) Leasing not to be pursued in area.--If the Secretary
concludes that leasing will not be pursued in any such
planning area, the Secretary shall describe in the report the
reasons for the conclusion.
(4) Administration.--In preparing the report, the Secretary
shall--
(A) consult with the Governor of Alaska; and
(B) provide an opportunity for public comment.
(d) Effect on Other Laws.--Nothing in this section waives
or modifies any environmental or other law applicable to oil
and gas leasing and development on the outer Continental
Shelf.

Subtitle C--Leasing in National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska

SEC. 221. ACCELERATION OF LEASE SALES FOR NATIONAL PETROLEUM
RESERVE IN ALASKA.

Section 107(d) of the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production
Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6506a(d)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(d)'' and all that follows through ``;
first lease sale'' and inserting the following:
``(d) Lease Sales.--
``(1) First lease sale.--The first lease sale''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Subsequent lease sales.--The Secretary shall
accelerate, to the maximum extent practicable, competitive
and environmentally responsible leasing of oil and gas in the
Reserve in accordance with this Act and all applicable
environmental laws, including at least 1 lease sale during
each of calendar years 2009 through 2013.''.

Subtitle D--Strategic Petroleum Reserve

SEC. 231. DEFINITIONS.

In this subtitle:
(1) Heavy-grade petroleum.--The term ``heavy-grade
petroleum'' means crude oil with an American Petroleum
Institute gravity of 26 degrees or lower.
(2) Light-grade petroleum.--The term ``light-grade
petroleum'' means--
(A) crude oil in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve
categorized as Bayou Choctaw Sweet, Big Hill Sweet, West
Hackberry Sweet, or Bryan Mound Sweet; and
(B) oil acquired for storage in the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve with any category of oil referred to in subparagraph
(A).
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.
(4) SPR petroleum account.--The term ``SPR Petroleum
Account'' means the SPR Petroleum Account established under
section 167 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42
U.S.C. 6247).
(5) Strategic petroleum reserve.--The term ``Strategic
Petroleum Reserve'' means the Strategic Petroleum Reserve
established under part B of title I of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6231 et seq.).

SEC. 232. MODERNIZATION OF THE STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE.

(a) Initial Petroleum Exchange From Reserve.--
Notwithstanding section 161 of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6241), not later than 15 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall--
(1) exchange, in the quantity described in subsection (b),
light-grade petroleum from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve
for--
(A) an equivalent volume of heavy-grade petroleum; plus
(B) any additional cash bonus bids received that reflect
the difference in--
(i) the market value between light-grade petroleum and
heavy-grade petroleum; and
(ii) the timing of deliveries of the heavy-grade petroleum;
(2) of the gross proceeds of the cash bonus bids, deposit
the amount required to pay for the direct administrative and
operational costs of the exchange in the SPR Petroleum
Account; and
(3) disburse the remaining net proceeds from the exchange
to the Secretary of Health and Human Services to carry out
the low-income home energy assistance program established
under the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Act of 1981 (42
U.S.C. 8621 et seq.), to be available without further
appropriation and to remain available until expended.
(b) Quantities and Schedule.--
(1) Sale of light-grade petroleum.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, to carry out
subsection (a), the Secretary shall sell at least 70,000,000
barrels of light-grade petroleum from the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve.
(2) Acquisition of heavy-grade petroleum.--The acquisition
of heavy-grade petroleum through purchase or exchange shall--
(A) commence not earlier than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act;
(B) be completed, at the discretion of the Secretary, not
later than 5 years after the date of enactment of this Act;
and
(C) be carried out in a manner that maximizes the monetary
value of the exchange to the Federal Government.

SEC. 233. DEFERRALS.

As the Secretary determines to be economically beneficial
and practical, the Secretary is encouraged to grant any
request to defer a scheduled delivery of petroleum to the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve if the deferral will result in a
premium paid in additional barrels of oil that will--
(1) reduce the cost of oil acquisition; and
(2) increase the volume of oil delivered to the Reserve.

Subtitle E--Resource Estimates

SEC. 241. RESOURCE ESTIMATES.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior shall
annually collect and report to Congress--
(1) data on the number of acres of land under Federal
onshore oil and gas lease--
(A) on which exploration activity is occurring; and
(B) on which production is occurring;
(2) resource estimates and number of acres for Federal
onshore and offshore land under lease;
(3) resource estimates and number of acres for unleased
Federal onshore and offshore land available for oil and gas
leasing;
(4) resource estimates and number of acres for areas of the
outer Continental Shelf--
(A) under lease but not producing;
(B) offered for lease in a lease sale conducted during the
previous year but not leased;
(C) included in proposed sale areas in the 5-year plan
developed by the Secretary pursuant to section 18 of the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1344); and
(D) available for oil and gas leasing but not included in
the 5-year plan; and
(5) resource estimates and number of acres for Federal
onshore land--
(A) under lease but not producing; and
(B) offered for lease in a lease sale conducted during the
previous year but not leased.
(b) Covered Provisions.--Subsection (a) shall apply with
respect leases and land eligible for leasing pursuant to--
(1) section 17 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 226);
(2) section 107 of the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production
Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6506a); and
(3) the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331
et seq.).

Subtitle F--Sense of Senate on Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline

SEC. 251. SENSE OF SENATE ON ALASKA NATURAL GAS PIPELINE.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) more than 35,000,000,000,000 cubic feet of natural gas
reserves have been discovered on Federal and State land open
to leasing as of the date of enactment of this Act in the
North Slope area of the State of Alaska, but

[[Page 16267]]

that natural gas is being injected underground because the
natural gas cannot be transported to markets in the lower 48
States; and
(2) in 2004, Congress passed the Alaska Natural Gas
Pipeline Act (15 U.S.C. 720 et seq.)--
(A) to expedite the Federal regulatory process for siting
of an Alaska natural gas pipeline;
(B) to establish a Federal office to coordinate the
permitting process;
(C) to authorize a loan guarantee for the construction of
an Alaska natural gas pipeline;
(D) to provide accelerated depreciation for an Alaska
natural gas pipeline; and
(E) to provide favorable tax treatment for a gas
conditioning plant in the North Slope area of the State of
Alaska.
(b) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that--
(1) the Alaska natural gas pipeline is a critically
important national infrastructure project that would benefit
all consumers in the United States;
(2) all parties interested in the development of an Alaska
natural gas pipeline, including oil and gas producers,
pipeline companies, the State of Alaska, Federal agencies,
Canadian authorities, and others, should, and are encouraged
by the Senate, to accelerate their efforts to work together
to allow that critical national infrastructure project to
move forward; and
(3) an Alaska natural gas transportation project would
provide significant economic benefits to the United States
and Canada and, to maximize those benefits, the sponsors of
the Alaska natural gas transportation project should make
every effort to--
(A) use steel that is manufactured in North America; and
(B) negotiate a project labor agreement to expedite
construction of the pipeline.

Subtitle G--Roan Plateau Oil and Gas Leasing

SEC. 261. SHORT TITLE.

This subtitle may be cited as the ``Roan Plateau Oil and
Gas Leasing Improvement Act of 2008''.

SEC. 262. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) the Roan Plateau Planning Area likely contains
significant energy resources, especially natural gas;
(2) the Roan Plateau Planning Area also is--
(A) an important part of the natural heritage of the State
of Colorado that provides important habitat for fish and
wildlife, including genetically pure populations of Colorado
River cutthroat trout, mule deer, and Rocky Mountain elk; and
(B) increasingly important for hunters, fishermen, and
other outdoor recreationists as development has made other
land in the western part of the State less conducive to those
uses;
(3) oil and gas development activities have the potential
to disturb the environment and pose a particular threat to
habitats for wildlife and aquatic species on the Roan
Plateau, while phased leasing of the energy resources
associated with the Roan Plateau can result in payment by the
leaseholders of greater revenues than would result from more
rapid leasing; and
(4) phased development and long-range planning pursuant to
unit agreements will--
(A) maximize lease revenues;
(B) reduce duplicative infrastructure, such as roads,
pipelines, and compressor stations;
(C) reduce overall ground disturbance; and
(D) minimize habitat fragmentation.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of this subtitle is to provide
for balanced development of the energy resources of the Roan
Plateau in a manner that minimizes the adverse impacts on
fish and wildlife habitats and environmental resources and
values while increasing the financial returns to the United
States and the State of Colorado.

SEC. 263. DEFINITIONS.

In this subtitle:
(1) Draft resource management plan.--The term ``draft
resource management plan'' means the Draft Resource
Management Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement
of the Bureau of Land Management for the Roan Plateau
Planning Area (2004).
(2) Eligible public land.--The term ``eligible public
land'' means --
(A) the public land within the 6,000-acre developed tract
of Oil Shale Reserve Numbered 3 described in section
7439(a)(2) of title 10, United States Code; and
(B) in the case of public land described in the proposed
resource management plan--
(i) a phased development area; and
(ii) any public land within the northeastern, northwestern,
southeastern, or southwestern quadrant of the Roan Plateau
Planning Area that is defined as ``below the rim'' or ``below
the cliffs'' in figure 1-3.
(3) June 2007 record of decision.--The term ``record of
decision'' means the Record of Decision made available
pursuant to the notice entitled ``Notice of Availability of
the Record of Decision for the Resource Management Plan
Amendment (RMPA) for Portions of the Roan Plateau Planning
Area and Supplemental Information for Proposed Areas of
Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) With Associated
Resource Use Limitations for Public Lands in Garfield and Rio
Blanco Counties, CO'' (72 Fed. Reg. 32138), dated June 11,
2007.
(4) March 2008 record of decision.--The term ``March 2008
Record of Decision'' means the Record of Decision for the
Designation of Areas of Critical Environmental Concern for
the Roan Plateau Resource Management Plan Amendment and
Environmental Impact Statement, dated March 15, 2008.
(5) Mineral lease.--The term ``mineral lease'' means a
lease of minerals owned by the United States pursuant to the
Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.).
(6) Phased development area.--The term ``phased development
area'' means each of the 6 tracts of public domain land on
the top of the Roan Plateau, each of which is--
(A) depicted in figure 2-1 on page 2-26 of the proposed
resource management plan; and
(B) described, respectively, as--
(i) the Anvil Ridge Oil & Gas Phased Development Area;
(ii) the Cook Ridge Oil & Gas Phased Development Area;
(iii) the Corral Ridge Oil & Gas Phased Development Area;
(iv) the Long Ridge East Oil & Gas Phased Development Area;
(v) the Long Ridge West Oil & Gas Phased Development Area;
and
(vi) the Short Ridge Oil & Gas Phased Development Area.
(7) Proposed resource management plan.--The term ``proposed
resource management plan'' means the proposed Resource
Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement of the
Bureau of Land Management for the Roan Plateau Management
Area (August 2006).
(8) Public land.--The term ``public land'' has the meaning
given the term ``public lands'' in section 103 of the Federal
Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702).
(9) Resource management plan amendment.--The term
``resource management plan amendment'' means the Resource
Management Plan Amendment and Final Environmental Impact
Statement of the Bureau of Land Management for the Roan
Plateau Planning Area (2006).
(10) Roan plateau planning area.--The term ``Roan Plateau
Planning Area'' means public land in the State that is
covered by the draft resource management plan.
(11) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior, acting through the Director of the Bureau of
Land Management.
(12) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of
Colorado.

SEC. 264. SPECIAL PROTECTION AREAS.

(a) Designation.--There are designated the following
Special Protection Areas:
(1) All public land identified as an Area of Critical
Environmental Concern (ACEC) on the map entitled
``Alternative II Management'' of the draft resource
management plan.
(2) All public land located within the watersheds or
drainages of Northwater Creek and the East Fork of Parachute
Creek above the confluence with First Anvil Creek.
(3) All public land identified as subject to a No Ground
Disturbance (NGD/NSO) stipulation on the map entitled
``Alternative II Stipulations'' of the resource management
plan amendment.
(b) Management.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subtitle, the Secretary shall manage the Special Protection
Areas in a manner that prevents irreparable damage to the
fish and wildlife resources and the historical, cultural,
scenic, and environmental resources and values within those
areas.
(c) Terms and Conditions.--Except as provided in subsection
(d), the Secretary shall include in any mineral lease entered
into for any land within a Special Protection Area and for
any Federal minerals underlying the Northwater Creek
drainage--
(1) a stipulation prohibiting surface occupancy or surface
disturbance for purposes of exploration for or development of
oil or natural gas; and
(2) such other terms and conditions as are necessary to
protect and enhance the biological and ecological values
associated with public land covered by the lease.
(d) Nonwaivability.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), a
stipulation, term, or condition described in subsection
(c)(1) shall not be subject to waiver, exemption, or
exception.
(2) Exceptions for existing ridge-top roads.--The Secretary
may allow the holder of a mineral lease to occupy the surface
of public land identified on the map entitled ``Alternative
II Management'' of the draft resource management plan that
has a surveyed slope of not more than 20 percent and is
within 600 feet on either side of the center line of the
following existing ridge-top roads (not including any
secondary roads or spur roads appurtenant to the ridge-top
roads, other than the road described in subparagraph (F)):
(A) Anvil Points Road.
(B) Long Ridge Road.
(C) Short Ridge Road.
(D) Cook Ridge Road.
(E) Corral Ridge Road, numbered 8,000 off of Cow Creek
Road, but only in areas that are outside the watershed of
Trapper Creek.
(F) The spur road off of Cow Creek Road and Corral Ridge
Road in sec. 1, 2, and 11, T.

[[Page 16268]]

5 S., R. 95 W., but only on the north and west sides of the
road.
(e) Conditions for Oil and Gas Exploration and Development
Along Existing Ridge-Top Roads.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary may permit oil and gas
exploration and development activities within the development
corridors designated under subsection (d) only after--
(A) site-specific consultation with the Department of
Natural Resources of the State;
(B) the conduct of a detailed review and analysis of the
proposed location and activities; and
(C) incorporation of operational and procedural practices
to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any potential impacts to
biological or ecological resources, including state-of-the-
art measures to minimize erosion from stormwater runoff.
(2) Compliance with federal and state law.--Any oil and gas
exploration and development activities authorized under
subsection (d)(2) shall comply with applicable Federal and
State laws (including regulations).
(f) Public Comment.--Before permitting oil and gas
exploration and development activities under subsection
(d)(2), the Secretary shall provide notice and an opportunity
for public comment.

SEC. 265. PHASED MINERAL LEASING.

(a) In General.--
(1) Leases.--Except as provided in paragraph (2) and to the
extent consistent with this subtitle, the Secretary may issue
mineral leases affecting public land within the Roan Plateau
Planning Area pursuant to the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C.
181 et seq.).
(2) Oil shale.--The Secretary may not permit through a
lease or other means any exploration for or development of
oil shale resources within the Roan Plateau Planning Area.
(b) Phased Development.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary
may not at any time issue mineral leases for public land
within more than 1 of the phased development areas.
(2) Initial phased development area.--The Secretary, in
consultation with and concurrence by the Department of
Natural Resources of the State and pursuant to this
subsection, may select an area for initial issuance of
mineral leases.
(3) Factors.--In making the selection under paragraph (2),
the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable--
(A) minimize environmental and ecological impact;
(B) minimize disturbance to natural areas atop the Roan
Plateau;
(C) maximize use of existing access roads and oil and gas
pipeline and production infrastructure;
(D) consider patterns of private land ownership adjacent to
public land;
(E) protect and promote ecological diversity;
(F) minimize adverse effects on wildlife populations,
habitat, and migration patterns;
(G) minimize adverse effects on watershed values; and
(H) maximize the revenues likely to be obtained by the
United States and, pursuant to the Mineral Leasing Act (30
U.S.C. 181 et seq.), the State.
(4) Choice of initial area.--The Secretary may select as
the initial area for offering of leases only--
(A) the Anvil Ridge Oil and Gas Development Area; or
(B) the Corral Ridge Oil and Gas Development Area.
(5) Public comment.--Before making a selection of a phased
development area under this subsection, the Secretary shall
provide notice and an opportunity for public comment.
(c) Environmental Protection.--Each mineral lease affecting
public land within the Roan Plateau Planning Area shall
include provisions to ensure the protection of the
environment, including minimum pad spacing that incorporates
current state-of-the-art drilling technologies and clustered
development.
(d) Bonus Bids and Leases.--In entering into leases for oil
or gas exploration and development on public land within the
Roan Plateau Planning Area, the Secretary may include minimum
bonus bid amounts and lease sizes that are above the limits
established under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section
17(b)(1) of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 226(b)(1)), to
the extent the Secretary considers the amounts and sizes
appropriate to accomplish the purposes of this subtitle,
including maximization of lease revenues and protection of
the environment.
(e) Reports.--Not later than 1 year after the date on which
leases are first offered pursuant to this section and
annually thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the
appropriate committees of Congress a report that includes
detailed information about--
(1) the status of exploration or development activities
pursuant to leases entered into under this section and the
stipulations and other terms and conditions applicable to
each such lease;
(2) the nature and effectiveness of actions taken to
mitigate adverse effects of exploration or development
activities pursuant to the leases and to reclaim land
affected by the activities;
(3) the effectiveness of the actions described in paragraph
(2); and
(4) the effects of such exploration or development
activities on--
(A) water quality and quantity;
(B) air quality;
(C) the viability of native fish populations;
(D) wildlife habitat and populations;
(E) opportunities for hunting, fishing, and other
recreational activities; and
(F) land affected by any discharges or spills related to
the activities.

SEC. 266. SELECTION OF SUBSEQUENT LEASING AREAS.

(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (d) and consistent
with this subtitle, the Secretary, in consultation with and
concurrence by the Department of Natural Resources of the
State, may select the second and each subsequent phased
development area for issuance of mineral leases.
(b) Requirements.--Each selection under this section shall
be made in accordance with the requirements of section
265(b)(3) that apply to the initial selection.
(c) Public Comment.--Before making a selection of a
subsequent phased development area under this section, the
Secretary shall provide notice and an opportunity for public
comment.
(d) Conditions.--Selection and leasing of the second or any
subsequent phased development area shall occur only if--
(1) wells have been completed to recover at least 90
percent of the recoverable natural gas in each previously
selected phased development area; and
(2) reclamation of ground disturbance to a 5-year interim
reclamation standard as set forth in Appendix C of the June
2007 Record of Decision has occurred on at least 99 percent
of the public land leased in each previously-selected phased
development area.

SEC. 267. FEDERAL UNITIZATION AGREEMENTS.

(a) In General.--The Secretary, in consultation with and
concurrence by the Department of Natural Resources of the
State, shall ensure that each lease for oil or gas
exploration and development on public land within the Roan
Plateau Planning Area under this subtitle contains a
stipulation that requires the lessee to join a Federal
unitization agreement that is approved by the Secretary
covering all leases offered in the relevant phased
development area.
(b) Contents.--The unitization agreement under subsection
(a) shall--
(1) identify the operator of the unit;
(2) allocate costs and benefits of production to all of the
covered lessees; and
(3) provide a development plan for the leased area.

SEC. 268. RECORD OF DECISION.

(a) Reclamation Requirements and Disturbance Limitations.--
Each development activity conducted under a mineral lease
affecting public land within the Roan Plateau Planning Area
shall be subject to the reclamation requirements and
disturbance limitations of the June 2007 Record of Decision
and the March 2008 Record of Decision, including the
limitation on the total unreclaimed surface disturbance on
the Plateau to 350 acres.
(b) Continued Application.--The June 2007 Record of
Decision and the March 2008 Record of Decision shall continue
to apply to the Roan Plateau Planning Area to the extent that
the June 2007 Record of Decision and the March 2008 Record of
Decision are consistent with this subtitle.

SEC. 269. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

Section 7439 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by striking ``(1) Beginning on November 18, 1997, or as
soon thereafter as practicable, the'' and inserting ``The'';
and
(ii) in the first sentence--

(I) by striking ``shall'' and inserting ``may''; and
(II) by inserting ``, as authorized under the Roan Plateau
Oil and Gas Leasing Improvement Act of 2008'' before the
period at the end; and

(B) by striking paragraph (2); and
(2) in subsection (f)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``specified in paragraph
(2)'' and inserting ``beginning on November 18, 1997, and
ending on the date of enactment of the Roan Plateau Oil and
Gas Leasing Improvement Act of 2008''; and
(B) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
``(2) Beginning on the date of enactment of the Roan
Plateau Oil and Gas Leasing Improvement Act of 2008, any
amounts received by the United States from a lease under this
section (including amounts in the form of sales, bonuses,
royalties (including interest charges collected under the
Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 (30 U.S.C.
1701 et seq.)), and rentals) shall be deposited in the
Treasury of the United States, for use in accordance with
section 35 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 191).''.

Subtitle H--Export of Refined Petroleum Products

SEC. 271. EXPORT OF REFINED PETROLEUM PRODUCTS.

(a) In General.--The President shall report to Congress if
net petroleum product exports to any country outside of North
America exceed 1 percent of total United States consumption
of refined petroleum products for any period of more than 7
days.

[[Page 16269]]

(b) Contents.--The report shall--
(1) describe the reasons for the exports; and
(2) state whether those petroleum products that were
exported could otherwise have been consumed inside the United
States.

TITLE III--OIL DEMAND

Subtitle A--Oil Savings

SEC. 301. FINDINGS.

Congress finds that--
(1) the United States imports more oil from the Middle East
today than before the attacks on the United States on
September 11, 2001;
(2) the United States remains the most oil-dependent
industrialized nation in the world, consuming approximately
25 percent of the oil supply of the world;
(3) the ongoing dependence of the United States on foreign
oil is one of the greatest threats to the national security
and economy of the United States; and
(4) the United States needs to take transformative steps to
wean itself from its addiction to oil.

SEC. 302. POLICY ON REDUCING OIL DEPENDENCE.

It is the policy of the United States to reduce the
dependence of the United States on oil, and thereby--
(1) alleviate the strategic dependence of the United States
on oil-producing countries;
(2) reduce the economic vulnerability of the United States;
and
(3) reduce the greenhouse gas emissions associated with oil
use.

SEC. 303. OIL SAVINGS PLAN.

(a) Initial Oil Savings Target and Action Plan.--Not later
than 270 days after the date of enactment of this Act, an
interagency task force composed of the Secretary of Energy,
the Secretary of Transportation, the Secretary of Defense,
the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of the Treasury,
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, and
the head of any other agency the President determines
appropriate (referred to in this section as the ``Interagency
Task Force'') shall publish in the Federal Register an action
plan consisting of--
(1) a draft list of proposals for agency action that will
be sufficient, when taken together, to save from the baseline
determined under subsection (d)--
(A) 2,500,000 barrels of oil per day on average during
calendar year 2016;
(B) 7,000,000 barrels of oil per day on average during
calendar year 2026; and
(C) 10,000,000 barrels per day on average during calendar
year 2030; and
(2) a Federal Government-wide analysis demonstrating--
(A) the expected oil savings from the baseline to be
accomplished by--
(i) chapter 329 of title 49, United States Code (including
regulations promulgated to carry out that chapter); and
(ii) section 211(o) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7545(o)) (including regulations promulgated to carry out
section 211(o) of that Act); and
(B) that the proposals described in paragraph (1), taken
together with expected oil savings described in subparagraph
(A), will achieve the oil savings specified in this
subsection.
(b) Review and Update of Action Plan.--
(1) Review.--Not later than January 1, 2011, and every 3
years thereafter, the Interagency Task Force shall submit to
Congress, and publish, a report that--
(A) evaluates the progress achieved in implementing the oil
savings targets established under subsection (a);
(B) analyzes the expected oil savings under the action plan
established under that subsection; and
(C)(i) analyzes the potential to achieve oil savings that
are in addition to the oil savings goals under that
subsection; and
(ii) if the President determines that it is in the national
interest, requires an analysis under that subsection for a
higher oil savings goal for calendar year 2017 or any
subsequent calendar year.
(2) Insufficient oil savings.--If the oil savings are less
than the targets described in subsection (a), simultaneously
with the report required under paragraph (1), the Interagency
Task Force shall publish a revised action plan that is
sufficient to achieve the targets.
(c) Public Comment and Final Proposals.--
(1) In general.--After a 30-day period for public comment
on the publications under subsection (a) and (b), the
Interagency Task Force shall, not later than 1 year after the
date of enactment of this Act, issue a final list of
proposals to meet the requirements of this section.
(2) Additional legislative authority.--The proposals shall
include a request to Congress for any additional legislative
authority necessary to implement the proposals.
(d) Baseline and Analysis Requirements.--In performing the
analyses required for the action plan to achieve the oil
savings described in subsection (a), the Secretary of Energy,
the Secretary of Transportation, the Secretary of Defense,
the Secretary of Agriculture, the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, and the head of any other
agency the President determines to be appropriate shall--
(1) determine oil savings as the projected reduction in oil
consumption from the baseline established by the reference
case contained in the report of the Energy Information
Administration entitled ``Annual Energy Outlook 2008'';
(2) determine the oil savings projections required on an
annual basis for each of calendar years 2009 through 2030;
and
(3) account for any overlap among implementation actions to
ensure that the projected oil savings from all the
implementation actions, taken together, are as accurate as
practicable.
(e) Relationship to Other Laws.--Nothing in this section
affects the authority provided or responsibility delegated
under any other law.

Subtitle B--Telework

PART I--INCENTIVE PROGRAMS FOR REDUCING PETROLEUM CONSUMPTION

SEC. 306. INCENTIVE PROGRAMS FOR REDUCING PETROLEUM
CONSUMPTION.

Part J of title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation
Act (42 U.S.C. 6374 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end
the following:

``SEC. 400GG. INCENTIVE PROGRAMS FOR REDUCING PETROLEUM
CONSUMPTION.

``(a) Federal Employee Incentive Programs for Reducing
Petroleum Consumption.--
``(1) In general.--Each Federal agency shall actively
promote incentive programs that encourage Federal employees
and contractors to reduce petroleum usage through the use of
practices such as--
``(A) telecommuting;
``(B) public transit;
``(C) carpooling; and
``(D) bicycling.
``(2) Monitoring and support for incentive programs.--The
Administrator of General Services, the Director of the Office
of Personnel Management, and the Secretary of Energy shall
monitor and provide appropriate support to agency programs
described in paragraph (1).
``(3) Recognition.--The Secretary may establish a program
under which the Secretary recognizes private sector employers
for outstanding programs to reduce petroleum usage through
practices described in paragraph (1).
``(b) Grants to States and Local Governments for Incentive
Programs for Reducing Petroleum Consumption.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall make grants to
States and local governments to pay the Federal share of the
cost of carrying out incentive programs to reduce petroleum
usage through the use of practices such as--
``(A) telecommuting;
``(B) public transit;
``(C) carpooling; and
``(D) bicycling.
``(2) Federal share.--Except as provided in paragraph
(3)(B), the Federal share of the cost of carrying out an
incentive program described in paragraph (1) shall be 50
percent.
``(3) Rural areas.--In the case of local governments that
serve rural areas (as defined by the Secretary)--
``(A) the Secretary shall give priority to those local
governments in making grants under this subsection; and
``(B) the Federal share of the cost of carrying out an
incentive program described in paragraph (1) shall be 100
percent.
``(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to
carry out this subsection for each of fiscal years 2009
through 2015.''.

PART II--TELEWORK ENHANCEMENT

SEC. 311. SHORT TITLE.

This part may be cited as the ``Telework Enhancement Act of
2008''.

SEC. 312. DEFINITIONS.

In this part:
(1) Employee.--The term ``employee'' has the meaning given
that term by section 2105 of title 5, United States Code.
(2) Executive agency.--The term ``executive agency'' has
the meaning given that term by section 105 of title 5, United
States Code.
(3) Noncompliant.--The term ``noncompliant'' means not
conforming to the requirements under this part.
(4) Telework.--The term ``telework'' means a work
arrangement in which an employee regularly performs
officially assigned duties at home or other worksites
geographically convenient to the residence of the employee
during at least 20 percent of each pay period that the
employee is performing officially assigned duties.

SEC. 313. EXECUTIVE AGENCIES TELEWORK REQUIREMENT.

[[Page 16270]]

(2) require a written agreement between an agency manager
and an employee authorized to telework in order for that
employee to participate in telework;
(3) provide that an employee may not be authorized to
telework if the performance of that employee does not comply
with the terms of the written agreement between the agency
manager and that employee;
(4) except in emergency situations as determined by an
agency head, not apply to any employee of the agency whose
official duties require daily physical presence for activity
with equipment or handling of secure materials; and
(5) determine the use of telework as part of the continuity
of operations plans the agency in the event of an emergency.

SEC. 314. TRAINING AND MONITORING.

The head of each executive agency shall ensure that--
(1) an interactive telework training program is provided
to--
(A) employees eligible to participate in the telework
program of the agency; and
(B) all managers of teleworkers;
(2) no distinction is made between teleworkers and
nonteleworkers for the purposes of performance appraisals;
and
(3) when determining what constitutes diminished employee
performance, the agency shall consult the established
performance management guidelines of the Office of Personnel
Management.

SEC. 315. POLICY AND SUPPORT.

(a) Agency Consultation With the Office of Personnel
Management.--Each executive agency shall consult with the
Office of Personnel Management in developing telework
policies.
(b) Guidance and Consultation.--The Office of Personnel
Management shall--
(1) provide policy and policy guidance for telework in the
areas of pay and leave, agency closure, performance
management, official worksite, recruitment and retention, and
accommodations for employees with disabilities; and
(2) consult with--
(A) the Federal Emergency Management Agency on policy and
policy guidance for telework in the areas of continuation of
operations and long-term emergencies; and
(B) the General Services Administration on policy and
policy guidance for telework in the areas of telework
centers, travel, technology, equipment, and dependent care.
(c) Continuity of Operations Plans.--During any period that
an agency is operating under a continuity of operations plan,
that plan shall supersede any telework policy.
(d) Telework Website.--The Office of Personnel Management
shall--
(1) maintain a central telework website; and
(2) include on that website related--
(A) telework links;
(B) announcements;
(C) guidance developed by the Office of Personnel
Management; and
(D) guidance submitted by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, and the General Services Administration to the Office
of Personnel Management not later than 10 business days after
the date of submission.

SEC. 316. TELEWORK MANAGING OFFICER.

(a) In General.--
(1) Appointment.--The head of each executive agency shall
appoint an employee of the agency as the Telework Managing
Officer. The Telework Managing Officer shall be established
within the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer or a
comparable office with similar functions.
(2) Telework coordinators.--
(A) Appropriations act, 2004.--Section 627 of the
Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary,
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Law
108-199; 118 Stat. 99) is amended by striking ``designate a
`Telework Coordinator' to be'' and inserting ``appoint a
Telework Managing Officer to be''.
(B) Appropriations act, 2005.--Section 622 of the
Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary,
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law
108-447; 118 Stat. 2919) is amended by striking ``designate a
`Telework Coordinator' to be'' and inserting ``appoint a
Telework Managing Officer to be''.
(b) Duties.--The Telework Managing Officer shall--
(1) be devoted to policy development and implementation
related to agency telework programs;
(2) serve as--
(A) an advisor for agency leadership, including the Chief
Human Capital Officer;
(B) a resource for managers and employees; and
(C) a primary agency point of contact for the Office of
Personnel Management on telework matters; and
(3) perform other duties as the applicable appointing
authority may assign.

SEC. 317. ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS.

(a) Submission of Reports.--Not later than 18 months after
the date of enactment of this Act and on an annual basis
thereafter, the Director of the Office of Personnel
Management shall--
(1) submit a report addressing the telework programs of
each executive agency to--
(A) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate; and
(B) the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the
House of Representatives; and
(2) transmit a copy of the report to the Comptroller
General and the Office of Management and Budget.
(b) Contents.--Each report submitted under this section
shall include--
(1) the telework policy, the measures in place to carry out
the policy, and an analysis of employee telework
participation during the preceding 12-month period provided
by each executive agency;
(2) an assessment of the progress of each agency in
maximizing telework opportunities for employees of that
agency without diminishing employee performance or agency
operations;
(3) the definition of telework and telework policies and
any modifications to such definitions;
(4) the degree of participation by employees of each agency
in teleworking during the period covered by the evaluation,
including--
(A) the number and percent of the employees in the agency
who are eligible to telework;
(B) the number and percent of employees who engage in
telework;
(C) the number and percent of eligible employees in each
agency who have declined the opportunity to telework; and
(D) the number of employees who were not authorized,
willing, or able to telework and the reason;
(5) the extent to which barriers to maximize telework
opportunities have been identified and eliminated; and
(6) best practices in agency telework programs.

SEC. 318. COMPLIANCE OF EXECUTIVE AGENCIES.

(a) Executive Agencies.--An executive agency shall be in
compliance with this part if each employee of that agency
participating in telework regularly performs officially
assigned duties at home or other worksites geographically
convenient to the residence of the employee during at least
20 percent of each pay period that the employee is performing
officially assigned duties.
(b) Agency Manager Reports.--Not later than 180 days after
the establishment of a policy described under section 313,
and annually thereafter, each agency manager shall submit a
report to the Chief Human Capital Officer and Telework
Managing Officer of that agency that contains a summary of--
(1) efforts to promote telework opportunities for employees
supervised by that manager; and
(2) any obstacles which hinder the ability of that manager
to promote telework opportunities.
(c) Chief Human Capital Officer Reports.--
(1) In general.--Each year the Chief Human Capital Officer
of each agency, in consultation with the Telework Managing
Officer of that agency, shall submit a report to the Chair
and Vice Chair of the Chief Human Capital Offices Council on
agency management efforts to promote telework.
(2) Review and inclusion of relevant information.--The
Chair and Vice Chair of the Chief Human Capital Offices
Council shall--
(A) review the reports submitted under paragraph (1);
(B) include relevant information from the submitted reports
in the annual report to Congress required under section
317(b)(2); and
(C) use that relevant information for other purposes
related to the strategic management of human capital.
(d) Compliance Reports.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of submission of each report under section 317, the
Office of Management and Budget shall submit a report to
Congress that--
(1) identifies and recommends corrective actions and time
frames for each executive agency that the Office of
Management and Budget determines is noncompliant; and
(2) describes progress of noncompliant executive agencies,
justifications of any continuing noncompliance, and any
recommendations for corrective actions planned by the Office
of Management and Budget or the executive agency to eliminate
noncompliance.

SEC. 319. EXTENSION OF TRAVEL EXPENSES TEST PROGRAMS.

(a) In General.--Section 5710 of title 5, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``for a period not to
exceed 24 months''; and
(2) in subsection (e), by striking ``7 years'' and
inserting ``16 years''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect as though enacted as part of the Travel and
Transportation Reform Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-264; 112
Stat. 2350).

Subtitle C--Public Transportation

SEC. 331. ENERGY EFFICIENT TRANSIT GRANT PROGRAM.

(a) Establishment of Program.--The Secretary of
Transportation shall establish a program for making grants to
public transportation agencies to assist in reducing energy
consumption or greenhouse gas emissions of their public
transportation systems.
(b) Eligible Uses of Funds.--A recipient of a grant under
subsection (a) shall use the grant funds for one or more of
the following:
(1) Improvements that reduce energy consumption or
greenhouse gas emissions to lighting, heating, cooling, or
ventilation systems in public transportation stations and

[[Page 16271]]

other facilities for which grants authorized by sections
5307, 5309, and 5311 of title 49, United States Code, may be
expended.
(2) Adjustments to signal timing or other vehicle
controlling systems, including computer controlled systems,
that reduce energy consumption or greenhouse gas emissions.
(3) Purchasing or retrofitting rolling stock to improve
energy efficiency or reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
(4) Improvements to energy distribution systems.
(c) Distribution of Funds.--In determining the recipients
of grants under this section, the Secretary of Transportation
shall--
(1) consult with other Federal agencies, including the
Department of Energy, as appropriate; and
(2) evaluate applications based on--
(A) the total energy savings that are projected to result
from the project; and
(B) the projected energy savings as a percentage of the
transit agency's total energy usage.
(d) Government's Share of Costs.--The Government's share of
the cost of an activity funded using amounts made available
under this section may not exceed 80 percent of the cost of
the activity.
(e) Terms and Conditions.--Except as otherwise specifically
provided in this section, a grant provided under this section
shall be subject to the terms and conditions applicable to a
grant made under section 5307 of title 49, United States
Code.
(f) Annual Reports.--On March 1, 2009, and 2010, the
Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Banking, Housing,
and Urban Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives, a report listing the recipients of grants
under this section, the purposes for which grant funds were
awarded, and any grant applicants who did not receive
funding.
(g) Limitation on Use of Available Amounts.--The Secretary
may use not more than 0.5 percent of the amount made
available for a fiscal year under subsection (h) to provide
technical assistance and administer the grants authorized
under this section.
(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation to make
grants under this section $200,000,000 for each of fiscal
years 2009 through 2011. Sums appropriated to carry out this
section shall remain available until expended.

SEC. 332. TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT CORRIDORS GRANT
PROGRAM.

(a) Establishment of Program.--The Secretary of
Transportation shall establish a program for making grants to
public transportation agencies, metropolitan planning
organizations, and other State or local government
authorities to support planning and design of Transit-
Oriented Development Corridors.
(b) Definitions.--In this section, the following
definitions apply:
(1) Transit-oriented development corridor.--The term
``Transit-Oriented Development Corridor'' means a geographic
area, including rights-of-way for fixed guideway public
transportation facilities, within \1/2\ mile radius of a
fixed guideway transit station or stop.
(2) Other terms.--The terms ``fixed guideway'', ``local
governmental authority'', ``public transportation'',
``Secretary'', and ``State'' have the meanings given such
terms in section 5302 of title 49, United States Code.
(c) Eligible Uses of Funds.--A recipient of a grant under
subsection (a) shall use the grant funds for planning or
designing Transit-Oriented Development Corridors.
(d) Distribution of Funds.--In determining the recipients
of grants under this section, the Secretary shall evaluate
applications based on the following considerations:
(1) The justification for the project, including the extent
to which the project would reduce energy consumption or
greenhouse gas emissions, including by increasing transit
ridership and by increasing non-motorized trips to access the
transit station or facility.
(2) The location of the project, to ensure that selected
projects are geographically diverse nationwide and include
both urban and suburban areas.
(3) The extent to which project development is being
coordinated with all relevant participants, including real-
estate, retail, housing, commercial and economic development,
and non-profit participants.
(4) The extent to which the project includes mixed-use
development within the designated geographic area.
(5) The extent to which the project is being coordinated
with relevant housing, economic development, land use, and
transportation plans.
(e) Government's Share of Costs.--The Government's share of
the cost of an activity funded using amounts made available
under this section may not exceed 80 percent of the cost of
the activity, except for an activity undertaken by a grant
recipient who has not previously engaged in the planning or
design of a corridor which would meet the definition of a
Transit-Oriented Development Corridor under this section.
(f) Terms and Conditions.--Except as otherwise specifically
provided in this section, a grant provided under this section
for planning shall be subject to the terms and conditions
applicable to a grant made under section 5303 of title 49,
United States Code. Except as otherwise specifically provided
in this section, a grant provided under this section for
design shall be subject to the terms and conditions
applicable to a grant for design made under section 5309 of
title 49, United States Code.
(g) Annual Reports.--On June 1, 2009, and 2010, the
Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Banking, Housing,
and Urban Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives, a report listing the recipients of grants
under this section, the Federal share provided, the purposes
for which grant funds were awarded, and any grant applicants
who did not receive funding.
(h) Limitation on Use of Available Amounts.--The Secretary
may use not more than 0.5 percent of the amount made
available for a fiscal year under subsection (i) to provide
technical assistance and administer the grants authorized
under this section.
(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation to make
grants under this section $200,000,000 for each of fiscal
years 2009 through 2011. Sums appropriated to carry out this
section shall remain available until expended.

SEC. 333. ENHANCED TRANSIT OPTIONS.

(a) Authorization.--The Secretary of Transportation is
authorized to make transit enhancement grants under this
section to public transportation agencies.
(b) Eligible Recipients.--Grants authorized under
subsection (a) may be awarded--
(1) to public transportation agencies which have a full
funding grant agreement in force on the date of enactment of
this Act with Federal payments scheduled in any year
beginning with fiscal year 2008, for activities authorized
under the full funding grant agreement that would expedite
construction of the project; and
(2) to designated recipients as defined in section 5307 of
title 49, United States Code, for immediate use to--
(A) address an already-identified backlog of maintenance
needs;
(B) purchase additional rolling stock or buses, if the
contracts for such purchases are in place prior to the grant
award; and
(C) continue or expand service to accommodate ridership
increases.
(c) Appropriation of Funds.--There are appropriated, out of
funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to the
Secretary of Transportation to make grants under this
section--
(1) $300,000,000 for grants to recipients described in
subsection (b)(1); and
(2) $1,000,000,000 for grants to recipients described in
subsection (b)(2).
(d) Distribution of Funds.--
(1) Expedited new starts grants.--Funds authorized under
subsection (c)(1) shall be distributed among eligible
recipients so that each recipient receives an equal
percentage increase based on the Federal funding commitment
for fiscal year 2008 specified in Attachment 6 of the
recipient's full funding grant agreement.
(2) Formula grants.--Of funds authorized under subsection
(c)(2)--
(A) 60 percent shall be distributed according to the
formula in subsections (a) through (c) of section 5336 of
title 49, United States Code; and
(B) 40 percent shall be distributed according to the
formula in section 5340 of title 49, United States Code.
(3) Determination.--The Secretary of Transportation shall
determine the allocation of the amounts authorized among
recipients described in subsection (b) no later than 20 days
after the date of enactment of this Act.
(e) Pre-Award Spending Authority.--
(1) In general.--A recipient of a grant under this section
shall have pre-award spending authority.
(2) Requirements.--If pre-award spending authority is used,
the expenditures shall conform with applicable Federal
requirements in order to remain eligible for future Federal
reimbursement.
(f) Federal Share.--The Federal share of grants authorized
under this section shall be 100 percent.
(g) Self-Certification.--
(1) In general.--Prior to obligation of grant funds, the
recipient of the grant award shall certify--
(A) for recipients under subsection (b)(1), that it will
comply with the terms and conditions that apply to grants
under section 5309 of title 49, United States Code;
(B) for recipients under subsection (b)(2), that it will
comply with the terms and conditions that apply to grants
under section 5307 of title 49, United States Code; and
(C) that the funds will be used in a manner that will
stimulate the economy.
(2) Inclusion.--Required certifications under this
subsection may be made as part of the certification required
under section 5307(d)(1) of title 49, United States Code.
(3) Penalty.--If, upon audit, the Secretary of
Transportation finds that the recipient has not complied with
applicable requirements under this section and has not made a
good-faith effort to comply, the Secretary

[[Page 16272]]

may withhold not more than 25 percent of the amount required
to be appropriated for that recipient under section 5307 of
title 49, United States Code, for the following fiscal year.

Subtitle D--Fuel Consumption Indicator Devices

SEC. 336. ONBOARD FUEL ECONOMY INDICATORS AND DEVICES.

(a) In General.--Chapter 329 of title 49, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 32920. Fuel economy indicators and devices

``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation, in
consultation with the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, shall prescribe a fuel economy standard
for passenger automobiles and non-passenger automobiles
manufactured by a manufacturer in model year 2012, and in
each model year after 2012, that requires each such
automobile to be equipped with--
``(1) an onboard electronic instrument that provides real-
time and cumulative fuel economy data;
``(2) an onboard electronic instrument that signals a
driver when inadequate tire pressure may be affecting fuel
economy; and
``(3) a device that will allow drivers to place the
automobile in a mode that will automatically produce greater
fuel economy.
``(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to any
vehicle that is not subject to an average fuel economy
standard under section 32902(b).
``(c) Enforcement.--Subchapter IV of chapter 301 of this
title shall apply to a fuel economy standard prescribed under
subsection (a) to the same extent and in the same manner as
if that standard were a motor vehicle safety standard under
chapter 301.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter
329 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting
after the item relating to section 32919 the following:

``32920. Fuel economy indicators and devices.''.

Subtitle E--Vehicle-to-Grid Demonstration Program

SEC. 341. VEHICLE-TO-GRID DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.
(2) V2G program.--The term ``V2G program'' means the
vehicle-to-grid demonstration program established under
subsection (b).
(b) Program.--The Secretary shall establish and carry out a
vehicle-to-grid demonstration program--
(1) to demonstrate ways in which electricity may be
transmitted between plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and an
electricity distribution system;
(2) to collect real-world data on that transmission;
(3) to develop a better understanding of the benefits of
vehicle-to-grid technologies;
(4) to facilitate future adoption of vehicle-to-grid
systems; and
(5) to demonstrate optimal integration of advanced vehicle
technologies with a renewable energy-based electricity
distribution system.
(c) Requirements.--The V2G program shall address the
challenges to achieving integration of advanced vehicle
technologies with the electricity distribution system,
including challenges relating to--
(1) charging infrastructure;
(2) accurate and discrete measurement of energy delivered;
(3) communication protocol standards;
(4) power flow control;
(5) smart metering technology; and
(6) the impact on the grid from integration of various
renewable energy generation loads ranging from 10 to 25
percent renewable power.
(d) Cooperation.--The Secretary shall carry out the V2G
program through consortia of individuals and entities such
as--
(1) energy storage system manufacturers and associated
suppliers;
(2) electric drive vehicle manufacturers;
(3) rural electric cooperatives;
(4) investor-owned utilities;
(5) municipal and rural electric utilities;
(6) State and local governments;
(7) metropolitan transportation authorities; and
(8) institutions of higher education.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the Secretary such sums as are
necessary to carry out this section.

Subtitle F--Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Incentive
Program

SEC. 346. ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING
INCENTIVE PROGRAM.

Section 136 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007 (42 U.S.C. 17013) is amended--
(1) in subsection (d)(1), by striking ``and subject to the
availability of appropriated funds,''; and
(2) by striking subsection (i) and inserting the following:
``(i) Funding.--
``(1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated
such sums as are necessary to carry out this section (other
than subsection (d)) for each of fiscal years 2008 through
2013.
``(2) Direct loan program.--
``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, on October 1, 2008, and on each October 1 thereafter
through October 1, 2012, out of any funds in the Treasury not
otherwise appropriated, the Secretary of the Treasury shall
transfer to the Secretary for the cost of loans to carry out
subsection (d) $200,000,000, to remain available until
expended.
``(B) Receipt and acceptance.--The Secretary shall be
entitled to receive, shall accept, and shall use to carry out
subsection (d) the funds transferred under subparagraph (A),
without further appropriation.''.

Subtitle G--Advanced Batteries

SEC. 351. DEFINITION OF ADVANCED BATTERY.

In this subtitle, the term ``advanced battery'' means an
electrical storage device that is suitable for a vehicle
application.

SEC. 352. ADVANCED BATTERY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy shall--
(1) expand and accelerate research and development efforts
for advanced batteries; and
(2) emphasize lower cost means of producing abuse-tolerant
advanced batteries with the appropriate balance of power and
energy capacity to meet market requirements.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 641(p) of the
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C.
17231(p)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``$50,000,000'' and
inserting ``$100,000,000'';
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``$80,000,000'' and
inserting ``$160,000,000'';
(3) in paragraph (3), by striking ``$100,000,000'' and
inserting ``$200,000,000'';
(4) in paragraph (4), by striking ``$30,000,000'' and
inserting ``$60,000,000''; and
(5) in paragraph (5), by striking ``$30,000,000'' and
inserting ``$60,000,000''.

SEC. 353. ADVANCED BATTERY MANUFACTURING AND TECHNOLOGY
ROADMAP.

(a) Roadmap Required.--The Director of the Office of
Science and Technology Policy shall (in coordination with the
Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary
of Commerce, and heads of other appropriate Federal agencies)
develop a multiyear roadmap to develop advanced battery
technologies and sustain domestic advanced battery
manufacturing capabilities and an assured supply chain
necessary to ensure that the United States has assured access
to advanced battery technologies to support current and
emerging energy security and defense needs.
(b) Elements.--The roadmap required by subsection (a) shall
include--
(1) an identification of current and future capability
gaps, performance enhancements, cost savings goals, and
assured technology access goals that require advances in
battery technology and manufacturing capabilities;
(2) specific research, technology, and manufacturing goals
and milestones, and timelines and estimates of funding
necessary for achieving the goals and milestones;
(3) specific mechanisms for coordinating the activities of
Federal agencies, State and local governments, coalition
partners, private industry, and academia covered by the
roadmap; and
(4) such other matters as are considered to be appropriate
for purposes of the roadmap.
(c) Coordination.--
(1) In general.--The roadmap required by subsection (a)
shall be developed in coordination with--
(A) all appropriate agencies and organizations within the
Department of Defense;
(B) other appropriate Federal agencies;
(C) Federal, State, and local governmental organizations;
and
(D) representatives of private industry and academia.
(2) Office of science and technology policy.--The Director
of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall ensure
that appropriate elements and organizations of the Office of
Science and Technology Policy provide such information and
other support as are required for the development of the
roadmap.
(d) Submission to Congress.--Not later than 1 year after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office
of Science and Technology Policy shall submit to the
appropriate committees of Congress the roadmap required by
subsection (a).

SEC. 354. SENSE OF SENATE ON PURCHASE OF PLUG-IN ELECTRIC
DRIVE VEHICLES.

It is the sense of the Senate that, to the maximum extent
practicable, the Federal Government should implement policies
to increase the purchase of plug-in electric drive vehicles
by the Federal Government.

Subtitle H--National Energy-Efficient Driver Education Program

SEC. 361. NATIONAL ENERGY-EFFICIENT DRIVER EDUCATION PROGRAM.

Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall develop and
actively promote educational materials providing information

[[Page 16273]]

that can be incorporated into driver education programs
regarding driving and vehicle maintenance practices that
optimize vehicle fuel economy.

Subtitle I--Oil and Gas Reserves Reporting Requirements

SEC. 366. OIL AND GAS RESERVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

It is the sense of the Senate that the Securities and
Exchange Commission should accelerate the rulemaking process
being undertaken to modernize and increase transparency in
oil and gas reserves reporting requirements.

Subtitle J--Tire Efficiency Consumer Information

SEC. 371. CONSUMER TIRE INFORMATION.

Section 32304A(a)(1) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``24 months'' and inserting ``15
months''.

Subtitle K--Petroleum Use Reduction Technology Deployment

SEC. 376. PETROLEUM USE REDUCTION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT
GRANTS.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy shall establish a
competitive grant program, to be administered through the
Vehicle Technology Deployment Program of the Department of
Energy, to provide grants to local Clean Cities coalitions
and stakeholders, industry partners, fuel providers, and end
users to promote the adoption and use of petroleum use
reduction technologies and practices.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $50,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013.

Subtitle L--Energy Efficient Building Codes

SEC. 381. ENERGY EFFICIENT BUILDING CODES.

(a) Updating National Model Building Energy Codes and
Standards.--
(1) Updating.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary of Energy (referred to in
this section as the ``Secretary'') shall facilitate the
updating of national model building energy codes and
standards at least every 3 years to achieve overall energy
savings, compared to the 2006 International Energy
Conservation Code (referred to in this section as the
``IECC'') for residential buildings and ASHRAE/IES Standard
90.1 (2004) for commercial buildings, of at least--
(i) 30 percent by 2015; and
(ii) 50 percent by 2022.
(B) Modification of goal.--If the Secretary determines that
the goal referred to in subparagraph (A)(ii) cannot be
achieved using existing technology, or would not be lifecycle
cost effective, the Secretary shall establish, after
providing notice and an opportunity for public comment, a
revised goal that ensures the maximum level of energy
efficiency that is technologically feasible and lifecycle
cost effective.
(2) Revision of codes and standards.--
(A) In general.--If the IECC or ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1
regarding building energy use is revised, not later than 1
year after the date of the revision, the Secretary shall
determine whether the revision will--
(i) improve energy efficiency in buildings; and
(ii) meets the targets established under paragraph (1).
(B) Revision by secretary.--
(i) In general.--If the Secretary makes a determination
under subparagraph (A)(ii) that a code or standard does not
meet the targets established under paragraph (1), or if a
national model code or standard is not updated for more than
3 years, not later than 2 years after the determination or
the expiration of the 3-year period, the Secretary shall
amend the IECC or ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 (as in effect on
the date on which the determination is made) to establish a
modified code or standard that meets the targets established
under paragraph (1).
(ii) Baseline.--The modified code or standard shall serve
as the baseline for the next determination under subparagraph
(A)(i).
(C) Notice and comment.--The Secretary shall--
(i) publish in the Federal Register notice of targets,
determinations, and modified codes and standards under this
subsection; and
(ii) provide the opportunity for public comment on targets,
determinations, and modified codes and standards under this
subsection.
(b) State Certification of Building Energy Code Updates.--
(1) State certification.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, each State shall certify to the
Secretary that the State has reviewed and updated the
residential and commercial building code of the State
regarding energy efficiency.
(B) Energy savings.--The certification shall include a
demonstration that the code of the State--
(i) meets or exceeds the 2006 IECC for residential
buildings and the ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2004 for
commercial buildings; or
(ii) achieves equivalent or greater energy savings.
(2) Revision of codes and standards.--
(A) In general.--If the Secretary makes an affirmative
determination under subsection (a)(2)(A)(i) or establishes a
modified code or standard under subsection (a)(2)(B), not
later than 2 years after the determination or proposal, each
State shall certify that the State has reviewed and updated
the building code of the State regarding energy efficiency.
(B) Energy savings.--The certification shall include a
demonstration that the code of the State--
(i) meets or exceeds the revised code or standard; or
(ii) achieves equivalent or greater energy savings.
(C) Review and updating by states.--If the Secretary fails
to make a determination under subsection (a)(2)(A)(i) by the
date specified in subsection (a)(2) or makes a negative
determination under subsection (a)(2)(A), not later 3 years
after the specified date or the date of the determination,
each State shall certify that the State has--
(i) reviewed the revised code or standard; and
(ii) updated the building code of the State regarding
energy efficiency to--

(I) meet or exceed any provisions found to improve energy
efficiency in buildings; or
(II) achieve equivalent or greater energy savings in other
ways.

(c) State Certification of Compliance With Building
Codes.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 3 years after a
certification of a State under subsection (b), the State
shall certify that the State has achieved compliance with the
certified building energy code.
(2) Rate of compliance.--The certification shall include
documentation of the rate of compliance based on independent
inspections of a random sample of the new and renovated
buildings covered by the code during the preceding year.
(3) Compliance.--A State shall be considered to achieve
compliance with the certified building energy code under
paragraph (1) if--
(A) at least 90 percent of new and renovated buildings
covered by the code during the preceding year substantially
meet all the requirements of the code; or
(B) the estimated excess energy use of new and renovated
buildings that did not meet the code during the preceding
year, compared to a baseline of comparable buildings that
meet the code, is not more than 10 percent of the estimated
energy use of all new and renovated buildings covered by the
code during the preceding year.
(d) Failure To Meet Deadlines.--
(1) Reports.--A State that has not made a certification
required under subsection (b) or (c) by the applicable
deadline shall submit to the Secretary a report on--
(A) the status of the State with respect to completing and
submitting the certification; and
(B) a plan of the State for completing and submitting the
certification.
(2) Extensions.--The Secretary shall permit an extension of
an applicable deadline for a certification requirement under
subsection (b) or (c) for not more than 1 year if a State
demonstrates in the report of the State under paragraph (1)
that the State has made--
(A) a good faith effort to comply with the requirements;
and
(B) significant progress in complying with the
requirements, including by developing and implementing a plan
to achieve that compliance.
(3) Noncompliance by state.--Any State for which the
Secretary has not accepted a certification by a deadline
established under subsection (b) or (c), with any extension
granted under paragraph (2), shall be considered not in
compliance with this section.
(4) Compliance by local governments.--In any State that is
not in compliance with this section, a local government of
the State may comply with this section by meeting the
certification requirements under subsections (b) and (c).
(5) Annual compliance reports.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall annually submit to
Congress a report that contains, and publish in the Federal
Register, a list of--
(i) each State (including local governments in a State, as
applicable) that is in compliance with the requirements of
this section; and
(ii) each State that is not in compliance with those
requirements.
(B) Inclusion.--For each State included on a list described
in subparagraph (A)(ii), the Secretary shall include an
estimate of--
(i) the increased energy use by buildings in that State due
to the failure of the State to comply with this section; and
(ii) the resulting increase in energy costs to individuals
and businesses.
(e) Technical Assistance.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall provide technical
assistance (including building energy analysis and design
tools, building demonstrations, and design assistance and
training) to enable the national model building energy codes
and standards to meet the targets established under
subsection (a)(1).
(2) Assistance to states.--The Secretary shall provide
technical assistance to States to--
(A) implement this section, including procedures for States
to demonstrate that the codes of the States achieve
equivalent or greater energy savings than the national model
codes and standards;

[[Page 16274]]

(B) improve and implement State residential and commercial
building energy efficiency codes; and
(C) otherwise promote the design and construction of energy
efficient buildings.
(f) Availability of Incentive Funding.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall provide incentive
funding to States to--
(A) implement this section; and
(B) improve and implement State residential and commercial
building energy efficiency codes, including increasing and
verifying compliance with the codes.
(2) Factors.--In determining whether, and in what amount,
to provide incentive funding under this subsection, the
Secretary shall consider the actions proposed by the State
to--
(A) implement this section;
(B) improve and implement residential and commercial
building energy efficiency codes; and
(C) promote building energy efficiency through the use of
the codes.
(3) Additional funding.--The Secretary shall provide
additional funding under this subsection for implementation
of a plan to achieve and document at least a 90 percent rate
of compliance with residential and commercial building energy
efficiency codes, based on energy performance--
(A) to a State that has adopted and is implementing, on a
statewide basis--
(i) a residential building energy efficiency code that
meets or exceeds the requirements of the 2006 IECC, or any
succeeding version of that code that has received an
affirmative determination from the Secretary under subsection
(a)(2)(A)(i); and
(ii) a commercial building energy efficiency code that
meets or exceeds the requirements of the ASHRAE/IES Standard
90.1-2004, or any succeeding version of that standard that
has received an affirmative determination from the Secretary
under subsection (a)(2)(A)(i); or
(B) in a State in which there is no statewide energy code
either for residential buildings or for commercial buildings,
to a local government that has adopted and is implementing
residential and commercial building energy efficiency codes,
as described in subparagraph (A).
(4) Training.--Of the amounts made available under this
subsection, the Secretary may use to train State and local
officials to implement codes described in paragraph (3) at
least $500,000 for each fiscal year.
(5) Authorization of appropriations.--
(A) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this subsection--
(i) $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2010;
and
(ii) such sums as are necessary for fiscal year 2011 and
each fiscal year thereafter.
(B) Limitation.--Funding provided to States under paragraph
(3) for each fiscal year shall not exceed \1/2\ of the excess
of funding under this subsection over $5,000,000 for the
fiscal year.
(g) Technical Correction.--Section 303 of the Energy
Conservation and Production Act (42 U.S.C. 6832) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``(17) IECC.--The term `IECC' means the International
Energy Conservation Code.''.

Subtitle M--Renewable Energy Pilot Project Offices

SEC. 386. PILOT PROJECT OFFICE TO IMPROVE FEDERAL PERMIT
COORDINATION FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY.

(a) In General.--Section 365 of the Energy Policy Act of
2005 (42 U.S.C. 15924) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(k) Pilot Project Office To Improve Federal Permit
Coordination for Renewable Energy.--
``(1) Definition of renewable energy.--In this subsection,
the term `renewable energy' means energy derived from a wind
or solar source.
``(2) Field offices.--As part of the Pilot Project, the
Secretary shall designate 1 field office of the Bureau of
Land Management in each of the following States to serve as
Renewable Energy Pilot Project Offices for coordination of
Federal permits for renewable energy projects on Federal
land:
``(A) Arizona.
``(B) California.
``(C) New Mexico.
``(D) Nevada.
``(E) Montana.
``(3) Memorandum of understanding.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall enter into
an amended memorandum of understanding under subsection (b)
to provide for the inclusion of the additional Renewable
Energy Pilot Project Offices in the Pilot Project.
``(B) Signatures by governors.--The Secretary may request
that the Governors of each of the States described in
paragraph (2) be signatories to the amended memorandum of
understanding.
``(4) Designation of qualified staff.--Not later than 30
days after the date of the signing of the amended memorandum
of understanding, all Federal signatory parties shall, if
appropriate, assign to each Renewable Energy Pilot Project
Offices designated under paragraph (2) an employee described
in subsection (c) to carry out duties described in that
subsection.
``(5) Additional personnel.--The Secretary shall assign to
each Renewable Energy Pilot Project Office additional
personnel under subsection (f).''.
(b) Permit Processing Improvement Fund.--Section 35(c)(3)
of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 191(c)(3)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``use authorizations'' and inserting ``and
renewable energy use authorizations''; and
(2) by striking ``section 365(d)'' and inserting
``subsections (d) and (k)(2) of section 365''.

TITLE IV--ROYALTY MANAGEMENT REFORMS

Subtitle A--Repeal of Deep Water Royalty Relief

SEC. 401. REPEAL OF DEEP WATER ROYALTY RELIEF.

Sections 344 and 345 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42
U.S.C. 15904, 15905) are repealed.

Subtitle B--Royalty Reforms

SEC. 411. DEFINITIONS.

Section 3 of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act
of 1982 (30 U.S.C. 1702) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (20)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``: Provided, That''
and all that follows through ``subject of the judicial
proceeding''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``(with written notice
to the lessee who designated the designee)'';
(2) in paragraph (23)(A), by striking ``(with written
notice to the lessee who designated the designee)'' ;
(3) by striking paragraph (24) and inserting the following:
``(24) `designee' means any person who pays, offsets, or
credits monies, makes adjustments, requests and receives
refunds, or submits reports with respect to payments a lessee
is required to make pursuant to section 102(a);'';
(4) in paragraph (25)(B), by striking ``(subject to the
provisions of section 102(a) of this Act)''; and
(5) in paragraph (26), by striking ``(with notice to the
lessee who designated the designee)''.

SEC. 412. LIABILITY FOR ROYALTY PAYMENTS.

Section 102 of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management
Act of 1982 (30 U.S.C. 1712) is amended by striking
subsection (a) and inserting the following:
``(a) Liability for Royalty Payments.--
``(1) In general.--To increase receipts and achieve
effective collections of royalty and other payments, a lessee
who is required to make any royalty or other payment under a
lease or under the mineral leasing laws, shall make the
payments in the time and manner as may be specified by the
Secretary or the applicable delegated State.
``(2) Status as designee.--Any person who pays, offsets, or
credits funds, makes adjustments, requests and receives
refunds, or submits reports with respect to payments the
lessee is required to make shall be considered the designee
of the lessee under this Act.
``(3) Liability of designee.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this Act, a designee shall be liable for any
payment obligation of any lessee on whose behalf the designee
pays royalty under the lease.
``(4) Owners of operating rights and title.--The person
owning operating rights in a lease and a person owning legal
record title in a lease shall be liable for the pro rata
share of the person of payment obligations under the
lease.''.

SEC. 413. INTEREST.

(a) Estimated Payments; Interest on Amount of
Underpayment.--Section 111(j) of the Federal Oil and Gas
Royalty Management Act of 1982 (30 U.S.C. 1721(j)) is amended
by striking ``If the estimated payment exceeds the actual
royalties due, interest is owed on the overpayment.''.
(b) Overpayments.--Section 111 of the Federal Oil and Gas
Royalty Management Act of 1982 (30 U.S.C. 1721) is amended--
(1) by striking subsections (h) and (i); and
(2) by redesignating subsections (j), (k), and (l) as
subsections (h), (i), and (j), respectively.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
take effect on the date that is 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 414. OBLIGATION PERIOD.

Section 115(c) of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty
Management Act of 1982 (30 U.S.C. 1724(c)) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(3) Adjustments.--In the case of an adjustment under
section 111A(a) in which a recoupment by the lessee results
in an underpayment of an obligation, for purposes of this
Act, the obligation shall become due on the date the lessee
or a designee of the lessee makes the adjustment.''.

SEC. 415. TOLLING AGREEMENTS AND SUBPOENAS.

(a) Tolling Agreements.--Section 115(d)(1) of the Federal
Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 (30 U.S.C.
1724(d)(1)) is amended by striking ``(with notice to the
lessee who designated the designee)''.
(b) Subpoenas.--Section 115(d)(2)(A) of the Federal Oil and
Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 (30 U.S.C. 1724(d)(2)(A))
is amended by striking ``(with notice to the lessee who
designated the designee, which notice

[[Page 16275]]

shall not constitute a subpoena to the lessee)''.
______

SA 5136. Mr. GREGG (for himself and Mr. Sununu) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend
the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

TITLE II--WARM ACT

SEC. 21. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Weatherization,
Assistance, and Relief for Middle-Income Households Act of
2008'' or the ``WARM Act of 2008''.

SEC. 22. LOW-INCOME HOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE APPROPRIATIONS.

In addition to any amounts appropriated under any other
provision of Federal law, there is appropriated, out of any
money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for fiscal
year 2008--
(1) $1,265,000,000 (to remain available until expended) for
making payments under subsections (a) through (d) of section
2604 of the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Act of 1981 (42
U.S.C. 8623); and
(2) $1,265,000,000 (to remain available until expended) for
making payments under section 2604(e) of the Low-Income Home
Energy Assistance Act of 1981 (42 U.S.C. 8623(e)),
notwithstanding the designation requirement of section
2602(e) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 8621(e)).

SEC. 23. WEATHERIZATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR LOW-INCOME
PERSONS.

In addition to any amounts appropriated under any other
provision of Federal law, there is appropriated, out of any
money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for fiscal
year 2008 $523,000,000 to carry out the Weatherization
Assistance Program for Low-Income Persons established under
part A of title IV of the Energy Conservation and Production
Act (42 U.S.C. 6861 et seq.), to remain available until
expended.

SEC. 24. CREDIT FOR HOME HEATING OIL EXPENDITURES.

``SEC. 25E. HOME HEATING OIL EXPENDITURES.

``(a) Allowance of Credit.--In the case of an individual,
there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by
this chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to 50
percent of the qualified home heating oil expenditures made
by the taxpayer during such taxable year.
``(b) Limitations.--
``(1) Maximum credit.--The credit allowed under subsection
(a) for any taxable year shall not exceed $1,000 ($2,000 in
the case of a joint return).
``(2) Limitation based on adjusted gross income.--The
amount which would (but for this paragraph) be taken into
account under subsection (a) for the taxable year shall be
reduced (but not below zero) by 10 percent (20 percent in the
case of a joint return) of so much of the taxpayer's adjusted
gross income as exceeds $60,000 ($90,000 in the case of a
joint return).
``(c) Qualified Home Heating Oil Expenditures.--For
purposes of this section, the term `qualified home heating
oil expenditures' means any expenditures for the purchase of
heating oil that--
``(1) are made for the purpose of heating a dwelling unit
or heating water for use in a dwelling unit located in the
United States and used as a residence by the taxpayer, and
``(2) are made on or after June 1, 2008, and before January
1, 2009.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 24(b)(3)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 is amended by striking ``and 25B'' and inserting ``,
25B, and 25E''.
(2) Section 25(e)(1)(C)(ii) of such Code is amended by
inserting ``25E,'' after ``25D,''.
(3) Section 25B(g)(2) of such Code is amended by striking
``section 23'' and inserting ``sections 23 and 25E''.
(4) Section 25D(c)(2) of such Code is amended by striking
``and 25B'' and inserting ``25B, and 25E''.
(5) Section 26(a)(1) of such Code is amended by striking
``and 25B'' and inserting ``25B, and 25E''.
(6) Section 904(i) of such Code is amended by striking
``and 25B'' and inserting ``25B, and 25E''.
(7) Section 1400C(d)(2) of such Code is amended by striking
``and 25D'' and inserting ``25D, and 25E''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart
A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 25D
the following new item:

``Sec. 25E. Home heating oil expenditures.''.

SEC. 25. DENIAL OF DEDUCTION FOR MAJOR INTEGRATED OIL
COMPANIES FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO DOMESTIC
PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY PRODUCTS
THEREOF.

(a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 199(c)(4) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exceptions) is
amended by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (ii), by
striking the period at the end of clause (iii) and inserting
``, or'', and by inserting after clause (iii) the following
new clause:
``(iv) in the case of any major integrated oil company (as
defined in section 167(h)(5)(B)), the production, refining,
processing, transportation, or distribution of oil, gas, or
any primary product thereof during any taxable year described
in section 167(h)(5)(B).''.
(b) Primary Product.--Section 199(c)(4)(B) of such Code is
amended by adding at the end the following flush sentence:

``For purposes of clause (iv), the term `primary product' has
the same meaning as when used in section 927(a)(2)(C), as in
effect before its repeal.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2008.

SEC. 26. CLARIFICATION OF DETERMINATION OF FOREIGN OIL AND
GAS EXTRACTION INCOME.

(a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 907(c) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating
subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C), by striking ``or'' at
the end of subparagraph (A), and by inserting after
subparagraph (A) the following new subparagraph:
``(B) so much of any transportation of such minerals as
occurs before the fair market value event, or''.
(b) Fair Market Value Event.--Subsection (c) of section 907
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at
the end the following new paragraph:
``(6) Fair market value event.--For purposes of this
section, the term `fair market value event' means, with
respect to any mineral, the first point in time at which such
mineral--
``(A) has a fair market value which can be determined on
the basis of a transfer, which is an arm's length
transaction, of such mineral from the taxpayer to a person
who is not related (within the meaning of section 482) to
such taxpayer, or
``(B) is at a location at which the fair market value is
readily ascertainable by reason of transactions among
unrelated third parties with respect to the same mineral
(taking into account source, location, quality, and chemical
composition).''.
(c) Special Rule for Certain Petroleum Taxes.--Subsection
(c) of section 907 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended by subsection (b), is amended by adding at the end
the following new paragraph:
``(7) Oil and gas taxes.--In the case of any tax imposed by
a foreign country which is limited in its application to
taxpayers engaged in oil or gas activities--
``(A) the term `oil and gas extraction taxes' shall include
such tax,
``(B) the term `foreign oil and gas extraction income'
shall include any taxable income which is taken into account
in determining such tax (or is directly attributable to the
activity to which such tax relates), and
``(C) the term `foreign oil related income' shall not
include any taxable income which is treated as foreign oil
and gas extraction income under subparagraph (B).''.
(d) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Subparagraph (C) of section 907(c)(1) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as redesignated by this section, is
amended by inserting ``or used by the taxpayer in the
activity described in subparagraph (B)'' before the period at
the end.
(2) Subparagraph (B) of section 907(c)(2) of such Code is
amended to read as follows:
``(B) so much of the transportation of such minerals or
primary products as is not taken into account under paragraph
(1)(B),''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
______

SA 5137. Mr. COLEMAN (for himself, Mr. Domenici, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr.
McConnell, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Allard, Mr. Bond, Mr. Brownback, Mr.
Bunning, Mr. Burr, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Craig, Mr. Crapo, Mrs.
Dole, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Graham, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Martinez, Mr.
Roberts, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. Wicker, and Mr. Sununu)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S.
3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price
speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. ___. DEEP SEA EXPLORATION.

[[Page 16276]]

(2) in clause (i) (as so designated), by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of the Stop Excessive Energy
Speculation Act of 2008''; and
(3) by inserting after clause (i) (as so designated) the
following:
``(ii)(I) The projected lines shall also be used for the
purpose of preleasing and leasing activities conducted in new
producing areas under section 32.
``(II) This clause shall not affect any property right or
title to Federal submerged land on the outer Continental
Shelf.
``(III) In carrying out this clause, the President shall
consider the offshore administrative boundaries beyond State
submerged lands for planning, coordination, and
administrative purposes of the Department of the Interior,
but may establish different boundaries.''.
(b) Production of Oil and Natural Gas in New Producing
Areas.--The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331
et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 32. PRODUCTION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS IN NEW PRODUCING
AREAS.

``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Coastal political subdivision.--The term `coastal
political subdivision' means a political subdivision of a new
producing State any part of which political subdivision is--
``(A) within the coastal zone (as defined in section 304 of
the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1453)) of
the new producing State as of the date of enactment of this
section; and
``(B) not more than 200 nautical miles from the geographic
center of any leased tract.
``(2) Moratorium area.--
``(A) In general.--The term `moratorium area' means an area
covered by sections 104 through 105 of the Department of the
Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2118) (as in effect
on the day before the date of enactment of this section).
``(B) Exclusion.--The term `moratorium area' does not
include an area located in the Gulf of Mexico.
``(3) New producing area.--The term `new producing area'
means any moratorium area within the offshore administrative
boundaries beyond the submerged land of a State that is
located greater than 50 miles from the coastline of the
State.
``(4) New producing state.--The term `new producing State'
means a State that has, within the offshore administrative
boundaries beyond the submerged land of the State, a new
producing area available for oil and gas leasing under
subsection (b).
``(5) Offshore administrative boundaries.--The term
`offshore administrative boundaries' means the administrative
boundaries established by the Secretary beyond State
submerged land for planning, coordination, and administrative
purposes of the Department of the Interior and published in
the Federal Register on January 3, 2006 (71 Fed. Reg. 127).
``(6) Qualified outer continental shelf revenues.--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified outer Continental
Shelf revenues' means all rentals, royalties, bonus bids, and
other sums due and payable to the United States from leases
entered into on or after the date of enactment of this
section for new producing areas.
``(B) Exclusions.--The term `qualified outer Continental
Shelf revenues' does not include--
``(i) revenues from a bond or other surety forfeited for
obligations other than the collection of royalties;
``(ii) revenues from civil penalties;
``(iii) royalties taken by the Secretary in-kind and not
sold;
``(iv) revenues generated from leases subject to section
8(g); or
``(v) any revenues considered qualified outer Continental
Shelf revenues under section 102 of the Gulf of Mexico Energy
Security Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 note; Public Law 109-
432).
``(b) Petition for Leasing New Producing Areas.--
``(1) In general.--Beginning on the date on which the
President delineates projected State lines under section
4(a)(2)(A)(ii), the Governor of a State, with the concurrence
of the legislature of the State, with a new producing area
within the offshore administrative boundaries beyond the
submerged land of the State may submit to the Secretary a
petition requesting that the Secretary make the new producing
area available for oil and gas leasing.
``(2) Action by secretary.--Notwithstanding section 18, as
soon as practicable after receipt of a petition under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall approve the petition if
the Secretary determines that leasing the new producing area
would not create an unreasonable risk of harm to the marine,
human, or coastal environment.
``(c) Disposition of Qualified Outer Continental Shelf
Revenues From New Producing Areas.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 9 and subject to
the other provisions of this subsection, for each applicable
fiscal year, the Secretary of the Treasury shall deposit--
``(A) 50 percent of qualified outer Continental Shelf
revenues in the general fund of the Treasury; and
``(B) 50 percent of qualified outer Continental Shelf
revenues in a special account in the Treasury from which the
Secretary shall disburse--
``(i) 75 percent to new producing States in accordance with
paragraph (2); and
``(ii) 25 percent to provide financial assistance to States
in accordance with section 6 of the Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l -8), which
shall be considered income to the Land and Water Conservation
Fund for purposes of section 2 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 460l-
5).
``(2) Allocation to new producing states and coastal
political subdivisions.--
``(A) Allocation to new producing states.--Effective for
fiscal year 2008 and each fiscal year thereafter, the amount
made available under paragraph (1)(B)(i) shall be allocated
to each new producing State in amounts (based on a formula
established by the Secretary by regulation) proportional to
the amount of qualified outer Continental Shelf revenues
generated in the new producing area offshore each State.
``(B) Payments to coastal political subdivisions.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall pay 20 percent of
the allocable share of each new producing State, as
determined under subparagraph (A), to the coastal political
subdivisions of the new producing State.
``(ii) Allocation.--The amount paid by the Secretary to
coastal political subdivisions shall be allocated to each
coastal political subdivision in accordance with the
regulations promulgated under subparagraph (A).
``(3) Minimum allocation.--The amount allocated to a new
producing State for each fiscal year under paragraph (2)
shall be at least 5 percent of the amounts available for the
fiscal year under paragraph (1)(B)(i).
``(4) Timing.--The amounts required to be deposited under
subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) for the applicable fiscal
year shall be made available in accordance with that
subparagraph during the fiscal year immediately following the
applicable fiscal year.
``(5) Authorized uses.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), each new
producing State and coastal political subdivision shall use
all amounts received under paragraph (2) in accordance with
all applicable Federal and State laws, only for 1 or more of
the following purposes:
``(i) Projects and activities for the purposes of coastal
protection, including conservation, coastal restoration,
hurricane protection, and infrastructure directly affected by
coastal wetland losses.
``(ii) Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, or natural
resources.
``(iii) Implementation of a federally approved marine,
coastal, or comprehensive conservation management plan.
``(iv) Funding of onshore infrastructure projects.
``(v) Planning assistance and the administrative costs of
complying with this section.
``(B) Limitation.--Not more than 3 percent of amounts
received by a new producing State or coastal political
subdivision under paragraph (2) may be used for the purposes
described in subparagraph (A)(v).
``(6) Administration.--Amounts made available under
paragraph (1)(B) shall--
``(A) be made available, without further appropriation, in
accordance with this subsection;
``(B) remain available until expended; and
``(C) be in addition to any amounts appropriated under--
``(i) other provisions of this Act;
``(ii) the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16
U.S.C. 460l-4 et seq.); or
``(iii) any other provision of law.
``(d) Disposition of Qualified Outer Continental Shelf
Revenues From Other Areas.--Notwithstanding section 9, for
each applicable fiscal year, the terms and conditions of
subsection (c) shall apply to the disposition of qualified
outer Continental Shelf revenues that--
``(1) are derived from oil or gas leasing in an area that
is not included in the current 5-year plan of the Secretary
for oil or gas leasing; and
``(2) are not assumed in the budget of the United States
Government submitted by the President under section 1105 of
title 31, United States Code.''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--Sections 104 and 105 of the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2118)
are amended by striking ``No funds'' each place it appears
and inserting ``Except as provided in section 32 of the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act, no funds''.

SEC. __. ADVANCED BATTERIES FOR ELECTRIC DRIVE VEHICLES.

[[Page 16277]]

(B) the design of tooling and equipment and the development
of manufacturing processes and material for suppliers of
production facilities that produce qualifying components or
advanced batteries.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.
(b) Advanced Battery Research and Development.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall--
(A) expand and accelerate research and development efforts
for advanced batteries; and
(B) emphasize lower cost means of producing abuse-tolerant
advanced batteries with the appropriate balance of power and
energy capacity to meet market requirements.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $100,000,000
for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014.
(c) Direct Loan Program.--
(1) In general.--Subject to the availability of
appropriated funds, not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall carry out a
program to provide a total of not more than $250,000,000 in
loans to eligible individuals and entities for not more than
30 percent of the costs of 1 or more of--
(A) reequipping a manufacturing facility in the United
States to produce advanced batteries;
(B) expanding a manufacturing facility in the United States
to produce advanced batteries; or
(C) establishing a manufacturing facility in the United
States to produce advanced batteries.
(2) Eligibility.--
(A) In general.--To be eligible to obtain a loan under this
subsection, an individual or entity shall--
(i) be financially viable without the receipt of additional
Federal funding associated with a proposed project under this
subsection;
(ii) provide sufficient information to the Secretary for
the Secretary to ensure that the qualified investment is
expended efficiently and effectively; and
(iii) meet such other criteria as may be established and
published by the Secretary.
(B) Consideration.--In selecting eligible individuals or
entities for loans under this subsection, the Secretary may
consider whether the proposed project of an eligible
individual or entity under this subsection would--
(i) reduce manufacturing time;
(ii) reduce manufacturing energy intensity;
(iii) reduce negative environmental impacts or byproducts;
or
(iv) increase spent battery or component recycling
(3) Rates, terms, and repayment of loans.--A loan provided
under this subsection--
(A) shall have an interest rate that, as of the date on
which the loan is made, is equal to the cost of funds to the
Department of the Treasury for obligations of comparable
maturity;
(B) shall have a term that is equal to the lesser of--
(i) the projected life, in years, of the eligible project
to be carried out using funds from the loan, as determined by
the Secretary; or
(ii) 25 years; and
(C) may be subject to a deferral in repayment for not more
than 5 years after the date on which the eligible project
carried out using funds from the loan first begins
operations, as determined by the Secretary.
(4) Period of availability.--A loan under this subsection
shall be available for--
(A) facilities and equipment placed in service before
December 30, 2020; and
(B) engineering integration costs incurred during the
period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act and
ending on December 30, 2020.
(5) Fees.--The cost of administering a loan made under this
subsection shall not exceed $100,000.
(6) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this subsection for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013.
(d) Sense of the Senate on Purchase of Plug-in Electric
Drive Vehicles.--It is the sense of the Senate that, to the
maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government should
implement policies to increase the purchase of plug-in
electric drive vehicles by the Federal Government.
______

SA 5138. Mr. BARRASSO (for himself, Mr. Bunning, and Mr. Enzi)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S.
3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price
speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. PROCUREMENT OF UNCONVENTIONAL FUEL BY DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE.

(a) Procurement Authorized.--Subchapter II of chapter 173
of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the
end the following new section:

``SEC. 2922G. PROCUREMENT OF UNCONVENTIONAL FUEL.

``(a) Long Term Contracts for Unconventional Fuel.--The
Secretary of Defense may enter into contracts for the
procurement of unconventional fuel. The term of any contract
under this section may be such period as the Secretary
considers appropriate, but not more than 25 years.
``(b) Waiver Authority.--(1) In procuring unconventional
fuel, the Secretary may waive the application of any
provision of law prescribing procedures to be followed in the
formation of contracts, prescribing terms and conditions to
be included in contracts, or regulating the performance of
contracts if the Secretary determines that--
``(A) the waiver is necessary to procure such
unconventional fuel for Government needs; and
``(B) in the case of a contract for a term in excess of
five years, it would not be possible to procure such
unconventional fuel from the source in an economical manner
without the use of a contract for a period in excess of five
years.
``(2) Any waiver that is applicable to a contract for the
procurement of unconventional fuel under this subsection may
also, at the election of the Secretary, apply to a
subcontract under that contract.
``(c) Pricing Authority for Unconventional Fuel Purchased
From Domestic Sources.--(1) The Secretary shall ensure that
any purchase of unconventional fuel under a contract under
this section is cost effective for the Department of Defense.
``(2) The Secretary may procure unconventional fuel from
domestic sources at a price higher than comparable petroleum
products, or include a price guarantee for the procurement of
unconventional fuel from such sources, if the Secretary
determines that--
``(A) such price is necessary to develop or maintain an
assured supply of unconventional fuel produced from domestic
sources; and
``(B) supplies of unconventional fuel from domestic sources
cannot be effectively increased or obtained at lower prices.
``(d) Obligation of Funds.--At the time of award of any
contract for the procurement of unconventional fuel under
this section in excess of one year, the Secretary may
obligate annually funds sufficient to cover the annual costs
of the contract. In the event that funds are not available
for the continuation of the contract in any subsequent years,
the contract shall be cancelled or terminated. The Secretary
may fund any cancellation or termination liability out of
funds originally available at the time of award, funds
currently available at the time termination liability is
incurred, or funds specifically appropriated for those
payments.
``(e) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `domestic source' means a facility
(including feedstock) located physically in the United States
that produces or generates unconventional fuel.
``(2) The term `unconventional fuel' means transportation
fuel that is derived from a feedstock other than conventional
petroleum and includes transportation services related to the
delivery of such fuel.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of subchapter II of chapter 173 of such title is
amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``2922g. Procurement of unconventional fuel.''.

SEC. __. REDUCTION OF GASOLINE CONSUMPTION BY FEDERAL
AGENCIES.

The President shall take such action as is necessary to
ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that Federal
agencies (other than agencies of the Department of Defense),
individually and collectively, reduce consumption of gasoline
during fiscal year 2009 and each subsequent fiscal year by
not less than 2 percent from the level of gasoline consumed
by the Federal agencies during fiscal year 2007.
______

SA 5139. Mr. BARRASSO submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

TITLE II--ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE

SEC. 21. TAX-EXEMPT FINANCING OF ENERGY TRANSPORTATION
INFRASTRUCTURE NOT SUBJECT TO PRIVATE BUSINESS
USE TESTS.

(a) In General.--Section 141(b)(6) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (defining private business use) is amended by
adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(C) Exception for certain energy transportation
infrastructure.--
``(i) In general.--For purposes of the 1st sentence of
subparagraph (A), the operation or use of any property
described in clause (ii) by any person which is not a
governmental unit shall not be considered a private business
use.
``(ii) Property described.--For purposes of clause (i), the
following property is described in this clause:

[[Page 16278]]

``(I) Any tangible property used to transmit electricity at
230 or more kilovolts if such property is placed in service
as part of a State or multi-State effort to improve
interstate electricity transmission and is physically located
in not less than 2 States.
``(II) Any tangible property used to transmit electricity
generated from renewable resources.
``(III) Any tangible property used as a transmission
pipeline for crude oil or diesel fuel produced from coal or
other synthetic petroleum products produced from coal if such
property is placed in service as part of a State or multi-
State effort to improve the transportation of crude oil or
diesel fuel produced from coal or other synthetic petroleum
products produced from coal.
``(IV) Any tangible property used as a carbon dioxide
transmission pipeline if such property is placed in service
as part of a State or multi-State effort to improve
interstate or intrastate efforts to develop transportation
infrastructure for purposes of permanently sequestering
carbon dioxide.''.

(b) Exception to Private Loan Financing Test.--Section
141(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
exception for tax assessment, etc., loans) is amended--
(1) by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (B),
(2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (C)
and inserting ``, or'', and
(3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(D) enables the borrower to finance any property
described in subsection (b)(6)(C)(ii).''.
(c) Reduction of State Volume Cap by Amount of Energy
Transportation Infrastructure Financing.--Section 146 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to volume cap) is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(o) Reduction for Energy Transportation Infrastructure
Financing.--The volume cap of any issuing authority for any
calendar year shall be reduced by the amount of bonds issued
as part of an issue by such authority to provide for property
described in section 141(b)(6)(C)(ii).''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to bonds issued after the date of the enactment
of this Act and before December 31, 2015.

SEC. 22. LIMITATION ON DISCRIMINATORY TAXATION OF CERTAIN
PIPELINE PROPERTY.

(a) Definitions.--For purposes of section:
(1) Assessment.--The term ``assessment'' means valuation
for a property tax levied by a taxing authority.
(2) Assessment jurisdiction.--The term ``assessment
jurisdiction'' means a geographical area used in determining
the assessed value of property for ad valorem taxation.
(3) Commercial and industrial property.--The term
``commercial and industrial property'' means property
(excluding pipeline property, public utility property, and
land used primarily for agricultural purposes or timber
growth) devoted to commercial or industrial use and subject
to a property tax levy.
(4) Pipeline property.--The term ``pipeline property''
means all property, real, personal, and intangible, owned or
used by a natural gas pipeline providing transportation or
storage of natural gas, subject to the jurisdiction of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
(5) Public utility property.--The term ``public utility
property'' means property (excluding pipeline property) that
is devoted to public service and is owned or used by any
entity that performs a public service and is regulated by any
governmental agency.
(b) Discriminatory Acts.--The acts specified in this
subsection unreasonably burden and discriminate against
interstate commerce. A State, subdivision of a State,
authority acting for a State or subdivision of a State, or
any other taxing authority (including a taxing jurisdiction
and a taxing district) may not do any of the following such
acts:
(1) Assess pipeline property at a value that has a higher
ratio to the true market value of the pipeline property than
the ratio that the assessed value of other commercial and
industrial property in the same assessment jurisdiction has
to the true market value of the other commercial and
industrial property.
(2) Levy or collect a tax on an assessment that may not be
made under paragraph (1).
(3) Levy or collect an ad valorem property tax on pipeline
property at a tax rate that exceeds the tax rate applicable
to commercial and industrial property in the same assessment
jurisdiction.
(4) Impose any other tax that discriminates against a
pipeline providing transportation subject to the jurisdiction
of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
(c) Jurisdiction of Courts; Relief.--
(1) Grant of jurisdiction.--Notwithstanding section 1341 of
title 28, United States Code, and notions of comity, and
without regard to the amount in controversy or citizenship of
the parties, the district courts of the United States shall
have jurisdiction, concurrent with other jurisdiction of the
courts of the United States, of States, and of all other
taxing authorities and taxing jurisdictions, to prevent a
violation of subsection (b).
(2) Relief.--Except as otherwise provided in this
paragraph, relief may be granted under this Act only if the
ratio of assessed value to true market value of pipeline
property exceeds by at least 5 percent the ratio of assessed
value to true market value of other commercial and industrial
property in the same assessment jurisdiction. If the ratio of
the assessed value of other commercial and industrial
property in the assessment jurisdiction to the true market
value of all other commercial and industrial property cannot
be determined to the satisfaction of the court through the
random-sampling method known as a sales assessment ratio
study (to be carried out under statistical principles
applicable to such a study), each of the following shall be a
violation of subsection (b) for which relief under this
section may be granted:
(A) An assessment of the pipeline property at a value that
has a higher ratio of assessed value to the true market value
of the pipeline property than the ratio of the assessed value
of all other property (excluding public utility property)
subject to a property tax levy in the assessment jurisdiction
has to the true market value of all other property (excluding
public utility property).
(B) The collection of an ad valorem property tax on the
pipeline property at a tax rate that exceeds the tax rate
applicable to all other taxable property (excluding public
utility property) in the taxing jurisdiction.

SEC. 23. NATURAL GAS PIPELINE INTEGRITY REASSESSMENT
INTERVALS BASED ON RISK.

(a) In General.--Section 60109(c)(3)(B) of title 49, United
States Code, is amended by inserting ``, until the Secretary
issues regulations basing the reassessment intervals on
technical data, risk factors, and engineering analysis,
consistent with the recommendations of the Comptroller
General of the United States in Report 06-945'' after
``subparagraph (A)''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
______

SA 5140. Mr. SHELBY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end, add the following:

TITLE II--NEW AND REAUTHORIZED PRODUCING AREAS

Subtitle A--Leasing Program for Land Within Coastal Plain

SEC. 201. DEFINITIONS.

In this subtitle:
(1) Coastal plain.--The term ``Coastal Plain'' means that
area identified as the ``1002 Coastal Plain Area'' on the
map.
(2) Federal agreement.--The term ``Federal Agreement''
means the Federal Agreement and Grant Right-of-Way for the
Trans-Alaska Pipeline issued on January 23, 1974, in
accordance with section 28 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30
U.S.C. 185) and the Trans- Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act
(43 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.).
(3) Final statement.--The term ``Final Statement'' means
the final legislative environmental impact statement on the
Coastal Plain, dated April 1987, and prepared pursuant to
section 1002 of the Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3142) and section 102(2)(C) of
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(C)).
(4) Map.--The term ``map'' means the map entitled ``Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge'', dated September 2005, and
prepared by the United States Geological Survey.
(5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior (or the designee of the Secretary), acting
through the Director of the Bureau of Land Management in
consultation with the Director of the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service and in coordination with a State coordinator
appointed by the Governor of the State of Alaska.

SEC. 202. LEASING PROGRAM FOR LAND WITHIN THE COASTAL PLAIN.

[[Page 16279]]

(i) ensure the oil and gas exploration, development, and
production activities on the Coastal Plain will result in no
significant adverse effect on fish and wildlife, their
habitat, subsistence resources, and the environment; and
(ii) require the application of the best commercially
available technology for oil and gas exploration,
development, and production to all exploration, development,
and production operations under this subtitle in a manner
that ensures the receipt of fair market value by the public
for the mineral resources to be leased.
(b) Repeal.--
(1) Repeal.--Section 1003 of the Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3143) is repealed.
(2) Conforming amendment.--The table of contents contained
in section 1 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 3101 note) is amended by
striking the item relating to section 1003.
(c) Compliance With Requirements Under Certain Other
Laws.--
(1) Compatibility.--For purposes of the National Wildlife
Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et
seq.)--
(A) the oil and gas pre-leasing and leasing program, and
activities authorized by this section in the Coastal Plain,
shall be considered to be compatible with the purposes for
which the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was established;
and
(B) no further findings or decisions shall be required to
implement that program and those activities.
(2) Adequacy of the department of the interior's
legislative environmental impact statement.--The Final
Statement shall be considered to satisfy the requirements
under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) that apply with respect to pre-leasing
activities, including exploration programs and actions
authorized to be taken by the Secretary to develop and
promulgate the regulations for the establishment of a leasing
program authorized by this subtitle before the conduct of the
first lease sale.
(3) Compliance with nepa for other actions.--
(A) In general.--Before conducting the first lease sale
under this subtitle, the Secretary shall prepare an
environmental impact statement in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) with respect to the actions authorized by this subtitle
that are not referred to in paragraph (2).
(B) Identification and analysis.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, in carrying out this paragraph, the
Secretary shall not be required--
(i) to identify nonleasing alternative courses of action;
or
(ii) to analyze the environmental effects of those courses
of action.
(C) Identification of preferred action.--Not later than 18
months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall--
(i) identify only a preferred action and a single leasing
alternative for the first lease sale authorized under this
subtitle; and
(ii) analyze the environmental effects and potential
mitigation measures for those 2 alternatives.
(D) Public comments.--In carrying out this paragraph, the
Secretary shall consider only public comments that are filed
not later than 20 days after the date of publication of a
draft environmental impact statement.
(E) Effect of compliance.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, compliance with this paragraph shall be
considered to satisfy all requirements for the analysis and
consideration of the environmental effects of proposed
leasing under this subtitle.
(d) Relationship to State and Local Authority.--Nothing in
this subtitle expands or limits any State or local regulatory
authority.
(e) Special Areas.--
(1) Designation.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary, after consultation with the
State of Alaska, the North Slope Borough, Alaska, and the
City of Kaktovik, Alaska, may designate not more than 45,000
acres of the Coastal Plain as a special area if the Secretary
determines that the special area would be of such unique
character and interest as to require special management and
regulatory protection.
(B) Sadlerochit spring area.--The Secretary shall designate
as a special area in accordance with subparagraph (A) the
Sadlerochit Spring area, comprising approximately 4,000 acres
as depicted on the map.
(2) Management.--The Secretary shall manage each special
area designated under this subsection in a manner that--
(A) respects and protects the Native people of the area;
and
(B) preserves the unique and diverse character of the area,
including fish, wildlife, subsistence resources, and cultural
values of the area.
(3) Exclusion from leasing or surface occupancy.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary may exclude any special area
designated under this subsection from leasing.
(B) No surface occupancy.--If the Secretary leases all or a
portion of a special area for the purposes of oil and gas
exploration, development, production, and related activities,
there shall be no surface occupancy of the land comprising
the special area.
(4) Directional drilling.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this subsection, the Secretary may lease all or
a portion of a special area under terms that permit the use
of horizontal drilling technology from sites on leases
located outside the special area.
(f) Limitation on Closed Areas.--The Secretary may not
close land within the Coastal Plain to oil and gas leasing or
to exploration, development, or production except in
accordance with this subtitle.
(g) Regulations.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 15 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, in consultation with appropriate
agencies of the State of Alaska, the North Slope Borough,
Alaska, and the City of Kaktovik, Alaska, the Secretary shall
issue such regulations as are necessary to carry out this
subtitle, including rules and regulations relating to
protection of the fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife
habitat, and subsistence resources of the Coastal Plain.
(2) Revision of regulations.--The Secretary may
periodically review and, as appropriate, revise the rules and
regulations issued under paragraph (1) to reflect any
significant scientific or engineering data that come to the
attention of the Secretary.

SEC. 203. LEASE SALES.

SEC. 204. GRANT OF LEASES BY THE SECRETARY.

(a) In General.--Upon payment by a lessee of such bonus as
may be accepted by the Secretary, the Secretary may grant to
the highest responsible qualified bidder in a lease sale
conducted pursuant to section 203 a lease for any land on the
Coastal Plain.
(b) Subsequent Transfers.--
(1) In general.--No lease issued under this subtitle may be
sold, exchanged, assigned, sublet, or otherwise transferred
except with the approval of the Secretary.
(2) Condition for approval.--Before granting any approval
described in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consult with
and give due consideration to the opinion of the Attorney
General.

SEC. 205. LEASE TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

[[Page 16280]]

(B) upon application by the lessee, to a higher or better
standard, as approved by the Secretary;
(6) contain terms and conditions relating to protection of
fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, subsistence
resources, and the environment as required under section
202(a)(2);
(7) provide that each lessee, and each agent and contractor
of a lessee, use their best efforts to provide a fair share
of employment and contracting for Alaska Natives and Alaska
Native Corporations from throughout the State of Alaska, as
determined by the level of obligation previously agreed to in
the Federal Agreement; and
(8) contain such other provisions as the Secretary
determines to be necessary to ensure compliance with this
subtitle and regulations issued under this subtitle.
(b) Project Labor Agreements.--The Secretary, as a term and
condition of each lease under this subtitle, and in
recognizing the proprietary interest of the Federal
Government in labor stability and in the ability of
construction labor and management to meet the particular
needs and conditions of projects to be developed under the
leases issued pursuant to this subtitle (including the
special concerns of the parties to those leases), shall
require that each lessee, and each agent and contractor of a
lessee, under this subtitle negotiate to obtain a project
labor agreement for the employment of laborers and mechanics
on production, maintenance, and construction under the lease.

SEC. 206. COASTAL PLAIN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.

(a) No Significant Adverse Effect Standard To Govern
Authorized Coastal Plain Activities.--In accordance with
section 202, the Secretary shall administer this subtitle
through regulations, lease terms, conditions, restrictions,
prohibitions, stipulations, or other provisions that--
(1) ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that oil and
gas exploration, development, and production activities on
the Coastal Plain will result in no significant adverse
effect on fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, and
the environment;
(2) require the application of the best commercially
available technology for oil and gas exploration,
development, and production on all new exploration,
development, and production operations; and
(3) ensure that the maximum surface acreage covered in
connection with the leasing program by production and support
facilities, including airstrips and any areas covered by
gravel berms or piers for support of pipelines, does not
exceed 2,000 acres on the Coastal Plain.
(b) Site-Specific Assessment and Mitigation.--The Secretary
shall require, with respect to any proposed drilling and
related activities on the Coastal Plain, that--
(1) a site-specific environmental analysis be made of the
probable effects, if any, that the drilling or related
activities will have on fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife
habitat, subsistence resources, subsistence uses, and the
environment;
(2) a plan be implemented to avoid, minimize, and mitigate
(in that order and to the maximum extent practicable) any
significant adverse effect identified under paragraph (1);
and
(3) the development of the plan occur after consultation
with--
(A) each agency having jurisdiction over matters mitigated
by the plan;
(B) the State of Alaska;
(C) North Slope Borough, Alaska; and
(D) the City of Kaktovik, Alaska.
(c) Regulations To Protect Coastal Plain Fish and Wildlife
Resources, Subsistence Users, and the Environment.--Before
implementing the leasing program authorized by this subtitle,
the Secretary shall prepare and issue regulations, lease
terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, stipulations,
or other measures designed to ensure, to the maximum extent
practicable, that the activities carried out on the Coastal
Plain under this subtitle are conducted in a manner
consistent with the purposes and environmental requirements
of this subtitle.
(d) Compliance With Federal and State Environmental Laws
and Other Requirements.--The proposed regulations, lease
terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, and
stipulations for the leasing program under this subtitle
shall require--
(1) compliance with all applicable provisions of Federal
and State environmental law (including regulations);
(2) implementation of and compliance with--
(A) standards that are at least as effective as the safety
and environmental mitigation measures, as described in items
1 through 29 on pages 167 through 169 of the Final Statement,
on the Coastal Plain;
(B) seasonal limitations on exploration, development, and
related activities, as necessary, to avoid significant
adverse effects during periods of concentrated fish and
wildlife breeding, denning, nesting, spawning, and migration;
(C) design safety and construction standards for all
pipelines and any access and service roads that minimize, to
the maximum extent practicable, adverse effects on--
(i) the passage of migratory species (such as caribou); and
(ii) the flow of surface water by requiring the use of
culverts, bridges, or other structural devices;
(D) prohibitions on general public access to, and use of,
all pipeline access and service roads;
(E) stringent reclamation and rehabilitation requirements
in accordance with this subtitle for the removal from the
Coastal Plain of all oil and gas development and production
facilities, structures, and equipment on completion of oil
and gas production operations, except in a case in which the
Secretary determines that those facilities, structures, or
equipment--
(i) would assist in the management of the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge; and
(ii) are donated to the United States for that purpose;
(F) appropriate prohibitions or restrictions on--
(i) access by all modes of transportation;
(ii) sand and gravel extraction; and
(iii) use of explosives;
(G) reasonable stipulations for protection of cultural and
archaeological resources;
(H) measures to protect groundwater and surface water,
including--
(i) avoidance, to the maximum extent practicable, of
springs, streams, and river systems;
(ii) the protection of natural surface drainage patterns
and wetland and riparian habitats; and
(iii) the regulation of methods or techniques for
developing or transporting adequate supplies of water for
exploratory drilling; and
(I) research, monitoring, and reporting requirements;
(3) that exploration activities (except surface geological
studies) be limited to the period between approximately
November 1 and May 1 of each year and be supported, if
necessary, by ice roads, winter trails with adequate snow
cover, ice pads, ice airstrips, and air transport methods
(except that those exploration activities may be permitted at
other times if the Secretary determines that the exploration
will have no significant adverse effect on fish and wildlife,
fish and wildlife habitat, subsistence resources, and the
environment of the Coastal Plain);
(4) consolidation of facility siting;
(5) avoidance or reduction of air traffic-related
disturbance to fish and wildlife;
(6) treatment and disposal of hazardous and toxic wastes,
solid wastes, reserve pit fluids, drilling muds and cuttings,
and domestic wastewater, including, in accordance with
applicable Federal and State environmental laws (including
regulations)--
(A) preparation of an annual waste management report;
(B) development and implementation of a hazardous materials
tracking system; and
(C) prohibition on the use of chlorinated solvents;
(7) fuel storage and oil spill contingency planning;
(8) conduct of periodic field crew environmental briefings;
(9) avoidance of significant adverse effects on subsistence
hunting, fishing, and trapping;
(10) compliance with applicable air and water quality
standards;
(11) appropriate seasonal and safety zone designations
around well sites, within which subsistence hunting and
trapping shall be limited; and
(12) development and implementation of such other
protective environmental requirements, restrictions, terms,
or conditions as the Secretary, after consultation with the
State of Alaska, North Slope Borough, Alaska, and the City of
Kaktovik, Alaska, determines to be necessary.
(e) Considerations.--In preparing and issuing regulations,
lease terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, or
stipulations under this section, the Secretary shall take
into consideration--
(1) the stipulations and conditions that govern the
National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska leasing program, as set
forth in the 1999 Northeast National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska
Final Integrated Activity Plan/Environmental Impact
Statement;
(2) the environmental protection standards that governed
the initial Coastal Plain seismic exploration program under
parts 37.31 through 37.33 of title 50, Code of Federal
Regulations (or successor regulations); and
(3) the land use stipulations for exploratory drilling on
the KIC-ASRC private land described in Appendix 2 of the
agreement between Arctic Slope Regional Corporation and the
United States dated August 9, 1983.
(f) Facility Consolidation Planning.--
(1) In general.--After providing for public notice and
comment, the Secretary shall prepare and periodically update
a plan to govern, guide, and direct the siting and
construction of facilities for the exploration, development,
production, and transportation of oil and gas resources from
the Coastal Plain.
(2) Objectives.--The objectives of the plan shall be--
(A) the avoidance of unnecessary duplication of facilities
and activities;
(B) the encouragement of consolidation of common facilities
and activities;
(C) the location or confinement of facilities and
activities to areas that will minimize impact on fish and
wildlife, fish and

[[Page 16281]]

wildlife habitat, subsistence resources, and the environment;
(D) the use of existing facilities, to the maximum extent
practicable; and
(E) the enhancement of compatibility between wildlife
values and development activities.
(g) Access to Public Land.--The Secretary shall--
(1) manage public land in the Coastal Plain in accordance
with subsections (a) and (b) of section 811 of the Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3121);
and
(2) ensure that local residents shall have reasonable
access to public land in the Coastal Plain for traditional
uses.

SEC. 207. EXPEDITED JUDICIAL REVIEW.

SEC. 208. RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS ACROSS COASTAL PLAIN.

SEC. 209. CONVEYANCE.

SEC. 210. LOCAL GOVERNMENT IMPACT AID AND COMMUNITY SERVICE
ASSISTANCE.

(a) Establishment of Fund.--
(1) In general.--As a condition on the receipt of funds
under section 212(2), the State of Alaska shall establish in
the treasury of the State, and administer in accordance with
this section, a fund to be known as the ``Coastal Plain Local
Government Impact Aid Assistance Fund'' (referred to in this
section as the ``Fund'').
(2) Deposits.--Subject to paragraph (1), the Secretary of
the Treasury shall deposit into the Fund, $35,000,000 each
year from the amount available under section 212(2)(A).
(3) Investment.--The Governor of the State of Alaska
(referred to in this section as the ``Governor'') shall
invest amounts in the Fund in interest-bearing securities of
the United States or the State of Alaska.
(b) Assistance.--The Governor, in cooperation with the
Mayor of the North Slope Borough, shall use amounts in the
Fund to provide assistance to North Slope Borough, Alaska,
the City of Kaktovik, Alaska, and any other borough,
municipal subdivision, village, or other community in the
State of Alaska that is directly impacted by exploration for,
or the production of, oil or gas on the Coastal Plain under
this subtitle, or any Alaska Native Regional Corporation
acting on behalf of the villages and communities within its
region whose lands lie along the right of way of the Trans
Alaska Pipeline System, as determined by the Governor.
(c) Application.--
(1) In general.--To receive assistance under subsection
(b), a community or Regional Corporation described in that
subsection shall submit to the Governor, or to the Mayor of
the North Slope Borough, an application in such time, in such
manner, and containing such information as the Governor may
require.
(2) Action by north slope borough.--The Mayor of the North
Slope Borough shall submit to the Governor each application
received under paragraph (1) as soon as practicable after the
date on which the application is received.
(3) Assistance of governor.--The Governor shall assist
communities in submitting applications under this subsection,
to the maximum extent practicable.
(d) Use of Funds.--A community or Regional Corporation that
receives funds under subsection (b) may use the funds--
(1) to plan for mitigation, implement a mitigation plan, or
maintain a mitigation project to address the potential
effects of oil and gas exploration and development on
environmental, social, cultural, recreational, and
subsistence resources of the community;
(2) to develop, carry out, and maintain--
(A) a project to provide new or expanded public facilities;
or
(B) services to address the needs and problems associated
with the effects described in paragraph (1), including
firefighting, police, water and waste treatment, first
responder, and other medical services;
(3) to compensate residents of the Coastal Plain for
significant damage to environmental, social, cultural,
recreational, or subsistence resources; and
(4) in the City of Kaktovik, Alaska--
(A) to develop a mechanism for providing members of the
Kaktovikmiut Inupiat community an opportunity to--
(i) monitor development on the Coastal Plain; and
(ii) provide information and recommendations to the
Governor based on traditional aboriginal knowledge of the
natural resources, flora, fauna, and ecological processes of
the Coastal Plain; and
(B) to establish a local coordination office, to be managed
by the Mayor of the North Slope Borough, in coordination with
the City of Kaktovik, Alaska--
(i) to coordinate with and advise developers on local
conditions and the history of areas affected by development;
(ii) to provide to the Committee on Resources of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate annual reports on the status of the
coordination between developers and communities affected by
development;
(iii) to collect from residents of the Coastal Plain
information regarding the impacts of development on fish,
wildlife, habitats, subsistence resources, and the
environment of the Coastal Plain; and
(iv) to ensure that the information collected under clause
(iii) is submitted to--

(I) developers; and
(II) any appropriate Federal agency.

SEC. 211. PROHIBITION ON EXPORTS.

An oil lease issued under this subtitle shall prohibit the
exportation of oil produced under the lease.

SEC. 212. ALLOCATION OF REVENUES.

Notwithstanding the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et
seq.) or any other provision of law, the adjusted bonus,
rental, and royalty receipts from Federal oil and gas leasing
and operations authorized under this subtitle shall be
deposited in accordance with section 222(b).

Subtitle B--Repeal of Moratoria and Disposition of Qualified Revenues

SEC. 221. REPEAL OF MORATORIA.

(a) Commercial Oil Shale Leasing.--Section 433 of the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2152)
is repealed.
(b) Outer Continental Shelf Leasing.--Sections 104 and 105
of the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-161; 121
Stat. 2118) are repealed.

SEC. 222. DISPOSITION OF QUALIFIED REVENUES FROM NEW
PRODUCING AREAS.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Fund.--The term ``Fund'' means the Energy Independence
Trust Fund established by subsection (c)(1).
(2) New producing area.--The term ``new producing area''
means--
(A) an area covered by sections 104 through 105 of the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2118)
(as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this
section) that is located greater than 50 miles from the
coastline of the State;
(B) an area available for leasing under section 369(e) of
the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15927(e)); or
(C) the Coastal Plain (as defined in section 201).
(3) Qualified revenue.--The term ``qualified revenue''
means the Federal share of all

[[Page 16282]]

rentals, royalties, bonus bids, and other sums due and
payable to the United States from leases entered into on or
after the date of enactment of this Act for new producing
areas under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C.
1331 et seq.) or section 369(e) of the Energy Policy Act of
2005 (42 U.S.C. 15927(e)).
(b) Disposition of Qualified Revenues.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law--
(A) 20 percent of qualified revenues shall be deposited in
the Highway Trust Fund; and
(B) 80 percent of qualified revenues shall be deposited in
the Fund.
(2) Limitation.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (A) of
paragraph (1), the total amount to be deposited under that
subparagraph for any fiscal year shall not exceed the deficit
in the Highway Trust Fund for the preceding fiscal year.
(c) Energy Independence Trust Fund.--
(1) Establishment.--There is established in the Treasury of
the United States a revolving fund, to be known as the
``Energy Independence Trust Fund'', consisting of such
amounts as are deposited under subsection (b)(1)(B).
(2) Expenditures from fund.--On request by the Secretary of
Energy, the Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer from the
Fund to the Secretary of Energy such amounts as the Secretary
of Energy determines are necessary to provide competitive
grants for--
(A) the conduct of research on, and the development of,
alternative fuels, energy conservation products, and products
that develop and use energy in manners that are safer,
cleaner, and more efficient than similar existing products;
and
(B) activities to provide information to the public on the
benefits of energy conservation.
(3) Transfers of amounts.--
(A) In general.--The amounts required to be transferred to
the Fund under this subsection shall be transferred at least
monthly from the general fund of the Treasury to the Fund on
the basis of estimates made by the Secretary of the Treasury.
(B) Adjustments.--Proper adjustment shall be made in
amounts subsequently transferred to the extent prior
estimates were in excess of or less than the amounts required
to be transferred.
______

SA 5141. Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 3268, to amend
the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

In section 4(e)(1)(B)(iii) of the Commodity Exchange Act
(as added by section 3), strike ``legitimate and
nonlegitimate hedge trading'' and insert ``bona fide and non-
bona fide hedge trading (as those terms are defined in
section 4a(h)(1))''.
In section 4a(g) of the Commodity Exchange Act (as added by
section 5), strike ``nonlegitimate hedge trading'' and insert
``non-bona fide hedge trading (as defined in section
4a(h)(1))''.
In section 4a(h) of the Commodity Exchange Act (as added by
section 6)--
(1) in the heading, strike ``Nonlegitimate Hedge'' and
insert ``Non-Bona Fide Hedge'';
(2) strike paragraph (1) and insert the following:
``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(A) Bona fide hedge trade.--
``(i) In general.--The term `bona fide hedge trade' means a
transaction that--

``(I) represents a substitute for a transaction to be made
or a position to be taken at a later time in a physical
marketing channel;
``(II) is economically appropriate for the reduction of
risks in the conduct and management of a commercial
enterprise; and
``(III) arises from the potential change in the value of--

``(aa) assets that a person owns, produces, manufactures,
possesses, or merchandises (or anticipates owning, producing,
manufacturing, possessing, or merchandising);
``(bb) liabilities that a person incurs or anticipates
incurring; or
``(cc) services that a person provides or purchases (or
anticipates providing or purchasing).
``(ii) Exclusion.--The term `bona fide hedge trade' does
not include a transaction entered into on a designated
contract market for the purpose of offsetting a financial
risk arising from an over-the-counter commodity derivative.
``(B) Non-bona fide hedge trade.--The term `non-bona fide
hedge trade' means a transaction that is not a bona fide
hedge trade.'';
(3) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in the heading, strike ``legitimate hedge'' and insert
``bona fide hedge''; and
(B) in subparagraph (A), strike ``legitimate hedge'' and
insert ``bona fide hedge'';
(4) in paragraph (3)(A), strike ``legitimate hedge'' and
insert ``bona fide hedge''; and
(5) in paragraph (4)--
(A) in subparagraph (A)(i), strike ``legitimate hedge'' and
insert ``bona fide hedge'';
(B) in subparagraph (B)(i), strike ``legitimate hedge'' and
insert ``bona fide hedge'';
(C) in subparagraph (C)--
(i) in the heading, strike ``nonlegitimate hedge'' and
insert ``non-bona fide hedge'';
(ii) in clause (i)(I), strike ``legitimate hedge'' and
insert ``bona fide hedge'';
(iii) in clause (ii)(II)(aa), strike ``legitimate hedge''
and insert ``bona fide hedge'';
(iv) in clause (iv)(I)(aa), strike ``nonlegitimate hedge''
and insert ``non-bona fide hedge''; and
(v) in clause (v)(I), in the matter preceding item (aa),
strike ``nonlegitimate traders'' and insert ``non-bona fide
traders''; and
(D) in subparagraph (D)(i)--
(i) in subclause (I), strike ``legitimate hedging'' and
insert ``bona fide hedging'';
(ii) in subclause (III), strike ``legitimate hedge'' and
insert ``bona fide hedge''; and
(iii) in subclause (IV), strike ``nonlegitimate hedge'' and
insert ``non-bona fide hedge''.
In section 2(j) of the Commodity Exchange Act (as added by
section 7)--
(1) in paragraph (1)(C)(iii), strike ``nonlegitimate hedge
trading'' and insert ``non-bona fide hedge trading (as
defined in section 4a(h)(1))''; and
(2) in paragraph (3)(B)(iii), strike ``legitimate hedge
trading from nonlegitimate hedge trading'' and insert ``bona
fide hedge trading from non-bona fide hedge trading (as those
terms are defined in section 4a(h)(1))''.
In section 4(f)(4) of the Commodity Exchange Act (as added
by section 8), strike ``legitimate and nonlegitimate hedge
trading'' and insert ``bona fide hedge trading and non-bona
fide hedge trading (as those terms are defined in section
4a(h)(1))''.
______

SA 5142. Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 3268, to amend
the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

In section 1(a), strike ``Energy Speculation'' and insert
``Commodity Speculation''.
In section 4(e) of the Commodity Exchange Act (as added by
section 3)--
(1) in paragraph (1), in the matter preceding subparagraph
(A), strike ``an energy commodity'' and insert ``a covered
commodity (as defined in section 4a(h)(1))''; and
(2) in paragraph (2), strike ``an energy commodity'' and
insert ``a covered commodity (as defined in section
4a(h)(1))''.
In section 4a(e) of the Commodity Exchange Act, in the
second sentence (as amended by section 4(a)(2)(A)(ii))--
(1) strike ``an energy commodity'' and insert ``a covered
commodity (as defined in subsection (h)(1))''; and
(2) strike ``or energy commodity'' and insert ``or covered
commodity (as defined in subsection (h)(1))''.
In section 4a(h) of the Commodity Exchange Act (as added by
section 6)--
(1) strike paragraph (1) and insert the following:
``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(A) Covered commodity.--The term `covered commodity'
means--
``(i) an agricultural commodity; and
``(ii) an energy commodity.
``(B) Legitimate hedge trading.--
``(i) In general.--The term `legitimate hedge trading'
means the conduct of trading that involves transactions by
commercial producers and purchasers of actual covered
commodities for future delivery and the direct counterparties
to such trades (regardless of whether the counterparties are
commercial producers or purchasers).
``(ii) Inclusion.--To the extent a commercial producer or
purchaser of an actual physical covered commodity for future
delivery trades with an intermediary (referred to in this
subparagraph as an `initial trade'), each subsequent trade by
the intermediary arising solely due to the initial trade and
that directly results from such initial trade (referred to in
this subparagraph as a `follow-on trade') shall be considered
to be the conduct of `legitimate hedge trading' if each
follow-on trade executed by the intermediary is--

``(I) done proximate to the initial trade; and
``(II) in the aggregate, economically the same in size and
substance as the initial trade.''; and

(2) in paragraph (4)(C)--
(A) in clause (i)(II), strike ``an energy commodity'' each
place it appears and insert ``a covered commodity''; and
(B) in clause (iv)(I)(aa), strike ``an energy commodity''
and insert ``a covered commodity''.
In section 2(j) of the Commodity Exchange Act (as added by
section 7)--
(1) in paragraph (1)(E), in the matter preceding clause
(i), strike ``energy commodity'' and insert ``covered
commodity (as defined in section 4a(h)(1))''; and
(2) in paragraph (5), strike ``energy commodity'' and
insert ``covered commodity (as defined in section
4a(h)(1))''.
In section 15(a)--
(1) in the heading, strike ``Energy Commodity'' and insert
``Agricultural and Energy Commodities'';

[[Page 16283]]

(2) in paragraph (1), strike ``energy commodity'' and
insert ``agricultural and energy commodities''; and
(3) in paragraph (2)(A), strike ``energy commodity'' and
insert ``agricultural and energy commodities''.
______

SA 5143. Mr. CORKER submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Increasing Transparency and
Accountability in Energy Prices Act of 2008''.

SEC. 2. STUDY OF INTERNATIONAL REGULATION OF ENERGY COMMODITY
MARKETS.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Treasury, the
Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange
Commission, and the Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission shall jointly conduct a study of the international
regime for regulating the trading of energy commodity futures
and derivatives.
(b) Analysis.--The study shall include an analysis of, at a
minimum--
(1) key common features and differences among countries in
the regulation of energy commodity trading, including with
respect to market oversight and enforcement;
(2) agreements and practices for sharing market and trading
data;
(3) the use of position limits or thresholds to detect and
prevent price manipulation, excessive speculation as
described in section 4a(a) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7
U.S.C. 6a(a)) or other unfair trading practices;
(4) practices regarding the identification of commercial
and noncommercial trading and the extent of market
speculation; and
(5) agreements and practices for facilitating international
cooperation on market oversight, compliance, and enforcement.
(c) Report.--Not later than 120 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the heads of the Federal agencies
described in subsection (a) shall jointly submit to the
appropriate committees of Congress a report that--
(1) describes the results of the study; and
(2) provides recommendations to improve openness,
transparency, and other necessary elements of a properly
functioning market.

SEC. 3. FOREIGN BOARDS OF TRADE.

Section 4 of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 6) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Foreign Boards of Trade.--
``(1) In general.--The Commission shall not permit a
foreign board of trade's members or other participants
located in the United States to enter trades directly into
the foreign board of trade's trade matching system with
respect to an agreement, contract, or transaction in an
energy commodity (as defined by the Commission) that settles
against any price, including the daily or final settlement
price, of a contract or contracts listed for trading on a
registered entity, unless--
``(A) the foreign board of trade makes public daily
information on settlement prices, volume, open interest, and
opening and closing ranges for the agreement, contract, or
transaction that is comparable to the daily trade information
published by the registered entity for the contract or
contracts against which it settles;
``(B) the foreign board of trade or a foreign futures
authority adopts position limitations (including related
hedge exemption provisions) or position accountability for
speculators for the agreement, contract, or transaction that
are comparable to the position limitations (including related
hedge exemption provisions) or position accountability
adopted by the registered entity for the contract or
contracts against which it settles; and
``(C) the foreign board of trade or a foreign futures
authority provides such information to the Commission
regarding the extent of speculative and non-speculative
trading in the agreement, contract, or transaction that is
comparable to the information the Commission determines is
necessary to publish its weekly report of traders (commonly
known as the Commitments of Traders report) for the contract
or contracts against which it settles.
``(2) Existing foreign boards of trade.--Paragraph (1)
shall become effective 1 year after the date of enactment of
this subsection with respect to any agreement, contract, or
transaction in an energy commodity (as defined by the
Commission) conducted on a foreign board of trade for which
the Commission's staff had granted relief from the
requirements of this Act prior to the date of enactment of
this subsection.''.

SEC. 4. INDEX TRADERS AND SWAP DEALERS; DISAGGREGATION OF
INDEX FUNDS.

Section 4 of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 6) (as
amended by section 3) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(f) Index Traders and Swap Dealers.--
``(1) Reporting.--The Commission shall--
``(A) issue a proposed rule regarding routine reporting
requirements for index traders and swap dealers (as those
terms are defined by the Commission) in energy and
agricultural transactions (as those terms are defined by the
Commission) within the jurisdiction of the Commission not
later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this
subsection, and issue a final rule regarding such reporting
requirements not later than 270 days after the date of
enactment of this subsection; and
``(B) subject to the provisions of section 8, disaggregate
and make public monthly information on the positions and
value of index funds and other passive, long-only positions
in the energy and agricultural futures markets.
``(2) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall submit to
the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives
and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of
the Senate a report regarding--
``(A) the scope of commodity index trading in the futures
markets;
``(B) whether classification of index traders and swap
dealers in the futures markets can be improved for regulatory
and reporting purposes; and
``(C) whether, based on a review of the trading practices
for index traders in the futures markets--
``(i) index trading activity is adversely impacting the
price discovery process in the futures markets; and
``(ii) different practices and controls should be
required.''.

SEC. 5. IMPROVED OVERSIGHT AND ENFORCEMENT.

(a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
(1) crude oil prices are at record levels and consumers in
the United States are paying record prices for gasoline;
(2) funding for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
has been insufficient to cover the significant growth of the
futures markets;
(3) since the establishment of the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission, the volume of trading on futures
exchanges has grown 8,000 percent while staffing numbers have
decreased 12 percent; and
(4) in today's dynamic market environment, it is essential
that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission receive the
funding necessary to enforce existing authority to ensure
that all commodity markets, including energy markets, are
properly monitored for market manipulation.
(b) Additional Employees.--As soon as practicable after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission shall hire at least 100 additional full-time
employees--
(1) to increase the public transparency of operations in
energy futures markets;
(2) to improve the enforcement in those markets; and
(3) to carry out such other duties as are prescribed by the
Commission.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--In addition to any
other funds made available to carry out the Commodity
Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), there are authorized to be
appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this
section for fiscal year 2009.
______

SA 5144. Mr. MARTINEZ (for himself, Ms. Collins, Mrs. Feinstein, and
Mr. Sununu) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to
the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. ____. REPEAL OF TEMPORARY DUTY OF 54 CENTS PER GALLON.

(a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 99 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended--
(1) by striking heading 9901.00.50; and
(2) by striking U.S. Notes 2 and 3 relating to heading
9901.00.50.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
apply with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
______

SA 5145. Mr. VITTER submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end, add the following:

TITLE _--REFINERY STREAMLINING

SEC. _01. DEFINITIONS.

In this title:
(1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
(2) Applicant.--The term ``applicant'' means a person who
is seeking a Federal refinery authorization.

[[Page 16284]]

(3) Biomass.--The term ``biomass'' has the meaning given
that term in section 932(a) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(42 U.S.C. 16232(a)).
(4) Federal refinery authorization.--
(A) In general.--The term ``Federal refinery
authorization'' means any authorization required under
Federal law, whether administered by a Federal or State
administrative agency or official, with respect to expansion
or operation of a refinery.
(B) Inclusion.--The term ``Federal refinery authorization''
includes any permits, licenses, special use authorizations,
certifications, opinions, or other approvals required under
Federal law with respect to expansion or operation of a
refinery.
(5) Refinery.--The term ``refinery'' means--
(A) a facility designed and operated to receive, load,
unload, store, transport, process, and refine crude oil by
any chemical or physical process, including distillation,
fluid catalytic cracking, hydrocracking, coking, alkylation,
etherification, polymerization, catalytic reforming,
isomerization, hydrotreating, blending, and any combination
thereof, in order to produce gasoline or distillate;
(B) a facility designed and operated to receive, load,
unload, store, transport, process, and refine coal by any
chemical or physical process, including liquefaction, in
order to produce gasoline or diesel as the primary output; or
(C) a facility designed and operated to receive, load,
unload, store, transport, process (including biochemical,
photochemical, and biotechnology processes), and refine
biomass in order to produce biofuel.
(6) State.--The term ``State'' means--
(A) a State;
(B) the District of Columbia;
(C) the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and
(D) any other territory or possession of the United States.

SEC. _02. STATE ASSISTANCE.

(a) In General.--At the request of a governor of a State,
the Administrator is authorized to provide financial
assistance to the State to facilitate the hiring of
additional personnel to assist the State with expertise in
fields relevant to consideration of Federal refinery
authorizations.
(b) Other Assistance.--At the request of a governor of a
State, a Federal agency responsible for a Federal refinery
authorization shall provide technical, legal, or other
nonfinancial assistance to the State to facilitate the
consideration of the State of Federal refinery
authorizations.

SEC. _03. REFINERY PROCESS COORDINATION AND PROCEDURES.

(a) Appointment of Federal Coordinator.--
(1) In general.--The President shall appoint a Federal
coordinator to perform the responsibilities assigned to the
Federal coordinator under this Act.
(2) Other agencies.--Each Federal and State agency or
official required to provide a Federal refinery authorization
shall cooperate with the Federal coordinator.
(b) Federal Refinery Authorizations.--
(1) Meeting participants.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 30 days after receiving a
notification from an applicant that the applicant is seeking
a Federal refinery authorization pursuant to Federal law, the
Federal coordinator appointed under subsection (a) shall
convene a meeting of representatives from all Federal and
State agencies responsible for a Federal refinery
authorization with respect to the refinery.
(B) Identification.--The governor of a State shall identify
each agency of the State that is responsible for a Federal
refinery authorization with respect to that refinery.
(2) Memorandum of agreement.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 90 days after receipt of a
notification described in paragraph (1), the Federal
coordinator and the other participants at a meeting convened
under that paragraph shall establish a memorandum of
agreement that describes the most expeditious coordinated
schedule possible for completion of all Federal refinery
authorizations with respect to the refinery, consistent with
the full substantive and procedural review required by
Federal law.
(B) Schedule accommodation.--If a Federal or State agency
responsible for a Federal refinery authorization with respect
to the refinery is not represented at a meeting convened
under paragraph (1), the Federal coordinator shall ensure
that the schedule accommodates those Federal refinery
authorizations, consistent with Federal law.
(C) Priority.--In the event of a conflict among Federal
refinery authorization scheduling requirements, the
requirements of the Administrator shall be given priority.
(D) Publication.--Not later than 15 days after completing
the memorandum of agreement, the Federal coordinator shall
publish the memorandum of agreement in the Federal Register.
(E) Implementation.--The Federal coordinator shall--
(i) ensure that all parties to the memorandum of agreement
are working in good faith to carry out the memorandum of
agreement; and
(ii) facilitate the maintenance of the schedule established
in the memorandum of agreement.
(c) Consolidated Record.--
______

SA 5146. Mr. VITTER submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. ___. FEDERAL PERMIT STREAMLINING PILOT PROJECT.

(a) Establishment.--The Secretary of the Interior
(referred to in this section as the ``Secretary'') shall
establish a Federal permit streamlining pilot project
(referred to in this section as the ``Pilot Project'').
(b) Memorandum of Understanding.--Not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall
enter into a memorandum of understanding for purposes of this
section with the Secretary of Commerce.
(c) Designation of Qualified Staff.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
the signing of the memorandum of understanding under
subsection (b), the Secretary of Commerce shall assign to
each of the regional offices identified in subsection (d) an
employee who has expertise in--
(A) the consultations and the preparation of biological
opinions under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973 (16 U.S.C. 1536);
(B) the consultations and preparation of biological
opinions under the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (16
U.S.C. 1361 et seq.); and
(C) the preparation of analyses under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
(2) Duties.--Each employee assigned under paragraph (1)
shall--
(A) not later than 90 days after the date of assignment,
report to the office of the Minerals Management Service
Regional Director to which the employee is assigned;
(B) be responsible for all issues relating to the
jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce; and
(C) participate as part of the team of personnel working
on proposed energy projects, planning, and environmental
analyses.
(d) Regional Permitting Offices.--The following Minerals
Management Service Regional Offices shall serve as Pilot
Project offices:
(1) The Gulf of Mexico.
(2) Alaska.
(e) Reports.--Not later than 3 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report that--
(1) outlines the results of the Pilot Project; and
(2) makes a recommendation to the President regarding
whether the Pilot Project should become a permanent program.
(f) Additional Personnel.--The Secretary shall assign to
each Pilot Project office identified in subsection (d) any
additional personnel that are necessary to ensure the
effective implementation of--
(1) the Pilot Project; and
(2) other programs administered by the Regional Offices,
including leasing and regulation of energy development on the
outer Continental Shelf in accordance with the requirements
of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et
seq.).
______

SA 5147. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. OIL AND NATURAL GAS LEASING IN NEW PRODUCING AREAS.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Eligible producing state.--The term ``eligible
producing State'' means--
(A) a new producing State; and
(B) any other producing State that has, within the
offshore administrative boundaries beyond the submerged land
of a State, areas available for oil leasing, natural gas
leasing, or both.
(2) New producing area.--The term ``new producing area''
means an area that is--
(A) within the offshore administrative boundaries beyond
the submerged land of a State; and
(B) not available for oil or natural gas leasing as of
the date of enactment of this Act.
(3) New producing state.--The term ``new producing
State'' means a State with respect to which a petition has
been approved by the Secretary under subsection (b).
(4) Qualified revenues.--The term ``qualified revenues''
means all rentals, royalties, bonus bids, and other sums due
and payable to the United States from leases entered into on
or after the date of enactment of this Act for new producing
areas.

[[Page 16285]]

(5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the
Secretary of the Interior.
(b) Petition for Leasing New Producing Areas.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Governor of a State, with the concurrence of the
State legislature, may submit to the Secretary a petition
requesting that the Secretary make a new producing area of
the State eligible for oil leasing, gas leasing, or both, as
determined by the State, in accordance with the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.) and the
Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.).
(2) Action by secretary.--As soon as practicable after
the date on which the Secretary receives a petition under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall approve or disapprove the
petition.
(c) Disposition of Qualified Outer Continental Shelf
Revenues From Eligible Producing States.--Notwithstanding
section 9 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C.
1338), for each applicable fiscal year, the Secretary of the
Treasury shall deposit--
(1) 50 percent of qualified revenues in the general fund
of the Treasury; and
(2) 50 percent of qualified revenues in a special account
in the Treasury, which the Secretary shall disburse to
eligible producing States for new producing areas, to be
allocated in accordance with subsection (d).
(d) Allocation to Eligible Producing States.--The amount
made available under subsection (c)(2) shall be allocated to
eligible producing States in amounts (based on a formula
established by the Secretary by regulation) that are
inversely proportional to the respective distances between
the point on the coastline of each eligible producing State
that is closest to the geographic center of the applicable
leased tract and the geographic center of the leased tract,
as determined by the Secretary.
(e) Effect.--Nothing in this section affects any
authority that permits energy production under any other
provision of law.
______

SA 5148. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the bill, add the following:

TITLE II--COLLABORATIVE PERMITTING PROCESS FOR DOMESTIC FUELS
FACILITIES

SEC. 201. DEFINITIONS.

In this title:
(1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
(2) Coal-to-liquid.--The term ``coal-to-liquid'' means--
(A) with respect to a process or technology, the use of a
feedstock, the majority of which is derived from the coal
resources of the United States, using the class of reactions
known as Fischer-Tropsch, to produce synthetic fuel suitable
for transportation; and
(B) with respect to a facility, the portion of a facility
related to producing the inputs for the Fischer-Tropsch
process, or the finished fuel from the Fischer-Tropsch
process, using a feedstock that is primarily domestic coal at
the Fischer-Tropsch facility.
(3) Domestic fuels facility.--
(A) In general.--The term ``domestic fuels facility''
means--
(i) a coal liquification or coal-to-liquid facility at
which coal is processed into synthetic crude oil or any other
transportation fuel;
(ii) a facility that produces a renewable fuel (as defined
in section 211(o)(1) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7545(o)(1))); and
(iii) a facility at which crude oil is refined into
transportation fuel or other petroleum products.
(B) Inclusion.--The term ``domestic fuels facility''
includes a domestic fuels facility expansion.
(4) Domestic fuels facility expansion.--The term ``domestic
fuels facility expansion'' means a physical change in a
domestic fuels facility that results in an increase in the
capacity of the domestic fuels facility.
(5) Domestic fuels facility permitting agreement.--The term
``domestic fuels facility permitting agreement'' means an
agreement entered into between the Administrator and a State
or Indian tribe under section 202.
(6) Domestic fuels producer.--The term ``domestic fuels
producer'' means an individual or entity that--
(A) owns or operates a domestic fuels facility; or
(B) seeks to become an owner or operator of a domestic
fuels facility.
(7) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the
meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
(8) Permit.--The term ``permit'' means any permit, license,
approval, variance, or other form of authorization that a
refiner is required to obtain--
(A) under any Federal law; or
(B) from a State or Indian tribal government agency
delegated with authority by the Federal Government, or
authorized under Federal law to issue permits.
(9) State.--The term ``State'' means--
(A) a State;
(B) the District of Columbia;
(C) the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and
(D) any other territory or possession of the United States.

SEC. 202. COLLABORATIVE PERMITTING PROCESS FOR DOMESTIC FUELS
FACILITIES.

(a) In General.--At the request of the Governor of a State
or the governing body of an Indian tribe, the Administrator
shall enter into a domestic fuels facility permitting
agreement with the State or Indian tribe under which the
process for obtaining all permits necessary for the
construction and operation of a domestic fuels facility shall
be improved using a systematic interdisciplinary multimedia
approach as provided in this section.
(b) Authority of Administrator.--Under a domestic fuels
facility permitting agreement--
(1) the Administrator shall have authority, as applicable
and necessary, to--
(A) accept from a refiner a consolidated application for
all permits that the domestic fuels producer is required to
obtain to construct and operate a domestic fuels facility;
(B) establish a schedule under which each Federal, State,
or Indian tribal government agency that is required to make
any determination to authorize the issuance of a permit
shall--
(i) concurrently consider, to the maximum extent
practicable, each determination to be made; and
(ii) complete each step in the permitting process; and
(C) issue a consolidated permit that combines all permits
that the domestic fuels producer is required to obtain; and
(2) the Administrator shall provide to State and Indian
tribal government agencies--
(A) financial assistance in such amounts as the agencies
reasonably require to hire such additional personnel as are
necessary to enable the government agencies to comply with
the applicable schedule established under paragraph (1)(B);
and
(B) technical, legal, and other assistance in complying
with the domestic fuels facility permitting agreement.
(c) Agreement by the State.--Under a domestic fuels
facility permitting agreement, a State or governing body of
an Indian tribe shall agree that--
(1) the Administrator shall have each of the authorities
described in subsection (b); and
(2) each State or Indian tribal government agency shall--
(A) make such structural and operational changes in the
agencies as are necessary to enable the agencies to carry out
consolidated project-wide permit reviews concurrently and in
coordination with the Environmental Protection Agency and
other Federal agencies; and
(B) comply, to the maximum extent practicable, with the
applicable schedule established under subsection (b)(1)(B).
(d) Interdisciplinary Approach.--
(1) In general.--The Administrator and a State or governing
body of an Indian tribe shall incorporate an
interdisciplinary approach, to the maximum extent
practicable, in the development, review, and approval of
domestic fuels facility permits subject to this section.
(2) Options.--Among other options, the interdisciplinary
approach may include use of--
(A) environmental management practices; and
(B) third party contractors.
(e) Deadlines.--
(1) New domestic fuels facilities.--In the case of a
consolidated permit for the construction of a new domestic
fuels facility, the Administrator and the State or governing
body of an Indian tribe shall approve or disapprove the
consolidated permit not later than--
(A) 360 days after the date of the receipt of the
administratively complete application for the consolidated
permit; or
(B) on agreement of the applicant, the Administrator, and
the State or governing body of the Indian tribe, 90 days
after the expiration of the deadline established under
subparagraph (A).
(2) Expansion of existing domestic fuels facilities.--In
the case of a consolidated permit for the expansion of an
existing domestic fuels facility, the Administrator and the
State or governing body of an Indian tribe shall approve or
disapprove the consolidated permit not later than--
(A) 120 days after the date of the receipt of the
administratively complete application for the consolidated
permit; or
(B) on agreement of the applicant, the Administrator, and
the State or governing body of the Indian tribe, 30 days
after the expiration of the deadline established under
subparagraph (A).
(f) Federal Agencies.--Each Federal agency that is required
to make any determination to authorize the issuance of a
permit shall comply with the applicable schedule established
under subsection (b)(1)(B).

[[Page 16286]]

(g) Judicial Review.--Any civil action for review of any
determination of any Federal, State, or Indian tribal
government agency in a permitting process conducted under a
domestic fuels facility permitting agreement brought by any
individual or entity shall be brought exclusively in the
United States district court for the district in which the
domestic fuels facility is located or proposed to be located.
(h) Efficient Permit Review.--In order to reduce the
duplication of procedures, the Administrator shall use State
permitting and monitoring procedures to satisfy substantially
equivalent Federal requirements under this section.
(i) Severability.--If 1 or more permits that are required
for the construction or operation of a domestic fuels
facility are not approved on or before any deadline
established under subsection (e), the Administrator may issue
a consolidated permit that combines all other permits that
the domestic fuels producer is required to obtain other than
any permits that are not approved.
(j) Savings.--Nothing in this section affects the operation
or implementation of otherwise applicable law regarding
permits necessary for the construction and operation of a
domestic fuels facility.
(k) Consultation With Local Governments.--Congress
encourages the Administrator, States, and tribal governments
to consult, to the maximum extent practicable, with local
governments in carrying out this section.
(l) Effect on Local Authority.--Nothing in this section
affects--
(1) the authority of a local government with respect to the
issuance of permits; or
(2) any requirement or ordinance of a local government
(such as zoning regulations).
______

SA 5149. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike section 4.
______

SA 5150. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. REMOVAL OF PROHIBITION ON FINAL REGULATIONS FOR
COMMERCIAL LEASING PROGRAM FOR OIL SHALE
RESOURCES ON PUBLIC LAND.

Section 433 of the Department of the Interior, Environment,
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law
110-161; 121 Stat. 2152) is repealed.
______

SA 5151. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. LIMITATIONS ON LEGISLATION THAT WOULD INCREASE
NATIONAL AVERAGE FUEL PRICES FOR AUTOMOBILES.

(a) Definition of Legislation.--In this section, the term
``legislation'' means a bill, joint resolution, amendment,
motion, or conference report.
(b) Point of Order.--
(1) In general.--Subject to subsection (c), if the Senate
is considering legislation, on a point of order being made by
any Senator against legislation, or any part of the
legislation, that it has been determined in accordance with
paragraph (2) that the legislation, if enacted, would result
in an increase in the national average fuel price for
automobiles, and the point of order is sustained by the
Presiding Officer, the Senate shall cease consideration of
the legislation.
(2) Determination.--For the purpose of paragraph (1), the
determination described in this paragraph means a
determination by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office, in consultation with the Energy Information
Administration and the heads of other appropriate Federal
Government agencies, that is made on the request of a Senator
for review of legislation, that the legislation, or part of
the legislation, would, if enacted, result in an increase in
the national average fuel price for automobiles.
(c) Waivers and Appeals.--
(1) Waivers.--
(A) In general.--Before the Presiding Officer rules on a
point of order described in subsection (b)(1), any Senator
may move to waive the point of order.
(B) Amendments.--The motion to waive under this paragraph
shall not be subject to amendment.
(C) Voting requirement.--A point of order described in
subsection (b)(1) shall be waived only by the affirmative
vote of at least 60 Members of the Senate, duly chosen and
sworn.
(2) Appeals.--
(A) In general.--After the Presiding Officer rules on a
point of order described in subsection (b)(1), any Senator
may appeal the ruling of the Presiding Officer on the point
of order as the ruling applies to some or all of the
provisions on which the Presiding Officer ruled.
(B) Voting requirement.--A ruling of the Presiding Officer
on a point of order described in subsection (b)(1) shall be
sustained unless at least 60 Members of the Senate, duly
chosen and sworn, vote not to sustain the ruling.
(3) Debate.--
(A) In general.--Debate on the motion to waive under
paragraph (1) or on an appeal of the ruling of the Presiding
Officer under paragraph (2) shall be limited to 1 hour.
(B) Division of time.--The time shall be equally divided
between, and controlled by, the Majority Leader and the
Minority Leader of the Senate, or designees.
______

SA 5152. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Section 4a(h)(1)(B) of the Commodity Exchange Act (as added
by section 6) is amended in the matter preceding clause (i)
by inserting ``, or a commercial consumer of a product
derived from,'' after ``producer or purchaser of''.
______

SA 5153. Mr. CRAIG (for himself, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Bond, Mr. Vitter, and
Mr. Inhofe) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to
the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. MORATORIUM OF OIL AND GAS LEASING IN CERTAIN AREAS
OF GULF OF MEXICO.

(a) In General.--Section 104(a) of the Gulf of Mexico
Energy Security Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 note; Public Law
109-432) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (1);
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``125 miles'' and
inserting ``50 miles'';
(3) in paragraph (3), by striking ``100 miles'' each place
it appears and inserting ``50 miles''; and
(4) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs
(1) and (2), respectively.
(b) Regulations.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall
promulgate regulations that establish appropriate
environmental safeguards for the exploration and production
of oil and natural gas on the outer Continental Shelf.
(2) Minimum requirements.--At a minimum, the regulations
shall include--
(A) provisions requiring surety bonds of sufficient value
to ensure the mitigation of any foreseeable incident;
(B) provisions assigning liability to the leaseholder in
the event of an incident causing damage or loss, regardless
of the negligence of the leaseholder or lack of negligence;
(C) provisions no less stringent than those contained in
the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure regulations
promulgated under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C.
2701 et seq.);
(D) provisions ensuring that--
(i) no facility for the exploration or production of
resources is visible to the unassisted eye from any shore of
any coastal State; and
(ii) the impact of offshore production facilities on
coastal vistas is otherwise mitigated;
(E) provisions to ensure, to the maximum extent
practicable, that exploration and production activities will
result in no significant adverse effect on fish or wildlife
(including habitat), subsistence resources, or the
environment; and
(F) provisions that will impose seasonal limitations on
activity to protect breeding, spawning, and wildlife
migration patterns.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 105 of the Department of
the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2006 (Public Law 109-54; 119 Stat. 521)
(as amended by section 103(d) of the Gulf of Mexico Energy
Security Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 note; Public Law 109-
432)) is amended by inserting ``and any other area that the
Secretary of the Interior may offer for leasing, preleasing,
or any related activity under section 104 of that Act'' after
``2006)''.

SEC. __. DISPOSITION OF REVENUES FROM NEW PRODUCING AREAS OF
THE EASTERN GULF OF MEXICO.

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

[[Page 16287]]

``SEC. 32. DISPOSITION OF REVENUES FROM NEW PRODUCING AREAS
OF THE EASTERN GULF OF MEXICO.

``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Coastal political subdivision.--The term `coastal
political subdivision' means a political subdivision of an
Eastern Gulf producing State any part of which political
subdivision is--
``(A) within the coastal zone (as defined in section 304 of
the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1453)) of
the Eastern Gulf producing State as of the date of enactment
of this section; and
``(B) not more than 200 nautical miles from the geographic
center of any leased tract.
``(2) Eastern gulf producing state.--The term `Eastern Gulf
producing State' means each of the States of Alabama,
Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.
``(3) Moratorium area.--The term `moratorium area' means an
area covered by section 104(a) of the Gulf of Mexico Energy
Security Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 note; Public Law 109-
432) (as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of
this section).
``(4) New producing area.--The term `new producing area'
means any moratorium area beyond the submerged land of a
State that is located greater than 50 miles from the
coastline of the State of Florida.
``(5) Qualified outer continental shelf revenues.--The term
`qualified outer Continental Shelf revenues' means all
rentals, royalties, bonus bids, and other sums due and
payable to the United States from leases entered into on or
after the date of enactment of this section for new producing
areas.
``(b) Leasing New Producing Areas.--The Secretary shall
make new producing areas available for leasing in accordance
with this Act.
``(c) Disposition of Qualified Outer Continental Shelf
Revenues From New Producing Areas.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 9 and subject to
the other provisions of this subsection, for each applicable
fiscal year, the Secretary of the Treasury shall deposit--
``(A) 50 percent of qualified outer Continental Shelf
revenues in the general fund of the Treasury; and
``(B) 50 percent of qualified outer Continental Shelf
revenues in a special account in the Treasury from which the
Secretary shall disburse--
``(i) 75 percent to Eastern Gulf producing States in
accordance with paragraph (2); and
``(ii) 25 percent to provide financial assistance to States
in accordance with section 6 of the Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l -8), which
shall be considered income to the Land and Water Conservation
Fund for purposes of section 2 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 460l-
5).
``(2) Allocation to eastern gulf producing states and
coastal political subdivisions.--
``(A) Allocation to eastern gulf producing states.--
Effective for fiscal year 2009 and each fiscal year
thereafter, the amount made available under paragraph
(1)(B)(i) shall be allocated to each Eastern Gulf producing
State in amounts (based on a formula established by the
Secretary by regulation) that are inversely proportional to
the respective distances between the point on the coastline
of each Eastern Gulf producing State that is closest to the
geographic center of the applicable leased tract and the
geographic center of the leased tract.
``(B) Payments to coastal political subdivisions.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall pay 20 percent of
the allocable share of each Eastern Gulf producing State, as
determined under subparagraph (A), to the coastal political
subdivisions of the Eastern Gulf producing State.
``(ii) Allocation.--The amount paid by the Secretary to
coastal political subdivisions shall be allocated to each
coastal political subdivision in accordance with
subparagraphs (B) and (C) of section 31(b)(4).
``(3) Minimum allocation.--The amount allocated to an
Eastern Gulf producing State each fiscal year under paragraph
(2)(A) shall be at least 10 percent of the amounts available
under paragraph (1)(B)(i).
``(4) Timing.--The amounts required to be deposited under
subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) for the applicable fiscal
year shall be made available in accordance with that
subparagraph during the fiscal year immediately following the
applicable fiscal year.
``(5) Authorized uses.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), each
Eastern Gulf producing State and coastal political
subdivision shall use all amounts received under paragraph
(2) in accordance with all applicable Federal and State laws,
only for 1 or more of the following purposes:
``(i) Projects and activities for the purposes of coastal
protection, including conservation, coastal restoration,
hurricane protection, and infrastructure directly affected by
coastal wetland losses.
``(ii) Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, or natural
resources.
``(iii) Implementation of a federally approved marine,
coastal, or comprehensive conservation management plan.
``(iv) Mitigation of the impact of outer Continental Shelf
activities through the funding of onshore infrastructure
projects.
``(v) Planning assistance and the administrative costs of
complying with this section.
``(B) Limitation.--Not more than 3 percent of amounts
received by an Eastern Gulf producing State or coastal
political subdivision under paragraph (2) may be used for the
purposes described in subparagraph (A)(v).
``(6) Administration.--Amounts made available under
paragraph (1)(B) shall--
``(A) be made available, without further appropriation, in
accordance with this subsection;
``(B) remain available until expended; and
``(C) be in addition to any amounts appropriated under--
``(i) other provisions of this Act;
``(ii) the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16
U.S.C. 460l-4 et seq.); or
``(iii) any other provision of law.''.
______

SA 5154. Mr. COBURN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end, add the following:

DIVISION B--AMERICAN ENERGY ACT

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This division may be cited as the
``American Energy Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this
division is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

TITLE I--AMERICAN ENERGY

Subtitle A--OCS

Sec. 101. Short title.
Sec. 102. Policy.
Sec. 103. Definitions under the Submerged Lands Act.
Sec. 104. Seaward boundaries of States.
Sec. 105. Exceptions from confirmation and establishment of States'
title, power, and rights.
Sec. 106. Definitions under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act.
Sec. 107. Determination of adjacent zones and planning areas.
Sec. 108. Administration of leasing.
Sec. 109. Grant of leases by Secretary.
Sec. 110. Disposition of receipts.
Sec. 111. Reservation of lands and rights.
Sec. 112. Outer Continental Shelf leasing program.
Sec. 113. Coordination with adjacent States.
Sec. 114. Environmental studies.
Sec. 115. Termination of effect of laws prohibiting the spending of
appropriated funds for certain purposes.
Sec. 116. Outer Continental Shelf incompatible use.
Sec. 117. Repurchase of certain leases.
Sec. 118. Offsite environmental mitigation.
Sec. 119. OCS regional headquarters.
Sec. 120. Leases for areas located within 100 miles of California or
Florida.
Sec. 121. Coastal impact assistance.
Sec. 122. Repeal of the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006.

Subtitle B--ANWR

Sec. 141. Short title.
Sec. 142. Definitions.
Sec. 143. Leasing program for lands within the Coastal Plain.
Sec. 144. Lease sales.
Sec. 145. Grant of leases by the Secretary.
Sec. 146. Lease terms and conditions.
Sec. 147. Coastal Plain environmental protection.
Sec. 148. Expedited judicial review.
Sec. 149. Federal and State distribution of revenues.
Sec. 150. Rights-of-way across the Coastal Plain.
Sec. 151. Conveyance.
Sec. 152. Local government impact aid and community service assistance.

Subtitle C--Oil Shale

Sec. 161. Repeal.

TITLE II--CONSERVATION AND EFFICIENCY

Subtitle A--Tax Incentives for Fuel Efficiency

Sec. 201. Credit for new qualified plug-in electric drive motor
vehicles.
Sec. 202. Extension of credit for alternative fuel vehicles.
Sec. 203. Extension of alternative fuel vehicle refueling property
credit.

Subtitle B--Tapping America's Ingenuity and Creativity

Sec. 211. Definitions.
Sec. 212. Statement of policy.
Sec. 213. Prize authority.
Sec. 214. Eligibility.
Sec. 215. Intellectual property.
Sec. 216. Waiver of liability.
Sec. 217. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 218. Next generation automobile prize program.
Sec. 219. Advanced battery manufacturing incentive program.

Subtitle C--Home and Business Tax Incentives

Sec. 221. Extension of credit for energy efficient appliances.
Sec. 222. Extension of credit for nonbusiness energy property.
Sec. 223. Extension of credit for residential energy efficient
property.
Sec. 224. Extension of new energy efficient home credit.

[[Page 16288]]

Sec. 225. Extension of energy efficient commercial buildings deduction.
Sec. 226. Extension of special rule to implement FERC and State
electric restructuring policy.
Sec. 227. Home energy audits.
Sec. 228. Accelerated recovery period for depreciation of smart meters.

Subtitle D--Refinery Permit Process Schedule

Sec. 231. Short title.
Sec. 232. Definitions.
Sec. 233. State assistance.
Sec. 234. Refinery process coordination and procedures.
Sec. 235. Designation of closed military bases.
Sec. 236. Savings clause.
Sec. 237. Refinery revitalization repeal.

TITLE III--NEW AND EXPANDING TECHNOLOGIES

Subtitle A--Alternative Fuels

Sec. 301. Repeal.
Sec. 302. Government auction of long term put option contracts on coal-
to-liquid fuel produced by qualified coal-to-liquid
facilities.
Sec. 303. Standby loans for qualifying coal-to-liquids projects.

Subtitle B--Tax Provisions

Sec. 311. Extension of renewable electricity, refined coal, and Indian
coal production credit.
Sec. 312. Extension of energy credit.
Sec. 313. Extension and modification of credit for clean renewable
energy bonds.
Sec. 314. Extension of credits for biodiesel and renewable diesel.

Subtitle C--Nuclear

Sec. 321. Use of funds for recycling.
Sec. 322. Rulemaking for licensing of spent nuclear fuel recycling
facilities.
Sec. 323. Nuclear waste fund budget status.
Sec. 324. Waste Confidence.
Sec. 325. ASME Nuclear Certification credit.

Subtitle D--American Renewable and Alternative Energy Trust Fund

Sec. 331. American Renewable and Alternative Energy Trust Fund.

TITLE I--AMERICAN ENERGY

Subtitle A--OCS

SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.

This subtitle may be cited as the ``Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2008''.

SEC. 102. POLICY.

It is the policy of the United States that--
(1) the United States is blessed with abundant energy
resources on the outer Continental Shelf and has developed a
comprehensive framework of environmental laws and regulations
and fostered the development of state-of-the-art technology
that allows for the responsible development of these
resources for the benefit of its citizenry;
(2) Adjacent States are required by the circumstances to
commit significant resources in support of exploration,
development, and production activities for mineral resources
on the outer Continental Shelf, and it is fair and proper for
a portion of the receipts from such activities to be shared
with Adjacent States and their local coastal governments;
(3) the existing laws governing the leasing and production
of the mineral resources of the outer Continental Shelf have
reduced the production of mineral resources, have preempted
Adjacent States from being sufficiently involved in the
decisions regarding the allowance of mineral resource
development, and have been harmful to the national interest;
(4) the national interest is served by granting the
Adjacent States more options related to whether or not
mineral leasing should occur in the outer Continental Shelf
within their Adjacent Zones;
(5) it is not reasonably foreseeable that exploration of a
leased tract located more than 25 miles seaward of the
coastline, development and production of a natural gas
discovery located more than 25 miles seaward of the
coastline, or development and production of an oil discovery
located more than 50 miles seaward of the coastline will
adversely affect resources near the coastline;
(6) transportation of oil from a leased tract might
reasonably be foreseen, under limited circumstances, to have
the potential to adversely affect resources near the
coastline if the oil is within 50 miles of the coastline, but
such potential to adversely affect such resources is likely
no greater, and probably less, than the potential impacts
from tanker transportation because tanker spills usually
involve large releases of oil over a brief period of time;
and
(7) among other bodies of inland waters, the Great Lakes,
Long Island Sound, Delaware Bay, Chesapeake Bay, Albemarle
Sound, San Francisco Bay, and Puget Sound are not part of the
outer Continental Shelf, and are not subject to leasing by
the Federal Government for the exploration, development, and
production of any mineral resources that might lie beneath
them.

SEC. 103. DEFINITIONS UNDER THE SUBMERGED LANDS ACT.

Section 2 of the Submerged Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1301) is
amended--
(1) in subparagraph (2) of paragraph (a) by striking all
after ``seaward to a line'' and inserting ``twelve nautical
miles distant from the coast line of such State;'';
(2) by striking out paragraph (b) and redesignating the
subsequent paragraphs in order as paragraphs (b) through (g);
(3) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (g) (as
so redesignated) and inserting ``; and'';
(4) by adding the following: ``(i) The term `Secretary'
means the Secretary of the Interior.''; and
(5) by defining ``State'' as it is defined in section 2(r)
of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331(r)).

SEC. 104. SEAWARD BOUNDARIES OF STATES.

Section 4 of the Submerged Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1312) is
amended--
(1) in the first sentence by striking ``original'', and in
the same sentence by striking ``three geographical'' and
inserting ``twelve nautical''; and
(2) by striking all after the first sentence and inserting
the following: ``Extension and delineation of lateral
offshore State boundaries under the provisions of this Act
shall follow the lines used to determine the Adjacent Zones
of coastal States under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
to the extent such lines extend twelve nautical miles for the
nearest coastline.''

SEC. 105. EXCEPTIONS FROM CONFIRMATION AND ESTABLISHMENT OF
STATES' TITLE, POWER, AND RIGHTS.

Section 5 of the Submerged Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1313) is
amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (a) through (c) in order as
paragraphs (1) through (3);
(2) by inserting ``(a)'' before ``There is excepted''; and
(3) by inserting at the end the following:
``(b) Exception of Oil and Gas Mineral Rights.--There is
excepted from the operation of sections 3 and 4 all of the
oil and gas mineral rights for lands beneath the navigable
waters that are located within the expanded offshore State
seaward boundaries established under this Act. These oil and
gas mineral rights shall remain Federal property and shall be
considered to be part of the Federal outer Continental Shelf
for purposes of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1331 et seq.) and subject to leasing under the
authority of that Act and to laws applicable to the leasing
of the oil and gas resources of the Federal outer Continental
Shelf. All existing Federal oil and gas leases within the
expanded offshore State seaward boundaries shall continue
unchanged by the provisions of this Act, except as otherwise
provided herein. However, a State may exercise all of its
sovereign powers of taxation within the entire extent of its
expanded offshore State boundaries.''.

SEC. 106. DEFINITIONS UNDER THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF LANDS
ACT.

Section 2 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1331) is amended--
(1) by amending paragraph (f) to read as follows:
``(f) The term `affected State' means the `Adjacent
State'.'';
(2) by striking the semicolon at the end of each of
paragraphs (a) through (o) and inserting a period;
(3) by striking ``; and'' at the end of paragraph (p) and
inserting a period;
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(r) The term `Adjacent State' means, with respect to any
program, plan, lease sale, leased tract or other activity,
proposed, conducted, or approved pursuant to the provisions
of this Act, any State the laws of which are declared,
pursuant to section 4(a)(2), to be the law of the United
States for the portion of the outer Continental Shelf on
which such program, plan, lease sale, leased tract or
activity appertains or is, or is proposed to be, conducted.
For purposes of this paragraph, the term `State' includes the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam,
and the other Territories of the United States.
``(s) The term `Adjacent Zone' means, with respect to any
program, plan, lease sale, leased tract, or other activity,
proposed, conducted, or approved pursuant to the provisions
of this Act, the portion of the outer Continental Shelf for
which the laws of a particular Adjacent State are declared,
pursuant to section 4(a)(2), to be the law of the United
States.
``(t) The term `miles' means statute miles.
``(u) The term `coastline' has the same meaning as the term
`coast line' as defined in section 2(c) of the Submerged
Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1301(c)).
``(v) The term `Neighboring State' means a coastal State
having a common boundary at the coastline with the Adjacent
State.''; and
(5) in paragraph (a), by inserting after ``control'' the
following: ``or lying within the United States exclusive
economic zone adjacent to the Territories of the United
States''.

SEC. 107. DETERMINATION OF ADJACENT ZONES AND PLANNING AREAS.

Section 4(a)(2)(A) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
(43 U.S.C. 1333(a)(2)(A)) is amended in the first sentence by
striking ``, and the President'' and all that follows through
the end of the sentence and inserting the following: ``. The
lines extending seaward and defining each State's Adjacent
Zone, and each OCS Planning Area, are as indicated on the
maps for each outer Continental Shelf region entitled `Alaska
OCS Region State Adjacent Zone and OCS Planning Areas',
`Pacific OCS Region State Adjacent

[[Page 16289]]

Zones and OCS Planning Areas', `Gulf of Mexico OCS Region
State Adjacent Zones and OCS Planning Areas', and `Atlantic
OCS Region State Adjacent Zones and OCS Planning Areas', all
of which are dated September 2005 and on file in the Office
of the Director, Minerals Management Service.''.

SEC. 108. ADMINISTRATION OF LEASING.

Section 5 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1334) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(k) Voluntary Partial Relinquishment of a Lease.--Any
lessee of a producing lease may relinquish to the Secretary
any portion of a lease that the lessee has no interest in
producing and that the Secretary finds is geologically
prospective. In return for any such relinquishment, the
Secretary shall provide to the lessee a royalty incentive for
the portion of the lease retained by the lessee, in
accordance with regulations promulgated by the Secretary to
carry out this subsection. The Secretary shall publish final
regulations implementing this subsection within 365 days
after the date of the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2008.
``(l) Natural Gas Lease Regulations.--Not later than July
1, 2010, the Secretary shall publish a final regulation that
shall--
``(1) establish procedures for entering into natural gas
leases;
``(2) ensure that natural gas leases are only available for
tracts on the outer Continental Shelf that are wholly within
100 miles of the coastline within an area withdrawn from
disposition by leasing on the day after the date of enactment
of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2008;
``(3) provide that natural gas leases shall contain the
same rights and obligations established for oil and gas
leases, except as otherwise provided in the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2008;
``(4) provide that, in reviewing the adequacy of bids for
natural gas leases, the value of any crude oil estimated to
be contained within any tract shall be excluded;
``(5) provide that any crude oil produced from a well and
reinjected into the leased tract shall not be subject to
payment of royalty, and that the Secretary shall consider, in
setting the royalty rates for a natural gas lease, the
additional cost to the lessee of not producing any crude oil;
and
``(6) provide that any Federal law that applies to an oil
and gas lease on the outer Continental Shelf shall apply to a
natural gas lease unless otherwise clearly inapplicable.''.

SEC. 109. GRANT OF LEASES BY SECRETARY.

Section 8 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1337) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1) by inserting after the first
sentence the following: ``Further, the Secretary may grant
natural gas leases in a manner similar to the granting of oil
and gas leases and under the various bidding systems
available for oil and gas leases.'';
(2) by adding at the end of subsection (b) the following:
``The Secretary may issue more than one lease for a given
tract if each lease applies to a separate and distinct range
of vertical depths, horizontal surface area, or a combination
of the two. The Secretary may issue regulations that the
Secretary determines are necessary to manage such leases
consistent with the purposes of this Act.'';
(3) by amending subsection (p)(2)(B) to read as follows:
``(B) The Secretary shall provide for the payment to
coastal States, and their local coastal governments, of 75
percent of Federal receipts from projects authorized under
this section located partially or completely within the area
extending seaward of State submerged lands out to 4 marine
leagues from the coastline, and the payment to coastal States
of 50 percent of the receipts from projects completely
located in the area more than 4 marine leagues from the
coastline. Payments shall be based on a formula established
by the Secretary by rulemaking no later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources
Act of 2008 that provides for equitable distribution, based
on proximity to the project, among coastal States that have
coastline that is located within 200 miles of the geographic
center of the project.''.
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(q) Natural Gas Leases.--
``(1) Right to produce natural gas.--A lessee of a natural
gas lease shall have the right to produce the natural gas
from a field on a natural gas leased tract if the Secretary
estimates that the discovered field has at least 40 percent
of the economically recoverable Btu content of the field
contained within natural gas and such natural gas is
economical to produce.
``(2) Crude oil.--A lessee of a natural gas lease may not
produce crude oil from the lease unless the Governor of the
Adjacent State agrees to such production.
``(3) Estimates of btu content.--The Secretary shall make
estimates of the natural gas Btu content of discovered fields
on a natural gas lease only after the completion of at least
one exploration well, the data from which has been tied to
the results of a three-dimensional seismic survey of the
field. The Secretary may not require the lessee to further
delineate any discovered field prior to making such
estimates.
``(4) Definition of natural gas.--For purposes of a natural
gas lease, natural gas means natural gas and all substances
produced in association with gas, including, but not limited
to, hydrocarbon liquids (other than crude oil) that are
obtained by the condensation of hydrocarbon vapors and
separate out in liquid form from the produced gas stream.
``(r) Removal of Restrictions on Joint Bidding in Certain
Areas of the Outer Continental Shelf.--Restrictions on joint
bidders shall no longer apply to tracts located in the Alaska
OCS Region. Such restrictions shall not apply to tracts in
other OCS regions determined to be `frontier tracts' or
otherwise `high cost tracts' under final regulations that
shall be published by the Secretary by not later than 365
days after the date of the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2008.
``(s) Royalty Suspension Provisions.--After the date of the
enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2008,
price thresholds shall apply to any royalty suspension
volumes granted by the Secretary. Unless otherwise set by
Secretary by regulation or for a particular lease sale, the
price thresholds shall be $40.50 for oil (January 1, 2006
dollars) and $6.75 for natural gas (January 1, 2006 dollars).
``(t) Conservation of Resources Fees.--Not later than one
year after the date of the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2008, the Secretary by regulation shall
establish a conservation of resources fee for nonproducing
leases that will apply to new and existing leases which shall
be set at $3.75 per acre per year. This fee shall apply from
and after October 1, 2008, and shall be treated as offsetting
receipts.'';
(5) by striking subsection (a)(3)(A) and redesignating the
subsequent subparagraphs as subparagraphs (A) and (B),
respectively;
(6) in subsection (a)(3)(A) (as so redesignated) by
striking ``In the Western'' and all that follows through
``the Secretary'' the first place it appears and inserting
``The Secretary''; and
(7) effective October 1, 2008, in subsection (g)--
(A) by striking all after ``(g)'', except paragraph (3);
(B) by striking the last sentence of paragraph (3); and
(C) by striking ``(3)''.

SEC. 110. DISPOSITION OF RECEIPTS.

Section 9 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1338) is amended--
(1) by designating the existing text as subsection (a);
(2) in subsection (a) (as so designated) by inserting ``,
if not paid as otherwise provided in this title'' after
``receipts''; and
(3) by adding the following:
``(b) Treatment of OCS Receipts From Tracts Completely
Within 100 Miles of the Coastline.--
``(1) Deposit.--The Secretary shall deposit into a separate
account in the Treasury the portion of OCS Receipts for each
fiscal year that will be shared under paragraphs (2), (3),
and (4).
``(2) Phased-in receipts sharing.--
``(A) Beginning October 1, 2008, the Secretary shall share
OCS Receipts derived from the following areas:
``(i) Lease tracts located on portions of the Gulf of
Mexico OCS Region completely beyond 4 marine leagues from any
coastline and completely within 100 miles of any coastline
that were available for leasing under the 2002-2007 5-Year
OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program.
``(ii) Lease tracts in production prior to October 1, 2008,
completely beyond 4 marine leagues from any coastline and
completely within 100 miles of any coastline located on
portions of the OCS that were not available for leasing under
the 2002-2007 5-Year OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program.
``(iii) Lease tracts for which leases are issued prior to
October 1, 2008, located in the Alaska OCS Region completely
beyond 4 marine leagues from any coastline and completely
within 100 miles of the coastline.
``(B) The Secretary shall share the following percentages
of OCS Receipts from the leases described in subparagraph (A)
derived during the fiscal year indicated:
``(i) For fiscal year 2009, 5 percent.
``(ii) For fiscal year 2010, 8 percent.
``(iii) For fiscal year 2011, 11 percent.
``(iv) For fiscal year 2012, 14 percent.
``(v) For fiscal year 2013, 17 percent.
``(vi) For fiscal year 2014, 20 percent.
``(vii) For fiscal year 2015, 23 percent.
``(viii) For fiscal year 2016, 26 percent.
``(ix) For fiscal year 2017, 29 percent.
``(x) For fiscal year 2018, 32 percent.
``(xi) For fiscal year 2019, 35 percent.
``(xii) For fiscal year 2020 and each subsequent fiscal
year, 37.5 percent.
``(C) The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to
leases that could not have been issued but for section 5(k)
of this Act or section 6(2) of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2008.
``(3) Immediate receipts sharing.--Beginning October 1,
2008, the Secretary shall share 37.50 percent of OCS Receipts
derived from all leases located completely beyond 4 marine
leagues from any coastline and completely within 100 miles of
any coastline not included within the provisions of paragraph

[[Page 16290]]

(2), and 90 percent of the balance of such OCS Receipts shall
be deposited into the American Renewable and Alternative
Energy Trust Fund established by section 331 of the American
Energy Act.
``(4) Receipts sharing from tracts within 4 marine leagues
of any coastline.--
``(A) Areas described in paragraph (2).--Beginning October
1, 2008, and continuing through September 30, 2010, the
Secretary shall share 25 percent of OCS Receipts derived from
all leases located within 4 marine leagues from any coastline
within areas described in paragraph (2). For each fiscal year
after September 30, 2010, the Secretary shall increase the
percent shared in 5 percent increments each fiscal year until
the sharing rate for all leases located within 4 marine
leagues from any coastline within areas described in
paragraph (2) becomes 75 percent.
``(B) Areas not described in paragraph (2).--Beginning
October 1, 2008, the Secretary shall share 75 percent of OCS
receipts derived from all leases located completely or
partially within 4 marine leagues from any coastline within
areas not described paragraph (2).
``(5) Allocations.--The Secretary shall allocate the OCS
Receipts deposited into the separate account established by
paragraph (1) that are shared under paragraphs (2), (3), and
(4) as follows:
``(A) Bonus bids.--Deposits derived from bonus bids from a
leased tract, including interest thereon, shall be allocated
at the end of each fiscal year to the Adjacent State.
``(B) Royalties.--Deposits derived from royalties from a
leased tract, including interest thereon, shall be allocated
at the end of each fiscal year to the Adjacent State and any
other producing State or States with a leased tract within
its Adjacent Zone within 100 miles of its coastline that
generated royalties during the fiscal year, if the other
producing or States have a coastline point within 300 miles
of any portion of the leased tract, in which case the amount
allocated for the leased tract shall be--
``(i) one-third to the Adjacent State; and
``(ii) two-thirds to each producing State, including the
Adjacent State, inversely proportional to the distance
between the nearest point on the coastline of the producing
State and the geographic center of the leased tract.
``(c) Treatment of OCS Receipts From Tracts Partially or
Completely Beyond 100 Miles of the Coastline.--
``(1) Deposit.--The Secretary shall deposit into a separate
account in the Treasury the portion of OCS Receipts for each
fiscal year that will be shared under paragraphs (2) and (3).
``(2) Phased-in receipts sharing.--
``(A) Beginning October 1, 2008, the Secretary shall share
OCS Receipts derived from the following areas:
``(i) Lease tracts located on portions of the Gulf of
Mexico OCS Region partially or completely beyond 100 miles of
any coastline that were available for leasing under the 2002-
2007 5-Year OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program.
``(ii) Lease tracts in production prior to October 1, 2008,
partially or completely beyond 100 miles of any coastline
located on portions of the OCS that were not available for
leasing under the 2002-2007 5-Year OCS Oil and Gas Leasing
Program.
``(iii) Lease tracts for which leases are issued prior to
October 1, 2008, located in the Alaska OCS Region partially
or completely beyond 100 miles of the coastline.
``(B) The Secretary shall share the following percentages
of OCS Receipts from the leases described in subparagraph (A)
derived during the fiscal year indicated:
``(i) For fiscal year 2009, 5 percent.
``(ii) For fiscal year 2010, 8 percent.
``(iii) For fiscal year 2011, 11 percent.
``(iv) For fiscal year 2012, 14 percent.
``(v) For fiscal year 2013, 17 percent.
``(vi) For fiscal year 2014, 20 percent.
``(vii) For fiscal year 2015, 23 percent.
``(viii) For fiscal year 2016, 26 percent.
``(ix) For fiscal year 2017, 29 percent.
``(x) For fiscal year 2018, 32 percent.
``(xi) For fiscal year 2019, 35 percent.
``(xii) For fiscal year 2020 and each subsequent fiscal
year, 37.5 percent.
``(C) The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to
leases that could not have been issued but for section 5(k)
of this Act or section 106(2) of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2008.
``(3) Immediate receipts sharing.--Beginning October 1,
2008, the Secretary shall share 37.5 percent of OCS Receipts
derived on and after October 1, 2008, from all leases located
partially or completely beyond 100 miles of any coastline not
included within the provisions of paragraph (2), except that
the Secretary shall only share 25 percent of such OCS
Receipts derived from all such leases within a State's
Adjacent Zone if no leasing is allowed within any portion of
that State's Adjacent Zone located completely within 100
miles of any coastline.
``(4) Allocations.--The Secretary shall allocate the OCS
Receipts deposited into the separate account established by
paragraph (1) that are shared under paragraphs (2) and (3) as
follows:
``(A) Bonus bids.--Deposits derived from bonus bids from a
leased tract, including interest thereon, shall be allocated
at the end of each fiscal year to the Adjacent State.
``(B) Royalties.--Deposits derived from royalties from a
leased tract, including interest thereon, shall be allocated
at the end of each fiscal year to the Adjacent State and any
other producing State or States with a leased tract within
its Adjacent Zone partially or completely beyond 100 miles of
its coastline that generated royalties during the fiscal
year, if the other producing State or States have a coastline
point within 300 miles of any portion of the leased tract, in
which case the amount allocated for the leased tract shall
be--
``(i) one-third to the Adjacent State; and
``(ii) two-thirds to each producing State, including the
Adjacent State, inversely proportional to the distance
between the nearest point on the coastline of the producing
State and the geographic center of the leased tract.
``(d) Transmission of Allocations.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the end of
each fiscal year, the Secretary shall transmit--
``(A) to each State 60 percent of such State's allocations
under subsections (b)(5)(A), (b)(5)(B), (c)(4)(A), and
(c)(4)(B) for the immediate prior fiscal year;
``(B) to each coastal county-equivalent and municipal
political subdivisions of such State a total of 40 percent of
such State's allocations under subsections (b)(5)(A),
(b)(5)(B), (c)(4)(A), and (c)(4)(B), together with all
accrued interest thereon; and
``(C) the remaining allocations under subsections (b)(5)
and (c)(4), together with all accrued interest thereon.
``(2) Allocations to coastal county-equivalent political
subdivisions.--The Secretary shall make an initial allocation
of the OCS Receipts to be shared under paragraph (1)(B) as
follows:
``(A) 25 percent shall be allocated to coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions that are completely more
than 25 miles landward of the coastline and at least a part
of which lies not more than 75 miles landward from the
coastline, with the allocation among such coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions based on population.
``(B) 75 percent shall be allocated to coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions that are completely or
partially less than 25 miles landward of the coastline, with
the allocation among such coastal county-equivalent political
subdivisions to be further allocated as follows:
``(i) 25 percent shall be allocated based on the ratio of
such coastal county-equivalent political subdivision's
population to the coastal population of all coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions in the State.
``(ii) 25 percent shall be allocated based on the ratio of
such coastal county-equivalent political subdivision's
coastline miles to the coastline miles of all coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions in the State as calculated
by the Secretary. In such calculations, coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions without a coastline shall
be considered to have 50 percent of the average coastline
miles of the coastal county-equivalent political subdivisions
that do have coastlines.
``(iii) 25 percent shall be allocated to all coastal
county-equivalent political subdivisions having a coastline
point within 300 miles of the leased tract for which OCS
Receipts are being shared based on a formula that allocates
the funds based on such coastal county-equivalent political
subdivision's relative distance from the leased tract.
``(iv) 25 percent shall be allocated to all coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions having a coastline point
within 300 miles of the leased tract for which OCS Receipts
are being shared based on the relative level of outer
Continental Shelf oil and gas activities in a coastal
political subdivision compared to the level of outer
Continental Shelf activities in all coastal political
subdivisions in the State. The Secretary shall define the
term `outer Continental Shelf oil and gas activities' for
purposes of this subparagraph to include, but not be limited
to, construction of vessels, drillships, and platforms
involved in exploration, production, and development on the
outer Continental Shelf; support and supply bases, ports, and
related activities; offices of geologists, geophysicists,
engineers, and other professionals involved in support of
exploration, production, and development of oil and gas on
the outer Continental Shelf; pipelines and other means of
transporting oil and gas production from the outer
Continental Shelf; and processing and refining of oil and gas
production from the outer Continental Shelf. For purposes of
this subparagraph, if a coastal county-equivalent political
subdivision does not have a coastline, its coastal point
shall be the point on the coastline closest to it.
``(3) Allocations to coastal municipal political
subdivisions.--The initial allocation to each coastal county-
equivalent political subdivision under paragraph (2) shall be
further allocated to the coastal county-equivalent political
subdivision and any coastal municipal political subdivisions
located partially or wholly within the boundaries of the
coastal county-equivalent political subdivision as follows:
``(A) One-third shall be allocated to the coastal county-
equivalent political subdivision.

[[Page 16291]]

``(B) Two-thirds shall be allocated on a per capita basis
to the municipal political subdivisions and the county-
equivalent political subdivision, with the allocation to the
latter based upon its population not included within the
boundaries of a municipal political subdivision.
``(e) Investment of Deposits.--Amounts deposited under this
section shall be invested by the Secretary of the Treasury in
securities backed by the full faith and credit of the United
States having maturities suitable to the needs of the account
in which they are deposited and yielding the highest
reasonably available interest rates as determined by the
Secretary of the Treasury.
``(f) Use of Funds.--A recipient of funds under this
section may use the funds for one or more of the following:
``(1) To reduce in-State college tuition at public
institutions of higher learning and otherwise support public
education, including career technical education.
``(2) To make transportation infrastructure improvements.
``(3) To reduce taxes.
``(4) To promote, fund, and provide for--
``(A) coastal or environmental restoration;
``(B) fish, wildlife, and marine life habitat enhancement;
``(C) waterways construction and maintenance;
``(D) levee construction and maintenance and shore
protection; and
``(E) marine and oceanographic education and research.
``(5) To promote, fund, and provide for--
``(A) infrastructure associated with energy production
activities conducted on the outer Continental Shelf;
``(B) energy demonstration projects;
``(C) supporting infrastructure for shore-based energy
projects;
``(D) State geologic programs, including geologic mapping
and data storage programs, and State geophysical data
acquisition;
``(E) State seismic monitoring programs, including
operation of monitoring stations;
``(F) development of oil and gas resources through enhanced
recovery techniques;
``(G) alternative energy development, including bio fuels,
coal-to-liquids, oil shale, tar sands, geothermal,
geopressure, wind, waves, currents, hydro, and other
renewable energy;
``(H) energy efficiency and conservation programs; and
``(I) front-end engineering and design for facilities that
produce liquid fuels from hydrocarbons and other biological
matter.
``(6) To promote, fund, and provide for--
``(A) historic preservation programs and projects;
``(B) natural disaster planning and response; and
``(C) hurricane and natural disaster insurance programs.
``(7) For any other purpose as determined by State law.
``(g) No Accounting Required.--No recipient of funds under
this section shall be required to account to the Federal
Government for the expenditure of such funds, except as
otherwise may be required by law. However, States may enact
legislation providing for accounting for and auditing of such
expenditures. Further, funds allocated under this section to
States and political subdivisions may be used as matching
funds for other Federal programs.
``(h) Effect of Future Laws.--Enactment of any future
Federal statute that has the effect, as determined by the
Secretary, of restricting any Federal agency from spending
appropriated funds, or otherwise preventing it from
fulfilling its pre-existing responsibilities as of the date
of enactment of the statute, unless such responsibilities
have been reassigned to another Federal agency by the statute
with no prevention of performance, to issue any permit or
other approval impacting on the OCS oil and gas leasing
program, or any lease issued thereunder, or to implement any
provision of this Act shall automatically prohibit any
sharing of OCS Receipts under this section directly with the
States, and their coastal political subdivisions, for the
duration of the restriction. The Secretary shall make the
determination of the existence of such restricting effects
within 30 days of a petition by any outer Continental Shelf
lessee or producing State.
``(i) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Coastal county-equivalent political subdivision.--The
term `coastal county-equivalent political subdivision' means
a political jurisdiction immediately below the level of State
government, including a county, parish, borough in Alaska,
independent municipality not part of a county, parish, or
borough in Alaska, or other equivalent subdivision of a
coastal State, that lies within the coastal zone.
``(2) Coastal municipal political subdivision.--The term
`coastal municipal political subdivision' means a
municipality located within and part of a county, parish,
borough in Alaska, or other equivalent subdivision of a
State, all or part of which coastal municipal political
subdivision lies within the coastal zone.
``(3) Coastal population.--The term `coastal population'
means the population of all coastal county-equivalent
political subdivisions, as determined by the most recent
official data of the Census Bureau.
``(4) Coastal zone.--The term `coastal zone' means that
portion of a coastal State, including the entire territory of
any coastal county-equivalent political subdivision at least
a part of which lies, within 75 miles landward from the
coastline, or a greater distance as determined by State law
enacted to implement this section.
``(5) Bonus bids.--The term `bonus bids' means all funds
received by the Secretary to issue an outer Continental Shelf
minerals lease.
``(6) Royalties.--The term `royalties' means all funds
received by the Secretary from production of oil or natural
gas, or the sale of production taken in-kind, from an outer
Continental Shelf minerals lease.
``(7) Producing state.--The term `producing State' means an
Adjacent State having an Adjacent Zone containing leased
tracts from which OCS Receipts were derived.
``(8) OCS receipts.--The term `OCS Receipts' means bonus
bids, royalties, and conservation of resources fees.''.

SEC. 111. RESERVATION OF LANDS AND RIGHTS.

Section 12 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1341) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) by adding at the end the following:
``The President may partially or completely revise or revoke
any prior withdrawal made by the President under the
authority of this section. The President may not revise or
revoke a withdrawal that is extended by a State under
subsection (h), nor may the President withdraw from leasing
any area for which a State failed to prohibit, or petition to
prohibit, leasing under subsection (g). Further, in the area
of the outer Continental Shelf more than 100 miles from any
coastline, not more than 25 percent of the acreage of any OCS
Planning Area may be withdrawn from leasing under this
section at any point in time. A withdrawal by the President
may be for a term not to exceed 10 years. When considering
potential uses of the outer Continental Shelf, to the maximum
extent possible, the President shall accommodate competing
interests and potential uses.'';
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(g) Availability for Leasing Within Certain Areas of the
Outer Continental Shelf.--
``(1) Prohibition against leasing.--
``(A) Unavailable for leasing without state request.--
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, from and
after enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of
2008, the Secretary shall not offer for leasing for oil and
gas, or natural gas, any area within 50 miles of the
coastline that was withdrawn from disposition by leasing in
the Atlantic OCS Region or the Pacific OCS Region, or the
Gulf of Mexico OCS Region Eastern Planning Area, as depicted
on the maps referred to in this subparagraph, under the
`Memorandum on Withdrawal of Certain Areas of the United
States Outer Continental Shelf from Leasing Disposition', 34
Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1111, dated June 12, 1998, or any
area within 50 miles of the coastline not withdrawn under
that Memorandum that is included within the Gulf of Mexico
OCS Region Eastern Planning Area as indicated on the map
entitled `Gulf of Mexico OCS Region State Adjacent Zones and
OCS Planning Areas' or the Florida Straits Planning Area as
indicated on the map entitled `Atlantic OCS Region State
Adjacent Zones and OCS Planning Areas', both of which are
dated September 2005 and on file in the Office of the
Director, Minerals Management Service.
``(B) Areas between 50 and 100 miles from the coastline.--
Unless an Adjacent State petitions under subsection (h)
within one year after the date of the enactment of the Deep
Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2008 for natural gas leasing or
by June 30, 2010, for oil and gas leasing, the Secretary
shall offer for leasing any area more than 50 miles but less
than 100 miles from the coastline that was withdrawn from
disposition by leasing in the Atlantic OCS Region, the
Pacific OCS Region, or the Gulf of Mexico OCS Region Eastern
Planning Area, as depicted on the maps referred to in this
subparagraph, under the `Memorandum on Withdrawal of Certain
Areas of the United States Outer Continental Shelf from
Leasing Disposition', 34 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1111, dated
June 12, 1998, or any area more than 50 miles but less than
100 miles of the coastline not withdrawn under that
Memorandum that is included within the Gulf of Mexico OCS
Region Eastern Planning Area as indicated on the map entitled
`Gulf of Mexico OCS Region State Adjacent Zones and OCS
Planning Areas' or within the Florida Straits Planning Area
as indicated on the map entitled `Atlantic OCS Region State
Adjacent Zones and OCS Planning Areas', both of which are
dated September 2005 and on file in the Office of the
Director, Minerals Management Service.
``(2) Petition for leasing.--
``(A) In general.--The Governor of the State, upon
concurrence of its legislature, may submit to the Secretary a
petition requesting that the Secretary make available any
area that is within the State's Adjacent Zone, included
within the provisions of paragraph (1), and that (i) is
greater than 25 miles from any point on the coastline of a

[[Page 16292]]

Neighboring State for the conduct of offshore leasing, pre-
leasing, and related activities with respect to natural gas
leasing; or (ii) is greater than 50 miles from any point on
the coastline of a Neighboring State for the conduct of
offshore leasing, pre-leasing, and related activities with
respect to oil and gas leasing. The Adjacent State may also
petition for leasing any other area within its Adjacent Zone
if leasing is allowed in the similar area of the Adjacent
Zone of the applicable Neighboring State, or if not allowed,
if the Neighboring State, acting through its Governor,
expresses its concurrence with the petition. The Secretary
shall only consider such a petition upon making a finding
that leasing is allowed in the similar area of the Adjacent
Zone of the applicable Neighboring State or upon receipt of
the concurrence of the Neighboring State. The date of receipt
by the Secretary of such concurrence by the Neighboring State
shall constitute the date of receipt of the petition for that
area for which the concurrence applies.
``(B) Limitations on leasing.--In its petition, a State
with an Adjacent Zone that contains leased tracts may
condition new leasing for oil and gas, or natural gas for
tracts within 25 miles of the coastline by--
``(i) requiring a net reduction in the number of production
platforms;
``(ii) requiring a net increase in the average distance of
production platforms from the coastline;
``(iii) limiting permanent surface occupancy on new leases
to areas that are more than 10 miles from the coastline;
``(iv) limiting some tracts to being produced from shore or
from platforms located on other tracts; or
``(v) other conditions that the Adjacent State may deem
appropriate as long as the Secretary does not determine that
production is made economically or technically impracticable
or otherwise impossible.
``(C) Action by secretary.--Not later than 90 days after
receipt of a petition under subparagraph (A), the Secretary
shall approve the petition, unless the Secretary determines
that leasing the area would probably cause serious harm or
damage to the marine resources of the State's Adjacent Zone.
Prior to approving the petition, the Secretary shall complete
an environmental assessment that documents the anticipated
environmental effects of leasing in the area included within
the scope of the petition.
``(D) Failure to act.--If the Secretary fails to approve or
deny a petition in accordance with subparagraph (C) the
petition shall be considered to be approved 90 days after
receipt of the petition.
``(E) Amendment of the 5-year leasing program.--
Notwithstanding section 18, within 180 days of the approval
of a petition under subparagraph (C) or (D), after the
expiration of the time limits in paragraph (1)(B), the
Secretary shall amend the current 5-Year Outer Continental
Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program to include a lease sale or
sales for at least 75 percent of the associated areas, unless
there are, from the date of approval, expiration of such time
limits, as applicable, fewer than 12 months remaining in the
current 5-Year Leasing Program in which case the Secretary
shall include the associated areas within lease sales under
the next 5-Year Leasing Program. For purposes of amending the
5-Year Program in accordance with this section, further
consultations with States shall not be required. For purposes
of this section, an environmental assessment performed under
the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 to assess the effects of approving the petition shall be
sufficient to amend the 5-Year Leasing Program.
``(h) Option To Extend Withdrawal From Leasing Within
Certain Areas of the Outer Continental Shelf.--A State,
through its Governor and upon the concurrence of its
legislature, may extend for a period of time of up to 5 years
for each extension the withdrawal from leasing for all or
part of any area within the State's Adjacent Zone located
more than 50 miles, but less than 100 miles, from the
coastline that is subject to subsection (g)(1)(B). A State
may extend multiple times for any particular area but not
more than once per calendar year for any particular area. A
State must prepare separate extensions, with separate votes
by its legislature, for oil and gas leasing and for natural
gas leasing. An extension by a State may affect some areas to
be withdrawn from all leasing and some areas to be withdrawn
only from one type of leasing.
``(i) Effect of Other Laws.--Adoption by any Adjacent State
of any constitutional provision, or enactment of any State
statute, that has the effect, as determined by the Secretary,
of restricting either the Governor or the Legislature, or
both, from exercising full discretion related to subsection
(g) or (h), or both, shall automatically (1) prohibit any
sharing of OCS Receipts under this Act with the Adjacent
State, and its coastal political subdivisions, and (2)
prohibit the Adjacent State from exercising any authority
under subsection (h), for the duration of the restriction.
The Secretary shall make the determination of the existence
of such restricting constitutional provision or State statute
within 30 days of a petition by any outer Continental Shelf
lessee or coastal State.
``(j) Prohibition on Leasing East of the Military Mission
Line.--
``(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, from and
after the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of
2008, prior to January 1, 2022, no area of the outer
Continental Shelf located in the Gulf of Mexico east of the
military mission line may be offered for leasing for oil and
gas or natural gas unless a waiver is issued by the Secretary
of Defense. If such a waiver is granted, 62.5 percent of the
OCS Receipts from a lease within such area issued because of
such waiver shall be paid annually to the National Guards of
all States having a point within 1000 miles of such a lease,
allocated among the States on a per capita basis using the
entire population of such States.
``(2) In this subsection, the term `military mission line'
means a line located at 86 degrees, 41 minutes West
Longitude, and extending south from the coast of Florida to
the outer boundary of United States territorial waters in the
Gulf of Mexico.''.

SEC. 112. OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF LEASING PROGRAM.

Section 18 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1344) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by adding at the end of paragraph
(3) the following: ``The Secretary shall, in each 5-Year
Program, include lease sales that when viewed as a whole
propose to offer for oil and gas or natural gas leasing at
least 75 percent of the available unleased acreage within
each OCS Planning Area. Available unleased acreage is that
portion of the outer Continental Shelf that is not under
lease at the time of the proposed lease sale, and has not
otherwise been made unavailable for leasing by law.'';
(2) in subsection (c), by striking so much as precedes
paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(c)(1) During the preparation of any proposed leasing
program under this section, the Secretary shall consider and
analyze leasing throughout the entire outer Continental Shelf
without regard to any other law affecting such leasing.
During this preparation the Secretary shall invite and
consider suggestions from any interested Federal agency,
including the Attorney General, in consultation with the
Federal Trade Commission, and from the Governor of any
coastal State. The Secretary may also invite or consider any
suggestions from the executive of any local government in a
coastal State that have been previously submitted to the
Governor of such State, and from any other person. Further,
the Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of Defense
regarding military operational needs in the outer Continental
Shelf. The Secretary shall work with the Secretary of Defense
to resolve any conflicts that might arise regarding offering
any area of the outer Continental Shelf for oil and gas or
natural gas leasing. If the Secretaries are not able to
resolve all such conflicts, any unresolved issues shall be
elevated to the President for resolution.
``(2) After the consideration and analysis required by
paragraph (1), including the consideration of the suggestions
received from any interested Federal agency, the Federal
Trade Commission, the Governor of any coastal State, any
local government of a coastal State, and any other person,
the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register a
proposed leasing program accompanied by a draft environmental
impact statement prepared pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969. After the publishing of the
proposed leasing program and during the comment period
provided for on the draft environmental impact statement, the
Secretary shall submit a copy of the proposed program to the
Governor of each affected State for review and comment. The
Governor may solicit comments from those executives of local
governments in the Governor's State that the Governor, in the
discretion of the Governor, determines will be affected by
the proposed program. If any comment by such Governor is
received by the Secretary at least 15 days prior to
submission to the Congress pursuant to paragraph (3) and
includes a request for any modification of such proposed
program, the Secretary shall reply in writing, granting or
denying such request in whole or in part, or granting such
request in such modified form as the Secretary considers
appropriate, and stating the Secretary's reasons therefor.
All such correspondence between the Secretary and the
Governor of any affected State, together with any additional
information and data relating thereto, shall accompany such
proposed program when it is submitted to the Congress.''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(i) Projection of State Adjacent Zone Resources and State
and Local Government Shares of OCS Receipts.--Concurrent with
the publication of the scoping notice at the beginning of the
development of each 5-Year Outer Continental Shelf Oil and
Gas Leasing Program, or as soon thereafter as possible, the
Secretary shall--
``(1) provide to each Adjacent State a current estimate of
proven and potential oil and gas resources located within the
State's Adjacent Zone; and
``(2) provide to each Adjacent State, and coastal political
subdivisions thereof, a best-efforts projection of the OCS
Receipts that the Secretary expects will be shared with each
Adjacent State, and its coastal political

[[Page 16293]]

subdivisions, using the assumption that the unleased tracts
within the State's Adjacent Zone are fully made available for
leasing, including long-term projected OCS Receipts. In
addition, the Secretary shall include a macroeconomic
estimate of the impact of such leasing on the national
economy and each State's economy, including investment, jobs,
revenues, personal income, and other categories.''.

SEC. 113. COORDINATION WITH ADJACENT STATES.

Section 19 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1345) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) in the first sentence by inserting
``, for any tract located within the Adjacent State's
Adjacent Zone,'' after ``government''; and
(2) by adding the following:
``(f)(1) No Federal agency may permit or otherwise approve,
without the concurrence of the Adjacent State, the
construction of a crude oil or petroleum products (or both)
pipeline within the part of the Adjacent State's Adjacent
Zone that is withdrawn from oil and gas or natural gas
leasing, except that such a pipeline may be approved, without
such Adjacent State's concurrence, to pass through such
Adjacent Zone if at least 50 percent of the production
projected to be carried by the pipeline within its first 10
years of operation is from areas of the Adjacent State's
Adjacent Zone.
``(2) No State may prohibit the construction within its
Adjacent Zone or its State waters of a natural gas pipeline
that will transport natural gas produced from the outer
Continental Shelf. However, an Adjacent State may prevent a
proposed natural gas pipeline landing location if it proposes
two alternate landing locations in the Adjacent State,
acceptable to the Adjacent State, located within 50 miles on
either side of the proposed landing location.''.

SEC. 114. ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES.

Section 20(d) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1346) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(d)''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) For all programs, lease sales, leases, and actions
under this Act, the following shall apply regarding the
application of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969:
``(A) Granting or directing lease suspensions and the
conduct of all preliminary activities on outer Continental
Shelf tracts, including seismic activities, are categorically
excluded from the need to prepare either an environmental
assessment or an environmental impact statement, and the
Secretary shall not be required to analyze whether any
exceptions to a categorical exclusion apply for activities
conducted under the authority of this Act.
``(B) The environmental impact statement developed in
support of each 5-Year Oil and Gas Leasing Program provides
the environmental analysis for all lease sales to be
conducted under the program and such sales shall not be
subject to further environmental analysis.
``(C) Exploration plans shall not be subject to any
requirement to prepare an environmental impact statement, and
the Secretary may find that exploration plans are eligible
for categorical exclusion due to the impacts already being
considered within an environmental impact statement or due to
mitigation measures included within the plan.
``(D) Within each OCS Planning Area, after the preparation
of the first development and production plan environmental
impact statement for a leased tract within the Area, future
development and production plans for leased tracts within the
Area shall only require the preparation of an environmental
assessment unless the most recent development and production
plan environmental impact statement within the Area was
finalized more than 10 years prior to the date of the
approval of the plan, in which case an environmental impact
statement shall be required.''.

SEC. 115. TERMINATION OF EFFECT OF LAWS PROHIBITING THE
SPENDING OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS FOR CERTAIN
PURPOSES.

All provisions of existing Federal law prohibiting the
spending of appropriated funds to conduct oil and natural gas
leasing and preleasing activities, or to issue a lease to any
person, for any area of the outer Continental Shelf shall
have no force or effect.

SEC. 116. OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF INCOMPATIBLE USE.

(a) In General.--No Federal agency may permit construction
or operation (or both) of any facility, or designate or
maintain a restricted transportation corridor or operating
area on the Federal outer Continental Shelf or in State
waters, that will be incompatible with, as determined by the
Secretary of the Interior, oil and gas or natural gas leasing
and substantially full exploration and production of tracts
that are geologically prospective for oil or natural gas (or
both).
(b) Exceptions.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to any
facility, transportation corridor, or operating area the
construction, operation, designation, or maintenance of which
is or will be--
(1) located in an area of the outer Continental Shelf that
is unavailable for oil and gas or natural gas leasing by
operation of law;
(2) used for a military readiness activity (as defined in
section 315(f) of Public Law 107-314; 16 U.S.C. 703 note); or
(3) required in the national interest, as determined by the
President.

SEC. 117. REPURCHASE OF CERTAIN LEASES.

(a) Authority To Repurchase and Cancel Certain Leases.--The
Secretary of the Interior shall repurchase and cancel any
Federal oil and gas, geothermal, coal, oil shale, tar sands,
or other mineral lease, whether onshore or offshore, but not
including any outer Continental Shelf oil and gas leases that
were subject to litigation in the Court of Federal Claims on
January 1, 2006, if the Secretary finds that such lease
qualifies for repurchase and cancellation under the
regulations authorized by this section.
(b) Regulations.--Not later than 365 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish a
final regulation stating the conditions under which a lease
referred to in subsection (a) would qualify for repurchase
and cancellation, and the process to be followed regarding
repurchase and cancellation. Such regulation shall include,
but not be limited to, the following:
(1) The Secretary shall repurchase and cancel a lease after
written request by the lessee upon a finding by the Secretary
that--
(A) a request by the lessee for a required permit or other
approval complied with applicable law, except the Coastal
Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.), and
terms of the lease and such permit or other approval was
denied;
(B) a Federal agency failed to act on a request by the
lessee for a required permit, other approval, or
administrative appeal within a regulatory or statutory time-
frame associated with the requested action, whether advisory
or mandatory, or if none, within 180 days; or
(C) a Federal agency attached a condition of approval,
without agreement by the lessee, to a required permit or
other approval if such condition of approval was not mandated
by Federal statute or regulation in effect on the date of
lease issuance, or was not specifically allowed under the
terms of the lease.
(2) A lessee shall not be required to exhaust
administrative remedies regarding a permit request,
administrative appeal, or other required request for approval
for the purposes of this section.
(3) The Secretary shall make a final agency decision on a
request by a lessee under this section within 180 days of
request.
(4) Compensation to a lessee to repurchase and cancel a
lease under this section shall be the amount that a lessee
would receive in a restitution case for a material breach of
contract.
(5) Compensation shall be in the form of a check or
electronic transfer from the Department of the Treasury from
funds deposited into miscellaneous receipts under the
authority of the same Act that authorized the issuance of the
lease being repurchased.
(6) Failure of the Secretary to make a final agency
decision on a request by a lessee under this section within
180 days of request shall result in a 10 percent increase in
the compensation due to the lessee if the lease is ultimately
repurchased.
(c) No Prejudice.--This section shall not be interpreted to
prejudice any other rights that the lessee would have in the
absence of this section.

SEC. 118. OFFSITE ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any person
conducting activities under the Mineral Leasing Act (30
U.S.C. 181 et seq.), the Geothermal Steam Act (30 U.S.C. 1001
et seq.), the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands (30
U.S.C. 351 et seq.), the Weeks Act (16 U.S.C. 552 et seq.),
the General Mining Act of 1872 (30 U.S.C. 22 et seq.), the
Materials Act of 1947 (30 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), or the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.), may in
satisfying any mitigation requirements associated with such
activities propose mitigation measures on a site away from
the area impacted and the Secretary of the Interior shall
accept these proposed measures if the Secretary finds that
they generally achieve the purposes for which mitigation
measures appertained.

SEC. 119. OCS REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS.

Not later than July 1, 2010, the Secretary of the Interior
shall establish the headquarters for the Atlantic OCS Region,
the headquarters for the Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, and the
headquarters for the Pacific OCS Region within a State
bordering the Atlantic OCS Region, a State bordering the Gulf
of Mexico OCS Region, and a State bordering the Pacific OCS
Region, respectively, from among the States bordering those
Regions, that petitions by no later than January 1, 2010, for
leasing, for oil and gas or natural gas, covering at least 40
percent of the area of its Adjacent Zone within 100 miles of
the coastline. Such Atlantic and Pacific OCS Regions
headquarters shall be located within 25 miles of the
coastline and each MMS OCS regional headquarters shall be the
permanent duty station for all Minerals Management Service
personnel that on a daily basis spend on average 60 percent
or more of their time in performance of duties in support of
the activities of the respective Region, except that the
Minerals Management Service may house regional inspection
staff in other locations. Each OCS Region shall each be led

[[Page 16294]]

by a Regional Director who shall be an employee within the
Senior Executive Service.

SEC. 120. LEASES FOR AREAS LOCATED WITHIN 100 MILES OF
CALIFORNIA OR FLORIDA.

(a) Authorization To Cancel and Exchange Certain Existing
Oil and Gas Leases; Prohibition on Submittal of Exploration
Plans for Certain Leases Prior to June 30, 2012.--
(1) Authority.--Within 2 years after the date of enactment
of this Act, the lessee of an existing oil and gas lease for
an area located completely within 100 miles of the coastline
within the California or Florida Adjacent Zones shall have
the option, without compensation, of exchanging such lease
for a new oil and gas lease having a primary term of 5 years.
For the area subject to the new lease, the lessee may select
any unleased tract on the outer Continental Shelf that is in
an area available for leasing. Further, with the permission
of the relevant Governor, such a lessee may convert its
existing oil and gas lease into a natural gas lease having a
primary term of 5 years and covering the same area as the
existing lease or another area within the same State's
Adjacent Zone within 100 miles of the coastline.
(2) Administrative process.--The Secretary of the Interior
shall establish a reasonable administrative process to
implement paragraph (1). Exchanges and conversions under
subsection (a), including the issuance of new leases, shall
not be considered to be major Federal actions for purposes of
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.). Further, such actions conducted in accordance with
this section are deemed to be in compliance all provisions of
the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et
seq.).
(3) Operating restrictions.--A new lease issued in exchange
for an existing lease under this section shall be subject to
such national defense operating stipulations on the OCS tract
covered by the new lease as may be applicable upon issuance.
(4) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority in the
lease exchange process based on the amount of the original
bonus bid paid for the issuance of each lease to be
exchanged. The Secretary shall allow leases covering partial
tracts to be exchanged for leases covering full tracts
conditioned upon payment of additional bonus bids on a per-
acre basis as determined by the average per acre of the
original bonus bid per acre for the partial tract being
exchanged.
(5) Exploration plans.--Any exploration plan submitted to
the Secretary of the Interior after the date of the enactment
of this Act and before July 1, 2012, for an oil and gas lease
for an area wholly within 100 miles of the coastline within
the California Adjacent Zone or Florida Adjacent Zone shall
not be treated as received by the Secretary until the earlier
of July 1, 2012, or the date on which a petition by the
Adjacent State for oil and gas leasing covering the area
within which is located the area subject to the oil and gas
lease was approved.
(b) Further Lease Cancellation and Exchange Provisions.--
(1) Cancellation of lease.--As part of the lease exchange
process under this section, the Secretary shall cancel a
lease that is exchanged under this section.
(2) Consent of lessees.--All lessees holding an interest in
a lease must consent to cancellation of their leasehold
interests in order for the lease to be cancelled and
exchanged under this section.
(3) Waiver of rights.--As a prerequisite to the exchange of
a lease under this section, the lessee must waive any rights
to bring any litigation against the United States related to
the transaction.
(4) Plugging and abandonment.--The plugging and abandonment
requirements for any wells located on any lease to be
cancelled and exchanged under this section must be complied
with by the lessees prior to the cancellation and exchange.
(c) Area Partially Within 100 Miles of Florida.--An
existing oil and gas lease for an area located partially
within 100 miles of the coastline within the Florida Adjacent
Zone may only be developed and produced using wells drilled
from well-head locations at least 100 miles from the
coastline to any bottom-hole location on the area of the
lease. This subsection shall not apply if Florida has
petitioned for leasing closer to the coastline than 100
miles.
(d) Existing Oil and Gas Lease Defined.--In this section
the term ``existing oil and gas lease'' means an oil and gas
lease in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 121. COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE.

Section 31 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1356a) is repealed.

SEC. 122. REPEAL OF THE GULF OF MEXICO ENERGY SECURITY ACT OF
2006.

The Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 is repealed
effective October 1, 2008.

Subtitle B--ANWR

SEC. 141. SHORT TITLE.

This subtitle may be cited as the ``American Energy
Independence and Price Reduction Act''.

SEC. 142. DEFINITIONS.

In this subtitle:
(1) Coastal plain.--The term ``Coastal Plain'' means that
area described in appendix I to part 37 of title 50, Code of
Federal Regulations.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'', except as otherwise
provided, means the Secretary of the Interior or the
Secretary's designee.

SEC. 143. LEASING PROGRAM FOR LANDS WITHIN THE COASTAL PLAIN.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall take such actions as
are necessary--
(1) to establish and implement, in accordance with this
subtitle and acting through the Director of the Bureau of
Land Management in consultation with the Director of the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, a competitive oil
and gas leasing program that will result in an
environmentally sound program for the exploration,
development, and production of the oil and gas resources of
the Coastal Plain; and
(2) to administer the provisions of this subtitle through
regulations, lease terms, conditions, restrictions,
prohibitions, stipulations, and other provisions that ensure
the oil and gas exploration, development, and production
activities on the Coastal Plain will result in no significant
adverse effect on fish and wildlife, their habitat,
subsistence resources, and the environment, including, in
furtherance of this goal, by requiring the application of the
best commercially available technology for oil and gas
exploration, development, and production to all exploration,
development, and production operations under this subtitle in
a manner that ensures the receipt of fair market value by the
public for the mineral resources to be leased.
(b) Repeal.--
(1) Repeal.--Section 1003 of the Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (16 U.S.C. 3143) is repealed.
(2) Conforming amendment.--The table of contents in section
1 of such Act is amended by striking the item relating to
section 1003.
(c) Compliance With Requirements Under Certain Other
Laws.--
(1) Compatibility.--For purposes of the National Wildlife
Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et
seq.), the oil and gas leasing program and activities
authorized by this section in the Coastal Plain are deemed to
be compatible with the purposes for which the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge was established, and no further findings or
decisions are required to implement this determination.
(2) Adequacy of the department of the interior's
legislative environmental impact statement.--The ``Final
Legislative Environmental Impact Statement'' (April 1987) on
the Coastal Plain prepared pursuant to section 1002 of the
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (16
U.S.C. 3142) and section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)) is
deemed to satisfy the requirements under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 that apply with respect to
prelease activities, including actions authorized to be taken
by the Secretary to develop and promulgate the regulations
for the establishment of a leasing program authorized by this
subtitle before the conduct of the first lease sale.
(3) Compliance with nepa for other actions.--Before
conducting the first lease sale under this subtitle, the
Secretary shall prepare an environmental impact statement
under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 with
respect to the actions authorized by this subtitle that are
not referred to in paragraph (2). Notwithstanding any other
law, the Secretary is not required to identify nonleasing
alternative courses of action or to analyze the environmental
effects of such courses of action. The Secretary shall only
identify a preferred action for such leasing and a single
leasing alternative, and analyze the environmental effects
and potential mitigation measures for those two alternatives.
The identification of the preferred action and related
analysis for the first lease sale under this subtitle shall
be completed within 18 months after the date of enactment of
this Act. The Secretary shall only consider public comments
that specifically address the Secretary's preferred action
and that are filed within 20 days after publication of an
environmental analysis. Notwithstanding any other law,
compliance with this paragraph is deemed to satisfy all
requirements for the analysis and consideration of the
environmental effects of proposed leasing under this
subtitle.
(d) Relationship to State and Local Authority.--Nothing in
this subtitle shall be considered to expand or limit State
and local regulatory authority.
(e) Special Areas.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary, after consultation with the
State of Alaska, the city of Kaktovik, and the North Slope
Borough, may designate up to a total of 45,000 acres of the
Coastal Plain as a Special Area if the Secretary determines
that the Special Area is of such unique character and
interest so as to require special management and regulatory
protection. The Secretary shall designate as such a Special
Area the Sadlerochit Spring area, comprising approximately
4,000 acres.
(2) Management.--Each such Special Area shall be managed so
as to protect and preserve the area's unique and diverse
character including its fish, wildlife, and subsistence
resource values.
(3) Exclusion from leasing or surface occupancy.--The
Secretary may exclude any

[[Page 16295]]

Special Area from leasing. If the Secretary leases a Special
Area, or any part thereof, for purposes of oil and gas
exploration, development, production, and related activities,
there shall be no surface occupancy of the lands comprising
the Special Area.
(4) Directional drilling.--Notwithstanding the other
provisions of this subsection, the Secretary may lease all or
a portion of a Special Area under terms that permit the use
of horizontal drilling technology from sites on leases
located outside the Special Area.
(f) Limitation on Closed Areas.--The Secretary's sole
authority to close lands within the Coastal Plain to oil and
gas leasing and to exploration, development, and production
is that set forth in this subtitle.
(g) Regulations.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary to carry out this subtitle,
including rules and regulations relating to protection of the
fish and wildlife, their habitat, subsistence resources, and
environment of the Coastal Plain, by no later than 15 months
after the date of enactment of this Act.
(2) Revision of regulations.--The Secretary shall
periodically review and, if appropriate, revise the rules and
regulations issued under subsection (a) to reflect any
significant biological, environmental, or engineering data
that come to the Secretary's attention.

SEC. 144. LEASE SALES.

(a) In General.--Lands may be leased pursuant to this
subtitle to any person qualified to obtain a lease for
deposits of oil and gas under the Mineral Leasing Act (30
U.S.C. 181 et seq.).
(b) Procedures.--The Secretary shall, by regulation,
establish procedures for--
(1) receipt and consideration of sealed nominations for any
area in the Coastal Plain for inclusion in, or exclusion (as
provided in subsection (c)) from, a lease sale;
(2) the holding of lease sales after such nomination
process; and
(3) public notice of and comment on designation of areas to
be included in, or excluded from, a lease sale.
(c) Lease Sale Bids.--Bidding for leases under this
subtitle shall be by sealed competitive cash bonus bids.
(d) Acreage Minimum in First Sale.--In the first lease sale
under this subtitle, the Secretary shall offer for lease
those tracts the Secretary considers to have the greatest
potential for the discovery of hydrocarbons, taking into
consideration nominations received pursuant to subsection
(b)(1), but in no case less than 200,000 acres.
(e) Timing of Lease Sales.--The Secretary shall--
(1) conduct the first lease sale under this subtitle within
22 months after the date of the enactment of this Act;
(2) evaluate the bids in such sale and issue leases
resulting from such sale, within 90 days after the date of
the completion of such sale; and
(3) conduct additional sales so long as sufficient interest
in development exists to warrant, in the Secretary's
judgment, the conduct of such sales.

SEC. 145. GRANT OF LEASES BY THE SECRETARY.

(a) In General.--The Secretary may grant to the highest
responsible qualified bidder in a lease sale conducted
pursuant to section 144 any lands to be leased on the Coastal
Plain upon payment by the lessee of such bonus as may be
accepted by the Secretary.
(b) Subsequent Transfers.--No lease issued under this
subtitle may be sold, exchanged, assigned, sublet, or
otherwise transferred except with the approval of the
Secretary. Prior to any such approval the Secretary shall
consult with, and give due consideration to the views of, the
Attorney General.

SEC. 146. LEASE TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

(a) In General.--An oil or gas lease issued pursuant to
this subtitle shall--
(1) provide for the payment of a royalty of not less than
12\1/2\ percent in amount or value of the production removed
or sold from the lease, as determined by the Secretary under
the regulations applicable to other Federal oil and gas
leases;
(2) provide that the Secretary may close, on a seasonal
basis, portions of the Coastal Plain to exploratory drilling
activities as necessary to protect caribou calving areas and
other species of fish and wildlife;
(3) require that the lessee of lands within the Coastal
Plain shall be fully responsible and liable for the
reclamation of lands within the Coastal Plain and any other
Federal lands that are adversely affected in connection with
exploration, development, production, or transportation
activities conducted under the lease and within the Coastal
Plain by the lessee or by any of the subcontractors or agents
of the lessee;
(4) provide that the lessee may not delegate or convey, by
contract or otherwise, the reclamation responsibility and
liability to another person without the express written
approval of the Secretary;
(5) provide that the standard of reclamation for lands
required to be reclaimed under this subtitle shall be, as
nearly as practicable, a condition capable of supporting the
uses which the lands were capable of supporting prior to any
exploration, development, or production activities, or upon
application by the lessee, to a higher or better use as
approved by the Secretary;
(6) contain terms and conditions relating to protection of
fish and wildlife, their habitat, subsistence resources, and
the environment as required pursuant to section 143(a)(2);
(7) provide that the lessee, its agents, and its
contractors use best efforts to provide a fair share, as
determined by the level of obligation previously agreed to in
the 1974 agreement implementing section 29 of the Federal
Agreement and Grant of Right of Way for the Operation of the
Trans-Alaska Pipeline, of employment and contracting for
Alaska Natives and Alaska Native Corporations from throughout
the State;
(8) prohibit the export of oil produced under the lease;
and
(9) contain such other provisions as the Secretary
determines necessary to ensure compliance with the provisions
of this subtitle and the regulations issued under this
subtitle.
(b) Project Labor Agreements.--The Secretary, as a term and
condition of each lease under this subtitle and in
recognizing the Government's proprietary interest in labor
stability and in the ability of construction labor and
management to meet the particular needs and conditions of
projects to be developed under the leases issued pursuant to
this subtitle and the special concerns of the parties to such
leases, shall require that the lessee and its agents and
contractors negotiate to obtain a project labor agreement for
the employment of laborers and mechanics on production,
maintenance, and construction under the lease.

SEC. 147. COASTAL PLAIN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.

(a) No Significant Adverse Effect Standard To Govern
Authorized Coastal Plain Activities.--The Secretary shall,
consistent with the requirements of section 143, administer
the provisions of this subtitle through regulations, lease
terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, stipulations,
and other provisions that--
(1) ensure the oil and gas exploration, development, and
production activities on the Coastal Plain will result in no
significant adverse effect on fish and wildlife, their
habitat, and the environment;
(2) require the application of the best commercially
available technology for oil and gas exploration,
development, and production on all new exploration,
development, and production operations; and
(3) ensure that the maximum amount of surface acreage
covered by production and support facilities, including
airstrips and any areas covered by gravel berms or piers for
support of pipelines, does not exceed 2,000 acres on the
Coastal Plain.
(b) Site-Specific Assessment and Mitigation.--The Secretary
shall also require, with respect to any proposed drilling and
related activities, that--
(1) a site-specific analysis be made of the probable
effects, if any, that the drilling or related activities will
have on fish and wildlife, their habitat, subsistence
resources, and the environment;
(2) a plan be implemented to avoid, minimize, and mitigate
(in that order and to the extent practicable) any significant
adverse effect identified under paragraph (1); and
(3) the development of the plan shall occur after
consultation with the agency or agencies having jurisdiction
over matters mitigated by the plan.
(c) Regulations To Protect Coastal Plain Fish and Wildlife
Resources, Subsistence Users, and the Environment.--Before
implementing the leasing program authorized by this subtitle,
the Secretary shall prepare and promulgate regulations, lease
terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, stipulations,
and other measures designed to ensure that the activities
undertaken on the Coastal Plain under this subtitle are
conducted in a manner consistent with the purposes and
environmental requirements of this subtitle.
(d) Compliance With Federal and State Environmental Laws
and Other Requirements.--The proposed regulations, lease
terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, and
stipulations for the leasing program under this subtitle
shall require compliance with all applicable provisions of
Federal and State environmental law, and shall also require
the following:
(1) Standards at least as effective as the safety and
environmental mitigation measures set forth in items 1
through 29 at pages 167 through 169 of the ``Final
Legislative Environmental Impact Statement'' (April 1987) on
the Coastal Plain.
(2) Seasonal limitations on exploration, development, and
related activities, where necessary, to avoid significant
adverse effects during periods of concentrated fish and
wildlife breeding, denning, nesting, spawning, and migration.
(3) That exploration activities, except for surface
geological studies, be limited to the period between
approximately November 1 and May 1 each year and that
exploration activities shall be supported, if necessary, by
ice roads, winter trails with adequate snow cover, ice pads,
ice airstrips, and air transport methods, except that such
exploration activities may occur at other times if the
Secretary finds that such exploration will have no
significant adverse effect on the fish

[[Page 16296]]

and wildlife, their habitat, and the environment of the
Coastal Plain.
(4) Design safety and construction standards for all
pipelines and any access and service roads, that--
(A) minimize, to the maximum extent possible, adverse
effects upon the passage of migratory species such as
caribou; and
(B) minimize adverse effects upon the flow of surface water
by requiring the use of culverts, bridges, and other
structural devices.
(5) Prohibitions on general public access and use on all
pipeline access and service roads.
(6) Stringent reclamation and rehabilitation requirements,
consistent with the standards set forth in this subtitle,
requiring the removal from the Coastal Plain of all oil and
gas development and production facilities, structures, and
equipment upon completion of oil and gas production
operations, except that the Secretary may exempt from the
requirements of this paragraph those facilities, structures,
or equipment that the Secretary determines would assist in
the management of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and
that are donated to the United States for that purpose.
(7) Appropriate prohibitions or restrictions on access by
all modes of transportation.
(8) Appropriate prohibitions or restrictions on sand and
gravel extraction.
(9) Consolidation of facility siting.
(10) Appropriate prohibitions or restrictions on use of
explosives.
(11) Avoidance, to the extent practicable, of springs,
streams, and river system; the protection of natural surface
drainage patterns, wetlands, and riparian habitats; and the
regulation of methods or techniques for developing or
transporting adequate supplies of water for exploratory
drilling.
(12) Avoidance or minimization of air traffic-related
disturbance to fish and wildlife.
(13) Treatment and disposal of hazardous and toxic wastes,
solid wastes, reserve pit fluids, drilling muds and cuttings,
and domestic wastewater, including an annual waste management
report, a hazardous materials tracking system, and a
prohibition on chlorinated solvents, in accordance with
applicable Federal and State environmental law.
(14) Fuel storage and oil spill contingency planning.
(15) Research, monitoring, and reporting requirements.
(16) Field crew environmental briefings.
(17) Avoidance of significant adverse effects upon
subsistence hunting, fishing, and trapping by subsistence
users.
(18) Compliance with applicable air and water quality
standards.
(19) Appropriate seasonal and safety zone designations
around well sites, within which subsistence hunting and
trapping shall be limited.
(20) Reasonable stipulations for protection of cultural and
archeological resources.
(21) All other protective environmental stipulations,
restrictions, terms, and conditions deemed necessary by the
Secretary.
(e) Considerations.--In preparing and promulgating
regulations, lease terms, conditions, restrictions,
prohibitions, and stipulations under this section, the
Secretary shall consider the following:
(1) The stipulations and conditions that govern the
National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska leasing program, as set
forth in the 1999 Northeast National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska
Final Integrated Activity Plan/Environmental Impact
Statement.
(2) The environmental protection standards that governed
the initial Coastal Plain seismic exploration program under
parts 37.31 to 37.33 of title 50, Code of Federal
Regulations.
(3) The land use stipulations for exploratory drilling on
the KIC-ASRC private lands that are set forth in Appendix 2
of the August 9, 1983, agreement between Arctic Slope
Regional Corporation and the United States.
(f) Facility Consolidation Planning.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall, after providing for
public notice and comment, prepare and update periodically a
plan to govern, guide, and direct the siting and construction
of facilities for the exploration, development, production,
and transportation of Coastal Plain oil and gas resources.
(2) Objectives.--The plan shall have the following
objectives:
(A) Avoiding unnecessary duplication of facilities and
activities.
(B) Encouraging consolidation of common facilities and
activities.
(C) Locating or confining facilities and activities to
areas that will minimize impact on fish and wildlife, their
habitat, and the environment.
(D) Utilizing existing facilities wherever practicable.
(E) Enhancing compatibility between wildlife values and
development activities.
(g) Access to Public Lands.--The Secretary shall--
(1) manage public lands in the Coastal Plain subject to
subsections (a) and (b) of section 811 of the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3121); and
(2) ensure that local residents shall have reasonable
access to public lands in the Coastal Plain for traditional
uses.

SEC. 148. EXPEDITED JUDICIAL REVIEW.

(a) Filing of Complaint.--
(1) Deadline.--Subject to paragraph (2), any complaint
seeking judicial review of any provision of this subtitle or
any action of the Secretary under this subtitle shall be
filed--
(A) except as provided in subparagraph (B), within the 90-
day period beginning on the date of the action being
challenged; or
(B) in the case of a complaint based solely on grounds
arising after such period, within 90 days after the
complainant knew or reasonably should have known of the
grounds for the complaint.
(2) Venue.--Any complaint seeking judicial review of any
provision of this subtitle or any action of the Secretary
under this subtitle may be filed only in the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
(3) Limitation on scope of certain review.--Judicial review
of a Secretarial decision to conduct a lease sale under this
subtitle, including the environmental analysis thereof, shall
be limited to whether the Secretary has complied with the
terms of this subtitle and shall be based upon the
administrative record of that decision. The Secretary's
identification of a preferred course of action to enable
leasing to proceed and the Secretary's analysis of
environmental effects under this subtitle shall be presumed
to be correct unless shown otherwise by clear and convincing
evidence to the contrary.
(b) Limitation on Other Review.--Actions of the Secretary
with respect to which review could have been obtained under
this section shall not be subject to judicial review in any
civil or criminal proceeding for enforcement.

SEC. 149. FEDERAL AND STATE DISTRIBUTION OF REVENUES.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, of the amount of adjusted bonus, rental, and royalty
revenues from Federal oil and gas leasing and operations
authorized under this subtitle--
(1) 50 percent shall be paid to the State of Alaska; and
(2) except as provided in section 152(d), 90 percent of the
balance shall be deposited into the American Renewable and
Alternative Energy Trust Fund established by section 331.
(b) Payments to Alaska.--Payments to the State of Alaska
under this section shall be made semiannually.

SEC. 150. RIGHTS-OF-WAY ACROSS THE COASTAL PLAIN.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall issue rights-of-way
and easements across the Coastal Plain for the transportation
of oil and gas--
(1) except as provided in paragraph (2), under section 28
of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 185), without regard to
title XI of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation
Act (30 U.S.C. 3161 et seq.); and
(2) under title XI of the Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act (30 U.S.C. 3161 et seq.), for access
authorized by sections 1110 and 1111 of that Act (16 U.S.C.
3170 and 3171).
(b) Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary shall include in
any right-of-way or easement issued under subsection (a) such
terms and conditions as may be necessary to ensure that
transportation of oil and gas does not result in a
significant adverse effect on the fish and wildlife,
subsistence resources, their habitat, and the environment of
the Coastal Plain, including requirements that facilities be
sited or designed so as to avoid unnecessary duplication of
roads and pipelines.
(c) Regulations.--The Secretary shall include in
regulations under section 143(g) provisions granting rights-
of-way and easements described in subsection (a) of this
section.

SEC. 151. CONVEYANCE.

In order to maximize Federal revenues by removing clouds on
title to lands and clarifying land ownership patterns within
the Coastal Plain, the Secretary, notwithstanding the
provisions of section 1302(h)(2) of the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3192(h)(2)), shall
convey--
(1) to the Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation the surface estate
of the lands described in paragraph 1 of Public Land Order
6959, to the extent necessary to fulfill the Corporation's
entitlement under sections 12 and 14 of the Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1611 and 1613) in accordance
with the terms and conditions of the Agreement between the
Department of the Interior, the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the
Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation effective January 22, 1993; and
(2) to the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation the remaining
subsurface estate to which it is entitled pursuant to the
August 9, 1983, agreement between the Arctic Slope Regional
Corporation and the United States of America.

SEC. 152. LOCAL GOVERNMENT IMPACT AID AND COMMUNITY SERVICE
ASSISTANCE.

(a) Financial Assistance Authorized.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary may use amounts available
from the Coastal Plain Local Government Impact Aid Assistance
Fund established by subsection (d) to provide timely
financial assistance to entities that are eligible under
paragraph (2) and that are directly impacted by the
exploration for or

[[Page 16297]]

production of oil and gas on the Coastal Plain under this
subtitle.
(2) Eligible entities.--The North Slope Borough, the City
of Kaktovik, and any other borough, municipal subdivision,
village, or other community in the State of Alaska that is
directly impacted by exploration for, or the production of,
oil or gas on the Coastal Plain under this subtitle, as
determined by the Secretary, shall be eligible for financial
assistance under this section.
(b) Use of Assistance.--Financial assistance under this
section may be used only for--
(1) planning for mitigation of the potential effects of oil
and gas exploration and development on environmental, social,
cultural, recreational, and subsistence values;
(2) implementing mitigation plans and maintaining
mitigation projects;
(3) developing, carrying out, and maintaining projects and
programs that provide new or expanded public facilities and
services to address needs and problems associated with such
effects, including fire-fighting, police, water, waste
treatment, medivac, and medical services; and
(4) establishment of a coordination office, by the North
Slope Borough, in the City of Kaktovik, which shall--
(A) coordinate with and advise developers on local
conditions, impact, and history of the areas utilized for
development; and
(B) provide to the Committee on Resources of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate an annual report on the status of
coordination between developers and the communities affected
by development.
(c) Application.--
(1) In general.--Any community that is eligible for
assistance under this section may submit an application for
such assistance to the Secretary, in such form and under such
procedures as the Secretary may prescribe by regulation.
(2) North slope borough communities.--A community located
in the North Slope Borough may apply for assistance under
this section either directly to the Secretary or through the
North Slope Borough.
(3) Application assistance.--The Secretary shall work
closely with and assist the North Slope Borough and other
communities eligible for assistance under this section in
developing and submitting applications for assistance under
this section.
(d) Establishment of Fund.--
(1) In general.--There is established in the Treasury the
Coastal Plain Local Government Impact Aid Assistance Fund.
(2) Use.--Amounts in the fund may be used only for
providing financial assistance under this section.
(3) Deposits.--Subject to paragraph (4), there shall be
deposited into the fund amounts received by the United States
as revenues derived from rents, bonuses, and royalties from
Federal leases and lease sales authorized under this
subtitle.
(4) Limitation on deposits.--The total amount in the fund
may not exceed $11,000,000.
(5) Investment of balances.--The Secretary of the Treasury
shall invest amounts in the fund in interest bearing
government securities.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--To provide financial
assistance under this section there is authorized to be
appropriated to the Secretary from the Coastal Plain Local
Government Impact Aid Assistance Fund $5,000,000 for each
fiscal year.

Subtitle C--Oil Shale

SEC. 161. REPEAL.

Section 433 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 is
repealed.

TITLE II--CONSERVATION AND EFFICIENCY

Subtitle A--Tax Incentives for Fuel Efficiency

SEC. 201. CREDIT FOR NEW QUALIFIED PLUG-IN ELECTRIC DRIVE
MOTOR VEHICLES.

(a) In General.--Subpart B of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by
adding at the end the following new section:

``SEC. 30D. NEW QUALIFIED PLUG-IN ELECTRIC DRIVE MOTOR
VEHICLES.

``(a) Allowance of Credit.--There shall be allowed as a
credit against the tax imposed by this chapter for the
taxable year an amount equal to the sum of the credit amounts
determined under subsection (b) with respect to each new
qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle placed in
service by the taxpayer during the taxable year.
``(b) Per Vehicle Dollar Limitation.--
``(1) In general.--The amount determined under this
subsection with respect to any new qualified plug-in electric
drive motor vehicle is the sum of the amounts determined
under paragraphs (2) and (3) with respect to such vehicle.
``(2) Base amount.--The amount determined under this
paragraph is $3,000.
``(3) Battery capacity.--In the case of a vehicle which
draws propulsion energy from a battery with not less than 5
kilowatt hours of capacity, the amount determined under this
paragraph is $200, plus $200 for each kilowatt hour of
capacity in excess of 5 kilowatt hours. The amount determined
under this paragraph shall not exceed $2,000.
``(c) Application With Other Credits.--
``(1) Business credit treated as part of general business
credit.--So much of the credit which would be allowed under
subsection (a) for any taxable year (determined without
regard to this subsection) that is attributable to property
of a character subject to an allowance for depreciation shall
be treated as a credit listed in section 38(b) for such
taxable year (and not allowed under subsection (a)).
``(2) Personal credit.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of this title, the credit
allowed under subsection (a) for any taxable year (determined
after application of paragraph (1)) shall be treated as a
credit allowable under subpart A for such taxable year.
``(B) Limitation based on amount of tax.--In the case of a
taxable year to which section 26(a)(2) does not apply, the
credit allowed under subsection (a) for any taxable year
(determined after application of paragraph (1)) shall not
exceed the excess of--
``(i) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in
section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
``(ii) the sum of the credits allowable under subpart A
(other than this section and sections 23 and 25D) and section
27 for the taxable year.
``(d) New Qualified Plug-In Electric Drive Motor Vehicle.--
For purposes of this section--
``(1) In general.--The term `new qualified plug-in electric
drive motor vehicle' means a motor vehicle (as defined in
section 30(c)(2))--
``(A) the original use of which commences with the
taxpayer,
``(B) which is acquired for use or lease by the taxpayer
and not for resale,
``(C) which is made by a manufacturer,
``(D) which has a gross vehicle weight rating of less than
14,000 pounds,
``(E) which has received a certificate of conformity under
the Clean Air Act and meets or exceeds the Bin 5 Tier II
emission standard established in regulations prescribed by
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
under section 202(i) of the Clean Air Act for that make and
model year vehicle, and
``(F) which is propelled to a significant extent by an
electric motor which draws electricity from a battery which--
``(i) has a capacity of not less than 4 kilowatt hours, and
``(ii) is capable of being recharged from an external
source of electricity.
``(2) Exception.--The term `new qualified plug-in electric
drive motor vehicle' shall not include any vehicle which is
not a passenger automobile or light truck if such vehicle has
a gross vehicle weight rating of less than 8,500 pounds.
``(3) Other terms.--The terms `passenger automobile',
`light truck', and `manufacturer' have the meanings given
such terms in regulations prescribed by the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency for purposes of the
administration of title II of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7521 et seq.).
``(4) Battery capacity.--The term `capacity' means, with
respect to any battery, the quantity of electricity which the
battery is capable of storing, expressed in kilowatt hours,
as measured from a 100 percent state of charge to a 0 percent
state of charge.
``(e) Limitation on Number of New Qualified Plug-In
Electric Drive Motor Vehicles Eligible for Credit.--
``(1) In general.--In the case of a new qualified plug-in
electric drive motor vehicle sold during the phaseout period,
only the applicable percentage of the credit otherwise
allowable under subsection (a) shall be allowed.
``(2) Phaseout period.--For purposes of this subsection,
the phaseout period is the period beginning with the second
calendar quarter following the calendar quarter which
includes the first date on which the number of new qualified
plug-in electric drive motor vehicles manufactured by the
manufacturer of the vehicle referred to in paragraph (1) sold
for use in the United States after the date of the enactment
of this section, is at least 60,000.
``(3) Applicable percentage.--For purposes of paragraph
(1), the applicable percentage is--
``(A) 50 percent for the first 2 calendar quarters of the
phaseout period,
``(B) 25 percent for the 3d and 4th calendar quarters of
the phaseout period, and
``(C) 0 percent for each calendar quarter thereafter.
``(4) Controlled groups.--Rules similar to the rules of
section 30B(f)(4) shall apply for purposes of this
subsection.
``(f) Special Rules.--
``(1) Basis reduction.--The basis of any property for which
a credit is allowable under subsection (a) shall be reduced
by the amount of such credit (determined without regard to
subsection (c)).
``(2) Recapture.--The Secretary shall, by regulations,
provide for recapturing the benefit of any credit allowable
under subsection (a) with respect to any property which
ceases to be property eligible for such credit.
``(3) Property used outside united states, etc., not
qualified.--No credit shall be allowed under subsection (a)
with respect to any property referred to in section 50(b)(1)

[[Page 16298]]

or with respect to the portion of the cost of any property
taken into account under section 179.
``(4) Election not to take credit.--No credit shall be
allowed under subsection (a) for any vehicle if the taxpayer
elects to not have this section apply to such vehicle.
``(5) Property used by tax-exempt entity; interaction with
air quality and motor vehicle safety standards.--Rules
similar to the rules of paragraphs (6) and (10) of section
30B(h) shall apply for purposes of this section.''.
(b) Coordination With Alternative Motor Vehicle Credit.--
Section 30B(d)(3) of such Code is amended by adding at the
end the following new subparagraph:
``(D) Exclusion of plug-in vehicles.--Any vehicle with
respect to which a credit is allowable under section 30D
(determined without regard to subsection (c) thereof) shall
not be taken into account under this section.''.
(c) Credit Made Part of General Business Credit.--Section
38(b) of such Code is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' each place it appears at the end of
any paragraph,
(2) by striking ``plus'' each place it appears at the end
of any paragraph,
(3) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (31) and
inserting ``, plus'', and
(4) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(32) the portion of the new qualified plug-in electric
drive motor vehicle credit to which section 30D(c)(1)
applies.''.
(d) Conforming Amendments.--
(1)(A) Section 24(b)(3)(B) of such Code is amended by
striking ``and 25D'' and inserting ``25D, and 30D''.
(B) Section 25(e)(1)(C)(ii) of such Code is amended by
inserting ``30D,'' after ``25D,''.
(C) Section 25B(g)(2) of such Code is amended by striking
``and 25D'' and inserting ``, 25D, and 30D''.
(D) Section 26(a)(1) of such Code is amended by striking
``and 25D'' and inserting ``25D, and 30D''.
(E) Section 1400C(d)(2) of such Code is amended by striking
``and 25D'' and inserting ``25D, and 30D''.
(2) Section 1016(a) of such Code is amended by striking
``and'' at the end of paragraph (35), by striking the period
at the end of paragraph (36) and inserting ``, and'', and by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(37) to the extent provided in section 30D(f)(1).''.
(3) Section 6501(m) of such Code is amended by inserting
``30D(f)(4),'' after ``30C(e)(5),''.
(4) The table of sections for subpart B of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by adding
at the end the following new item:

``Sec. 30D. New qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicles.''.

(e) Treatment of Alternative Motor Vehicle Credit as a
Personal Credit.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (2) of section 30B(g) of such
Code is amended to read as follows:
``(2) Personal credit.--The credit allowed under subsection
(a) for any taxable year (after application of paragraph (1))
shall be treated as a credit allowable under subpart A for
such taxable year.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Subparagraph (A) of section 30C(d)(2) of such Code is
amended by striking ``sections 27, 30, and 30B'' and
inserting ``sections 27 and 30''.
(B) Paragraph (3) of section 55(c) of such Code is amended
by striking ``30B(g)(2),''.
(f) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subsection, the amendments made by this section shall apply
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2008.
(2) Treatment of alternative motor vehicle credit as
personal credit.--The amendments made by subsection (e) shall
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2007.
(g) Application of EGTRRA Sunset.--The amendment made by
subsection (d)(1)(A) shall be subject to title IX of the
Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 in
the same manner as the provision of such Act to which such
amendment relates.

SEC. 202. EXTENSION OF CREDIT FOR ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLES.

Paragraph (4) of section 30B(j) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``December 31, 2010'' and
inserting ``December 31, 2014''.

SEC. 203. EXTENSION OF ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLE REFUELING
PROPERTY CREDIT.

Paragraph (1) of section 30C(g) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``hydrogen,'' inserting
``hydrogen or alternative fuels (as defined in section
30B(e)(4)(B)),''.

Subtitle B--Tapping America's Ingenuity and Creativity

SEC. 211. DEFINITIONS.

In this subtitle:
(1) Administering entity.--The term ``administering
entity'' means the entity with which the Secretary enters
into an agreement under section 214(c).
(2) Department.--The term ``Department'' means the
Department of Energy.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.

SEC. 212. STATEMENT OF POLICY.

It is the policy of the United States to provide incentives
to encourage the development and implementation of innovative
energy technologies and new energy sources that will reduce
our reliance on foreign energy.

SEC. 213. PRIZE AUTHORITY.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall carry out a program to
competitively award cash prizes in conformity with this
subtitle to advance the research, development, demonstration,
and commercial application of innovative energy technologies
and new energy sources.
(b) Advertising and Solicitation of Competitors.--
(1) Advertising.--The Secretary shall widely advertise
prize competitions to encourage broad participation in the
program carried out under subsection (a), including
individuals, universities, communities, and large and small
businesses.
(2) Announcement through federal register notice.--The
Secretary shall announce each prize competition by publishing
a notice in the Federal Register. This notice shall include
essential elements of the competition such as the subject of
the competition, the duration of the competition, the
eligibility requirements for participation in the
competition, the process for participants to register for the
competition, the amount of the prize, and the criteria for
awarding the prize.
(c) Administering the Competition.--The Secretary may enter
into an agreement with a private, nonprofit entity to
administer the prize competitions, subject to the provisions
of this subtitle. The administering entity shall perform the
following functions:
(1) Advertise the competition and its results.
(2) Raise funds from private entities and individuals to
pay for administrative costs and cash prizes.
(3) Develop, in consultation with and subject to the final
approval of the Secretary, criteria to select winners based
upon the goal of safely and adequately storing nuclear used
fuel.
(4) Determine, in consultation with and subject to the
final approval of the Secretary, the appropriate amount of
the awards.
(5) Protect against the administering entity's unauthorized
use or disclosure of a registered participant's intellectual
property, trade secrets, and confidential business
information. Any information properly identified as trade
secrets or confidential business information that is
submitted by a participant as part of a competitive program
under this subtitle may be withheld from public disclosure.
(6) Develop and promulgate sufficient rules to define the
parameters of designing and proposing innovative energy
technologies and new energy sources with input from industry,
citizens, and corporations familiar with such activities.
(d) Funding Sources.--Prizes under this subtitle may
consist of Federal appropriated funds, funds provided by the
administering entity, or funds raised through grants or
donations. The Secretary may accept funds from other Federal
agencies for such cash prizes and, notwithstanding section
3302(b) of title 31, United States Code, may use such funds
for the cash prize program. Other than publication of the
names of prize sponsors, the Secretary may not give any
special consideration to any private sector entity or
individual in return for a donation to the Secretary or
administering entity.
(e) Announcement of Prizes.--The Secretary may not publish
a notice required by subsection (b)(2) until all the funds
needed to pay out the announced amount of the prize have been
appropriated to the Department or the Department has received
from the administering entity a written commitment to provide
all necessary funds.

SEC. 214. ELIGIBILITY.

To be eligible to win a prize under this subtitle, an
individual or entity--
(1) shall notify the administering entity of intent to
submit ideas and intent to collect the prize upon selection;
(2) shall comply with all the requirements stated in the
Federal Register notice required under section 213(b)(2);
(3) in the case of a private entity, shall be incorporated
in and maintain a primary place of business in the United
States, and in the case of an individual, whether
participating singly or in a group, shall be a citizen of the
United States;
(4) shall not be a Federal entity, a Federal employee
acting within the scope of his or her employment, or an
employee of a national laboratory acting within the scope of
employment;
(5) shall not use Federal funding or other Federal
resources to compete for the prize; and
(6) shall not be an entity acting on behalf of any foreign
government or agent.

SEC. 215. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.

The Federal Government shall not, by virtue of offering or
awarding a prize under this subtitle, be entitled to any
intellectual property rights derived as a consequence of, or
in direct relation to, the participation by a registered
participant in a competition authorized by this subtitle.
This section shall not

[[Page 16299]]

be construed to prevent the Federal Government from
negotiating a license for the use of intellectual property
developed for a prize competition under this subtitle. The
Federal Government may seek assurances that technologies for
which prizes are awarded under this subtitle are offered for
commercialization in the event an award recipient does not
take, or is not expected to take within a reasonable time,
effective steps to achieve practical application of the
technology.

SEC. 216. WAIVER OF LIABILITY.

The Secretary may require registered participants to waive
claims against the Federal Government and the administering
entity (except claims for willful misconduct) for any injury,
death, damage, or loss of property, revenue, or profits
arising from the registered participants' participation in a
competition under this subtitle. The Secretary shall give
notice of any waiver required under this section in the
notice required by section 213(b)(2). The Secretary may not
require a registered participant to waive claims against the
administering entity arising out of the unauthorized use or
disclosure by the administering entity of the registered
participant's intellectual property, trade secrets, or
confidential business information.

SEC. 217. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Awards.--40 percent of amounts in the American Energy
Trust Fund shall be available without further appropriation
to carry out specified provisions of this section.
(b) Treatment of Awards.--Amounts received pursuant to an
award under this subtitle may not be taxed by any Federal,
State, or local authority.
(c) Administration.--In addition to the amounts authorized
under subsection (a), there are authorized to be appropriated
to the Secretary for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2020
$2,000,000 for the administrative costs of carrying out this
subtitle.
(d) Carryover of Funds.--Funds appropriated for prize
awards under this subtitle shall remain available until
expended and may be transferred, reprogrammed, or expended
for other purposes only after the expiration of 11 fiscal
years after the fiscal year for which the funds were
originally appropriated. No provision in this subtitle
permits obligation or payment of funds in violation of
section 1341 of title 31, United States Code.

SEC. 218. NEXT GENERATION AUTOMOBILE PRIZE PROGRAM.

The Secretary of Energy shall establish a program to award
a prize in the amount of $500,000,000 to the first automobile
manufacturer incorporated in the United States to manufacture
and sell in the United States 50,000 midsized sedan
automobiles which operate on gasoline and can travel 100
miles per gallon.

SEC. 219. ADVANCED BATTERY MANUFACTURING INCENTIVE PROGRAM.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Advanced battery.--The term ``advanced battery'' means
an electrical storage device suitable for vehicle
applications.
(2) Engineering integration costs.--The term ``engineering
integration costs'' includes the cost of engineering tasks
relating to--
(A) incorporation of qualifying components into the design
of advanced batteries; and
(B) design of tooling and equipment and developing
manufacturing processes and material suppliers for production
facilities that produce qualifying components or advanced
batteries.
(b) Advanced Battery Manufacturing Facility.--The Secretary
shall provide facility funding awards under this section to
advanced battery manufacturers to pay not more than 30
percent of the cost of reequipping, expanding, or
establishing a manufacturing facility in the United States to
produce advanced batteries.
(c) Period of Availability.--An award under subsection (b)
shall apply to--
(1) facilities and equipment placed in service before
December 30, 2020; and
(2) engineering integration costs incurred during the
period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act and
ending on December 30, 2020.
(d) Direct Loan Program.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this subtitle, and subject to the availability
of appropriated funds, the Secretary shall carry out a
program to provide a total of not more than $100,000,000 in
loans to eligible individuals and entities (as determined by
the Secretary) for the costs of activities described in
subsection (b).
(2) Selection of eligible projects.--The Secretary shall
select eligible projects to receive loans under this
subsection in cases in which, as determined by the Secretary,
the award recipient--
(A) is financially viable without the receipt of additional
Federal funding associated with the proposed project;
(B) will provide sufficient information to the Secretary
for the Secretary to ensure that the qualified investment is
expended efficiently and effectively; and
(C) has met such other criteria as may be established and
published by the Secretary.
(3) Rates, terms, and repayment of loans.--A loan provided
under this subsection--
(A) shall have an interest rate that, as of the date on
which the loan is made, is equal to the cost of funds to the
Department of the Treasury for obligations of comparable
maturity;
(B) shall have a term equal to the lesser of--
(i) the projected life, in years, of the eligible project
to be carried out using funds from the loan, as determined by
the Secretary; and
(ii) 25 years;
(C) may be subject to a deferral in repayment for not more
than 5 years after the date on which the eligible project
carried out using funds from the loan first begins
operations, as determined by the Secretary; and
(D) shall be made by the Federal Financing Bank.
(e) Fees.--The cost of administering a loan made under this
section shall not exceed $100,000.
(f) Set Aside for Small Manufacturers.--
(1) Definition of covered firm.--In this subsection, the
term ``covered firm'' means a firm that--
(A) employs fewer than 500 individuals; and
(B) manufactures automobiles or components of automobiles.
(2) Set aside.--Of the amount of funds used to provide
awards for each fiscal year under subsection (b), the
Secretary shall use not less than 10 percent to provide
awards to covered firms or consortia led by a covered firm.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated from the American Energy Trust Fund such
sums as are necessary to carry out this section for each of
fiscal years 2009 through 2013.

Subtitle C--Home and Business Tax Incentives

SEC. 221. EXTENSION OF CREDIT FOR ENERGY EFFICIENT
APPLIANCES.

(a) In General.--Subsection (b) of section 45M of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to applicable amount)
is amended by striking ``calendar year 2006 or 2007'' each
place it appears in paragraphs (1)(A)(i), (1)(B)(i),
(1)(C)(ii)(I), and (1)(C)(iii)(I), and inserting ``calendar
year 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, or 2013''.
(b) Restart of Credit Limitation.--Paragraph (1) of section
45M(e) of such Code (relating to aggregate credit amount
allowed) is amended by inserting ``beginning after December
31, 2007'' after ``for all prior taxable years''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to appliances produced after December 31, 2007.

SEC. 222. EXTENSION OF CREDIT FOR NONBUSINESS ENERGY
PROPERTY.

(a) In General.--Section 25C(g) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (relating to termination) is amended by striking
``December 31, 2007'' and inserting ``December 31, 2013''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after December 31,
2007.

SEC. 223. EXTENSION OF CREDIT FOR RESIDENTIAL ENERGY
EFFICIENT PROPERTY.

Section 25D(g) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(relating to termination) is amended by striking ``December
31, 2008'' and inserting ``December 31, 2013''.

SEC. 224. EXTENSION OF NEW ENERGY EFFICIENT HOME CREDIT.

Subsection (g) of section 45L of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 (relating to termination) is amended by striking
``December 31, 2008'' and inserting ``December 31, 2013''.

SEC. 225. EXTENSION OF ENERGY EFFICIENT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS
DEDUCTION.

Section 179D(h) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(relating to termination) is amended by striking ``December
31, 2008'' and inserting ``December 31, 2013''.

SEC. 226. EXTENSION OF SPECIAL RULE TO IMPLEMENT FERC AND
STATE ELECTRIC RESTRUCTURING POLICY.

(a) In General.--Paragraph (3) of section 451(i) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking
``January 1, 2008'' and inserting ``January 1, 2014''.
(b) Extension of Period for Transfer of Operational Control
Authorized by FERC.--Clause (ii) of section 451(i)(4)(B) of
such Code is amended by striking ``December 31, 2007'' and
inserting ``the date which is 4 years after the close of the
taxable year in which the transaction occurs''.
(c) Effective Dates.--
(1) Extension.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall
apply to transactions after December 31, 2007.
(2) Transfers of operational control.--The amendment made
by subsection (b) shall take effect as if included in section
909 of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004.

SEC. 227. HOME ENERGY AUDITS.

(a) In General.--Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by
inserting after section 25D the following new section:

``SEC. 25E. HOME ENERGY AUDITS.

``(a) In General.--In the case of an individual, there
shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this
chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to 50 percent of
the amount of qualified energy audit paid or incurred by the
taxpayer during the taxable year.

[[Page 16300]]

``(b) Limitations.--
``(1) Dollar limitation.--The amount allowed as a credit
under subsection (a) with respect to a residence of the
taxpayer for a taxable year shall not exceed $400.
``(2) Limitation based on amount of tax.--In the case of
any taxable year to which section 26(a)(2) does not apply,
the credit allowed under subsection (a) shall not exceed the
excess of--
``(A) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in
section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
``(B) the sum of the credits allowable under this subpart
(other than this section) and section 27 for the taxable
year.
``(c) Qualified Energy Audit.--For purposes of this
section, the term `qualified energy audit' means an energy
audit of the principal residence of the taxpayer performed by
a qualified energy auditor through a comprehensive site
visit. Such audit may include a blower door test, an infra-
red camera test, and a furnace combustion efficiency test. In
addition, such audit shall include such substitute tests for
the tests specified in the preceding sentence, and such
additional tests, as the Secretary may by regulation require.
A principal residence shall not be taken into consideration
under this subparagraph unless such residence is located in
the United States.
``(d) Principal Residence.--For purposes of this section,
the term `principal residence' has the same meaning as when
used in section 121.
``(e) Qualified Energy Auditor.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall specify by
regulations the qualifications required to be a qualified
energy auditor for purposes of this section. Such regulations
shall include rules prohibiting conflicts-of-interest,
including the disallowance of commissions or other payments
based on goods or non-audit services purchased by the
taxpayer from the auditor.
``(2) Certification.--The Secretary shall prescribe the
procedures and methods for certifying that an auditor is a
qualified energy auditor. To the maximum extent practicable,
such procedures and methods shall provide for a variety of
sources to obtain certifications.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 23(b)(4)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 is amended by inserting ``and section 25E'' after ``this
section''.
(2) Section 23(c)(1) of such Code is amended by inserting
``, 25E,'' after ``25D''.
(3) Section 24(b)(3)(B) of such Code is amended by striking
``and 25B'' and inserting ``, 25B, and 25E''.
(4) Clauses (i) and (ii) of section 25(e)(1)(C) of such
Code are each amended by inserting ``25E,'' after ``25D,''.
(5) Section 25B(g)(2) of such Code is amended by striking
``section 23'' and inserting ``sections 23 and 25E''.
(6) Section 25D(c)(1) of such Code is amended by inserting
``and section 25E'' after ``this section''.
(7) Section 25D(c)(2) of such Code is amended by striking
``and 25B'' and inserting ``25B, and 25E''.
(8) The table of sections for subpart A of part IV of
subchapter A chapter 1 of such Code is amended by inserting
after the item relating to section 25D the following new
item:

``Sec. 25E. Home energy audits.''.

(c) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall
apply to amounts paid or incurred in taxable years beginning
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) Application of egtrra sunset.--The amendments made by
paragraphs (1) and (3) of subsection (b) shall be subject to
title IX of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation
Act of 2001 in the same manner as the provisions of such Act
to which such amendments relate.

SEC. 228. ACCELERATED RECOVERY PERIOD FOR DEPRECIATION OF
SMART METERS.

(a) In General.--Section 168(e)(3)(B) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``and'' at the
end of clause (v), by striking the period at the end of
clause (vi) and inserting ``, and'', and by inserting after
clause (vi) the following new clause:
``(vii) any qualified smart electric meter.''.
(b) Definition.--Section 168(i) of such Code is amended by
inserting at the end the following new paragraph:
``(18) Qualified smart electric meters.--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified smart electric
meter' means any smart electric meter which is placed in
service by a taxpayer who is a supplier of electric energy or
a provider of electric energy services.
``(B) Smart electric meter.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A), the term `smart electric meter' means any time-based
meter and related communication equipment which is capable of
being used by the taxpayer as part of a system that--
``(i) measures and records electricity usage data on a
time-differentiated basis in at least 24 separate time
segments per day,
``(ii) provides for the exchange of information between
supplier or provider and the customer's electric meter in
support of time-based rates or other forms of demand
response,
``(iii) provides data to such supplier or provider so that
the supplier or provider can provide energy usage information
to customers electronically, and
``(iv) provides net metering.''.
(c) Continued Application of 150 Percent Declining Balance
Method.--Paragraph (2) of section 168(b) of such Code is
amended by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (B), by
redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D), and by
inserting after subparagraph (B) the following new
subparagraph:
``(C) any property (other than property described in
paragraph (3)) which is a qualified smart electric meter,
or''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after the date of
the enactment of this Act.

Subtitle D--Refinery Permit Process Schedule

SEC. 231. SHORT TITLE.

This subtitle may be cited as the ``Refinery Permit Process
Schedule Act''.

SEC. 232. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this subtitle--
(1) the term ``Administrator'' means the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency;
(2) the term ``applicant'' means a person who (with the
approval of the governor of the State, or in the case of
Native American tribes or tribal territories the designated
leader of the tribe or tribal community, where the proposed
refinery would be located) is seeking a Federal refinery
authorization;
(3) the term ``biomass'' has the meaning given that term in
section 932(a)(1) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005;
(4) the term ``Federal refinery authorization''--
(A) means any authorization required under Federal law,
whether administered by a Federal or State administrative
agency or official, with respect to siting, construction,
expansion, or operation of a refinery; and
(B) includes any permits, licenses, special use
authorizations, certifications, opinions, or other approvals
required under Federal law with respect to siting,
construction, expansion, or operation of a refinery;
(5) the term ``refinery'' means--
(A) a facility designed and operated to receive, load,
unload, store, transport, process, and refine crude oil by
any chemical or physical process, including distillation,
fluid catalytic cracking, hydrocracking, coking, alkylation,
etherification, polymerization, catalytic reforming,
isomerization, hydrotreating, blending, and any combination
thereof, in order to produce gasoline or distillate;
(B) a facility designed and operated to receive, load,
unload, store, transport, process, and refine coal by any
chemical or physical process, including liquefaction, in
order to produce gasoline or diesel as its primary output; or
(C) a facility designed and operated to receive, load,
unload, store, transport, process (including biochemical,
photochemical, and biotechnology processes), and refine
biomass in order to produce biofuel; and
(6) the term ``State'' means a State, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any other
territory or possession of the United States.

SEC. 233. STATE ASSISTANCE.

(a) State Assistance.--At the request of a governor of a
State, or in the case of Native American tribes or tribal
territories the designated leader of the tribe or tribal
community, the Administrator is authorized to provide
financial assistance to that State or tribe or tribal
community to facilitate the hiring of additional personnel to
assist the State or tribe or tribal community with expertise
in fields relevant to consideration of Federal refinery
authorizations.
(b) Other Assistance.--At the request of a governor of a
State, or in the case of Native American tribes or tribal
territories the designated leader of the tribe or tribal
community, a Federal agency responsible for a Federal
refinery authorization shall provide technical, legal, or
other nonfinancial assistance to that State or tribe or
tribal community to facilitate its consideration of Federal
refinery authorizations.

SEC. 234. REFINERY PROCESS COORDINATION AND PROCEDURES.

[[Page 16301]]

coordinator and the other participants at a meeting convened
under paragraph (1) shall establish a memorandum of agreement
setting forth the most expeditious coordinated schedule
possible for completion of all Federal refinery
authorizations with respect to the refinery, consistent with
the full substantive and procedural review required by
Federal law. If a Federal or State agency responsible for a
Federal refinery authorization with respect to the refinery
is not represented at such meeting, the Federal coordinator
shall ensure that the schedule accommodates those Federal
refinery authorizations, consistent with Federal law. In the
event of conflict among Federal refinery authorization
scheduling requirements, the requirements of the
Environmental Protection Agency shall be given priority.
(B) Not later than 15 days after completing the memorandum
of agreement, the Federal coordinator shall publish the
memorandum of agreement in the Federal Register.
(C) The Federal coordinator shall ensure that all parties
to the memorandum of agreement are working in good faith to
carry out the memorandum of agreement, and shall facilitate
the maintenance of the schedule established therein.
(c) Consolidated Record.--The Federal coordinator shall,
with the cooperation of Federal and State administrative
agencies and officials, maintain a complete consolidated
record of all decisions made or actions taken by the Federal
coordinator or by a Federal administrative agency or officer
(or State administrative agency or officer acting under
delegated Federal authority) with respect to any Federal
refinery authorization. Such record shall be the record for
judicial review under subsection (d) of decisions made or
actions taken by Federal and State administrative agencies
and officials, except that, if the Court determines that the
record does not contain sufficient information, the Court may
remand the proceeding to the Federal coordinator for further
development of the consolidated record.
(d) Remedies.--
(1) In general.--The United States District Court for the
district in which the proposed refinery is located shall have
exclusive jurisdiction over any civil action for the review
of the failure of an agency or official to act on a Federal
refinery authorization in accordance with the schedule
established pursuant to the memorandum of agreement.
(2) Standing.--If an applicant or a party to a memorandum
of agreement alleges that a failure to act described in
paragraph (1) has occurred and that such failure to act would
jeopardize timely completion of the entire schedule as
established in the memorandum of agreement, such applicant or
other party may bring a cause of action under this
subsection.
(3) Court action.--If an action is brought under paragraph
(2), the Court shall review whether the parties to the
memorandum of agreement have been acting in good faith,
whether the applicant has been cooperating fully with the
agencies that are responsible for issuing a Federal refinery
authorization, and any other relevant materials in the
consolidated record. Taking into consideration those factors,
if the Court finds that a failure to act described in
paragraph (1) has occurred, and that such failure to act
would jeopardize timely completion of the entire schedule as
established in the memorandum of agreement, the Court shall
establish a new schedule that is the most expeditious
coordinated schedule possible for completion of proceedings,
consistent with the full substantive and procedural review
required by Federal law. The court may issue orders to
enforce any schedule it establishes under this paragraph.
(4) Federal coordinator's action.--When any civil action is
brought under this subsection, the Federal coordinator shall
immediately file with the Court the consolidated record
compiled by the Federal coordinator pursuant to subsection
(c).
(5) Expedited review.--The Court shall set any civil action
brought under this subsection for expedited consideration.

SEC. 235. DESIGNATION OF CLOSED MILITARY BASES.

(a) Designation Requirement.--Not later than 90 days after
the date of enactment of this Act, the President shall
designate no less than 3 closed military installations, or
portions thereof, as potentially suitable for the
construction of a refinery. At least 1 such site shall be
designated as potentially suitable for construction of a
refinery to refine biomass in order to produce biofuel.
(b) Redevelopment Authority.--The redevelopment authority
for each installation designated under subsection (a), in
preparing or revising the redevelopment plan for the
installation, shall consider the feasibility and
practicability of siting a refinery on the installation.
(c) Management and Disposal of Real Property.--The
Secretary of Defense, in managing and disposing of real
property at an installation designated under subsection (a)
pursuant to the base closure law applicable to the
installation, shall give substantial deference to the
recommendations of the redevelopment authority, as contained
in the redevelopment plan for the installation, regarding the
siting of a refinery on the installation. The management and
disposal of real property at a closed military installation
or portion thereof found to be suitable for the siting of a
refinery under subsection (a) shall be carried out in the
manner provided by the base closure law applicable to the
installation.
(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
(1) the term ``base closure law'' means the Defense Base
Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of
Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) and title II of the
Defense Authorization Amendments and Base Closure and
Realignment Act (Public Law 100-526; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note);
and
(2) the term ``closed military installation'' means a
military installation closed or approved for closure pursuant
to a base closure law.

SEC. 236. SAVINGS CLAUSE.

Nothing in this subtitle shall be construed to affect the
application of any environmental or other law, or to prevent
any party from bringing a cause of action under any
environmental or other law, including citizen suits.

SEC. 237. REFINERY REVITALIZATION REPEAL.

Subtitle H of title III of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
and the items relating thereto in the table of contents of
such Act are repealed.

TITLE III--NEW AND EXPANDING TECHNOLOGIES

Subtitle A--Alternative Fuels

SEC. 301. REPEAL.

Section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007 (42 U.S.C. 17142) is repealed.

SEC. 302. GOVERNMENT AUCTION OF LONG TERM PUT OPTION
CONTRACTS ON COAL-TO-LIQUID FUEL PRODUCED BY
QUALIFIED COAL-TO-LIQUID FACILITIES.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall, from time to time,
auction to the public coal-to- liquid fuel put option
contracts having expiration dates of 5 years, 10 years, 15
years, or 20 years.
(b) Consultation With Secretary of Energy.--The Secretary
shall consult with the Secretary of Energy regarding--
(1) the frequency of the auctions;
(2) the strike prices specified in the contracts;
(3) the number of contracts to be auctioned with a given
strike price and expiration date; and
(4) the capacity of existing or planned facilities to
produce coal-to-liquid fuel.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Coal-to-liquid fuel.--The term ``coal-to-liquid fuel''
means any transportation-grade liquid fuel derived primarily
from coal (including peat) and produced at a qualified coal-
to-liquid facility.
(2) Coal-to-liquid put option contract.--The term ``coal-
to-liquid put option contract'' means a contract, written by
the Secretary, which--
(A) gives the holder the right (but not the obligation) to
sell to the Government of the United States a certain
quantity of a specific type of coal-to-liquid fuel produced
by a qualified coal-to-liquid facility specified in the
contract, at a strike price specified in the contract, on or
before an expiration date specified in the contract; and
(B) is transferable by the holder to any other entity.
(3) Qualified coal-to-liquid facility.--The term
``qualified coal-to-liquid facility'' means a manufacturing
facility that has the capacity to produce at least 10,000
barrels per day of transportation grade liquid fuels from a
feedstock that is primarily domestic coal (including peat and
any property which allows for the capture, transportation, or
sequestration of by-products resulting from such process,
including carbon emissions).
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Treasury.
(5) Strike price.--The term ``strike price'' means, with
respect to a put option contract, the price at which the
holder of the contract has the right to sell the fuel which
is the subject of the contract.
(d) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary to carry out this section.
(e) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 1 year
after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 303. STANDBY LOANS FOR QUALIFYING COAL-TO-LIQUIDS
PROJECTS.

Section 1702 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C.
16512) is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(k) Standby Loans for Qualifying CTL Projects.--
``(1) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection:
``(A) Cap price.--The term `cap price' means a market price
specified in the standby loan agreement above which the
project is required to make payments to the United States.
``(B) Full term.--The term `full term' means the full term
of a standby loan agreement, as specified in the agreement,
which shall not exceed the lesser of 30 years or 90 percent
of the projected useful life of the project (as determined by
the Secretary).
``(C) Market price.--The term `market price' means the
average quarterly price of a

[[Page 16302]]

petroleum price index specified in the standby loan
agreement.
``(D) Minimum price.--The term `minimum price' means a
market price specified in the standby loan agreement below
which the United States is obligated to make disbursements to
the project.
``(E) Output.--The term `output' means some or all of the
liquid or gaseous transportation fuels produced from the
project, as specified in the loan agreement.
``(F) Primary term.--The term `primary term' means the
initial term of a standby loan agreement, as specified in the
agreement, which shall not exceed the lesser of 20 years or
75 percent of the projected useful life of the project (as
determined by the Secretary).
``(G) Qualifying ctl project.--The term `qualifying CTL
project' means--
``(i) a commercial-scale project that converts coal to one
or more liquid or gaseous transportation fuels; or
``(ii) not more than one project at a facility that
converts petroleum refinery waste products, including
petroleum coke, into one or more liquids or gaseous
transportation fuels,
that demonstrates the capture, and sequestration or disposal
or use of, the carbon dioxide produced in the conversion
process, and that, on the basis of a carbon dioxide
sequestration plan prepared by the applicant, is certified by
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, in
consultation with the Secretary, as producing fuel with life
cycle carbon dioxide emissions at or below the average life
cycle carbon dioxide emissions for the same type of fuel
produced at traditional petroleum based facilities with
similar annual capacities.
``(H) Standby loan agreement.--The term `standby loan
agreement' means a loan agreement entered into under
paragraph (2).
``(2) Standby loans.--
``(A) Loan authority.--The Secretary may enter into standby
loan agreements with not more than six qualifying CTL
projects, at least one of which shall be a project jointly or
in part owned by two or more small coal producers. Such an
agreement--
``(i) shall provide that the Secretary will make a direct
loan (within the meaning of section 502(1) of the Federal
Credit Reform Act of 1990) to the qualifying CTL project; and
``(ii) shall set a cap price and a minimum price for the
primary term of the agreement.
``(B) Loan disbursements.--Such a loan shall be disbursed
during the primary term of such agreement whenever the market
price falls below the minimum price. The amount of such
disbursements in any calendar quarter shall be equal to the
excess of the minimum price over the market price, times the
output of the project (but not more than a total level of
disbursements specified in the agreement).
``(C) Loan repayments.--The Secretary shall establish terms
and conditions, including interest rates and amortization
schedules, for the repayment of such loan within the full
term of the agreement, subject to the following limitations:
``(i) If in any calendar quarter during the primary term of
the agreement the market price is less than the cap price,
the project may elect to defer some or all of its repayment
obligations due in that quarter. Any unpaid obligations will
continue to accrue interest.
``(ii) If in any calendar quarter during the primary term
of the agreement the market price is greater than the cap
price, the project shall meet its scheduled repayment
obligation plus deferred repayment obligations, but shall not
be required to pay in that quarter an amount that is more
than the excess of the market price over the cap price, times
the output of the project.
``(iii) At the end of the primary term of the agreement,
the cumulative amount of any deferred repayment obligations,
together with accrued interest, shall be amortized (with
interest) over the remainder of the full term of the
agreement.
``(3) Profit-sharing.--The Secretary is authorized to enter
into a profit-sharing agreement with the project at the time
the standby loan agreement is executed. Under such an
agreement, if the market price exceeds the cap price in a
calendar quarter, a profit-sharing payment shall be made for
that quarter, in an amount equal to--
``(A) the excess of the market price over the cap price,
times the output of the project; less
``(B) any loan repayments made for the calendar quarter.
``(4) Compliance with federal credit reform act.--
``(A) Upfront payment of cost of loan.--No standby loan
agreement may be entered into under this subsection unless
the project makes a payment to the United States that the
Office of Management and Budget determines is equal to the
cost of such loan (determined under 502(5)(B) of the Federal
Credit Reform Act of 1990). Such payment shall be made at the
time the standby loan agreement is executed.
``(B) Minimization of risk to the government.--In making
the determination of the cost of the loan for purposes of
setting the payment for a standby loan under subparagraph
(A), the Secretary and the Office of Management and Budget
shall take into consideration the extent to which the minimum
price and the cap price reflect historical patterns of
volatility in actual oil prices relative to projections of
future oil prices, based upon publicly available data from
the Energy Information Administration, and employing
statistical methods and analyses that are appropriate for the
analysis of volatility in energy prices.
``(C) Treatment of payments.--The value to the United
States of a payment under subparagraph (A) and any profit-
sharing payments under paragraph (3) shall be taken into
account for purposes of section 502(5)(B)(iii) of the Federal
Credit Reform Act of 1990 in determining the cost to the
Federal Government of a standby loan made under this
subsection. If a standby loan has no cost to the Federal
Government, the requirements of section 504(b) of such Act
shall be deemed to be satisfied.
``(5) Other provisions.--
``(A) No double benefit.--A project receiving a loan under
this subsection may not, during the primary term of the loan
agreement, receive a Federal loan guarantee under subsection
(a) of this section, or under other laws.
``(B) Subrogation, etc.--Subsections (g)(2) (relating to
subrogation), (h) (relating to fees), and (j) (relating to
full faith and credit) shall apply to standby loans under
this subsection to the same extent they apply to loan
guarantees.''.

Subtitle B--Tax Provisions

SEC. 311. EXTENSION OF RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY, REFINED COAL,
AND INDIAN COAL PRODUCTION CREDIT.

(a) Credit Made Permanent.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (d) of section 45 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to qualified
facilities) is amended--
(A) by striking ``and before January 1, 2009'' each place
it occurs,
(B) by striking ``, and before January 1, 2009'' in
paragraphs (1) and (2)(A)(i), and
(C) by striking ``before January 1, 2009'' in paragraph
(10).
(2) Open-loop biomass facilities.--Subparagraph (A) of
section 45(d)(3) of such Code is amended to read as follows:
``(A) In general.--In the case of a facility using open-
loop biomass to produce electricity, the term `qualified
facility' means any facility owned by the taxpayer which is
originally placed in service after October 22, 2004.''.
(3) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection
shall apply to electricity produced and sold after December
31, 2008, in taxable years ending after such date.
(b) Sales of Net Electricity to Regulated Public Utilities
Treated as Sales to Unrelated Persons.--Paragraph (4) of
section 45(e) of such Code is amended by adding at the end
the following new sentence: ``The net amount of electricity
sold by any taxpayer to a regulated public utility (as
defined in section 7701(a)(33)) shall be treated as sold to
an unrelated person.''.
(c) Allowance Against Alternative Minimum Tax.--
(1) In general.--Clause (ii) of section 38(c)(4)(B) of such
Code (relating to specified credits) is amended by striking
``produced--'' and all that follows and inserting ``produced
at a facility which is originally placed in service after the
date of the enactment of this paragraph.''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1)
shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 312. EXTENSION OF ENERGY CREDIT.

(a) Solar Energy Property.--Paragraphs (2)(A)(i)(II) and
(3)(A)(ii) of section 48(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (relating to energy credit) are each amended by striking
``but only with respect to periods ending before January 1,
2009''.
(b) Fuel Cell Property.--Section 48(c)(1) of such Code
(relating to qualified fuel cell property) is amended by
striking subparagraph (E).
(c) Microturbine Property.--Subparagraph (E) of section
48(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
qualified microturbine property) is amended by striking
``December 31, 2008'' and inserting ``December 31, 2013''.
(d) Allowance Against Alternative Minimum Tax.--
(1) In general.--Subparagraph (B) of section 38(c)(4) of
such Code (relating to specified credits) is amended by
striking ``and'' at the end of clause (iii), by redesignating
clause (iv) as clause (v), and by inserting after clause
(iii) the following new clause:
``(iv) the credit determined under section 48, and''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1)
shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 313. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF CREDIT FOR CLEAN
RENEWABLE ENERGY BONDS.

(a) Extension.--Section 54(m) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 (relating to termination) is amended by striking
``December 31, 2008'' and inserting ``December 31, 2013''.
(b) Increase in National Limitation.--Section 54(f) of such
Code (relating to limitation on amount of bonds designated)
is amended--

[[Page 16303]]

(1) by striking ``$1,200,000,000'' in paragraph (1) and
inserting ``$1,600,000,000'', and
(2) by striking ``$750,000,000'' in paragraph (2) and
inserting ``$1,000,000,000''.
(c) Modification of Ratable Principal Amortization
Requirement.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (5) of section 54(l) of such
Code is amended to read as follows:
``(5) Ratable principal amortization required.--A bond
shall not be treated as a clean renewable energy bond unless
it is part of an issue which provides for an equal amount of
principal to be paid by the qualified issuer during each 12-
month period that the issue is outstanding (other than the
first 12-month period).''.
(2) Technical amendment.--The third sentence of section
54(e)(2) of such Code is amended by striking ``subsection
(l)(6)'' and inserting ``subsection (l)(5)''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to bonds issued after the date of the enactment
of this Act.

SEC. 314. EXTENSION OF CREDITS FOR BIODIESEL AND RENEWABLE
DIESEL.

(a) In General.--Sections 40A(g), 6426(c)(6), and
6427(e)(5)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 are each
amended by striking ``December 31, 2008'' and inserting
``December 31, 2013''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to fuel produced, and sold or used, after
December 31, 2008.

Subtitle C--Nuclear

SEC. 321. USE OF FUNDS FOR RECYCLING.

Section 302 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42
U.S.C. 10222) is amended--
(1) in subsection (d), by striking ``The Secretary may''
and inserting ``Except as provided in subsection (f), the
Secretary may''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) Recycling.--
``(1) In general.--Amounts in the Waste Fund may be used by
the Secretary of Energy to make grants to or enter into long-
term contracts with private sector entities for the recycling
of spent nuclear fuel.
``(2) Competitive selection.--Grants and contracts
authorized under paragraph (1) shall be awarded on the basis
of a competitive bidding process that--
``(A) maximizes the competitive efficiency of the projects
funded;
``(B) best serves the goal of reducing the amount of waste
requiring disposal under this Act; and
``(C) ensures adequate protection against the proliferation
of nuclear materials that could be used in the manufacture of
nuclear weapons.''.

SEC. 322. RULEMAKING FOR LICENSING OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL
RECYCLING FACILITIES.

(a) Requirement.--The Nuclear Regulatory Commission shall,
as expeditiously as possible, but in no event later than 2
years after the date of enactment of this Act, complete a
rulemaking establishing a process for the licensing by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, under the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, of facilities for the recycling of spent nuclear fuel.
(b) Funding.--Amounts in the Nuclear Waste Fund established
under section 302 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42
U.S.C. 10222) shall be made available to the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission to cover the costs of carrying out
subsection (a) of this section.

SEC. 323. NUCLEAR WASTE FUND BUDGET STATUS.

Section 302(e) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42
U.S.C. 10222(e)) is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(7) The receipts and disbursements of the Waste Fund
shall not be counted as new budget authority, outlays,
receipts, or deficits or surplus for purposes of--
``(A) the budget of the United States Government as
submitted by the President;
``(B) the congressional budget; or
``(C) the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act
of 1985.''.

SEC. 324. WASTE CONFIDENCE.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission may not deny an
application for a license, permit, or other authorization
under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 on the grounds that
sufficient capacity does not exist, or will not become
available on a timely basis, for disposal of spent nuclear
fuel or high-level radioactive waste from the facility for
which the license, permit, or other authorization is sought.

SEC. 325. ASME NUCLEAR CERTIFICATION CREDIT.

(a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 (relating to business related credits) is amended
by adding at the end the following new section:

``SEC. 45O. ASME NUCLEAR CERTIFICATION CREDIT.

``(a) In General.--For purposes of section 38, the ASME
Nuclear Certification credit determined under this section
for any taxable year is an amount equal to 15 percent of the
qualified nuclear expenditures paid or incurred by the
taxpayer.
``(b) Qualified Nuclear Expenditures.--For purposes of this
section, the term `qualified nuclear expenditures' means any
expenditure related to--
``(1) obtaining a certification under the American Society
of Mechanical Engineers Nuclear Component Certification
program, or
``(2) increasing the taxpayer's capacity to construct,
fabricate, assemble, or install components--
``(A) for any facility which uses nuclear energy to produce
electricity, and
``(B) with respect to the construction, fabrication,
assembly, or installation of which the taxpayer is certified
under such program.
``(c) Timing of Credit.--The credit allowed under
subsection (a) for any expenditures shall be allowed--
``(1) in the case of a qualified nuclear expenditure
described in subsection (b)(1), for the taxable year of such
certification, and
``(2) in the case of any other qualified nuclear
expenditure, for the taxable year in which such expenditure
is paid or incurred.
``(d) Special Rules.--
``(1) Basis adjustment.--For purposes of this subtitle, if
a credit is allowed under this section for an expenditure,
the increase in basis which would result (but for this
subsection) for such expenditure shall be reduced by the
amount of the credit allowed under this section.
``(2) Denial of double benefit.--No deduction shall be
allowed under this chapter for any amount taken into account
in determining the credit under this section.
``(e) Termination.--This section shall not apply to any
expenditures paid or incurred in taxable years beginning
after December 31, 2019.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Subsection (b) of section
38 is amended by striking ``plus'' at the end of paragraph
(30), by striking the period at the end of paragraph (31) and
inserting ``, plus'', and by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(32) the ASME Nuclear Certification credit determined
under section 45O(a).''.
(2) Subsection (a) of section 1016 (relating to adjustments
to basis) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of
paragraph (36), by striking the period at the end of
paragraph (37) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
``(38) to the extent provided in section 45O(e)(1).''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to expenditures paid or incurred in taxable years
beginning after December 31, 2007.

Subtitle D--American Renewable and Alternative Energy Trust Fund

SEC. 331. AMERICAN RENEWABLE AND ALTERNATIVE ENERGY TRUST
FUND.

(a) Establishment of Trust Fund.--There is established in
the Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as
the ``American Renewable and Alternative Energy Trust Fund'',
consisting of such amounts as may be transferred to the
American Renewable and Alternative Energy Trust Fund as
provided in section 149 and the amendments made by section
110 of this division.
(b) Expenditures From American Renewable and Alternative
Energy Trust Fund.--
(1) In general.--Amounts in the American Renewable and
Alternative Energy Trust Fund shall be available without
further appropriation to carry out specified provisions of
the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-58; in this
section referred to as ``EPAct2005'') and the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-140; in
this section referred to as ``EISAct2007''), as follows:
(A) Grants to improve the commercial value of forest
biomass for electric energy, useful heat, transportation
fuels, and other commercial purposes, section 210 of
EPAct2005, 3 percent
(B) Hydroelectric production incentives, section 242 of
EPAct2005, 2 percent.
(C) Oil shale, tar sands, and other strategic
unconventional fuels, section 369 of EPAct2005, 3 percent.
(D) Clean Coal Power Initiative, section 401 of EPAct2005,
7 percent.
(E) Solar and wind technologies, section 812 of EPAct2005,
7 percent.
(F) Renewable Energy, section 931 of EPAct2005, 20 percent.
(G) Production incentives for cellulosic biofuels, section
942 of EPAct2005, 2.5 percent.
(H) Coal and related technologies program, section 962 of
EPAct2005, 4 percent.
(I) Methane hydrate research, section 968 of EPAct2005, 2.5
percent.
(J) Incentives for Innovative Technologies, section 1704 of
EPAct2005, 7 percent.
(K) Grants for production of advanced biofuels, section 207
of EISAct2007, 16 percent.
(L) Photovoltaic demonstration program, section 607
EISAct2007, 2.5 percent.
(M) Geothermal Energy, title VI, subtitle B of EISAct2007,
4 percent.
(N) Marine and Hydrokinetic Renewable Energy Technologies,
title VI, subtitle C of EISAct2007, 2.5 percent.
(O) Energy storage competitiveness, section 641 of
EISAct2007, 10 percent.
(P) Smart grid technology research, development, and
demonstration, section 1304 of EISAct2007, 7 percent.

[[Page 16304]]

(2) Apportionment of excess amount.--Notwithstanding
paragraph (1), any amounts allocated under paragraph (1) that
are in excess of the amounts authorized in the applicable
cited section or subtitle of EPAct2005 and EISAct2007 shall
be reallocated to the remaining sections and subtitles cited
in paragraph (1), up to the amounts otherwise authorized by
law to carry out such sections and subtitles, in proportion
to the amounts authorized by law to be appropriated for such
other sections and subtitles.
______

SA 5155. Mr. CRAPO submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
bim to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Increasing Transparency and
Accountability in Energy Prices Act of 2008''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

For the purposes of this Act, the term ``excessive
speculation'' has the meaning described in section 4a(a) of
the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 6a(a)).

SEC. 3. SENSE OF SENATE ON THE NEED FOR GREATER TRANSPARENCY
IN AND REGULATORY RESOURCES OVERSEEING THE
ENERGY FUTURES MARKETS.

(a) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that--
(1) excessive speculation may be adding to the price of oil
and other energy commodities;
(2) the public and Congress are concerned that because the
regulator of the energy futures markets, the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission, does not have access to all of
the national and international data required to fully assess
the role of excessive speculation, it cannot definitively
determine whether energy futures prices are being driven
solely by supply and demand;
(3) the staffing levels of the Commission have dropped to
the lowest levels in the 33-year history of the Commission,
thereby making it difficult for the Commission to analyze the
growing volumes of futures transactions adequately;
(4) the acting Chairman of the Commission has said publicly
that an additional 100 employees are needed in light of the
inflow of trading data; and
(5) a more robust regulator over the energy futures markets
can help restore public confidence in the proper functioning
of energy futures markets with respect to the price discovery
mechanism they are meant to provide, at least in part by more
aggressively applying and enforcing section 9 of the Act,
including provisions relating to manipulation or attempted
manipulation, the making of false statements, and willful
violations of this Act; and
(6) the Commodity Futures Trading Commission should be
provided with additional resources sufficient to--
(A) help restore public confidence in energy commodities
markets;
(B) significantly improve the information technology
capabilities of the Commission to help the Commission
effectively regulate energy futures markets; and
(C) fund at least 100 new full-time positions at the
Commission to oversee energy commodity market speculation and
to enforce the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.).

SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL COMMISSION EMPLOYEES FOR IMPROVED
OVERSIGHT AND ENFORCEMENT.

Section 2(a)(7) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C.
2(a)(7)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(D) Additional employees.--As soon as practicable after
the date of enactment of this subparagraph, the Commission
shall appoint at least 100 full-time employees (in addition
to the employees employed by the Commission as of the date of
enactment of this subparagraph)--
``(i) to increase the public transparency of operations in
energy futures markets;
``(ii) to improve the enforcement of this Act in those
markets; and
``(iii) to carry out such other duties as are prescribed by
the Commission.''.

SEC. 5. STUDY OF INTERNATIONAL REGULATION OF ENERGY COMMODITY
MARKETS.

(a) In General.--The Comptroller General of the United
States shall conduct a study of the international regime for
regulating the trading of energy commodity futures and
derivatives.
(b) Analysis.--The study shall include an analysis of, at a
minimum--
(1) key common features and differences among countries in
the regulation of energy commodity trading, including market
oversight and enforcement standards and activities;
(2) variations among countries in the use of position
limits, accountability limits, or other thresholds to detect
and prevent price manipulation, excessive speculation, or
other unfair trading practices;
(3) variations in practices regarding the differentiation
of commercial and noncommercial trading;
(4) agreements and practices for sharing market and trading
data between regulatory bodies and between individual
regulators and the entities they oversee; and
(5) agreements and practices for facilitating international
cooperation on market oversight, compliance, and enforcement.
(c) Report.--Not later than 120 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit
to the appropriate committees of Congress a report that--
(1) describes the results of the study;
(2) addresses the effects of excessive speculation and
energy price volatility on energy futures; and
(3) provides recommendations to improve openness,
transparency, and other necessary elements of a properly
functioning market in a manner that protects consumers in the
United States.

SEC. 6. SPECULATIVE LIMITS AND TRANSPARENCY FOR OFF-SHORE OIL
TRADING.

Section 4 of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 6) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Foreign Boards of Trade.--
``(1) In general.--The Commission shall not permit a
foreign board of trade's members or other participants
located in the United States to enter trades into the foreign
board of trade's trade matching system with respect to an
agreement, contract, or transaction in an energy commodity
(as defined by the Commission) that settles against any
price, including the daily or final settlement price, of a
contract or contracts listed for trading on a registered
entity, unless--
``(A) the foreign board of trade makes public daily
information on settlement prices, volume, open interest, and
opening and closing ranges for the agreement, contract, or
transaction that is comparable to the daily trading
information published by the registered entity for the
contract or contracts against which it settles;
``(B) the foreign board of trade or foreign futures
authority adopts position limits (including related hedge
exemption provisions) or position accountability for
speculators for the agreement, contract, or transaction that
are comparable to the position limits (including related
hedge exemption provisions) or position accountability
adopted by the registered entity for the contract or
contracts against which it settles;
``(C) the foreign board of trade or foreign futures
authority has the authority to require or direct market
participants to limit, reduce, or liquidate any position it
deems necessary to prevent or reduce the threat of price
manipulation, excessive speculation, price distortion, or
disruption of delivery or the cash settlement process;
``(D) the foreign board of trade or foreign futures
authority provides such information to the Commission
regarding the extent of speculative and nonspeculative
trading in the agreement, contract, or transaction that is
comparable to the information the Commission determines is
necessary to publish its Commitment of Traders report for the
contract or contracts against which it settles; and
``(E) the foreign board of trade or foreign futures
authority regularly notifies the Commission before
implementing any regulatory changes regarding the information
it will make public, the position and accountability limits
it will adopt and enforce, the position reductions it will
require to prevent manipulation, or any other area of
interest expressed by the Commission.
``(2) Existing foreign boards of trade.--Paragraph (1)
shall become effective 6 months after the date of enactment
of this subsection with respect to any agreement, contract,
or transaction in an energy commodity (as defined by the
Commission) conducted on a foreign board of trade for which
the Commission had granted relief prior to the date of
enactment of this subsection.''.

SEC. 7. COMMISSION AUTHORITY OVER TRADERS.

(a) In General.--
(1) Violations.--Section 9(a) of the Commodity Exchange Act
(7 U.S.C. 13(a)) is amended by inserting ``, including any
person trading on a foreign board of trade,'' after ``Any
person''.
(2) Excessive speculation as a burden on interstate
commerce.--Section 4a(e) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7
U.S.C. 6a(e)) is amended by adding after ``fixed by the
Commission.'' the following: ``It shall be a violation of
this Act for any person located within the United States, its
territories, or possessions, or who enters trades into a
foreign board of trade's trade matching system from the
United States, its territories, or possessions, to violate
any bylaw, rule, regulation, or resolution of any foreign
board of trade or foreign futures authority fixing limits on
the amount of trading which may be done or positions which
may be held under contacts of a sale of an energy commodity
(as defined by the Commission) for future delivery or under
options on such contracts or commodities, that settle against
any price, including the daily or final settlement price, of
a contract or contracts listed for trading on a registered
entity.''

[[Page 16305]]

(3) Restriction of futures trading to contract markets or
derivatives transaction execution facilities.--Section 4(b)
of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 6(b)) is amended by
adding after the first sentence the following: ``The
Commission may adopt rules and regulations requiring the
keeping of books and records by any person located within the
United States, its territories, or possessions, or who enters
trades into a foreign board of trade's trade matching system
from the United States, its territories, or possessions.''
(b) Consultation.--Prior to the issuance of any order to
reduce a position on a foreign board of trade located outside
located outside the United States, its territories, or
possessions, the Commission shall consult with the foreign
board of trade and the appropriate regulatory authority.
(c) Administration.--Nothing in this subsection limits any
of the otherwise applicable authorities of the Commission.

SEC. 8. DETAILED REPORTING FROM INDEX TRADERS AND SWAP
DEALERS.

Section 4 of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 6) (as
amended by section 6) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(f) Index Traders and Swap Dealers.--
``(1) Reporting.--The Commission shall--
``(A) issue a proposed rule defining and classifying index
traders and swap dealers (as those terms are defined in the
rulemaking by the Commission) for purposes of data reporting
requirements and setting routine detailed reporting
requirements for such entities in energy and agricultural
transactions within the jurisdiction of the Commission not
later than 60 days after the enactment of this subsection,
and issue a final rule within 120 days after the enactment of
this subsection; and
``(B) subject to the provisions of section 8, disaggregate
and make public monthly information on the positions and
value of index funds and other passive positions in the
energy and agricultural futures markets, comparing these
positions and values to the speculative positions of bona
fide physical hedgers in those markets.
``(2) Report.--The Commission shall submit a report to the
Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry and
the House Agriculture Committee, not later than September 15,
2008, regarding--
``(A) the scope of commodity index trading in the futures
markets;
``(B) whether and how the classification of index traders
and swap dealers in the futures markets can be improved for
regulatory reporting purposes;
``(C) whether, based on a review of the trading practices
for index traders in the futures markets--
``(i) index trading activity is adversely impacting the
price discovery process in the futures markets; and
``(ii) different practices and controls should be
required.''.
______

SA 5156. Mr. CRAPO submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:

SECTION 1. STUDY OF INTERNATIONAL REGULATION OF ENERGY
COMMODITY MARKETS.

SEC. 2. FOREIGN BOARDS OF TRADE.

Section 4 of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 6) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Foreign Boards of Trade.--
``(1) In general.--The Commission shall not permit a
foreign board of trade's members or other participants
located in the United States to enter trades directly into
the foreign board of trade's trade matching system with
respect to an agreement, contract, or transaction in an
energy commodity (as defined by the Commission) that settles
against any price, including the daily or final settlement
price, of a contract or contracts listed for trading on a
registered entity, unless--
``(A) the foreign board of trade makes public daily
information on settlement prices, volume, open interest, and
opening and closing ranges for the agreement, contract, or
transaction that is comparable to the daily trade information
published by the registered entity for the contract or
contracts against which it settles;
``(B) the foreign board of trade or a foreign futures
authority adopts position limitations (including related
hedge exemption provisions) or position accountability for
speculators for the agreement, contract, or transaction that
are comparable to the position limitations (including related
hedge exemption provisions) or position accountability
adopted by the registered entity for the contract or
contracts against which it settles; and
``(C) the foreign board of trade or a foreign futures
authority provides such information to the Commission
regarding the extent of speculative and nonspeculative
trading in the agreement, contract, or transaction that is
comparable to the information the Commission determines is
necessary to publish its weekly report of traders (commonly
known as the Commitments of Traders report) for the contract
or contracts against which it settles.
``(2) Existing foreign boards of trade.--Paragraph (1)
shall become effective 1 year after the date of enactment of
this subsection with respect to any agreement, contract, or
transaction in an energy commodity (as defined by the
Commission) conducted on a foreign board of trade for which
the Commission's staff had granted relief from the
requirements of this Act prior to the date of enactment of
this subsection.''.

SEC. 3. INDEX TRADERS AND SWAP DEALERS; DISAGGREGATION OF
INDEX FUNDS.

Section 4 of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 6) (as
amended by section 2) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(f) Index Traders and Swap Dealers.--
``(1) Reporting.--The Commission shall--
``(A) issue a proposed rule regarding routine reporting
requirements for index traders and swap dealers (as those
terms are defined by the Commission) in energy and
agricultural transactions (as those terms are defined by the
Commission) within the jurisdiction of the Commission not
later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this
subsection, and issue a final rule regarding such reporting
requirements not later than 270 days after the date of
enactment of this subsection; and
``(B) subject to the provisions of section 8, disaggregate
and make public monthly information on the positions and
value of index funds and other passive, long-only positions
in the energy and agricultural futures markets.
``(2) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall submit to
the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives
and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of
the Senate a report regarding--
``(A) the scope of commodity index trading in the futures
markets;
``(B) whether classification of index traders and swap
dealers in the futures markets can be improved for regulatory
and reporting purposes; and
``(C) whether, based on a review of the trading practices
for index traders in the futures markets--
``(i) index trading activity is adversely impacting the
price discovery process in the futures markets; and
``(ii) different practices and controls should be
required.''.

SEC. 4. IMPROVED OVERSIGHT AND ENFORCEMENT.

[[Page 16306]]

this Act, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission shall hire
at least 100 additional full-time employees--
(1) to increase the public transparency of operations in
energy futures markets;
(2) to improve the enforcement in those markets; and
(3) to carry out such other duties as are prescribed by the
Commission.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--In addition to any
other funds made available to carry out the Commodity
Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), there are authorized to be
appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this
section for fiscal year 2009.
______

SA 5157. Mr. ENZI (for himself and Mr. Barrasso) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend
the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows;

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY TO DEDUCT AMOUNTS FROM
SHARE OF OIL AND GAS LEASING REVENUES PROVIDED
TO STATES.

(a) In General.--Effective December 26, 2007, the matter
under the heading ``administrative provisions'' under the
heading ``Minerals Management Service'' of title I of the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Subdivision F of Public Law 110-
161; 121 Stat. 2109) is amended by striking the second
undesignated paragraph.
(b) Administration.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of the
Interior shall not deduct any amount from or reduce the
amount of payments otherwise payable to States under section
35 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 191).
______

SA 5158. Mr. ENZI submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows;

Strike section 3.
______

SA 5159. Mr. ENZI submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows;

Strike section 6.
______

SA 5160. Mr. STEVENS (for himself and Ms. Murkowski) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend
the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Supporting
Alternative and Viable Energy for America Act of 2008''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

TITLE I--LEASING PROGRAM FOR LAND WITHIN COASTAL PLAIN

Sec. 101. Definitions.
Sec. 102. Leasing program for land within the Coastal Plain.
Sec. 103. Lease sales.
Sec. 104. Grant of leases by the Secretary.
Sec. 105. Lease terms and conditions.
Sec. 106. Coastal plain environmental protection.
Sec. 107. Expedited judicial review.
Sec. 108. Rights-of-way and easements across Coastal Plain.
Sec. 109. Conveyance.
Sec. 110. Federal and State distribution of revenues.
Sec. 111. Local government impact aid and community service assistance.
Sec. 112. ANWR Alternative Energy Trust Fund.
Sec. 113. Prohibition on exports.
Sec. 114. Severability.

TITLE II--OCS IMPACT READINESS ACT OF 2008

Sec. 201. Short title.
Sec. 202. Definitions.
Sec. 203. Disposition of qualified outer continental shelf receipts
from outer continental shelf oil and gas leasing planning
areas.

TITLE III--ALASKA NATURAL GAS PIPELINE

Sec. 301. Discharges into navigable waters.
Sec. 302. Federal Coordinator.

TITLE IV--INVENTORY OF ALASKA WATER POWER RESOURCES

Sec. 401. Inventory of Alaska water power resources.

TITLE V--NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION

Subtitle A--Nuclear Power Technology and Manufacturing

Sec. 501. Definitions.
Sec. 502. Spent fuel recycling program.
Sec. 503. Financial incentives program.
Sec. 504. Forms of awards.
Sec. 505. Selection criteria.

Subtitle B--Accelerated Depreciation

Sec. 511. 5-year accelerated depreciation period for new nuclear power
plants.

TITLE VI--JUDICIAL REVIEW

Sec. 601. Judicial review.

TITLE VII--OIL SPECULATION

Sec. 701. Short title.
Sec. 702. Definition of institutional investor.
Sec. 703. Inspector General.
Sec. 704. Trading practices review with respect to index traders, swap
dealers, and institutional investors.
Sec. 705. Bona fide hedging transactions or positions.
Sec. 706. Speculation limits relating to speculators in energy markets.
Sec. 707. Large trader reporting with respect to index traders, swap
dealers, and institutional investors.
Sec. 708. Institutional investor speculation limits.

TITLE VIII--OIL SPILL DAMAGES CONSISTENCY

Sec. 801. Short title.
Sec. 802. Punitive damages for discharges of oil or hazardous
substances.

TITLE IX--TELEWORK ENHANCEMENT

Sec. 901. Short title.
Sec. 902. Definitions.
Sec. 903. Executive Agencies telework requirement.
Sec. 904. Training and monitoring.
Sec. 905. Policy and support.
Sec. 906. Telework Managing Officer.
Sec. 907. Annual Report to Congress.
Sec. 908. Compliance of executive agencies.
Sec. 909. Extension of travel expenses test programs.

TITLE I--LEASING PROGRAM FOR LAND WITHIN COASTAL PLAIN

SEC. 101. DEFINITIONS.

SEC. 102. LEASING PROGRAM FOR LAND WITHIN THE COASTAL PLAIN.

[[Page 16307]]

gas exploration, development, and production to all
exploration, development, and production operations under
this title in a manner that ensures the receipt of fair
market value by the public for the mineral resources to be
leased.
(b) Repeal.--
(1) Repeal.--Section 1003 of the Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3143) is repealed.
(2) Conforming amendment.--The table of contents contained
in section 1 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 3101 note) is amended by
striking the item relating to section 1003.
(c) Compliance With Requirements Under Certain Other
Laws.--
(1) Compatibility.--For purposes of the National Wildlife
Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et
seq.)--
(A) the oil and gas pre-leasing and leasing program, and
activities authorized by this section in the Coastal Plain,
shall be considered to be compatible with the purposes for
which the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was established;
and
(B) no further findings or decisions shall be required to
implement that program and those activities.
(2) Adequacy of the department of the interior's
legislative environmental impact statement.--The Final
Statement shall be considered to satisfy the requirements
under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) that apply with respect to pre-leasing
activities, including exploration programs and actions
authorized to be taken by the Secretary to develop and
promulgate the regulations for the establishment of a leasing
program authorized by this title before the conduct of the
first lease sale.
(3) Compliance with nepa for other actions.--
(A) In general.--Before conducting the first lease sale
under this title, the Secretary shall prepare an
environmental impact statement under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
with respect to the actions authorized by this title that are
not referred to in paragraph (2).
(B) Identification and analysis.--Notwithstanding any other
law, in carrying out this paragraph, the Secretary shall not
be required--
(i) to identify nonleasing alternative courses of action;
or
(ii) to analyze the environmental effects of those courses
of action.
(C) Identification of preferred action.--Not later than 18
months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall--
(i) identify only a preferred action and a single leasing
alternative for the first lease sale authorized under this
title; and
(ii) analyze the environmental effects and potential
mitigation measures for those 2 alternatives.
(D) Public comments.--In carrying out this paragraph, the
Secretary shall consider only public comments that are filed
not later than 20 days after the date of publication of an
environmental analysis.
(E) Effect of compliance.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, compliance with this paragraph shall be
considered to satisfy all requirements for the analysis and
consideration of the environmental effects of proposed
leasing under this title.
(d) Relationship to State and Local Authority.--Nothing in
this title expands or limits any State or local regulatory
authority.
(e) Special Areas.--
(1) Designation.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary, after consultation with the
State of Alaska, the North Slope Borough, Alaska, and the
City of Kaktovik, Alaska, may designate not more than 45,000
acres of the Coastal Plain as a special area if the Secretary
determines that the special area would be of such unique
character and interest as to require special management and
regulatory protection.
(B) Sadlerochit spring area.--The Secretary shall designate
as a special area in accordance with subparagraph (A) the
Sadlerochit Spring area, comprising approximately 4,000 acres
as depicted on the map.
(2) Management.--The Secretary shall manage each special
area designated under this subsection in a manner that--
(A) respects and protects the Native people of the area;
and
(B) preserves the unique and diverse character of the area,
including fish, wildlife, subsistence resources, and cultural
values of the area.
(3) Exclusion from leasing or surface occupancy.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary may exclude any special area
designated under this subsection from leasing.
(B) No surface occupancy.--If the Secretary leases all or a
portion of a special area for the purposes of oil and gas
exploration, development, production, and related activities,
there shall be no surface occupancy of the land comprising
the special area.
(4) Directional drilling.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this subsection, the Secretary may lease all or
a portion of a special area under terms that permit the use
of horizontal drilling technology from sites on leases
located outside the special area.
(f) Limitation on Closed Areas.--The Secretary may not
close land within the Coastal Plain to oil and gas leasing or
to exploration, development, or production except in
accordance with this title.
(g) Regulations.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 15 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, in consultation with appropriate
agencies of the State of Alaska, the North Slope Borough,
Alaska, and the City of Kaktovik, Alaska, the Secretary shall
issue such regulations as are necessary to carry out this
title, including rules and regulations relating to protection
of the fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, and
subsistence resources of the Coastal Plain.
(2) Revision of regulations.--The Secretary may
periodically review and, as appropriate, revise the rules and
regulations issued under paragraph (1) to reflect any
significant scientific or engineering data that come to the
attention of the Secretary.

SEC. 103. LEASE SALES.

(a) In General.--Land may be leased pursuant to this title
to any person qualified to obtain a lease for deposits of oil
and gas under the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et
seq.).
(b) Procedures.--The Secretary shall, by regulation,
establish procedures for--
(1) receipt and consideration of sealed nominations for any
area in the Coastal Plain for inclusion in, or exclusion (as
provided in subsection (c)) from, a lease sale;
(2) the holding of lease sales after that nomination
process; and
(3) public notice of and comment on designation of areas to
be included in, or excluded from, a lease sale.
(c) Lease Sale Bids.--Bidding for leases under this title
shall be by sealed competitive cash bonus bids.
(d) Acreage Minimum in First Sale.--For the first lease
sale under this title, the Secretary shall offer for lease
those tracts the Secretary considers to have the greatest
potential for the discovery of hydrocarbons, taking into
consideration nominations received pursuant to subsection
(b)(1), but in no case less than 200,000 acres.
(e) Timing of Lease Sales.--The Secretary shall--
(1) not later than 22 months after the date of enactment of
this Act, conduct the first lease sale under this title;
(2) not later than 90 days after the date of the completion
of the sale, evaluate the bids in the sale and issue leases
resulting from the sale; and
(3) conduct additional sales at appropriate intervals if
sufficient interest in exploration or development exists to
warrant the conduct of the additional sales.

SEC. 104. GRANT OF LEASES BY THE SECRETARY.

SEC. 105. LEASE TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

[[Page 16308]]

State of Alaska, as determined by the level of obligation
previously agreed to in the 1974 agreement implementing
section 29 of the Federal Agreement and Grant of Right of Way
for the Operation of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline; and
(8) contain such other provisions as the Secretary
determines to be necessary to ensure compliance with this
title and regulations issued under this title.
(b) Project Labor Agreements.--The Secretary, as a term and
condition of each lease under this title, and in recognizing
the proprietary interest of the Federal Government in labor
stability and in the ability of construction labor and
management to meet the particular needs and conditions of
projects to be developed under the leases issued pursuant to
this title (including the special concerns of the parties to
those leases), shall require that each lessee, and each agent
and contractor of a lessee, under this title negotiate to
obtain a project labor agreement for the employment of
laborers and mechanics on production, maintenance, and
construction under the lease.

SEC. 106. COASTAL PLAIN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.

(a) No Significant Adverse Effect Standard To Govern
Authorized Coastal Plain Activities.--In accordance with
section 102, the Secretary shall administer this title
through regulations, lease terms, conditions, restrictions,
prohibitions, or stipulations that--
(1) ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that oil and
gas exploration, development, and production activities on
the Coastal Plain will result in no significant adverse
effect on fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, and
the environment;
(2) require the application of the best commercially
available technology for oil and gas exploration,
development, and production on all new exploration,
development, and production operations; and
(3) ensure that the maximum surface acreage covered in
connection with the leasing program by production and support
facilities, including airstrips and any areas covered by
gravel berms or piers for support of pipelines, does not
exceed 2,000 acres on the Coastal Plain.
(b) Site-Specific Assessment and Mitigation.--The Secretary
shall require, with respect to any proposed drilling and
related activities on the Coastal Plain, that--
(1) a site-specific environmental analysis be made of the
probable effects, if any, that the drilling or related
activities will have on fish and wildlife, fish and wildlife
habitat, subsistence resources, subsistence uses, and the
environment;
(2) a plan be implemented to avoid, minimize, and mitigate
(in that order and to the maximum extent practicable) any
significant adverse effect identified under paragraph (1);
and
(3) the development of the plan occur after consultation
with--
(A) each agency having jurisdiction over matters mitigated
by the plan;
(B) the State of Alaska;
(C) North Slope Borough, Alaska; and
(D) the City of Kaktovik, Alaska.
(c) Regulations To Protect Coastal Plain Fish and Wildlife
Resources, Subsistence Users, and the Environment.--Before
implementing the leasing program authorized by this title,
the Secretary shall prepare and issue regulations, lease
terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, or
stipulations designed to ensure, to the maximum extent
practicable, that the activities carried out on the Coastal
Plain under this title are conducted in a manner consistent
with the purposes and environmental requirements of this
title.
(d) Compliance With Federal and State Environmental Laws
and Other Requirements.--The proposed regulations, lease
terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, and
stipulations for the leasing program under this title shall
require--
(1) compliance with all applicable provisions of Federal
and State environmental law (including regulations);
(2) implementation of and compliance with--
(A) standards that are at least as effective as the safety
and environmental mitigation measures, as described in items
1 through 29 on pages 167 through 169 of the Final Statement,
on the Coastal Plain;
(B) seasonal limitations, the duration of which shall not
exceed 120 days, on exploration, development, and related
activities, as necessary, to avoid significant adverse
effects during periods of concentrated fish and wildlife
breeding, denning, nesting, spawning, and migration;
(C) design safety and construction standards for all
pipelines and any access and service roads that minimize, to
the maximum extent practicable, adverse effects on--
(i) the passage of migratory species (such as caribou); and
(ii) the flow of surface water by requiring the use of
culverts, bridges, or other structural devices;
(D) prohibitions on general public access to, and use of,
all pipeline access and service roads;
(E) stringent reclamation and rehabilitation requirements
in accordance with this title for the removal from the
Coastal Plain of all oil and gas development and production
facilities, structures, and equipment on completion of oil
and gas production operations, except in a case in which the
Secretary determines that those facilities, structures, or
equipment--
(i) would assist in the management of the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge; and
(ii) are donated to the United States for that purpose;
(F) appropriate prohibitions or restrictions on--
(i) access by all modes of transportation;
(ii) sand and gravel extraction; and
(iii) use of explosives;
(G) reasonable stipulations for protection of cultural and
archaeological resources;
(H) measures to protect surface water, including--
(i) avoidance, to the maximum extent practicable, of
springs, streams, and river systems;
(ii) the protection of natural surface drainage patterns
and wetland and riparian habitats; and
(iii) the regulation of methods or techniques for
developing or transporting adequate supplies of water for
exploratory drilling; and
(I) research, monitoring, and reporting requirements;
(3) that exploration activities (except surface geological
studies) be limited to the period between approximately
November 1 and May 1 of each year and be supported, if
necessary, by ice roads, winter trails with adequate snow
cover, ice pads, ice airstrips, and air transport methods
(except that those exploration activities may be permitted at
other times if the Secretary determines that the exploration
will have no significant adverse effect on fish and wildlife,
fish and wildlife habitat, subsistence resources, and the
environment of the Coastal Plain);
(4) consolidation of facility siting;
(5) avoidance or reduction of air traffic-related
disturbance to fish and wildlife;
(6) treatment and disposal of hazardous and toxic wastes,
solid wastes, reserve pit fluids, drilling muds and cuttings,
and domestic wastewater, including, in accordance with
applicable Federal and State environmental laws (including
regulations)--
(A) preparation of an annual waste management report;
(B) development and implementation of a hazardous materials
tracking system; and
(C) prohibition on the use of chlorinated solvents;
(7) fuel storage and oil spill contingency planning;
(8) conduct periodic field crew environmental briefings;
(9) avoidance of significant adverse effects on subsistence
hunting, fishing, and trapping;
(10) compliance with applicable air and water quality
standards; and
(11) appropriate seasonal and safety zone designations
around well sites, within which subsistence hunting and
trapping may be limited.
(e) Considerations.--In preparing and issuing regulations,
lease terms, conditions, restrictions, prohibitions, or
stipulations under this section, the Secretary shall take
into consideration--
(1) the stipulations and conditions that govern the
National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska leasing program, as set
forth in the 1999 Northeast National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska
Final Integrated Activity Plan/Environmental Impact
Statement;
(2) the environmental protection standards that governed
the initial Coastal Plain seismic exploration program under
parts 37.31 through 37.33 of title 50, Code of Federal
Regulations; and
(3) the land use stipulations for exploratory drilling on
the KIC-ASRC private land described in Appendix 2 of the
agreement between Arctic Slope Regional Corporation and the
United States dated August 9, 1983.
(f) Facility Consolidation Planning.--
(1) In general.--After providing for public notice and
comment, the Secretary shall prepare and periodically update
a plan to govern, guide, and direct the siting and
construction of facilities for the exploration, development,
production, and transportation of oil and gas resources from
the Coastal Plain.
(2) Objectives.--The objectives of the plan shall be--
(A) the avoidance of unnecessary duplication of facilities
and activities;
(B) the encouragement of consolidation of common facilities
and activities;
(C) the location or confinement of facilities and
activities to areas that will minimize impact on fish and
wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, subsistence resources,
and the environment;
(D) the use of existing facilities, to the maximum extent
practicable; and
(E) the enhancement of compatibility between wildlife
values and development activities.
(g) Access to Public Land.--The Secretary shall--
(1) manage public land in the Coastal Plain in accordance
with subsections (a) and (b) of section 811 of the Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3121);
and
(2) ensure that local residents shall have reasonable
access to public land in the Coastal Plain for traditional
uses.

[[Page 16309]]

SEC. 107. EXPEDITED JUDICIAL REVIEW.

(a) Filing of Complaints.--
(1) Deadline.--A complaint seeking judicial review of a
provision of this title or an action of the Secretary under
this title shall be filed during the 90-day period beginning
on the date on which the action being challenged was carried
out.
(2) Venue.--A complaint seeking judicial review of a
provision of this title or an action of the Secretary under
this title shall be filed in the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia.
(3) Scope.--
(A) In general.--Judicial review of a decision of the
Secretary under this title (including an environmental
analysis of such a lease sale) shall be--
(i) limited to a review of whether the decision is in
accordance with this title; and
(ii) based on the administrative record of the decision.
(B) Presumptions.--Any identification by the Secretary of a
preferred course of action relating to a lease sale, and any
analysis by the Secretary of environmental effects, under
this title shall be presumed to be correct unless proven
otherwise by clear and convincing evidence.
(b) Limitation on Other Review.--Any action of the
Secretary that is subject to judicial review under this
section shall not be subject to judicial review in any civil
or criminal proceeding.

SEC. 108. RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS ACROSS COASTAL PLAIN.

SEC. 109. CONVEYANCE.

SEC. 110. FEDERAL AND STATE DISTRIBUTION OF REVENUES.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, of the amount of adjusted bonus, rental, and royalty
revenues from Federal oil and gas leasing and operations
authorized under this title for each fiscal year--
(1) 50 percent shall be paid to the State of Alaska each
fiscal year, of which not less than 37.5 percent shall be
used each fiscal year to provide local government impact aid
and community service assistance under section 111; and
(2) the balance shall be transferred to the ANWR
Alternative Energy Trust Fund established by section 112.
(b) Payments to Alaska.--Payments to the State of Alaska
under this section shall be made semiannually.

SEC. 111. LOCAL GOVERNMENT IMPACT AID AND COMMUNITY SERVICE
ASSISTANCE.

(a) Establishment of Fund.--
(1) In general.--As a condition on the receipt of funds
under section 110(a)(1), the State of Alaska shall establish
in the treasury of the State, and administer in accordance
with this section, a fund to be known as the ``Coastal Plain
Local Government Impact Aid Assistance Fund'' (referred to in
this section as the ``Fund'').
(2) Deposits.--Subject to paragraph (1), the amount made
available under section 110(a)(1) to provide local government
impact aid and community service assistance shall be
deposited into the Fund.
(3) Investment.--The Governor of the State of Alaska
(referred to in this section as the ``Governor'') shall
invest amounts in the Fund in interest-bearing securities of
the United States or the State of Alaska.
(b) Assistance.--The Governor, in cooperation with the
Mayor of the North Slope Borough, shall use amounts in the
Fund to provide assistance to North Slope Borough, Alaska,
the City of Kaktovik, Alaska, and any other borough,
municipal subdivision, village, or other community in the
State of Alaska that is directly impacted by exploration for,
or the production of, oil or gas on the Coastal Plain under
this title, or any Alaska Native Regional Corporation acting
on behalf of the villages and communities within its region
whose lands lie along the right of way of the Trans Alaska
Pipeline System, as determined by the Governor.
(c) Application.--
(1) In general.--To receive assistance under subsection
(b), a community or Regional Corporation described in that
subsection shall submit to the Governor, or to the Mayor of
the North Slope Borough, an application in such time, in such
manner, and containing such information as the Governor may
require.
(2) Action by north slope borough.--The Mayor of the North
Slope Borough shall submit to the Governor each application
received under paragraph (1) as soon as practicable after the
date on which the application is received.
(3) Assistance of governor.--The Governor shall assist
communities in submitting applications under this subsection,
to the maximum extent practicable.
(d) Use of Funds.--A community or Regional Corporation that
receives funds under subsection (b) may use the funds--
(1) to plan for mitigation, implement a mitigation plan, or
maintain a mitigation project to address the potential
effects of oil and gas exploration and development on
environmental, social, cultural, recreational, and
subsistence resources of the community;
(2) to develop, carry out, and maintain--
(A) a project to provide new or expanded public facilities;
or
(B) services to address the needs and problems associated
with the effects described in paragraph (1), including
firefighting, police, water and waste treatment, first
responder, and other medical services;
(3) to compensate residents of the Coastal Plain for
significant damage to environmental, social, cultural,
recreational, or subsistence resources; and
(4) in the City of Kaktovik, Alaska--
(A) to develop a mechanism for providing members of the
Kaktovikmiut Inupiat community an opportunity to--
(i) monitor development on the Coastal Plain; and
(ii) provide information and recommendations to the
Governor based on traditional aboriginal knowledge of the
natural resources, flora, fauna, and ecological processes of
the Coastal Plain; and
(B) to establish a local coordination office, to be managed
by the Mayor of the North Slope Borough, in coordination with
the City of Kaktovik, Alaska--
(i) to coordinate with and advise developers on local
conditions and the history of areas affected by development;
(ii) to provide to the Committee on Resources of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate annual reports on the status of the
coordination between developers and communities affected by
development;
(iii) to collect from residents of the Coastal Plain
information regarding the impacts of development on fish,
wildlife, habitats, subsistence resources, and the
environment of the Coastal Plain; and
(iv) to ensure that the information collected under clause
(iii) is submitted to--

(I) developers; and
(II) any appropriate Federal agency.

SEC. 112. ANWR ALTERNATIVE ENERGY TRUST FUND.

(a) Establishment of Trust Fund.--There is established in
the Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as
the ``ANWR Alternative Energy Trust Fund'', consisting of
such amounts as may be transferred to the ANWR Alternative
Energy Trust Fund as provided in section 110(a)(2).
(b) Expenditures From ANWR Alternative Energy Trust Fund.--
(1) In general.--Amounts in the ANWR Alternative Energy
Trust Fund shall be available without further appropriation
to carry out specified provisions of the Energy Policy Act of
2005 (Public Law 109-58; referred to in this section as
``EPAct2005''), the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007 (Public Law 110-140; referred to in this section as
``EISAct2007''), and subtitle A of title V of this Act, as
follows:

The following
percentage of annual
receipts to the ANWR
Alternative Energy
To carry out the provisions of: Trust Fund, but not to
exceed the limit on
amount authorized, if
any:

EPAct2005:
Section 210.................................. 1.5 percent
Section 242.................................. 1.0 percent
Section 369.................................. 2.0 percent
Section 401.................................. 6.0 percent
Section 812.................................. 6.0 percent
Section 931.................................. 16.0 percent
Section 942.................................. 1.5 percent
Section 962.................................. 3.0 percent
Section 968.................................. 1.5 percent
Section 1704................................. 5.5 percent
EISAct2007:
Section 207.................................. 15.0 percent
Section 607.................................. 1.0 percent
Title VI, Subtitle B......................... 3.0 percent
Title VI, Subtitle C......................... 1.5 percent
Section 641.................................. 9.0 percent
Title VII, Subtitle A........................ 10.0 percent
Section 1112................................. 1.5 percent
Section 1304................................. 5.0 percent
Title V of this Act, Subtitle A:............. 10.0 percent.

[[Page 16310]]

and EISAct2007 shall be reallocated to the remaining sections
and subtitles cited in paragraph (1), up to the amounts
otherwise authorized by law to carry out those sections and
subtitles, in proportion to the amounts authorized by law to
be appropriated for those other sections and subtitles.

SEC. 113. PROHIBITION ON EXPORTS.

An oil or gas lease issued under this title shall prohibit
the exportation of oil or gas produced under the lease.

SEC. 114. SEVERABILITY.

TITLE II--OCS IMPACT READINESS ACT OF 2008

SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``OCS Impact Readiness Act
of 2008''.

SEC. 202. DEFINITIONS.

In this title:
(1) Coastal political subdivision.--The term ``coastal
political subdivision'', with respect to a Fairness State,
means a county-equivalent subdivision of a Fairness State--
(A) all or a portion of which lies within the coastal zone
(as defined in section 304 of the Coastal Zone Management Act
of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1453); and
(B) the closest point of which is not more than 300 statute
miles from the geographical center of any leased tract.
(2) Distance.--The term ``distance'' means minimum great
circle distance.
(3) Fairness state.--The term ``Fairness State'' means a
coastal State with a coastal seaward boundary within a
distance of 300 statute miles of the geographical center of a
leased tract in an outer Continental Shelf planning area
that, as of January 1, 2000--
(A) had no oil or natural gas production; and
(B) is not a ``Gulf producing State'' (as defined in
section 102 of the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006
(43 U.S.C. 1331 note; Public Law 109-432)).
(4) Leased tract.--The term ``leased tract'' means a tract
leased under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C.
1331 et seq.) for the purpose of drilling for, developing,
and producing oil or natural gas resources.
(5) Qualified outer continental shelf receipts.--
(A) In general.--The term ``qualified outer Continental
Shelf receipts'' means all amounts received by the United
States, in the fiscal year immediately following the fiscal
year in which this Act is enacted and each fiscal year
thereafter--
(i) from each leased tract or portion of a leased tract,
the geographical center of which lies within a distance of
300 statute miles from any part of the coastline of a
Fairness State, including--

(I) bonus bids;
(II) rents;
(III) royalties (including the value of royalties taken in
kind);
(IV) net profit share payments;
(V) fees; and
(VI) related late payment interest; and

(ii) from leases entered into on or after January 1, 2000.
(B) Exclusions.--The term ``qualified outer Continental
Shelf receipts'' does not include--
(i) receipts from the forfeiture of a bond or other surety
securing obligations other than royalties, or civil
penalties; or
(ii) receipts generated from leases subject to section 8(g)
of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1337(g)).
(6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.

SEC. 203. DISPOSITION OF QUALIFIED OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF
RECEIPTS FROM OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF OIL AND
GAS LEASING PLANNING AREAS.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 9 of the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1338) and subject to
the other provisions of this section, for each applicable
fiscal year, the Secretary of the Treasury shall deposit--
(1) 62.5 percent of qualified outer Continental Shelf
receipts in the miscellaneous receipts of the Treasury; and
(2) 37.5 percent of qualified outer Continental Shelf
receipts in a special account in the Treasury that the
Secretary shall disburse to Fairness States and certain
coastal political subdivisions of those Fairness States.
(b) Allocation Among Fairness States and Their Coastal
Political Subdivisions.--
(1) Allocation among fairness states.--
(A) In general.--Effective for the fiscal year immediately
following the fiscal year in which this Act is enacted and
each fiscal year thereafter, the amount made available under
subsection (a)(2) shall be allocated by the Secretary to each
Fairness State in amounts (based on a formula established by
the Secretary by regulation) that are inversely proportional
to the respective distances between the point on the
coastline of each Fairness State that is closest to the
geographical center of the applicable leased tract and the
geographical center of the leased tract.
(B) Single fairness state.--If only 1 Fairness State is
within a distance of 300 miles of the geographical center of
a lease described in subparagraph (A), the entire amount made
available under subsection (a)(2) from the lease shall be
allocated to that Fairness State.
(2) Allocation among coastal political subdivisions of
fairness states.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall pay 40 percent of the
allocable share of each Fairness State, as determined under
paragraph (1), to certain coastal political subdivisions of
the Fairness State.
(B) Allocation.--
(i) In general.--For each leased tract used to calculate
the allocation for a Fairness State, the Secretary shall pay
each coastal political subdivision located within a distance
of 300 miles of the geographical center of the leased tract
based on the relative distance of the coastal political
subdivision from the leased tract in accordance with clauses
(ii) and (iii).
(ii) Determination of distances.--For each coastal
political subdivision described in clause (i), the Secretary
shall determine the distance between the point on the coastal
political subdivision coastline closest to the geographical
center of the leased tract and the geographical center of the
tract.
(iii) Inversely proportional allocation.--The Secretary
shall divide and allocate the qualified Outer Continental
Shelf receipts derived from the leased tract among coastal
political subdivisions described in clause (i) in amounts
that are inversely proportional to the distances determined
under clause (ii).
(c) Timing.--The amounts required to be deposited under
subsection (a)(2) for the applicable fiscal year shall be
made available in accordance with subsection (a)(2) during
the first 90 days of the fiscal year immediately following
the applicable fiscal year.
(d) Authorized Uses.--Each Fairness State and coastal
political subdivision shall use all amounts received under
subsection (b), in accordance with all applicable Federal and
State laws, only for 1 or more of the following purposes:
(1) Projects and activities for the purposes of coastal
protection (including conservation), coastal restoration,
storm protection, and infrastructure directly affected by
coastal wetland and tundra losses.
(2) Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, or natural
resources.
(3) Implementation of a federally-approved marine, coastal,
or comprehensive conservation management plan.
(4) Mitigation of the impact of outer Continental Shelf
activities through the funding of onshore infrastructure
projects.
(5) Any other purpose authorized for the use of those
amounts under State law.
(e) Revenue Sharing From Areas in Alaska Adjacent Zone.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraphs (2) through (4),
revenues from production that occurs beginning on the date
that is 5 years after the date of enactment of this Act in an
area in the Alaska Adjacent Zone shall be distributed in the
same proportion as provided in subsection (b).
(2) Establishment of alaska offshore continental shelf
coordination office.--Before disbursing funds otherwise
allocable to coastal political subdivisions in the State of
Alaska under subsection (b)(2), the Secretary shall annually
set aside $10,000,000 for an Alaska Offshore Continental
Shelf Coordination Office to be established and maintained by
the Mayor of the North Slope Borough.
(3) Deposits.--
(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), for each
fiscal year, the Secretary shall pay to the North Slope
Borough $10,000,000 from the amount otherwise allocable to
coastal political subdivisions in the State of Alaska under
subsection (b)(2) for the purpose of establishing and
maintaining a local coordination office.
(B) Insufficient amounts.--If, for any fiscal year, less
than $10,000,000 is available under subsection (b)(2), the
Secretary shall set aside and pay to the North Slope Borough
all funds available under subsection (b)(2) for the purpose
of establishing and maintaining the Alaska Offshore
Continental Shelf Coordination Office.
(4) Use of funds for local coordination office.--The North
Slope Borough shall use amounts received under paragraph (3),
in accordance with all applicable Federal and State laws, to
establish a local coordination office--
(A) to coordinate with and advise developers on local
conditions and the history of areas affected by development;
(B) to provide to the Committee on Natural Resources of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources of the Senate annual reports on the status
of the coordination between developers and communities
affected by development;
(C) to collect from residents of the North Slope
information regarding the impacts of development on marine
wildlife, coastal habitats, marine and coastal subsistence
resources, and the marine and coastal environment of the
North Slope region of the State of Alaska; and

[[Page 16311]]

(D) to ensure that the information collected under
subparagraph (C) is submitted to--
(i) developers of the Alaska outer Continental Shelf; and
(ii) any appropriate Federal agency.
(f) Limitations on Amount of Distributed Qualified Outer
Continental Shelf Receipts.--The total amount of qualified
outer Continental Shelf receipts made available under
subsection (a)(2) to an individual Fairness State and coastal
political subdivisions of the Fairness State shall not exceed
$500,000,000 for each fiscal year, as indexed for United
States dollar inflation from fiscal year 2008 (as measured by
the Consumer Price Index).

TITLE III--ALASKA NATURAL GAS PIPELINE

SEC. 301. DISCHARGES INTO NAVIGABLE WATERS.

Section 104 of the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act (15
U.S.C. 720b) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Discharges Into Navigable Waters.--The discharge of
dredged or fill material into the navigable waters at any
site necessary for the construction of the pipeline under
this Act or to otherwise carry out this Act shall not be
subject to section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act (33 U.S.C. 1251) (including any consultation or
mitigation requirements of that section) unless the discharge
directly enters into navigable waters that exhibit a
continuous, visible surface flow for a substantial part of
the year during which the discharge takes place.''.

SEC. 302. FEDERAL COORDINATOR.

(a) Prohibition of Certain Actions.--Section 106(d)(3) of
the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act (15 U.S.C. 720d(d)(3)) is
amended by striking ``Unless required by law'' and inserting
``Unless explicitly required by statute''.
(b) State Coordination.--Section 106(e) of the Alaska
Natural Gas Pipeline Act (15 U.S.C. 720d(e)) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(3) Administrative compliance.--The Federal Coordinator
may establish a schedule and deadline for administrative
compliance of Federal agencies with this Act using authority
that is commensurate with and parallel to the authority
provided to the Commission under section 104(c)(1).''.
(c) Agency Authorized Officers.--Section 106(h) of the
Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act (15 U.S.C. 720d(h)) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(5) Agency authorized officers.--The Federal Coordinator
may require a Federal agency to designate and provide
mutually-agreed on agency authorized officers to the Office
of the Federal Coordinator for purposes of expediting and
coordinating the duties of the agency in furtherance of the
objectives of the Federal Coordinator.''.

TITLE IV--INVENTORY OF ALASKA WATER POWER RESOURCES

SEC. 401. INVENTORY OF ALASKA WATER POWER RESOURCES.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy, in consultation
with representatives of the State of Alaska, shall conduct an
inventory of water power resources of the State of Alaska,
including hydropower, stream, and ocean (including current,
wave, tidal, kinetic, and thermal) resources.
(b) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
appropriate committees of Congress, the President, and the
Governor of the State of Alaska a report describing the
results of the inventory.

TITLE V--NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION

Subtitle A--Nuclear Power Technology and Manufacturing

SEC. 501. DEFINITIONS.

In this subtitle:
(1) Engineering integration costs.--The term ``engineering
integration costs'' includes the costs of engineering tasks
relating to--
(A) the redesign of manufacturing processes to produce
qualifying components and nuclear power generation
technologies;
(B) the design of new tooling and equipment for production
facilities that produce qualifying components and nuclear
power generation technologies; and
(C) the establishment or expansion of manufacturing or
processing operations for qualifying components and nuclear
power generation technologies.
(2) Nuclear power generation.--The term ``nuclear power
generation'' means generation of electricity by an electric
generation unit that--
(A) emits no carbon dioxide into the atmosphere;
(B) uses uranium as its fuel source; and
(C) was placed into commercial service after the date of
enactment of this Act.
(3) Nuclear power generation technology.--The term
``nuclear power generation technology'' means a technology
used to produce nuclear power generation.
(4) Qualifying component.--The term ``qualifying
component'' means a component that the Secretary determines
to be specially designed for nuclear power generation
technology.
(5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.

SEC. 502. SPENT FUEL RECYCLING PROGRAM.

(a) Purpose.--It is the policy of the United States to
recycle spent nuclear fuel to advance energy independence by
maximizing the energy potential of nuclear fuel in a
proliferation-resistant manner that reduces the quantity of
waste dedicated to a permanent Federal repository.
(b) Spent Fuel Recycling Research and Development
Facility.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall begin construction
of a spent fuel recycling research and development facility.
(2) Purpose.--The facility described in paragraph (1) shall
serve as the lead site for continuing research and
development of advanced nuclear fuel cycles and separation
technologies.
(3) Site selection.--In selecting a site for the facility,
the Secretary shall give preference to a site that has--
(A) the most technically sound bid;
(B) a demonstrated technical expertise in spent fuel
recycling; and
(C) proximity to existing and proposed nuclear reactors.
(c) Contracts.--The Secretary shall use amounts made
available under section 112(b), and such other amounts as are
appropriated to carry out this section, to enter into long-
term contracts with private sector entities for the recycling
of spent nuclear fuel.
(d) Competitive Selection.--Contracts awarded under
subsection (c) shall be awarded on the basis of a competitive
bidding process that--
(1) maximizes the competitive efficiency of the projects
funded;
(2) best serves the goal of reducing the amount of waste
requiring disposal under this Act; and
(3) ensures adequate protection against the proliferation
of nuclear materials that could be used in the manufacture of
nuclear weapons.
(e) Regulatory Authority.--Not later than 1 year after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, in collaboration with the Secretary, shall
promulgate regulations for the licensing of facilities for
recovery and use of spent nuclear fuel that provide
reasonable assurance that licenses issued for that purpose
will not be counter to the defense, security, and national
interests of the United States.

SEC. 503. FINANCIAL INCENTIVES PROGRAM.

(a) In General.--For each fiscal year beginning on or after
October 1, 2010, the Secretary shall use amounts made
available under section 112(b) (but not to exceed a total
amount of $1,000,000,000 for any fiscal year) to
competitively award financial incentives under this subtitle
in the following technology categories:
(1) The production of electricity from new nuclear power
generation.
(2) Facility establishment or conversion by manufacturers
and suppliers of nuclear power generation technology and
qualifying components.
(b) Requirements.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall make awards under this
section to--
(A) domestic producers of new nuclear power generation;
(B) manufacturers and suppliers of nuclear power generation
technology and qualifying components; and
(C) owners or operators of existing nuclear power
generation facilities.
(2) Basis for awards.--The Secretary shall make awards
under this section--
(A) in the case of producers of new nuclear power
generation, based on the bid of each producer in terms of
dollars per megawatt-hour of electricity generated;
(B) in the case of manufacturers and suppliers of nuclear
power generation technology and qualifying components, based
on the criteria described in section 505; and
(C) in the case of owners or operators of existing nuclear
power generating facilities, based upon criteria described in
section 505.
(3) Acceptance of bids.--In making awards under this
subsection, the Secretary shall--
(A) solicit bids for reverse auction from appropriate
producers, manufacturers, and suppliers, as determined by the
Secretary; and
(B) award financial incentives to the producers,
manufacturers, and suppliers that submit the lowest bids that
meet the requirements established by the Secretary.

SEC. 504. FORMS OF AWARDS.

[[Page 16312]]

(1) In general.--An award for facility establishment or
conversion costs for nuclear power generation technology
under this subtitle shall be in an amount equal to not more
than 30 percent of the cost of--
(A) establishing, reequipping, or expanding a manufacturing
facility to produce--
(i) qualifying nuclear power generation technology; or
(ii) qualifying components;
(B) engineering integration costs of nuclear power
generation technology and qualifying components; and
(C) property, machine tools, and other equipment acquired
or constructed primarily to enable the recipient to test
equipment necessary for the construction or operation of a
nuclear power generation facility.
(2) Amount.--The Secretary shall use the amounts made
available to carry out this section to make awards to
entities for the manufacturing of nuclear power generation
technology.

SEC. 505. SELECTION CRITERIA.

In making awards under this subtitle to producers,
manufacturers, and suppliers of nuclear power generation
technology and qualifying components, the Secretary shall
select producers, manufacturers, and suppliers that--
(1) document the greatest use of domestically-sourced parts
and components;
(2) return to productive service existing idle
manufacturing capacity;
(3) are located in States or political subdivisions with
the greatest dependence on fossil fuel-based energy;
(4) demonstrate a high probability of commercial success;
and
(5) meet other appropriate criteria, as determined by the
Secretary.

Subtitle B--Accelerated Depreciation

SEC. 511. 5-YEAR ACCELERATED DEPRECIATION PERIOD FOR NEW
NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS.

TITLE VI--JUDICIAL REVIEW

SEC. 601. JUDICIAL REVIEW.

(a) Exclusive Jurisdiction.--Except for review by the
Supreme Court on writ of certiorari, the United States Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit shall have
original and exclusive jurisdiction to determine--
(1) the validity of any final order or action (including
any failure to act) of any Federal agency or officer under or
in furtherance of titles II and V;
(2) the constitutionality of any provision of this Act, or
any decision made or action taken under or in furtherance of
titles II and V; and
(3) the adequacy of any environmental impact statement or
similar analysis required under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) with respect to
any action under or in furtherance of titles II and V,
including--
(A) the final environmental impact statement for Chukchi
Sea Planning Area Oil and Gas Lease Sale 193 as the statement
relates to activities proposed and undertaken in affected
areas, including activities to lease blocks--
(i) NR 03-01;
(ii) NR 03-02;
(iii) NR 03-03;
(iv) NR 03-04;
(v) NR 03-08; and
(vi) NR 04-01; and
(B) the environmental assessment for Proposed Beaufort Sea
Planning Area Oil and Gas Lease Sale 202 as the assessment
relates to activities proposed and undertaken in affected
areas, including activities to lease blocks--
(i) NR 05-01;
(ii) NR 05-02;
(iii) NR 05-04;
(iv) NR 06-03;
(v) NR 06-04;
(vi) NR 07-03; and
(vii) NR 07-05.
(b) Deadline for Filing Claim.--A claim arising under title
II or V may be brought not later than 60 days after the date
of the decision or action giving rise to the claim.
(c) Expedited Consideration.--The United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit shall set any
action brought under subsection (a) for expedited
consideration, taking into account the national interest of
enhancing national energy security by providing access to the
significant resources needed to meet the continuing and
anticipated domestic demand for energy.
(d) Administrative Appeal.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior and the
Secretary of Energy may not extend the time period for
administrative review of, or action against, any project,
proposal, or activity taken under title II or V.
(2) Constructive approval.--If no decision on
administrative review of an action under title II or V is
made within the time period required under that title, the
decision shall be considered affirmed.

TITLE VII--OIL SPECULATION

SEC. 701. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Oil Speculation Control
Act of 2008''.

SEC. 702. DEFINITION OF INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR.

(a) Definition.--Section 1a of the Commodity Exchange Act
(7 U.S.C. 1a) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (22) through (34) as
paragraphs (23) through (35), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (21) the following:
``(22) Institutional investor.--The term `institutional
investor' means a long-term investor in financial markets
(including pension funds, endowments, and foundations) that--
``(A) invests in energy commodities as an asset class in a
portfolio of financial investments; and
``(B) does not take or make physical delivery of energy
commodities on a frequent basis, as determined by the
Commission.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 13106(b)(1) of the Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act of 2008 is amended by striking ``section 1a(32)''
and inserting ``section 1a''.
(2) Section 402(d)(1)(B) of the Legal Certainty for Bank
Products Act of 2000 (7 U.S.C. 27(d)(1)(B)) is amended by
striking ``section 1a(33)'' and inserting ``section 1a''.

SEC. 703. INSPECTOR GENERAL.

Section 2(a) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 2(a))
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(13) Inspector general.--
``(A) Office.--There shall be in the Commission, as an
independent office, an Office of the Inspector General.
``(B) Appointment.--The Office shall be headed by an
Inspector General, appointed in accordance with the Inspector
General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.).
``(C) Compensation.--The Inspector General shall be
compensated at the rate provided for level IV of the
Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5, United
States Code.
``(D) Administration.--The Inspector General shall exert
independent control of the budget allocations, expenditures,
and staffing levels, personnel decisions and processes,
procurement, and other administrative and management
functions of the Office.''.

SEC. 704. TRADING PRACTICES REVIEW WITH RESPECT TO INDEX
TRADERS, SWAP DEALERS, AND INSTITUTIONAL
INVESTORS.

Section 4 of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 6) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Trading Practices Review With Respect to Index
Traders, Swap Dealers, and Institutional Investors.--
``(1) Review.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall carry out
a review of the trading practices of index traders, swap
dealers, and institutional investors in markets under the
jurisdiction of the Commission--
``(i) to ensure that index trading is not adversely
impacting the price discovery process;
``(ii) to determine whether different practices or
regulations should be implemented; and
``(iii) to gather data for use in proposing regulations to
limit the size and influence of institutional investor
positions in commodity markets.
``(B) Emergency authority.--For the 60-day period described
in subparagraph (A), in accordance with each applicable rule
adopted under section 5(d)(6), the Commission shall exercise
the emergency authority of the Commission to prevent
institutional investors from increasing the positions of the
institutional investors in--
``(i) energy commodity futures; and
``(ii) commodity future index funds.
``(2) Report.--Not later than 30 days after the date
described in paragraph (1)(A), the Commission shall submit to
the appropriate committees of Congress a report that contains
recommendations for such legislation as the Commission
determines to be necessary to limit the size and influence of
institutional investor positions in commodity markets.''.

SEC. 705. BONA FIDE HEDGING TRANSACTIONS OR POSITIONS.

Section 4a(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C.
6a(c)) is amended by striking ``(c) No rule'' and inserting
the following:
``(c) Bona Fide Hedging Transactions or Positions.--
``(1) Definition of bona fide hedging transaction or
position.--The term `bona fide hedging transaction or
position' means a

[[Page 16313]]

transaction or position that represents a hedge against price
risk exposure relating to physical transactions involving an
energy commodity.
``(2) Application with respect to bona fide hedging
transactions or positions.--No rule''.

SEC. 706. SPECULATION LIMITS RELATING TO SPECULATORS IN
ENERGY MARKETS.

Section 4a of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 6a) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(f) Speculation Limits Relating to Speculators in Energy
Markets.--
``(1) Definition of speculator.--In this subsection, the
term `speculator' includes any institutional investor or
investor of an investment fund that holds a position through
an intermediary broker or dealer.
``(2) Enforcement of speculation limits.--The Commission
shall enforce speculation limits with respect to speculators
in energy markets.''.

SEC. 707. LARGE TRADER REPORTING WITH RESPECT TO INDEX
TRADERS, SWAP DEALERS, AND INSTITUTIONAL
INVESTORS.

Section 4g of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 6g) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(g) Large Trader Reporting With Respect to Index Traders,
Swap Dealers, and Institutional Investors.--
``(1) In general.--Each recordkeeping and reporting
requirement under this section relating to large trader
transactions and positions shall apply to index traders,
swaps dealers, and institutional investors in markets under
the jurisdiction of the Commission.
``(2) Promulgation of regulations.--As soon as practicable
after the date of enactment of this subsection, the
Commission shall promulgate regulations to establish separate
classifications for index traders, swaps dealers, and
institutional investors--
``(A) to enforce the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements described in paragraph (1); and
``(B) to enforce position limits and position
accountability levels with respect to energy commodities
under section 4a(f).''.

SEC. 708. INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR SPECULATION LIMITS.

(a) Core Principles Applicable to Significant Price
Discovery Contracts.--Section 2(h)(7)(C)(ii)(IV) of the
Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(C)(ii)(IV)) is
amended by inserting after ``speculators'' the following:
``(including institutional investors that do not take
delivery of energy commodities and that hold positions in
energy commodities through swaps dealers or other third
parties)''.
(b) Core Principles for Contract Markets.--Section 5(d)(5)
of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 7(d)(5)) is amended
by inserting after ``speculators'' the following:
``(including institutional investors that do not take
delivery of energy commodities and that hold positions in
energy commodities through swaps dealers or other third
parties)''.

TITLE VIII--OIL SPILL DAMAGES CONSISTENCY

SEC. 801. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Oil Spill Damages
Consistency Act''.

SEC. 802. PUNITIVE DAMAGES FOR DISCHARGES OF OIL OR HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCES.

Title III of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act is
amended by inserting after section 311 (33 U.S.C. 1321) the
following:

``SEC. 311A. DISCHARGES OF CARGO.

``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) In general.--The terms `contiguous zone',
`discharge', `hazardous substance', `inland waters of the
United States', `oil', `owner or operator', and `vessel' have
the meanings given the terms in section 311.
``(2) Cargo.--The term `cargo' means any lading or freight
of a vessel, including--
``(A) oil; and
``(B) a hazardous substance.
``(3) Detrimental discharge.--The term `detrimental
discharge' means a discharge of the cargo of a vessel--
``(A)(i) into or on--
``(I) navigable waters or inland waters of the United
States;
``(II) an adjoining shoreline; or
``(III) the waters of the contiguous zone; or
``(ii) in connection with an activity carried out under--
``(I) the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331
et seq.); or
``(II) the Deepwater Port Act of 1974 (33 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.); and
``(B) in a quantity that, as determined by the Secretary,
may adversely affect a natural resource belonging to, or
under the exclusive management authority of, the United
States (including any resource under the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et
seq.)).
``(4) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary
of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating.
``(b) Prohibition on Detrimental Discharges.--
``(1) Prohibition.--Except as provided in paragraph (2) or
any other provision of this Act, a detrimental discharge is
prohibited.
``(2) Exceptions.--The prohibition under paragraph (1)
shall not apply to a detrimental discharge that is--
``(A) permitted under the International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the
Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL); or
``(B) in such quantities and at such times and locations or
under such circumstances or conditions as the Secretary
determines, by regulation, not to be harmful.
``(c) Enforcement Actions.--
``(1) In general.--A person who has been harmed by a
detrimental discharge may bring a civil action for relief
against any owner or operator or person in charge of a vessel
from which the detrimental discharge was made, in accordance
with this subsection.
``(2) Relief.--In a civil action under paragraph (1), a
court of competent jurisdiction may award appropriate relief,
including--
``(A) compensatory damages; and
``(B) punitive damages in an amount not to exceed an amount
equal to the product obtained by multiplying--
``(i) the amount of compensatory damages awarded under
subparagraph (A); and
``(ii) 5.
``(3) Corporate liability.--A corporation shall be liable
under this section for punitive damages awarded under
paragraph (2)(B) for harm resulting from any act of
recklessness by a managerial employee of the corporation,
including the captain of any applicable vessel.
``(4) Jurisdiction.--A civil action under paragraph (1) may
be brought in--
``(A) the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia; or
``(B) the United States district court for the district in
which the applicable detrimental discharge is alleged to have
occurred.
``(d) Relationship to Other Provisions.--Nothing in this
section limits or otherwise affects the application of any
administrative or civil penalty under--
``(1) section 311; or
``(2) any other provision of law.''.

TITLE IX--TELEWORK ENHANCEMENT

SEC. 901. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Telework Enhancement Act
of 2008''.

SEC. 902. DEFINITIONS.

In this title:
(1) Employee.--The term ``employee'' has the meaning given
that term by section 2105 of title 5, United States Code.
(2) Executive agency.--The term ``executive agency'' has
the meaning given that term by section 105 of title 5, United
States Code.
(3) Noncompliant.--The term ``noncompliant'' means not
conforming to the requirements under this title.
(4) Telework.--The term ``telework'' means a work
arrangement in which an employee regularly performs
officially assigned duties at home or other worksites
geographically convenient to the residence of the employee
during at least 20 percent of each pay period that the
employee is performing officially assigned duties.

SEC. 903. EXECUTIVE AGENCIES TELEWORK REQUIREMENT.

(a) Telework Eligibility.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of enactment of this Act, the head of each executive
agency shall--
(1) establish a policy under which eligible employees of
the agency may be authorized to telework;
(2) determine the eligibility for all employees of the
agency to participate in telework; and
(3) notify all employees of the agency of their eligibility
to telework.
(b) Participation.--The policy described under subsection
(a) shall--
(1) ensure that telework does not diminish employee
performance or agency operations;
(2) require a written agreement between an agency manager
and an employee authorized to telework in order for that
employee to participate in telework;
(3) provide that an employee may not be authorized to
telework if the performance of that employee does not comply
with the terms of the written agreement between the agency
manager and that employee;
(4) except in emergency situations as determined by an
agency head, not apply to any employee of the agency whose
official duties require daily physical presence for activity
with equipment or handling of secure materials; and
(5) determine the use of telework as part of the continuity
of operations plans the agency in the event of an emergency.

SEC. 904. TRAINING AND MONITORING.

SEC. 905. POLICY AND SUPPORT.

(a) Agency Consultation With the Office of Personnel
Management.--Each executive agency shall consult with the
Office of

[[Page 16314]]

Personnel Management in developing telework policies.
(b) Guidance and Consultation.--The Office of Personnel
Management shall--
(1) provide policy and policy guidance for telework in the
areas of pay and leave, agency closure, performance
management, official worksite, recruitment and retention, and
accommodations for employees with disabilities; and
(2) consult with--
(A) the Federal Emergency Management Agency on policy and
policy guidance for telework in the areas of continuation of
operations and long-term emergencies; and
(B) the General Services Administration on policy and
policy guidance for telework in the areas of telework
centers, travel, technology, and equipment.
(c) Continuity of Operations Plans.--During any period that
an agency is operating under a continuity of operations plan,
that plan shall supersede any telework policy.
(d) Telework Website.--The Office of Personnel Management
shall--
(1) maintain a central telework website; and
(2) include on that website related--
(A) telework links;
(B) announcements;
(C) guidance developed by the Office of Personnel
Management; and
(D) guidance submitted by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, and the General Services Administration to the Office
of Personnel Management not later than 10 business days after
the date of submission.

SEC. 906. TELEWORK MANAGING OFFICER.

SEC. 907. ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS.

SEC. 908. COMPLIANCE OF EXECUTIVE AGENCIES.

(a) Executive Agencies.--An executive agency shall be in
compliance with this title if each employee of that agency
participating in telework regularly performs officially
assigned duties at home or other worksites geographically
convenient to the residence of the employee during at least
20 percent of each pay period that the employee is performing
officially assigned duties.
(b) Agency Manager Reports.--Not later than 180 days after
the establishment of a policy described under section 903,
and annually thereafter, each agency manager shall submit a
report to the Chief Human Capital Officer and Telework
Managing Officer of that agency that contains a summary of--
(1) efforts to promote telework opportunities for employees
supervised by that manager; and
(2) any obstacles which hinder the ability of that manager
to promote telework opportunities.
(c) Chief Human Capital Officer Reports.--
(1) In general.--Each year the Chief Human Capital Officer
of each agency, in consultation with the Telework Managing
Officer of that agency, shall submit a report to the Chair
and Vice Chair of the Chief Human Capital Offices Council on
agency management efforts to promote telework.
(2) Review and inclusion of relevant information.--The
Chair and Vice Chair of the Chief Human Capital Offices
Council shall--
(A) review the reports submitted under paragraph (1);
(B) include relevant information from the submitted reports
in the annual report to Congress required under section
907(b)(2); and
(C) use that relevant information for other purposes
related to the strategic management of human capital.
(d) Compliance Reports.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of submission of each report under section 907, the
Office of Management and Budget shall submit a report to
Congress that--
(1) identifies and recommends corrective actions and time
frames for each executive agency that the Office of
Management and Budget determines is noncompliant; and
(2) describes progress of noncompliant executive agencies,
justifications of any continuing noncompliance, and any
recommendations for corrective actions planned by the Office
of Management and Budget or the executive agency to eliminate
noncompliance.

SEC. 909. EXTENSION OF TRAVEL EXPENSES TEST PROGRAMS.

SA 5161. Mr. CORNYN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL OF EXPLORATION, DEVELOPMENT,
AND PRODUCTION PROJECTS UNDER FEDERAL OIL AND
GAS LEASES.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) the responsible development of the domestic oil and gas
resources of the United States is vital to the economy and
national security of the United States;
(2) the immediate and long-term interests of the people of
United States are served by encouraging domestic oil and gas
exploration, development, and production;
(3) to achieve those objectives, domestic energy
development projects should proceed without persistent
litigation, subject to the regulatory oversight of
responsible Federal agencies; and
(4) the long-term planning and heavy investments of human
and financial resources necessary to develop and produce
domestic oil and gas resources are frustrated, and future
investments discouraged, when projects that have been
reviewed and approved by the responsible executive branch
agencies are enjoined or otherwise halted in the courts.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to authorize
the President to review and approve oil and gas exploration,
development, and production projects under Federal oil and
gas leases, both onshore and offshore, on a finding that the
project complies with all applicable Federal law.
(c) Review by President.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the President may review any project for
the exploration, development, or production of oil or gas
resources under a Federal lease, located onshore or offshore,
to determine whether the project complies with all applicable
Federal law.

[[Page 16315]]

(d) Approval.--A project described in subsection (c)
(including all authorizations, permits, studies, or other
forms of executive branch approvals otherwise required to
conduct the project) shall be conclusively approved and
authorized to proceed on a written finding submitted by the
President to Congress that the project--
(1) serves the public interest in responsible domestic oil
or gas development; and
(2) complies with all applicable Federal law.
(e) Administrative or Judicial Review.--The decision of the
President under this section and the project approved under
subsection (d) shall not be subject to further administrative
or judicial review, stay, or injunction or, if pending,
continued administrative or judicial review, stay, or
injunction, except with respect to an appeal filed by an
applicant for a permit to carry out the project or a claim
based on the Constitution of the United States.
(f) Regulatory Oversight.--A project approved by the
President under this section shall--
(1) continue to be subject to the regulatory oversight of
the Federal agencies with jurisdiction over activities
conducted under the project, as otherwise provided by law;
and
(2) be regulated under the terms, conditions, and
requirements of any authorization, permit, or other approval
necessary to conduct the activities.
______

SA 5162. Mr. WARNER (for himself and Mr. Webb) submitted an amendment
intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the
Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. AVAILABILITY OF CERTAIN AREAS FOR LEASING.

Section 8 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1337) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(q) Availability of Certain Areas for Leasing.--
``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(A) Atlantic coastal state.--The term `Atlantic Coastal
State' means each of the States of Maine, New Hampshire,
Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Delaware, New York,
New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South
Carolina, Georgia, and Florida.
``(B) Governor.--The term `Governor' means the Governor of
the State.
``(C) Qualified revenues.--The term `qualified revenues'
means all rentals, royalties, bonus bids, and other sums due
and payable to the United States from leases entered into on
or after the date of enactment of this Act for natural gas
exploration and extraction activities authorized by the
Secretary under this subsection.
``(D) State.--The term `State' means the State of Virginia.
``(2) Petition.--
``(A) In general.--The Governor may submit to the
Secretary--
``(i) a petition requesting that the Secretary issue leases
authorizing the conduct of natural gas exploration activities
only to ascertain the presence or absence of a natural gas
reserve in any area that is at least 50 miles beyond the
coastal zone of the State; and
``(ii) if a petition for exploration by the State described
in clause (i) has been approved in accordance with paragraph
(3) and the geological finding of the exploration justifies
extraction, a second petition requesting that the Secretary
issue leases authorizing the conduct of natural gas
extraction activities in any area that is at least 50 miles
beyond the coastal zone of the State.
``(B) Contents.--In any petition under subparagraph (A),
the Governor shall include a detailed plan of the proposed
exploration and subsequent extraction activities, as
applicable.
``(3) Action by secretary.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (F), as soon as
practicable after the date of receipt of a petition under
paragraph (2), the Secretary shall approve or deny the
petition.
``(B) Requirements for exploration.--The Secretary shall
not approve a petition submitted under paragraph (2)(A)(i)
unless the State legislature has enacted legislation
supporting exploration for natural gas in the coastal zone of
the State.
``(C) Requirements for extraction.--The Secretary shall not
approve a petition submitted under paragraph (2)(A)(ii)
unless the State legislature has enacted legislation
supporting extraction for natural gas in the coastal zone of
the State.
``(D) Consistency with legislation.--The plan provided in
the petition under paragraph (2)(B) shall be consistent with
the legislation described in subparagraph (B) or (C), as
applicable.
``(E) Comments from atlantic coastal states.--On receipt of
a petition under paragraph (2), the Secretary shall--
``(i) provide Atlantic Coastal States with an opportunity
to provide to the Secretary comments on the petition; and
``(ii) take into consideration, but not be bound by, any
comments received under clause (i).
``(F) Conflicts with military operations.--The Secretary
shall not approve a petition for a drilling activity under
this paragraph if the drilling activity would conflict with
any military operation, as determined by the Secretary of
Defense.
``(4) Disposition of revenues.--Notwithstanding section 9,
for each applicable fiscal year, the Secretary of the
Treasury shall deposit--
``(A) 50 percent of qualified revenues in a Clean Energy
Fund in the Treasury, which shall be established by the
Secretary; and
``(B) 50 percent of qualified revenues in a special account
in the Treasury from which the Secretary shall disburse--
``(i) 75 percent to the State;
``(ii) 12.5 percent to provide financial assistance to
States in accordance with section 6 of the Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l-8), which shall
be considered income to the Land and Water Conservation Fund
for purposes of section 2 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 460l-5); and
``(iii) 12.5 percent to a reserve fund to be used to
mitigate for any environmental damage that occurs as a result
of extraction activities authorized under this subsection,
regardless of whether the damage is--

``(I) reasonably foreseeable; or
``(II) caused by negligence, natural disasters, or other
acts.''.

______

SA 5163. Mr. WARNER (for himself and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend
the Commmodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation
with respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. IMMEDIATE STEPS TO CONSERVE GASOLINE ACT.

(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the
``Immediate Steps to Conserve Gasoline Act''.
(b) Federal Conservation of Gasoline.--
(1) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(A) each day, as Americans contend with rising gasoline
prices, personal stories reflect the ways in which Americans
are altering their family budgets, including food budgets, to
cope with record high gasoline costs;
(B) as a consequence of economic pressures, Americans are
taking initiatives to reduce consumption of gasoline, such
as--
(i) driving less frequently;
(ii) altering daily routines; and
(iii) changing, or even cancelling, family vacation plans;
(C) the conservation efforts being taken by Americans, on
their own initiative, bring hardships but save funds that can
be redirected--
(i) to meet essential family needs; and
(ii) to relieve, to some extent, the demand for gasoline;
(D) just as individuals are taking initiatives to reduce
gasoline consumption, the Federal Government, including
Congress, should take initiatives to conserve gasoline;
(E) such Government-wide initiatives to conserve gasoline
would send a signal to Americans that the Federal
Government--
(i) recognizes the burdens imposed by unprecedented
gasoline costs; and
(ii) will participate in activities to reduce gasoline
consumption;
(F) an overall reduction of gasoline consumption by the
Federal Government by even 3 percentage points would send a
strong signal that, as a nation, the United States is working
to conserve energy;
(G) in 2005, policies directed at reducing the usage of
energy in Federal agency and department buildings by 20
percent by 2015, at a rate of a 2-percent reduction per
calendar year, were enacted by the President and Congress;
(H) in 2007, policies increasing the energy reduction goal
to 30 percent by 2015, at a rate of a 3-percent reduction per
calendar year, were enacted by the President and Congress;
and
(I) Congress and the President should extend the precedent
of those mandatory conservation initiatives taken in 2005 and
2007 to usage by the Federal Government of gasoline.
(2) Reduction of gasoline usage by federal departments and
agencies.--For fiscal year 2009, each Federal department and
agency shall develop and carry out initiatives to reduce by
not less than 3 percent the annual consumption of gasoline by
the department or agency.
(3) Congressional conservation of gasoline.--For fiscal
year 2009, Congress shall develop and carry out initiatives
to reduce by not less than 3 percent the annual consumption
of gasoline by Congress.
(c) Studies and Reports on National Speed Limit and Future
Gasoline Conservation.--
(1) National speed limit.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Energy
Information Administration shall conduct, and submit to

[[Page 16316]]

Congress a report describing the results of, a study of the
potential transportation fuel savings of imposing a national
speed limit on highways on the Interstate System of 60 miles
per hour.
(B) Inclusions.--The study under subparagraph (B) shall
include--
(i) an examination of the fuel efficiency of automobiles in
use as of the date on which the study is conducted;
(ii) a description of the range at which those automobiles
are most fuel-efficient on highways on the Interstate System;
(iii) an analysis of actions carried out by the Federal
Government, with the full support of Congress, during the
1973-1974 energy crisis, resulting in a national speed limit
on highways on the Interstate System of 55 miles per hour,
which remained in effect until 1995;
(iv) a recognition that in 1974, when fewer than
137,000,000 cars traveled in the United States (as compared
to 250,000,000 cars in 2006) and only 30 percent of United
States oil was imported from foreign sources (as compared to
60 percent of oil so imported on the date of enactment of
this Act), 167,000 barrels of oil per day were saved by the
imposition of a national speed limit, such that greater
savings are possible on the date of enactment of this Act
than the savings realized in 1974; and
(v) a determination of whether a limitation on the national
speed limit on highways on the Interstate System similar to
the limitation described in clause (iii) could serve as a
model to generate gasoline savings, through a national speed
limit on highways on the Interstate System of 60 miles per
hour, given the improved fuel efficiency of automobile
engines in use on the date of enactment of this Act.
(2) Future gasoline conservation.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United
States shall conduct, and submit to the Committees on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Environment and
Public Works, and Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate
and the Committees on House Administration, Transportation
and Infrastructure, and Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives a report describing the results of, a study
to determine whether additional gasoline reduction measures
by Federal departments and agencies and Congress are
technically feasible.
(B) Inclusion.--The report under subparagraph (A) shall
include a proposed schedule of future gasoline reduction
measures, if the measures are determined to be technically
feasible.
______

SA 5164. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commmodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. MORATORIUM ON ALL OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF LEASING.

Notwithstanding the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1331 et seq.), the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act
of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 note; Public Law 109-432), or any
other provision of law, the Secretary of the Interior shall
not offer for leasing, preleasing, or any related activity
any area on the outer Continental Shelf (as defined in
section 2 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C.
1331)).
______

SA 5165. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. USE OF INFORMATION ABOUT OIL AND GAS PUBLIC
CHALLENGES.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds that the Government
Accountability Office, in report GAO-05-124, found that--
(1) the Bureau of Land Management does not systematically
gather and use nationwide information on public challenges to
manage the oil and gas program of the Bureau; and
(2) that failure--
(A) prevents the Director of the Bureau from assessing the
impact of public challenges on the workload of the Bureau of
Land Management State offices; and
(B) eliminates the ability of the Director to make
appropriate staffing and funding resource allocation
decisions.
(b) Requirements.--The Secretary of the Interior and the
Secretary of Agriculture shall systematically--
(1) collect and use nationwide information on public
challenges to manage the oil and gas programs of the
Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture,
respectively;
(2) gather the information at the planning, leasing,
exploration, and development stages; and
(3) maintain the information electronically with current
data.
______

SA 5166. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the bill, add the following:

TITLE II--DEEP SEA EXPLORATION

SEC. 201. PUBLICATION OF PROJECTED STATE LINES ON OUTER
CONTINENTAL SHELF.

Section 4(a)(2)(A) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
(43 U.S.C. 1333(a)(2)(A)) is amended--
(1) by designating the first, second, and third sentences
as clause (i), (iii), and (iv), respectively;
(2) in clause (i) (as so designated), by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of the Stop Excessive Energy
Speculation Act of 2008''; and
(3) by inserting after clause (i) (as so designated) the
following:
``(ii)(I) The projected lines shall also be used for the
purpose of preleasing and leasing activities conducted in new
producing areas under section 32.
``(II) This clause shall not affect any property right or
title to Federal submerged land on the outer Continental
Shelf.
``(III) In carrying out this clause, the President shall
consider the offshore administrative boundaries beyond State
submerged lands for planning, coordination, and
administrative purposes of the Department of the Interior,
but may establish different boundaries.''.

SEC. 202. PRODUCTION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS IN NEW PRODUCING
AREAS.

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 32. PRODUCTION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS IN NEW PRODUCING
AREAS.

[[Page 16317]]

State lines under section 4(a)(2)(A)(ii), the Governor of a
State, with the concurrence of the legislature of the State,
with a new producing area within the offshore administrative
boundaries beyond the submerged land of the State may submit
to the Secretary a petition requesting that the Secretary
make the new producing area available for oil and gas
leasing.
``(2) Action by secretary.--Notwithstanding section 18, as
soon as practicable after receipt of a petition under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall approve the petition if
the Secretary determines that leasing the new producing area
would not create an unreasonable risk of harm to the marine,
human, or coastal environment.
``(c) Disposition of Qualified Outer Continental Shelf
Revenues From New Producing Areas.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 9 and subject to
the other provisions of this subsection, for each applicable
fiscal year, the Secretary of the Treasury shall deposit--
``(A) 50 percent of qualified outer Continental Shelf
revenues in the general fund of the Treasury; and
``(B) 50 percent of qualified outer Continental Shelf
revenues in a special account in the Treasury from which the
Secretary shall disburse--
``(i) 75 percent to new producing States in accordance with
paragraph (2); and
``(ii) 25 percent to provide financial assistance to States
in accordance with section 6 of the Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l-8), which shall
be considered income to the Land and Water Conservation Fund
for purposes of section 2 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 460l-5).
``(2) Allocation to new producing states and coastal
political subdivisions.--
``(A) Allocation to new producing states.--Effective for
fiscal year 2008 and each fiscal year thereafter, the amount
made available under paragraph (1)(B)(i) shall be allocated
to each new producing State in amounts (based on a formula
established by the Secretary by regulation) proportional to
the amount of qualified outer Continental Shelf revenues
generated in the new producing area offshore each State.
``(B) Payments to coastal political subdivisions.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall pay 20 percent of
the allocable share of each new producing State, as
determined under subparagraph (A), to the coastal political
subdivisions of the new producing State.
``(ii) Allocation.--The amount paid by the Secretary to
coastal political subdivisions shall be allocated to each
coastal political subdivision in accordance with the
regulations promulgated under subparagraph (A).
``(3) Minimum allocation.--The amount allocated to a new
producing State for each fiscal year under paragraph (2)
shall be at least 5 percent of the amounts available for the
fiscal year under paragraph (1)(B)(i).
``(4) Timing.--The amounts required to be deposited under
subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) for the applicable fiscal
year shall be made available in accordance with that
subparagraph during the fiscal year immediately following the
applicable fiscal year.
``(5) Authorized uses.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), each new
producing State and coastal political subdivision shall use
all amounts received under paragraph (2) in accordance with
all applicable Federal and State laws, only for 1 or more of
the following purposes:
``(i) Projects and activities for the purposes of coastal
protection, including conservation, coastal restoration,
hurricane protection, and infrastructure directly affected by
coastal wetland losses.
``(ii) Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, or natural
resources.
``(iii) Implementation of a federally approved marine,
coastal, or comprehensive conservation management plan.
``(iv) Funding of onshore infrastructure projects.
``(v) Planning assistance and the administrative costs of
complying with this section.
``(B) Limitation.--Not more than 3 percent of amounts
received by a new producing State or coastal political
subdivision under paragraph (2) may be used for the purposes
described in subparagraph (A)(v).
``(6) Administration.--Amounts made available under
paragraph (1)(B) shall--
``(A) be made available, without further appropriation, in
accordance with this subsection;
``(B) remain available until expended; and
``(C) be in addition to any amounts appropriated under--
``(i) other provisions of this Act;
``(ii) the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16
U.S.C. 460l-4 et seq.); or
``(iii) any other provision of law.
``(d) Disposition of Qualified Outer Continental Shelf
Revenues From Other Areas.--Notwithstanding section 9, for
each applicable fiscal year, the terms and conditions of
subsection (c) shall apply to the disposition of qualified
outer Continental Shelf revenues that--
``(1) are derived from oil or gas leasing in an area that
is not included in the current 5-year plan of the Secretary
for oil or gas leasing; and
``(2) are not assumed in the budget of the United States
Government submitted by the President under section 1105 of
title 31, United States Code.''.

SEC. 203. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

Sections 104 and 105 of the Department of the Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008
(Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2118) are amended by striking
``No funds'' each place it appears and inserting ``Except as
provided in section 32 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands
Act, no funds''.

SEC. 204. LOW-INCOME HOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), in addition to
any amounts appropriated under any other provision of Federal
law, there is appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury
not otherwise appropriated, for fiscal year 2008--
(1) $1,265,000,000 (to remain available until expended) for
making payments under subsections (a) through (d) of section
2604 of the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Act of 1981 (42
U.S.C. 8623); and
(2) $1,265,000,000 (to remain available until expended) for
making payments under section 2604(e) of the Low-Income Home
Energy Assistance Act of 1981 (42 U.S.C. 8623(e)),
notwithstanding the designation requirement of section
2602(e) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 8621(e)).
(b) New Producing States.--In the case of a new producing
State (as defined in section 32(a) of the Outer Continental
Shelf Lands Act), amounts made available under subsection (a)
shall not be allocated for a new producing State until the
legislature of the new producing State considers and approves
or disapproves legislation that would make new producing
areas (as so defined) in the new producing State available
for oil and gas leasing.
(c) Emergency Requirement.--The amount provided under this
section is designated as an emergency requirement and
necessary to meet emergency needs, pursuant to section 204 of
S. Con. Res. 21 (110th Congress), the concurrent resolution
on the budget for fiscal year 2008.
______

SA 5167. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. IMPROVING MOTOR FUEL SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION.

(a) Limiting Number of Boutique Fuels.--Section
211(c)(4)(C) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7545(c)(4)(C))
is amended by striking the second clause (v) (as added by
section 1541(b) of Public Law 109-58) and inserting the
following:
``(vi)(I) The Administrator shall have no authority, when
considering a State implementation plan or a State
implementation plan revision, to approve under this paragraph
any fuel included in such plan or revision if the effect of
such approval would be to increase the total number of fuels
approved under this paragraph as of January 1, 2009 in all
State implementation plans.
``(II) The Administrator, in consultation with the
Secretary of Energy, shall determine the total number of
fuels approved under this paragraph as of January 1, 2009, in
all State implementation plans and shall publish a list of
such fuels, including the states and Petroleum Administration
for Defense District in which they are used, in the Federal
Register no later than 90 days after enactment.
``(III) The Administrator shall remove a fuel from the list
published under subclause (II) if a fuel ceases to be
included in a State implementation plan or if a fuel in a
State implementation plan is identical to a Federal fuel
formulation implemented by the Administrator, but the
Administrator shall not reduce the total number of fuels
authorized under the list published under subclause (II).
``(IV) Subclause (I) shall not apply to approval by the
Administrator of a control or prohibition respecting any new
fuel under this paragraph in a State's implementation plan or
a revision to that State's implementation plan after the date
of enactment of this Act if the fuel, as of the date of
consideration by the Administrator--

``(aa) would replace completely a fuel on the list
published under subclause (II);
``(bb) has been approved in at least one State
implementation plan in the applicable Petroleum
Administration for Defense District; or
``(cc) is a fuel that differs from the Federal conventional
gasoline specifications under subsection (k)(8) only with
respect to the requirement of a summertime Reid Vapor
Pressure of 7.0 or 7.8 pounds per square inch.

``(V) Nothing in this clause shall be construed to have any
effect regarding any available authority of States to require
the use of any fuel additive registered in accordance with
subsection (b), including any fuel additive registered in
accordance with subsection (b) after the enactment of this
subclause.
``(VI) In this clause:

``(aa) The term `control or prohibition respecting a new
fuel' means a control or prohibition on the formulation,
composition, or

[[Page 16318]]

emissions characteristics of a fuel that would require the
increase or decrease of a constituent in gasoline or diesel
fuel.
``(bb) The term `fuel' means gasoline, diesel fuel, and any
other liquid petroleum product commercially known as gasoline
and diesel fuel for use in highway and non-road motor
vehicles.''.

(b) Temporary Waivers During Supply Emergencies.--Section
211(c)(4) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7545(c)(4)) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(D) Temporary Waivers During Supply Emergencies.--The
Administrator may temporarily waive a control or prohibition
with respect to the use of a fuel or fuel additive required
or regulated by the Administrator under subsection (c), (h),
(i), (k), or (m), or prescribed in an applicable
implementation plan under section 110 that is approved by the
Administrator under subparagraph (c)(4)(C)(i), if, after
consultation with and concurrence by the Secretary of Energy,
the Administrator determines that--
``(i) an extreme and unusual fuel or fuel additive supply
circumstance exists in a State or region that prevents the
distribution of an adequate supply of the fuel or fuel
additive to consumers;
``(ii) the extreme and unusual fuel or fuel additive supply
circumstance is the result of a natural disaster, an act of
God, a pipeline or refinery equipment failure, or another
event that could not reasonably have been foreseen or
prevented and not a lack of prudent planning on the part of
the suppliers of the fuel or fuel additive to the State or
region; and
``(iii) it is in the public interest to grant the waiver.
``(E) Requirements for Waiver.--
``(i) Definition of motor fuel distribution system.--In
this subparagraph, the term `motor fuel distribution system'
has the meaning given the term by the Administrator, by
regulation.
``(ii) Requirements.--A waiver under subparagraph (D) shall
be permitted only if--
``(I) the waiver applies to the smallest geographic area
necessary to address the extreme and unusual fuel or fuel
additive supply circumstance;
``(II) the waiver is effective for a period of 15 calendar
days or, if the Administrator determines that a shorter or
longer waiver period is adequate, for the shortest
practicable time period necessary to permit the correction of
the extreme and unusual fuel or fuel additive supply
circumstances and to mitigate impact on air quality;
``(III) the waiver permits a transitional period, the
duration of which shall be determined by the Administrator,
after the termination of the temporary waiver to permit
wholesalers and retailers to blend down wholesale and retail
inventory;
``(IV) the waiver applies to all persons in the motor fuel
distribution system; and
``(V) the Administrator has given public notice regarding
consideration by the Administrator of, and, if applicable,
the granting of, a waiver to all parties in the motor fuel
distribution system, State and local regulators, public
interest groups, and consumers in the State or region to be
covered by the waiver.
``(F) Affect on Waiver Authority.--Nothing in subparagraph
(D)--
``(i) limits or otherwise affects the application of any
other waiver authority of the Administrator under this
section or a regulation promulgated pursuant to this section;
or
``(ii) subjects any State or person to an enforcement
action, penalties, or liability solely arising from actions
taken pursuant to the issuance of a waiver under subparagraph
(D).''.
______

SA 5168. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

TITLE II--NEW RESOURCES FOR DOMESTIC CONSUMPTION

SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``New Resources for Domestic
Consumption Act of 2008''.

SEC. 202. DEFINITION OF 1002 AREA OF ALASKA.

In this title, the term ``1002 Area of Alaska'' means the
area described in appendix I to part 37 of title 50, Code of
Federal Regulations, as in effect on July 14, 2008, popularly
known as the ``Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge''.

SEC. 203. PURPOSE.

The purpose of this title is to provide for the expeditious
development of oil, natural gas, and other resources of the
1002 Area of Alaska by transferring to the State of Alaska
all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to
the 1002 Area of Alaska.

SEC. 204. TRANSFER OF 1002 AREA TO STATE OF ALASKA.

(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b) and
notwithstanding any other provision of law, not later than 30
days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
of the Interior shall transfer to the State of Alaska all
right, title, and interest of the United States in and to the
1002 Area of Alaska.
(b) Condition.--As a condition of any transfer under this
section, the Secretary shall require the State of Alaska to
pay to the United States 50 percent of all amounts received
by the State of Alaska as a result of development of oil,
natural gas, and other natural resources of the 1002 Area of
Alaska.

SEC. 205. PROHIBITION ON EXPORT OF OIL.

No oil produced in the 1002 Area of Alaska after the date
of any transfer under section 204 may be exported from the
United States.
______

SA 5169. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. REPROCESSING OF COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR WASTE.

Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of Energy shall take such actions as are
necessary to ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that
all commercial nuclear waste in existence on the date of
enactment of this Act be designated for reprocessing only.
______

SA 5170. Mr. SMITH (for himself, Mr. Craig, Mr. Stevens, and Ms.
Murkowski) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive
price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other
purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end, add the following:

SEC. ____. SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY SELF-
DETERMINATION PROGRAM.

(a) Reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act of 2000.--The Secure Rural
Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (16
U.S.C. 500 note; Public Law 106-393) is amended by striking
sections 1 through 403 and inserting the following:

``SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

``This Act may be cited as the `Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act of 2000'.

``SEC. 2. PURPOSES.

``The purposes of this Act are--
``(1) to stabilize and transition payments to counties to
provide funding for schools and roads that supplements other
available funds;
``(2) to make additional investments in, and create
additional employment opportunities through, projects that--
``(A)(i) improve the maintenance of existing
infrastructure;
``(ii) implement stewardship objectives that enhance forest
ecosystems; and
``(iii) restore and improve land health and water quality;
``(B) enjoy broad-based support; and
``(C) have objectives that may include--
``(i) road, trail, and infrastructure maintenance or
obliteration;
``(ii) soil productivity improvement;
``(iii) improvements in forest ecosystem health;
``(iv) watershed restoration and maintenance;
``(v) the restoration, maintenance, and improvement of
wildlife and fish habitat;
``(vi) the control of noxious and exotic weeds; and
``(vii) the reestablishment of native species; and
``(3) to improve cooperative relationships among--
``(A) the people that use and care for Federal land; and
``(B) the agencies that manage the Federal land.

``SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

``In this Act:
``(1) Adjusted share.--The term `adjusted share' means the
number equal to the quotient obtained by dividing--
``(A) the number equal to the quotient obtained by
dividing--
``(i) the base share for the eligible county; by
``(ii) the income adjustment for the eligible county; by
``(B) the number equal to the sum of the quotients obtained
under subparagraph (A) and paragraph (8)(A) for all eligible
counties.
``(2) Base share.--The term `base share' means the number
equal to the average of--
``(A) the quotient obtained by dividing--
``(i) the number of acres of Federal land described in
paragraph (7)(A) in each eligible county; by
``(ii) the total number acres of Federal land in all
eligible counties in all eligible States; and
``(B) the quotient obtained by dividing--
``(i) the amount equal to the average of the 3 highest 25-
percent payments and safety net payments made to each
eligible State for

[[Page 16319]]

each eligible county during the eligibility period; by
``(ii) the amount equal to the sum of the amounts
calculated under clause (i) and paragraph (9)(B)(i) for all
eligible counties in all eligible States during the
eligibility period.
``(3) County payment.--The term `county payment' means the
payment for an eligible county calculated under section
101(b).
``(4) Eligible county.--The term `eligible county' means
any county that--
``(A) contains Federal land (as defined in paragraph (7));
and
``(B) elects to receive a share of the State payment or the
county payment under section 102(b).
``(5) Eligibility period.--The term `eligibility period'
means fiscal year 1986 through fiscal year 1999.
``(6) Eligible state.--The term `eligible State' means a
State or territory of the United States that received a 25-
percent payment for 1 or more fiscal years of the eligibility
period.
``(7) Federal land.--The term `Federal land' means--
``(A) land within the National Forest System, as defined in
section 11(a) of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources
Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1609(a)) exclusive of the
National Grasslands and land utilization projects designated
as National Grasslands administered pursuant to the Act of
July 22, 1937 (7 U.S.C. 1010-1012); and
``(B) such portions of the revested Oregon and California
Railroad and reconveyed Coos Bay Wagon Road grant land as are
or may hereafter come under the jurisdiction of the
Department of the Interior, which have heretofore or may
hereafter be classified as timberlands, and power-site land
valuable for timber, that shall be managed, except as
provided in the former section 3 of the Act of August 28,
1937 (50 Stat. 875; 43 U.S.C. 1181c), for permanent forest
production.
``(8) 50-Percent adjusted share.--The term `50-percent
adjusted share' means the number equal to the quotient
obtained by dividing--
``(A) the number equal to the quotient obtained by
dividing--
``(i) the 50-percent base share for the eligible county; by
``(ii) the income adjustment for the eligible county; by
``(B) the number equal to the sum of the quotients obtained
under subparagraph (A) and paragraph (1)(A) for all eligible
counties.
``(9) 50-Percent base share.--The term `50-percent base
share' means the number equal to the average of--
``(A) the quotient obtained by dividing--
``(i) the number of acres of Federal land described in
paragraph (7)(B) in each eligible county; by
``(ii) the total number acres of Federal land in all
eligible counties in all eligible States; and
``(B) the quotient obtained by dividing--
``(i) the amount equal to the average of the 3 highest 50-
percent payments made to each eligible county during the
eligibility period; by
``(ii) the amount equal to the sum of the amounts
calculated under clause (i) and paragraph (2)(B)(i) for all
eligible counties in all eligible States during the
eligibility period.
``(10) 50-percent payment.--The term `50-percent payment'
means the payment that is the sum of the 50-percent share
otherwise paid to a county pursuant to title II of the Act of
August 28, 1937 (chapter 876; 50 Stat. 875; 43 U.S.C. 1181f),
and the payment made to a county pursuant to the Act of May
24, 1939 (chapter 144; 53 Stat. 753; 43 U.S.C. 1181f-1 et
seq.).
``(11) Full funding amount.--The term `full funding amount'
means--
``(A) $526,079,656 for fiscal year 2008;
``(B) $520,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
``(C) for fiscal year 2010 and each fiscal year thereafter,
the amount that is equal to 90 percent of the full funding
amount for the preceding fiscal year.
``(12) Income adjustment.--The term `income adjustment'
means the square of the quotient obtained by dividing--
``(A) the per capita personal income for each eligible
county; by
``(B) the median per capita personal income of all eligible
counties.
``(13) Per capita personal income.--The term `per capita
personal income' means the most recent per capita personal
income data, as determined by the Bureau of Economic
Analysis.
``(14) Safety net payments.--The term `safety net payments'
means the special payment amounts paid to States and counties
required by section 13982 or 13983 of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1993 (Public Law 103-66; 16 U.S.C. 500
note; 43 U.S.C. 1181f note).
``(15) Secretary concerned.--The term `Secretary concerned'
means--
``(A) the Secretary of Agriculture or the designee of the
Secretary of Agriculture with respect to the Federal land
described in paragraph (7)(A); and
``(B) the Secretary of the Interior or the designee of the
Secretary of the Interior with respect to the Federal land
described in paragraph (7)(B).
``(16) State payment.--The term `State payment' means the
payment for an eligible State calculated under section
101(a).
``(17) 25-Percent payment.--The term `25-percent payment'
means the payment to States required by the sixth paragraph
under the heading of `forest service' in the Act of May 23,
1908 (35 Stat. 260; 16 U.S.C. 500), and section 13 of the Act
of March 1, 1911 (36 Stat. 963; 16 U.S.C. 500).

``TITLE I--SECURE PAYMENTS FOR STATES AND COUNTIES CONTAINING FEDERAL
LAND

``SEC. 101. SECURE PAYMENTS FOR STATES CONTAINING FEDERAL
LAND.

``(a) State Payment.--For each of fiscal years 2008 through
2011, the Secretary of Agriculture shall calculate for each
eligible State an amount equal to the sum of the products
obtained by multiplying--
``(1) the adjusted share for each eligible county within
the eligible State; by
``(2) the full funding amount for the fiscal year.
``(b) County Payment.--For each of fiscal years 2008
through 2011, the Secretary of the Interior shall calculate
for each eligible county that received a 50-percent payment
during the eligibility period an amount equal to the product
obtained by multiplying--
``(1) the 50-percent adjusted share for the eligible
county; by
``(2) the full funding amount for the fiscal year.

``SEC. 102. PAYMENTS TO STATES AND COUNTIES.

``(a) Payment Amounts.--Except as provided in section 103,
the Secretary of the Treasury shall pay to--
``(1) a State or territory of the United States an amount
equal to the sum of the amounts elected under subsection (b)
by each county within the State or territory for--
``(A) if the county is eligible for the 25-percent payment,
the share of the 25-percent payment; or
``(B) the share of the State payment of the eligible
county; and
``(2) a county an amount equal to the amount elected under
subsection (b) by each county for--
``(A) if the county is eligible for the 50-percent payment,
the 50-percent payment; or
``(B) the county payment for the eligible county.
``(b) Election to Receive Payment Amount.--
``(1) Election; submission of results.--
``(A) In general.--The election to receive a share of the
State payment, the county payment, a share of the State
payment and the county payment, a share of the 25-percent
payment, the 50-percent payment, or a share of the 25-percent
payment and the 50-percent payment, as applicable, shall be
made at the discretion of each affected county by August 1,
2008, and August 1 of each second fiscal year thereafter, in
accordance with paragraph (2), and transmitted to the
Secretary concerned by the Governor of each eligible State.
``(B) Failure to transmit.--If an election for an affected
county is not transmitted to the Secretary concerned by the
date specified under subparagraph (A), the affected county
shall be considered to have elected to receive a share of the
State payment, the county payment, or a share of the State
payment and the county payment, as applicable.
``(2) Duration of election.--
``(A) In general.--A county election to receive a share of
the 25-percent payment or 50-percent payment, as applicable
shall be effective for 2 fiscal years.
``(B) Full funding amount.--If a county elects to receive a
share of the State payment or the county payment, the
election shall be effective for all subsequent fiscal years
through fiscal year 2011.
``(3) Source of payment amounts.--The payment to an
eligible State or eligible county under this section for a
fiscal year shall be derived from--
``(A) any revenues, fees, penalties, or miscellaneous
receipts, exclusive of deposits to any relevant trust fund,
special account, or permanent operating funds, received by
the Federal Government from activities by the Bureau of Land
Management or the Forest Service on the applicable Federal
land;
``(B) for fiscal year 2008, any funds appropriated to carry
out this Act; and
``(C) to the extent of any shortfall, out of any amounts in
the Treasury of the United States not otherwise appropriated.
``(c) Distribution and Expenditure of Payments.--
``(1) Distribution method.--A State that receives a payment
under subsection (a) for Federal land described in section
3(7)(A) shall distribute the appropriate payment amount among
the appropriate counties in the State in accordance with--
``(A) the Act of May 23, 1908 (16 U.S.C. 500); and
``(B) section 13 of the Act of March 1, 1911 (36 Stat. 963;
16 U.S.C. 500).
``(2) Expenditure purposes.--Subject to subsection (d),
payments received by a State under subsection (a) and
distributed to counties in accordance with paragraph (1)
shall be expended as required by the laws referred to in
paragraph (1).
``(d) Expenditure Rules for Eligible Counties.--
``(1) Allocations.--
``(A) Use of portion in same manner as 25-percent payment
or 50-percent payment, as

[[Page 16320]]

applicable.--Except as provided in paragraph (3)(B), if an
eligible county elects to receive its share of the State
payment or the county payment, not less than 80 percent, but
not more than 85 percent, of the funds shall be expended in
the same manner in which the 25-percent payments or 50-
percent payment, as applicable, are required to be expended.
``(B) Election as to use of balance.--Except as provided in
subparagraph (C), an eligible county shall elect to do 1 or
more of the following with the balance of any funds not
expended pursuant to subparagraph (A):
``(i) Reserve any portion of the balance for projects in
accordance with title II.
``(ii) Reserve not more than 7 percent of the total share
for the eligible county of the State payment or the county
payment for projects in accordance with title III.
``(iii) Return the portion of the balance not reserved
under clauses (i) and (ii) to the Treasury of the United
States.
``(C) Counties with modest distributions.--In the case of
each eligible county to which more than $100,000, but less
than $350,000, is distributed for any fiscal year pursuant to
either or both of paragraphs (1)(B) and (2)(B) of subsection
(a), the eligible county, with respect to the balance of any
funds not expended pursuant to subparagraph (A) for that
fiscal year, shall--
``(i) reserve any portion of the balance for--

``(I) carrying out projects under title II;
``(II) carrying out projects under title III; or
``(III) a combination of the purposes described in
subclauses (I) and (II); or

``(ii) return the portion of the balance not reserved under
clause (i) to the Treasury of the United States.
``(2) Distribution of funds.--
``(A) In general.--Funds reserved by an eligible county
under subparagraph (B)(i) or (C)(i) of paragraph (1) for
carrying out projects under title II shall be deposited in a
special account in the Treasury of the United States.
``(B) Availability.--Amounts deposited under subparagraph
(A) shall--
``(i) be available for expenditure by the Secretary
concerned, without further appropriation; and
``(ii) remain available until expended in accordance with
title II.
``(3) Election.--
``(A) Notification.--
``(i) In general.--An eligible county shall notify the
Secretary concerned of an election by the eligible county
under this subsection not later than September 30 of each
fiscal year.
``(ii) Failure to elect.--Except as provided in
subparagraph (B), if the eligible county fails to make an
election by the date specified in clause (i), the eligible
county shall--

``(I) be considered to have elected to expend 85 percent of
the funds in accordance with paragraph (1)(A); and
``(II) return the balance to the Treasury of the United
States.

``(B) Counties with minor distributions.--In the case of
each eligible county to which less than $100,000 is
distributed for any fiscal year pursuant to either or both of
paragraphs (1)(B) and (2)(B) of subsection (a), the eligible
county may elect to expend all the funds in the same manner
in which the 25-percent payments or 50-percent payments, as
applicable, are required to be expended.
``(e) Time for Payment.--The payments required under this
section for a fiscal year shall be made as soon as
practicable after the end of that fiscal year.

``SEC. 103. TRANSITION PAYMENTS TO CERTAIN STATES.

``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Adjusted amount.--The term `adjusted amount' means,
with respect to a covered State--
``(A) for fiscal year 2008--
``(i) the sum of the amounts paid for fiscal year 2006
under section 102(a)(2) (as in effect on September 29, 2006)
for the eligible counties in the covered State that have
elected under section 102(b) to receive a share of the State
payment for fiscal year 2008; and
``(ii) the sum of the amounts paid for fiscal year 2006
under section 103(a)(2) (as in effect on September 29, 2006)
for the eligible counties in the State of Oregon that have
elected under section 102(b) to receive the county payment
for fiscal year 2008;
``(B) for fiscal year 2009, 90 percent of--
``(i) the sum of the amounts paid for fiscal year 2006
under section 102(a)(2) (as in effect on September 29, 2006)
for the eligible counties in the covered State that have
elected under section 102(b) to receive a share of the State
payment for fiscal year 2009; and
``(ii) the sum of the amounts paid for fiscal year 2006
under section 103(a)(2) (as in effect on September 29, 2006)
for the eligible counties in the State of Oregon that have
elected under section 102(b) to receive the county payment
for fiscal year 2009;
``(C) for fiscal year 2010, 81 percent of--
``(i) the sum of the amounts paid for fiscal year 2006
under section 102(a)(2) (as in effect on September 29, 2006)
for the eligible counties in the covered State that have
elected under section 102(b) to receive a share of the State
payment for fiscal year 2010; and
``(ii) the sum of the amounts paid for fiscal year 2006
under section 103(a)(2) (as in effect on September 29, 2006)
for the eligible counties in the State of Oregon that have
elected under section 102(b) to receive the county payment
for fiscal year 2010; and
``(D) for fiscal year 2011, 73 percent of--
``(i) the sum of the amounts paid for fiscal year 2006
under section 102(a)(2) (as in effect on September 29, 2006)
for the eligible counties in the covered State that have
elected under section 102(b) to receive a share of the State
payment for fiscal year 2011; and
``(ii) the sum of the amounts paid for fiscal year 2006
under section 103(a)(2) (as in effect on September 29, 2006)
for the eligible counties in the State of Oregon that have
elected under section 102(b) to receive the county payment
for fiscal year 2011.
``(2) Covered state.--The term `covered State' means each
of the States of California, Louisiana, Oregon, Pennsylvania,
South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, and Washington.
``(b) Transition Payments.--For each of fiscal years 2008
through 2011, in lieu of the payment amounts that otherwise
would have been made under paragraphs (1)(B) and (2)(B) of
section 102(a), the Secretary of the Treasury shall pay the
adjusted amount to each covered State and the eligible
counties within the covered State, as applicable.
``(c) Distribution of Adjusted Amount in Oregon and
Washington.--It is the intent of Congress that the method of
distributing the payments under subsection (b) among the
counties in a covered State (other than California) for each
of fiscal years 2008 through 2011 be in the same proportion
that the payments were distributed to the eligible counties
in that State in fiscal year 2006.
``(d) Distribution of Payments in California.--The
following payments shall be distributed among the eligible
counties in the State of California in the same proportion
that payments under section 102(a)(2) (as in effect on
September 29, 2006) were distributed to the eligible counties
for fiscal year 2006:
``(1) Payments to the State of California under subsection
(b).
``(2) The shares of the eligible counties of the State
payment for California under section 102 for fiscal year
2011.
``(e) Treatment of Payments.--For purposes of this Act, any
payment made under subsection (b) shall be considered to be a
payment made under section 102(a).

``TITLE II--SPECIAL PROJECTS ON FEDERAL LAND

``SEC. 201. DEFINITIONS.

``In this title:
``(1) Participating county.--The term `participating
county' means an eligible county that elects under section
102(d) to expend a portion of the Federal funds received
under section 102 in accordance with this title.
``(2) Project funds.--The term `project funds' means all
funds an eligible county elects under section 102(d) to
reserve for expenditure in accordance with this title.
``(3) Resource advisory committee.--The term `resource
advisory committee' means--
``(A) an advisory committee established by the Secretary
concerned under section 205; or
``(B) an advisory committee determined by the Secretary
concerned to meet the requirements of section 205.
``(4) Resource management plan.--The term `resource
management plan' means--
``(A) a land use plan prepared by the Bureau of Land
Management for units of the Federal land described in section
3(7)(B) pursuant to section 202 of the Federal Land Policy
and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1712); or
``(B) a land and resource management plan prepared by the
Forest Service for units of the National Forest System
pursuant to section 6 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable
Resources Planning Act of 1974l (16 U.S.C. 1604).

``SEC. 202. GENERAL LIMITATION ON USE OF PROJECT FUNDS.

``(a) Limitation.--Project funds shall be expended solely
on projects that meet the requirements of this title.
``(b) Authorized Uses.--Project funds may be used by the
Secretary concerned for the purpose of entering into and
implementing cooperative agreements with willing Federal
agencies, State and local governments, private and nonprofit
entities, and landowners for protection, restoration, and
enhancement of fish and wildlife habitat, and other resource
objectives consistent with the purposes of this Act on
Federal land and on non-Federal land where projects would
benefit the resources on Federal land.

``SEC. 203. SUBMISSION OF PROJECT PROPOSALS.

``(a) Submission of Project Proposals to Secretary
Concerned.--
``(1) Projects funded using project funds.--Not later than
September 30 for fiscal year 2008, and each September 30
thereafter for each succeeding fiscal year through fiscal
year 2011, each resource advisory committee shall submit to
the Secretary concerned a description of any projects that
the resource advisory committee proposes the Secretary
undertake using any project funds reserved by eligible
counties in the area in which the resource advisory committee
has geographic jurisdiction.
``(2) Projects funded using other funds.--A resource
advisory committee may

[[Page 16321]]

submit to the Secretary concerned a description of any
projects that the committee proposes the Secretary undertake
using funds from State or local governments, or from the
private sector, other than project funds and funds
appropriated and otherwise available to do similar work.
``(3) Joint projects.--Participating counties or other
persons may propose to pool project funds or other funds,
described in paragraph (2), and jointly propose a project or
group of projects to a resource advisory committee
established under section 205.
``(b) Required Description of Projects.--In submitting
proposed projects to the Secretary concerned under subsection
(a), a resource advisory committee shall include in the
description of each proposed project the following
information:
``(1) The purpose of the project and a description of how
the project will meet the purposes of this title.
``(2) The anticipated duration of the project.
``(3) The anticipated cost of the project.
``(4) The proposed source of funding for the project,
whether project funds or other funds.
``(5)(A) Expected outcomes, including how the project will
meet or exceed desired ecological conditions, maintenance
objectives, or stewardship objectives.
``(B) An estimate of the amount of any timber, forage, and
other commodities and other economic activity, including jobs
generated, if any, anticipated as part of the project.
``(6) A detailed monitoring plan, including funding needs
and sources, that--
``(A) tracks and identifies the positive or negative
impacts of the project, implementation, and provides for
validation monitoring; and
``(B) includes an assessment of the following:
``(i) Whether or not the project met or exceeded desired
ecological conditions; created local employment or training
opportunities, including summer youth jobs programs such as
the Youth Conservation Corps where appropriate.
``(ii) Whether the project improved the use of, or added
value to, any products removed from land consistent with the
purposes of this title.
``(7) An assessment that the project is to be in the public
interest.
``(c) Authorized Projects.--Projects proposed under
subsection (a) shall be consistent with section 2.

``SEC. 204. EVALUATION AND APPROVAL OF PROJECTS BY SECRETARY
CONCERNED.

``(a) Conditions for Approval of Proposed Project.--The
Secretary concerned may make a decision to approve a project
submitted by a resource advisory committee under section 203
only if the proposed project satisfies each of the following
conditions:
``(1) The project complies with all applicable Federal laws
(including regulations).
``(2) The project is consistent with the applicable
resource management plan and with any watershed or subsequent
plan developed pursuant to the resource management plan and
approved by the Secretary concerned.
``(3) The project has been approved by the resource
advisory committee in accordance with section 205, including
the procedures issued under subsection (e) of that section.
``(4) A project description has been submitted by the
resource advisory committee to the Secretary concerned in
accordance with section 203.
``(5) The project will improve the maintenance of existing
infrastructure, implement stewardship objectives that enhance
forest ecosystems, and restore and improve land health and
water quality.
``(b) Environmental Reviews.--
``(1) Request for payment by county.--The Secretary
concerned may request the resource advisory committee
submitting a proposed project to agree to the use of project
funds to pay for any environmental review, consultation, or
compliance with applicable environmental laws required in
connection with the project.
``(2) Conduct of environmental review.--If a payment is
requested under paragraph (1) and the resource advisory
committee agrees to the expenditure of funds for this
purpose, the Secretary concerned shall conduct environmental
review, consultation, or other compliance responsibilities in
accordance with Federal laws (including regulations).
``(3) Effect of refusal to pay.--
``(A) In general.--If a resource advisory committee does
not agree to the expenditure of funds under paragraph (1),
the project shall be deemed withdrawn from further
consideration by the Secretary concerned pursuant to this
title.
``(B) Effect of withdrawal.--A withdrawal under
subparagraph (A) shall be deemed to be a rejection of the
project for purposes of section 207(c).
``(c) Decisions of Secretary Concerned.--
``(1) Rejection of projects.--
``(A) In general.--A decision by the Secretary concerned to
reject a proposed project shall be at the sole discretion of
the Secretary concerned.
``(B) No administrative appeal or judicial review.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a decision by the
Secretary concerned to reject a proposed project shall not be
subject to administrative appeal or judicial review.
``(C) Notice of rejection.--Not later than 30 days after
the date on which the Secretary concerned makes the rejection
decision, the Secretary concerned shall notify in writing the
resource advisory committee that submitted the proposed
project of the rejection and the reasons for rejection.
``(2) Notice of project approval.--The Secretary concerned
shall publish in the Federal Register notice of each project
approved under subsection (a) if the notice would be required
had the project originated with the Secretary.
``(d) Source and Conduct of Project.--Once the Secretary
concerned accepts a project for review under section 203, the
acceptance shall be deemed a Federal action for all purposes.
``(e) Implementation of Approved Projects.--
``(1) Cooperation.--Notwithstanding chapter 63 of title 31,
United States Code, using project funds the Secretary
concerned may enter into contracts, grants, and cooperative
agreements with States and local governments, private and
nonprofit entities, and landowners and other persons to
assist the Secretary in carrying out an approved project.
``(2) Best value contracting.--
``(A) In general.--For any project involving a contract
authorized by paragraph (1) the Secretary concerned may elect
a source for performance of the contract on a best value
basis.
``(B) Factors.--The Secretary concerned shall determine
best value based on such factors as--
``(i) the technical demands and complexity of the work to
be done;
``(ii)(I) the ecological objectives of the project; and
``(II) the sensitivity of the resources being treated;
``(iii) the past experience by the contractor with the type
of work being done, using the type of equipment proposed for
the project, and meeting or exceeding desired ecological
conditions; and
``(iv) the commitment of the contractor to hiring highly
qualified workers and local residents.
``(3) Merchantable timber contracting pilot program.--
``(A) Establishment.--The Secretary concerned shall
establish a pilot program to implement a certain percentage
of approved projects involving the sale of merchantable
timber using separate contracts for--
``(i) the harvesting or collection of merchantable timber;
and
``(ii) the sale of the timber.
``(B) Annual percentages.--Under the pilot program, the
Secretary concerned shall ensure that, on a nationwide basis,
not less than the following percentage of all approved
projects involving the sale of merchantable timber are
implemented using separate contracts:
``(i) For fiscal year 2008, 25 percent.
``(ii) For fiscal year 2009, 35 percent.
``(iii) For fiscal year 2010, 45 percent.
``(iv) For each of fiscal years 2011 and 2012, 50 percent.
``(C) Inclusion in pilot program.--The decision whether to
use separate contracts to implement a project involving the
sale of merchantable timber shall be made by the Secretary
concerned after the approval of the project under this title.
``(D) Assistance.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary concerned may use funds
from any appropriated account available to the Secretary for
the Federal land to assist in the administration of projects
conducted under the pilot program.
``(ii) Maximum amount of assistance.--The total amount
obligated under this subparagraph may not exceed $1,000,000
for any fiscal year during which the pilot program is in
effect.
``(E) Review and report.--
``(i) Initial report.--Not later than September 30, 2009,
the Comptroller General shall submit to the Committees on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry and Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate and the Committees on Agriculture and
Natural Resources of the House of Representatives a report
assessing the pilot program.
``(ii) Annual report.--The Secretary concerned shall submit
to the Committees on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry and
Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committees
on Agriculture and Natural Resources of the House of
Representatives an annual report describing the results of
the pilot program.
``(f) Requirements for Project Funds.--The Secretary shall
ensure that at least 50 percent of all project funds be used
for projects that are primarily dedicated--
``(1) to road maintenance, decommissioning, or
obliteration; or
``(2) to restoration of streams and watersheds.

``SEC. 205. RESOURCE ADVISORY COMMITTEES.

``(a) Establishment and Purpose of Resource Advisory
Committees.--
``(1) Establishment.--The Secretary concerned shall
establish and maintain resource advisory committees to
perform the duties

[[Page 16322]]

in subsection (b), except as provided in paragraph (4).
``(2) Purpose.--The purpose of a resource advisory
committee shall be--
``(A) to improve collaborative relationships; and
``(B) to provide advice and recommendations to the land
management agencies consistent with the purposes of this
title.
``(3) Access to resource advisory committees.--To ensure
that each unit of Federal land has access to a resource
advisory committee, and that there is sufficient interest in
participation on a committee to ensure that membership can be
balanced in terms of the points of view represented and the
functions to be performed, the Secretary concerned may,
establish resource advisory committees for part of, or 1 or
more, units of Federal land.
``(4) Existing advisory committees.--
``(A) In general.--An advisory committee that meets the
requirements of this section, a resource advisory committee
established before September 29, 2006, or an advisory
committee determined by the Secretary concerned before
September 29, 2006, to meet the requirements of this section
may be deemed by the Secretary concerned to be a resource
advisory committee for the purposes of this title.
``(B) Charter.--A charter for a committee described in
subparagraph (A) that was filed on or before September 29,
2006, shall be considered to be filed for purposes of this
Act.
``(C) Bureau of land management advisory committees.--The
Secretary of the Interior may deem a resource advisory
committee meeting the requirements of subpart 1784 of part
1780 of title 43, Code of Federal Regulations, as a resource
advisory committee for the purposes of this title.
``(b) Duties.--A resource advisory committee shall--
``(1) review projects proposed under this title by
participating counties and other persons;
``(2) propose projects and funding to the Secretary
concerned under section 203;
``(3) provide early and continuous coordination with
appropriate land management agency officials in recommending
projects consistent with purposes of this Act under this
title;
``(4) provide frequent opportunities for citizens,
organizations, tribes, land management agencies, and other
interested parties to participate openly and meaningfully,
beginning at the early stages of the project development
process under this title;
``(5)(A) monitor projects that have been approved under
section 204; and
``(B) advise the designated Federal official on the
progress of the monitoring efforts under subparagraph (A);
and
``(6) make recommendations to the Secretary concerned for
any appropriate changes or adjustments to the projects being
monitored by the resource advisory committee.
``(c) Appointment by the Secretary.--
``(1) Appointment and term.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary concerned, shall appoint
the members of resource advisory committees for a term of 4
years beginning on the date of appointment.
``(B) Reappointment.--The Secretary concerned may reappoint
members to subsequent 4-year terms.
``(2) Basic requirements.--The Secretary concerned shall
ensure that each resource advisory committee established
meets the requirements of subsection (d).
``(3) Initial appointment.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary
concerned shall make initial appointments to the resource
advisory committees.
``(4) Vacancies.--The Secretary concerned shall make
appointments to fill vacancies on any resource advisory
committee as soon as practicable after the vacancy has
occurred.
``(5) Compensation.--Members of the resource advisory
committees shall not receive any compensation.
``(d) Composition of Advisory Committee.--
``(1) Number.--Each resource advisory committee shall be
comprised of 15 members.
``(2) Community interests represented.--Committee members
shall be representative of the interests of the following 3
categories:
``(A) 5 persons that--
``(i) represent organized labor or non-timber forest
product harvester groups;
``(ii) represent developed outdoor recreation, off highway
vehicle users, or commercial recreation activities;
``(iii) represent--

``(I) energy and mineral development interests; or
``(II) commercial or recreational fishing interests;

``(iv) represent the commercial timber industry; or
``(v) hold Federal grazing or other land use permits, or
represent nonindustrial private forest land owners, within
the area for which the committee is organized.
``(B) 5 persons that represent--
``(i) nationally recognized environmental organizations;
``(ii) regionally or locally recognized environmental
organizations;
``(iii) dispersed recreational activities;
``(iv) archaeological and historical interests; or
``(v) nationally or regionally recognized wild horse and
burro interest groups, wildlife or hunting organizations, or
watershed associations.
``(C) 5 persons that--
``(i) hold State elected office (or a designee);
``(ii) hold county or local elected office;
``(iii) represent American Indian tribes within or adjacent
to the area for which the committee is organized;
``(iv) are school officials or teachers; or
``(v) represent the affected public at large.
``(3) Balanced representation.--In appointing committee
members from the 3 categories in paragraph (2), the Secretary
concerned shall provide for balanced and broad representation
from within each category.
``(4) Geographic distribution.--The members of a resource
advisory committee shall reside within the State in which the
committee has jurisdiction and, to extent practicable, the
Secretary concerned shall ensure local representation in each
category in paragraph (2).
``(5) Chairperson.--A majority on each resource advisory
committee shall select the chairperson of the committee.
``(e) Approval Procedures.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (3), each resource
advisory committee shall establish procedures for proposing
projects to the Secretary concerned under this title.
``(2) Quorum.--A quorum must be present to constitute an
official meeting of the committee.
``(3) Approval by majority of members.--A project may be
proposed by a resource advisory committee to the Secretary
concerned under section 203(a), if the project has been
approved by a majority of members of the committee from each
of the 3 categories in subsection (d)(2).
``(f) Other Committee Authorities and Requirements.--
``(1) Staff assistance.--A resource advisory committee may
submit to the Secretary concerned a request for periodic
staff assistance from Federal employees under the
jurisdiction of the Secretary.
``(2) Meetings.--All meetings of a resource advisory
committee shall be announced at least 1 week in advance in a
local newspaper of record and shall be open to the public.
``(3) Records.--A resource advisory committee shall
maintain records of the meetings of the committee and make
the records available for public inspection.

``SEC. 206. USE OF PROJECT FUNDS.

``(a) Agreement Regarding Schedule and Cost of Project.--
``(1) Agreement between parties.--The Secretary concerned
may carry out a project submitted by a resource advisory
committee under section 203(a) using project funds or other
funds described in section 203(a)(2), if, as soon as
practicable after the issuance of a decision document for the
project and the exhaustion of all administrative appeals and
judicial review of the project decision, the Secretary
concerned and the resource advisory committee enter into an
agreement addressing, at a minimum, the following:
``(A) The schedule for completing the project.
``(B) The total cost of the project, including the level of
agency overhead to be assessed against the project.
``(C) For a multiyear project, the estimated cost of the
project for each of the fiscal years in which it will be
carried out.
``(D) The remedies for failure of the Secretary concerned
to comply with the terms of the agreement consistent with
current Federal law.
``(2) Limited use of federal funds.--The Secretary
concerned may decide, at the sole discretion of the Secretary
concerned, to cover the costs of a portion of an approved
project using Federal funds appropriated or otherwise
available to the Secretary for the same purposes as the
project.
``(b) Transfer of Project Funds.--
``(1) Initial transfer required.--As soon as practicable
after the agreement is reached under subsection (a) with
regard to a project to be funded in whole or in part using
project funds, or other funds described in section 203(a)(2),
the Secretary concerned shall transfer to the applicable unit
of National Forest System land or Bureau of Land Management
District an amount of project funds equal to--
``(A) in the case of a project to be completed in a single
fiscal year, the total amount specified in the agreement to
be paid using project funds, or other funds described in
section 203(a)(2); or
``(B) in the case of a multiyear project, the amount
specified in the agreement to be paid using project funds, or
other funds described in section 203(a)(2) for the first
fiscal year.
``(2) Condition on project commencement.--The unit of
National Forest System land or Bureau of Land Management
District concerned, shall not commence a project until the
project funds, or other funds described in section 203(a)(2)
required to be transferred under paragraph (1) for the
project, have been made available by the Secretary concerned.
``(3) Subsequent transfers for multiyear projects.--
``(A) In general.--For the second and subsequent fiscal
years of a multiyear project to be funded in whole or in part
using project funds, the unit of National Forest System

[[Page 16323]]

land or Bureau of Land Management District concerned shall
use the amount of project funds required to continue the
project in that fiscal year according to the agreement
entered into under subsection (a).
``(B) Suspension of work.--The Secretary concerned shall
suspend work on the project if the project funds required by
the agreement in the second and subsequent fiscal years are
not available.

``SEC. 207. AVAILABILITY OF PROJECT FUNDS.

``(a) Submission of Proposed Projects to Obligate Funds.--
By September 30 of each fiscal year through fiscal year 2011,
a resource advisory committee shall submit to the Secretary
concerned pursuant to section 203(a)(1) a sufficient number
of project proposals that, if approved, would result in the
obligation of at least the full amount of the project funds
reserved by the participating county in the preceding fiscal
year.
``(b) Use or Transfer of Unobligated Funds.--Subject to
section 208, if a resource advisory committee fails to comply
with subsection (a) for a fiscal year, any project funds
reserved by the participating county in the preceding fiscal
year and remaining unobligated shall be available for use as
part of the project submissions in the next fiscal year.
``(c) Effect of Rejection of Projects.--Subject to section
208, any project funds reserved by a participating county in
the preceding fiscal year that are unobligated at the end of
a fiscal year because the Secretary concerned has rejected
one or more proposed projects shall be available for use as
part of the project submissions in the next fiscal year.
``(d) Effect of Court Orders.--
``(1) In general.--If an approved project under this Act is
enjoined or prohibited by a Federal court, the Secretary
concerned shall return the unobligated project funds related
to the project to the participating county or counties that
reserved the funds.
``(2) Expenditure of funds.--The returned funds shall be
available for the county to expend in the same manner as the
funds reserved by the county under subparagraph (B) or (C)(i)
of section 102(d)(1).

``SEC. 208. TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.

``(a) In General.--The authority to initiate projects under
this title shall terminate on September 30, 2011.
``(b) Deposits in Treasury.--Any project funds not
obligated by September 30, 2012, shall be deposited in the
Treasury of the United States.

``TITLE III--COUNTY FUNDS

``SEC. 301. DEFINITIONS.

``In this title:
``(1) County funds.--The term `county funds' means all
funds an eligible county elects under section 102(d) to
reserve for expenditure in accordance with this title.
``(2) Participating county.--The term `participating
county' means an eligible county that elects under section
102(d) to expend a portion of the Federal funds received
under section 102 in accordance with this title.

``SEC. 302. USE.

``(a) Authorized Uses.--A participating county, including
any applicable agencies of the participating county, shall
use county funds, in accordance with this title, only--
``(1) to carry out activities under the Firewise
Communities program to provide to homeowners in fire-
sensitive ecosystems education on, and assistance with
implementing, techniques in home siting, home construction,
and home landscaping that can increase the protection of
people and property from wildfires;
``(2) to reimburse the participating county for search and
rescue and other emergency services, including firefighting,
that are--
``(A) performed on Federal land after the date on which the
use was approved under subsection (b);
``(B) paid for by the participating county; and
``(3) to develop community wildfire protection plans in
coordination with the appropriate Secretary concerned.
``(b) Proposals.--A participating county shall use county
funds for a use described in subsection (a) only after a 45-
day public comment period, at the beginning of which the
participating county shall--
``(1) publish in any publications of local record a
proposal that describes the proposed use of the county funds;
and
``(2) submit the proposal to any resource advisory
committee established under section 205 for the participating
county.

``SEC. 303. CERTIFICATION.

``(a) In General.--Not later than February 1 of the year
after the year in which any county funds were expended by a
participating county, the appropriate official of the
participating county shall submit to the Secretary concerned
a certification that the county funds expended in the
applicable year have been used for the uses authorized under
section 302(a), including a description of the amounts
expended and the uses for which the amounts were expended.
``(b) Review.--The Secretary concerned shall review the
certifications submitted under subsection (a) as the
Secretary concerned determines to be appropriate.

``SEC. 304. TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.

``(a) In General.--The authority to initiate projects under
this title terminates on September 30, 2011.
``(b) Availability.--Any county funds not obligated by
September 30, 2012, shall be returned to the Treasury of the
United States.

``TITLE IV--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

``SEC. 401. REGULATIONS.

``The Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the
Interior shall issue regulations to carry out the purposes of
this Act.

``SEC. 402. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

``(a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated
such sums as are necessary to carry out this Act for each of
fiscal years 2008 through 2011.
``(b) Emergency Designation.--Of the amounts authorized to
be appropriated under subsection (a) for fiscal year 2008,
$425,000,000 is designated as an emergency requirement
pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress).

``SEC. 403. TREATMENT OF FUNDS AND REVENUES.

``(a) Relation to Other Appropriations.--Funds made
available under section 402 and funds made available to a
Secretary concerned under section 206 shall be in addition to
any other annual appropriations for the Forest Service and
the Bureau of Land Management.
``(b) Deposit of Revenues and Other Funds.--All revenues
generated from projects pursuant to title II, including any
interest accrued from the revenues, shall be deposited in the
Treasury of the United States.''.
(b) Forest Receipt Payments to Eligible States and
Counties.--
(1) Act of may 23, 1908.--The sixth paragraph under the
heading ``forest service'' in the Act of May 23, 1908 (16
U.S.C. 500) is amended in the first sentence by striking
``twenty-five percentum'' and all that follows through
``shall be paid'' and inserting the following: ``an amount
equal to the annual average of 25 percent of all amounts
received for the applicable fiscal year and each of the
preceding 6 fiscal years from each national forest shall be
paid''.
(2) Weeks law.--Section 13 of the Act of March 1, 1911
(commonly known as the ``Weeks Law'') (16 U.S.C. 500) is
amended in the first sentence by striking ``twenty-five
percentum'' and all that follows through ``shall be paid''
and inserting the following: ``an amount equal to the annual
average of 25 percent of all amounts received for the
applicable fiscal year and each of the preceding 6 fiscal
years from each national forest shall be paid''.
(c) Payments in Lieu of Taxes.--
(1) In general.--Section 6906 of title 31, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 6906. Funding

``For each of fiscal years 2008 through 2011--
``(1) each county or other eligible unit of local
government shall be entitled to payment under this chapter;
and
``(2) sums shall be made available to the Secretary of the
Interior for obligation or expenditure in accordance with
this chapter.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--The table of sections for
chapter 69 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by
striking the item relating to section 6906 and inserting the
following:

``6906. Funding.''.

(3) Budget scorekeeping.--
(A) In general.--Notwithstanding the Budget Scorekeeping
Guidelines and the accompanying list of programs and accounts
set forth in the joint explanatory statement of the committee
of conference accompanying Conference Report 105-217, the
amendment made by paragraph (1)--
(i) shall be treated under section 252 of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (as in
effect before September 30, 2002), by the Chairpersons of the
Committee on the Budget of the House of Representatives and
the Committee on the Budget of the Senate, as appropriate,
for purposes of budget enforcement in the House of
Representatives and the Senate, and under the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) as changing direct
spending or receipts, as appropriate (as if such language
were included in an Act other than an appropriations Act);
and
(ii) shall be treated in the baseline after fiscal year
2008 for purposes of section 257 of the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 907) (as in
effect before September 30, 2002), by the Chairpersons of the
Committee on the Budget of the House of Representatives and
the Committee on the Budget of the Senate, as appropriate,
for purposes of budget enforcement in the House of
Representatives and the Senate, and under the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) as if Payment in
Lieu of Taxes (14-1114-0-1-806) were an account designated as
Appropriated Entitlements and Mandatories for Fiscal Year
1997 in the joint explanatory statement of the committee of
conference accompanying Conference Report 105-217.
(B) Effective date.--This paragraph shall--
(i) be effective beginning on the date of enactment of this
Act; and

[[Page 16324]]

(ii) remain in effect for any fiscal year for which the
entitlement in section 6906 of title 31, United States Code
(as amended by paragraph (1)), applies.
(d) Modification of Effective Date of Leasing Provisions of
the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004.--
(1) Leases to foreign entities.--Section 849(b) of the
American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 is amended by adding at
the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) Leases to foreign entities.--In the case of tax-
exempt use property leased to a tax-exempt entity which is a
foreign person or entity, the amendments made by this part
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2006, with respect to leases entered into on or before March
12, 2004.''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection
shall take effect as if included in the enactment of the
American Jobs Creation Act of 2004.
(e) Application of Rules Treating Inverted Corporations as
Domestic Corporations to Certain Transactions Occurring After
March 20, 2002.--
(1) In general.--Section 7874(b) (relating to inverted
corporations treated as domestic corporations) is amended to
read as follows:
``(b) Inverted Corporations Treated as Domestic
Corporations.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 7701(a)(4), a
foreign corporation shall be treated for purposes of this
title as a domestic corporation if such corporation would be
a surrogate foreign corporation if subsection (a)(2) were
applied by substituting `80 percent' for `60 percent'.
``(2) Special rule for certain transactions occurring after
march 20, 2002.--
``(A) In general.--If--
``(i) paragraph (1) does not apply to a foreign
corporation, but
``(ii) paragraph (1) would apply to such corporation if, in
addition to the substitution under paragraph (1), subsection
(a)(2) were applied by substituting `March 20, 2002' for
`March 4, 2003' each place it appears,
then paragraph (1) shall apply to such corporation but only
with respect to taxable years of such corporation beginning
after December 31, 2006.
``(B) Special rules.--Subject to such rules as the
Secretary may prescribe, in the case of a corporation to
which paragraph (1) applies by reason of this paragraph--
``(i) the corporation shall be treated, as of the close of
its last taxable year beginning before January 1, 2008, as
having transferred all of its assets, liabilities, and
earnings and profits to a domestic corporation in a
transaction with respect to which no tax is imposed under
this title,
``(ii) the bases of the assets transferred in the
transaction to the domestic corporation shall be the same as
the bases of the assets in the hands of the foreign
corporation, subject to any adjustments under this title for
built-in losses,
``(iii) the basis of the stock of any shareholder in the
domestic corporation shall be the same as the basis of the
stock of the shareholder in the foreign corporation for which
it is treated as exchanged, and
``(iv) the transfer of any earnings and profits by reason
of clause (i) shall be disregarded in determining any deemed
dividend or foreign tax creditable to the domestic
corporation with respect to such transfer.
``(C) Regulations.--The Secretary may prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out
this paragraph, including regulations to prevent the
avoidance of the purposes of this paragraph.''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2006.
______

SA 5171. Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself, Mr. Roberts, and Mr. Sununu)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S.
3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price
speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

TITLE II--DEEP SEA EXPLORATION

SEC. 201. PUBLICATION OF PROJECTED STATE LINES ON OUTER
CONTINENTAL SHELF.

Section 4(a)(2)(A) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
(43 U.S.C. 1333(a)(2)(A)) is amended--
(1) by designating the first, second, and third sentences
as clause (i), (iii), and (iv), respectively;
(2) in clause (i) (as so designated), by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of the Stop Excessive Energy
Speculation Act of 2008''; and
(3) by inserting after clause (i) (as so designated) the
following:
``(ii)(I) The projected lines shall also be used for the
purpose of preleasing and leasing activities conducted in new
producing areas under section 32.
``(II) This clause shall not affect any property right or
title to Federal submerged land on the outer Continental
Shelf.
``(III) In carrying out this clause, the President shall
consider the offshore administrative boundaries beyond State
submerged lands for planning, coordination, and
administrative purposes of the Department of the Interior,
but may establish different boundaries.''.

SEC. 202. PRODUCTION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS IN NEW PRODUCING
AREAS.

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 32. PRODUCTION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS IN NEW PRODUCING
AREAS.

[[Page 16325]]

``(i) 75 percent to new producing States in accordance with
paragraph (2); and
``(ii) 25 percent to provide financial assistance to States
in accordance with section 6 of the Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l-8), which shall
be considered income to the Land and Water Conservation Fund
for purposes of section 2 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 460l-5).
``(2) Allocation to new producing states and coastal
political subdivisions.--
``(A) Allocation to new producing states.--Effective for
fiscal year 2008 and each fiscal year thereafter, the amount
made available under paragraph (1)(B)(i) shall be allocated
to each new producing State in amounts (based on a formula
established by the Secretary by regulation) proportional to
the amount of qualified outer Continental Shelf revenues
generated in the new producing area offshore each State.
``(B) Payments to coastal political subdivisions.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall pay 20 percent of
the allocable share of each new producing State, as
determined under subparagraph (A), to the coastal political
subdivisions of the new producing State.
``(ii) Allocation.--The amount paid by the Secretary to
coastal political subdivisions shall be allocated to each
coastal political subdivision in accordance with the
regulations promulgated under subparagraph (A).
``(3) Minimum allocation.--The amount allocated to a new
producing State for each fiscal year under paragraph (2)
shall be at least 5 percent of the amounts available for the
fiscal year under paragraph (1)(B)(i).
``(4) Timing.--The amounts required to be deposited under
subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) for the applicable fiscal
year shall be made available in accordance with that
subparagraph during the fiscal year immediately following the
applicable fiscal year.
``(5) Authorized uses.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), each new
producing State and coastal political subdivision shall use
all amounts received under paragraph (2) in accordance with
all applicable Federal and State laws, only for 1 or more of
the following purposes:
``(i) Projects and activities for the purposes of coastal
protection, including conservation, coastal restoration,
hurricane protection, and infrastructure directly affected by
coastal wetland losses.
``(ii) Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, or natural
resources.
``(iii) Implementation of a federally approved marine,
coastal, or comprehensive conservation management plan.
``(iv) Funding of onshore infrastructure projects.
``(v) Planning assistance and the administrative costs of
complying with this section.
``(B) Limitation.--Not more than 3 percent of amounts
received by a new producing State or coastal political
subdivision under paragraph (2) may be used for the purposes
described in subparagraph (A)(v).
``(6) Administration.--Amounts made available under
paragraph (1)(B) shall--
``(A) be made available, without further appropriation, in
accordance with this subsection;
``(B) remain available until expended; and
``(C) be in addition to any amounts appropriated under--
``(i) other provisions of this Act;
``(ii) the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16
U.S.C. 460l-4 et seq.); or
``(iii) any other provision of law.
``(d) Disposition of Qualified Outer Continental Shelf
Revenues From Other Areas.--Notwithstanding section 9, for
each applicable fiscal year, the terms and conditions of
subsection (c) shall apply to the disposition of qualified
outer Continental Shelf revenues that--
``(1) are derived from oil or gas leasing in an area that
is not included in the current 5-year plan of the Secretary
for oil or gas leasing; and
``(2) are not assumed in the budget of the United States
Government submitted by the President under section 1105 of
title 31, United States Code.
``(e) Energy Trust Fund.--
``(1) Establishment.--There is established in the Treasury
of the United States a revolving fund, to be known as the
`Energy Trust Fund', consisting of such amounts as may be
transferred to the Trust Fund under paragraph (2).
``(2) Transfers to trust fund.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the
Secretary shall transfer to the Energy Trust Fund amounts
equivalent to 20 percent of the qualified revenue received
for each fiscal year under this section.
``(B) Limitation on transfers to energy trust fund.--The
amounts transferred to the Energy Trust Fund for any fiscal
year under this paragraph shall not exceed $1,000,000,000.
``(3) Expenditures.--On request by the Secretary of Energy,
the Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer from the Energy
Trust Fund to the Secretary of Energy such amounts as the
Secretary of Energy determines are necessary to carry out
activities--
``(A) to accelerate the use of clean domestic renewable
energy resources (including solar, wind, clean coal, and
nuclear energy resources) and alternative fuels (including
ethanol, and including cellulosic ethanol, biodiesel, and
fuel cell technology);
``(B) to promote the use of energy-efficient products and
practices and conservation; and
``(C) to increase research, development, and deployment of
clean renewable energy and efficiency technologies.
``(4) Transfers of amounts.--
``(A) In general.--The amounts required to be transferred
to the Energy Trust Fund under this subsection shall be
transferred at least monthly from the general fund of the
Treasury to the Energy Trust Fund on the basis of estimates
made by the Secretary of the Treasury.
``(B) Adjustments.--Proper adjustment shall be made in
amounts subsequently transferred to the extent prior
estimates were in excess of or less than the amounts required
to be transferred.''.

SEC. 203. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

SA 5172. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. GULF OF MEXICO ENERGY SECURITY.

(a) Definitions.--Section 102(9)(A)(i) of the Gulf of
Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 note;
Public Law 109-432) is amended--
(1) in subclause (I), by striking ``and'' at the end; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:

``(III) any area in the 181 Area that was not available for
leasing on July 1, 2008; and''.

(b) Offshore Oil and Gas Leasing.--Section 103(a) of the
Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331
note; Public Law 109-432) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Except'' and inserting the following:
``(1) In general.--Except''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Leasing after certain date.--The Secretary shall
offer any part of the 181 Area for oil and gas leasing
pursuant to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C.
1331 et seq.) that was not available for leasing on July 1,
2008, as soon as practicable, but not later than 2 years,
after that date and at any time thereafter, as the Secretary
determines to be appropriate.''.
(c) Moratorium on Leasing.--Section 104(a) of the Gulf of
Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 note;
Public Law 109-432) is amended by striking paragraph (3) and
inserting the following:
``(3) any area in the Central Planning Area that is--
``(A) outside the 181 Area;
``(B) east of the western edge of the Pensacola Official
Protection Diagram (UTM X coordinate 1,393,920 (NAD 27
feet)); and
``(C) within 100 miles of the coastline of the State of
Florida.''.
______

SA 5173. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

TITLE __--BETTER ENERGY STRATEGY FOR TOMORROW

SEC. _01. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Better Energy Strategy for
Tomorrow Act of 2008'' or the ``BEST Act of 2008''.

SEC. _02. DEFINITIONS.

In this title:
(1) Air pollutant.--The term ``air pollutant'' has the
meaning given the term in section 302 of the Clean Air Act
(42 U.S.C. 7602).
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.

SEC. _03. FEDERAL ENERGY POLICIES.

Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this
Act and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall--
(1) conduct an analysis of all policies of the Federal
Government (including mandates, subsidies, tariffs, and tax
policy) that encourage, or have the potential to encourage,
energy production in the United States; and
(2) submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the
House of Representatives a report that contains
recommendations for the adjustment of the policies described
in paragraph (1) to reduce--
(A) the dependence of the United States on foreign sources
of energy;
(B) the quantity of air pollutants in the environment;
(C) greenhouse gas emissions; and

[[Page 16326]]

(D) the cost of energy.

SEC. _04. ENERGY SECURITY STRATEGY.

(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act and every 4 years thereafter, the
President shall develop an energy security strategy that
proposes comprehensive and long-range energy policies for the
United States to reduce--
(1) the dependence of the United States on foreign sources
of energy;
(2) the quantity of air pollutants in the environment;
(3) greenhouse gas emissions; and
(4) the cost of energy.
(b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act and every 4 years year thereafter, the
President shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and
Commerce of the House of Representatives a report that
describes the latest energy security strategy developed under
subsection (a), including--
(1) an estimate of the domestic and foreign energy supplies
needed to meet the projected energy demand of the United
States consistent with the strategy developed under
subsection (a); and
(2) a summary of research and development efforts funded by
the Federal Government to achieve the strategy developed
under subsection (a).

SEC. _05. ADMINISTRATION.

(a) Comments.--In preparing each report required under
sections _03(2) and _04(b) (referred to in this section as
``each report''), the Secretary and the President,
respectively, shall seek the comments of State and local
agencies and the private sector to ensure, to the maximum
extent practicable, that the views and proposals of all
segments of the economy are taken into account in preparing
each report.
(b) Data and Analysis.--The Secretary and the President
shall include in each report such data and analyses as are
necessary to support the objectives, resource needs, and
policy recommendations of each report.
(c) Review.--The Secretary and the President shall enter
into an arrangement with the National Academy of Sciences
under which the Academy shall--
(1) conduct a review of each report; and
(2) submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
of the Senate, the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the
House of Representatives, and the Secretary a report that
describes the results of each review.
______

SA 5174. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. STUDY OF DIESEL VEHICLE ATTRIBUTES.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy, in consultation
with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
and the Secretary of Transportation, shall conduct a study to
identify--
(1) the environmental and efficiency attributes of diesel-
fueled vehicles as compared to comparable vehicles fueled by
gasoline or E-85 fuel and hybrid vehicles;
(2) the technical, economic, regulatory, environmental, and
other obstacles to increasing the usage of diesel-fueled
vehicles;
(3) the legislative, administrative, and other actions that
could reduce or eliminate the obstacles identified under
paragraph (2); and
(4) the costs and benefits associated with reducing or
eliminating the obstacles identified under paragraph (2).
(b) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and
the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives a report describing the results of the study
conducted under subsection (a).
______

SA 5175. Mr. INHOFE (for himself and Mr. Domenici) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend
the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. REPEAL.

Section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007 (42 U.S.C. 17142) is repealed.
______

SA 5176. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

On page 43, after line 24, add the following:

SEC. 17. ESTABLISHMENT OF CHIEF ENERGY AND ENERGY SERVICES
NEGOTIATOR.

(a) In General.--Section 141(b)(2) of the Trade Act of 1974
(19 U.S.C. 2171(b)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
``(2)(A) There shall be in the Office 3 Deputy United
States Trade Representatives, 1 Chief Agricultural
Negotiator, and 1 Chief Energy and Energy Services
Negotiator.
``(B) The 3 Deputy United States Trade Representatives, the
Chief Agricultural Negotiator, and the Chief Energy and
Energy Services Negotiator shall be appointed by the
President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
``(C) As an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate,
any nomination of a Deputy United States Trade
Representative, the Chief Agricultural Negotiator, or the
Chief Energy and Energy Services Negotiator submitted to the
Senate for its advice and consent, and referred to a
committee, shall be referred to the Committee on Finance.
``(D) Each Deputy United States Trade Representative, the
Chief Agricultural Negotiator, and the Chief Energy and
Energy Services Negotiator shall hold office at the pleasure
of the President and shall have the rank of Ambassador''.
(b) Duties.--Section 141(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2171(c)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(6) The principal function of the Chief Energy and Energy
Services Negotiator shall be to eliminate energy subsidies
and policies of foreign governments that distort trade and
adversely affect the United States.''.

SEC. 18. STUDIES AND REPORTS ON SUBSIDIZATION OF FUELS AND
ENERGY USE BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES.

(a) ITC Annual Study and Report on Economic Impact of
Foreign Subsidization of Retail Fuel and Energy.--
(1) Study.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act and annually thereafter, the
International Trade Commission shall commence a study on--
(A) the subsidization by foreign governments of retail fuel
and energy use in foreign countries; and
(B) the impact of such subsidization on the economy of the
United States.
(2) Report.--Not later than June 1, 2009, and June 1 of
each year thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report describing the findings of the Secretary with
respect to the most recent study commenced by the Secretary
under paragraph (1).
(b) USTR Bi-Annual Study and Report on Energy Use Subsidies
Provided by Foreign Governments.--
(1) Study.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act and every 180 days thereafter, the
United States Trade Representative shall conduct a study on
the provision by foreign governments of energy use subsidies.
(2) Report.--Not later than January 1, 2009, and every 180
days thereafter, the United States Trade Representative shall
submit to the Industry Trade Advisory Committee on Energy and
Energy Services of the Department of Commerce and Congress a
report on the findings of the United States Trade
Representative with respect to the most recent study
conducted by the United States Trade Representative under
paragraph (1), including a description of the amounts of
energy use subsidies provided by foreign governments.
(c) Energy Information Agency Annual Study and Report on
Foreign Subsidization of Energy and Fuel Use.--
(1) Annual study.--Each year, the Secretary of Energy
shall, acting through the Administrator of the Energy
Information Administration, conduct a study on foreign
governments that subsidize energy and fuel use and assess the
impact of such subsidization on energy costs in the United
States.
(2) Annual report.--Not later than June 1 of each year, the
Secretary of Energy shall submit to the President and
Congress a report on the findings of the Secretary with
respect to the most recent study conducted under paragraph
(1).

SEC. 19. DEPARTMENT OF STATE ANNUAL REPORT ON ENERGY
SECURITY.

(a) Annual Report.--Not later than March 1 of each year,
the Secretary of State shall submit to the appropriate
committees of Congress a report on the efforts undertaken by
the Secretary in the previous calendar year to achieve the
following goals:
(1) To eliminate energy subsidies and policies of foreign
governments that distort trade and adversely affect the
United States.
(2) To enhance United States and global energy security
by--
(A) promoting open and transparent, integrated, and
diversified energy markets;
(B) encouraging appropriate energy-sector investments to
expand access to energy and increase economic growth and
opportunity; and
(C) developing clean and efficient energy technologies.
(b) Appropriate Committees of Congress.--In this section,
the term ``appropriate committees of Congress'' means--
(1) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;

[[Page 16327]]

(2) the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the
Senate;
(3) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives; and
(4) the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives.
______

SA 5177. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end, add the following:

TITLE II--NATURAL GAS

SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Drive America on Natural
Gas Act of 2008''.

SEC. 202. NEW QUALIFIED ALTERNATIVE FUEL MOTOR VEHICLE CREDIT
ALLOWED FOR DUAL FUELED MOTOR VEHICLES.

(a) In General.--Clause (i) of section 30B(e)(4)(A) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to definition of new
qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle) is amended to read
as follows:
``(i) which--

``(I) is only capable of operating on an alternative fuel,
or
``(II) is capable of operating on an alternative fuel alone
and gasoline or diesel fuel alone,''.

(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after the date of
the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 203. NATURAL GAS VEHICLE RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND
DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
(2) Natural gas.--The term ``natural gas'' means compressed
natural gas, liquefied natural gas, biomethane, and mixtures
of hydrogen and methane or natural gas.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.
(b) Program.--The Secretary, in coordination with the
Administrator, shall conduct a program of natural gas vehicle
research, development, and demonstration.
(c) Purpose.--The program under this section shall focus
on--
(1) the continued improvement and development of new,
cleaner, more efficient light-duty, medium-duty, and heavy-
duty natural gas vehicle engines;
(2) the integration of those engines into light-duty,
medium-duty, and heavy-duty natural gas vehicles for onroad
and offroad applications;
(3) expanding product availability by assisting
manufacturers with the certification of the engines or
vehicles described in paragraph (1) or (2) to Federal and
California certification requirements and in-use emission
standards;
(4) the demonstration and proper operation and use of the
vehicles described in paragraph (2) under all operating
conditions;
(5) the development and improvement of nationally
recognized codes and standards for the continued safe
operation of natural gas vehicles and components;
(6) improvement in the reliability and efficiency of
natural gas fueling station infrastructure;
(7) the certification of natural gas fueling station
infrastructure to nationally recognized and industry safety
standards;
(8) the improvement in the reliability and efficiency of
onboard natural gas fuel storage systems;
(9) the development of new natural gas fuel storage
materials;
(10) the certification of onboard natural gas fuel storage
systems to nationally recognized and industry safety
standards; and
(11) the use of natural gas engines in hybrid vehicles.
(d) Certification of Conversion Systems.--The Secretary
shall coordinate with the Administrator on issues related to
streamlining the certification of natural gas conversion
systems to the appropriate Federal certification requirements
and in-use emission standards.
(e) Cooperation and Coordination With Industry.--In
developing and carrying out the program under this section,
the Secretary shall coordinate with the natural gas vehicle
industry to ensure cooperation between the public and the
private sector.
(f) Conduct of Program.--The program under this section
shall be conducted in accordance with sections 3001 and 3002
of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13541, 13542).
(g) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report on the implementation of this section.
(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the Secretary such sums as are
necessary to carry out this section.

SEC. 204. DEVELOPMENT OF LOW-EMISSION NATURAL GAS
TRANSPORTATION-FUELED VEHICLES.

Part C of title II of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7581 et
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 251. DEVELOPMENT OF LOW-EMISSION NATURAL GAS
TRANSPORTATION-FUELED VEHICLES.

``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Alternative fuel.--The term `alternative fuel' means
compressed or liquefied natural gas or liquefied petroleum
gas.
``(2) Alternative-fueled vehicle.--The term `alternative-
fueled vehicle' means a vehicle that is manufactured or
converted to operate using alternative fuel.
``(3) Bi-fueled vehicle.--The term `bi-fueled vehicle'
means a vehicle that is capable of operating on gasoline or
an alternative fuel, but not both at the same time.
``(4) Convert.--The term `convert', with respect to a
vehicle, means to modify the engine and other applicable
components of the vehicle to enable the vehicle to operate
using an alternative fuel (including compressed natural gas).
``(5) OBD system.--The term `OBD system' means an on-board,
computer-based diagnostic system built into certain vehicles
to monitor the performance of certain primary engine
components of the vehicle (including components responsible
for controlling emissions).
``(6) Program.--The term `program' means the alternative-
fueled vehicle development demonstration program established
under subsection (b).
``(7) Small volume manufacturer.--
``(A) In general.--The term `small volume manufacturer'
means a manufacturer of vehicles described in section 86.001-
1(e) of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor
regulation) that is approved and certified in accordance with
part 86 of subchapter C of chapter I of title 40, Code of
Federal Regulations (or successor regulations).
``(B) Inclusion.--The term `small volume manufacturer'
includes a manufacturer of kits or equipment used to convert
vehicles.
``(b) Program.--
``(1) Establishment.--For the period of fiscal years 2009
through 2013, the Administrator shall establish and carry out
a demonstration program to assist States in facilitating the
development of alternative-fueled vehicles.
``(2) Application.--A State may participate in the program
by submitting to the Administrator an application at such
time, in such form, and containing such information as the
Administrator shall specify.
``(3) Benefits available to participating small volume
manufacturers.--Under the program, with respect to small
volume manufacturers located in States participating in the
program, the Administrator shall, by regulation--
``(A) waive all fees applicable to small volume
manufacturers for the certification and conversion of
alternative-fueled vehicles;
``(B) waive requirements for recertification of kits for
the conversion of vehicles in any case in which, as
determined by the Administrator--
``(i) the kit has been previously certified for the model
of vehicle to be converted; and
``(ii) neither the kit nor the design and specifications of
the model of vehicle to be converted have substantially
changed;
``(C) modify such regulatory requirements relating to OBD
systems as the Administrator determines to be appropriate to
provide flexibility to small volume manufacturers in
reprogramming OBD systems to be compatible with the use of
alternative fuel;
``(D) permit small volume manufacturers to include more
vehicles and engines in a single engine category to improve
the cost-efficiency of emission testing of converted
vehicles;
``(E) waive the liability of small volume manufacturers, in
the case of a bi-fueled vehicle capable of operating on
gasoline or compressed natural gas, for the compliance of the
gasoline system of the bi-fueled vehicle with applicable
emission requirements;
``(F) provide additional guidance to small volume
manufacturers with respect to the conversion of older models
of vehicles; and
``(G) revise and streamline certification requirements
applicable to small volume manufacturers.
``(4) State responsibility.--As a condition of
participating in the program, during the period of fiscal
years 2009 through 2013, a State shall--
``(A) develop regulations for (as compared to Federal
requirements in effect as of the date of enactment of this
section) an equally effective but less burdensome system of
certifying and verifying emissions of alternative-fueled
vehicles and equipment used for conversions; and
``(B) not later than December 31, 2012, submit the proposed
regulations of the State to the Administrator for review.
``(c) State Programs.--Upon receipt of proposed regulations
of a State under subsection (b)(4), the Administrator shall--
``(1) review the regulations; and
``(2) if the Administrator determines that the
implementation of the regulations would result in (as
compared to Federal requirements in effect as of the date of
enactment of this section) an equally effective but less
burdensome system of certifying and verifying emissions of
alternative-fueled vehicles and equipment used for
conversions,

[[Page 16328]]

authorize the State to implement the regulations with respect
to small volume manufacturers in the State for the period of
fiscal years 2014 through 2018, subject to--
``(A) the submission of annual reports to the
Administrator; and
``(B) such periodic inspection and other oversight
requirements as the Administrator determines to be
appropriate.
``(d) Duration of Program.--The program and all authority
under the program (other than the authority of the
Administrator described in subsection (c)) shall terminate on
December 31, 2013, unless the Administrator--
``(1) in consultation with the States, elects to continue
the program; and
``(2) promulgates such regulations as are necessary to
continue the program.
``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to
carry out this section.''.

SEC. 205. NATURAL GAS CONVERSION EMISSION CERTIFICATIONS.

Part C of title II of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7581 et
seq.) (as amended by section 204) is amended by adding at the
end the following:

``SEC. 252. NATURAL GAS CONVERSION EMISSION CERTIFICATIONS.

``(a) In General.--The Administrator shall waive
requirements for recertification of kits for the conversion
of vehicles into vehicles that are powered by natural gas or
liquefied petroleum gas in any case in which, as determined
by the Administrator--
``(1) the kit has been previously certified for the model
of vehicle to be converted; and
``(2) neither the kit nor the design and specifications of
the model of vehicle to be converted have substantially
changed.
``(b) Older Vehicles.--The Administrator shall waive
emission certification system requirements for a vehicle that
is over 10 years old or has over 120,000 miles that is
powered by natural gas.''.
______

SA 5178. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end, add the following:

TITLE II--MARGINAL WELL PRODUCTION PRESERVATION AND ENHANCEMENT

SEC. 21. TAX TREATMENT FOR PROLONGED MARGINAL PRODUCTION.

(a) Increase in Percentage Depletion for Oil and Natural
Gas Produced From Marginal Properties.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (6) of section 613A(c) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to oil and natural
gas produced from marginal properties), as amended by this
Act, is amended to read as follows:
``(6) Oil and natural gas produced from marginal
properties.--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (d)--
``(i) the allowance for depletion under section 611 shall
be computed in accordance with section 613 with respect to
the taxpayer's marginal production of domestic crude oil and
domestic natural gas, and
``(ii) 27.5 percent shall be deemed to be specified in
subsection (b) of section 613 for purposes of subsection (a)
of that section.
``(B) Coordination with other production of domestic oil
and natural gas.--For purposes of this subsection--
``(i) no allowance for depletion shall be allowed by reason
of paragraph (1) with respect to the taxpayer's marginal
production of domestic crude oil and domestic natural gas,
and
``(ii) such production shall not be taken into account--

``(I) in determining under paragraph (1) how much of the
taxpayer's depletable oil quantity or depletable natural gas
quantity has been used, or
``(II) for purposes of applying subparagraph (A), (B), or
(C) of paragraph (7).

``(C) Marginal production.--The term `marginal production'
means domestic crude oil or domestic natural gas which is
produced during any taxable year from a property which--
``(i) is a stripper well property for the calendar year in
which the taxable year begins, or
``(ii) is a property substantially all of the production of
which during such calendar year is heavy oil.
``(D) Stripper well property.--For purposes of this
paragraph, the term `stripper well property' means, with
respect to any calendar year, any property with respect to
which the amount determined by dividing--
``(i) the average daily production of domestic crude oil
and domestic natural gas from producing wells on such
property for such calendar year, by
``(ii) the number of such wells,
is 15 barrel equivalents or less.
``(E) Heavy oil.--For purposes of this paragraph, the term
`heavy oil' means domestic crude oil produced from any
property if such crude oil had a weighted average gravity of
20 degrees API or less (corrected to 60 degrees Fahrenheit).
``(F) Nonapplication of taxable income limit with respect
to marginal production.--The second sentence of subsection
(a) of section 613 shall not apply to so much of the
allowance for depletion as is determined under subparagraph
(A).''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Section 613A(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(defining depletable oil quantity) is amended to read as
follows:
``(3) Depletable oil quantity.--For purposes of paragraph
(1), the taxpayer's depletable oil quantity shall be 1,000
barrels.''.
(B) Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 613A(c)(7) of such
Code are each amended by striking ``or (6), as the case may
be''.
(3) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2008.
(b) 1-Year Extension of Suspension of Taxable Income
Limit.--Section 613A(c)(6)(H) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (relating to temporary suspension of taxable income
limit with respect to marginal production) is amended by
striking ``2008'' and inserting ``2009''.

SEC. 22. OIL AND GAS WELLS AND PIPELINE FACILITIES TECHNICAL
AMENDMENT.

Section 112(n)(4)(A) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7412(n)(4)(A)) is amended by striking ``this section'' and
inserting ``this Act''.

SEC. 23. NATIONAL RESPONSE SYSTEM.

Section 311(j) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(33 U.S.C. 1321(j)) is amended by striking paragraph (1) and
inserting the following:
``(1) System.--
``(A) Definition of.--In this paragraph, the term
`wastewater treatment facility' includes produced water from
an oil production facility.
``(B) Regulations.--Consistent with the National
Contingency Plan required under subsection (d), as soon as
practicable after the effective date of this section, and
from time to time thereafter, the President shall promulgate
regulations consistent with maritime safety and marine and
navigation laws--
``(i) establishing methods and procedures for removal of
discharged oil and hazardous substances;
``(ii) establishing criteria for the development and
implementation of local and regional oil and hazardous
substance removal contingency plans;
``(iii) establishing procedures, methods, and equipment and
other requirements for equipment to prevent discharges of oil
and hazardous substances from vessels and from onshore
facilities and offshore facilities (other than wastewater
treatment facilities), and to contain those discharges; and
``(iv) governing the inspection of vessels carrying cargoes
of oil and hazardous substances and the inspection of those
cargoes in order to reduce the likelihood of discharges of
oil from vessels in violation of this section.
``(C) Small facilities.--In carrying out clause (iii) of
subparagraph (B), not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of that clause, the Administrator shall establish
procedures, methods, and equipment and other requirements
for, and consider the cost-effectiveness of those
requirements on, small facilities (including agricultural and
oil production facilities) to prevent discharges from
facilities and offshore facilities, and to contain those
discharges, by developing regulations based on storage volume
and capacity that, with respect to those small facilities--
``(i) apply to any facility the total oil storage capacity
of which is at least 1,320 gallons but less than 50,000
gallons, and at which no single tank exceeds a nominal
capacity of 21,000 gallons; and
``(ii) establish minimal requirements and plans by
eliminating engineer certification, flow lines, loading and
unloading areas, integrity testing, and other requirements
that, as determined by the Administrator, do not take into
consideration and meet cost-effectiveness standards.''.

SEC. 24. RECOVERY PERIOD FOR DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY USED TO
INJECT QUALIFIED TERTIARY INJECTANTS.

(a) In General.--Section 168(e)((3)(A) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (defining 3-year property) is amended by
striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ii), by striking the
period at the end of clause (iii) and inserting ``, and'',
and by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(iv) any qualified tertiary injectant property.''.
(b) Qualified Tertiary Injectant Property.--Section 168(e)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
classification of property) is amended by adding at the end
the following new paragraph:
``(8) Qualified tertiary injectant property.--The term
`qualified tertiary injectant property' means--
``(A) any property--
``(i) the principal use of which is to inject any tertiary
injectant as a part of a tertiary recovery method (as defined
in section 193(b)(3)), or
``(ii) which is a pipeline used to carry any tertiary
injectant in connection with such tertiary recovery method,
and
``(B) which has a class life of more than 4 years.''.
(c) Alternative System.--The table contained in section
168(g)(3)(B) of the Internal

[[Page 16329]]

Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after the item
relating to subparagraph (A)(iii) the following new item:
``(A)(iv)..........................................................7''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after the date of
the enactment of this Act, in taxable years ending after such
date.
______

SA 5179. Mr. GRAHAM (for himself, Mr. Kyl, Mr. McCain, and Mr.
Inhofe) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive
price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other
purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

TITLE _--NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION

Subtitle A--Credit for Qualifying Nuclear Power Manufacturing

SEC. __01. CREDIT FOR QUALIFYING NUCLEAR POWER MANUFACTURING.

(a) In General.--Subpart E of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by
this Act, is amended by inserting after section 48B the
following new section:

``SEC. 48C. QUALIFYING NUCLEAR POWER MANUFACTURING CREDIT.

``(a) Allowance of Credit.--For purposes of section 46, the
qualifying nuclear power manufacturing credit for any taxable
year is an amount equal to 20 percent of the qualified
investment for such taxable year.
``(b) Qualified Investment.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a), the
qualified investment for any taxable year is the basis of
property placed in service by the taxpayer during such
taxable year which is certified under subsection (c) and--
``(A) which is either part of a qualifying nuclear power
manufacturing project or is qualifying nuclear power
manufacturing equipment,
``(B)(i) the construction, reconstruction, or erection of
which is completed by the taxpayer, or
``(ii) which is acquired by the taxpayer if the original
use of such property commences with the taxpayer,
``(C) with respect to which depreciation (or amortization
in lieu of depreciation) is allowable, and
``(D) which is placed in service on or before December 31,
2015.
``(2) Special rule for certain subsidized property.--Rules
similar to the rules of section 48(a)(4) shall apply for
purposes of this section.
``(3) Certain qualified progress expenditures rules made
applicable.--Rules similar to the rules of subsections (c)(4)
and (d) of section 46 (as in effect on the day before the
enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990) shall
apply for purposes of this section.
``(c) Qualifying Nuclear Power Manufacturing Project and
Qualifying Nuclear Power Manufacturing Equipment
Certification.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this section, the Secretary, in consultation
with the Secretary of Energy, shall establish a program to
consider and award certifications for property eligible for
credits under this section as part of either a qualifying
nuclear power manufacturing project or as qualifying nuclear
power manufacturing equipment. The total amounts of credit
that may be allocated under the program shall not exceed
$100,000,000.
``(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) Qualifying nuclear power manufacturing project.--The
term `qualifying nuclear power manufacturing project' means
any project which is designed primarily to enable the
taxpayer to produce or test equipment necessary for the
construction or operation of a nuclear power plant.
``(2) Qualifying nuclear power manufacturing equipment.--
The term `qualifying nuclear power manufacturing equipment'
means machine tools and other similar equipment, including
computers and other peripheral equipment, acquired or
constructed primarily to enable the taxpayer to produce or
test equipment necessary for the construction or operation of
a nuclear power plant.
``(3) Project.--The term `project' includes any building
constructed to house qualifying nuclear power manufacturing
equipment.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Additional investment credit.--Section 46 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by this Act, is
amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (4);
(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (5) and
inserting ``, and''; and
(C) by inserting after paragraph (5) the following new
paragraph:
``(6) the qualifying nuclear power manufacturing credit.''.
(2) Application of section 49.--Subparagraph (C) of section
49(a)(1) of such Code, as amended by this Act, is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (iv);
(B) by striking the period at the end of clause (v) and
inserting ``, and''; and
(C) by inserting after clause (v) the following new clause:
``(vi) the basis of any property which is part of a
qualifying nuclear power manufacturing project or qualifying
nuclear power manufacturing equipment under section 48C.''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart
E of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code, as
amended by this Act, is amended by inserting after the item
relating to section 48B the following new item:

``Sec. 48C. Qualifying nuclear power manufacturing credit.''.

(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property--
(1) the construction, reconstruction, or erection of which
begins after the date of enactment of this Act; or
(2) which is acquired by the taxpayer on or after such date
and not pursuant to a binding contract which was in effect on
the day prior to such date.

Subtitle B--Accelerated Depreciation

SEC. _11. 5-YEAR ACCELERATED DEPRECIATION PERIOD FOR NEW
NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS.

Subtitle C--Next Generation Nuclear Plant Project Modifications

SEC. _21. NEXT GENERATION NUCLEAR PLANT PROJECT
MODIFICATIONS.

``(I) petroleum refining;
``(II) petrochemical processes;
``(III) converting coal to synfuels and other hydrocarbon
feedstocks; and
``(IV) desalination.

``SEC. 642. PROJECT MANAGEMENT.

``(a) Departmental Management.--
``(1) In general.--The Project shall be managed in the
Department by the Office of Nuclear Energy.
``(2) Generation iv nuclear energy systems initiative.--

[[Page 16330]]

``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the Project
may be carried out in coordination with the Generation IV
Nuclear Energy Systems Initiative.
``(B) Requirement.--Regardless of whether the Project is
carried out in coordination with the Generation IV Nuclear
Energy Systems Initiative under subparagraph (A), the
Secretary shall establish a separate budget line-item for the
Project.
``(3) Interaction with industry.--Any activity to support
the Project by an individual or entity in the private
industry shall be carried out pursuant to a competitive
cooperative agreement or other assistance agreement (such as
a technology investment agreement) between the Department and
the industry group established under subsection (c).
``(b) Laboratory Management.--
``(1) In general.--The Idaho National Laboratory shall be
the lead National Laboratory for the Project.
``(2) Collaboration.--The Idaho National Laboratory shall
collaborate regarding research and development activities
with other National Laboratories, institutions of higher
education, research institutes, representatives of industry,
international organizations, and Federal agencies to support
the Project.
``(c) Industry Group.--
``(1) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a group
of appropriate industrial partners in the private sector to
carry out cost-shared activities with the Department to
support the Project.
``(2) Cooperative agreement.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall offer to enter into
a cooperative agreement or other assistance agreement with
the industry group established under paragraph (1) to manage
and support the development, licensing, construction, and
initial operation of the Project.
``(B) Requirement.--The agreement under subparagraph (A)
shall contain a provision under which the industry group may
enter into contracts with entities in the public sector for
the provision of services and products to that sector that
reflect typical commercial practices, including (without
limitation) the conditions applicable to sales under section
2563 of title 10, United States Code.
``(C) Project management.--
``(i) In general.--The industry group shall use commercial
practices and project management processes and tools in
carrying out activities to support the Project.
``(ii) Interface requirements.--The requirements for
interface between the project management requirements of the
Department (including the requirements contained in the
document of the Department numbered DOE O 413.3A and entitled
`Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of
Capital Assets') and the commercial practices and project
management processes and tools described in clause (i) shall
be defined in the agreement under subparagraph (A).
``(3) Cost sharing.--Activities of industrial partners
funded by the Project shall be cost-shared in accordance with
section 988.
``(4) Preference.--Preference in determining the final
structure of industrial partnerships under this part shall be
given to a structure (including designating as a lead
industrial partner an entity incorporated in the United
States) that retains United States technological leadership
in the Project while maximizing cost sharing opportunities
and minimizing Federal funding responsibilities.
``(d) Reactor Test Capabilities.--The Project shall use, if
appropriate, reactor test capabilities at the Idaho National
Laboratory.
``(e) Other Laboratory Capabilities.--The Project may use,
if appropriate, facilities at other National Laboratories.''.
(c) Project Organization.--Section 643 of the Energy Policy
Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16023) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(2), by inserting ``transport and''
before ``conversion'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by striking subparagraph (C); and
(ii) by redesignating subparagraphs (A), (B), and (D) as
clauses (i), (ii), and (iii), respectively, and indenting the
clauses appropriately;
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``, through a
competitive process,'';
(ii) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``reactor'' and
inserting ``energy system'';
(iii) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``hydrogen or
electricity'' and inserting ``energy transportation,
conversion, and''; and
(iv) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) through (D) as
clauses (i) through (iv), respectively, and indenting the
clauses appropriately;
(C) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as
subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively, and indenting the
subparagraphs appropriately;
(D) by striking ``The Project shall be'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--The Project shall be''; and
(E) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Overlapping phases.--The phases described in
paragraph (1) may overlap for the Project or any portion of
the Project, as necessary.''; and
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``powerplant'' and
inserting ``power plant'';
(B) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the following:
``(E) Industry group.--The industry group established under
section 642(c) may enter into any necessary contracts for
services, support, or equipment in carrying out an agreement
with the Department.''; and
(C) in paragraph (3)--
(i) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``research'';
(ii) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking
``Research'';
(iii) by striking ``NERAC'' each place it appears and
inserting ``NEAC'';
(iv) in subparagraph (A)--

(I) by striking clause (i) and inserting the following:

``(i) review program plans for the Project prepared by the
Office of Nuclear Energy and all progress under the Project
on an ongoing basis;'';

(II) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(III) by adding at the end the following:

(I) by striking ``On a determination'' and inserting the
following:

``(i) In general.--On a determination'';

(II) in clause (i) (as designated by subclause (I))--

(aa) by striking ``subsection (b)(1)'' and inserting
``subsection (b)(1)(A)''; and
(bb) by striking ``subsection (b)(2)'' and inserting
``subsection (b)(1)(B)''; and

(III) by adding at the end the following:

[[Page 16331]]

``(2) Inclusions.--The plan under paragraph (1) shall
include--
``(A) a summary of the schedule for the design, licensing,
construction, and initial operation and demonstration period
for the nuclear energy system prototype facility and hydrogen
production prototype facility of the Project;
``(B) the process by which a specific design for the
prototype nuclear energy system facility and hydrogen
production facility will be selected;
``(C) the specific licensing strategy for the Project,
including--
``(i) resource requirements of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission; and
``(ii) the schedule for the submission of a preapplication,
the submission of an application, and application review for
the prototype nuclear energy system facility of the Project;
``(D) a summary of the schedule for each major event
relating to the Project; and
``(E) a time-based cost and cost-sharing profile to support
planning for appropriations.''; and
(2) in subsection (d), in the matter preceding paragraph
(1), by striking ``research and construction activities'' and
inserting ``research and development, design, licensing,
construction, and initial operation and demonstration
activities''.
______

SA 5180. Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself and Ms. Collins) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend
the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

In section 4a(h)(4)(C)(i) of the Commodity Exchange Act (as
added by section 6), strike subclause (II) and insert the
following:

``(II) Application.--The Commission shall apply the limits
imposed under subclause (I) to--

``(aa) any person who executes accounts, agreements, or
transactions involving an energy commodity for the own
account of the person and to any person for whom an agent in
fact or substance executes accounts, agreements, or
transactions involving an energy commodity, on a registered
entity or in covered over-the-counter trading; and
``(bb) any citizen of the United States who executes
accounts, agreements, or transactions involving an energy
commodity for the own account of the citizen and to any
citizen of the United States for whom an agent in fact or
substance executes accounts, agreements, or transactions
involving an energy commodity, on a foreign board of trade or
trading facility based in a country other than the United
States.
______

SA 5181. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end, add the following:

SEC. 16. PUBLICATION OF PROJECTED STATE LINES ON OUTER
CONTINENTAL SHELF.

Section 4(a)(2)(A) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
(43 U.S.C. 1333(a)(2)(A)) is amended--
(1) by designating the first, second, and third sentences
as clause (i), (iii), and (iv), respectively;
(2) in clause (i) (as so designated), by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of the Stop Excessive Energy
Speculation Act of 2008''; and
(3) by inserting after clause (i) (as so designated) the
following:
``(ii)(I) The projected lines shall also be used for the
purpose of preleasing and leasing activities conducted in new
producing areas under section 32.
``(II) This clause shall not affect any property right or
title to Federal submerged land on the outer Continental
Shelf.
``(III) In carrying out this clause, the President shall
consider the offshore administrative boundaries beyond State
submerged lands for planning, coordination, and
administrative purposes of the Department of the Interior,
but may establish different boundaries.''.

SEC. 17. PRODUCTION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS IN NEW PRODUCING
AREAS AND FEDERAL PRODUCTION AREAS.

(a) In General.--The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1331 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following:

``SEC. 32. PRODUCTION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS IN NEW PRODUCING
AREAS.

``(I) 75 percent to new producing States in accordance with
subparagraph (B); and
``(II) 25 percent to provide financial assistance to States
in accordance with section 6 of the Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l -8), which
shall be considered income to the Land and Water Conservation
Fund for purposes of section 2 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 460l-
5).

``(B) Allocation to new producing states and coastal
political subdivisions.--
``(i) Allocation to new producing states.--Effective for
fiscal year 2008 and each fiscal year thereafter, the amount
made available under subparagraph (A)(ii)(I) shall be
allocated to each new producing State in amounts (based on a
formula established by

[[Page 16332]]

the Secretary by regulation) proportional to the amount of
qualified new producing area revenues generated in the new
producing area offshore each State.
``(ii) Payments to coastal political subdivisions.--

``(I) In general.--The Secretary shall pay 20 percent of
the allocable share of each new producing State, as
determined under clause (i), to the coastal political
subdivisions of the new producing State.
``(II) Allocation.--The amount paid by the Secretary to
coastal political subdivisions shall be allocated to each
coastal political subdivision in accordance with
subparagraphs (B) and (C) of section 31(b)(4).

``(C) Minimum allocation.--The amount allocated to a new
producing State for each fiscal year under subparagraph (B)
shall be at least 5 percent of the amounts available under
for the fiscal year under subparagraph (A)(ii)(I).
``(D) Timing.--The amounts required to be deposited under
clause (ii) of subparagraph (B) for the applicable fiscal
year shall be made available in accordance with that clause
during the fiscal year immediately following the applicable
fiscal year.
``(E) Authorized uses.--
``(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), each new
producing State and coastal political subdivision shall use
all amounts received under subparagraph (B) in accordance
with all applicable Federal and State laws, only for 1 or
more of the following purposes:

``(I) Projects and activities for the purposes of coastal
protection, including conservation, coastal restoration,
hurricane protection, and infrastructure directly affected by
coastal wetland losses.
``(II) Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, or natural
resources.
``(III) Implementation of a federally approved marine,
coastal, or comprehensive conservation management plan.
``(IV) Mitigation of the impact of outer Continental Shelf
activities through the funding of onshore infrastructure
projects.
``(V) Planning assistance and the administrative costs of
complying with this section.

``(ii) Limitation.--Not more than 3 percent of amounts
received by a new producing State or coastal political
subdivision under subparagraph (B) may be used for the
purposes described in clause (i)(V).
``(F) Administration.--Amounts made available under
subparagraph (A)(ii) shall--
``(i) be made available, without further appropriation, in
accordance with this paragraph;
``(ii) remain available until expended; and
``(iii) be in addition to any amounts appropriated under--

``(I) other provisions of this Act;
``(II) the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16
U.S.C. 460l-4 et seq.); or
``(III) any other provision of law.

``(4) Disposition of qualified outer continental shelf
revenues from other areas.--Notwithstanding section 9, for
each applicable fiscal year, the terms and conditions of
paragraph (3) shall apply to the disposition of qualified
outer Continental Shelf revenues that--
``(A) are derived from oil or gas leasing in an area that
is not included in the current 5-year plan of the Secretary
for oil or gas leasing; and
``(B) are not assumed in the budget of the United States
Government submitted by the President under section 1105 of
title 31, United States Code.
``(c) Leasing in Federal Production Areas.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall make the Federal
production areas available for oil and gas leasing.
``(2) Priority.--The Secretary may prioritize the lease
sales under paragraph (1) based on available data of oil and
gas reserves in the Federal production areas.
``(3) Disposition of qualified federal producing area
revenues.--For each applicable fiscal year, the Secretary of
the Treasury shall deposit--
``(A) 85 percent of qualified Federal producing area
revenues in the Energy Independence Fund established by
section 19; and
``(B) 15 percent of qualified Federal producing area
revenues in a special account in the Treasury from which the
Secretary shall disburse to provide financial assistance to
States in accordance with section 6 of the Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l-8), which shall
be considered income to the Land and Water Conservation Fund
for purposes of section 2 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 460l-5)''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Sections 104 through 105 of the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2118)
are repealed.

SEC. 18. OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF INVENTORY.

(a) In General .--Not later than 3 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Director of the Minerals
Management Service shall conduct a comprehensive inventory of
oil and gas reserves of the outer Continental Shelf.
(b) Annual Report.--Beginning on the date that is 1 year
after the date of enactment of this Act and annually
thereafter until the inventory required under subsection (a)
is completed, the Director of the Minerals Management Service
shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a
report describing the progress of the inventory.

SEC. 19. ENERGY INDEPENDENCE TRUST FUND.

(a) Establishment.--There is established in the Treasury of
the United States a fund, to be known as the ``Energy
Independence Trust Fund'' (referred to in this section as the
``Fund''), consisting of--
(1) such amounts as are deposited in the Fund under
subsections (b)(3)(A)(i) and (c)(3)(A) of the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act (as added by section 17(a)); and
(2) any interest earned from investment of amounts in the
Fund.
(b) Authorized Uses.--Subject to appropriations, the
amounts in the Fund shall be available to offset the cost of
alternative fuel and conservation programs carried out by the
Department of Agriculture, Department of Energy, and
Department of Transportation that--
(1) enhance and accelerate the use of domestic renewable
energy resources and alternative fuels, with an emphasis on
cellulosic ethanol;
(2) increase the development and deployment of biofuels
infrastructure, including--
(A) alternative fuel refueling pumps, which are capable of
dispensing blends of gasoline from 10 percent ethanol to 85
percent ethanol; and
(B) a biofuel dedicated pipeline;
(3) promote the utilization of energy-efficient products
and practices and encourage and reward sound energy
conservation practices;
(4) expand research, development, and deployment of
renewable energy and efficiency technologies;
(5) expand research development, and deployment of hydrogen
fuel cell technology; or
(6) expand research, development, and deployment of
electric plug-in vehicle and advanced battery technology.
______

SA 5182. Mr. BURR submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

In section 1(a) of the Commodity Exchange Act (as amended
by section 2(a)), strike paragraph (13) and insert the
following:
``(13) Energy commodity.--
``(A) In general.--The term `energy commodity' means each
energy commodity traded on--
``(i) the Chicago Mercantile Exchange;
``(ii) the Chicago Board of Trade;
``(iii) the New York Mercantile Exchange; and
``(iv) any other United States Exchange.
``(B) Inclusions.--The term `energy commodity' includes--
``(i) a petroleum product, including--

``(I) light sweet crude oil;
``(II) heating oil; and
``(III) Reformulated Blendstock for Oxygenate Blending
(RBOB) gasoline;

``(ii) natural gas;
``(iii) ethanol;
``(iv) electricity;
``(v) uranium;
``(vi) coal; and
``(vii) carbon.''.
______

SA 5183. Mr. SMITH submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

On page 43, after line 17, add the following:

SEC. 17. EMERGENCY TRANSFER FROM AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST
FUND.

(a) In General.--The Department of Transportation
Appropriations Act, 2008 (title I of division K of Public Law
110-161) is amended, under the heading ``payments to air
carriers'', by striking ``$60,000,000'' and inserting
``$120,000,000''.
(b) Emergency Requirement.--The additional amount made
available by the amendment under subsection (a) is designated
as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 204 of S.
Con. Res. 21 (110th Congress).
______

SA 5184. Mr. REED (for himself and Ms. Snowe) submitted an amendment
intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the
Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end, add the following:

TITLE _--NATIONAL OILHEAT RESEARCH ALLIANCE

SEC. _01. NATIONAL OILHEAT RESEARCH ALLIANCE ACT OF 2000.

(a) Findings.--Section 702 of the National Oilheat Research
Alliance Act of 2000 (42

[[Page 16333]]

U.S.C. 6201 note; Public Law 106-469) is amended by striking
``oilheat'' each place it appears and inserting ``oilheat
fuel''.
(b) Definitions.--Section 703 of the National Oilheat
Research Alliance Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 6201 note; Public
Law 106-469) is amended--
(1) by striking ``oilheat'' each place it appears (other
than paragraph (10)) and inserting ``oilheat fuel'';
(2) by striking paragraph (7) and inserting the following:
``(7) Oilheat fuel.--The term `oilheat fuel' means
distillate liquid that is used as a fuel for nonindustrial
commercial or residential space or hot water heating.'';
(3) in paragraph (8), by striking ``Oilheat'' and inserting
``Oilheat fuel'';
(4) in paragraph (14)--
(A) by striking ``No. 1 distillate or No. 2 dyed
distillate'' each place it appears and inserting ``distillate
liquid''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``sells the
distillate'' and inserting ``sells the distillate liquid'';
(5) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (13) and (14)
as paragraphs (4) through (14) and (16), respectively, and
moving paragraph (16) (as so redesignated) to appear after
paragraph (15); and
(6) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) Distillate liquid.--The term `distillate liquid'
means--
``(A) No. 1 distillate;
``(B) No. 2 dyed distillate; or
``(C) a liquid blended with No. 1 distillate or No. 2 dyed
distillate.''.
(c) Referenda.--Section 704 of the National Oilheat
Research Alliance Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 6201 note; Public
Law 106-469) is amended--
(1) by striking ``oilheat'' each place it appears and
inserting ``oilheat fuel'';
(2) by striking ``No. 1 distillate and No. 2 dyed
distillate'' each place it appears in subsections (a) and (c)
and inserting ``distillate liquid'';
(3) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (5)(B), by striking ``Except as provided
in subsection (b), the'' and inserting ``The''; and
(B) in paragraph (6), by striking ``, No. 1 distillate, or
No. 2 dyed distillate'' and inserting ``or distillate
liquid''; and
(4) in subsection (b), by striking ``under'' and inserting
``consistent with''.
(d) Membership.--Section 705 of the National Oilheat
Research Alliance Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 6201 note; Public
Law 106-469) is amended--
(1) by striking ``oilheat'' each place it appears and
inserting ``oilheat fuel'';
(2) in subsection (b)(2), by striking ``No. 1 distillate
and No. 2 dyed distillate'' and inserting ``distillate
liquid''; and
(3) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
``(c) Number of Members.--
``(1) In general.--The membership of the Alliance shall be
as follows:
``(A) 1 member representing each State participating in the
Alliance.
``(B) 5 representatives of retail marketers, of whom 1
shall be selected by each of the qualified State associations
of the 5 States with the highest volume of annual oilheat
fuel sales.
``(C) 5 additional representatives of retail marketers.
``(D) 21 representatives of wholesale distributors.
``(E) 6 public members, who shall be representatives of
significant users of oilheat fuel, the oilheat fuel research
community, State energy officials, or other groups with
expertise in oilheat fuel.
``(2) Full-time owners or employees.--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
other than the public members of the Alliance, Alliance
members shall be full-time managerial owners or employees of
members of the oilheat fuel industry.
``(B) Employees.--Members described in subparagraphs (B),
(C), and (D) of paragraph (1) may be employees of the
qualified industry organization or an industry trade
association.''.
(e) Functions.--Section 706 of the National Oilheat
Research Alliance Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 6201 note; Public
Law 106-469) is amended by striking ``oilheat'' each place it
appears and inserting ``oilheat fuel''.
(f) Assessments.--Section 707 of the National Oilheat
Research Alliance Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 6201 note; Public
Law 106-469) is amended--
(1) by striking ``oilheat'' each place it appears and
inserting ``oilheat fuel'';
(2) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following:
``(a) Rate.--
``(1) In general.--The assessment rate for calendar years
2008 and 2009 shall be equal to \2/10\ of 1 cent per gallon
of distillate liquid.
``(2) Subsequent assessments.--Subject to paragraphs (3)
and (4), beginning with calendar year 2010, the annual
assessment rate shall be sufficient to cover the costs of the
plans and programs developed by the Alliance.
``(3) Maximum rate.--The annual assessment rate shall not
exceed \1/2\ of 1 cent per gallon of distillate liquid.
``(4) Limitations on increase.--
``(A) In general.--The annual assessment shall not be
increased by more than \1/2\ of 1 cent per gallon in any 1
year.
``(B) Approval.--No increase in the assessment may occur
unless the increase is approved by \2/3\ of the members
voting at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Alliance.
``(C) Notice.--The Alliance shall provide notice of a
change in assessment at least 90 days before the date on
which the change is to take effect.'';
(3) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``No. 1 distillate or No. 2 dyed
distillate'' each place it appears and inserting ``distillate
liquid''; and
(B) in paragraphs (2)(B) and (5)(B), by striking ``fuel''
each place it appears and inserting ``distillate liquid'';
and
(4) in subsection (c), by striking ``No. 1 distillate and
No. 2 dyed distillate'' and inserting ``Distillate liquid''.
(g) Market Survey and Consumer Protection.--Section 708 of
the National Oilheat Research Alliance Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C.
6201 note; Public Law 106-469) is amended by striking
``oilheat'' each place it appears and inserting ``oilheat
fuel''.
(h) Violations.--Section 712(a) of the National Oilheat
Research Alliance Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 6201 note; Public
Law 106-469) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``oilheat'' and inserting
``oilheat fuel''; and
(2) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(3) a direct reference to a competing product.''.
(i) Repeal of Sunset.--Section 713 of the National Oilheat
Research Alliance Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 6201 note; Public
Law 106-469) is repealed.
______

SA 5185. Mr. CARDIN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end, add the following:

TITLE __--ENERGY SECURITY

SEC. _01. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Energy Security Act of
2008''.

SEC. _02. PURPOSE AND GOALS.

The purpose of this title is to provide support for
projects and activities to facilitate the energy security of
the United States so as to ensure that all but 10 percent of
the energy needs of the United States are supplied by
domestic energy sources by calendar year 2017.

SEC. _03. NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ENERGY SECURITY.

(a) Establishment.--
(1) In general.--There is established a commission, to be
known as the ``National Commission on Energy Security''
(referred to in this section as the ``Commission'').
(2) Membership.--The Commission shall be composed of 15
members, of whom--
(A) 3 shall be appointed by the President;
(B) 3 shall be appointed by the majority leader of the
Senate;
(C) 3 shall be appointed by the minority leader of the
Senate;
(D) 3 shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of
Representatives; and
(E) 3 shall be appointed by the minority leader of the
House of Representatives.
(3) Co-chairpersons.--
(A) In general.--The President shall designate 2 co-
chairpersons from among the members of the Commission
appointed.
(B) Political affiliation.--The co-chairpersons designated
under subparagraph (A) shall not both be affiliated with the
same political party.
(4) Deadline for appointment.--Members of the Commission
shall be appointed not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act.
(5) Term; vacancies.--
(A) Term.--A member of the Commission shall be appointed
for the life of the Commission.
(B) Vacancies.--Any vacancy in the Commission--
(i) shall not affect the powers of the Commission; and
(ii) shall be filled in the same manner as the original
appointment.
(b) Purpose.--The Commission shall conduct a comprehensive
review of the energy policy of the United States by--
(1) reviewing relevant analyses of the current and long-
term energy policy of, and conditions in, the United States;
(2) identifying problems that may threaten the achievement
by the United States of long-term energy policy goals,
including energy security;
(3) analyzing potential solutions to problems that threaten
the long-term ability of the United States to achieve those
energy policy goals; and
(4) providing recommendations that will ensure, to the
maximum extent practicable, that the energy policy goals of
the United States are achieved.
(c) Report and Recommendations.--
(1) In general.--Not later than June 30 of each of calendar
years 2009, 2011, 2013, and

[[Page 16334]]

2015, the Commission shall submit to Congress and the
President a report on the progress of United States in
meeting the long-term energy policy goal of energy security,
including a detailed statement of the findings, conclusions,
and recommendations of the Commission.
(2) Legislative language.--If a recommendation submitted
under paragraph (1) involves legislative action, the report
shall include proposed legislative language to carry out the
action.
(d) Commission Personnel Matters.--
(1) Staff and director.--The Commission shall have a staff
headed by an Executive Director.
(2) Staff appointment.--The Executive Director may appoint
such personnel as the Executive Director and the Commission
determine to be appropriate.
(3) Experts and consultants.--With the approval of the
Commission, the Executive Director may procure temporary and
intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5,
United States Code.
(4) Federal agencies.--
(A) Detail of government employees.--
(i) In general.--Upon the request of the Commission, the
head of any Federal agency may detail, without reimbursement,
any of the personnel of the Federal agency to the Commission
to assist in carrying out the duties of the Commission.
(ii) Nature of detail.--Any detail of a Federal employee
under clause (i) shall not interrupt or otherwise affect the
civil service status or privileges of the Federal employee.
(B) Technical assistance.--Upon the request of the
Commission, the head of a Federal agency shall provide such
technical assistance to the Commission as the Commission
determines to be necessary to carry out the duties of the
Commission.
(e) Resources.--
(1) In general.--The Commission shall have reasonable
access to materials, resources, statistical data, and such
other information from Executive agencies as the Commission
determines to be necessary to carry out the duties of the
Commission.
(2) Form of requests.--The co-chairpersons of the
Commission shall make requests for access described in
paragraph (1) in writing, as necessary.
______

SA 5186. Ms. CANTWELL (for herself, Mr. Lieberman, and Mr. Nelson of
Florida) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the
bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive
price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other
purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

In section 6, at page 10 line 8, strike all through page 20
line 6 and insert the following:
Section 4a of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 6a) (as
amended by section 5) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(h) Elimination of Excessive Speculation as a Cause of
High Oil, Gas, and Energy Prices.--
``(1) ``(1).--Definition of bona-fide hedge trading.--
(A) In general.--The term `Bona-Fide Hedge Trading' means a
transaction that--
(aa) represents a substitute for a transaction to be made
or a position to be taken at a later time in a physical
marketing channel;
(bb) is economically appropriate for the reduction of risks
in the conduct and management of a commercial enterprise that
uses the underlying commodity in the production or operation
of its business; and
(cc) arises from the potential change in the value of--
(AA) assets that a person owns, produces, manufactures,
possesses, or merchandises (or anticipates owning, producing,
manufacturing, possessing, or merchandising);
(BB) liabilities that a person incurs or anticipates
incurring; or
(CC) services that a person provides or purchases (or
anticipates providing or purchasing).
(B) Exclusion.--The term `Bona-fide Hedge Trading' does not
include a transaction entered into on a designated contract
market for the purpose of offsetting a financial risk arising
from an over-the-counter commodity derivative.''
``(2) Identification of bona-fide hedge trading.--In
carrying out this Act, the Commission shall distinguish
between--
``(A) bona-fide hedge trading; and
``(B) all other trading in energy commodities.
(3) Definition of covered over-the-counter commodity
derivative.--The term `over-the-counter commodity derivative'
means any agreement, contract, or transaction that--
(A) (aa) traded or executed in the United States;
(bb) is held by a person located in the United States; or
(B) is not traded on a designated contract market or
derivatives transaction execution facility; and
(C) (aa) is a put, call, cap, floor, collar, or similar
option of any kind for the purchase or sale of, or
substantially based on the value of, or more qualifying
commodities or an economic or financial index or measure of
economic or financial risk primarily associated with 1 or
more qualifying commodities;
(bb) provides on an executory basis for the applicable
transaction, on a fixed or contingent basis, of 1 or more
payments substantially based on the value of 1 or more
qualifying commodities or an economic or financial index or
measure of economic or financial risk primarily associated
with 1 or more qualifying commodities, and that transfers
between the parties to the transaction, in whole or in part,
the economic or financial risk associated with a future
change in any such value without also conveying a current or
future direct or indirect ownership interest in an asset or
liability that incorporates the financial risk that is
transferred; or
(cc) is any combination or permutation of, or option on,
any agreement, contract, or transaction described in item
(aa) or (bb).
``(4) ``Control entity.--For purposes of this Act, a
control entity shall mean a person or entity that holds or
controls a position in proportion to the person or entity's
direct or indirect ownership or equity interest in the
position.
(5) In section 4a(h)(4)(C)(i) of the Commodity Exchange Act
(as added by section 6), strike subclause (II) and insert the
following:
``(II) Application.--The Commission shall apply the limits
imposed under subclause (I) to--
``(aa) any person who executes accounts, agreements, or
transactions involving an energy commodity for the own
account of the person and to any person for whom an agent in
fact or substance executes accounts, agreements, or
transactions involving an energy commodity, on a registered
entity or in covered over-the-counter trading; and
``(bb) any citizen of the United States who executes
accounts, agreements, or transactions involving an energy
commodity for the own account of the citizen and to any
citizen of the United States for whom an agent in fact or
substance executes accounts, agreements, or transactions
involving an energy commodity, on a foreign board of trade or
trading facility based in a country other than the United
States.
``(4) Elimination of excessive speculation.--
``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this Act, the Commission shall review all regulations, rules,
exemptions, exclusions, guidance, no action letters, orders,
and other actions taken by or on behalf of the Commission
(including any action or inaction taken pursuant to delegated
authority by an exchange, self-regulatory organization, or
any other entity) regarding all energy futures market
participants or market activity (referred to in this
subsection individually as a `prior action') to ensure that--
``(i) bona fide hedge trading is protected and promoted;
and
``(ii) excessive speculation is eliminated.
``(B) Prior action.--
``(i) In general.--The Commission shall modify or revoke
the application after the date of enactment of this
subsection of any prior action taken by the Commission
(including any prior action taken pursuant to delegated
authority by any other entity) with respect to any trade on
any market, exchange, foreign board of trade, swap or swap
transaction, index or index market participant or trade,
hedge fund, pension fund, and any other transaction, trade,
trader, or petroleum or energy futures market activity unless
the Commission affirmatively determines that such prior
action will protect and promote bona fide hedge trading and
does not permit or encourage excessive speculation.
``(ii) Revocation.--In carrying out this subparagraph, the
Commission shall modify or revoke the results of each prior
action that, in whole or in part, has the direct or indirect
affect of limiting, reducing, or eliminating the filing of
any report or data regarding any direct or indirect trade or
trader, including the filing of large trader reports.
``(C) Aggregate speculative position limits applicable to
trading in energy commodities and derivatives that is not
bonafide hedge trading.--
``(i) Aggregate speculative position limits.--
``(I) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall impose, by
rule, regulation, or order, aggregate speculative position
limits on trading that is not bona fide hedge trading at the
control entity level,
``(a) on designated contract markets;
``(b) on derivatives transaction execution facilities; and
``(c) in covered over-the-counter commodity derivatives.
``(II) In establishing aggregate speculative position
limits, the Commission shall set the limits at the minimum
level practicable--
(a) to ensure sufficient market liquidity for the conduct
of bonafide hedging activities;
(b) to ensure that price discovery is not disrupted;
(c) to protect and promote bonafide hedge trading;
(d) to minimize non-bonafide hedge trading; and (e) to
eliminate excess speculation.''
``(II) The aggregate speculative position limits shall
apply to positions held that expire during--

[[Page 16335]]

(a) the spot month;
(b) each separate futures trading month (other than the
spot month); or
(c) the sum of each trading month (including the spot
month).''
``(ii) Advisory group.--Physical Hedgers Energy Advisory
Committee
(a) Advisory committee.--Not later than 30 days after
enactment, the CFTC shall establish a ``physical hedgers
energy advisory committee'' for users of futures and swaps
transactions for price discovery or hedging price risk of
physical energy commodities (hereinafter ``physical
hedgers''), which shall include:
(aa) commercial producers or sellers,
(bb) purchasers or users, or
(cc) middlemen involved with the purchase or sale of such
energy commodities
(b) Composition.--In making appointments, not fewer than
75% of the membership of this committee shall be composed of
participants (or their associations) for whom the
preponderance of their participation in futures or over the
counter markets is confined to hedging price risk for an
energy commodity in their capacity as a commercial producer,
seller, purchaser, user or middleman involved with such
commodities. Not fewer than two representatives shall be
appointed from each category:
(aa) Airlines
(bb) Trucking and Railroads
(cc) Petroleum Marketers and Heating Oil Distributors
(dd) Industrial Energy Consumers
(ee) Public and private gas and electric utilities
(ff) Oil and distillate refiners
(gg) Crude oil producers and shippers/terminal operators
(hh) Natural gas producers and pipeline operators
(ii) Other energy producers or sellers who use futures
markets
Up to 25% of such committee shall include consumer advocacy
organizations, futures exchanges and trading facilities,
state and local governments, financial services industry
participants.
(c) Meetings.--This committee shall meet not less than 4
times per year, but shall meet more often upon the call of
the Chair or by the request of the Commission.
(d) Purposes.--The Physical Hedgers Energy Advisory
Committee shall provide advice to the Commission on rules,
regulations and policies related to energy commodity markets,
recommend appropriate levels of liquidity necessary for price
discovery and physical hedging, review and make
recommendations on the size of speculative positions limits,
review and make recommendations on transactions that should
be deemed commercial or non-commercial, evaluate whether
additional policies are needed to prevent excessive
speculation, and recommend improvements to rules, regulations
and policies, and for other purposes.
(e) Chair and Tenure.--The Chair shall be selected by the
full Commission. Members shall serve for 3 year terms. The
Committee shall have not more than 24 members.
(f) FACA.--The Committee shall be subject to the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA).
(g) Interim Recommendations to CFTC.--Not later than 60
days after enactment, the ``physical hedgers energy advisory
committee'' shall submit to the CFTC interim recommendations
on the establishment of an appropriate level for aggregate
speculative position limits for each energy commodity. Such
recommendation shall be transmitted to Congress.
``(iii) Review of recommendations.--Not later than 270 days
after the date of enactment of this subsection, the
Commission shall--
``(I) analyze and review the recommendations submitted by
the advisory group under clause (ii)(II); and
``(II) submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a
report describing each recommendation (including each
modification to the statutory authority of the Commission
that the Commission determines to be necessary to effectuate
each recommendation).
``(iv) Rulemaking.--
``(I) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date
of enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall
promulgate a final rule that establishes speculative position
limits--
``(aa) for any person engaged in trading of an energy
commodity that is not bona-fide hedge trading; and
``(bb) that are consistent with this Act.
``(II) Effective date.--The final rule described in
subclause (I) shall take effect on the date that is 30 days
after the date on which the Commission promulgates the final
rule.
``(V) Development of methodology.--
``(I) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall propose
a methodology to determine and set aggregate speculative
position limits for each person engaging trading that is not
bona-fide hedge trading of energy commodities--
``(aa) on designated contract markets;
``(bb) on derivatives transaction execution facilities; and
``(cc) in covered over-the-counter commodity derivatives.
``(dd) The aggregate speculative position limits
established under this subsection shall apply to positions
held that expire during--
(AA) the spot month;
(BB) each separate futures trading month (other than the
spot month); or
(CC) the sum of each trading month (including the spot
month).''
``(II) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall submit to
the appropriate committees of Congress a report that
contains--
``(aa) any recommendations regarding any additional
statutory authority that the Commission determines to be
necessary for the imposition of the speculative position
limits described in subclause (I); and
``(bb) a description of the resources that the Commission
considers to be necessary to implement the speculative
position limits.
``(D) Maximum level of speculative position limits.--
``(i) In general. In establishing speculative position
limits under this section (including subparagraph (C)(iv)),
the Commission shall set the limits at the minimum level
practicable--
``(I) to ensure sufficient market liquidity for the conduct
of bona-fide hedging activities;
``(II) to ensure that price discovery is not disrupted;
``(III) to protect and promote bona-fide hedge trading;
``(IV) to minimize trading of an energy commodity that is
not bona-fide hedge trading; and
``(V) to eliminate excess speculation.
______

SA 5187. Mrs. DOLE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
her to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end add the following:

TITLE II--NEW CLEAN FUELS

SEC. 21. SHORT TITLE.

(a) Short Title.--This title may be cited as the ``New
Clean Energy Tax Extenders Act''.
(b) Reference.--Except as otherwise expressly provided,
whenever in this title an amendment or repeal is expressed in
terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other
provision, the reference shall be considered to be made to a
section or other provision of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986.
(c) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this
title is as follows:

TITLE II--NEW CLEAN FUELS

Sec. 21. Short title.

Subtitle A--Extension of Clean Energy Production Incentives

Sec. 22. Extension and modification of renewable energy production tax
credit.
Sec. 23. Extension and modification of solar energy and fuel cell
investment tax credit.
Sec. 24. Extension and modification of residential energy efficient
property credit.
Sec. 25. Extension and modification of credit for clean renewable
energy bonds.
Sec. 26. Extension of special rule to implement FERC restructuring
policy.

Subtitle B--Extension of Incentives to Improve Energy Efficiency

Sec. 27. Extension and modification of credit for energy efficiency
improvements to existing homes.
Sec. 28. Extension and modification of tax credit for energy efficient
new homes.
Sec. 29. Extension and modification of energy efficient commercial
buildings deduction.
Sec. 30. Modification and extension of energy efficient appliance
credit for appliances produced after 2007.

Subtitle C--Revenue Provisions

Sec. 31. Denial of deduction for major integrated oil companies for
income attributable to domestic production of oil, gas,
or primary products thereof.
Sec. 32. Elimination of the different treatment of foreign oil and gas
extraction income and foreign oil related income for
purposes of the foreign tax credit.

Subtitle A--Extension of Clean Energy Production Incentives

SEC. 22. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY
PRODUCTION TAX CREDIT.

[[Page 16336]]

(4) Paragraph (4).
(5) Paragraph (5).
(6) Paragraph (6).
(7) Paragraph (7).
(8) Paragraph (8).
(9) Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (9).
(b) Production Credit for Electricity Produced From Marine
Renewables.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 45(c) (relating
to resources) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of
subparagraph (G), by striking the period at the end of
subparagraph (H) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at
the end the following new subparagraph:
``(I) marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy.''.
(2) Marine renewables.--Subsection (c) of section 45 is
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(10) Marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy.--
``(A) In general.--The term `marine and hydrokinetic
renewable energy' means energy derived from--
``(i) waves, tides, and currents in oceans, estuaries, and
tidal areas,
``(ii) free flowing water in rivers, lakes, and streams,
``(iii) free flowing water in an irrigation system, canal,
or other man-made channel, including projects that utilize
nonmechanical structures to accelerate the flow of water for
electric power production purposes, or
``(iv) differentials in ocean temperature (ocean thermal
energy conversion).
``(B) Exceptions.--Such term shall not include any energy
which is derived from any source which utilizes a dam,
diversionary structure (except as provided in subparagraph
(A)(iii)), or impoundment for electric power production
purposes.''.
(3) Definition of facility.--Subsection (d) of section 45
is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(11) Marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy
facilities.--In the case of a facility producing electricity
from marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy, the term
`qualified facility' means any facility owned by the
taxpayer--
``(A) which has a nameplate capacity rating of at least 150
kilowatts, and
``(B) which is originally placed in service on or after the
date of the enactment of this paragraph and before January 1,
2013.''.
(4) Credit rate.--Subparagraph (A) of section 45(b)(4) is
amended by striking ``or (9)'' and inserting ``(9), or
(11)''.
(5) Coordination with small irrigation power.--Paragraph
(5) of section 45(d), as amended by subsection (a), is
amended by striking ``January 1, 2010'' and inserting ``the
date of the enactment of paragraph (11)''.
(c) Sales of Electricity to Regulated Public Utilities
Treated as Sales to Unrelated Persons.--Section 45(e)(4)
(relating to related persons) is amended by adding at the end
the following new sentence: ``A taxpayer shall be treated as
selling electricity to an unrelated person if such
electricity is sold to a regulated public utility (as defined
in section 7701(a)(33).''.
(d) Trash Facility Clarification.--Paragraph (7) of section
45(d) is amended--
(1) by striking ``facility which burns'' and inserting
``facility (other than a facility described in paragraph (6))
which uses'', and
(2) by striking ``combustion''.
(e) Effective Dates.--
(1) Extension.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall
apply to property originally placed in service after December
31, 2008.
(2) Modifications.--The amendments made by subsections (b)
and (c) shall apply to electricity produced and sold after
the date of the enactment of this Act, in taxable years
ending after such date.
(3) Trash facility clarification.--The amendments made by
subsection (d) shall apply to electricity produced and sold
before, on, or after December 31, 2007.

SEC. 23. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF SOLAR ENERGY AND FUEL
CELL INVESTMENT TAX CREDIT.

(a) Extension of Credit.--
(1) Solar energy property.--Paragraphs (2)(A)(i)(II) and
(3)(A)(ii) of section 48(a) (relating to energy credit) are
each amended by striking ``January 1, 2009'' and inserting
``January 1, 2017''.
(2) Fuel cell property.--Subparagraph (E) of section
48(c)(1) (relating to qualified fuel cell property) is
amended by striking ``December 31, 2008'' and inserting
``January 1, 2017''.
(3) Qualified microturbine property.--Subparagraph (E) of
section 48(c)(2) (relating to qualified microturbine
property) is amended by striking ``December 31, 2008'' and
inserting ``January 1, 2017''.
(b) Allowance of Energy Credit Against Alternative Minimum
Tax.--Subparagraph (B) of section 38(c)(4) (relating to
specified credits) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end
of clause (iii), by striking the period at the end of clause
(iv) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the
following new clause:
``(v) the credit determined under section 46 to the extent
that such credit is attributable to the energy credit
determined under section 48.''.
(c) Repeal of Dollar Per Kilowatt Limitation for Fuel Cell
Property.--
(1) In general.--Section 48(c)(1) (relating to qualified
fuel cell), as amended by subsection (a)(2), is amended by
striking subparagraph (B) and by redesignating subparagraphs
(C), (D), and (E) as subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D),
respectively.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 48(a)(1) is amended by
striking ``paragraphs (1)(B) and (2)(B) of subsection (c)''
and inserting ``subsection (c)(2)(B)''.
(d) Public Electric Utility Property Taken Into Account.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (3) of section 48(a) is amended
by striking the second sentence thereof.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Paragraph (1) of section 48(c), as amended by this
section, is amended by striking subparagraph (C) and
redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (C).
(B) Paragraph (2) of section 48(c), as amended by
subsection (a)(3), is amended by striking subparagraph (D)
and redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (D).
(e) Effective Dates.--
(1) Extension.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall
take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) Allowance against alternative minimum tax.--The
amendments made by subsection (b) shall apply to credits
determined under section 46 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 in taxable years beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act and to carrybacks of such credits.
(3) Fuel cell property and public electric utility
property.--The amendments made by subsections (c) and (d)
shall apply to periods after the date of the enactment of
this Act, in taxable years ending after such date, under
rules similar to the rules of section 48(m) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (as in effect on the day before the date
of the enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990).

SEC. 24. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF RESIDENTIAL ENERGY
EFFICIENT PROPERTY CREDIT.

(a) Extension.--Section 25D(g) (relating to termination) is
amended by striking ``December 31, 2008'' and inserting
``December 31, 2012''.
(b) No Dollar Limitation for Credit for Solar Electric
Property.--
(1) In general.--Section 25D(b)(1) (relating to maximum
credit) is amended by striking subparagraph (A) and by
redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as subparagraphs (A)
and (B), respectively.
(2) Conforming amendments.--Section 25D(e)(4) is amended--
(A) by striking clause (i) in subparagraph (A),
(B) by redesignating clauses (ii) and (iii) in subparagraph
(A) as clauses (i) and (ii), respectively, and
(C) by striking ``, (2),'' in subparagraph (C).
(c) Credit Allowed Against Alternative Minimum Tax.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (c) of section 25D is amended
to read as follows:
``(c) Limitation Based on Amount of Tax; Carryforward of
Unused Credit.--
``(1) Limitation based on amount of tax.--In the case of a
taxable year to which section 26(a)(2) does not apply, the
credit allowed under subsection (a) for the taxable year
shall not exceed the excess of--
``(A) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in
section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
``(B) the sum of the credits allowable under this subpart
(other than this section) and section 27 for the taxable
year.
``(2) Carryforward of unused credit.--
``(A) Rule for years in which all personal credits allowed
against regular and alternative minimum tax.--In the case of
a taxable year to which section 26(a)(2) applies, if the
credit allowable under subsection (a) exceeds the limitation
imposed by section 26(a)(2) for such taxable year reduced by
the sum of the credits allowable under this subpart (other
than this section), such excess shall be carried to the
succeeding taxable year and added to the credit allowable
under subsection (a) for such succeeding taxable year.
``(B) Rule for other years.--In the case of a taxable year
to which section 26(a)(2) does not apply, if the credit
allowable under subsection (a) exceeds the limitation imposed
by paragraph (1) for such taxable year, such excess shall be
carried to the succeeding taxable year and added to the
credit allowable under subsection (a) for such succeeding
taxable year.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Section 23(b)(4)(B) is amended by inserting ``and
section 25D'' after ``this section''.
(B) Section 24(b)(3)(B) is amended by striking ``and 25B''
and inserting ``, 25B, and 25D''.
(C) Section 25B(g)(2) is amended by striking ``section 23''
and inserting ``sections 23 and 25D''.
(D) Section 26(a)(1) is amended by striking ``and 25B'' and
inserting ``25B, and 25D''.
(d) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2007.
(2) Application of egtrra sunset.--The amendments made by
subparagraphs (A) and

[[Page 16337]]

(B) of subsection (c)(2) shall be subject to title IX of the
Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 in
the same manner as the provisions of such Act to which such
amendments relate.

SEC. 25. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF CREDIT FOR CLEAN
RENEWABLE ENERGY BONDS.

(a) Extension.--Section 54(m) (relating to termination) is
amended by striking ``December 31, 2008'' and inserting
``December 31, 2012''.
(b) Increase in National Limitation.--Section 54(f)
(relating to limitation on amount of bonds designated) is
amended--
(1) by inserting ``, and for the period beginning after the
date of the enactment of the New Clean Energy Tax Extenders
Act and ending before January 1, 2013, $400,000,000'' after
``$1,200,000,000'' in paragraph (1),
(2) by striking ``$750,000,000 of the'' in paragraph (2)
and inserting ``$750,000,000 of the $1,200,000,000'', and
(3) by striking ``bodies'' in paragraph (2) and inserting
``bodies, and except that the Secretary may not allocate more
than \1/3\ of the $400,000,000 national clean renewable
energy bond limitation to finance qualified projects of
qualified borrowers which are public power providers nor more
than \1/3\ of such limitation to finance qualified projects
of qualified borrowers which are mutual or cooperative
electric companies described in section 501(c)(12) or section
1381(a)(2)(C)''.
(c) Public Power Providers Defined.--Section 54(j) is
amended--
(1) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(6) Public power provider.--The term `public power
provider' means a State utility with a service obligation, as
such terms are defined in section 217 of the Federal Power
Act (as in effect on the date of the enactment of this
paragraph).'', and
(2) by inserting ``; Public Power Provider'' before the
period at the end of the heading.
(d) Technical Amendment.--The third sentence of section
54(e)(2) is amended by striking ``subsection (l)(6)'' and
inserting ``subsection (l)(5)''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to bonds issued after the date of the enactment
of this Act.

SEC. 26. EXTENSION OF SPECIAL RULE TO IMPLEMENT FERC
RESTRUCTURING POLICY.

(a) Qualifying Electric Transmission Transaction.--
(1) In general.--Section 451(i)(3) (defining qualifying
electric transmission transaction) is amended by striking
``January 1, 2008'' and inserting ``January 1, 2013''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection
shall apply to transactions after December 31, 2007.
(b) Independent Transmission Company.--
(1) In general.--Section 451(i)(4)(B)(ii) (defining
independent transmission company) is amended by striking
``December 31, 2007'' and inserting ``the date which is 5
years after the date of such transaction''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection
shall take effect as if included in the amendments made by
section 909 of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004.

Subtitle B--Extension of Incentives to Improve Energy Efficiency

SEC. 27. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF CREDIT FOR ENERGY
EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING HOMES.

(a) Extension of Credit.--Section 25C(g) (relating to
termination) is amended by striking ``December 31, 2007'' and
inserting ``December 31, 2012''.
(b) Qualified Biomass Fuel Property.--
(1) In general.--Section 25C(d)(3) is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (D),
(B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (E)
and inserting ``, and'', and
(C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(F) a stove which uses the burning of biomass fuel to
heat a dwelling unit located in the United States and used as
a residence by the taxpayer, or to heat water for use in such
a dwelling unit, and which has a thermal efficiency rating of
at least 75 percent.''.
(2) Biomass fuel.--Section 25C(d) (relating to residential
energy property expenditures) is amended by adding at the end
the following new paragraph:
``(6) Biomass fuel.--The term `biomass fuel' means any
plant-derived fuel available on a renewable or recurring
basis, including agricultural crops and trees, wood and wood
waste and residues (including wood pellets), plants
(including aquatic plants), grasses, residues, and fibers.''.
(c) Modifications of Standards for Energy-Efficient
Building Property.--
(1) Electric heat pumps.--Subparagraph (B) of section
25C(d)(3) is amended to read as follows:
``(A) an electric heat pump which achieves the highest
efficiency tier established by the Consortium for Energy
Efficiency, as in effect on January 1, 2008.''.
(2) Central air conditioners.--Section 25C(d)(3)(D) is
amended by striking ``2006'' and inserting ``2008''.
(3) Water heaters.--Subparagraph (E) of section 25C(d) is
amended to read as follows:
``(E) a natural gas, propane, or oil water heater which has
either an energy factor of at least 0.80 or a thermal
efficiency of at least 90 percent.''.
(4) Oil furnaces and hot water boilers.--Paragraph (4) of
section 25C(d) is amended to read as follows:
``(4) Qualified natural gas, propane, and oil furnaces and
hot water boilers.--
``(A) Qualified natural gas furnace.--The term `qualified
natural gas furnace' means any natural gas furnace which
achieves an annual fuel utilization efficiency rate of not
less than 95.
``(B) Qualified natural gas hot water boiler.--The term
`qualified natural gas hot water boiler' means any natural
gas hot water boiler which achieves an annual fuel
utilization efficiency rate of not less than 90.
``(C) Qualified propane furnace.--The term `qualified
propane furnace' means any propane furnace which achieves an
annual fuel utilization efficiency rate of not less than 95.
``(D) Qualified propane hot water boiler.--The term
`qualified propane hot water boiler' means any propane hot
water boiler which achieves an annual fuel utilization
efficiency rate of not less than 90.
``(E) Qualified oil furnaces.--The term `qualified oil
furnace' means any oil furnace which achieves an annual fuel
utilization efficiency rate of not less than 90.
``(F) Qualified oil hot water boiler.--The term `qualified
oil hot water boiler' means any oil hot water boiler which
achieves an annual fuel utilization efficiency rate of not
less than 90.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made this section shall
apply to expenditures made after December 31, 2007.

SEC. 28. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF TAX CREDIT FOR ENERGY
EFFICIENT NEW HOMES.

(a) Extension of Credit.--Subsection (g) of section 45L
(relating to termination) is amended by striking ``December
31, 2008'' and inserting ``December 31, 2012''.
(b) Allowance for Contractor's Personal Residence.--
Subparagraph (B) of section 45L(a)(1) is amended to read as
follows:
``(B)(i) acquired by a person from such eligible contractor
and used by any person as a residence during the taxable
year, or
``(ii) used by such eligible contractor as a residence
during the taxable year.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to homes acquired after December 31, 2008.

SEC. 29. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF ENERGY EFFICIENT
COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS DEDUCTION.

(a) Extension.--Section 179D(h) (relating to termination)
is amended by striking ``December 31, 2008'' and inserting
``December 31, 2012''.
(b) Adjustment of Maximum Deduction Amount.--
(1) In general.--Subparagraph (A) of section 179D(b)(1)
(relating to maximum amount of deduction) is amended by
striking ``$1.80'' and inserting ``$2.25''.
(2) Partial allowance.--Paragraph (1) of section 179D(d) is
amended--
(A) by striking ``$.60'' and inserting ``$0.75'', and
(B) by striking ``$1.80'' and inserting ``$2.25''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after the date of
the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 30. MODIFICATION AND EXTENSION OF ENERGY EFFICIENT
APPLIANCE CREDIT FOR APPLIANCES PRODUCED AFTER
2007.

(a) In General.--Subsection (b) of section 45M (relating to
applicable amount) is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Applicable Amount.--For purposes of subsection (a)--
``(1) Dishwashers.--The applicable amount is--
``(A) $45 in the case of a dishwasher which is manufactured
in calendar year 2008 or 2009 and which uses no more than 324
kilowatt hours per year and 5.8 gallons per cycle, and
``(B) $75 in the case of a dishwasher which is manufactured
in calendar year 2008, 2009, or 2010 and which uses no more
than 307 kilowatt hours per year and 5.0 gallons per cycle
(5.5 gallons per cycle for dishwashers designed for greater
than 12 place settings).
``(2) Clothes washers.--The applicable amount is--
``(A) $75 in the case of a residential top-loading clothes
washer manufactured in calendar year 2008 which meets or
exceeds a 1.72 modified energy factor and does not exceed a
8.0 water consumption factor,
``(B) $125 in the case of a residential top-loading clothes
washer manufactured in calendar year 2008 or 2009 which meets
or exceeds a 1.8 modified energy factor and does not exceed a
7.5 water consumption factor,
``(C) $150 in the case of a residential or commercial
clothes washer manufactured in calendar year 2008, 2009, or
2010 which meets or exceeds 2.0 modified energy factor and
does not exceed a 6.0 water consumption factor, and
``(D) $250 in the case of a residential or commercial
clothes washer manufactured in calendar year 2008, 2009, or
2010 which meets or exceeds 2.2 modified energy factor and
does not exceed a 4.5 water consumption factor.

[[Page 16338]]

``(3) Refrigerators.--The applicable amount is--
``(A) $50 in the case of a refrigerator which is
manufactured in calendar year 2008, and consumes at least 20
percent but not more than 22.9 percent less kilowatt hours
per year than the 2001 energy conservation standards,
``(B) $75 in the case of a refrigerator which is
manufactured in calendar year 2008 or 2009, and consumes at
least 23 percent but no more than 24.9 percent less kilowatt
hours per year than the 2001 energy conservation standards,
``(C) $100 in the case of a refrigerator which is
manufactured in calendar year 2008, 2009, or 2010, and
consumes at least 25 percent but not more than 29.9 percent
less kilowatt hours per year than the 2001 energy
conservation standards, and
``(D) $200 in the case of a refrigerator manufactured in
calendar year 2008, 2009, or 2010 and which consumes at least
30 percent less energy than the 2001 energy conservation
standards.''.
(b) Eligible Production.--
(1) Similar treatment for all appliances.--Subsection (c)
of section 45M (relating to eligible production) is amended--
(A) by striking paragraph (2),
(B) by striking ``(1) In general'' and all that follows
through ``the eligible'' and inserting ``The eligible'', and
(C) by moving the text of such subsection in line with the
subsection heading and redesignating subparagraphs (A) and
(B) as paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively.
(2) Modification of base period.--Paragraph (2) of section
45M(c), as amended by paragraph (1) of this section, is
amended by striking ``3-calendar year'' and inserting ``2-
calendar year''.
(c) Types of Energy Efficient Appliances.--Subsection (d)
of section 45M (defining types of energy efficient
appliances) is amended to read as follows:
``(d) Types of Energy Efficient Appliance.--For purposes of
this section, the types of energy efficient appliances are--
``(1) dishwashers described in subsection (b)(1),
``(2) clothes washers described in subsection (b)(2), and
``(3) refrigerators described in subsection (b)(3).''.
(d) Aggregate Credit Amount Allowed.--
(1) Increase in limit.--Paragraph (1) of section 45M(e)
(relating to aggregate credit amount allowed) is amended to
read as follows:
``(1) Aggregate credit amount allowed.--The aggregate
amount of credit allowed under subsection (a) with respect to
a taxpayer for any taxable year shall not exceed $75,000,000
reduced by the amount of the credit allowed under subsection
(a) to the taxpayer (or any predecessor) for all prior
taxable years beginning after December 31, 2007.''.
(2) Exception for certain refrigerator and clothes
washers.--Paragraph (2) of section 45M(e) is amended to read
as follows:
``(2) Amount allowed for certain refrigerators and clothes
washers.--Refrigerators described in subsection (b)(3)(D) and
clothes washers described in subsection (b)(2)(D) shall not
be taken into account under paragraph (1).''.
(e) Qualified Energy Efficient Appliances.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 45M(f) (defining
qualified energy efficient appliance) is amended to read as
follows:
``(1) Qualified energy efficient appliance.--The term
`qualified energy efficient appliance' means--
``(A) any dishwasher described in subsection (b)(1),
``(B) any clothes washer described in subsection (b)(2),
and
``(C) any refrigerator described in subsection (b)(3).''.
(2) Clothes washer.--Section 45M(f)(3) (defining clothes
washer) is amended by inserting ``commercial'' before
``residential'' the second place it appears.
(3) Top-loading clothes washer.--Subsection (f) of section
45M (relating to definitions) is amended by redesignating
paragraphs (4), (5), (6), and (7) as paragraphs (5), (6),
(7), and (8), respectively, and by inserting after paragraph
(3) the following new paragraph:
``(4) Top-loading clothes washer.--The term `top-loading
clothes washer' means a clothes washer which has the clothes
container compartment access located on the top of the
machine and which operates on a vertical axis.''.
(4) Replacement of energy factor.--Section 45M(f)(6), as
redesignated by paragraph (3), is amended to read as follows:
``(6) Modified energy factor.--The term `modified energy
factor' means the modified energy factor established by the
Department of Energy for compliance with the Federal energy
conservation standard.''.
(5) Gallons per cycle; water consumption factor.--Section
45M(f) (relating to definitions), as amended by paragraph
(3), is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(9) Gallons per cycle.--The term `gallons per cycle'
means, with respect to a dishwasher, the amount of water,
expressed in gallons, required to complete a normal cycle of
a dishwasher.
``(10) Water consumption factor.--The term `water
consumption factor' means, with respect to a clothes washer,
the quotient of the total weighted per-cycle water
consumption divided by the cubic foot (or liter) capacity of
the clothes washer.''.
(f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to appliances produced after December 31, 2007.

Subtitle C--Revenue Provisions

SEC. 31. DENIAL OF DEDUCTION FOR MAJOR INTEGRATED OIL
COMPANIES FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO DOMESTIC
PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY PRODUCTS
THEREOF.

SEC. 32. ELIMINATION OF THE DIFFERENT TREATMENT OF FOREIGN
OIL AND GAS EXTRACTION INCOME AND FOREIGN OIL
RELATED INCOME FOR PURPOSES OF THE FOREIGN TAX
CREDIT.

(a) In General.--Subsections (a) and (b) of section 907
(relating to special rules in case of foreign oil and gas
income) are amended to read as follows:
``(a) Reduction in Amount Allowed as Foreign Tax Under
Section 901.--In applying section 901, the amount of any
foreign oil and gas taxes paid or accrued (or deemed to have
been paid) during the taxable year which would (but for this
subsection) be taken into account for purposes of section 901
shall be reduced by the amount (if any) by which the amount
of such taxes exceeds the product of--
``(1) the amount of the combined foreign oil and gas income
for the taxable year,
``(2) multiplied by--
``(A) in the case of a corporation, the percentage which is
equal to the highest rate of tax specified under section
11(b), or
``(B) in the case of an individual, a fraction the
numerator of which is the tax against which the credit under
section 901(a) is taken and the denominator of which is the
taxpayer's entire taxable income.
``(b) Combined Foreign Oil and Gas Income; Foreign Oil and
Gas Taxes.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) Combined foreign oil and gas income.--The term
`combined foreign oil and gas income' means, with respect to
any taxable year, the sum of--
``(A) foreign oil and gas extraction income, and
``(B) foreign oil related income.
``(2) Foreign oil and gas taxes.--The term `foreign oil and
gas taxes' means, with respect to any taxable year, the sum
of--
``(A) oil and gas extraction taxes, and
``(B) any income, war profits, and excess profits taxes
paid or accrued (or deemed to have been paid or accrued under
section 902 or 960) during the taxable year with respect to
foreign oil related income (determined without regard to
subsection (c)(4)) or loss which would be taken into account
for purposes of section 901 without regard to this
section.''.
(b) Recapture of Foreign Oil and Gas Losses.--Paragraph (4)
of section 907(c) (relating to recapture of foreign oil and
gas extraction losses by recharacterizing later extraction
income) is amended to read as follows:
``(4) Recapture of foreign oil and gas losses by
recharacterizing later combined foreign oil and gas income.--
``(A) In general.--The combined foreign oil and gas income
of a taxpayer for a taxable year (determined without regard
to this paragraph) shall be reduced--
``(i) first by the amount determined under subparagraph
(B), and
``(ii) then by the amount determined under subparagraph
(C).

The aggregate amount of such reductions shall be treated as
income (from sources without the United States) which is not
combined foreign oil and gas income.
``(B) Reduction for pre-2008 foreign oil extraction
losses.--The reduction under this paragraph shall be equal to
the lesser of--
``(i) the foreign oil and gas extraction income of the
taxpayer for the taxable year (determined without regard to
this paragraph), or
``(ii) the excess of--

``(I) the aggregate amount of foreign oil extraction losses
for preceding taxable years

[[Page 16339]]

beginning after December 31, 1982, and before January 1,
2008, over
``(II) so much of such aggregate amount as was
recharacterized under this paragraph (as in effect before and
after the date of the enactment of the Energy Advancement and
Investment Act of 2007) for preceding taxable years beginning
after December 31, 1982.

``(C) Reduction for post-2008 foreign oil and gas losses.--
The reduction under this paragraph shall be equal to the
lesser of--
``(i) the combined foreign oil and gas income of the
taxpayer for the taxable year (determined without regard to
this paragraph), reduced by an amount equal to the reduction
under subparagraph (A) for the taxable year, or
``(ii) the excess of--

``(I) the aggregate amount of foreign oil and gas losses
for preceding taxable years beginning after December 31,
2007, over
``(II) so much of such aggregate amount as was
recharacterized under this paragraph for preceding taxable
years beginning after December 31, 2007.

``(D) Foreign oil and gas loss defined.--
``(i) In general.--For purposes of this paragraph, the term
`foreign oil and gas loss' means the amount by which--

``(I) the gross income for the taxable year from sources
without the United States and its possessions (whether or not
the taxpayer chooses the benefits of this subpart for such
taxable year) taken into account in determining the combined
foreign oil and gas income for such year, is exceeded by
``(II) the sum of the deductions properly apportioned or
allocated thereto.

``(ii) Net operating loss deduction not taken into
account.--For purposes of clause (i), the net operating loss
deduction allowable for the taxable year under section 172(a)
shall not be taken into account.
``(iii) Expropriation and casualty losses not taken into
account.--For purposes of clause (i), there shall not be
taken into account--

``(I) any foreign expropriation loss (as defined in section
172(h) (as in effect on the day before the date of the
enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990)) for the
taxable year, or
``(II) any loss for the taxable year which arises from
fire, storm, shipwreck, or other casualty, or from theft,

to the extent such loss is not compensated for by insurance
or otherwise.
``(iv) Foreign oil extraction loss.--For purposes of
subparagraph (B)(ii)(I), foreign oil extraction losses shall
be determined under this paragraph as in effect on the day
before the date of the enactment of the Energy Advancement
and Investment Act of 2007.''.
(c) Carryback and Carryover of Disallowed Credits.--Section
907(f) (relating to carryback and carryover of disallowed
credits) is amended--
(1) by striking ``oil and gas extraction taxes'' each place
it appears and inserting ``foreign oil and gas taxes'', and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(4) Transition rules for pre-2008 and 2008 disallowed
credits.--
``(A) Pre-2008 credits.--In the case of any unused credit
year beginning before January 1, 2008, this subsection shall
be applied to any unused oil and gas extraction taxes carried
from such unused credit year to a year beginning after
December 31, 2007, by substituting `oil and gas extraction
taxes' for `foreign oil and gas taxes' each place it appears
in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), and by substituting `foreign
oil and gas extraction income' for `foreign oil and gas
income' in applying subsection (a) for each relevant year.
``(B) 2008 credits.--In the case of any unused credit year
beginning in 2008, the amendments made to this subsection by
the Energy Advancement and Investment Act of 2007 shall be
treated as being in effect for any preceding year beginning
before January 1, 2008, solely for purposes of determining
how much of the unused foreign oil and gas taxes for such
unused credit year may be deemed paid or accrued in such
preceding year.''.
(d) Conforming Amendment.--Section 6501(i) is amended by
striking ``oil and gas extraction taxes'' and inserting
``foreign oil and gas taxes''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2007.
______

SA 5188. Mr. LAUTENBERG submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange
Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy
commodities, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the
table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. ___. OPEC ACCOUNTABILITY.

(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``OPEC
Accountability Act''.
(b) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Gasoline prices have more than quadrupled since January
2002, with crude oil recently trading at more than $119 per
barrel for the first time ever.
(2) Rising gasoline prices have placed an inordinate burden
on American families.
(3) High gasoline prices have hindered and will continue to
hinder economic recovery.
(4) The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries
(OPEC) has formed a cartel and engaged in anticompetitive
practices to manipulate the price of oil, keeping it
artificially high.
(5) Eight member nations of OPEC--Ecuador, Indonesia,
Kuwait, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates,
and Venezuela--are also members of the World Trade
Organization. Algeria, Iran, Iraq, and Libya are also
Observer Governments of the World Trade Organization.
(6) The agreement among OPEC member nations to limit oil
exports is an illegal prohibition or restriction on the
exportation or sale for export of a product under article XI
of the GATT 1994.
(7) The export quotas and resulting high prices harm
American families, undermine the American economy, impede
American and foreign commerce, and are contrary to the
national interests of the United States.
(c) Actions To Curb Certain Cartel Anticompetitive
Practices.--
(1) Definitions.--In this section:
(A) Gatt 1994.--The term ``GATT 1994'' has the meaning
given such term in section 2(1)(B) of the Uruguay Round
Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3501(1)(B)).
(B) Understanding on rules and procedures governing the
settlement of disputes.--The term ``Understanding on Rules
and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes'' means
the agreement described in section 101(d)(16) of the Uruguay
Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3511(d)(16)).
(C) World trade organization.--
(i) In general.--The term ``World Trade Organization''
means the organization established pursuant to the WTO
Agreement.
(ii) WTO agreement.--The term ``WTO Agreement'' means the
Agreement Establishing The World Trade Organization entered
into on April 15, 1994.
(2) Action by president.--
(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the President shall, not later than 15 days after the
date of enactment of this Act, initiate consultations with
the countries described in subparagraph (B) to seek the
elimination by those countries of any action that--
(i) limits the production or distribution of oil, natural
gas, or any other petroleum product;
(ii) sets or maintains the price of oil, natural gas, or
any petroleum product; or
(iii) otherwise is an action in restraint of trade with
respect to oil, natural gas, or any petroleum product, when
such action constitutes an act, policy, or practice that is
unjustifiable and burdens and restricts United States
commerce.
(B) Countries described.--The countries described in this
paragraph are the following:
(i) Indonesia.
(ii) Kuwait.
(iii) Nigeria.
(iv) Qatar.
(v) The United Arab Emirates.
(vi) Venezuela.
(vii) Ecuador.
(viii) Saudi Arabia.
(3) Initiation of wto dispute proceedings.--If the
consultations described in paragraph (2) are not successful
with respect to any country described in paragraph (2)(B),
the United States Trade Representative shall, not later than
60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, institute
proceedings pursuant to the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes with respect
to that country and shall take appropriate action with
respect to that country under the trade remedy laws of the
United States.
______

SA 5189. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5181 submitted by Mr. Thune and intended to be proposed
to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no new offshore
oil and gas leasing, preleasing, or related activity may
commence in any State--
(1)(A) in the waters of which offshore oil and gas
preleasing, leasing, and related activity has, as of the date
of enactment of this Act, never been permitted; or
(B) all or a portion of the waters of which are subject to
any moratorium on oil and gas preleasing, leasing, and
related activity described in section 104 or 105 of the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat.
2118), regardless of whether any preleasing, leasing, or
related activity is ongoing in the waters of the State as of
the date of enactment of this Act; and

[[Page 16340]]

(2) without the consent of each other State the waters of
which are located within 100 miles of the waters of the State
in which the new offshore oil and gas preleasing, leasing, or
related activity is proposed to occur.
______

SA 5190. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5171 submitted by Mr. Voinovich (for himself, Mr.
Roberts, and Mr. Sununu) and intended to be proposed to the bill S.
3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price
speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5191. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5166 submitted by Mr. Burr and intended to be proposed
to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5192. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5162 submitted by Mr. Warner (for himself and Mr. Webb)
and intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity
Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with respect to
energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on
the table; as follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5193. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5161 submitted by Mr. Cornyn and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5194. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5154 submitted by Mr. Coburn and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5195. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5153 submitted by Mr. Craig (for himself, Mr. Crapo,
Mr. Bond, Mr. Vitter, and Mr. Inhofe) and intended to be proposed to
the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5196. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed

[[Page 16341]]

to amendment SA 5147 submitted by Mr. DeMint and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5197. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5137 submitted by Mr. Coleman (for himself, Mr.
Domenici, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Allard, Mr.
Bond, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Burr, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Cornyn,
Mr. Craig, Mr. Crapo, Mrs. Dole, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Graham, Mr. Inhofe, Mr.
Isakson, Mr. Martinez, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Voinovich, Mr.
Wicker, and Mr. Sununu) and intended to be proposed to the bill S.
3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price
speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5198. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5132 submitted by Ms. Landrieu and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5199. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5123 submitted by Mr. Bond and intended to be proposed
to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5200. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5121 submitted by Mr. Bond and intended to be proposed
to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5201. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5116 submitted by Mr. Domenici and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5202. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5110 submitted by

[[Page 16342]]

Mr. Vitter and intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend
the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with
respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5203. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5090 submitted by Mr. Vitter and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

(a) Denial of Deduction for Major Integrated Oil Companies
for Income Attributable to Domestic Production of Oil, Gas,
or Primary Products Thereof.--
(1) In general.--Subparagraph (B) of section 199(c)(4) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exceptions) is
amended by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (ii), by
striking the period at the end of clause (iii) and inserting
``, or'', and by inserting after clause (iii) the following
new clause:
``(iv) in the case of any major integrated oil company (as
defined in section 167(h)(5)(B)), the production, refining,
processing, transportation, or distribution of oil, gas, or
any primary product thereof during any taxable year described
in section 167(h)(5)(B).''.
(2) Primary product.--Section 199(c)(4)(B) of such Code is
amended by adding at the end the following flush sentence:
``For purposes of clause (iv), the term `primary product' has
the same meaning as when used in section 927(a)(2)(C), as in
effect before its repeal.''.
(b) Limitation on Oil Related Qualified Production
Activities Income for Taxpayers Other Than Major Integrated
Oil Companies.--
(1) In general.--Section 199(d) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating paragraph (9) as
paragraph (10) and by inserting after paragraph (8) the
following new paragraph:
``(9) Special rule for taxpayers with oil related qualified
production activities income.--
``(A) In general.--If a taxpayer (other than a major
integrated oil company (as defined in section 167(h)(5)(B)))
has oil related qualified production activities income for
any taxable year beginning after 2009, the amount of the
deduction under subsection (a) shall be reduced by 3 percent
of the least of--
``(i) the oil related qualified production activities
income of the taxpayer for the taxable year,
``(ii) the qualified production activities income of the
taxpayer for the taxable year, or
``(iii) taxable income (determined without regard to this
section).
``(B) Oil related qualified production activities income.--
The term `oil related qualified production activities income'
means for any taxable year the qualified production
activities income which is attributable to the production,
refining, processing, transportation, or distribution of oil,
gas, or any primary product thereof during such taxable
year.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 199(d)(2) of such Code
(relating to application to individuals) is amended by
striking ``subsection (a)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``subsections
(a)(1)(B) and (d)(9)(A)(iii)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2008.
______

SA 5204. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5097 submitted by Mr. Coleman and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

SA 5205. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5108 submitted by Mr. McConnell and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

[[Page 16343]]

(1) In general.--Section 199(d) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating paragraph (9) as
paragraph (10) and by inserting after paragraph (8) the
following new paragraph:
``(9) Special rule for taxpayers with oil related qualified
production activities income.--
``(A) In general.--If a taxpayer (other than a major
integrated oil company (as defined in section 167(h)(5)(B)))
has oil related qualified production activities income for
any taxable year beginning after 2009, the amount of the
deduction under subsection (a) shall be reduced by 3 percent
of the least of--
``(i) the oil related qualified production activities
income of the taxpayer for the taxable year,
``(ii) the qualified production activities income of the
taxpayer for the taxable year, or
``(iii) taxable income (determined without regard to this
section).
``(B) Oil related qualified production activities income.--
The term `oil related qualified production activities income'
means for any taxable year the qualified production
activities income which is attributable to the production,
refining, processing, transportation, or distribution of oil,
gas, or any primary product thereof during such taxable
year.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 199(d)(2) of such Code
(relating to application to individuals) is amended by
striking ``subsection (a)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``subsections
(a)(1)(B) and (d)(9)(A)(iii)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2008.
______

SA 5206. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5109 submitted by Mr. Vitter and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

SA 5207. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5110 submitted by Mr. Vitter and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

SA 5208. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5116 submitted by Mr. Domenici and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

[[Page 16344]]

SA 5209. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5121 submitted by Mr. Bond and intended to be proposed
to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

SA 5210. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5123 submitted by Mr. Bond and intended to be proposed
to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

SA 5211. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5132 submitted by Ms. Landrieu and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

[[Page 16345]]

SA 5212. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5137 submitted by Mr. Coleman (for himself, Mr.
Domenici, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Allard, Mr.
Bond, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Burr, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Cornyn,
Mr. Craig, Mr. Crapo, Mrs. Dole, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Graham, Mr. Inhofe, Mr.
Isakson, Mr. Martinez, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Voinovich, Mr.
Wicker, and Mr. Sununu) and intended to be proposed to the bill S.
3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price
speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

``For purposes of clause (iv), the term `primary product' has
the same meaning as when used in section 927(a)(2)(C), as in
effect before its repeal.''.
(b) Limitation on Oil Related Qualified Production
Activities Income for Taxpayers Other Than Major Integrated
Oil Companies.--
(1) In general.--Section 199(d) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating paragraph (9) as
paragraph (10) and by inserting after paragraph (8) the
following new paragraph:
``(9) Special rule for taxpayers with oil related qualified
production activities income.--
``(A) In general.--If a taxpayer (other than a major
integrated oil company (as defined in section 167(h)(5)(B)))
has oil related qualified production activities income for
any taxable year beginning after 2009, the amount of the
deduction under subsection (a) shall be reduced by 3 percent
of the least of--
``(i) the oil related qualified production activities
income of the taxpayer for the taxable year,
``(ii) the qualified production activities income of the
taxpayer for the taxable year, or
``(iii) taxable income (determined without regard to this
section).
``(B) Oil related qualified production activities income.--
The term `oil related qualified production activities income'
means for any taxable year the qualified production
activities income which is attributable to the production,
refining, processing, transportation, or distribution of oil,
gas, or any primary product thereof during such taxable
year.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 199(d)(2) of such Code
(relating to application to individuals) is amended by
striking ``subsection (a)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``subsections
(a)(1)(B) and (d)(9)(A)(iii)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2008.
______

SA 5213. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5147 submitted by Mr. DeMint and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

SA 5214. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5153 submitted by Mr. Craig (for himself, Mr. Crapo,
Mr. Bond, Mr. Vitter, and Mr. Inhofe) and intended to be proposed to
the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

[[Page 16346]]

gas, or any primary product thereof during any taxable year
described in section 167(h)(5)(B).''.
(2) Primary product.--Section 199(c)(4)(B) of such Code is
amended by adding at the end the following flush sentence:
``For purposes of clause (iv), the term `primary product' has
the same meaning as when used in section 927(a)(2)(C), as in
effect before its repeal.''.
(b) Limitation on Oil Related Qualified Production
Activities Income for Taxpayers Other Than Major Integrated
Oil Companies.--
(1) In general.--Section 199(d) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating paragraph (9) as
paragraph (10) and by inserting after paragraph (8) the
following new paragraph:
``(9) Special rule for taxpayers with oil related qualified
production activities income.--
``(A) In general.--If a taxpayer (other than a major
integrated oil company (as defined in section 167(h)(5)(B)))
has oil related qualified production activities income for
any taxable year beginning after 2009, the amount of the
deduction under subsection (a) shall be reduced by 3 percent
of the least of--
``(i) the oil related qualified production activities
income of the taxpayer for the taxable year,
``(ii) the qualified production activities income of the
taxpayer for the taxable year, or
``(iii) taxable income (determined without regard to this
section).
``(B) Oil related qualified production activities income.--
The term `oil related qualified production activities income'
means for any taxable year the qualified production
activities income which is attributable to the production,
refining, processing, transportation, or distribution of oil,
gas, or any primary product thereof during such taxable
year.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 199(d)(2) of such Code
(relating to application to individuals) is amended by
striking ``subsection (a)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``subsections
(a)(1)(B) and (d)(9)(A)(iii)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2008.
______

SA 5215. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5154 submitted by Mr. Coburn and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

SA 5216. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5161 submitted by Mr. Cornyn and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

SA 5217. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5162 submitted by Mr. Warner (for himself and Mr. Webb)
and intended to be proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity
Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price speculation with respect to
energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on
the table; as follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

[[Page 16347]]

``(iv) in the case of any major integrated oil company (as
defined in section 167(h)(5)(B)), the production, refining,
processing, transportation, or distribution of oil, gas, or
any primary product thereof during any taxable year described
in section 167(h)(5)(B).''.
(2) Primary product.--Section 199(c)(4)(B) of such Code is
amended by adding at the end the following flush sentence:
``For purposes of clause (iv), the term `primary product' has
the same meaning as when used in section 927(a)(2)(C), as in
effect before its repeal.''.
(b) Limitation on Oil Related Qualified Production
Activities Income for Taxpayers Other Than Major Integrated
Oil Companies.--
(1) In general.--Section 199(d) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating paragraph (9) as
paragraph (10) and by inserting after paragraph (8) the
following new paragraph:
``(9) Special rule for taxpayers with oil related qualified
production activities income.--
``(A) In general.--If a taxpayer (other than a major
integrated oil company (as defined in section 167(h)(5)(B)))
has oil related qualified production activities income for
any taxable year beginning after 2009, the amount of the
deduction under subsection (a) shall be reduced by 3 percent
of the least of--
``(i) the oil related qualified production activities
income of the taxpayer for the taxable year,
``(ii) the qualified production activities income of the
taxpayer for the taxable year, or
``(iii) taxable income (determined without regard to this
section).
``(B) Oil related qualified production activities income.--
The term `oil related qualified production activities income'
means for any taxable year the qualified production
activities income which is attributable to the production,
refining, processing, transportation, or distribution of oil,
gas, or any primary product thereof during such taxable
year.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 199(d)(2) of such Code
(relating to application to individuals) is amended by
striking ``subsection (a)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``subsections
(a)(1)(B) and (d)(9)(A)(iii)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2008.
______

SA 5218. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5166 submitted by Mr. Burr and intended to be proposed
to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

SA 5219. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5171 submitted by Mr. Voinovich (for himself, Mr.
Roberts, and Mr. Sununu) and intended to be proposed to the bill S.
3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price
speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

SA 5220. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5181 submitted by Mr. Thune and intended to be proposed
to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

[[Page 16348]]

striking the period at the end of clause (iii) and inserting
``, or'', and by inserting after clause (iii) the following
new clause:
``(iv) in the case of any major integrated oil company (as
defined in section 167(h)(5)(B)), the production, refining,
processing, transportation, or distribution of oil, gas, or
any primary product thereof during any taxable year described
in section 167(h)(5)(B).''.
(2) Primary product.--Section 199(c)(4)(B) of such Code is
amended by adding at the end the following flush sentence:
``For purposes of clause (iv), the term `primary product' has
the same meaning as when used in section 927(a)(2)(C), as in
effect before its repeal.''.
(b) Limitation on Oil Related Qualified Production
Activities Income for Taxpayers Other Than Major Integrated
Oil Companies.--
(1) In general.--Section 199(d) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating paragraph (9) as
paragraph (10) and by inserting after paragraph (8) the
following new paragraph:
``(9) Special rule for taxpayers with oil related qualified
production activities income.--
``(A) In general.--If a taxpayer (other than a major
integrated oil company (as defined in section 167(h)(5)(B)))
has oil related qualified production activities income for
any taxable year beginning after 2009, the amount of the
deduction under subsection (a) shall be reduced by 3 percent
of the least of--
``(i) the oil related qualified production activities
income of the taxpayer for the taxable year,
``(ii) the qualified production activities income of the
taxpayer for the taxable year, or
``(iii) taxable income (determined without regard to this
section).
``(B) Oil related qualified production activities income.--
The term `oil related qualified production activities income'
means for any taxable year the qualified production
activities income which is attributable to the production,
refining, processing, transportation, or distribution of oil,
gas, or any primary product thereof during such taxable
year.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 199(d)(2) of such Code
(relating to application to individuals) is amended by
striking ``subsection (a)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``subsections
(a)(1)(B) and (d)(9)(A)(iii)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2008.
______

SA 5221. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5090 submitted by Mr. Vitter and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5222. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5092 submitted by Mr. Vitter and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5223. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5097 submitted by Mr. Coleman and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5224. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5108 submitted by Mr. McConnell and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

SA 5225. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5109 submitted by Mr. Vitter and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

Strike the period at the end of the amendment and insert a
period and the following:

SEC. ___. CONSENT FOR NEW OIL AND GAS LEASING ACTIVITIES.

[[Page 16349]]

(Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2118), regardless of whether
any preleasing, leasing, or related activity is ongoing in
the waters of the State as of the date of enactment of this
Act; and
(2) without the consent of each other State the waters of
which are located within 100 miles of the waters of the State
in which the new offshore oil and gas preleasing, leasing, or
related activity is proposed to occur.
______

SA 5226. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5090 submitted by Mr. Vitter and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Lessee.--The term ``lessee'' includes any person or
other entity that controls, is controlled by, or is in or
under common control with, a lessee.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
(b) Leases.--Effective beginning on the date of
promulgation of regulations under subsection (c), the
Secretary shall not issue any new lease that authorizes the
exploration for or production of oil or natural gas under
section 17 of the Mineral Leasing Act (33 U.S.C. 226), the
Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands (30 U.S.C. 351 et
seq.), or the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C.
1331 et seq.) to a person unless the person--
(1) certifies for each existing lease under those Acts for
the production of oil or gas with respect to which the person
is a lessee, that the person has diligently developed the
Federal land that is subject to the lease in order to produce
oil or natural gas or is producing oil or natural gas from
the land; or
(2) has relinquished all Federal oil and gas leases under
which oil and gas is not being diligently developed.
(c) Diligent Development.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall promulgate
regulations that define ``diligently developed'' for purposes
of this section.
(2) Regulations.--The regulations shall--
(A) include benchmarks for oil and gas development that
will ensure that leaseholders produce oil and gas from each
lease within the original term of the lease; and
(B) require each leaseholder to submit to the Secretary a
diligent development plan demonstrating how the lessee will
meet the benchmarks.
(d) Failure To Comply With Requirements.--Any person that
fails to comply with this section (including any regulation
or order issued under this section) shall be liable for a
civil penalty under the terms and conditions of section 109
of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 (30
U.S.C. 1719).
______

SA 5227. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5092 submitted by Mr. Vitter and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5228. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5097 submitted by Mr. Coleman and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5229. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5108 submitted by Mr. McConnell and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

[[Page 16350]]

define ``diligently developed'' for purposes of this section.
(2) Regulations.--The regulations shall--
(A) include benchmarks for oil and gas development that
will ensure that leaseholders produce oil and gas from each
lease within the original term of the lease; and
(B) require each leaseholder to submit to the Secretary a
diligent development plan demonstrating how the lessee will
meet the benchmarks.
(d) Failure To Comply With Requirements.--Any person that
fails to comply with this section (including any regulation
or order issued under this section) shall be liable for a
civil penalty under the terms and conditions of section 109
of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 (30
U.S.C. 1719).
______

SA 5230. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5109 submitted by Mr. Vitter and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5231. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5110 submitted by Mr. Vitter and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5232. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5116 submitted by Mr. Domenici and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5233. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5121 submitted by Mr. Bond and intended to be proposed
to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

[[Page 16351]]

(2) has relinquished all Federal oil and gas leases under
which oil and gas is not being diligently developed.
(c) Diligent Development.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall promulgate
regulations that define ``diligently developed'' for purposes
of this section.
(2) Regulations.--The regulations shall--
(A) include benchmarks for oil and gas development that
will ensure that leaseholders produce oil and gas from each
lease within the original term of the lease; and
(B) require each leaseholder to submit to the Secretary a
diligent development plan demonstrating how the lessee will
meet the benchmarks.
(d) Failure To Comply With Requirements.--Any person that
fails to comply with this section (including any regulation
or order issued under this section) shall be liable for a
civil penalty under the terms and conditions of section 109
of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 (30
U.S.C. 1719).
______

SA 5234. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5123 submitted by Mr. Bond and intended to be proposed
to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5235. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5132 submitted by Ms. Landrieu and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5236. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5137 submitted by Mr. Coleman (for himself, Mr.
Domenici, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Allard, Mr.
Bond, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Burr, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Cornyn,
Mr. Craig, Mr. Crapo, Mrs. Dole, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Graham, Mr. Inhofe, Mr.
Isakson, Mr. Martinez, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Voinovich, Mr.
Wicker, and Mr. Sununu) and intended to be proposed to the bill S.
3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price
speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5237. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5147 submitted by Mr. DeMint and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

[[Page 16352]]

(b) Leases.--Effective beginning on the date of
promulgation of regulations under subsection (c), the
Secretary shall not issue any new lease that authorizes the
exploration for or production of oil or natural gas under
section 17 of the Mineral Leasing Act (33 U.S.C. 226), the
Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands (30 U.S.C. 351 et
seq.), or the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C.
1331 et seq.) to a person unless the person--
(1) certifies for each existing lease under those Acts for
the production of oil or gas with respect to which the person
is a lessee, that the person has diligently developed the
Federal land that is subject to the lease in order to produce
oil or natural gas or is producing oil or natural gas from
the land; or
(2) has relinquished all Federal oil and gas leases under
which oil and gas is not being diligently developed.
(c) Diligent Development.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall promulgate
regulations that define ``diligently developed'' for purposes
of this section.
(2) Regulations.--The regulations shall--
(A) include benchmarks for oil and gas development that
will ensure that leaseholders produce oil and gas from each
lease within the original term of the lease; and
(B) require each leaseholder to submit to the Secretary a
diligent development plan demonstrating how the lessee will
meet the benchmarks.
(d) Failure To Comply With Requirements.--Any person that
fails to comply with this section (including any regulation
or order issued under this section) shall be liable for a
civil penalty under the terms and conditions of section 109
of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 (30
U.S.C. 1719).
______

SA 5238. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5153 submitted by Mr. Craig (for himself, Mr. Crapo,
Mr. Bond, Mr. Vitter, and Mr. Inhofe) and intended to be proposed to
the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5239. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5154 submitted by Mr. Coburn and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5240. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5161 submitted by Mr. Cornyn and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5241. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5161 submitted by Mr. Cornyn and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities,
and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as
follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

[[Page 16353]]

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5242. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5166 submitted by Mr. Burr and intended to be proposed
to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5243. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5171 submitted by Mr. Voinovich (for himself, Mr.
Roberts, and Mr. Sununu) and intended to be proposed to the bill S.
3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent excessive price
speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5244. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5181 submitted by Mr. Thune and intended to be proposed
to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. ISSUANCE OF NEW LEASES.

SA 5245. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5092 submitted by Mr. Vitter and intended to be
proposed to the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to
prevent excessive price speculation with respect

[[Page 16354]]

to energy commodities, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie
on the table; as follows:

At the end add the following:

SEC. ___. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

SA 5246. Ms. CANTWELL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 5135 submitted by Mr. Bingaman (for himself, Mr. Reid,
Mr. Schumer, Mr. Salazar, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Kerry, Ms.
Stabenow, Mr. Whitehouse, Mrs. Clinton, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Lieberman, Mr.
Nelson of Florida, and Ms. Klobuchar) and intended to be proposed to
the bill S. 3268, to amend the Commodity Exchange Act, to prevent
excessive price speculation with respect to energy commodities, and for
other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

On page 92, after line 23, insert the following:

TITLE V--TAX PROVISIONS

SEC. 501. AMENDMENT OF 1986 CODE.

Except as otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this
title an amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an
amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other provision, the
reference shall be considered to be made to a section or
other provision of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

Subtitle A--Energy Production Incentives

PART I--RENEWABLE ENERGY INCENTIVES

SEC. 511. RENEWABLE ENERGY CREDIT.

(a) Extension of Credit.--
(1) 1-year extension for wind facilities.--Paragraph (1) of
section 45(d) is amended by striking ``January 1, 2009'' and
inserting ``January 1, 2010''.
(2) 3-year extension for certain other facilities.--Each of
the following provisions of section 45(d) is amended by
striking ``January 1, 2009'' and inserting ``January 1,
2012'':
(A) Clauses (i) and (ii) of paragraph (2)(A).
(B) Clauses (i)(I) and (ii) of paragraph (3)(A).
(C) Paragraph (4).
(D) Paragraph (5).
(E) Paragraph (6).
(F) Paragraph (7).
(G) Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (9).
(b) Modification of Credit Phaseout.--
(1) Repeal of phaseout.--Subsection (b) of section 45 is
amended--
(A) by striking paragraph (1), and
(B) by striking ``the 8 cent amount in paragraph (1),'' in
paragraph (2) thereof.
(2) Limitation based on investment in facility.--Subsection
(b) of section 45 is amended by inserting before paragraph
(2) the following new paragraph:
``(1) Limitation based on investment in facility.--
``(A) In general.--In the case of any qualified facility
originally placed in service after December 31, 2009, the
amount of the credit determined under subsection (a) for any
taxable year with respect to electricity produced at such
facility shall not exceed the product of--
``(i) the applicable percentage with respect to such
facility, multiplied by
``(ii) the eligible basis of such facility.
``(B) Carryforward of unused limitation and excess
credit.--
``(i) Unused limitation.--If the limitation imposed under
subparagraph (A) with respect to any facility for any taxable
year exceeds the prelimitation credit for such facility for
such taxable year, the limitation imposed under subparagraph
(A) with respect to such facility for the succeeding taxable
year shall be increased by the amount of such excess.
``(ii) Excess credit.--If the prelimitation credit with
respect to any facility for any taxable year exceeds the
limitation imposed under subparagraph (A) with respect to
such facility for such taxable year, the credit determined
under subsection (a) with respect to such facility for the
succeeding taxable year (determined before the application of
subparagraph (A) for such succeeding taxable year) shall be
increased by the amount of such excess. With respect to any
facility, no amount may be carried forward under this clause
to any taxable year beginning after the 10-year period
described in subsection (a)(2)(A)(ii) with respect to such
facility.
``(iii) Prelimitation credit.--The term `prelimitation
credit' with respect to any facility for a taxable year means
the credit determined under subsection (a) with respect to
such facility for such taxable year, determined without
regard to subparagraph (A) and after taking into account any
increase for such taxable year under clause (ii).
``(C) Applicable percentage.--For purposes of this
paragraph--
``(i) In general.--The term `applicable percentage' means,
with respect to any facility, the appropriate percentage
prescribed by the Secretary for the month in which such
facility is originally placed in service.
``(ii) Method of prescribing applicable percentages.--The
applicable percentages prescribed by the Secretary for any
month under clause (i) shall be percentages which yield over
a 10-year period amounts of limitation under subparagraph (A)
which have a present value equal to 35 percent of the
eligible basis of the facility.
``(iii) Method of discounting.--The present value under
clause (ii) shall be determined--

``(I) as of the last day of the 1st year of the 10-year
period referred to in clause (ii),
``(II) by using a discount rate equal to the greater of 110
percent of the Federal long-term rate as in effect under
section 1274(d) for the month preceding the month for which
the applicable percentage is being prescribed, or 4.5
percent, and
``(III) by taking into account the limitation under
subparagraph (A) for any year on the last day of such year.

``(D) Eligible basis.--For purposes of this paragraph--
``(i) In general.--The term `eligible basis' means, with
respect to any facility, the sum of--

``(I) the basis of such facility determined as of the time
that such facility is originally placed in service, and
``(II) the portion of the basis of any shared qualified
property which is properly allocable to such facility under
clause (ii).

``(ii) Rules for allocation.--For purposes of subclause
(II) of clause (i), the basis of shared qualified property
shall be allocated among all qualified facilities which are
projected to be placed in service and which require
utilization of such property in proportion to projected
generation from such facilities.
``(iii) Shared qualified property.--For purposes of this
paragraph, the term `shared qualified property' means, with
respect to any facility, any property described in section
168(e)(3)(B)(vi)--

``(I) which a qualified facility will require for
utilization of such facility, and
``(II) which is not a qualified facility.

``(iv) Special rule relating to geothermal facilities.--In
the case of any qualified facility using geothermal energy to
produce electricity, the basis of such facility for purposes
of this paragraph shall be determined as though intangible
drilling and development costs described in section 263(c)
were capitalized rather than expensed.
``(E) Special rule for first and last year of credit
period.--In the case of any taxable year any portion of which
is not

[[Page 16355]]

within the 10-year period described in subsection
(a)(2)(A)(ii) with respect to any facility, the amount of the
limitation under subparagraph (A) with respect to such
facility shall be reduced by an amount which bears the same
ratio to the amount of such limitation (determined without
regard to this subparagraph) as such portion of the taxable
year which is not within such period bears to the entire
taxable year.
``(F) Election to treat all facilities placed in service in
a year as 1 facility.--At the election of the taxpayer, all
qualified facilities which are part of the same project and
which are placed in service during the same calendar year
shall be treated for purposes of this section as 1 facility
which is placed in service at the mid-point of such year or
the first day of the following calendar year.''.
(c) Trash Facility Clarification.--Paragraph (7) of section
45(d) is amended--
(1) by striking ``facility which burns'' and inserting
``facility (other than a facility described in paragraph (6))
which uses'', and
(2) by striking ``combustion''.
(d) Expansion of Biomass Facilities.--
(1) Open-loop biomass facilities.--Paragraph (3) of section
45(d) is amended by redesignating subparagraph (B) as
subparagraph (C) and by inserting after subparagraph (A) the
following new subparagraph:
``(B) Expansion of facility.--Such term shall include a new
unit placed in service after the date of the enactment of
this subparagraph in connection with a facility described in
subparagraph (A), but only to the extent of the increased
amount of electricity produced at the facility by reason of
such new unit.''.
(2) Closed-loop biomass facilities.--Paragraph (2) of
section 45(d) is amended by redesignating subparagraph (B) as
subparagraph (C) and inserting after subparagraph (A) the
following new subparagraph:
``(B) Expansion of facility.--Such term shall include a new
unit placed in service after the date of the enactment of
this subparagraph in connection with a facility described in
subparagraph (A)(i), but only to the extent of the increased
amount of electricity produced at the facility by reason of
such new unit.''.
(e) Sales of Net Electricity to Regulated Public Utilities
Treated as Sales to Unrelated Persons.--Paragraph (4) of
section 45(e) is amended by adding at the end the following
new sentence: ``The net amount of electricity sold by any
taxpayer to a regulated public utility (as defined in section
7701(a)(33)) shall be treated as sold to an unrelated
person.''.
(f) Modification of Rules for Hydropower Production.--
Subparagraph (C) of section 45(c)(8) is amended to read as
follows:
``(C) Nonhydroelectric dam.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A), a facility is described in this subparagraph if--
``(i) the hydroelectric project installed on the
nonhydroelectric dam is licensed by the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission and meets all other applicable
environmental, licensing, and regulatory requirements,
``(ii) the nonhydroelectric dam was placed in service
before the date of the enactment of this paragraph and
operated for flood control, navigation, or water supply
purposes and did not produce hydroelectric power on the date
of the enactment of this paragraph, and
``(iii) the hydroelectric project is operated so that the
water surface elevation at any given location and time that
would have occurred in the absence of the hydroelectric
project is maintained, subject to any license requirements
imposed under applicable law that change the water surface
elevation for the purpose of improving environmental quality
of the affected waterway.
The Secretary, in consultation with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, shall certify if a hydroelectric
project licensed at a nonhydroelectric dam meets the criteria
in clause (iii). Nothing in this section shall affect the
standards under which the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission issues licenses for and regulates hydropower
projects under part I of the Federal Power Act.''.
(g) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subsection, the amendments made by this section shall apply
to property originally placed in service after December 31,
2008.
(2) Repeal of credit phaseout.--The amendments made by
subsection (b)(1) shall apply to taxable years ending after
December 31, 2008.
(3) Limitation based on investment in facility.--The
amendment made by subsection (b)(2) shall apply to property
originally placed in service after December 31, 2009.
(4) Trash facility clarification; sales to related
regulated public utilities.--The amendments made by
subsections (c) and (e) shall apply to electricity produced
and sold after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(5) Expansion of biomass facilities.--The amendments made
by subsection (d) shall apply to property placed in service
after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 512. PRODUCTION CREDIT FOR ELECTRICITY PRODUCED FROM
MARINE RENEWABLES.

(a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 45(c) is amended
by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (G), by
striking the period at the end of subparagraph (H) and
inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the following
new subparagraph:
``(I) marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy.''.
(b) Marine Renewables.--Subsection (c) of section 45 is
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(10) Marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy.--
``(A) In general.--The term `marine and hydrokinetic
renewable energy' means energy derived from--
``(i) waves, tides, and currents in oceans, estuaries, and
tidal areas,
``(ii) free flowing water in rivers, lakes, and streams,
``(iii) free flowing water in an irrigation system, canal,
or other man-made channel, including projects that utilize
nonmechanical structures to accelerate the flow of water for
electric power production purposes, or
``(iv) differentials in ocean temperature (ocean thermal
energy conversion).
``(B) Exceptions.--Such term shall not include any energy
which is derived from any source which utilizes a dam,
diversionary structure (except as provided in subparagraph
(A)(iii)), or impoundment for electric power production
purposes.''.
(c) Definition of Facility.--Subsection (d) of section 45
is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(11) Marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy
facilities.--In the case of a facility producing electricity
from marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy, the term
`qualified facility' means any facility owned by the
taxpayer--
``(A) which has a nameplate capacity rating of at least 150
kilowatts, and
``(B) which is originally placed in service on or after the
date of the enactment of this paragraph and before January 1,
2012.''.
(d) Credit Rate.--Subparagraph (A) of section 45(b)(4) is
amended by striking ``or (9)'' and inserting ``(9), or
(11)''.
(e) Coordination With Small Irrigation Power.--Paragraph
(5) of section 45(d), as amended by section 101, is amended
by striking ``January 1, 2012'' and inserting ``the date of
the enactment of paragraph (11)''.
(f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to electricity produced and sold after the date
of the enactment of this Act, in taxable years ending after
such date.

SEC. 513. ENERGY CREDIT.

(a) Extension of Credit.--
(1) Solar energy property.--Paragraphs (2)(A)(i)(II) and
(3)(A)(ii) of section 48(a) are each amended by striking
``January 1, 2009'' and inserting ``January 1, 2015''.
(2) Fuel cell property.--Subparagraph (E) of section
48(c)(1) is amended by striking ``December 31, 2008'' and
inserting ``December 31, 2014''.
(3) Microturbine property.--Subparagraph (E) of section
48(c)(2) is amended by striking ``December 31, 2008'' and
inserting ``December 31, 2014''.
(b) Allowance of Energy Credit Against Alternative Minimum
Tax.--Subparagraph (B) of section 38(c)(4) is amended by
striking ``and'' at the end of clause (iii), by redesignating
clause (iv) as clause (v), and by inserting after clause
(iii) the following new clause:
``(iv) the credit determined under section 46 to the extent
that such credit is attributable to the energy credit
determined under section 48, and''.
(c) Energy Credit for Combined Heat and Power System
Property.--
(1) In general.--Section 48(a)(3)(A) (defining energy
property) is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of clause
(iii), by inserting ``or'' at the end of clause (iv), and by
adding at the end the following new clause:
``(v) combined heat and power system property,''.
(2) Combined heat and power system property.--Section 48 is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) Combined Heat and Power System Property.--For
purposes of subsection (a)(3)(A)(v)--
``(1) Combined heat and power system property.--The term
`combined heat and power system property' means property
comprising a system--
``(A) which uses the same energy source for the
simultaneous or sequential generation of electrical power,
mechanical shaft power, or both, in combination with the
generation of steam or other forms of useful thermal energy
(including heating and cooling applications),
``(B) which produces--
``(i) at least 20 percent of its total useful energy in the
form of thermal energy which is not used to produce
electrical or mechanical power (or combination thereof), and
``(ii) at least 20 percent of its total useful energy in
the form of electrical or mechanical power (or combination
thereof),
``(C) the energy efficiency percentage of which exceeds 60
percent, and
``(D) which is placed in service before January 1, 2015.
``(2) Limitation.--
``(A) In general.--In the case of combined heat and power
system property with an electrical capacity in excess of the
applicable capacity placed in service during the taxable
year, the credit under subsection (a)(1)

[[Page 16356]]

(determined without regard to this paragraph) for such year
shall be equal to the amount which bears the same ratio to
such credit as the applicable capacity bears to the capacity
of such property.
``(B) Applicable capacity.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A), the term `applicable capacity' means 15 megawatts or a
mechanical energy capacity of more than 20,000 horsepower or
an equivalent combination of electrical and mechanical energy
capacities.
``(C) Maximum capacity.--The term `combined heat and power
system property' shall not include any property comprising a
system if such system has a capacity in excess of 50
megawatts or a mechanical energy capacity in excess of 67,000
horsepower or an equivalent combination of electrical and
mechanical energy capacities.
``(3) Special rules.--
``(A) Energy efficiency percentage.--For purposes of this
subsection, the energy efficiency percentage of a system is
the fraction--
``(i) the numerator of which is the total useful
electrical, thermal, and mechanical power produced by the
system at normal operating rates, and expected to be consumed
in its normal application, and
``(ii) the denominator of which is the lower heating value
of the fuel sources for the system.
``(B) Determinations made on btu basis.--The energy
efficiency percentage and the percentages under paragraph
(1)(B) shall be determined on a Btu basis.
``(C) Input and output property not included.--The term
`combined heat and power system property' does not include
property used to transport the energy source to the facility
or to distribute energy produced by the facility.
``(4) Systems using biomass.--If a system is designed to
use biomass (within the meaning of paragraphs (2) and (3) of
section 45(c) without regard to the last sentence of
paragraph (3)(A)) for at least 90 percent of the energy
source--
``(A) paragraph (1)(C) shall not apply, but
``(B) the amount of credit determined under subsection (a)
with respect to such system shall not exceed the amount which
bears the same ratio to such amount of credit (determined
without regard to this paragraph) as the energy efficiency
percentage of such system bears to 60 percent.''.
(d) Increase of Credit Limitation for Fuel Cell Property.--
Subparagraph (B) of section 48(c)(1) is amended by striking
``$500'' and inserting ``$1,500''.
(e) Public Utility Property Taken Into Account.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (3) of section 48(a) is amended
by striking the second sentence thereof.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Paragraph (1) of section 48(c) is amended by striking
subparagraph (D) and redesignating subparagraph (E) as
subparagraph (D).
(B) Paragraph (2) of section 48(c) is amended by striking
subparagraph (D) and redesignating subparagraph (E) as
subparagraph (D).
(f) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subsection, the amendments made by this section shall take
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) Allowance against alternative minimum tax.--The
amendments made by subsection (b) shall apply to credits
determined under section 46 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 in taxable years beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act and to carrybacks of such credits.
(3) Combined heat and power and fuel cell property.--The
amendments made by subsections (c) and (d) shall apply to
periods after the date of the enactment of this Act, in
taxable years ending after such date, under rules similar to
the rules of section 48(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (as in effect on the day before the date of the
enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990).
(4) Public utility property.--The amendments made by
subsection (e) shall apply to periods after February 13,
2008, in taxable years ending after such date, under rules
similar to the rules of section 48(m) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (as in effect on the day before the date of the
enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990).

SEC. 514. CREDIT FOR RESIDENTIAL ENERGY EFFICIENT PROPERTY.

(a) Extension.--Section 25D(g) is amended by striking
``December 31, 2008'' and inserting ``December 31, 2014''.
(b) Maximum Credit for Solar Electric Property.--
(1) In general.--Section 25D(b)(1)(A) is amended by
striking ``$2,000'' and inserting ``$4,000''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 25D(e)(4)(A)(i) is
amended by striking ``$6,667'' and inserting ``$13,333''.
(c) Credit for Residential Wind Property.--
(1) In general.--Section 25D(a) is amended by striking
``and'' at the end of paragraph (2), by striking the period
at the end of paragraph (3) and inserting ``, and'', and by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(4) 30 percent of the qualified small wind energy
property expenditures made by the taxpayer during such
year.''.
(2) Limitation.--Section 25D(b)(1) is amended by striking
``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B), by striking the
period at the end of subparagraph (C) and inserting ``,
and'', and by adding at the end the following new
subparagraph:
``(D) $500 with respect to each half kilowatt of capacity
(not to exceed $4,000) of wind turbines for which qualified
small wind energy property expenditures are made.''.
(3) Qualified small wind energy property expenditures.--
(A) In general.--Section 25D(d) is amended by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
``(4) Qualified small wind energy property expenditure.--
The term `qualified small wind energy property expenditure'
means an expenditure for property which uses a wind turbine
to generate electricity for use in connection with a dwelling
unit located in the United States and used as a residence by
the taxpayer.''.
(B) No double benefit.--Section 45(d)(1) is amended by
adding at the end the following new sentence: ``Such term
shall not include any facility with respect to which any
qualified small wind energy property expenditure (as defined
in subsection (d)(4) of section 25D) is taken into account in
determining the credit under such section.''.
(4) Maximum expenditures in case of joint occupancy.--
Section 25D(e)(4)(A) is amended by striking ``and'' at the
end of clause (ii), by striking the period at the end of
clause (iii) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the
end the following new clause:
``(iv) $1,667 in the case of each half kilowatt of capacity
(not to exceed $13,333) of wind turbines for which qualified
small wind energy property expenditures are made.''.
(d) Credit for Geothermal Heat pump Systems.--
(1) In general.--Section 25D(a), as amended by subsection
(c), is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph
(3), by striking the period at the end of paragraph (4) and
inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(5) 30 percent of the qualified geothermal heat pump
property expenditures made by the taxpayer during such
year.''.
(2) Limitation.--Section 25D(b)(1), as amended by
subsection (c), is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of
subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end of
subparagraph (D) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at
the end the following new subparagraph:
``(E) $2,000 with respect to any qualified geothermal heat
pump property expenditures.''.
(3) Qualified geothermal heat pump property expenditure.--
Section 25D(d), as amended by subsection (c), is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) Qualified geothermal heat pump property
expenditure.--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified geothermal heat pump
property expenditure' means an expenditure for qualified
geothermal heat pump property installed on or in connection
with a dwelling unit located in the United States and used as
a residence by the taxpayer.
``(B) Qualified geothermal heat pump property.--The term
`qualified geothermal heat pump property' means any equipment
which--
``(i) uses the ground or ground water as a thermal energy
source to heat the dwelling unit referred to in subparagraph
(A) or as a thermal energy sink to cool such dwelling unit,
and
``(ii) meets the requirements of the Energy Star program
which are in effect at the time that the expenditure for such
equipment is made.''.
(4) Maximum expenditures in case of joint occupancy.--
Section 25D(e)(4)(A), as amended by subsection (c), is
amended by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (iii), by
striking the period at the end of clause (iv) and inserting
``, and'', and by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(v) $6,667 in the case of any qualified geothermal heat
pump property expenditures.''.
(e) Credit Allowed Against Alternative Minimum Tax.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (c) of section 25D is amended
to read as follows:
``(c) Limitation Based on Amount of Tax; Carryforward of
Unused Credit.--
``(1) Limitation based on amount of tax.--In the case of a
taxable year to which section 26(a)(2) does not apply, the
credit allowed under subsection (a) for the taxable year
shall not exceed the excess of--
``(A) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in
section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
``(B) the sum of the credits allowable under this subpart
(other than this section) and section 27 for the taxable
year.
``(2) Carryforward of unused credit.--
``(A) Rule for years in which all personal credits allowed
against regular and alternative minimum tax.--In the case of
a taxable year to which section 26(a)(2) applies, if the
credit allowable under subsection (a) exceeds the limitation
imposed by section 26(a)(2) for such taxable year reduced by
the sum of the credits allowable under this subpart (other
than this section), such

[[Page 16357]]

excess shall be carried to the succeeding taxable year and
added to the credit allowable under subsection (a) for such
succeeding taxable year.
``(B) Rule for other years.--In the case of a taxable year
to which section 26(a)(2) does not apply, if the credit
allowable under subsection (a) exceeds the limitation imposed
by paragraph (1) for such taxable year, such excess shall be
carried to the succeeding taxable year and added to the
credit allowable under subsection (a) for such succeeding
taxable year.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Section 23(b)(4)(B) is amended by inserting ``and
section 25D'' after ``this section''.
(B) Section 24(b)(3)(B) is amended by striking ``and 25B''
and inserting ``, 25B, and 25D''.
(C) Section 25B(g)(2) is amended by striking ``section 23''
and inserting ``sections 23 and 25D''.
(D) Section 26(a)(1) is amended by striking ``and 25B'' and
inserting ``25B, and 25D''.
(f) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2007.
(2) Application of egtrra sunset.--The amendments made by
subparagraphs (A) and (B) of subsection (e)(2) shall be
subject to title IX of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief
Reconciliation Act of 2001 in the same manner as the
provisions of such Act to which such amendments relate.

SEC. 515. SPECIAL RULE TO IMPLEMENT FERC AND STATE ELECTRIC
RESTRUCTURING POLICY.

(a) Extension for Qualified Electric Utilities.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (3) of section 451(i) is amended
by inserting ``(before January 1, 2010, in the case of a
qualified electric utility)'' after ``January 1, 2008''.
(2) Qualified electric utility.--Subsection (i) of section
451 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (6) through (10)
as paragraphs (7) through (11), respectively, and by
inserting after paragraph (5) the following new paragraph:
``(6) Qualified electric utility.--For purposes of this
subsection, the term `qualified electric utility' means a
person that, as of the date of the qualifying electric
transmission transaction, is vertically integrated, in that
it is both--
``(A) a transmitting utility (as defined in section 3(23)
of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(23))) with respect to
the transmission facilities to which the election under this
subsection applies, and
``(B) an electric utility (as defined in section 3(22) of
the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(22))).''.
(b) Extension of Period for Transfer of Operational Control
Authorized by FERC.--Clause (ii) of section 451(i)(4)(B) is
amended by striking ``December 31, 2007'' and inserting ``the
date which is 4 years after the close of the taxable year in
which the transaction occurs''.
(c) Property Located Outside the United States Not Treated
as Exempt Utility Property.--Paragraph (5) of section 451(i)
is amended by adding at the end the following new
subparagraph:
``(C) Exception for property located outside the united
states.--The term `exempt utility property' shall not include
any property which is located outside the United States.''.
(d) Effective Dates.--
(1) Extension.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall
apply to transactions after December 31, 2007.
(2) Transfers of operational control.--The amendment made
by subsection (b) shall take effect as if included in section
909 of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004.
(3) Exception for property located outside the united
states.--The amendment made by subsection (c) shall apply to
transactions after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 516. NEW CLEAN RENEWABLE ENERGY BONDS.

(a) In General.--Subpart I of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``SEC. 54C. NEW CLEAN RENEWABLE ENERGY BONDS.

``(a) New Clean Renewable Energy Bond.--For purposes of
this subpart, the term `new clean renewable energy bond'
means any bond issued as part of an issue if--
``(1) 100 percent of the available project proceeds of such
issue are to be used for capital expenditures incurred by
governmental bodies, public power providers, or cooperative
electric companies for one or more qualified renewable energy
facilities,
``(2) the bond is issued by a qualified issuer, and
``(3) the issuer designates such bond for purposes of this
section.
``(b) Reduced Credit Amount.--The annual credit determined
under section 54A(b) with respect to any new clean renewable
energy bond shall be 70 percent of the amount so determined
without regard to this subsection.
``(c) Limitation on Amount of Bonds Designated.--
``(1) In general.--The maximum aggregate face amount of
bonds which may be designated under subsection (a) by any
issuer shall not exceed the limitation amount allocated under
this subsection to such issuer.
``(2) National limitation on amount of bonds designated.--
There is a national new clean renewable energy bond
limitation of $2,000,000,000 which shall be allocated by the
Secretary as provided in paragraph (3), except that--
``(A) not more than 33\1/3\ percent thereof may be
allocated to qualified projects of public power providers,
``(B) not more than 33\1/3\ percent thereof may be
allocated to qualified projects of governmental bodies, and
``(C) not more than 33\1/3\ percent thereof may be
allocated to qualified projects of cooperative electric
companies.
``(3) Method of allocation.--
``(A) Allocation among public power providers.--After the
Secretary determines the qualified projects of public power
providers which are appropriate for receiving an allocation
of the national new clean renewable energy bond limitation,
the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable, make
allocations among such projects in such manner that the
amount allocated to each such project bears the same ratio to
the cost of such project as the limitation under paragraph
(2)(A) bears to the cost of all such projects.
``(B) Allocation among governmental bodies and cooperative
electric companies.--The Secretary shall make allocations of
the amount of the national new clean renewable energy bond
limitation described in paragraphs (2)(B) and (2)(C) among
qualified projects of governmental bodies and cooperative
electric companies, respectively, in such manner as the
Secretary determines appropriate.
``(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) Qualified renewable energy facility.--The term
`qualified renewable energy facility' means a qualified
facility (as determined under section 45(d) without regard to
paragraphs (8) and (10) thereof and to any placed in service
date) owned by a public power provider, a governmental body,
or a cooperative electric company.
``(2) Public power provider.--The term `public power
provider' means a State utility with a service obligation, as
such terms are defined in section 217 of the Federal Power
Act (as in effect on the date of the enactment of this
paragraph).
``(3) Governmental body.--The term `governmental body'
means any State or Indian tribal government, or any political
subdivision thereof.
``(4) Cooperative electric company.--The term `cooperative
electric company' means a mutual or cooperative electric
company described in section 501(c)(12) or section
1381(a)(2)(C).
``(5) Clean renewable energy bond lender.--The term `clean
renewable energy bond lender' means a lender which is a
cooperative which is owned by, or has outstanding loans to,
100 or more cooperative electric companies and is in
existence on February 1, 2002, and shall include any
affiliated entity which is controlled by such lender.
``(6) Qualified issuer.--The term `qualified issuer' means
a public power provider, a cooperative electric company, a
governmental body, a clean renewable energy bond lender, or a
not-for-profit electric utility which has received a loan or
loan guarantee under the Rural Electrification Act.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Paragraph (1) of section 54A(d) is amended to read as
follows:
``(1) Qualified tax credit bond.--The term `qualified tax
credit bond' means--
``(A) a qualified forestry conservation bond, or
``(B) a new clean renewable energy bond,
which is part of an issue that meets requirements of
paragraphs (2), (3), (4), (5), and (6).''.
(2) Subparagraph (C) of section 54A(d)(2) is amended to
read as follows:
``(C) Qualified purpose.--For purposes of this paragraph,
the term `qualified purpose' means--
``(i) in the case of a qualified forestry conservation
bond, a purpose specified in section 54B(e), and
``(ii) in the case of a new clean renewable energy bond, a
purpose specified in section 54C(a)(1).''.
(3) The table of sections for subpart I of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:

``Sec. 54C. Qualified clean renewable energy bonds.''.

(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to obligations issued after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

PART II--CARBON MITIGATION PROVISIONS

SEC. 521. EXPANSION AND MODIFICATION OF ADVANCED COAL PROJECT
INVESTMENT CREDIT.

(a) Modification of Credit Amount.--Section 48A(a) is
amended by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1), by
striking the period at the end of paragraph (2) and inserting
``, and'', and by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(3) 30 percent of the qualified investment for such
taxable year in the case of projects described in clause
(iii) of subsection (d)(3)(B).''.

[[Page 16358]]

(b) Expansion of Aggregate Credits.--Section 48A(d)(3)(A)
is amended by striking ``$1,300,000,000'' and inserting
``$2,550,000,000''.
(c) Authorization of Additional Projects.--
(1) In general.--Subparagraph (B) of section 48A(d)(3) is
amended to read as follows:
``(B) Particular projects.--Of the dollar amount in
subparagraph (A), the Secretary is authorized to certify--
``(i) $800,000,000 for integrated gasification combined
cycle projects the application for which is submitted during
the period described in paragraph (2)(A)(i),
``(ii) $500,000,000 for projects which use other advanced
coal-based generation technologies the application for which
is submitted during the period described in paragraph
(2)(A)(i), and
``(iii) $1,250,000,000 for advanced coal-based generation
technology projects the application for which is submitted
during the period described in paragraph (2)(A)(ii).''.
(2) Application period for additional projects.--
Subparagraph (A) of section 48A(d)(2) is amended to read as
follows:
``(A) Application period.--Each applicant for certification
under this paragraph shall submit an application meeting the
requirements of subparagraph (B). An applicant may only
submit an application--
``(i) for an allocation from the dollar amount specified in
clause (i) or (ii) of paragraph (3)(B) during the 3-year
period beginning on the date the Secretary establishes the
program under paragraph (1), and
``(ii) for an allocation from the dollar amount specified
in paragraph (3)(B)(iii) during the 3-year period beginning
at the earlier of the termination of the period described in
clause (i) or the date prescribed by the Secretary.''.
(3) Capture and sequestration of carbon dioxide emissions
requirement.--
(A) In general.--Section 48A(e)(1) is amended by striking
``and'' at the end of subparagraph (E), by striking the
period at the end of subparagraph (F) and inserting ``;
and'', and by adding at the end the following new
subparagraph:
``(G) in the case of any project the application for which
is submitted during the period described in subsection
(d)(2)(A)(ii), the project includes equipment which separates
and sequesters at least 65 percent (70 percent in the case of
an application for reallocated credits under subsection
(d)(4)) of such project's total carbon dioxide emissions.''.
(B) Highest priority for projects which sequester carbon
dioxide emissions.--Section 48A(e)(3) is amended by striking
``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A)(iii), by striking the
period at the end of subparagraph (B)(iii) and inserting ``,
and'', and by adding at the end the following new
subparagraph:
``(C) give highest priority to projects with the greatest
separation and sequestration percentage of total carbon
dioxide emissions.''.
(C) Recapture of credit for failure to sequester.--Section
48A is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(i) Recapture of Credit for Failure To Sequester.--The
Secretary shall provide for recapturing the benefit of any
credit allowable under subsection (a) with respect to any
project which fails to attain or maintain the separation and
sequestration requirements of subsection (e)(1)(G).''.
(4) Additional priority for research partnerships.--Section
48A(e)(3)(B), as amended by paragraph (3)(B), is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ii),
(B) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (iv), and
(C) by inserting after clause (ii) the following new
clause:
``(iii) applicant participants who have a research
partnership with an eligible educational institution (as
defined in section 529(e)(5)), and''.
(5) Clerical amendment.--Section 48A(e)(3) is amended by
striking ``integrated gasification combined cycle'' in the
heading and inserting ``certain''.
(d) Disclosure of Allocations.--Section 48A(d) is amended
by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) Disclosure of allocations.--The Secretary shall, upon
making a certification under this subsection or section
48B(d), publicly disclose the identity of the applicant and
the amount of the credit certified with respect to such
applicant.''.
(e) Effective Dates.--
(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subsection, the amendments made by this section shall apply
to credits the application for which is submitted during the
period described in section 48A(d)(2)(A)(ii) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 and which are allocated or reallocated
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) Disclosure of allocations.--The amendment made by
subsection (d) shall apply to certifications made after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(3) Clerical amendment.--The amendment made by subsection
(c)(5) shall take effect as if included in the amendment made
by section 1307(b) of the Energy Tax Incentives Act of 2005.

SEC. 522. EXPANSION AND MODIFICATION OF COAL GASIFICATION
INVESTMENT CREDIT.

(a) Modification of Credit Amount.--Section 48B(a) is
amended by inserting ``(30 percent in the case of credits
allocated under subsection (d)(1)(B))'' after ``20 percent''.
(b) Expansion of Aggregate Credits.--Section 48B(d)(1) is
amended by striking ``shall not exceed $350,000,000'' and all
that follows and inserting ``shall not exceed--
``(A) $350,000,000, plus
``(B) $250,000,000 for qualifying gasification projects
that include equipment which separates and sequesters at
least 75 percent of such project's total carbon dioxide
emissions.''.
(c) Recapture of Credit for Failure To Sequester.--Section
48B is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(f) Recapture of Credit for Failure To Sequester.--The
Secretary shall provide for recapturing the benefit of any
credit allowable under subsection (a) with respect to any
project which fails to attain or maintain the separation and
sequestration requirements for such project under subsection
(d)(1).''.
(d) Selection Priorities.--Section 48B(d) is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(4) Selection priorities.--In determining which
qualifying gasification projects to certify under this
section, the Secretary shall--
``(A) give highest priority to projects with the greatest
separation and sequestration percentage of total carbon
dioxide emissions, and
``(B) give high priority to applicant participants who have
a research partnership with an eligible educational
institution (as defined in section 529(e)(5)).''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to credits described in section 48B(d)(1)(B) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 which are allocated or
reallocated after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 523. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN COAL EXCISE TAX.

Paragraph (2) of section 4121(e) is amended--
(1) by striking ``January 1, 2014'' in subparagraph (A) and
inserting ``December 31, 2018'', and
(2) by striking ``January 1 after 1981'' in subparagraph
(B) and inserting ``December 31 after 2007''.

SEC. 524. SPECIAL RULES FOR REFUND OF THE COAL EXCISE TAX TO
CERTAIN COAL PRODUCERS AND EXPORTERS.

(a) Refund.--
(1) Coal producers.--
(A) In general.--Notwithstanding subsections (a)(1) and (c)
of section 6416 and section 6511 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, if--
(i) a coal producer establishes that such coal producer, or
a party related to such coal producer, exported coal produced
by such coal producer to a foreign country or shipped coal
produced by such coal producer to a possession of the United
States, or caused such coal to be exported or shipped, the
export or shipment of which was other than through an
exporter who meets the requirements of paragraph (2),
(ii) such coal producer filed an excise tax return on or
after October 1, 1990, and on or before the date of the
enactment of this Act, and
(iii) such coal producer files a claim for refund with the
Secretary not later than the close of the 30-day period
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act,

then the Secretary shall pay to such coal producer an amount
equal to the tax paid under section 4121 of such Code on such
coal exported or shipped by the coal producer or a party
related to such coal producer, or caused by the coal producer
or a party related to such coal producer to be exported or
shipped.
(B) Special rules for certain taxpayers.--For purposes of
this section--
(i) In general.--If a coal producer or a party related to a
coal producer has received a judgment described in clause
(iii), such coal producer shall be deemed to have established
the export of coal to a foreign country or shipment of coal
to a possession of the United States under subparagraph
(A)(i).
(ii) Amount of payment.--If a taxpayer described in clause
(i) is entitled to a payment under subparagraph (A), the
amount of such payment shall be reduced by any amount paid
pursuant to the judgment described in clause (iii).
(iii) Judgment described.--A judgment is described in this
subparagraph if such judgment--

(I) is made by a court of competent jurisdiction within the
United States,
(II) relates to the constitutionality of any tax paid on
exported coal under section 4121 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, and
(III) is in favor of the coal producer or the party related
to the coal producer.

(2) Exporters.--Notwithstanding subsections (a)(1) and (c)
of section 6416 and section 6511 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, and a judgment described in paragraph (1)(B)(iii) of
this subsection, if--
(A) an exporter establishes that such exporter exported
coal to a foreign country or shipped coal to a possession of
the United States, or caused such coal to be so exported or
shipped,
(B) such exporter filed a tax return on or after October 1,
1990, and on or before the date of the enactment of this Act,
and

[[Page 16359]]

(C) such exporter files a claim for refund with the
Secretary not later than the close of the 30-day period
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act,

then the Secretary shall pay to such exporter an amount equal
to $0.825 per ton of such coal exported by the exporter or
caused to be exported or shipped, or caused to be exported or
shipped, by the exporter.
(b) Limitations.--Subsection (a) shall not apply with
respect to exported coal if a settlement with the Federal
Government has been made with and accepted by, the coal
producer, a party related to such coal producer, or the
exporter, of such coal, as of the date that the claim is
filed under this section with respect to such exported coal.
For purposes of this subsection, the term ``settlement with
the Federal Government'' shall not include any settlement or
stipulation entered into as of the date of the enactment of
this Act, the terms of which contemplate a judgment
concerning which any party has reserved the right to file an
appeal, or has filed an appeal.
(c) Subsequent Refund Prohibited.--No refund shall be made
under this section to the extent that a credit or refund of
such tax on such exported or shipped coal has been paid to
any person.
(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
(1) Coal producer.--The term ``coal producer'' means the
person in whom is vested ownership of the coal immediately
after the coal is severed from the ground, without regard to
the existence of any contractual arrangement for the sale or
other disposition of the coal or the payment of any royalties
between the producer and third parties. The term includes any
person who extracts coal from coal waste refuse piles or from
the silt waste product which results from the wet washing (or
similar processing) of coal.
(2) Exporter.--The term ``exporter'' means a person, other
than a coal producer, who does not have a contract, fee
arrangement, or any other agreement with a producer or seller
of such coal to export or ship such coal to a third party on
behalf of the producer or seller of such coal and--
(A) is indicated in the shipper's export declaration or
other documentation as the exporter of record, or
(B) actually exported such coal to a foreign country or
shipped such coal to a possession of the United States, or
caused such coal to be so exported or shipped.
(3) Related party.--The term ``a party related to such coal
producer'' means a person who--
(A) is related to such coal producer through any degree of
common management, stock ownership, or voting control,
(B) is related (within the meaning of section 144(a)(3) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) to such coal producer, or
(C) has a contract, fee arrangement, or any other agreement
with such coal producer to sell such coal to a third party on
behalf of such coal producer.
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Treasury or the Secretary's designee.
(e) Timing of Refund.--With respect to any claim for refund
filed pursuant to this section, the Secretary shall determine
whether the requirements of this section are met not later
than 180 days after such claim is filed. If the Secretary
determines that the requirements of this section are met, the
claim for refund shall be paid not later than 180 days after
the Secretary makes such determination.
(f) Interest.--Any refund paid pursuant to this section
shall be paid by the Secretary with interest from the date of
overpayment determined by using the overpayment rate and
method under section 6621 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986.
(g) Denial of Double Benefit.--The payment under subsection
(a) with respect to any coal shall not exceed--
(1) in the case of a payment to a coal producer, the amount
of tax paid under section 4121 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 with respect to such coal by such coal producer or a
party related to such coal producer, and
(2) in the case of a payment to an exporter, an amount
equal to $0.825 per ton with respect to such coal exported by
the exporter or caused to be exported by the exporter.
(h) Application of Section.--This section applies only to
claims on coal exported or shipped on or after October 1,
1990, through the date of the enactment of this Act.
(i) Standing Not Conferred.--
(1) Exporters.--With respect to exporters, this section
shall not confer standing upon an exporter to commence, or
intervene in, any judicial or administrative proceeding
concerning a claim for refund by a coal producer of any
Federal or State tax, fee, or royalty paid by the coal
producer.
(2) Coal producers.--With respect to coal producers, this
section shall not confer standing upon a coal producer to
commence, or intervene in, any judicial or administrative
proceeding concerning a claim for refund by an exporter of
any Federal or State tax, fee, or royalty paid by the
producer and alleged to have been passed on to an exporter.

SEC. 525. CARBON AUDIT OF THE TAX CODE.

(a) Study.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall enter into
an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to
undertake a comprehensive review of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 to identify the types of and specific tax provisions
that have the largest effects on carbon and other greenhouse
gas emissions and to estimate the magnitude of those effects.
(b) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the National Academy of Sciences shall
submit to Congress a report containing the results of study
authorized under this section.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $1,500,000 for
the period of fiscal years 2008 and 2009.

Subtitle B--Transportation and Domestic Fuel Security Provisions

SEC. 531. INCLUSION OF CELLULOSIC BIOFUEL IN BONUS
DEPRECIATION FOR BIOMASS ETHANOL PLANT
PROPERTY.

(a) In General.--Paragraph (3) of section 168(l) is amended
to read as follows:
``(3) Cellulosic biofuel.--The term `cellulosic biofuel'
means any liquid fuel which is produced from any
lignocellulosic or hemicellulosic matter that is available on
a renewable or recurring basis.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Subsection (l) of section 168
is amended--
(1) by striking ``cellulosic biomass ethanol'' each place
it appears and inserting ``cellulosic biofuel'',
(2) by striking ``Cellulosic Biomass Ethanol'' in the
heading of such subsection and inserting ``Cellulosic
Biofuel'', and
(3) by striking ``cellulosic biomass ethanol'' in the
heading of paragraph (2) thereof and inserting ``cellulosic
biofuel''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after the date of
the enactment of this Act, in taxable years ending after such
date.

SEC. 532. CREDITS FOR BIODIESEL AND RENEWABLE DIESEL.

(a) In General.--Sections 40A(g), 6426(c)(6), and
6427(e)(5)(B) are each amended by striking ``December 31,
2008'' and inserting ``December 31, 2009''.
(b) Increase in Rate of Credit.--
(1) Income tax credit.--Paragraphs (1)(A) and (2)(A) of
section 40A(b) are each amended by striking ``50 cents'' and
inserting ``$1.00''.
(2) Excise tax credit.--Paragraph (2) of section 6426(c) is
amended to read as follows:
``(2) Applicable amount.--For purposes of this subsection,
the applicable amount is $1.00.''.
(3) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Subsection (b) of section 40A is amended by striking
paragraph (3) and by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as
paragraphs (3) and (4), respectively.
(B) Paragraph (2) of section 40A(f) is amended to read as
follows:
``(2) Exception.--Subsection (b)(4) shall not apply with
respect to renewable diesel.''.
(C) Paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 40A(e) are each
amended by striking ``subsection (b)(5)(C)'' and inserting
``subsection (b)(4)(C)''.
(D) Clause (ii) of section 40A(d)(3)(C) is amended by
striking ``subsection (b)(5)(B)'' and inserting ``subsection
(b)(4)(B)''.
(c) Uniform Treatment of Diesel Produced From Biomass.--
Paragraph (3) of section 40A(f) is amended--
(1) by striking ``diesel fuel'' and inserting ``liquid
fuel'',
(2) by striking ``using a thermal depolymerization
process'', and
(3) by striking ``or D396'' in subparagraph (B) and
inserting ``, D396, or other equivalent standard approved by
the Secretary''.
(d) Coproduction of Renewable Diesel With Petroleum
Feedstock.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (3) of section 40A(f) (defining
renewable diesel) is amended by adding at the end the
following new sentence: ``Such term does not include any fuel
derived from coprocessing biomass with a feedstock which is
not biomass. For purposes of this paragraph, the term
`biomass' has the meaning given such term by section
45K(c)(3).''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Paragraph (3) of section 40A(f)
is amended by striking ``(as defined in section 45K(c)(3))''.
(e) Eligibility of Certain Aviation Fuel.--Paragraph (3) of
section 40A(f) (defining renewable diesel) is amended by
adding at the end the following: ``The term `renewable
diesel' also means fuel derived from biomass which meets the
requirements of a Department of Defense specification for
military jet fuel or an American Society of Testing and
Materials specification for aviation turbine fuel.''.
(f) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subsection, the amendments made by this section shall apply
to fuel produced, and sold or used, after December 31, 2008.
(2) Coproduction of renewable diesel with petroleum
feedstock.--The amendments made by subsection (d) shall apply
to fuel produced, and sold or used, after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 533. CLARIFICATION THAT CREDITS FOR FUEL ARE DESIGNED TO
PROVIDE AN INCENTIVE FOR UNITED STATES
PRODUCTION.

(a) Alcohol Fuels Credit.--Paragraph (6) of section 40(d)
is amended to read as follows:

[[Page 16360]]

``(6) Limitation to alcohol with connection to the united
states.--No credit shall be determined under this section
with respect to any alcohol which is produced outside the
United States for use as a fuel outside the United States.
For purposes of this paragraph, the term `United States'
includes any possession of the United States.''.
(b) Biodiesel Fuels Credit.--Subsection (d) of section 40A
is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) Limitation to biodiesel with connection to the united
states.--No credit shall be determined under this section
with respect to any biodiesel which is produced outside the
United States for use as a fuel outside the United States.
For purposes of this paragraph, the term `United States'
includes any possession of the United States.''.
(c) Excise Tax Credit.--
(1) In general.--Section 6426 is amended by adding at the
end the following new subsection:
``(i) Limitation to Fuels With Connection to the United
States.--
``(1) Alcohol.--No credit shall be determined under this
section with respect to any alcohol which is produced outside
the United States for use as a fuel outside the United
States.
``(2) Biodiesel and alternative fuels.--No credit shall be
determined under this section with respect to any biodiesel
or alternative fuel which is produced outside the United
States for use as a fuel outside the United States.

For purposes of this subsection, the term `United States'
includes any possession of the United States.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Subsection (e) of section 6427
is amended by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (6)
and by inserting after paragraph (4) the following new
paragraph:
``(5) Limitation to fuels with connection to the united
states.--No amount shall be payable under paragraph (1) or
(2) with respect to any mixture or alternative fuel if credit
is not allowed with respect to such mixture or alternative
fuel by reason of section 6426(i).''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to claims for credit or payment made on or after
May 15, 2008.

SEC. 534. CREDIT FOR NEW QUALIFIED PLUG-IN ELECTRIC DRIVE
MOTOR VEHICLES.

(a) In General.--Subpart B of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``SEC. 30D. NEW QUALIFIED PLUG-IN ELECTRIC DRIVE MOTOR
VEHICLES.

[[Page 16361]]

(B) Section 25(e)(1)(C)(ii) is amended by inserting
``30D,'' after ``25D,''.
(C) Section 25B(g)(2), as amended by section 104, is
amended by striking ``and 25D'' and inserting ``, 25D, and
30D''.
(D) Section 26(a)(1), as amended by section 104, is amended
by striking ``and 25D'' and inserting ``25D, and 30D''.
(E) Section 1400C(d)(2) is amended by striking ``and 25D''
and inserting ``25D, and 30D''.
(2) Section 1016(a) is amended by striking ``and'' at the
end of paragraph (35), by striking the period at the end of
paragraph (36) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
``(37) to the extent provided in section 30D(f)(1).''.
(3) Section 6501(m) is amended by inserting ``30D(f)(4),''
after ``30C(e)(5),''.
(4) The table of sections for subpart B of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:

``Sec. 30D. New qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicles.''.

(e) Treatment of Alternative Motor Vehicle Credit as a
Personal Credit.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (2) of section 30B(g) is amended
to read as follows:
``(2) Personal credit.--The credit allowed under subsection
(a) for any taxable year (after application of paragraph (1))
shall be treated as a credit allowable under subpart A for
such taxable year.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Subparagraph (A) of section 30C(d)(2) is amended by
striking ``sections 27, 30, and 30B'' and inserting
``sections 27 and 30''.
(B) Paragraph (3) of section 55(c) is amended by striking
``30B(g)(2),''.
(f) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subsection, the amendments made by this section shall apply
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2008.
(2) Treatment of alternative motor vehicle credit as
personal credit.--The amendments made by subsection (e) shall
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2007.
(g) Application of EGTRRA Sunset.--The amendment made by
subsection (d)(1)(A) shall be subject to title IX of the
Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 in
the same manner as the provision of such Act to which such
amendment relates.

SEC. 535. EXCLUSION FROM HEAVY TRUCK TAX FOR IDLING REDUCTION
UNITS AND ADVANCED INSULATION.

(a) In General.--Section 4053 is amended by adding at the
end the following new paragraphs:
``(9) Idling reduction device.--Any device or system of
devices which--
``(A) is designed to provide to a vehicle those services
(such as heat, air conditioning, or electricity) that would
otherwise require the operation of the main drive engine
while the vehicle is temporarily parked or remains stationary
using one or more devices affixed to a tractor, and
``(B) is determined by the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, in consultation with the
Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Transportation, to
reduce idling of such vehicle at a motor vehicle rest stop or
other location where such vehicles are temporarily parked or
remain stationary.
``(10) Advanced insulation.--Any insulation that has an R
value of not less than R35 per inch.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to sales or installations after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 536. RESTRUCTURING OF NEW YORK LIBERTY ZONE TAX CREDITS.

(a) In General.--Part I of subchapter Y of chapter 1 is
amended by redesignating section 1400L as section 1400K and
by adding at the end the following new section:

``SEC. 1400L. NEW YORK LIBERTY ZONE TAX CREDITS.

``(a) In General.--In the case of a New York Liberty Zone
governmental unit, there shall be allowed as a credit against
any taxes imposed for any payroll period by section 3402 for
which such governmental unit is liable under section 3403 an
amount equal to so much of the portion of the qualifying
project expenditure amount allocated under subsection (b)(3)
to such governmental unit for the calendar year as is
allocated by such governmental unit to such period under
subsection (b)(4).
``(b) Qualifying Project Expenditure Amount.--For purposes
of this section--
``(1) In general.--The term `qualifying project expenditure
amount' means, with respect to any calendar year, the sum
of--
``(A) the total expenditures paid or incurred during such
calendar year by all New York Liberty Zone governmental units
and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey for any
portion of qualifying projects located wholly within the City
of New York, New York, and
``(B) any such expenditures--
``(i) paid or incurred in any preceding calendar year which
begins after the date of enactment of this section, and
``(ii) not previously allocated under paragraph (3).
``(2) Qualifying project.--The term `qualifying project'
means any transportation infrastructure project, including
highways, mass transit systems, railroads, airports, ports,
and waterways, in or connecting with the New York Liberty
Zone (as defined in section 1400K(h)), which is designated as
a qualifying project under this section jointly by the
Governor of the State of New York and the Mayor of the City
of New York, New York.
``(3) General allocation.--
``(A) In general.--The Governor of the State of New York
and the Mayor of the City of New York, New York, shall
jointly allocate to each New York Liberty Zone governmental
unit the portion of the qualifying project expenditure amount
which may be taken into account by such governmental unit
under subsection (a) for any calendar year in the credit
period.
``(B) Aggregate limit.--The aggregate amount which may be
allocated under subparagraph (A) for all calendar years in
the credit period shall not exceed $2,000,000,000.
``(C) Annual limit.--The aggregate amount which may be
allocated under subparagraph (A) for any calendar year in the
credit period shall not exceed the sum of--
``(i) $115,000,000 ($425,000,000 in the case of the last 2
years in the credit period), plus
``(ii) the aggregate amount authorized to be allocated
under this paragraph for all preceding calendar years in the
credit period which was not so allocated.
``(D) Unallocated amounts at end of credit period.--If, as
of the close of the credit period, the amount under
subparagraph (B) exceeds the aggregate amount allocated under
subparagraph (A) for all calendar years in the credit period,
the Governor of the State of New York and the Mayor of the
City of New York, New York, may jointly allocate to New York
Liberty Zone governmental units for any calendar year in the
5-year period following the credit period an amount equal
to--
``(i) the lesser of--

``(I) such excess, or
``(II) the qualifying project expenditure amount for such
calendar year, reduced by

``(ii) the aggregate amount allocated under this
subparagraph for all preceding calendar years.
``(4) Allocation to payroll periods.--Each New York Liberty
Zone governmental unit which has been allocated a portion of
the qualifying project expenditure amount under paragraph (3)
for a calendar year may allocate such portion to payroll
periods beginning in such calendar year as such governmental
unit determines appropriate.
``(c) Carryover of Unused Allocations.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), if
the amount allocated under subsection (b)(3) to a New York
Liberty Zone governmental unit for any calendar year exceeds
the aggregate taxes imposed by section 3402 for which such
governmental unit is liable under section 3403 for periods
beginning in such year, such excess shall be carried to the
succeeding calendar year and added to the allocation of such
governmental unit for such succeeding calendar year.
``(2) Reallocation.--If a New York Liberty Zone
governmental unit does not use an amount allocated to it
under subsection (b)(3) within the time prescribed by the
Governor of the State of New York and the Mayor of the City
of New York, New York, then such amount shall after such time
be treated for purposes of subsection (b)(3) in the same
manner as if it had never been allocated.
``(d) Definitions and Special Rules.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) Credit period.--The term `credit period' means the
12-year period beginning on January 1, 2009.
``(2) New york liberty zone governmental unit.--The term
`New York Liberty Zone governmental unit' means--
``(A) the State of New York,
``(B) the City of New York, New York, and
``(C) any agency or instrumentality of such State or City.
``(3) Treatment of funds.--Any expenditure for a qualifying
project taken into account for purposes of the credit under
this section shall be considered State and local funds for
the purpose of any Federal program.
``(4) Treatment of credit amounts for purposes of
withholding taxes.--For purposes of this title, a New York
Liberty Zone governmental unit shall be treated as having
paid to the Secretary, on the day on which wages are paid to
employees, an amount equal to the amount of the credit
allowed to such entity under subsection (a) with respect to
such wages, but only if such governmental unit deducts and
withholds wages for such payroll period under section 3401
(relating to wage withholding).
``(e) Reporting.--The Governor of the State of New York and
the Mayor of the City of New York, New York, shall jointly
submit to the Secretary an annual report--
``(1) which certifies--
``(A) the qualifying project expenditure amount for the
calendar year, and
``(B) the amount allocated to each New York Liberty Zone
governmental unit under subsection (b)(3) for the calendar
year, and
``(2) includes such other information as the Secretary may
require to carry out this section.
``(f) Guidance.--The Secretary may prescribe such guidance
as may be necessary or

[[Page 16362]]

appropriate to ensure compliance with the purposes of this
section.''.
(b) Termination of Special Allowance and Expensing.--
Subparagraph (A) of section 1400K(b)(2), as redesignated by
subsection (a), is amended by striking the parenthetical
therein and inserting ``(in the case of nonresidential real
property and residential rental property, the date of the
enactment of the Energy Independence and Tax Relief Act of
2008 or, if acquired pursuant to a binding contract in effect
on such enactment date, December 31, 2009)''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 38(c)(3)(B) is amended by striking ``section
1400L(a)'' and inserting ``section 1400K(a)''.
(2) Section 168(k)(2)(D)(ii) is amended by striking
``section 1400L(c)(2)'' and inserting ``section
1400K(c)(2)''.
(3) The table of sections for part I of subchapter Y of
chapter 1 is amended by redesignating the item relating to
section 1400L as an item relating to section 1400K and by
inserting after such item the following new item:

``Sec. 1400L. New York Liberty Zone tax credits.''

. (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 537. TRANSPORTATION FRINGE BENEFIT TO BICYCLE COMMUTERS.

(a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 132(f) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``(D) Any qualified bicycle commuting reimbursement.''.
(b) Limitation on Exclusion.--Paragraph (2) of section
132(f) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of
subparagraph (A), by striking the period at the end of
subparagraph (B) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at
the end the following new subparagraph:
``(C) the applicable annual limitation in the case of any
qualified bicycle commuting reimbursement.''.
(c) Definitions.--Paragraph (5) of section 132(f) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(F) Definitions related to bicycle commuting
reimbursement.--
``(i) Qualified bicycle commuting reimbursement.--The term
`qualified bicycle commuting reimbursement' means, with
respect to any calendar year, any employer reimbursement
during the 15-month period beginning with the first day of
such calendar year for reasonable expenses incurred by the
employee during such calendar year for the purchase of a
bicycle and bicycle improvements, repair, and storage, if
such bicycle is regularly used for travel between the
employee's residence and place of employment.
``(ii) Applicable annual limitation.--The term `applicable
annual limitation' means, with respect to any employee for
any calendar year, the product of $20 multiplied by the
number of qualified bicycle commuting months during such
year.
``(iii) Qualified bicycle commuting month.--The term
`qualified bicycle commuting month' means, with respect to
any employee, any month during which such employee--

``(I) regularly uses the bicycle for a substantial portion
of the travel between the employee's residence and place of
employment, and
``(II) does not receive any benefit described in
subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1).''.

(d) Constructive Receipt of Benefit.--Paragraph (4) of
section 132(f) is amended by inserting ``(other than a
qualified bicycle commuting reimbursement)'' after
``qualified transportation fringe''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2008.

SEC. 538. ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLE REFUELING PROPERTY CREDIT.

(a) Increase in Credit Amount.--Section 30C is amended--
(1) by striking ``30 percent'' in subsection (a) and
inserting ``50 percent'', and
(2) by striking ``$30,000'' in subsection (b)(1) and
inserting ``$50,000''.
(b) Extension of Credit.--Paragraph (2) of section 30C(g)
is amended by striking ``December 31, 2009'' and inserting
``December 31, 2010''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after the date of
the enactment of this Act, in taxable years ending after such
date.

Subtitle C--Energy Conservation and Efficiency Provisions

SEC. 541. QUALIFIED ENERGY CONSERVATION BONDS.

(a) In General.--Subpart I of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1, as amended by section 106, is amended by adding at
the end the following new section:

``SEC. 54D. QUALIFIED ENERGY CONSERVATION BONDS.

``(a) Qualified Energy Conservation Bond.--For purposes of
this subchapter, the term `qualified energy conservation
bond' means any bond issued as part of an issue if--
``(1) 100 percent of the available project proceeds of such
issue are to be used for one or more qualified conservation
purposes,
``(2) the bond is issued by a State or local government,
and
``(3) the issuer designates such bond for purposes of this
section.
``(b) Reduced Credit Amount.--The annual credit determined
under section 54A(b) with respect to any qualified energy
conservation bond shall be 70 percent of the amount so
determined without regard to this subsection.
``(c) Limitation on Amount of Bonds Designated.--The
maximum aggregate face amount of bonds which may be
designated under subsection (a) by any issuer shall not
exceed the limitation amount allocated to such issuer under
subsection (e).
``(d) National Limitation on Amount of Bonds Designated.--
There is a national qualified energy conservation bond
limitation of $3,000,000,000.
``(e) Allocations.--
``(1) In general.--The limitation applicable under
subsection (d) shall be allocated by the Secretary among the
States in proportion to the population of the States.
``(2) Allocations to largest local governments.--
``(A) In general.--In the case of any State in which there
is a large local government, each such local government shall
be allocated a portion of such State's allocation which bears
the same ratio to the State's allocation (determined without
regard to this subparagraph) as the population of such large
local government bears to the population of such State.
``(B) Allocation of unused limitation to state.--The amount
allocated under this subsection to a large local government
may be reallocated by such local government to the State in
which such local government is located.
``(C) Large local government.--For purposes of this
section, the term `large local government' means any
municipality or county if such municipality or county has a
population of 100,000 or more.
``(3) Allocation to issuers; restriction on private
activity bonds.--Any allocation under this subsection to a
State or large local government shall be allocated by such
State or large local government to issuers within the State
in a manner that results in not less than 70 percent of the
allocation to such State or large local government being used
to designate bonds which are not private activity bonds.
``(f) Qualified Conservation Purpose.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) In general.--The term `qualified conservation
purpose' means any of the following:
``(A) Capital expenditures incurred for purposes of--
``(i) reducing energy consumption in publicly-owned
buildings by at least 20 percent,
``(ii) implementing green community programs,
``(iii) rural development involving the production of
electricity from renewable energy resources, or
``(iv) any qualified facility (as determined under section
45(d) without regard to paragraphs (8) and (10) thereof and
without regard to any placed in service date).
``(B) Expenditures with respect to research facilities, and
research grants, to support research in--
``(i) development of cellulosic ethanol or other nonfossil
fuels,
``(ii) technologies for the capture and sequestration of
carbon dioxide produced through the use of fossil fuels,
``(iii) increasing the efficiency of existing technologies
for producing nonfossil fuels,
``(iv) automobile battery technologies and other
technologies to reduce fossil fuel consumption in
transportation, or
``(v) technologies to reduce energy use in buildings.
``(C) Mass commuting facilities and related facilities that
reduce the consumption of energy, including expenditures to
reduce pollution from vehicles used for mass commuting.
``(D) Demonstration projects designed to promote the
commercialization of--
``(i) green building technology,
``(ii) conversion of agricultural waste for use in the
production of fuel or otherwise,
``(iii) advanced battery manufacturing technologies,
``(iv) technologies to reduce peak use of electricity, or
``(v) technologies for the capture and sequestration of
carbon dioxide emitted from combusting fossil fuels in order
to produce electricity.
``(E) Public education campaigns to promote energy
efficiency.
``(2) Special rules for private activity bonds.--For
purposes of this section, in the case of any private activity
bond, the term `qualified conservation purposes' shall not
include any expenditure which is not a capital expenditure.
``(g) Population.--
``(1) In general.--The population of any State or local
government shall be determined for purposes of this section
as provided in section 146(j) for the calendar year which
includes the date of the enactment of this section.
``(2) Special rule for counties.--In determining the
population of any county for purposes of this section, any
population of such county which is taken into account in
determining the population of any municipality which is a
large local government shall not

[[Page 16363]]

be taken into account in determining the population of such
county.
``(h) Application to Indian Tribal Governments.--An Indian
tribal government shall be treated for purposes of this
section in the same manner as a large local government,
except that--
``(1) an Indian tribal government shall be treated for
purposes of subsection (e) as located within a State to the
extent of so much of the population of such government as
resides within such State, and
``(2) any bond issued by an Indian tribal government shall
be treated as a qualified energy conservation bond only if
issued as part of an issue the available project proceeds of
which are used for purposes for which such Indian tribal
government could issue bonds to which section 103(a)
applies.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Paragraph (1) of section 54A(d), as amended by section
106, is amended to read as follows:
``(1) Qualified tax credit bond.--The term `qualified tax
credit bond' means--
``(A) a qualified forestry conservation bond,
``(B) a new clean renewable energy bond, or
``(C) a qualified energy conservation bond,
which is part of an issue that meets requirements of
paragraphs (2), (3), (4), (5), and (6).''.
(2) Subparagraph (C) of section 54A(d)(2), as amended by
section 106, is amended to read as follows:
``(C) Qualified purpose.--For purposes of this paragraph,
the term `qualified purpose' means--
``(i) in the case of a qualified forestry conservation
bond, a purpose specified in section 54B(e),
``(ii) in the case of a new clean renewable energy bond, a
purpose specified in section 54C(a)(1), and
``(iii) in the case of a qualified energy conservation
bond, a purpose specified in section 54D(a)(1).''.
(3) The table of sections for subpart I of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:

``Sec. 54D. Qualified energy conservation bonds.''.

(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to obligations issued after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 542. CREDIT FOR NONBUSINESS ENERGY PROPERTY.

(a) Extension of Credit.--Section 25C(g) is amended by
striking ``December 31, 2007'' and inserting ``December 31,
2008''.
(b) Qualified Biomass Fuel Property.--
(1) In general.--Section 25C(d)(3) is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (D),
(B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (E)
and inserting ``, and'', and
(C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(F) a stove which uses the burning of biomass fuel to
heat a dwelling unit located in the United States and used as
a residence by the taxpayer, or to heat water for use in such
a dwelling unit, and which has a thermal efficiency rating of
at least 75 percent.''.
(2) Biomass fuel.--Section 25C(d) is amended by adding at
the end the following new paragraph:
``(6) Biomass fuel.--The term `biomass fuel' means any
plant-derived fuel available on a renewable or recurring
basis, including agricultural crops and trees, wood and wood
waste and residues (including wood pellets), plants
(including aquatic plants), grasses, residues, and fibers.''.
(c) Coordination With Credit for Qualified Geothermal Heat
Pump Property Expenditures.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (3) of section 25C(d), as
amended by subsection (b), is amended by striking
subparagraph (C) and by redesignating subparagraphs (D), (E),
and (F) as subparagraphs (C), (D), and (E), respectively.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Subparagraph (C) of section
25C(d)(2) is amended to read as follows:
``(C) Requirements and standards for air conditioners and
heat pumps.--The standards and requirements prescribed by the
Secretary under subparagraph (B) with respect to the energy
efficiency ratio (EER) for central air conditioners and
electric heat pumps--
``(i) shall require measurements to be based on published
data which is tested by manufacturers at 95 degrees
Fahrenheit, and
``(ii) may be based on the certified data of the Air
Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute that are prepared in
partnership with the Consortium for Energy Efficiency.''.
(d) Modification of Qualified Energy Efficiency
Improvements.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 25C(c) is amended
by inserting ``, or an asphalt roof with appropriate cooling
granules,'' before ``which meet the Energy Star program
requirements''.
(2) Building envelope component.--Subparagraph (D) of
section 25C(c)(2) is amended--
(A) by inserting ``or asphalt roof'' after ``metal roof'',
and
(B) by inserting ``or cooling granules'' after ``pigmented
coatings''.
(e) Effective Dates.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
amendments made this section shall apply to expenditures made
after December 31, 2007.
(2) Modification of qualified energy efficiency
improvements.--The amendments made by subsection (d) shall
apply to property placed in service after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 543. ENERGY EFFICIENT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS DEDUCTION.

Subsection (h) of section 179D is amended by striking
``December 31, 2008'' and inserting ``December 31, 2013''.

SEC. 544. MODIFICATIONS OF ENERGY EFFICIENT APPLIANCE CREDIT
FOR APPLIANCES PRODUCED AFTER 2007.

(a) In General.--Subsection (b) of section 45M is amended
to read as follows:
``(b) Applicable Amount.--For purposes of subsection (a)--
``(1) Dishwashers.--The applicable amount is--
``(A) $45 in the case of a dishwasher which is manufactured
in calendar year 2008 or 2009 and which uses no more than 324
kilowatt hours per year and 5.8 gallons per cycle, and
``(B) $75 in the case of a dishwasher which is manufactured
in calendar year 2008, 2009, or 2010 and which uses no more
than 307 kilowatt hours per year and 5.0 gallons per cycle
(5.5 gallons per cycle for dishwashers designed for greater
than 12 place settings).
``(2) Clothes washers.--The applicable amount is--
``(A) $75 in the case of a residential top-loading clothes
washer manufactured in calendar year 2008 which meets or
exceeds a 1.72 modified energy factor and does not exceed a
8.0 water consumption factor,
``(B) $125 in the case of a residential top-loading clothes
washer manufactured in calendar year 2008 or 2009 which meets
or exceeds a 1.8 modified energy factor and does not exceed a
7.5 water consumption factor,
``(C) $150 in the case of a residential or commercial
clothes washer manufactured in calendar year 2008, 2009, or
2010 which meets or exceeds 2.0 modified energy factor and
does not exceed a 6.0 water consumption factor, and
``(D) $250 in the case of a residential or commercial
clothes washer manufactured in calendar year 2008, 2009, or
2010 which meets or exceeds 2.2 modified energy factor and
does not exceed a 4.5 water consumption factor.
``(3) Refrigerators.--The applicable amount is--
``(A) $50 in the case of a refrigerator which is
manufactured in calendar year 2008, and consumes at least 20
percent but not more than 22.9 percent less kilowatt hours
per year than the 2001 energy conservation standards,
``(B) $75 in the case of a refrigerator which is
manufactured in calendar year 2008 or 2009, and consumes at
least 23 percent but no more than 24.9 percent less kilowatt
hours per year than the 2001 energy conservation standards,
``(C) $100 in the case of a refrigerator which is
manufactured in calendar year 2008, 2009, or 2010, and
consumes at least 25 percent but not more than 29.9 percent
less kilowatt hours per year than the 2001 energy
conservation standards, and
``(D) $200 in the case of a refrigerator manufactured in
calendar year 2008, 2009, or 2010 and which consumes at least
30 percent less energy than the 2001 energy conservation
standards.''.
(b) Eligible Production.--
(1) Similar treatment for all appliances.--Subsection (c)
of section 45M is amended--
(A) by striking paragraph (2),
(B) by striking ``(1) In general'' and all that follows
through ``the eligible'' and inserting ``The eligible'',
(C) by moving the text of such subsection in line with the
subsection heading, and
(D) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as
paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively, and by moving such
paragraphs 2 ems to the left.
(2) Modification of base period.--Paragraph (2) of section
45M(c), as amended by paragraph (1), is amended by striking
``3-calendar year'' and inserting ``2-calendar year''.
(c) Types of Energy Efficient Appliances.--Subsection (d)
of section 45M (defining types of energy efficient
appliances) is amended to read as follows:
``(d) Types of Energy Efficient Appliance.--For purposes of
this section, the types of energy efficient appliances are--
``(1) dishwashers described in subsection (b)(1),
``(2) clothes washers described in subsection (b)(2), and
``(3) refrigerators described in subsection (b)(3).''.
(d) Aggregate Credit Amount Allowed.--
(1) Increase in limit.--Paragraph (1) of section 45M(e) is
amended to read as follows:
``(1) Aggregate credit amount allowed.--The aggregate
amount of credit allowed under subsection (a) with respect to
a taxpayer for any taxable year shall not exceed $75,000,000
reduced by the amount of the credit allowed under subsection
(a) to the taxpayer (or any predecessor) for all prior
taxable years beginning after December 31, 2007.''.

[[Page 16364]]

(2) Exception for certain refrigerator and clothes
washers.--Paragraph (2) of section 45M(e) is amended to read
as follows:
``(2) Amount allowed for certain refrigerators and clothes
washers.--Refrigerators described in subsection (b)(3)(D) and
clothes washers described in subsection (b)(2)(D) shall not
be taken into account under paragraph (1).''.
(e) Qualified Energy Efficient Appliances.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 45M(f) (defining
qualified energy efficient appliance) is amended to read as
follows:
``(1) Qualified energy efficient appliance.--The term
`qualified energy efficient appliance' means--
``(A) any dishwasher described in subsection (b)(1),
``(B) any clothes washer described in subsection (b)(2),
and
``(C) any refrigerator described in subsection (b)(3).''.
(2) Clothes washer.--Section 45M(f)(3) is amended by
inserting ``commercial'' before ``residential'' the second
place it appears.
(3) Top-loading clothes washer.--Subsection (f) of section
45M is amended by redesignating paragraphs (4), (5), (6), and
(7) as paragraphs (5), (6), (7), and (8), respectively, and
by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new paragraph:
``(4) Top-loading clothes washer.--The term `top-loading
clothes washer' means a clothes washer which has the clothes
container compartment access located on the top of the
machine and which operates on a vertical axis.''.
(4) Replacement of energy factor.--Section 45M(f)(6), as
redesignated by paragraph (3), is amended to read as follows:
``(6) Modified energy factor.--The term `modified energy
factor' means the modified energy factor established by the
Department of Energy for compliance with the Federal energy
conservation standard.''.
(5) Gallons per cycle; water consumption factor.--Section
45M(f), as amended by paragraph (3), is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(9) Gallons per cycle.--The term `gallons per cycle'
means, with respect to a dishwasher, the amount of water,
expressed in gallons, required to complete a normal cycle of
a dishwasher.
``(10) Water consumption factor.--The term `water
consumption factor' means, with respect to a clothes washer,
the quotient of the total weighted per-cycle water
consumption divided by the cubic foot (or liter) capacity of
the clothes washer.''.
(f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to appliances produced after December 31, 2007.

SEC. 545. ACCELERATED RECOVERY PERIOD FOR DEPRECIATION OF
SMART METERS AND SMART GRID SYSTEMS.

(a) In General.--Section 168(e)(3)(D) is amended by
striking ``and'' at the end of clause (i), by striking the
period at the end of clause (ii) and inserting a comma, and
by inserting after clause (ii) the following new clauses:
``(iii) any qualified smart electric meter, and
``(iv) any qualified smart electric grid system.''.
(b) Definitions.--Section 168(i) is amended by inserting at
the end the following new paragraph:
``(18) Qualified smart electric meters.--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified smart electric
meter' means any smart electric meter which is placed in
service by a taxpayer who is a supplier of electric energy or
a provider of electric energy services.
``(B) Smart electric meter.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A), the term `smart electric meter' means any time-based
meter and related communication equipment which is capable of
being used by the taxpayer as part of a system that--
``(i) measures and records electricity usage data on a
time-differentiated basis in at least 24 separate time
segments per day,
``(ii) provides for the exchange of information between
supplier or provider and the customer's electric meter in
support of time-based rates or other forms of demand
response,
``(iii) provides data to such supplier or provider so that
the supplier or provider can provide energy usage information
to customers electronically, and
``(iv) provides net metering.
``(19) Qualified smart electric grid systems.--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified smart electric grid
system' means any smart grid property used as part of a
system for electric distribution grid communications,
monitoring, and management placed in service by a taxpayer
who is a supplier of electric energy or a provider of
electric energy services.
``(B) Smart grid property.--For the purposes of
subparagraph (A), the term `smart grid property' means
electronics and related equipment that is capable of--
``(i) sensing, collecting, and monitoring data of or from
all portions of a utility's electric distribution grid,
``(ii) providing real-time, two-way communications to
monitor or manage such grid, and
``(iii) providing real time analysis of and event
prediction based upon collected data that can be used to
improve electric distribution system reliability, quality,
and performance.''.
(c) Continued Application of 150 Percent Declining Balance
Method.--Paragraph (2) of section 168(b) is amended by
striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (B), by
redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D), and by
inserting after subparagraph (B) the following new
subparagraph:
``(C) any property (other than property described in
paragraph (3)) which is a qualified smart electric meter or
qualified smart electric grid system, or''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after the date of
the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 546. QUALIFIED GREEN BUILDING AND SUSTAINABLE DESIGN
PROJECTS.

(a) In General.--Paragraph (8) of section 142(l) is amended
by striking ``September 30, 2009'' and inserting ``September
30, 2012''.
(b) Treatment of Current Refunding Bonds.--Paragraph (9) of
section 142(l) is amended by striking ``October 1, 2009'' and
inserting ``October 1, 2012''.
(c) Accountability.--The second sentence of section 701(d)
of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 is amended by
striking ``issuance,'' and inserting ``issuance of the last
issue with respect to such project,''.

Subtitle D--Limitation of Oil Incentives

SEC. 551. LIMITATION OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, GAS, OR PRIMARY
PRODUCTS THEREOF.

(a) Denial of Deduction for Major Integrated Oil Companies
for Income Attributable to Domestic Production of Oil, Gas,
or Primary Products Thereof.--
(1) In general.--Subparagraph (B) of section 199(c)(4)
(relating to exceptions) is amended by striking ``or'' at the
end of clause (ii), by striking the period at the end of
clause (iii) and inserting ``, or'', and by inserting after
clause (iii) the following new clause:
``(iv) in the case of any major integrated oil company (as
defined in section 167(h)(5)(B)), the production, refining,
processing, transportation, or distribution of oil, gas, or
any primary product thereof during any taxable year described
in section 167(h)(5)(B).''.
(2) Primary product.--Section 199(c)(4)(B) is amended by
adding at the end the following flush sentence:
``For purposes of clause (iv), the term `primary product' has
the same meaning as when used in section 927(a)(2)(C), as in
effect before its repeal.''.
(b) Limitation on Oil Related Qualified Production
Activities Income for Taxpayers Other Than Major Integrated
Oil Companies.--
(1) In general.--Section 199(d) is amended by redesignating
paragraph (9) as paragraph (10) and by inserting after
paragraph (8) the following new paragraph:
``(9) Special rule for taxpayers with oil related qualified
production activities income.--
``(A) In general.--If a taxpayer (other than a major
integrated oil company (as defined in section 167(h)(5)(B)))
has oil related qualified production activities income for
any taxable year beginning after 2009, the amount of the
deduction under subsection (a) shall be reduced by 3 percent
of the least of--
``(i) the oil related qualified production activities
income of the taxpayer for the taxable year,
``(ii) the qualified production activities income of the
taxpayer for the taxable year, or
``(iii) taxable income (determined without regard to this
section).
``(B) Oil related qualified production activities income.--
The term `oil related qualified production activities income'
means for any taxable year the qualified production
activities income which is attributable to the production,
refining, processing, transportation, or distribution of oil,
gas, or any primary product thereof during such taxable
year.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 199(d)(2) (relating to
application to individuals) is amended by striking
``subsection (a)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``subsections
(a)(1)(B) and (d)(9)(A)(iii)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2008.

SEC. 552. CLARIFICATION OF DETERMINATION OF FOREIGN OIL AND
GAS EXTRACTION INCOME.

(a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 907(c) is amended
by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C), by
striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (A), and by
inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new
subparagraph:
``(B) so much of any transportation of such minerals as
occurs before the fair market value event, or''.
(b) Fair Market Value Event.--Subsection (c) of section 907
is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(6) Fair market value event.--For purposes of this
section, the term `fair market value event' means, with
respect to any mineral, the first point in time at which such
mineral--
``(A) has a fair market value which can be determined on
the basis of a transfer, which

[[Page 16365]]

is an arm's length transaction, of such mineral from the
taxpayer to a person who is not related (within the meaning
of section 482) to such taxpayer, or
``(B) is at a location at which the fair market value is
readily ascertainable by reason of transactions among
unrelated third parties with respect to the same mineral
(taking into account source, location, quality, and chemical
composition).''.
(c) Special Rule for Certain Petroleum Taxes.--Subsection
(c) of section 907, as amended by subsection (b), is amended
to by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(7) Oil and gas taxes.--In the case of any tax imposed by
a foreign country which is limited in its application to
taxpayers engaged in oil or gas activities--
``(A) the term `oil and gas extraction taxes' shall include
such tax,
``(B) the term `foreign oil and gas extraction income'
shall include any taxable income which is taken into account
in determining such tax (or is directly attributable to the
activity to which such tax relates), and
``(C) the term `foreign oil related income' shall not
include any taxable income which is treated as foreign oil
and gas extraction income under subparagraph (B).''.
(d) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Subparagraph (C) of section 907(c)(1), as redesignated
by this section, is amended by inserting ``or used by the
taxpayer in the activity described in subparagraph (B)''
before the period at the end.
(2) Subparagraph (B) of section 907(c)(2) is amended to
read as follows:
``(B) so much of the transportation of such minerals or
primary products as is not taken into account under paragraph
(1)(B),''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

____________________

AUTHORITY FOR COMMITTEES TO MEET

committee on armed services

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of
the Senate on Thursday, July 24, 2008, at 9:30 a.m.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

committee on environment and public works

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during
the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 24, 2008, in room 406 of
the Dirksen Senate Office Building at 9:30 a.m.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

committee on finance

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the
Senate on Thursday, July 24, 2008, at 10 a.m., in room 215 of the
Dirksen Senate Office Building.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

committee on finance

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the
Senate on Thursday, July 24, 2008, at 2 p.m., in room 215 of the
Dirksen Senate Office Building.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

committee on homeland security and governmental affairs

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized
to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 24, 2008, at
10 a.m.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

committee on indian affairs

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of
the Senate on Thursday, July 24, at 9:30 a.m. in room 562 of the
Dirksen Senate Office Building.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

committee on the judiciary

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of
the Senate to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Crimes Associated with
Polygamy: The Need for a Coordinated State and Federal Response'' on
Thursday, July 24, 2008, at 10 a.m., in room SD-226 of the Dirksen
Senate Office Building.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

subcommittee on federal financial management, government information,
federal services, and international security

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs' Subcommittee
on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal
Services, and International Security be authorized to meet during the
session of the Senate on Thursday, July 24, 2008, at 2:30 p.m. to
conduct a hearing entitled, ``Improving Federal Program Management
Using Performance Information.''
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

____________________

PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Zachary
Manning, Byron Hurlbut, and Madeleine Ward, who are interns with my
office and with the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, be granted
floor privileges today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

____________________

APPROVING RENEWAL OF IMPORT RESTRICTIONS IN THE BURMESE FREEDOM AND
DEMOCRACY ACT OF 2003

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 896, H.J. Res.
93, the Burma Sanctions Act.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the joint resolution by
title.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

A joint resolution (H.J. Res. 93), approving the renewal of
import restrictions contained in the Burmese Freedom and
Democracy Act of 2003.

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the joint
resolution.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
statutory time be yielded back, the joint resolution be read three
times, passed, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table;
that any statements relating thereto be printed in the Record, without
any intervening action or debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The joint resolution (H.J. Res 93) was ordered to a third reading,
was read the third time, and passed.

____________________

APPOINTMENT

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair, on behalf of the majority leader
pursuant to Public Law 107-252, Title II, Section 214, appoints the
following individual to serve as a member of the Election Assistance
Board of Advisors: Dr. Barbara Simons, of California.

____________________

UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT--S. 3268 AND H.R. 3221

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following
the cloture vote on S. 3268, and if cloture has not been invoked, and
the Senate has subsequently invoked cloture on the motion to concur in
the House amendment to the Senate amendment to the House amendments to
the Senate amendment to H.R. 3221, then postcloture debate time on
Friday, July 25, be divided in 30-minute blocks, beginning at 10 a.m.,
and until 1 p.m., and as specified in a subsequent order; with
postcloture time running during any recess or adjournment of the
Senate; that when the Senate convenes on Saturday, July 26 at 9 a.m.,
after the opening of the Senate, the time until 11 a.m. be equally
divided and controlled by the leaders or their designees, with the time
from 10:40 a.m. to 10:50 a.m. controlled by the Republican leader, and
the time from 10:50 a.m. to 11 a.m. controlled by the majority leader;
that at 11 a.m., all postcloture time be yielded back, the Senate
proceed to

[[Page 16366]]

vote on the motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate
amendment to the House amendments to the Senate amendment to H.R. 3221;
that if the motion is successful, the motion to reconsider be laid upon
the table and the motion to concur with an amendment be withdrawn;
further, that if cloture is invoked on S. 3268, then the provisions of
this agreement be null and void.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

____________________

MEASURE READ THE FIRST TIME--S. 3335

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I understand that S. 3335, which was
introduced earlier today by Senator Baucus, is at the desk. I ask for
its first reading.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will state the bill by title.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

A bill (S. 3335) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other
purposes.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask for a second reading and object to
my own request.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard. The bill will be read the
second time on the next legislative day.

____________________

ORDERS FOR FRIDAY, JULY 25, 2008

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the
Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 9:15 a.m.
tomorrow, Friday July 25; that following the prayer and pledge, the
Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed
to have expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their
use later in the day, and the Senate resume consideration of S. 3268,
and immediately proceed to a vote on the motion to invoke cloture on S.
3268, the energy speculation legislation. I further ask that the time
from 10 a.m. until 1 p.m. be equally divided and controlled by the
leaders in alternating 30-minute blocks of time, with the Republicans
controlling the first 30 minutes and the majority controlling the next
30 minutes. Finally, I ask unanimous consent that Senators have until
10 a.m. Friday to file second-degree amendments.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

____________________

PROGRAM

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, tomorrow, after 9:15 a.m., the Senate
will proceed to a cloture vote on the energy speculation bill. If
cloture is not invoked, the Senate will immediately proceed to a vote
on a motion to invoke cloture on the motion to concur with respect to
H.R. 3221, the housing reform legislation. Therefore, Senators should
expect two rollcall votes beginning at around 9:15 a.m. tomorrow.

____________________

ADJOURNMENT UNTIL 9:15 A.M. TOMORROW

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come
before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned
under the previous order.
There being no objection, the Senate, at 8:15 p.m., adjourned until
Friday, July 25, 2008, at 9:15 a.m.

____________________

NOMINATIONS

Executive nominations received by the Senate:

The Judiciary

Paul S. Diamond, of Pennsylvania, to be United States
Circuit Judge for the Third Circuit, vice Franklin S. Van
Antwerpen, retired.
Mitchell S. Goldberg, of Pennsylvania, to be United States
District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, vice
John R. Padova, retired.
C. Darnell Jones II, of Pennsylvania, to be United States
District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, vice
Bruce W. Kauffman, retired.
Carolyn P. Short, of Pennsylvania, to be United States
District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, vice
Paul S. Diamond, upon elevation.
Joel H. Slomsky, of Pennsylvania, to be United States
District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, vice
James T. Giles, retired.

In the Air Force

The following named officer for appointment in the United
States Air Force to the grade indicated under title 10,
U.S.C., section 624:

To be major general

Brig. Gen. David J. Scott

The following named officer for appointment in the United
States Air Force to the grade indicated under title 10,
U.S.C., section 624:

To be major general

Brig. Gen. Lawrence A. Stutzriem

The following named officer for appointment as Permanent
Professor at the United States Air Force Academy in the grade
indicated under title 10, U.S.C., sections 9333 (b) and 9336
(a):

To be colonel

Jeffrey T. Butler

In the Army

The following named Army National Guard of the United
States officer for appointment to the grade indicated in the
Reserve of the Army under title 10, U.S.C., sections 12203
and 12211:

To be colonel

Lemuel H. Clement

The following named Army National Guard of the United
States officer for appointment to the grade indicated in the
Reserve of the Army under title 10, U.S.C., sections 12203
and 12211:

To be colonel

Marco E. Harris

The following named Army National Guard of the United
States officers for appointment to the grade indicated in the
Reserve of the Army under title 10, U.S.C., sections 12203
and 12211:

To be colonel

Robert J. Howell, Jr.
Daryl D. Jaschen
Stanley R. Jones, Jr.
The following named Army National Guard of the United
States officer for appointment to the grade indicated in the
Reserve of the Army under title 10, U.S.C., sections 12203
and 12211:

To be colonel

Francis B. Magurn II
The following named individual for Regular appointment to
the grade indicated in the United States Army Nurse Corps
under title 10, U.S.C., sections 531 and 3064:

To be major

Joseph W. Brown
The following named individual for Regular appointment to
the grade indicated in the United States Army Medical Corps
under title 10, U.S.C., sections 531 and 3064:

To be major

Victor Ursua
The following named individual for Regular appointment to
the grade indicated in the United States Army Medical Service
Corps under title 10, U.S.C., sections 531 and 3064:

To be major

Yvonne M. Beale
The following named individual for Regular appointment to
the grade indicated in the United States Army Dental Corps
under title 10, U.S.C., sections 531 and 3064:

To be lieutenant colonel

Gerald P. Johnson

The following named individuals for regular appointment to
the grades indicated in the United States Army Dental Corps
under title 10, U.S.C., sections 531 and 3064:

To be colonel

Mauel Laborde

To be major

Anthony Wojcik

The following named individuals for regular appointment to
the grade indicated in the United States Army Medical
Specialist Corps under title 10, U.S.C., Sections 531 and
3064:

To be major

George J. Jicha
John R. Sabin
William H. Smithson
The following named individuals for regular appointment to
the grade indicated in the United States Army Judge Advocate
General's Corps under title 10, U.S.C., sections 531 and
3064:

To be major

Christopher M. Hartley
Sara M. Root
LaJohnne A. White

The following named individuals for regular appointment to
the grades indicated in the United States Army Medical Corps
under title 10, U.S.C., sections 531 and 3064:

To be colonel

Samuel M. Ruben

To be lieutenant colonel

Lorraine O. Harrisdavis
Daniel A. Kramer

To be major

George D. Horn

In the Navy

The following named individual for appointment to the grade
indicated in the United States Navy Reserve under title 10,
U.S.C., section 12203:

To be captain

Eric D. Seeland

The following named officers for regular appointment in the
grades indicated in the United States Navy under title 10,
U.S.C., sections 531 and 5582:

To be commander

William L. Hendrickson

To be lieutenant commander

Fouad A. Elzaatari
Orlando Gallardo, Jr.

____________________

WITHDRAWALS

Executive message transmitted by the President to the Senate on July
24,

2008 withdrawing from further Senate consideration the following
nominations:
GENE E. K. PRATTER, OF PENNSYLVANIA, TO BE UNITED STATES
CIRCUIT JUDGE FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, VICE FRANKLIN S. VAN
ANTWERPEN, RETIRED, WHICH WAS SENT TO THE SENATE ON NOVEMBER
15, 2007.
CAROLYN P. SHORT, OF PENNSYLVANIA, TO BE UNITED STATES
DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, VICE
GENE E. K. PRATTER, UPON ELEVATION, WHICH WAS SENT TO THE
SENATE ON NOVEMBER 15, 2007.

[[Page 16367]]

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES--Thursday, July 24, 2008

The House met at 10 a.m. and was called to order by the Speaker pro
tempore (Mrs. Tauscher).

____________________

DESIGNATION OF THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following
communication from the Speaker:

Washington, DC,

July 24, 2008.
I hereby appoint the Honorable Ellen O. Tauscher to act as
Speaker pro tempore on this day.
Nancy Pelosi,
Speaker of the House of Representatives.

____________________

PRAYER

Rev. Kelly D. McInerney, Bible Baptist Church, Wilmington, Ohio,
offered the following prayer:
Our Father, by Your divine providence You have blessed the American
people. You have blessed us with Your Spirit, for where the Spirit of
the Lord is, there is liberty. You have given to us the greatest form
of government that humanity has ever known. Today, I pray for the men
and women who represent the legislative branch of that government. I
pray for them to have wisdom as they debate the issues and decisions
that affect the lives of their constituents. I pray for them as they
consider our men and women in uniform who are protecting our freedoms.
I pray for them to seek Your guidance as they seek solutions to the
many needs our country faces. Ohio's State motto is, ``With God, all
things are possible.'' May these representatives of the people of the
United States have hope, confidence, and trust in those words. May they
truly believe that with God, all things are possible. Bless them this
day in the work that You have appointed them to do. And we ask these
things in the name of Your Son, and our Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen.

____________________

THE JOURNAL

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has examined the Journal of the
last day's proceedings and announces to the House her approval thereof.
Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved.

____________________

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Will the gentlewoman from California (Ms.
Loretta Sanchez) come forward and lead the House in the Pledge of
Allegiance.
Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California led the Pledge of Allegiance as
follows:

I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of
America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

____________________

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

A message from the Senate by Ms. Curtis, one of its clerks, announced
that the Senate had passed without amendment a bill of the House of the
following title:

H.R. 4841. An act to approve, ratify, and confirm the
settlement agreement entered into to resolve claims by the
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians relating to alleged
interferences with the water resources of the Tribe, to
authorize and direct the Secretary of the Interior to execute
and perform the Settlement Agreement and related waivers, and
for other purposes.

____________________

WELCOMING PASTOR KELLY McINERNEY

(Mr. TURNER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. TURNER. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to welcome today our
guest chaplain, Pastor Kelly McInerney, from Wilmington, Ohio, and I
thank him for leading the House in prayer.
Paster McInerney has led the congregation at Bible Baptist Church in
Wilmington since its inception in 1995. The church began as a mission
project of the Hillsboro Bible Baptist Church. Before the construction
of its first facility in 2001, the congregation met in a storefront, a
former bank building, and a historic theater in the heart of downtown
Wilmington. The church's membership and attendance have grown steadily
each year from a group of 40 charter members to a congregation whose
average Sunday morning attendance currently averages over 1,000
persons.
Pastor McInerney is a respected community leader who is devoted to
his congregation and his family and his faith. He is currently the
chaplain for the Southwest District of the Ohio State Highway Patrol,
the Clinton County Sheriff's Office, and the Wilmington City Fire
Department. As part of his service to the first responders of our
community, Pastor McInerney also holds annual Law Enforcement
Appreciation Day at his church. The event recognizes outstanding
members of the law enforcement community and pays tribute to all the
officers who have lost their lives in the line of duty in the history
of Clinton County.
His family includes his wife Theresa, and his sons Kenton and Kaden.
It is with great pleasure that I welcome Pastor McInerney and his
family to Washington, and I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking
our guest chaplain for his thoughtful and inspirational words.

____________________

ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will remind the House that on July
24, 1998, at 3:40 p.m., Officer Jacob J. Chestnut and Detective John M.
Gibson of the United States Capitol Police were killed in the line of
duty defending the Capitol against an intruder armed with a gun.
At 3:40 p.m. today, the Chair will recognize the anniversary of this
tragedy by observing a moment of silence in their memory.

____________________

ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will entertain up to 10 further
requests for 1-minute speeches on each side of the aisle.

____________________

ON ANNIVERSARY OF CAPITOL POLICE DEATHS

(Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. HOYER. The Speaker has just made an announcement about two of
those who served our democracy and our country and who served this
Capitol. Every morning when I come into work, I pass by a plaque
honoring Detective John Gibson and Officer Jacob Chestnut on the spot
where they were murdered 10 years ago this very day.
It's a quiet hallway now. Down the hall you can hear the sounds of
visitors to the Capitol; a few feet away the work of the majority
leader's office goes on every day. John Gibson lost his life in the
hallway that is in my office that was then the office of the majority
leader Tom DeLay. What a shock to think that that hallway could be
filled with gunshots and blood, to know that our Capitol, the most
sacred space in our democracy, could be filled with violence. But what
a saving grace to know that every day we are surrounded

[[Page 16368]]

by brave men and women who will stand in the way of violence even at
the cost of their own lives.
Detective Gibson and Officer Chestnut died in the defense of our
democracy just as surely as those in harm's way in Iraq and Afghanistan
and in other trouble spots of the world.
Detective Gibson and Officer Chestnut deserve every tribute they've
been given: Lying in honor under the Capitol dome; yesterday's words
dedicated to their memory; today's moment of silence at 3:40. But we
know that what they did, every member of the Capitol Police and every
law enforcement officer throughout our land stands ready to do as they
rise in the morning and put on a badge, either on their uniform or in
their wallet or on their hip, and they attach a gun, perhaps, as well,
prepared to defend and keep the peace.
We honor Detective Gibson and Officer Chestnut not because they were
unique in their sacrifice, which, however, they were, but because their
willingness to sacrifice was so typical, typical of all of the best in
those who wear the badge.
Edmund Burke wrote that ``Good order is the foundation of all
things.'' It is certainly the foundation of everything that happens in
this building. Without peace and good order, democracy could not
survive.
Let us thank those men and women who risk their lives to give us
order, safety, freedom from fear, and let us keep their families in our
thoughts today and every day.
God blesses America with men and women ready to defend our freedom,
our country, and our Capitol. Without them, the work of this Capitol
and the work of our democracy would not prevail. We thank their
families, we remember them this day, and may God grant them continued
peace.

____________________

DRILL ON THE ANWR SPECK

(Mr. POE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. POE. Madam Speaker, as our ``Drill Nothing'' Congress continues
to ignore viable energy options such as drilling in ANWR, I thought a
chart would best illustrate where these drilling locations are.
Madam Speaker, this is Alaska, this is ANWR, and this little bitty
red speck is where the proposed drilling in ANWR is to be. It takes
glasses to see it because it's only 3 square miles. To put it in
perspective, the Houston Intercontinental Airport is five times the
size of this speck. Disney World is 15 times the size of this speck,
and the King Ranch in Texas is 500 times this proposed drilling
location.
Madam Speaker, it's time for Congress to stop using the distortions
of the elites in the environmental fear lobby as an excuse not to take
care of ourselves. America needs to take care of Americans and not be
held hostage by OPEC and handcuffed by the Drill Nothing Congress.
And that's just the way it is.

____________________

PASSAGE OF THE HOUSING BILL

(Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California asked and was given permission to
address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Madam Speaker, I come to the floor
to acknowledge the bipartisan work of this Congress and the Bush
administration on the housing bill that the House passed yesterday.
This legislation is in the best interests of the American people, and
it was the product of honest negotiation and compromise between the
administration and this Congress.
At the beginning of the 110th Congress, I had hoped that this type of
work between the legislative and the executive branches would take
place regularly. Unfortunately, it has been a rare occurrence. I'm
optimistic that the next administration will be prepared to put forth
ideas and to work collaboratively with the Congress instead of
resorting to tired rhetoric and dragging their feet on policies that
are supported by Americans.
I'm glad that we had a positive breakthrough and bipartisan
negotiations with this important housing bill. It will provide needed
assistance to homeowners, to communities, and Main streets across the
Nation. And I look forward to the Senate's swift passage of this
legislation to enhance the economic future of the United States.

____________________

PUT ALL ENERGY OPTIONS ON THE TABLE

(Mr. WALBERG asked and was given permission to address the House for
1 minute.)
Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, earlier this week I had the opportunity
to meet with patients at the Jackson Dialysis Center in Jackson,
Michigan, and discuss transportation issues. I heard from patient after
patient about how high gas prices are negatively affecting their lives
and their health.
I also visited the American Red Cross branch in Jackson and learned
that service volunteers, men and women who help fire and accident
victims, are now using their own money to pay for gasoline because the
Red Cross cannot afford to reimburse.
I heard about situations in my district and across the Nation like
this, yet Congress continues to do nothing. High gas prices demand
action from Congress and we need to put all energy options on the
table. Just as with the Manhattan Project and the race to the Moon,
breaking our dependence on foreign oil should be a national priority.
Americans are being stretched to the max, and it is time their elected
representatives act on their behalf.
I urge my colleagues to sign on to my discharge petition to bring the
No More Excuses Energy Act to a vote. So I say to my colleagues on both
sides of the aisle, Madam Speaker, let's join together and vote to
immediately increase American energy production, bring down the price
of gas and make American energy independent.

____________________

THE MIDDLE CLASS IS GETTING SQUEEZED

(Mr. EMANUEL asked and was given permission to address the House for
1 minute.)
Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, yesterday the Wall Street Journal
reported that the richest 1 percent are doing better than ever under
President Bush. According to the Wall Street Journal, the income of the
richest 1 percent, people who earn above $1 million, are at a 19-year
high. At the same time, their average income tax rate is at an 18-year
low. And if they're doing so well, simple question, how are the other
99 percent doing?
Median household income has dropped $1,200 under George Bush and the
Republican Congress. Household expenses are up $4,600. College costs
have doubled. Health care costs have doubled. Gas prices have more than
doubled, and yet median income has dropped by $1,200. These are
sobering statistics. The middle class is simply getting squeezed in
this country.
After 7\1/2\ years of the administration policies, it's not a
surprise 99 percent are getting hurt and the top 1 percent are doing
better than ever. And now John McCain is offering an economic plan to
cut taxes to this top 1 percent by $127,000.
It is time for a new direction.

____________________

{time} 1015
EXELON

(Mr. PITTS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. PITTS. Madam Speaker, Exelon, an energy company which provides
electricity to my district in Pennsylvania, recently announced a
voluntary goal of reducing, offsetting, or displacing more than 15
million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions per year by 2020. This
is more than the company's current annual carbon emission total and is
equivalent to taking nearly 3 million cars off American roads and
highways.
The campaign, called Exelon 2020, will pursue three broad strategies:
first, reduce or offset Exelon's carbon emissions by reducing energy
consumption and operating to the highest environmental standards;
secondly, help

[[Page 16369]]

customers and the communities in which they serve to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions through energy efficiency programs and a diverse
portfolio of green products and services; and third, offer more low-
carbon electricity in the marketplace.
The voluntary, market-driven strategies such as Exelon 2020 will help
to strengthen our clean energy infrastructure, and they should be
commended.

____________________

MIDDLE CLASS TAX FAIRNESS ACT

(Mr. WALZ of Minnesota asked and was given permission to address the
House for 1 minute.)
Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, the gentleman on our side of
the aisle who just spoke from Illinois laid out the exact situation
that's happening in our economy. That's why today I'm proud to
introduce the Middle Class Tax Fairness Act, which will allow the
average taxpayer to keep more of their hard-earned dollars.
In this slow economy, it's unfair to put the load of taxation right
on the backs of the middle class. Middle class Americans are being
squeezed by high gas prices, high cost of groceries, high health care
costs, high tuition costs, and their paychecks, as you heard, are not
keeping up with the rising costs. And in fact, the speaker was right;
they're actually $1,000 less than they were 5 years ago.
Meanwhile, our tax code is full of government waste and unnecessary
giveaways to the richest 1 percent.
Today, I am introducing legislation that will restore balance to our
tax code and do something unusual: help reduce the national debt. My
bill will be a jump-start to this slumping economy. It will double the
standard deduction for the next 2 years, providing an annual savings of
$750 to 61 million Americans. It will expand access to the child tax
credit and provide relief on property tax.
My legislation allows the middle class to keep their income and does
so in a fiscally responsible manner, by fully being paid for.
Madam Speaker, it is easy to offer a tax cut. It's harder to pay for
it. Join me.

____________________

LIFT THE AMERICAN OIL EMBARGO

(Mr. CARTER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. CARTER. Madam Speaker, today we vote on a bill to draw down the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve by 70 million barrels of oil. The U.S.
consumes 21 to 23 million barrels of oil a day. So this is just over 3
days' supply.
The good news is that our Democrat colleagues have finally started to
realize that supply is the problem. Seventy million barrels may help
slightly the pain at the pump, but so would the billions of barrels of
oil in ANWR, offshore, and in shale oil.
Increasing American energy supply is not an ideological issue like
traditional marriage or abortion. It's a simple issue of do you support
the American people or radical environmental groups.
Sixty-seven percent of the American people want safe, environmentally
sound drilling for oil. This is what the American people want. This is
what they should have. The only obstacle seems to be Speaker Pelosi and
the Democrat Congress.
Americans are counting on Congress to work together and lift the
American oil embargo. Americans stand ready to work with the Democrats,
as do the Republicans.

____________________

POSITIVE CONTRIBUTIONS OF IMMIGRANTS TO THE UNITED STATES

(Mr. BACA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. BACA. Madam Speaker, I speak on behalf of the 12 to 14 million
immigrants in the United States.
Throughout history, America has been a Nation of immigrants. For
decades, immigrants have contributed with their heart, sweat, and tears
to have the American dream like the rest of us.
Immigrant families continue to pay property taxes in the form of
rent, pay sales taxes on every purchase, and most importantly,
contribute to Social Security without legally having any claim to any
of it. Yet, there are those who wish to downplay these positive
contributions for political gain.
You don't see many local governments turning away taxes paid by
undocumented immigrants. However, you do see local governments spending
these tax dollars to create anti-immigration legislation that strip
away families of basic services.
I urge my colleagues to get past the anti-immigrant myths and look at
the facts about the true positive contributions of immigrants.
We must stand firm and pass comprehensive immigration reform.

____________________

HONORING CHARLES HOOKER--WINNER OF CHARACTER COUNTS CONTEST IN
ELMHURST, ILLINOIS

(Mr. ROSKAM asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. ROSKAM. Madam Speaker, I don't know about you, but sitting here
and listening to these speeches, I'm ready for some good news. And the
good news is we are joined today by a constituent of mine named Charles
Hooker, who is a young boy who wrote an essay. It's short, it's sweet,
it's succinct, and I'm going to read it to you. It is a result of him
winning the Character Counts Contest in Elmhurst, Illinois. This is
what young Charles says to us.
``If I were Mayor of Elmhurst, I would be fair to everyone by
treating everyone the way I would like to be treated. I would listen to
the requests of the young and old equally, because they both matter. I
would be honest, be fair, and most importantly give credit to anyone
who helped make things possible. I would also make sure I communicated
well to show I'm trustful and responsible in all things. I am a
Christian, and I would represent God in anything I do.''
Madam Speaker, as we listen to these challenges that have been
outlined today, I think that's a good word for us all, and I offer
great congratulations to young Charles.

____________________

WE MUST MAKE THE MINIMUM WAGE A LIVING WAGE

(Mr. AL GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to address the
House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, today the minimum wage will
increase to $6.55 an hour. This is laudable. However, Madam Speaker, if
the truth be told, the increase will be consumed because of inflation,
higher gas prices, and higher food prices.
Madam Speaker, we must make the minimum wage a living wage. This is
why I have introduced the Living American Wage Act, the LAW Act, such
that we can have people who work full time always live above the
poverty line.
We have people in the richest country in the world, a country where 1
out of every 33 persons is a millionaire, we have people living in
poverty and working full time. No one should work full time and live
below the poverty line.
We need to pass the Living American Wage Act, the LAW Act. The living
wage should be the law.

____________________

WE CANNOT ALLOW OUR DOMESTIC ENERGY SOURCES TO WASTE AWAY

(Mrs. CAPITO asked and was given permission to address the House for
1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Speaker, today the House will consider legislation
that makes clear that our major obstacle to lowering prices is a
shortage of supply. Yet, this House will not act on any legislation
that will actually increase our Nation's overall energy supply.
It's time for this Congress to get serious about both protecting
consumers and taking action on real solutions that will ease the pain
at the pump.

[[Page 16370]]

I hear from West Virginians on a regular basis who can no longer
afford the price of gasoline. Just yesterday, I spoke to several West
Virginia seniors. They're concerned. They're making tough decisions.
And on fixed incomes, they're very troubled when they have to go to the
gas station to fill up their cars.
West Virginians deserve a truly comprehensive, all-of-the-above
approach to our energy challenges to become energy independent. We need
legislation that leads to new refineries, new technology, and new
energy exploration, not these weak attempts that are only wanting to
change the topic.
With gas prices at more than $4 a gallon, we simply cannot afford to
deliberately allow our domestic energy resources to waste away.

____________________

AUTISM

(Mr. DOYLE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. DOYLE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to correct the misinformation
about autism that shock jock Michael Savage spread on his syndicated
radio show last week.
Mr. Savage claimed that many diagnosed cases of autism were
fraudulent, and that, ``In 99 percent of the cases, it's a brat who
hasn't been told to cut out the act. They don't have a father around to
tell them, `Don't act like a moron.' ''
Madam Speaker, I've known a number of families dealing with autism
over the years, and I can tell you unequivocally that none of the
children with autism I've met fit that deplorable description.
But don't take my word for it. There have been decades of peer-
reviewed, scientific research on autism, and the evidence is clear.
Autism spectrum disorders are real, and they affect over 1 million
Americans today.
Mr. Speaker, I suggest, if Mr. Savage wants to find someone acting
like a moron, he should simply look in the mirror.

____________________

NUCLEAR ENERGY

(Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina asked and was given permission to
address the House for 1 minute.)
Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina. Madam Speaker, in the past few weeks
the focus of the energy crisis conversation has been about lifting the
offshore ban on drilling to increase oil and gas supplies in the U.S.,
and offshore drilling is one solution that can help ease the energy
crisis and lower gas prices at the pump.
However, there's also been talk about using alternative energy
sources to solve our energy problems for the long term. The Department
of Energy found that in the United States 103 nuclear units supply
about 20 percent of the electricity produced here in the United States.
And in my home State of South Carolina, 52 percent of our State's
power comes from nuclear power plants. For years, I've worked with
organizations and companies within South Carolina to promote the
benefits of nuclear power. Nuclear is clean, safe, and it's accessible
in our country.
Nuclear energy is an alternative energy source that our country can
use to create long-term energy solutions for generations to come. It's
a real solution that, if we invest now, will help us bridge from a
short-term solution to a long-term solution.

____________________

DEMOCRATS ARE PROVIDING SOLUTIONS TO AMERICA'S ENERGY CRISIS

(Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland asked and was given permission to address
the House for 1 minute.)
Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Madam Speaker, two people are most
responsible in this country for record-high gas prices: President Bush
and Vice President Cheney. When the oil barons came to Washington in
2001, the Vice President opened the doors of the White House and held
top secret meetings with their executives to draft the administration's
energy plan.
Then congressional Republicans helped them pass that plan into law in
2005, and now, here we are 3 years later, Big Oil is reaping billions
in profits while the American consumer is left squeezed at the pump.
And now, President Bush and Republicans in Congress have the audacity
to blame this Democratic Congress for record-high gas prices. For
shame.
Since day one, we've rejected the failed policies of the past, and
instead, as Democrats, we're providing real solutions to America's
energy crisis. We've repealed subsidies to Big Oil, cracked down on
price gouging, and invested in clean and renewable energy.
We also forced President Bush to stop filling the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve, and it's time now for the President to release that oil to
consumers from the reserve.
We're not done. As Democrats, we're going to tie our energy policy to
economic development by making green jobs good jobs, especially for
vulnerable communities.

____________________

THE ENERGY PROBLEM IS ONE WE CAN SOLVE

(Mrs. BLACKBURN asked and was given permission to address the House
for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Speaker, the President lifted the executive ban
on offshore oil and natural gas exploration last week, and now
Congress, this Democrat-led Congress, is what stands in the way of
increased domestic supply and lower prices.
Well, instead of taking steps toward a solution, the House Democrat
leadership has said ``no'' to the American people: go buy a hybrid,
take a subway to work. Well, in my Seventh District of Tennessee, that
doesn't work, because mass transit is not there.
Congress should open up ANWR, the Outer Continental Shelf, and should
promote the construction of oil refineries and nuclear power plants. We
need a short-, a mid-range and long-term solution. We should provide
tax incentives for American families to purchase more fuel-efficient
vehicles and to promote energy innovation and efficiency.
Republicans have offered a bill that includes all of the above,
promoting American-made energy in the short-, mid-, and long-range
plan.
Let's solve this problem, Madam Speaker. It requires action now.

____________________

MINIMUM WAGE

(Mrs. MALONEY of New York asked and was given permission to address
the House for 1 minute.)
Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, today, millions of workers
will be getting a much-deserved raise.
In the first 100 days of this New Direction Congress, we voted to
raise the wage floor for workers nationwide. Today, the Federal minimum
wage goes to $6.55 per hour. This raise was long overdue.
Prior to passage of this legislation, the minimum wage had sunk to
its lowest point in over half a century. Most minimum wage workers are
adults, many of whom are the sole breadwinners for their families.
Families are being squeezed by the rising costs for basic necessities
and wages that are failing to keep pace. I call this economy the stag-
gas-food-lation economy; stagnant wages, many workers have lost up to
$1,200 since this administration took office; rising gas and food
prices; and now inflation.
Today's raise in the minimum wage provides an important boost for the
millions of workers who have been left behind in this administration's
economy.

____________________

{time} 1030
NEW YORK TIMES SHOWS FAVORITISM

(Mr. SMITH of Texas asked and was given permission to address the
House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, in a blatant show of partisanship,
the New York Times this week refused to publish an op-ed by Senator
John

[[Page 16371]]

McCain about Iraq just days after publishing an op-ed on the same
subject by Senator Barack Obama. The Times' op-ed editor, a former
staff member in the Clinton administration, said he wanted something
from McCain that ``mirrors Senator Obama's piece.''
Instead of permitting one candidate to set the rules, maybe the Times
should allow equal opportunity for the Presidential candidates to both
express their views on major issues like Iraq.
The American people should demand more fairness and less favoritism
from the New York Times. Voters deserve the highest standards of
journalism both during this important election and afterwards.

____________________

BIG OIL SPENDS MORE ON STOCK, LESS ON EXPLORATION

(Ms. WATSON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Ms. WATSON. Madam Speaker, Americans are driving out of their way to
fill up on the cheapest gas and are skipping summer vacations and
important appointments because gas prices today are just too high.
And while Americans are paying record-high prices, Big Oil is reaping
record-high profits. But instead of investing those profits for
exploration on the 311 million acres of land open to new energy
production, Big Oil spends their money on stock buybacks and dividends.
In 1993, oil companies spent only 1 percent of their profits on
stocks. Last year, that number rose to 55 percent. And yet Big Oil
continues to spend only in the single digits on finding new oil. It's
no wonder that 68 million acres of land already leased to Big Oil sits
undeveloped because Big Oil is spending all of its profits buying back
its stock rather than searching for new oil. And yet House Republicans
continue to allow Big Oil to get away with this.
Last week, for the second time, House Republicans could have forced
Big Oil to use it or lose it, but once again, they sided with Big Oil.
How high do prices have to get before House Republicans will join us in
providing relief for the consumer?

____________________

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF SENATE AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5501, TOM
LANTOS AND HENRY J. HYDE UNITED STATES GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AGAINST HIV/
AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee
on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1362 and ask for its immediate
consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

H. Res. 1362

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R.
5501) to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2009
through 2013 to provide assistance to foreign countries to
combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and for other
purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and to consider
in the House, without intervention of any point of order
except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI, a motion
offered by the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
or his designee that the House concur in the Senate
amendment. The Senate amendment and the motion shall be
considered as read. The motion shall be debatable for one
hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the
motion to its adoption without intervening motion.
Sec. 2. During consideration of the motion to concur
pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of
the previous question, the Chair may postpone further
consideration of the motion to such time as may be designated
by the Speaker.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for
1 hour.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. For the purpose of debate only, Madam
Speaker, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my colleague, classmate
and good friend, Representative Diaz-Balart. All time yielded during
consideration of the rule is for debate only. I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
I also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative
days within which to revise and extend their remarks on House
Resolution 1362.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, House Resolution 1362
provides for consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 5501, the
Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against
HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008.
The rule provides 1 hour of general debate on the motion controlled
by the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Madam Speaker, the Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis
and Malaria Reauthorization Act is a comprehensive and fiscally
responsible way to continue and advance America's leadership in the
global fight against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria.
I might add that the two persons for whom this act is named were
persons that exemplified and manifested throughout their careers the
need for the Foreign Affairs Committee to proceed in a comprehensive
and responsible manner.
The bill authorizes $48 billion to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and
malaria for fiscal year 09 through fiscal year 2013, and includes
guidelines and goals for reducing the burden of these diseases.
The bill supports culturally competent prevention and treatment
measures that are based on empirical evidence rather than ideology.
Additionally, the underlying bill includes provisions that support a
multi-faceted approach to treating and preventing the three diseases,
and encourages foreign and domestic health care entities to
collaborate.
The bill prevents foreign governments from unjustly profiting from
U.S. aid and prohibits them from taxing the funds that the bill
authorizes.
Lastly, the bill seeks to improve oversight, transparency and
accountability in assessing the progress of United States global HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria programs.
Madam Speaker, the United States has become an important player in
combating these global epidemics. However, although the underlying bill
has bipartisan support, some have argued that it is imprudent to invest
in global health programs while we are experiencing so many problems
domestically. Nothing, in my opinion, could be further from the truth.
Investing in global health ultimately leads to communities and
countries that are more economically, socially and politically stable.
In this globally connected era, it is imperative that we address health
and development in foreign countries.
Malaria was virtually eradicated in most of the West more than 50
years ago. In fact, the Washington D.C. area was particularly
vulnerable to this disease. Effectively resolving this health threat
undoubtedly contributed to the ability of our country and other Western
countries to thrive and prosper. Therefore, it comes as no surprise
that the 40 percent of men, women and children who are at risk for
contracting malaria live in poorer countries, with less access to
education, preventative health care, and treatment.
As we consider this important bill, we would be remiss if we did not
look at it as an opportunity to think about how we can improve our
response to HIV/AIDS and other debilitating diseases that affect people
in this country.
The fight against HIV/AIDS is also a fight against the health,
economic and educational disparities that continue to exist in
communities that have been historically underprivileged.
Nearly three decades after the first national reports on HIV/AIDS,
the disease has reached every corner of the world and has claimed an
estimated 25 million lives.
Although the scope of HIV/AIDS has changed, the link between
socioeconomic disparity and those who contract and die from the disease
remains consistent around the world. In our hemisphere alone, whether
you're talking about Honduras or Haiti or my home State of Florida,
people of African, indigenous, and Hispanic ancestry

[[Page 16372]]

are disproportionately contracting and dying from HIV/AIDS.
Madam Speaker, this issue hits close to home for me, as Florida has
consistently ranked third in the Nation in the number of reported cases
of HIV/AIDS. In 2006, blacks accounted for 45 percent of all AIDS cases
in men and 69 percent in women, which is more than any other racial or
ethnic group in the State of Florida. Sadly, in that same year, the
HIV/AIDS case rate among black women was 17 times higher than among
white women.
In the absence of a cure, education and increased access to
medication are the most powerful and cost-effective ways to treat and
prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS around the world. Yet the resistance of
antiretroviral drugs and other treatment has not translated into
accessibility. Less than 25 percent of patients in developing countries
and 30 percent of patients domestically receive antiretroviral
treatment. Even more, the consequences of allowing people to remain
ignorant about HIV/AIDS has proven to be just as deadly as the virus
itself.
Consider this: Political leaders of countries particularly stricken
by HIV/AIDS have told their citizens that HIV/AIDS can be controlled by
consuming garlic, lemon juice, and beet root. Such a statement sounds
unquestionably absurd to most. However, around the world, people
continue to be misinformed about preventing and treating this disease.
They allow fear to halt open and honest discussions about this disease.
Personally, I have hosted three town hall meetings in the last year
and a half in the congressional district that I'm privileged to
represent. At each of them, activists, specialists, religious leaders
and the general public have openly discussed and asked questions about
how to address HIV/AIDS in their community. These fora have been
educational and meaningful tools in fighting this disease, and more are
needed.
I might add that at those fora, Madam Speaker, some courageous young
women that are HIV/AIDS infected appeared and gave their testimonies,
compelling in respect to their own issues, and informative as to those
that were in the audience to hear people who are living with this
disease actually put forward ideas about the need for greater
education, information and treatment.
As a leader in global health and human rights, Madam Speaker, this
country, all of us, must not allow ignorance, stigmatization, and
unequal access to medication to continue in this country or abroad. By
supporting this bill and the underlying bill, we're investing in global
health, the global economy, and our global community as a whole.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I'd like to thank
my good friend and fellow co-chairman of the Florida congressional
delegation, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), for the time,
and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
During his 2003 State of the Union speech, President Bush outlined a
bold new plan to confront and combat the scourge of HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis and malaria. Congress followed through and passed the U.S.
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Act, commonly
known as the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR),
authorizing $15 billion in assistance to combat these diseases for
fiscal years 2004 through 2008. That was the largest commitment ever by
any Nation for an international health initiative.
Since its enactment in 2003, the programs created by this landmark
legislation have made admirable progress in combating these horrible
diseases.

{time} 1045

So far more than 1.4 million people have received life-preserving
antiretroviral treatment, over 2.7 million HIV/AIDS-affected orphans
have received care, and many millions more have received instruction on
how to protect themselves from infection. Tens of millions of people
have received malaria and tuberculosis prevention or treatment
services.
Even though this program has achieved remarkable successes, there is
more that we can do. Tuberculosis still kills an estimated 2 million
people each year and is the leading cause of death for people with
AIDS; 1 million people die from malaria each year; and AIDS is the
world's fourth leading cause of death.
The devastating consequences of these diseases are plaguing sub-
Saharan Africa. Over 22 million people are living with HIV, and
approximately 1.7 million additional sub-Saharan Africans were infected
with HIV last year. That represents about 68 percent of the world's HIV
positive population and 90 percent of all HIV-infected children. Just
last year the horrible AIDS epidemic claimed the lives of an estimated
1.6 million people in that region. More than 11 million children have
been orphaned by AIDS. Many families are losing their income earners.
Health services are overburdened. Life expectancy in sub-Saharan Africa
is now 47 years. Economic activity and social progress has been
impeded. We must do all we can to prevent those tragedies.
The underlying legislation, justly and appropriately named the Tom
Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, will
augment our commitment to fight those horrible diseases with an
increase of approximately $35 billion in funding over the next 5 years.
This landmark legislation will help prevent 12 million new HIV
infections and treat at least 3 million people living with HIV/AIDS. It
will also provide supporting care for 12 million people infected with
HIV/AIDS, including 5 million orphans and children.
Some of my constituents, Madam Speaker, are from Haiti and have
families and friends in their land of origin. I often hear about the
disastrous effects that HIV/AIDS is having on that noble country. As of
2007, Haiti had an HIV rate of almost 4 percent, and according to the
World Bank, continued increases in HIV prevalence in the Caribbean will
negatively affect economic growth. Fortunately, since Congress first
passed PEPFAR, we have invested over $300 million to help Haiti combat
the AIDS pandemic by building on existing clinic- and community-based
health resources; expanding a network of satellite connections to the
Centers of Excellence to permit instant review of difficult cases;
training staff members of health care facilities that provide prenatal,
gynecological, and maternity care and prevention of mother-to-child HIV
transmission; and enhancing the lab network for clinical sites to
support the diagnosis and treatment of HIV and other associated
infections. I am pleased that the legislation will also now cover
several other countries that previously were not part of PEPFAR.
I believe that when we look upon our work in this Congress, Madam
Speaker, many years from now, I can think of nothing that we or anyone
else will be able to point to that is of more importance than this
admirable effort by the great and generous American people. This
extraordinary effort proposed by President Bush here in the U.S. House
of Representatives during his state of the Union address of 2003, the
President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief.
I would like to thank Chairman Berman and Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen
for their bipartisan work on this important issue. I also wish to thank
them for naming this landmark program for two ultimately respected
colleagues of ours who have recently left us, Henry Hyde and Tom
Lantos. This is truly a fitting tribute for two remarkable human beings
in public service.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 3
minutes to my good friend and fellow Rules Committee member, the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).
Mr. McGOVERN. I want to thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding
me the time.

[[Page 16373]]

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in support of the
underlying bill.
Madam Speaker, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization
Act is one of the most important foreign policy and global health bills
this Congress will pass. We have literally gone from 5 years ago from
standing helplessly by and watching people die of HIV/AIDS to watching
people live and take up productive lives in their communities. The
impact is far-reaching, and it wasn't a miracle. It is the result of
presidential leadership and broad bipartisan support, and the bill that
we take up later today, the Senate amendment to H.R. 5501, continues
and strengthens this legacy. And it merits the support of every single
Member of this House.
Madam Speaker, on April 2, when the House first debated H.R. 5501,
Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Berman, Africa and Global Health
Subcommittee Chairman Payne, Congresswoman Emerson, and I entered into
a bipartisan colloquy on the importance of food and nutrition for
successful HIV/AIDS programs. The colloquy also emphasized how funding
for such initiatives needs to be provided for PEPFAR programs but
without taking money away from other global food aid and nutrition
programs and priorities.
It is my understanding that later today when the House takes up the
Senate amendment to H.R. 5501, Chairman Berman will enter into the
Record a Statement of Legislative Intent reiterating the conclusions of
that April colloquy. I want to thank Chairman Berman for his important
Statement of Legislative Intent. I also want to express my appreciation
for his leadership and his commitment to food and nutrition as
important health initiatives and for his determination to safeguard the
scarce resources already dedicated to carrying out other U.S. global
food aid and nutrition programs.
Again, Madam Speaker, I urge that every single Member support the
rule and especially the underlying bill.

Colloquy: Food Security and Nutrition in H.R. 5501--PEPFAR
Reauthorization--April 2, 2008

Berman: I yield three minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts, Mr. McGovern, for purposes of a colloquy.
McGovern: I thank the Chairman and for time for the
gentlelady from Missouri and I to enter into a colloquy with
the Chairman on the importance of integrating food and
nutrition programs with the prevention, care, and treatment
of HIV/AIDS affected individuals, families, and communities.
McGovern: As the Chairman is aware, last year I traveled to
Africa and had the opportunity to see first-hand many of our
programs related to food security. In Ethiopia and Kenya, I
visited HIV/AIDS programs to look at how food and nutrition
were included. At that time, I heard from local communities,
NGO partners, and our embassy staff how restrictive guidance
for global HIV/AIDS assistance often hindered their ability
to design and carry out effective food and nutrition programs
targeted at HIV/AIDS affected individuals, families, and
communities. The lack of resources available for food and
nutrition programs within global HIV/AIDS assistance and from
other sources also posed a significant barrier.
I very much appreciate and support the work of the
Committee in ensuring H.R. 5501 addresses these concerns
throughout the bill, and especially in the section entitled
``Food Security and Nutrition Support.'' The bill recognizes
that strengthening the linkages and enhancing coordination
among HIV/AIDS programs and other vital development programs,
like food and nutrition programs, will significantly increase
our effectiveness in the fight against HIV/AIDS while we
advance other essential U.S. development priorities. I remain
concerned, however, that the bill is less clear on where or
how such funding will be provided for these purposes. It is
not clear on how much funding will come from the Global HIV/
AIDS program, versus other sources of funding. I am concerned
that without adequate resources through the global HIV/AIDS
program or necessary increases for current food and nutrition
services through programs like Food for Peace, USAID will be
faced with the possibility of having to divert funding from
programs that address long-term chronic hunger and food
insecurity to meet the enhanced mandates of H.R. 5501.
I know the Chairman will agree that we want to avoid the
scenario of robbing Peter to pay Paul, so that we do not end
up short-changing other communities suffering from hunger,
malnutrition and food insecurity. I yield to the gentlelady
from Missouri in this regard.
Emerson: Mr. Chairman, I am also concerned that the
situation will become even worse because the cost of food,
commodities, and transportation is skyrocketing. Just last
month, on February 12th, USAID's Office of Food for Peace
announced that the cost of wheat and other food the United
States donates to poor countries jumped 41% in the first half
of Fiscal Year 2008. According to USAID, this means $120
million in food assistance will not be available for people
who are malnourished or food insecure.
I would ask the Chairman to work on strengthening the
language in the bill as it moves through the legislative
process and into conference negotiations to clarify how the
necessary level of funding for food security and nutrition
will be provided, especially in light of rising food and
transportation costs, so that funds will not be diverted from
U.S. programs addressing chronic hunger and emergency
operations. I would yield back to the gentleman from
Massachusetts.
McGovern: I yield back to the Chairman to express his
views.
Berman: I yield one minute to the gentleman from New
Jersey, Mr. Payne to express his views on this matter.
Payne: Mr. Chairman, as you know, the provision on food and
nutrition security in the bill currently under consideration
is drawn directly from a bill that I introduced in December,
H.R. 4914, the Global HIV/AIDS Food Security, and Nutrition
Support Act of 2007. I introduced the bill after chairing a
hearing in the Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health to
determine whether the Global HIV/AIDS program was adequately
addressing the nutritional needs of its beneficiaries.
The hearing corroborated what I have heard in the field
during numerous visits to Africa over the past five years:
PEPFAR is falling short in this critical area. I share the
concerns of the gentleman from Massachusetts and the gentle
lady from Missouri about the increasing cost of food aid.
Just last week the World Food Program had to issue an appeal
for an additional $500 million to offset the increased cost
of food and fuel. Without the extra funds, 73 million people
who rely on WFP for their daily sustenance may have their
rations cut. This is a truly alarming situation, and it is
not my intent for the provisions in this bill to exacerbate
it. The language under consideration very clearly states that
these activities are to be funded from amounts authorized
under section 401 of the bill. I used this language
deliberately, as I strongly believe that the food assistance
and nutritional support we are providing under the Global
HIV/AIDS program must be on top of the food aid we are
already providing.
Payne: I thank the Chairman and yield back to him.
Berman: I yield myself one minute. I thank my colleagues
for raising these important concerns. H.R. 5501 provides
clear and specific instructions to the USAID Administrator
and the Global AIDS Coordinator to address the food and
nutrition needs of individuals with HIV/AIDS and other
affected individuals, including orphans and vulnerable
children; and to fully integrate food and nutrition support
in HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care programs carried
out under this Act.
I would like to emphasize that the Committee and I,
personally, share our colleagues' concerns about the negative
effect rising costs are having on our long-term and emergency
food aid programs. This is a matter that has our most serious
attention because it affects a wide array of our food aid and
development programs, including the effectiveness and success
of our Global HIV/AIDS programs.
I want to reassure my colleagues that I will be working
over the coming weeks to strengthen and clarify in the bill
that food security and nutrition programs, especially those
referred to as wraparound services, are not to be funded with
monies diverted from other standing commitments to address
food insecurity elsewhere in the world or in these countries.
I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
McGovern: I thank the Chairman for that assurance. I know
many Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, stand
ready to support him in these efforts. I yield back.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I have no further
requests for time, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my good
friend, the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth Sandlin).
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and the
underlying bill, H.R. 5501, the Tom Lantos and Henry Hyde HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act. I would like to thank
the chairman and ranking member for their work on this important
legislation authorizing $50 billion to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and

[[Page 16374]]

malaria overseas. I also support a provision added by the Senate to
authorize $2 billion to fund essential programs and infrastructure
development for Native American tribes, sovereign nations within our
own borders.
The United States has a special government-to-government relationship
to the federally recognized American Indian tribes, as established in
the U.S. Constitution. The $750 million for tribal law enforcement and
public safety would provide funding for detention facilities, police
officers, tribal courts, and other crucial services.
In June of 2007, the House Committee on Natural Resources held a
hearing on the Lower Brule Reservation in South Dakota entitled ``The
Needs and Challenges of Tribal Law Enforcement on Indian
Reservations.'' At the hearing tribal leaders shared examples of police
departments stretched too thin. They spoke of how a lack of law
enforcement personnel negatively impacts victims of crime and
undermines the sense of security across their communities. The funding
in today's bill will empower tribes to improve the law enforcement and
judicial systems on their reservations.
Additionally, I support the $250 million for the Indian Health
Service included in the bill. The Indian Health Service is the Federal
health care provider for approximately 1.5 million American Indians and
Alaskan Natives. Across the country tribal leaders agree that health
care is one of their top concerns. American Indians in my region of the
country die from cancer at a rate approximately 40 percent greater than
the general United States population. American Indians are over two
times more likely than non-Indians to be diagnosed with diabetes. The
$250 million in the bill is one important step towards addressing the
great needs for health care across Indian country.
And, finally, Native American reservations are often located in
remote rural areas where the basic water and sewer infrastructure many
of us take for granted is not well developed. The $1 billion helps
address the need for safe, clean, reliable sources of water.
Again I thank the chairman and ranking member for their work on the
bill. I look forward to supporting this bill that addresses the needs
of populations both overseas and on Native American reservations.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I continue to
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, I would like to compliment
the speaker, Ms. Herseth Sandlin, for pointing out the needs that
Native Americans have. It is extremely important, the issues that she
spoke to. And at another point in time, I am hopeful that we will
address the diabetes question with greater strength in this body's
involvement.
At this time, Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to
my good friend from the Virgin Islands, Dr. Donna Christensen, who has
been involved in not just this particular issue but all of our health
care issues in a fashion that few Members are involved in this body.
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise in full support of the rule and the bill to
adopt the Senate version of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United
States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Reauthorization Act of 2008, which will reauthorize, expand, and
strengthen the PEPFAR program.
First, I want to thank and applaud Congresswoman Barbara Lee for her
steadfast leadership. We would not be here today were it not for her
hard work. And also our colleague Congressman Luis Fortuno for his
successful efforts to include all Caribbean countries for the first
time. I am proud to have been a part of that effort. And let me also
thank the Honorable John Maginley, the Health Minister of Antigua and
Barbuda, who played a pivotal role in our efforts here as well.
This is very important because the Caribbean is second in prevalence
to sub-Saharan Africa. In fact, last year in the Caribbean, there were
230,000 adults and children infected with HIV, a prevalence rate of 1
to over 3 percent, depending on the nation, and there were 11,000
deaths. Without support from PEPFAR, the Caribbean will continue to
experience noted and detrimental economic, public health, and
sociopolitical repercussions that this bill will help to thwart.
I have had the opportunity to see the work of PEPFAR firsthand. With
this bill we will be able to do so much more: prevent 12 million new
cases, treat and support millions of newly infected individuals, and
expand the health care workforce that we need. So today I rise in
strong support of this rule and the bill and for this program that
saves countless lives and a program that, with the strengthened focus
and increased funding, let the millions of innocent human beings with
HIV around the globe know that they will be able to live healthier and
more productive lives. This bill represents our country at its best.
I am proud to support the rule and the bill and urge my colleagues on
both sides of the aisle to support this resolution and play a key role
in ensuring that we do our part to bring this world one step closer
towards beating the HIV/AIDS pandemic.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, at this time I am very
pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Waters), my good friend who on yesterday and days
previous led the fight on having us get relief in this country in
foreclosure and cities having an opportunity to participate in a
meaningful way in trying to help those in the need area of affordable
housing.
Ms. WATERS. I truly thank the gentleman from Florida for the time.
Madam Speaker, I strongly support the rule for H.R. 5501, the Tom
Lantos and Henry Hyde Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis,
and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008. This bill authorizes $48
billion over the next 5 years for the prevention and treatment of HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria.
Madam Speaker and Members, on June 27 stars of the screen, stage, and
studio paid tribute to former South African leader Nelson Mandela.

{time} 1100

Hollywood star Will Smith hosted a birthday celebration concert
honoring Mr. Mandela who turned 90, along with nearly 50,000 cheering
fans, in London's Hyde Park.
The event was organized to support Mandela's HIV/AIDS charity 46664,
named for the number assigned him as a onetime political prisoner, and
comes 20 years after another London concert on his behalf while he was
still behind bars for his stand against apartheid.
``Twenty years ago, London hosted a historic concert which called for
our freedom,'' a frail-looking Mr. Mandela told a waving crowd. ``Your
voices carried across the water and inspired us in our prison cells far
away,'' he said. ``As we celebrate, let us remind ourselves that our
work is far from complete. Where there is poverty and sickness,
especially including AIDS, where human beings are being oppressed,
there is more work to be done.''
Indeed there is more work to be done. I was in South Africa a short
while ago, and everywhere I went in South Africa, people told me about
the terrible problems they have trying to fill professional positions.
The shortage of educated professionals is a result of the fact that so
many South African professionals have died of AIDS or are too sick to
work.
The involvement of doctors, nurses, teachers and other professionals
is critical to stopping the spread of HIV/AIDS. That is why I'm pleased
that this bill includes provisions to strengthen the health care
infrastructure.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman from California
has expired.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield the gentlelady 30 additional
seconds.
Ms. WATERS. This bill will strengthen the health care infrastructure
in countries like South Africa and train at least 140,000 new health
care professionals and workers for HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment and
care. The bill also includes prevention funds to stop

[[Page 16375]]

the spread of HIV and treatment funds to allow infected individuals to
live productive lives and continue to serve their communities.
This is an important bill. I thank again all of our leaders for the
work that they have done to bring this bill before us.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, it's my pleasure
to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Weller).
Mr. WELLER of Illinois. Madam Speaker, I rise to speak on this rule
and rise in strong support for the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United
States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS Tuberculosis and Malaria
Reauthorization Act, legislation that I note is named after two very
distinguished and respected leaders who served our Nation, as well as
this Congress, so well.
And I want to commend the current leadership of Foreign Affairs
Committee, the bipartisan leadership of Chairman Berman and the ranking
member, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, for their leadership in moving this
legislation to the floor in a bipartisan way. I also note that no
President in history has done more for addressing the global AIDS
crisis than our current President, President Bush.
Almost 33 million citizens of this planet today suffer from the
consequences of HIV/AIDS. We have a moral responsibility to demonstrate
leadership in addressing this crisis, which not only is a health issue,
but it's a security issue for this globe.
We often think of Africa when we talk about global AIDS, but of the
33 million, there are also many living in our own hemisphere in Latin
America and the Caribbean who suffer from HIV/AIDS as well.
In Latin America today, there are over 1.6 million people living with
HIV/AIDS. That is up from 1.3 million in 2001. And we have lost 58,000
citizens of Latin America who have lost their lives to HIV/AIDS. In the
Caribbean, 230,000 adults and children are currently known to be
infected with HIV/AIDS. That is up from 190,000 in 2001. In the
Caribbean, 11,000 citizens of the Caribbean have lost their lives. In
Haiti alone, a large recipient of aid as a result of this initiative,
almost 4 percent of the population of Haiti is infected with HIV/AIDS.
Think about that, 190,000 people. Since 2004, thanks to this
initiative, the number of people receiving care and support has grown
from 30,000 to 125,000, and an anticipated 150,000 people will be
reached this year because of this initiative in Haiti. Haiti has
received almost $85 million from this program in the past year to
address this crisis which affects many in the Caribbean.
This AIDS initiative has allowed us to reach almost every person in
Haiti struggling with HIV/AIDS. And the continued support is necessary
to make sure we reach every person struggling with HIV/AIDS throughout
the world. That is why this legislation today is so very important.
Elsewhere in Latin America, let me give you another example in
Bolivia. Bolivia is now able to use data to combat HIV/AIDS thanks to
this legislation. In fact, real-time data is helping Bolivian health
officials carry out more HIV/AIDS prevention education, including HIV
counseling and testing services. And thanks to the Joint United Nations
Program on HIV/AIDS, prevalence rates in Bolivia's general population
has remained at one-tenth of 1 percent, which is a remarkable success
compared to some of its neighbors.
This is good legislation. It is bipartisan legislation. I commend
President Bush for his leadership. I commend the leadership of the
Foreign Affairs Committee for their leadership making this a bipartisan
initiative. I urge an ``aye'' vote on final adoption and passage of
this important legislation today.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I would inquire of the gentleman from
Florida if he has any remaining speakers.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I am the last speaker.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I'm the last speaker for this side, Madam
Speaker, and I'll reserve my time until the gentleman from Florida has
closed for his side and has yielded back his time.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, again I thank my
good friend, Mr. Hastings, for having yielded me the time and all of
those who have participated in this important debate with regard to the
critically important legislation that is being brought to the floor
today.
Madam Speaker, as Americans throughout the country are taking their
summer family vacations, they're continually shocked by the record
prices of gasoline. Part of the reason that we're seeing increases
continuously in the price of gasoline is because we have become more
and more dependent on oil, on foreign oil, while we avoid developing
domestic energy sources.
One important source of domestic energy is the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. However, efforts to develop just a tiny
portion of that section of ANWR have been fought and blocked to the
detriment of America's energy independence, even though the people of
Alaska are overwhelmingly in favor of searching for energy in ANWR,
both of their Senators and their Representative, in representation of
really a societal consensus in that State. With the price of gasoline
at $4 a gallon, we should be looking to do all we can to lower the
price of gasoline. And that includes domestic exploration when the
people of a State wish to search for it.
Today I will be asking each of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the
previous question to the rule. If the previous question is defeated, I
will amend the rule to make it in order for the House to consider an
amendment that would have the effect of lowering the national average
price per gallon of regular unleaded gasoline and diesel fuel by
increasing the domestic supply of oil by permitting the extraction of
oil in that section of Alaska, in the Arctic National Refuge, as the
people of that State, their Senators and their Representative, wish to
do.
I remind Members that defeating the previous question will not stop
debate on this important underlying legislation. It simply would allow
debate on an amendment to permit the Congress to consider another very
important issue.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the
amendment and extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the
previous question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. By voting ``no'' on the previous
question, Members can take a stand against the high fuel prices and our
reliance on foreign energy sources.
I ask for a ``no'' vote on the previous question.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, this is a good rule for a
critically important bill. The sooner that the House approves this
rule, the sooner the U.S. can continue to save and improve millions of
lives around the world and here at home.
The Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Reauthorization Act has received overwhelming support across the
political spectrum because it balances fiscal responsibility, oversight
and comprehensive health care programs.
I commend my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for supporting a
bill that uses scientifically proven strategies, international
cooperation and cultural competence to combat some of the most
devastating diseases in recent history.
We executed an aggressive response to the tuberculosis and malaria
epidemics in this country because we understood that it would allow us
to be a stronger and better Nation. Although we have made tremendous
progress in our country, the battle is far from over.
As the richest nation in the world, we now have the privilege of
helping other countries on their road to development. We must use the
knowledge that we gain from these partnerships to address the
disparities that continue to deprive countless men, women and

[[Page 16376]]

children in this country and abroad of a healthy and productive life.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule that
brings the underlying bill to the House.
Madam Speaker, before I close, I want to address this request of my
good friend and colleague from Florida about energy. What he is saying
is, and the people on his side of the aisle, is immediately upon the
adoption of this resolution, the House shall, without intervention of
any point of order, consider in the House the bill, H.R. 6107, to
direct the Secretary of the Interior to establish and implement a
competitive oil and gas leasing program that will result in an
environmentally sound program for the exploration, development, and
production of the oil and gas resources of the Coastal Plain of Alaska,
and for other purposes.
Now this bill that we're here on, Madam Speaker, is named after two
of the most distinguished persons that have ever served in this body.
My colleague from Florida and all of us that are here knew both of
these men and knew their seriousness when they came to this floor about
matters. We commemorate their memory with this bill. But what we do is
we denigrate their memory by bringing up political hyperbole, political
grandstanding, exhausting political hyperbole and bumper stickerism.
Enough of this.
Everybody knows that we have put forward, on the side that I am
privileged to represent as Democrats, numerous measures dealing with
these matters. We all know that there are 68 million acres off the
shore that are leased already to oil companies. Footnote. Has anybody
asked any of these oil companies whether or not they want to drill in
these areas? And in ANWR there are 23 million acres that are available.
How dare we come here with this pitiful excuse for a previous
question and say to the American people that on a matter of this
consequence, on a matter of dealing with malaria, tuberculosis and HIV/
AIDS that we would come here and denigrate the name of the two persons
that we commemorate with such a foolish proposition. It makes
absolutely no sense.
Now we will hear, obviously from now until the time that we're out of
session, from my Republican colleagues about energy. And I have said to
them repeatedly and over and over and over again, that all the
hyperbole, switchgrass, deed exhaustion, coal, shale, offshore, ANWR,
all of those things, geothermal, I can name them. All of us in here can
name them. Many of those are things in the future. All of us know that
we have a crisis in this country. Every man and woman in the House of
Representatives and in the United States would like to solve that
crisis. We know that speculators are involved in this. We put forward
energy legislation. Nancy Pelosi led with energy legislation. Markey
and Dingell have been on the floor repeatedly with energy legislation.
We are here about AIDS, and someone would dare come here and talk about
energy. That's crazy.
Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Tom Lantos
and Henry J. Hyde U.S. Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis
and Malaria Reauthorization Act.
Five years ago, Congress passed the first U.S. Leadership Act aimed
at combating HIV/AIDS, TB, and malaria worldwide. Since that time, U.S.
assistance has enabled 33 million HIV counseling and testing sessions,
provided antiretroviral treatment to 1.45 million people, and prevented
157,000 infants from contracting HIV through mother-to-child infection.
In addition to combating HIV/AIDS, the U.S. Leadership Act has
contributed to the treatment of millions of people with TB, and to the
distribution of millions of bed nets to prevent the spread of malaria.
But there is so much more work to be done. There are currently about
39 million people worldwide living with HIV/AIDS, more than the
population of California. Each year, 2 million people die from
tuberculosis. Every 30 seconds, a child dies from malaria, a fully
preventable disease.
From both a moral and self-interested perspective, we simply cannot
afford to let the epidemics of HIV, TB, and malaria grow. Our long-term
prosperity and security are inextricably linked to our commitment to
help build stronger economies and reduce poverty around the world.
Promoting public health is a critical component of this effort. Disease
cripples not only individuals, but economies as well, preventing
parents from supporting their families, and leaving children orphaned
with no financial security, limited opportunities for education, and
narrow prospects for future contributions.
We must also recognize that in a global society, we ourselves are not
immune to these diseases. Malaria was rampant in parts of the United
States as little as 60 years ago. The World Health Organization
estimates that worldwide, more than one third of the world's population
is infected with the tuberculosis bacteria. Poorly supervised or
incomplete treatment of tuberculosis can be more harmful than no
treatment at all, allowing the bacteria to develop resistance to drugs
and increasing the hazards of contracting the bacteria for the whole
planet. In an ever more integrated world, we cannot wall ourselves off
from the reach of these diseases.
This bill reflects our commitment to contribute to the treatment,
prevention, and ultimate elimination of these diseases worldwide. It
ensures a balanced approach to the prevention of HIV/AIDS that includes
abstinence, faithfulness, and condom promotion as the three-tiered
strategy to prevent HIV infection. The bill also includes key
provisions that recognize the inherent link between disease treatment
and support of basic needs, such as food, shelter, and economic
opportunity.
I urge my colleagues to vote for this important legislation.
The material previously referred to by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of
Florida is as follows:

Amendment to H. Res. 1362 Offered by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida

At the end of the resolution, add the following:
Sec. 3. Immediately upon the adoption of this resolution
the House shall, without intervention of any point of order,
consider in the House the bill (H.R. 6107) to direct the
Secretary of the Interior to establish and implement a
competitive oil and gas leasing program that will result in
an environmentally sound program for the exploration,
development, and production of the oil and gas resources of
the Coastal Plain of Alaska, and for other purposes. All
points of order against the bill are waived. The bill shall
be considered as read. The previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the bill and any amendment thereto
to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one
hour of debate on the bill equally divided and controlled by
the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on Natural
Resources, and (2) an amendment in the nature of a substitute
if offered by Representative Rahall of West Virginia or his
designee, which shall be considered as read and shall be
separately debatable for 40 minutes equally divided and
controlled by the proponent and an opponent; and (3) one
motion to recommit with or without instructions.
____

(The information contained herein was provided by
Democratic Minority on multiple occasions throughout the
109th Congress.)

The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means

This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous
question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote.
A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote
against the Democratic majority agenda and a vote to allow
the opposition, at least for the moment, to offer an
alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be
debating.
Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of
Representatives, (VI, 308-311) describes the vote on the
previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or
control the consideration of the subject before the House
being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous
question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the
subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling
of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the
House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes
the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to
offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the
majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated
the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to
a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to
recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said:
``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman
from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to
yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first
recognition.''
Because the vote today may look bad for the Democratic
majority they will say ``the vote on the previous question is
simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on
adopting the resolution . . . [and] has no substantive
legislative or policy implications whatsoever.'' But that is
not what they have always said. Listen to the definition of
the previous question used in the Floor Procedures Manual
published by the Rules Committee in the 109th Congress, (page
56). Here's how the Rules Committee

[[Page 16377]]

described the rule using information form Congressional
Quarterly's ``American Congressional Dictionary'': ``If the
previous question is defeated, control of debate shifts to
the leading opposition member (usually the minority Floor
Manager) who then manages an hour of debate and may offer a
germane amendment to the pending business.''
Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of Representatives,
the subchapter titled ``Amending Special Rules'' states: ``a
refusal to order the previous question on such a rule [a
special rule reported from the Committee on Rules] opens the
resolution to amendment and further debate.'' (Chapter 21,
section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues: Upon rejection of the
motion for the previous question on a resolution reported
from the Committee on Rules, control shifts to the Member
leading the opposition to the previous question, who may
offer a proper amendment or motion and who controls the time
for debate thereon.''
Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does
have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only
available tools for those who oppose the Democratic
majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the
opportunity to offer an alternative plan.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the
previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous
question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam 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, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

____________________

{time} 1115
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF MOTIONS TO SUSPEND THE RULES

Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on
Rules, I call up House Resolution 1367 and ask for its immediate
consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

H. Res. 1367

Resolved, That it shall be in order at any time on the
legislative day of Thursday, July 24, 2008, for the Speaker
to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules
relating to the bill (H.R. 6578) to provide for the sale of
light grade petroleum from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve
and its replacement with heavy grade petroleum.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Vermont is recognized for
1 hour.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only,
I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Sessions). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for
debate only.

General Leave

Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend
their remarks and to insert extraneous materials into the Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Vermont?
There was no objection.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, House Resolution 1367 provides that it shall be in
order on the legislative day of Thursday, July 24, 2008, for the
Speaker to entertain motions to suspend the rules relating to energy.
Today, a barrel of oil costs $124. Last week it was $134. In June, it
was over $140 a barrel. Congress is acting, and the market is reacting.
Many factors, we know, contribute to the price of a barrel of oil:
demand, supply, our economy, speculation, actions that Congress does or
doesn't take. But make no mistake, the actions that this Congress has
taken and will take are having an impact, a positive impact, to bring
down the price of a barrel of oil.
To just remind my colleagues what this Congress did, on May 13, we
passed H.R. 6022, a bill I sponsored, to halt shipments to the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve. That bill was signed into law by the
President.
On June 26, we passed H.R. 6377 to squeeze speculation out of the
market by directing that the CFTC, the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, utilize its authority to better regulate the energy
markets.
On July 17, a strong majority of the House supported H.R. 6515, the
DRILL Act. This bill would actually open up 22 million acres in Alaska
for drilling and direct oil companies to either use the leases they
have on the remaining 68 million acres, or lose them. They have the
opportunity to increase production. We are asking them to do it.
Every time the price of oil declines, consumers and businesses save
money. Let me just give one example. The airline industry alone, it
costs them $430 million every time the price of a barrel of oil goes up
$1. In the past 20 days, the price of oil has come down nearly $20.
That is approximately an $860 million savings for the airline industry
and our traveling public.
The energy crisis that we face is real, and it requires long-term
action, but it also requires immediate action. And the actions that we
can take to take the pressure off the price, we should take. Although
the price has recently fallen, we have much more we can do, and we must
today take this opportunity to provide the immediate relief that will
occur by releasing 10 percent of the oil now in the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve into the market. That would get relief to the American
consuming public within 2 weeks.
Incidentally, this is not an unprecedented action by Congress. It is
smart policy, it is nimble policy. It has been done in the past by
Republican and by Democratic Presidents. A few examples: on January 16,
1991, the first President Bush released fuel from the SPR. That was in
conjunction with the start of the Gulf War. President Bush said this
will send an important message to the American people that their $20
million investment in an emergency supply of crude oil has produced a
system that can respond rapidly.
A second time, September 22, 2000, President Clinton released 30
million barrels from the SPR into the market. President Clinton said,
``This is the right thing to do. It is good energy policy. It is good
national security policy, and good family policy.'' The market
responded immediately with prices dropping 18.7 percent.
Incidentally, when the first President Bush did it, the price went
down 33 percent. Our own President Bush, August 31, 2005, he authorized
a drawdown of crude oil from the SPR. This was after Hurricane Katrina.
Prices dropped 9.1 percent.
So what we have within our grasp is the opportunity to take an action
recently taken by three Presidents that immediately resulted in the
reduction of the price of gasoline. In one case 9 percent, in another
case 18 percent, and in a third case 33 percent. This is a time-tested
action that will help Americans now address the crippling cost of fuel.
Many of my colleagues have joined together urging the President to
use his authority to release fuel from the SPR. The President can do
that with a stroke of the pen. But if the President refuses to act,
Congress must act. We know, incidentally, Madam Speaker, that this bill
will not solve our energy problems. It is going to take a long-term
change in our energy policies to release ourselves from our addiction
to oil. Releasing fuel from the SPR is not a substitute for a long-term
policy, but it is a necessary action and a practical action to provide
immediate relief now by using a resource that does belong to the
American people.
Let's keep in mind that we do need a change in direction on our
energy policy. Our country has 2 percent of the proven reserves of
energy in the world. We are about 4 percent of the population, and we
are consuming 25 percent of the world's energy. That is not
sustainable. It is not good for our long-term security. We know we can
do better by having a policy that includes higher mileage standards for
our vehicles, higher energy efficiency standards, tax incentives for
clean energy alternatives, better construction designs, and restoration
of mass transit and rail. By doing that, we can create jobs,

[[Page 16378]]

improve our environment, develop affordable energy, and strengthen our
national security. But let's take the immediate short-term actions that
are within our grasp to take that will provide immediate relief to our
airline industry, to our businesses, and to our consumers and American
families. Take the actions that we can take, and take them now.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SESSIONS. I want to thank the gentleman for yielding me the time.
Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this rule which is a
cynical attempt to cover political Members of this body who have chosen
to elevate partisanship and politics above a real energy solution for
American consumers and this economy.
Let me start by answering my good friend regarding the issues that he
brought up and the things that he said.
First of all, the bottom line is that there could be 10 million acres
or 20 or 50 million acres that could be, quote, ``given to or leased''
by oil companies. They don't want to drill every bit of acreage they
have; they only want to drill where the oil is. Dry holes are not good
for anybody.
Secondly, when you look at what the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is
all about, it is there to protect this country. We should view that
ANWR is also a strategic petroleum reserve here for the United States.
There are 19 million acres in ANWR. Oil companies aren't after all 19
million acres, they are only after 2,000, just 2,000. That's where the
oil is.
And perhaps number three, the gentleman needs to understand this,
that energy companies are there to be in the business of providing
energy. They are not there for any other reason. They are there to help
the American consumer, to support our economy, and to make sure that
America is the greatest Nation on the face of this earth.
I am proud that we have the largest economy in this world and we use
energy to make us more successful. We should not apologize or say it is
a mistake that America utilizes energy. We simply need to make sure
that what we are doing is having a comprehensive, across-the-board
view, and not allowing drilling here in America and offshore is a
national security issue. That's the side of the story that my friend
did not tell this morning. That's why this bill is something we should
oppose.
For the last 5 months, everyday consumers and our national economy
have been suffering because of this Democrat majority's stubborn and
mind-boggling unwillingness to increase the supply of domestically
produced oil to reduce prices at the pump. And for over a year and a
half, Republicans have been unified in a commonsense approach and a
comprehensive approach to bringing down the price of gasoline for
consumers, only to have that plan ignored by the new Democrat majority
in favor of agenda that prioritizes scapegoats over solutions.
Rather than taking this opportunity to work in a constructive,
bipartisan way to address the real domestic energy supply issues, they
have let sky-high energy prices stand and continue for consumers.
Today, we are being asked outside of regular order and with no
opportunity for Members to offer their own good ideas to bring down the
price of gasoline, and we are spending only 40 minutes to debate a fig-
leaf piece of legislation that releases 3\1/2\ days' worth of oil from
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
The gentleman is correct, when there is more oil supply that is
available, the price does go down. The gentleman is correct, there have
been previous orders by the President to reduce the supply that is in
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve directly for consumers. But 3 days'
worth is all we are talking about. That is not a long-term fix. We need
a strategic petroleum reserve that is called ANWR to make America
competitive.
So rather than doing something that would be long term, all they are
trying to do is something that would be a political, short-term fix.
Madam Speaker, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is intended to deal
with natural disasters and national security crises, not preventable,
man-made political disasters like the short supply of energy that we
have today in America because of the Democrat Party no-energy strategy.
The world understands it. As a matter of fact, I was out on the west
side of the Capitol just yesterday as Republicans were talking about
our ability to go drill here in America and offshore. And whole loads,
bus loads of Democrat staffers and others are out front saying, No
drill, shame on the Republican Party. My gosh, I do understand that
that is the policy of the new Democrat majority. We're working their
plan. That's why gasoline is at $4 a gallon. We simply disagree in the
Republican Party.
However, there is one small bright spot associated with this
legislation, and it is by bringing it to the House floor today, the
Democrat leadership is finally admitting there is a supply-side
component to addressing America's energy concerns. My colleague was
very plain and forward when he said: When we dump oil into the
marketplace, the price goes down. Unfortunately, seriousness of purpose
in dealing with the problem has not accompanied this long-overdue
revelation--which is why we are here debating this do-nothing cover
vote today instead of real solutions to our problems.

{time} 1130

Yesterday I joined my Republican colleagues when we proposed a smart,
innovative and comprehensive approach to addressing our Nation's energy
independence solution, a problem whose guiding philosophy can be summed
up by one simple principle, use less and find more.
Rather than just releasing over a weekend's worth of energy and
calling it a day, like the Democrat proposal does, the Republican plan
is to increase the supply of American-made energy in an environmentally
sound way. This is what Republicans are pushing on the floor of the
House of Representatives yet again today.
We believe our deep-water oil resources, ocean resources, could
provide an additional 3 million barrels of oil per day as well as 76
trillion cubic square feet of natural gas. These are proven reserves.
We should open the Arctic coastal plain, which could provide an
additional 1 million barrels of oil a day. We should allow development
of our Nation's shale oil resources, which could provide an additional
2.5 million barrels of oil per day, and we would increase the supply of
gas at the pump by cutting bureaucratic red tape that hinders the
construction of new refineries.
To improve energy conservation and efficiency, our legislation will
provide tax incentives for businesses and families to purchase more
efficient vehicles. It will provide tax incentives for businesses and
homeowners who improve their energy efficiency. To promote alternative
and renewable energy technologies, this legislation will spur the
technology of alternative fuels through government contracting by
repealing the section 526 prohibition on government purchasing of
alternative energy and promotion of coal-to-liquids technology.
We will establish a renewable energy trust fund using revenues
generated by exploration in deep ocean and on the Arctic coastal plain.
We will extend permanently the tax credit for alternative energy
production, including wind, solar and hydrogen, and we will eliminate
barriers to the expansion of emission-free nuclear power production.
Speaker Pelosi and this new Democrat majority have the power to bring
these already-developed commonsense solutions up for a vote at any
time. Trust me, Madam Speaker, the Republicans are here to help. But
what we want is real solutions. We want to drill now to save America.
Speaker Pelosi should choose to be with Republicans in a bipartisan
answer, but, instead, this Speaker is choosing to ignore the American
public in favor of a radical environmentalist agenda. I will be giving
every Member of this body the opportunity to show where they really
stand on energy independence during the vote on the rule's previous
question. I encourage every single Member who agrees with

[[Page 16379]]

me that this country needs to increase its supply of safe and reliable
American energy to force this Democrat leadership to finally act by
rejecting the cynical rule and the meaningless underlying legislation
so that this House and the American people will be prepared for real
legislation that will have a real effect at the pump.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Massachusetts, the chairman of the Select Committee on
Energy Independence and Global Warming, Mr. Markey.
Mr. MARKEY. Thank you, Mr. Welch.
Madam Speaker, we have on the floor right now for consideration
legislation which will make it possible for American consumers, who are
being tipped upside down at the gasoline pump every time they go in
with their vehicle and having money shaken out of their pockets, to
have immediate relief, to have the United States be on the side of the
American consumer.
Now what has been happening over the last couple of months is really
unfortunate. The Republicans and President Bush have been arguing that
the answer is to go and to drill up in the remotest parts of the
Arctic, when their own Department of Energy is saying that it will take
10 to 20 years for any of that oil to get to the gas pumps in the
United States and, when it does, it will only offer insignificant
relief to the American consumer.
Meanwhile, the President went over to Saudi Arabia, just a month and
a half ago, to beg the Saudi Arabians to please produce more oil that
we can use right now, because that would drop the price in oil. The
Saudis said, ``Well, we'll think about it. Maybe we'll produce another
two or 300,000 barrels of oil, but you'll have to send back your
Secretary of Energy in another 3 weeks for us to talk to him.''
Well, you can either promise the American people something that
doesn't happen 10 to 20 years from now, which is what the Republicans
have been doing, or you can use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve right
now, which is what our legislation will do, and it will say to the
President, Mr. President, you must use 10 percent of all the oil in the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve right now, 70 million barrels of oil, and
you must use it over the next 5 or 6 months. That would average out to
about 500,000 barrels of oil a day. That's the signal that the
marketplace would absolutely respond to, because it would send shivers
up the spine of the speculators, of the manipulators, of the OPEC
cartel that has been playing games with the American consumer.
How do we know that this is going to work? We know it's going to work
because when past Presidents have turned the spigot on the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve, President Bush I, just before the first Persian Gulf
war, the price dropped 33 percent for oil.
In the year 2000 when Bill Clinton used it, it dropped 18 percent.
And even when this President Bush used it right after the Katrina
storm, it dropped 9 percent. We know this works.
But what's going to happen? The Republican leadership is going to get
on a plane and fly up to the Arctic wildlife refuge. Instead, they
should get on a plane and fly down to Houston and take a look at the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve and ask the President to just turn the
spigot on and to send that oil right now, not 10 or 20 years from now,
but 10 or 20 days from now so that Americans, who are enjoying their
August vacations know that the American government is on their side.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has from
Massachusetts expired.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.
Mr. MARKEY. The reason the Republicans won't use it, however, is that
they argue that we're not in an emergency. I think that is not how the
American people view where we are. $4 a gallon for gasoline. The price
for home heating oil and natural gas this winter rising by the day. We
have the airline industry in crisis. We have the trucking industry in
crisis. We have food prices skyrocketing.
The American people believe we are in an energy emergency. What we do
in this bill is we say, Mr. President, it might not fit your definition
of what an emergency is, but it fits the definition for the American
people. We want you to deploy the Strategic Petroleum Reserve now. We
want you to tap into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to protect the
American consumer now.
We don't want you to wait, Mr. President, until after some war in
Iran and deploy it then too, sir, but please do not wait until then.
Please understand that Americans want their oil. They paid for this
oil. They've paid $100 billion to put this oil in the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve in Houston, in Louisiana, in Mississippi. They want
relief now.
Vote ``aye'' on this legislation.
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, you know, I would love to cut a deal
with the gentleman right now and say Republicans would be completely
for this bill if you would do something for more than the 3 days'
supply if we would really approach the emergency that the American
people are talking about, and let's do something long term. We have
already had President Clinton 12 years ago sign the pen that said we
are not going to go after ANWR. We would have had that online now.
Why do we assume that in 5 or 6 or 7 years we are not going to need
this energy? We are going to need the energy.
This new Democrat majority, to a Member, is withholding from the
American people the opportunity to get prices down now. To say that we
would raid the Strategic Petroleum Reserve for 3 days' worth of
gasoline is laughable. It's laughable because the American people
understand that what this new Democrat majority is all about is having
the energy prices stay where they are. They see that the Democrat plan
evidently is working, the Democrat plan to squeeze American interests
out and to send the money overseas.
We have seen that now for 18 months. That's the Democrat majority's
plan. They want to keep building Dubai. They want to keep giving the
money to countries who do war against the United States and don't hold
us in favor. They want the money and the business to be done overseas.
They want the jobs to go overseas. That's really where this new
Democrat majority is.
If it were the Republican Party and reversed, it would be about all
the special interests that we're trying to give. But in this case, it
is about the American consumer that sees that their prices are at a
high level simply to make sure that this Democrat majority sends the
money overseas because they really don't like the energy companies here
in America. That's anti-American.
Madam Speaker, the Republican Party has great alternatives that are
on the table today. We want a long-term comprehensive fix for energy,
and we will continue to tell the American people, just as we are here
telling our colleagues here today, that we recognize who has the
capacity and the ability to bring a bill to the floor today to answer
the problem. The problem is the lack of resources of supply in the
gasoline marketplace, and it's extending also to high fuel prices that
will be paid in the Northeast this winter, and it is the new Democrat
majority that is responsible for that. This is their plan. They're
getting what they wanted, and we will keep building Dubais and keep
sending our money overseas as long as we cut off American jobs and
American energy companies.
I think it's a bad thing for policy for this country. That's why the
Republican Party has an alternative. I wish that it would be heard
today on the board to where we could vote for it.
Madam Speaker, we reserve the balance of our time.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Washington, a member of the committee on Energy and
Commerce and a leader on energy issues in Congress, Mr. Inslee.
Mr. INSLEE. Of course we need a long-term energy plan that can wean
ourselves off this addiction to oil. President Bush said we are
addicted to

[[Page 16380]]

oil, and he turns around and says let's just get more addicted to oil.
I don't understand why the Republicans then voted against our bill to
call for new clean energy sources of electricity so we can electrify
our car and not have to burn oil. I don't know why they voted against
our tax package that would allow tax breaks for companies like the
Sapphire Energy Company that's making biofuels out of algae. That's a
long-term solution to this problem, but we have got to have a short-
term solution too.
I will tell you this, listening to my Republican colleagues, if you
run out of gas on a dusty rural road somewhere, you better hope it's
not a Republican Congressman who pulls up and basically comes to your
aid and says, I can't help you now, can't help you next week, can't
help you next year. I'll be back around here in 10 years. Then maybe
we'll do something about it. Because that is all they are suggesting,
and that is a plan doomed for failure. We can't wait 10 years for
solutions to this problem. We need solutions that will work.
Let me suggest that the evidence is very, very clear about doing very
small releases from the SPR, and I was shocked to learn how successful
this can be. I went to a bipartisan war game at the war college last
week with some of my colleagues, and we war gamed out what would happen
if there was an interruption of our oil supplies due to overseas
disruption.
Let me tell you what I learned since then: Small releases from the
SPR can have huge ramifications for the price of gasoline. Look what
happened in 1990 during Desert Shield when the first President Bush
allowed release. Here is what the Energy Department concluded:
``The rapid decision to release crude oil from government-controlled
stocks in the United States and other OECD countries helped calm the
global oil market, and prices began to moderate. When the 1991 SPR
drawdown was announced in connection with Operation Desert Storm, the
price of oil immediately dropped $8 a barrel.''
Now why does this small less than 10 percent change in SPR, how can
it have these enormous ramifications? The answer has to do with human
psychology. These markets are driven by psychology, and that's why the
three times we have been done this before, all the last three
Presidents, including this President, has achieved reductions from 5 to
30 percent within 30 days in the price of oil.
Don't allow Americans to be told they have got to wait 10 years for
relief. Let's act now in conjunction with the legislation we are going
to pass eventually to tamp down speculation. Democrats have both a
long-term and a short-term response. Pass this bill.
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, let me agree with the gentleman.
Psychology does have a lot to do with this. That's why Republicans,
instead of trying to fall victim for a 3-day fix or for a long-term
fix--so let's get into the psychology for just a second.
How about if somebody brought legislation to the floor that said, you
know what? I think we ought to open up American deep-water oil
resources, ocean resources, because we do understand there are war
games that bipartisan Members of this House go attend to where we do
understand that if international shipping where oil was concerned, if
there was a bad mistake or a problem, that we would be in trouble.

{time} 1145

So why don't we, as just a good idea, let's open up America's deep
water ocean resources, which could provide an additional 3 million
barrels of oil per day, but it doesn't end there, and 76 trillion cubic
feet of natural gas.
Why don't we also bring to the table, let's open up the Arctic
Coastal Plain, which could provide an additional 1 million barrels of
oil a day. But there is more.
How about allowing the development of America's shale oil resources
for an additional 2.5 million barrels a day?
So instead of having just a 3-day fix and arguing all these new
issues that we bring up would take 10 to 20 years to bring to the
consumer, not true. It can be done tomorrow. We could decide, and we
should have decided 12 years ago. We should have decided last year. We
should decide that today, what we want to do is to make available the
resources of this country in the event, in the future, there really is
a big problem.
So the Republican Party is here on the floor today with real live
answers to real live problems that are happening every day.
And so once again, we will give this new Democrat majority credit.
The energy prices are the way that the Democrat Party wants them to be.
They do want prices to be high. They do not want a supply unless it is
paid for by the government. And they are not for a long-term solution
because it would mean that we would be using those big oil companies
resources.
My gosh. We are going to hold the American consumer hostage. We are
going to hold people in the Northeast who use and need this oil this
winter hostage, when, in fact, when it is 100 degrees outside, we are
saying, do this now; let's prepare. Let's be prepared for the future.
And instead, this new Democrat majority argues, time in and time out,
not going to drill, not going to put any more supply in, and prices
will simply continue to rise.
Madam Speaker, somebody will have to face up to the day of reckoning,
and that day of reckoning is going to be when American consumers, in
the dead of winter, are not only paying high prices at the pump, but
also high prices to heat their home.
We are trying to do something today. We have been trying to do
something for 18 months, and this new Democrat majority refuses,
refuses to see the facts of the case.
We reserve the balance of our time.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from New York, a man who serves on the select committee, Mr.
Hall.
Mr. HALL of New York. Madam Speaker, I just would like to say to my
friend across the aisle that I, as a member of the Democratic majority,
consider the repeated, deliberate use of the phrase ``Democrat
majority'' to be a pejorative use. That is not certainly what we call
ourselves. And we could call you the Republic minority, but we don't.
So, in the interest of bipartisanship and comity, I would suggest
``Democratic majority'' is the normal term to use.
I congratulate you on accepting and adopting most of the parts of
your plan from our plan. The renewable energy and conservation
components, which, by the way, the Vice President sneered at in 2002, I
think it was, when he said that conservation may be a personal virtue,
but it is no way to build a national energy policy.
We have been working, in this Congress, in the last year and a half
to pass the first increase in fuel mileage standards in 32 years, to
provide record, billions of dollars to alternative fuels research and
development, record billions of dollars for carbon sequestration so
that we can use coal that we have in this country without releasing
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
We have been trying, and I might say that perhaps your friend or the
colleague in the Republican Party in the other body, Senator Domenici,
could use a little talking to, perhaps from you, to get him to drop his
resistance to the renewable energy standard and to the extension of the
renewable tax credits which we have been fighting for on this side and
have been stymied in the Senate by a small number of Republicans who
are holding that up.
But allow me to go to what I was going to say, which is that in New
York this morning, gas prices are over $4.25 and in some cases $4.50
and have been this high for weeks. These sky high prices are squeezing
families in my district right now. Today we are trying to give them
relief using SPR oil to increase supply and bring down prices.
A release of oil from the SPR is a proven method of calming markets
and lowering prices. The last three Presidents have used it
successfully. And I urge all my colleagues to support it to do the same
thing today.

[[Page 16381]]

Announcement By the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from using
the second person and to address their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. SESSIONS. We reserve our time.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
Mr. DeFAZIO. Well, the GOP, the Grand Old Oil Party, is up to it
again. Now, it is as if the first six years of the Bush administration
never existed. The Republicans controlled the House, the White House,
and the United States Senate.
Vice President Dick Cheney, at the President's behest, met secretly
with the oil and gas industry and other energy producers and proposed
an energy policy, a Republican energy policy. That policy was passed by
the Republican House of Representatives, adopted by the Republican
Senate, and signed by the Republican president. We have been living
under it now for a couple of years, and it is having the predictable
results. We are now more dependent upon foreign oil. And many of us who
voted against that Republican energy policy said it was pushing the
country in that direction. We are seeing prices jacked up to
unbelievable levels. Many of us predicted at the time that the Bush/
Cheney Republican energy policy would have those results.
They didn't mandate increases in fuel standards. They didn't mandate
development of alternative fuels. They had a few pretend things about
hydrogen which was far enough off in the future that it didn't upset
their benefactors in the oil industry because they know hydrogen is 20,
30 years off. But things that we could have been moving toward quickly
they were against.
Now suddenly they are all for action. They are all for action.
What do we need? We need more leases on the Outer Continental Shelf.
Well, what about the fact that the industry today is sitting on leases
that can access 80 percent of the known reserves of oil and gas off the
United States of America? But they are simply not developing them.
Now, the industry says, well, they just don't have enough deep water
drilling rigs and other things. But last year Enron, I mean--sorry.
That is another guilty party here. But ExxonMobil made more money than
any corporation in the history of the world, $40 billion. And what did
they do with two thirds of their profit? Did they put it into new
supply? Did they put it into new drilling equipment? Heck no. They
bought back their own stock to enrich their board and their execs. The
president who retired got a $400 million retirement, and he bought an
oil field in Africa with his retirement. Now that is where their
profits and their money went.
They are in no hurry to develop new resources. But they would like to
lock up what might still be out there while Bush and Cheney are in the
White House so that they can get sweetheart deals like the one proposed
yesterday for oil shale, because these are their oilmen in the White
House. Plain and simple. That's what this bum's rush is all about.
The American people need short-term price relief. It isn't going to
come through letting more leases in sensitive areas that the industry
sits on. It would come from breaking the back of the speculators,
something they don't want to do, closing the Enron loophole.
Remember Ken Lay, head of Enron from Texas, the President's biggest
political benefactor throughout his entire life?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Oregon has
expired.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. DeFAZIO. The Enron loophole was created for him to trade oil and
gas off the books. Well, Ken Lay is dead, before he went to prison.
Enron is bankrupt, and the loophole lives on, and that is the price we
are paying at the pump today because of commodity speculation.
Take on the speculators, break their back. Break their back any way
you can. Re-regulate them or take oil out of the SPR. Break the back of
the speculators. That will give us short-term price relief. Develop our
resources in the midterm, and new energy future for the long term, not
dependent upon oil and foreign oil.
Mr. SESSIONS. You know, it's great to hear about this private meeting
that took place in the year 2000, and to now learn about all the
attributes of the meeting.
I would speculate, since I am sure the gentleman did, that ANWR would
have been in that list of things that the President of the United
States would have wanted, the consumers want, that ANWR would have been
on there, that every place that we would drill economically, and
ecologically, in a sound way, that that would have been on the table
too. That is exactly probably what the President had in mind and
probably what the energy companies had in mind.
Let's put American resources, jobs and national security to the
advantage of the American people, instead of the plan to send all this
money overseas to build Dubai. That is a mistake.
Madam Speaker, at this time I would like to yield 4 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Louisiana, Dr. Boustany.
Mr. BOUSTANY. Madam Speaker, I want to thank my friend and colleague
from Texas for yielding time to me.
You know, the collective wisdom of the American people is a force to
be reckoned with. And the American people are speaking very, very
loudly today about what we need. They are speaking about the need for a
comprehensive energy policy; an energy policy that looks at all the
possibilities that we have. And that is just, in fact, what House
Republicans are offering, and I would venture to say a fair number of
Democrats on the other side of the aisle want this. But this approach
is being blocked by the Democratic leadership, unfortunately.
Madam Speaker, I would urge that the Democratic leadership listen to
the collective wisdom of the American public.
Now this idea about drawing down out of the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve is incredibly irresponsible. We are on the verge of a new
hurricane season where we may need that oil. We have geopolitical
unrest around the world where we may need that oil. The current volume
held in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is just over 700 million
barrels, and at current usage of 20 million barrels a day in this
country, that is 35 days. 35 days. That reserve, that Strategic Reserve
was put in place for real, dire emergencies.
Now, some would argue, yes, the price at the pump is really hurting
American families, and I fully agree. I have spoken to many of my
constituents who are feeling the pain at the pump today. But that is no
excuse, that is no excuse for this Congress to shirk its responsibility
to come forward with a comprehensive energy policy that focuses on
production in an environmentally responsible way by opening the Outer
Continental Shelf in Alaska, by investing in alternative and
renewables, by looking into clean coal technology, shale oil, building
out refining capacity to meet our needs, investing in nuclear energy.
All of these things, all of the above is what this country demands and
is what is necessary.
So I would suggest it is time to quit this irresponsible posturing in
this body, and let's move forward with a comprehensive energy policy.
This is a national security issue. It is clearly a national security
issue. Speak to any of our generals and our troops who are fighting in
the Middle East. This is a national security issue. And I urge my
colleagues to get serious about this issue. The American people have
gotten serious about it. So why are we delaying? What is the reason for
procrastination?

{time} 1200

We can come to a reasonable compromise in this body to deal with all
of it. And I would point out that exploration and production today can
be done in a very environmentally sound way. My district in southwest
Louisiana has been doing this. If you look at the oil and gas industry,
in the aftermath of Hurricanes Rita and

[[Page 16382]]

Katrina when 80 percent of it was out, we didn't have spillages in the
Gulf of Mexico. Everything was done in a very sound and responsible
way. The evacuation was carried out well, and this oil and gas
production came back on line very quickly in the interest of the
American people.
And finally, I would add that by increasing responsible,
environmentally sound American exploration and production, we're
creating good, high-paying American jobs, also a very important
stimulus to this economy.
Clearly, what we need today is a comprehensive energy policy coupled
with strengthening of the dollar, and I think we will work our way out
of this economic crisis.
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, could I please find out how much time is
left on both sides.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas has 8 minutes
remaining. The gentleman from Vermont has 12 minutes remaining.
Mr. SESSIONS. Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I believe I heard the
gentleman say he has no additional speakers; is that correct?
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I would like to, with
permission, recognize the chairman again, Mr. Markey, but only if there
is no objection.
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, we will reserve our time.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
Mr. MARKEY. I thank the gentleman from Vermont.
You know, this Strategic Petroleum Reserve is an incredible weapon to
be used in order to protect the American consumer from being gouged at
the pump right now. And the Republican Party and President Bush and
Vice President Cheney are talking about anything but using the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve in order to protect the American consumer
at the pump today. And there's a good reason. Because the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve is to the oil industry what kryptonite is to
Superman. It saps them of their strength immediately. It decreases
dramatically their power over ordinary citizens across our country. And
that's why they object to it.
You're going to keep hearing from Republicans how they really want to
help consumers 10 and 20 years from now. But you're not going to hear a
word about their support for deploying 500,000 or 1 million barrels of
oil a day right now into the marketplace that will drive down the price
of oil, drive down the price of gasoline at the pump today.
That's what we're going to continue to wait to hear them say.
Now, they have plenty of time left in order to make that statement in
this debate today, but you're not going to hear it. You're not going to
hear them talking about immediate relief. They're going to continually
talk about oil that will come from drilling on our beaches 10 or 20
years from now. Well, that's fine 10 and 20 years from now, but what
are they going to do now? What are they going to do between now and
Labor Day when Americans are driving all over the country? They're
doing to say, We can't use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. We can't
drive down the price of oil now. We have to wait.
This is going to be an important bill to give protection to the
American consumers.
Mr. SESSIONS. Just so the gentleman from Massachusetts has an
opportunity to call my bluff, I'll take him up on it. I'll take him up
on it.
We do believe there is something immediately that can be done, and
we've been asking for this for years and years and years because the
fact of the matter is, as we've already heard, there is a lot of
psychology. The gentleman from the State of Washington talked about
psychology just a few speakers ago. Well, here is the psychology. If
you bring your own oil to the table, the other side sees what you're
willing to do and their oil's worthless because they cannot hold you
hostage.
So what the Republican Party does want to talk about today is today,
tomorrow, Labor Day, and moving forward. And that's why we're talking
about bringing 3 million barrels of oil per day, 76 trillion cubic feet
of natural gas, 1 million barrels of oil from the Arctic coastal plane,
and 2.5 million barrels a day from the shale that's in this country.
Darn right we want to talk about today.
But the fact of the matter is that we've been talking about this for
years, and now they make it seem like the debate just started today.
The debate did not start today. The debate started back when President
Clinton was in office. We asked for and passed a bill at that time, and
the President said, ``No. You cannot have ANWR.''
And now we get to today and they act like, ``Well, it just started.
But Republicans don't want to talk about today.'' Darn right we want to
talk about today. We want to talk about what has been talked about,
that is the psychological effort as well as a today's efforts; and
that's why the Republican Party is here yet another day.
Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to yield 4 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady).
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, another day, another energy gimmick.
It must be the 110th Congress.
The American public, hammered by high fuel prices, is getting tired
of the Democrats' Jed Clampett energy plan. You just can't shoot at a
bunch of imaginary targets and hope that energy is going to come
bubbling up from the ground. Today is another such gimmick. Depleting
America's emergency oil nest egg at a time when the world is
increasingly unstable in oil-producing nations like Nigeria, like
Venezuela, and Iran, why, even a hillbilly like me doesn't think that
makes much sense.
Tapping our energy reserve for 3 measly days of energy, 3, 3 days of
energy, that won't lower prices, nor does it send a signal to the world
that America is serious about taking more responsibility for meeting
our own daily energy needs.
If this bill were to pass, and it will fail spectacularly today, but
if it were to pass at the end of the drawdown, America would be more
dependent on foreign oil than we are today. We would be more dependent
on foreign oil than we are today. And how does that solve the problem?
So here is the question: How high does gas have to get before
Congress will act? How many families will be hurt? How many small
businesses will go under? How hard will our economy be hit before our
Speaker allows an up-or-down vote on producing more American-made
energy?
Congress has voted on conservation, we voted on renewable and passed
them both. Why can't we get a vote on more exploration here at home
with our resources? Speaker Pelosi to the Democrat leadership, I know
that you have the right heart. Tell the special interests to step
aside. Make room for the little guy who doesn't have a lobbyist, who
hasn't contributed to your campaign. Let them have an up-or-down vote
on this floor, a vote now for the American Energy Act so we can produce
more American-made energy so we can get serious about lowering gas
prices here in America.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask how much time remains
on my side.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Blumenauer). The gentleman from Texas
has 3\1/2\ minutes. The gentleman from Vermont has 10 minutes.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I understand the gentleman from Vermont is
through with his speakers and wishes to close.
I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Westmoreland).
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I thank my friend from Texas for yielding.
I wanted to have a quote up here that was from Mr. Kanjorski. And
this was in an interview that he was giving to one of the local
newspapers or television stations. And he was talking about really the
Democrats' promise to end the war in Iraq and bringing all of the
troops home, but it relates to their

[[Page 16383]]

energy policy, too, and what they promised when Speaker Pelosi, then-
minority leader in April of 2006, says, ``We as Democrats have a
commonsense plan to lower the skyrocketing price of gas.'' At the time
it was about $2.10 a gallon.
But Mr. Kanjorski said, ``We sort of stretched the truth and people
ate it up.'' Well, there's been some truth stretching going on lately
in this building, and I think what we've got to realize is that we need
to do something to increase the supply other than taking out of our
savings account.
If you have a shortfall every month and you take out of your savings
to make up for that shortfall or to increase the supply of money that
you have, you're eventually going to run out of that. We would run out
of oil, and we don't need to do that because then we would certainly be
at the mercy of our enemies.
This is Mr. DeFazio back on January 18 of 2007, Mr. Speaker, when the
Democrats came out with their energy plan. He said, ``It is sad to see
the Republicans come to this. Now they laughingly say this will lead
the higher prices.'' At the time, gas was $2.10 a gallon. Today it's
about $4.10 a gallon.
We told the Democrats then that their energy plan was not going to
work, that it was not going to help Americans lower the gas prices and
the price to heat their homes. We're telling them the same thing today:
by taking out of our Strategic Petroleum Reserve to increase the supply
is not the way to go. That's not the commonsense plan that Speaker
Pelosi promised us back in April of 2006.
We don't need to deplete our savings, the energy reserve that we have
in cases of emergency like when we used it for the first Gulf war and
when we used it for Katrina. We don't need to use our savings.
And so with that, I want to say that this is another situation where,
Mr. Speaker, the American people have heard the Republican idea of
increasing supply, an all-of-the-above policy, and the Democrats are
still doing things under suspension when they could do this under
regular rule. They've got 218 votes. Mr. Speaker, the reason I think
the majority party does not want to do it is because they know their
energy plan is a failure. They want these bills to fail that they have
under suspension.
Let's bring about something to this floor that will let the duly
elected people of this country vote on an energy policy that will bring
relief to the Americans at the pump. And that policy is to increase our
oil supply from our own natural resources.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, today I urge my colleagues to vote with me
to defeat the previous question so this House can finally consider real
solutions to rising energy costs.
If the previous question is defeated, I will move to amend the rule
to allow for the additional consideration of H.R. 6566, the American
Energy Act.
I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the amendment and
extraneous material inserted into the Record prior to the vote on the
previous question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
Mr. SESSIONS. I yield back the balance of our time.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Mr. Speaker, this bill is really a simple and
straightforward opportunity for Congress to take an action taken by
previous Presidents and Congresses to lower the price at the pump for
the American consumer and for American businesses.
The Strategic Petroleum Reserve has over 700 million barrels of oil.
That is an asset that was bought and paid for by the American taxpayer,
it's an asset of the American taxpayer and citizen, and it's there to
be used for the benefit of the American citizen and the American
taxpayer.
This legislation would direct that 10 percent of that reserve--10
percent only; 70 million barrels--could be released. And what we've
seen in history is that in the three most previous instances where,
with a stroke of a pen, the President has used that authority to
release this asset belonging to the American people, it's resulted in a
reduction in the price at the pump of gasoline from 33 percent to 18
percent to 9 percent. So it's a proven action that Presidents have
taken to benefit the American consumer.
It's also responsible. You know, 20 days ago, oil was over $140 a
barrel. It's $124 a barrel today. And that means that when we are
replenishing the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, it's going to cost less
for the American taxpayer.
There is a reason why so many interested parties who are affected by
the high price of oil strongly support this. The Air Transport
Association, National Farmers Union, American Truck Association, League
of Conservation Voters, many Republican Members of Congress: Zach Wamp,
Rodney Alexander, Heather Wilson, Senator Collins, Senator Hutchison,
Senator Isakson. And the reason is that whatever we are going to do in
the long term to change our energy policy, why would we not take the
immediate action in the short term that can provide immediate benefit
to the American consumer and to American businesses?

{time} 1215

It just stands to reason that a responsible Congress is going to take
those actions that can provide direct and immediate relief to the
American consumer. That's what the release of the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve will allow. Ten percent, not all of it. It's not robbing the
savings bank. It's using an asset that belongs to the citizens of this
country to provide help to the families of this country.
Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and the
rule.
The material previously referred to by Mr. Sessions is as follows:

Amendment to H. Res. 1367 Offered by Mr. Sessions of Texas

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
That it shall be in order at any time on the legislative
day of Thursday, July 24, 2008, for the Speaker to entertain
motions that the House suspend the rules relating to the bill
(H.R. 6566) to bring down energy prices by increasing safe,
domestic production, encouraging the development of
alternative and renewable energy, and promoting conservation.
____

(The information contained herein was provided by
Democratic Minority on multiple occasions throughout the
109th Congress.)

The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means

[[Page 16384]]

of debate and may offer a germane amendment to the pending
business.''
Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of Representatives,
the subchapter titled ``Amending Special Rules'' states: ``a
refusal to order the previous question on such a rule [a
special rule reported from the Committee on Rules] opens the
resolution to amendment and further debate.'' (Chapter 21,
section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues: Upon rejection of the
motion for the previous question on a resolution reported
from the Committee on Rules, control shifts to the Member
leading the opposition to the previous question, who may
offer a proper amendment or motion and who controls the time
for debate thereon.''
Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does
have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only
available tools for those who oppose the Democratic
majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the
opportunity to offer an alternative plan.

Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous
question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule
XX, this 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question on House
Resolution 1367 will be followed by 5-minute votes on adoption of House
Resolution 1367, if ordered; ordering the previous question on House
Resolution 1362; and adoption of House Resolution 1362, if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 232,
nays 184, not voting 18, as follows:

[Roll No. 524]

YEAS--232

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Cazayoux
Chandler
Childers
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

NAYS--184

Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gilchrest
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
Lamborn
Lampson
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Scalise
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--18

Bishop (UT)
Boozman
Boswell
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Cubin
Dingell
Gohmert
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hulshof
LaHood
McNerney
Moran (VA)
Ortiz
Renzi
Rogers (MI)
Rush
Waters

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining in this vote.

{time} 1241

Mr. BACHUS changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Messrs. RAMSTAD and LoBIONDO changed their vote from ``nay'' to
``yea.''
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and
nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 226,
nays 190, not voting 18, as follows:

[Roll No. 525]

YEAS--226

[[Page 16385]]

Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

NAYS--190

Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Coble
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
Lampson
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Scalise
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shays
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--18

Bishop (UT)
Boozman
Boswell
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Cole (OK)
Cubin
Dingell
Gohmert
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hulshof
Kirk
LaHood
Lamborn
Miller, George
Ortiz
Rush
Tiahrt

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining in this vote.

{time} 1248

So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated against:
Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 525, I was inadvertently
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

____________________

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF SENATE AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5501, TOM
LANTOS AND HENRY J. HYDE UNITED STATES GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AGAINST HIV/
AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on
ordering the previous question on House Resolution H. Res. 1362, on
which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous
question.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 231,
nays 185, not voting 18, as follows:

[Roll No. 526]

YEAS--231

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

NAYS--185

[[Page 16386]]

Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Scalise
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--18

Bishop (UT)
Boozman
Boswell
Braley (IA)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Cole (OK)
Cubin
Dingell
Ellison
Gohmert
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hulshof
LaHood
Meeks (NY)
Ortiz
Rush
Young (AK)

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining in this vote.

{time} 1255

So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 526, I did not
record my vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

personal explanation

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, July 24, 2008, I missed rollcall
votes 525 and 526.
I request that the Congressional Record reflect that had I been
present and voting, I would have voted as follows:
Rollcall vote 525: ``Nay'' (On the Rule providing for the
consideration of H.R. 6578);
Rollcall vote 526: ``Nay'' (On Calling the Previous Question on the
Rule providing for H.R. 5501).

personal explanation

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. Speaker, I missed three votes today due to an
emergency dental procedure. Had I been present, I would have voted as
follows:
Rollcall vote 524: ``yes'' on motion on ordering the previous
question on the rule providing for consideration of motions to suspend
the rules (H. Res. 1367).
Rollcall vote 525: ``yes'' on H. Res. 1367, the rule providing for
consideration of motions to suspend the rules.
Rollcall vote 526: ``yes'' on motion on ordering the previous
question on the rule for H.R. 5501--Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United
States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Reauthorization Act of 2008 (H. Res. 1362).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________

CONSUMER ENERGY SUPPLY ACT OF 2008

Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 6578) to provide for the sale of light grade petroleum from
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and its replacement with heavy grade
petroleum, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:

H.R. 6578

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 ``Consumer Energy Supply Act
of 2008''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act--
(1) the term ``light grade petroleum'' means crude oil with
an API gravity of 30 degrees or higher;
(2) the term ``heavy grade petroleum'' means crude oil with
an API gravity of 26 degrees or lower; and
(3) the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Energy.

SEC. 3. SALE AND REPLACEMENT OF OIL FROM THE STRATEGIC
PETROLEUM RESERVE.

(a) Initial Petroleum Sale and Replacement.--
Notwithstanding section 161 of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6241), the Secretary shall
publish a plan not later than 15 days after the date of
enactment of this Act to--
(1) sell, in the amounts and on the schedule described in
subsection (b), light grade petroleum from the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve and acquire an equivalent volume of heavy
grade petroleum;
(2) deposit the cash proceeds from sales under paragraph
(1) into the SPR Petroleum Account established under section
167 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C.
6247); and
(3) from the cash proceeds deposited pursuant to paragraph
(2), withdraw the amount necessary to pay for the direct
administrative and operational costs of the sale and
acquisition.
(b) Amounts and Schedule.--The sale and acquisition
described in subsection (a) shall require the offer for sale
of a total quantity of 70,000,000 barrels of light grade
petroleum from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The sale
shall commence, whether or not a plan has been published
under subsection (a), not later than 30 days after the date
of enactment of this Act and be completed no more than six
months after the date of enactment of this Act, with at least
20,000,000 barrels to be offered for sale within the first 60
days after the date of enactment of this Act. In no event
shall the Secretary sell barrels of oil under subsection (a)
that would result in a Strategic Petroleum Reserve that
contains fewer than 90 percent of the total amount of barrels
in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve as of the date of
enactment of this Act. Heavy grade petroleum, to replace the
quantities of light grade petroleum sold under this section,
shall be obtained through acquisitions which--
(1) shall commence no sooner than 6 months after the date
of enactment of this Act;
(2) shall be completed, at the discretion of the Secretary,
not later than 5 years after the date of enactment of this
Act;
(3) shall be carried out in a manner so as to maximize the
monetary value to the Federal Government; and
(4) shall be carried out using the receipts from the sales
of light grade petroleum authorized under this section.
(c) Deferrals.--The Secretary is encouraged to, when
economically beneficial and practical, grant requests to
defer scheduled deliveries of petroleum to the Reserve under
subsection (a) if the deferral will result in a premium paid
in additional barrels of oil which will reduce the cost of
oil acquisition and increase the volume of oil delivered to
the Reserve or yield additional cash bonuses.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Barrow) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.

General Leave

Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Georgia?
There was no objection.
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, gas prices are outrageous and we need to act. Families
are hurting and are looking to us to do anything and everything that
can help.
There's no silver bullet, but there sure are things we can be doing
better. One way is to make better use of our energy feedstocks, use
what we ought to use today and save what we need to save for tomorrow.
The goal of this bill, H.R. 6578, the Consumer Energy Supply Act, is
simple: to increase the supply of oil in the United States that can be
refined into gas. The bill will direct the Department of Energy to
release 70 million barrels of light sweet crude oil from the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve. The bill requires the sale or exchange of light
sweet crude to begin 15 days after enactment and to be completed within
6 months. Under the bill the revenue from the release will go into the
SPR petroleum account to purchase more oil so the SPR will end up with
more oil than it started out with. The bill will make sure that the SPR
level will not fall below 90 percent of the current level during the
exchange.
Now, the type of oil that will be released from the SPR is light
sweet crude, which is the easiest and the cheapest to turn into gas.

{time} 1300

And the oil that will replace the light oil will be heavy sour crude
which happens to be the oil that is best suited to be refined into
diesel.

[[Page 16387]]

What we need more of in this country is the highest and best use of
all of our energy feedstocks. And this bill takes the oil that we pump
back into the ground to save for later and puts that oil to its highest
and best use right now and replaces that oil with oil whose highest and
best use is to be held in reserve for a true national emergency.
This bill makes it easier and cheaper to get this fuel to the market
right now while making sure we aren't putting our future needs at risk.
We need to use today what is good for today and save for tomorrow what
is good for tomorrow. Because our refineries need more oil they can
refine quickly to get gas and diesel on the market, this bill gives it
to them. Adding heavy sour crude to the SPR in its place will make sure
that the SPR will be more effective if a real emergency arises. That is
because the heavy oil we will be swapping for light oil can be refined
to the diesel fuel needed to power our trucks, our trains and our
military needs in times of a true emergency.
In April this year, the acting director for natural resources of the
Government Accountability Office, Frank Rusco, gave Congress a detailed
report to modernize the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and improve its
flexibility and effectiveness. The Department of Energy has completed a
study in 2005 which produced similar conclusions. This legislation will
ensure that the SPR is more reflective of our Nation's modern refining
capacity and that its strategic capabilities are better used while
providing more oil available for refining right here in the U.S.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit these two documents for the
Record.
Mr. Speaker, this bill will ease market tensions. It will help unlock
some of the value in the SPR without negatively affecting the overall
capacity or our strategic reserve policy. A release from the SPR will
also help reduce the effects of market speculation on oil prices by
sending the message that Congress is prepared to defend American
families and businesses from these corrosive prices. That is what this
bill will do. That is why it is a good idea for us to pass it. And that
is why I urge my colleagues to vote for the bill.

[From the United States Government Accountability Office]

Testimony Before the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global
Warming, House of Representatives

Strategic Petroleum Reserve: Improving the Cost Effectiveness of
Filling the Reserve

(Statement of Frank Rusco, Acting Director Natural Resources and
Environment)

Why GAO Did This Study

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) was created in 1975
to help protect the U.S. economy from oil supply disruptions
and currently holds about 700 million barrels of crude oil.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 directed the Department of
Energy (DOE) to increase the SPR storage capacity from 727
million barrels to 1 billion barrels, which it plans to
accomplish by 2018. Since 1999, oil for the SPR has generally
been obtained through the royalty-in-kind program, whereby
the government receives oil instead of cash for payment of
royalties on leases of federal property. The Department of
Interior's Minerals Management Service (MMS) collects the
royalty oil and transfers it to DOE, which then trades it for
oil suitable for the SPR.
As DOE begins to expand the SPR, past experiences can help
inform future efforts to fill the reserve in the most cost-
effective manner. In that context, GAO's testimony today will
focus on: (1) Factors GAO recommends DOE consider when
filling the SPR, and (2) the cost-effectiveness of using oil
received through the royalty-in-kind program to fill the SPR.
To address these issues, GAO relied on its 2006 report on
the SPR, as well as its ongoing review of the royalty-in-kind
program, where GAO interviewed officials at both DOE and MMS,
and reviewed DOE's SPR policies and procedures. DOE provided
comments on a draft of this testimony, which we incorporated
where appropriate.

What GAO Found

To decrease the cost of filling the reserve and improve its
efficiency, GAO recommended in previous work that DOE should
include at least 10 percent heavy crude oil in the SPR. If
DOE bought 100 million barrels of heavy crude oil during its
expansion of the SPR it could save over $1 billion in nominal
terms, assuming a price differential of $12 between the price
of light crude oil and the lower price of heavy crude oil,
the average differential over the last five years. Having
heavy crude oil in the SPR would also make the SPR more
compatible with many U.S. refineries, helping these
refineries run more efficiently in the event that a supply
disruption triggers use of the SPR. DOE indicated that, due
to the planned SPR expansion, determinations of the amount of
heavy oil to include in the SPR should wait until it prepares
a new study of U.S. Gulf Coast refining requirements. In
addition, we recommended that DOE consider acquiring a steady
dollar value--rather than a steady volume--of oil over time
when filling the SPR. This ``dollar-cost-averaging'' approach
would allow DOE to acquire more oil when prices are low and
less when prices are high. GAO found that if DOE had used
this purchasing approach between October 2001 through August
2005, it could have saved approximately $590 million, or over
10 percent, in fill costs. GAO's simulations indicate that
DOE could save money using this approach for future SPR
fills, regardless of whether oil prices are trending up or
down as long as there is price volatility. GAO also
recommends that DOE consider giving companies participating
in the royalty-in-kind program additional flexibility to
defer oil deliveries in exchange for providing additional
barrels of oil. DOE has granted limited deferrals in the
past, and expanding their use could further decrease SPR fill
costs. While DOE indicated that its November 2006 rule on SPR
acquisition procedures addressed our recommendations, this
rule does not specifically address how to implement a dollar-
cost-averaging strategy.
Purchasing oil to fill the SPR--as DOE did until 1994--is
likely to be more cost-effective than exchanging oil from the
royalty-in-kind program for other oil to fill the SPR. The
latter method adds administrative complexity to the task of
filling the SPR, increasing the potential for waste and
inefficiency. A January 2008 DOE Inspector General report
found that DOE is unable to ensure that it receives all of
the royalty oil that MMS provides. In addition, we found that
DOE's method for evaluating bids has been more robust for
cash purchases than royalty-in-kind exchanges, increasing the
likelihood that cash purchases are more cost-effective. For
example, in April 2007, DOE solicited two different types of
bids--one to purchase oil for the SPR in cash and one to
exchange royalty oil for other oil to fill the SPR. DOE
rejected offers to purchase oil when the spot price was about
$69 per barrel, yet in the same month, DOE exchanged royalty-
in-kind oil for other oil to put in the SPR at about the same
price. Because the government would have otherwise sold this
royalty-in-kind oil, DOE committed the government to pay,
through forgone revenues to the U.S. Treasury, roughly the
same price per barrel that DOE concluded was too high to
purchase directly.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:
We are pleased to be here today to participate in the
Committee's hearing on the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR).
Congress authorized the SPR in 1975 to protect the nation
from oil supply disruptions following the Arab oil embargo of
1973 and 1974 that led to sharp increases in oil prices. The
federal government owns the SPR, and the Department of Energy
(DOE) operates it. The SPR currently has the capacity to
store up to 727 million barrels of crude oil in salt caverns
in Texas and Louisiana. As of April 21, 2008, current
inventory of the SPR stood at 701.3 million barrels of oil,
which is roughly equivalent to 58 days of net oil imports.
DOE made direct purchases of crude oil until 1994, when
purchases were suspended due to the federal budget deficit,
and in fiscal years 1996 and 1997 approximately 28 million
barrels of oil were sold to reduce the deficit. Since DOE
resumed filling the SPR in 1999, it has obtained oil from the
Department of the Interior's Minerals Management Service
(MMS) ``royalty-in-kind'' program. Through this program, the
MMS receives oil instead of cash for payments of royalties
from companies that lease federal property for oil and gas
development. MMS contracts for some of this royalty oil to be
delivered to designated oil terminal locations or ``market
centers'' where DOE takes possession. Because the royalty oil
often does not meet SPR quality specifications, and because
the market centers can be distant from SPR storage sites, DOE
generally awards contracts to exchange royalty oil at the
market center for SPR-quality oil delivered to SPR
facilities. Obtaining oil for the SPR through the royalty-in-
kind program avoids the need for Congress to make outlays to
finance oil purchases, but the foregone revenues associated
with using royalty-in-kind oil to trade for SPR oil imply an
equivalent loss of revenue because MMS would otherwise sell
the oil and deposit the revenues with the U.S. Treasury.
Interior estimates that the forgone revenue attributable to
using the royalty-in-kind program to fill the SPR were $4.6
billion from fiscal year 2000 through fiscal year 2007.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 directed DOE to increase the
SPR storage capacity to 1 billion barrels and to fill it ``as
expeditiously as practicable without incurring excessive cost
or appreciably affecting the price of petroleum products to
consumers.'' It required DOE to select sites to expand the
SPR's storage capacity within 1 year of enactment, by August
2006. On February 14, 2007, Secretary of Energy William
Bodman

[[Page 16388]]

designated three sites for the expansion, including a 160
million barrel facility in Richton, Mississippi, an 80
million barrel expansion of a facility in Big Hill, Texas,
and a 33 million barrel expansion of a facility in Bayou
Choctaw, Louisiana. In its June 2007 SPR plan, DOE
anticipated these expansions would begin in fiscal year 2008
and be complete in 2018. DOE also indicated that it would
prefer to continue using the royalty-in-kind program to fill
the additional storage capacity. DOE estimates the capital
cost for the SPR expansion at approximately $3.67 billion,
and estimates the cost of operating and maintaining the
expanded portion of the SPR at $35 to $40 million per year.
As DOE begins to expand the SPR, past experiences may help
inform future efforts to fill the SPR in the most cost-
effective manner. In that context, our testimony today will
focus on: (1) Factors we recommend DOE consider when filling
the SPR, and (2) the cost-effectiveness of using oil received
through the royalty-in-kind program to fill the SPR.
To address these issues, we are summarizing work from our
August 2006 report on the SPR and our ongoing review of the
royalty-in-kind program. For our August 2006 report, we
contracted with the National Academy of Sciences to convene a
group of 13 industry, academic, governmental, and
nongovernmental experts to collect opinions on the impacts of
past SPR fill and use and on recommendations for the future.
We also reviewed records and reports from DOE and the
International Energy Agency. In addition, for our ongoing
review of the royalty-in-kind program for this committee and
others, we identified and reviewed applicable laws and
documentation on DOE policies and procedures for evaluating
SPR purchase and exchange bids, and interviewed officials at
both Interior and DOE. We have also drawn upon previous GAO
reports on the royalty-in- kind program. We conducted our
work on this testimony from January to April 2008 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform
the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to
provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions
based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence
obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.

In summary

To fill the SPR in a more cost-effective manner, we
recommended in previous work that DOE include in the SPR at
least 10 percent heavy crude oils, which are more compatible
with many U.S. refiners and generally cheaper to acquire than
the lighter oils that comprise the SPR's volume. DOE
indicated that, due to the planned SPR expansion, such
determinations should wait until it prepares a new study of
U.S. Gulf Coast heavy sour crude refining requirements. In
addition, we recommended that DOE consider acquiring a steady
dollar value of oil over time and allowing oil companies more
flexibility to defer delivery of royalty-in-kind exchanges to
the SPR when prices are likely to decline in return for
additional deliveries in the future. In updating us on the
status of this recommendation, DOE indicated that its
November 8, 2006, rule on SPR acquisition procedures
addressed our recommendations; however, this rule does not
specifically address both how to implement a dollar-cost-
averaging strategy and how to provide industry with more
deferral flexibility. In subsequent comment, DOE noted that
the November 8, 2006, acquisition procedures do not address
dollar-cost-averaging, but they do address flexibility of
purchasing and scheduling in volatile markets.
Filling the SPR with oil purchased in cash is likely to be
more cost-effective than filling the SPR through the royalty-
in-kind program for several reasons. For example, the
royalty-in-kind program adds a layer of administrative
complexity to the task of filling the SPR, increasing the
potential for waste or inefficiency. Moreover, DOE has
evaluated the cost of cash purchases more thoroughly than
exchanges, increasing the * * *

With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I would ask
unanimous consent for an additional 30 minutes of debate on this bill
for debate purposes only, equally divided between the majority and the
minority. So, the minority would get 15 extra minutes, and the majority
would get 15 extra minutes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
Mr. BARROW. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, I would like
for us instead to proceed with the speakers that we have identified,
and we will address this later on as circumstances warrant at the end
of the debate time that is allotted.
So I do object at this time with the understanding that I will be
glad to consider such a request at the appropriate time at the end of
the time allotted for debate.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this piece of
legislation. I want to start by the simple statement that the House of
Representatives, which is the body closest to the people of the United
States, is considering a bill that wasn't written apparently until this
morning. There hasn't been a committee hearing on the issue. There
hasn't been a committee markup or a subcommittee markup. We could not
even get the text from the committee of jurisdiction's majority counsel
last evening at approximately 7:30 because they didn't have it.
Apparently, the text that was prepared in the middle of the night was
changed some time early this morning at the request of unidentified
parties.
In an economy where we're paying some of the highest gasoline prices
in the world, and certainly the highest gasoline prices the United
States has ever paid in terms of absolute dollars, where our truckers
are paying $5 for diesel and our airlines are hemorrhaging cash because
of their fuel costs, we are now bringing to the floor a piece of
legislation that nobody has really seen or vetted.
I think that is absolutely unacceptable, terrible public policy and a
travesty on the process of the House of Representatives. I can't object
more strongly to the process that even the majority counsel on the
committee of jurisdiction didn't have the text last evening. So on
process grounds alone, we ought to reject this legislation.
Now let's talk about the policy. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve was
established in 1975 as a consequence of the Arab oil embargo by OPEC
against the United States of America where there was a conscience
effort to prevent oil supplies from coming to this country. President
Ford signed the SPR Act into law in December of 1975. It authorized 1
billion barrels of oil to be put into a Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
And that oil was only to be used in the event of a severe supply
interruption that would result in severe economic harm to this country
as a result of a Presidential declaration of emergency. The Strategic
Petroleum Reserve, as established, was not intended to be used in a
manipulative way to control or affect prices.
Now we haven't had any hearings, we haven't had a law that has
changed the use of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. What we have before
us is a piece of legislation that was put together by unknown parties.
I could give some pretty good guesses about who some of those parties
are. But officially I don't know who they are. It's on the floor. It
allows 70 million barrels of oil to be released from the reserve. But
not just any 70 million barrels. It allows the sweet light crude, which
is the best oil in the reserve, to be released with apparently the
intent to lower prices.
Now, the problem on policy grounds with this particular SPR release
is that it also requires that that oil has to be replaced beginning no
later than 6 months and within 5 years with heavy crude, which is some
of the worst oil in the world. Do you know who has the heavy crude
available today? Saudi Arabia. So we're going to sell oil, the light
sweet crude, out of the reserve--right now, up to 70 million barrels--
and we're going to replace it theoretically over time with heavy crude
that is not nearly as easy to refine and not nearly as amenable to the
various product differentials as the sweet light crude is, and the only
place to get it is Saudi Arabia, which is, as we know, in the Middle
East, one of the most unstable regions of the world.
So what we are really doing, apparently, is helping out our Saudi
friends to make sure that the crude oil that they can't sell on the
world market right now because it's too heavy and there's not a market,
we will buy it and put it in the reserve, and we will use up the best
oil in our reserve for some short-term price fix here in the U.S.
market.
Well, what kind of a price impact will we get, Mr. Speaker? We have
got a supply-demand problem in the world

[[Page 16389]]

oil markets. We are using about 85 million barrels a day. And there is
only about 85 to 86 million barrels a day of production available on
the world market. If you put up to 2 to 3 million barrels a day of this
oil on the market and sustain it, you probably will have a temporary
price decrease. If you can get the supply-demand equation up to a 2 or
3 percent differential, I would say that oil prices will come down
temporarily. But since we're only selling 70 million barrels, if we
sold 3 million barrels, you can pump about 4 million barrels a day out
of the reserve. So let's say we pumped it out at maximum. That would
give us about 17 days of oil. So for 17 days, you might see a price
decline. But on the 18th day, when there is no more oil to come out of
the reserve, what is going to happen? You have not created new supply
in the world. The price is going to shoot back up. Speculators are
going to step back in, and the reserve is going to be 70 million
barrels less.
I mean if this isn't a cynical political ploy to hopefully lower oil
prices for the next 2 months before the election, then I have never
seen one. We ought to vote against this. If you want to have a real
debate on the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, if you really want to change
the purpose for which it was intended, let's go through the committee
system. Let's hold hearings. Let's have a give and take. Maybe we can
come up with a way to use the SPR somewhat differently than what it was
intended to be used. But unless you're willing to change the current
Federal law on the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, bringing up this piece
of legislation is just a political sham to, A, maybe show the country
that something is being done; B, help the Saudi oil ministry who can't
sell their heavy crude on the market today; and, C, maybe get the price
down for the next couple of months to help our majority friends in the
upcoming election.
I can't more strongly emphasize that we ought to vote against it on
not only procedural grounds but also on policy grounds. The SPR was
intended to be a buffer if we have a severe supply interruption that
would harm the U.S. economy in a significant way. We don't have that
today. We have high energy prices in America and high gasoline prices
in America because we are not producing energy in America that we could
produce.
Let's bring an OCS drilling bill, an ANWR bill, a shale bill and a
coal-to-liquids bill. Bring those bills to the floor, Mr. Speaker, and
actually show the world that America will develop its own energy
resources. If we do that, you're going to see the speculators get out
of the market. And you're going to see that as the supply goes up and
we hold demand constant, then you're going to see the price go down.
And that will be permanent and productive for the American economy.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson).
Mr. LAMPSON. I thank the gentleman from Georgia.
I will just make a couple of points in response to my colleague from
Texas (Mr. Barton). One, I look forward to working with the gentleman
in modernizing and working to overhaul the SPR. It is certainly in need
of improved management. And I might also mention that a version of this
bill was introduced back in May. And we also have been working on it to
make it as bipartisan a bill as we could possibly make it since
November. So there has been a great deal of effort to try to make sure
that we've heard everyone's concerns and to try to address them.
And one of the points that the gentleman made about imports and where
our heavy oil would come from to replace this, we purchase 14 percent,
or 70,000 barrels, from Canada per month. Also the Gulf of Mexico has a
significant amount of heavy crude that we also would be purchasing to
put into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
And I might make the point that the refineries have made significant
and actually great advances in technology. And they refine heavy crude
just as easily as they refine light crude today.
So, Mr. Speaker, today we consider this legislation that I believe is
an important step for our Nation's future energy security. It will make
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve more compatible with modern U.S.
refineries and thus more effective. Improving the SPR's flexibility
will maximize its utility. Shoring up our Nation's energy reserves is
just one piece of this energy supply puzzle which also includes
increased domestic drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf as well as
research and development for alternatives.
I would like to address national security concerns that have been
mentioned. The day that we went to war with Iraq, the SPR contained
only 624 million barrels of oil. Today we have more oil in the SPR than
we have ever had. And this bill ensures levels will not fall below 90
percent of the current level. In 2006, President Bush declared the SPR
is sufficiently large to guard against any major supply disruption with
only 688 million barrels. Today it's more than 700 million barrels.
Most importantly, this change will strengthen the SPR and enable
refiners to operate at full capacity during any potential supply
disruption.
When Congress created the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in 1975
following the Arab oil embargo to protect the Nation from any future
oil supply disruptions, refiners largely processed only light and
medium crude. Advances in technology over the years have led to the
ability to efficiently process heavy oil as it has become a larger part
of the market. In fact, 40 percent of the oil accepted last year by
refiners was heavier than the oil contained in the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve. With refiners planning to expand by 800,000 barrels worth of
mostly heavy oil capacity in just the next few years, I believe it is
incumbent upon us to ensure that the Nation's oil reserves match
refining capacity.

{time} 1315

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Texas has
expired.
Mr. BARROW. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. LAMPSON. The GAO stated if forced to rely on SPR oil, about half
of the refiners subject to potential supply disruptions would
experience an additional 5 percent or 735,000 barrels a day reduction
in production, further exacerbating any supply issues. This exchange
will ensure that the SPR will provide maximum protection for the
Nation's energy supplies.
This will further strengthen our energy supply against potential
disruptions because the exchange will raise funds that will be
deposited in the SPR account that will allow the SPR to increase the
total inventory level without the need for additional appropriations,
further strengthening our energy supply against potential disruptions.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
distinguished minority leader from the great State of Ohio (Mr.
Boehner).
Mr. BOEHNER. I thank my colleague for yielding, and let me say to my
colleagues, this is a joke. This is this week's answer to America's
energy crisis. We are going to take 70 million barrels of one type of
oil out of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and we are going to replace
it with another. It doesn't bring us any more supply. And as I said,
this is just the latest excuse for not having a real energy bill on the
floor.
We have got this bill this week. Last week we had Use It Or Lose It,
another farce because it is already the law. We had another bill up
that said, well, let's try to encourage the President to speed up the
pipeline in Alaska. And let's make sure that we drill in the National
Petroleum Reserve, which is already allowed. Nothing that is going to
bring more supply. And it has been one excuse after another excuse when
we actually could have a vote on a real energy bill that does all of
the above.
I and my colleagues yesterday introduced the American Energy Plan
that says we ought to have more conservation, we ought to have more
biofuels, more incentives for alternative sources of energy. We ought
to have nuclear energy; and yes, we ought to have more American-made
energy. And whether that oil and gas comes from the continental shelf
of Alaska or the Outer

[[Page 16390]]

Continental Shelf, or from the oil shale that we have in Intermountain
West, why can't we produce more American energy to bring down gas
prices for the American people.
I'll tell you why, because they've done everything humanly possible
to prevent a vote in this Chamber. The Speaker has gone through every
hi-jinks, every legislative trick known to man to avoid allowing us to
offer an amendment. That is why this bill is being considered under a
suspension of the rules. We are not allowed to offer an amendment. That
is why we have no appropriations, because my goodness, someone might
offer an energy amendment on the floor of the House and it might pass.
What does the Speaker have to fear in allowing this House to work its
will?
And I think the American Energy Plan is something that the American
people support. I think the votes are in this Chamber to pass that
bill, but we are not allowed to vote. I thought that is what the
American people sent us here to do, to represent their will; and the
Speaker is standing in front of the will of the American people by
refusing to allow us to vote.
Let's not vote for another excuse, another excuse to delay the actual
vote for a real bill, a real bill that will bring down gas prices; and
that is all this bill is, another excuse. It doesn't deserve our
support.
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
Mr. MARKEY. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Lampson and I and Mr. Van Hollen introduced this legislation
under the leadership of Speaker Pelosi in order to ensure that the
American people get the relief at the gas pump they need before Labor
Day in 2008. But the Republicans are holding consumers hostage. No
immediate relief, they are saying to American consumers, unless the
ultimate agenda of Big Oil is met. Unless they are allowed to drill off
the beaches 10 years from now, they will not allow the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve to be used now in order to preserve it. Ten to 20
days of relief is all it will take for us to get help to the American
consumer. The Republican plan is 10 to 20 years, according to their own
Department of Energy.
The President says he does not have a magic wand. Well, he does have
a magic wand, he has a big stick and that big stick is the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve that he can use right now to beat down the prices of
oil which are driving American consumers crazy in terms of their home
budgets.
Deploying the Strategic Petroleum Reserve works. It worked in 1991
when President Bush's father used it. It worked in the year 2000 when
President Clinton used it, and it worked after Hurricane Katrina when
President Bush the Second used it. The President is willing to use the
Army Reserve to go to Iraq to protect the oil over there, but he is not
willing to use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in order to protect
American consumers here from the emergency which we are facing at
home--high gas prices, home heating oil prices, natural gas prices, the
airline industry going under, the trucking industry in desperate shape.
But they will not use it right now.
The Democrats have a short-term plan, and that is to give relief in
10 to 20 days. Use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, use it as a weapon
against speculators, against Big Oil and against OPEC; but the
Republican Party is still the GOP; GOP, Gas and Oil Party. That's what
this is all about.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, before I yield to our distinguished
whip, I would again like to ask unanimous consent for an additional 30
minutes evenly divided between the majority and the minority for debate
purposes only on this pending legislation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, regrettably, I do need to object, and I
would be happy to consider such a request at the end of the time
allotted for debate.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. May I inquire how much time remains on each
side.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas has 11 minutes
remaining. The gentleman from Georgia has 11\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished whip from the Show-Me State of Missouri (Mr. Blunt).
Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
In fact, I think the discussion we just had about more time indicates
the lack of seriousness on this issue. For the 12 years I have been in
the Congress, a House which for the first 10 of it was led by
Republicans, we repeatedly sent bills to the Senate that would solve
this problem, bills to the Senate that would allow us to explore for
oil and gas where oil and gas is.
And again today, we have the same people that voted against all of
those bills, that stood in the way of that discussion, that took
advantage of the fact that the American people at that point said no,
we don't really need to have more supply and let's not do the right
thing for the future, let's do the right thing for now. And they bring
this bill to the floor, as we face a generational problem, that is a 3-
day solution. A 3-day solution to a generational problem. If it wasn't
so serious it would be funny, but it is serious.
And what we have to ask now, the good thing about this solution is
our friends who bring this bill to the floor are admitting that supply
matters. If supply matters, let's go after supply. If supply has an
impact on price, let's find the oil and gas that we have and really
affect the world market. Let's not assume that taking oil out of the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve at the level of 5.6 gallons for every car
in America is going to solve any real problem.
The real way to solve this problem is to go after our own resources
and to look for ways we can conserve energy and look for ways to invest
in new alternatives in the future. It is not another gimmick that says
let's be 3 days closer to being totally dependent on people who don't
like us, instead of using the Strategic Petroleum Reserve for what it
is and going after the real supply that can make a difference.
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen).
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I thank my colleague.
Mr. Speaker, what our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have
not told the American people is if you look at the report from our own
Department of Energy, they can see that drilling in the Arctic Wildlife
Refuge won't put one drop of new gas on the market for at least 10
years, and then it will only wind up having an insignificant impact on
price 20 years from now. The American people don't have 20 years to
wait. We need action, and this is an opportunity to provide that action
by tapping into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in a responsible way to
help bring down price.
After all, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is the supply of oil we
put away for America's rainy day. There are over 700 million gallons of
oil there, more than any other time in American history. And when it
comes to the hurt that the American people are feeling economically,
their rainy day is now.
This has been tapped into by the last three Presidents, including the
current President, and if we responsibly just put a little bit of this
oil away, we can provide relief at the pump today. Unfortunately, the
President has resisted our call, just like he resisted our call to stop
filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve which he finally relented in
doing.
We need to pass this legislation. This is not a long-term policy. We
need to work together to make sure that on a long-term basis we tap the
ingenuity of this country on renewable energy, energy efficiency, and
responsible drilling, but Americans are hurting now. This is not a so-
called ``mental recession'' as we heard from former Senator Phil Gramm.
The pain is real, and we need to address it now.
You know, a few months ago I think we all saw a spectacle that made
us

[[Page 16391]]

shudder. We saw President Bush travel to Saudi Arabia to plead with
their king to pump more oil. The Saudi king turned him down cold--no,
President Bush.
I don't think we should have to go around begging other countries to
pump more oil when we have a Strategic Petroleum Reserve of oil right
here at home that has been set aside for a rainy day. Our rainy day is
now. Let's pass this legislation.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a
distinguished member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers).
Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I met a young lady the other day
who made the determination that she could no longer afford to commute
to work. The costs of her commuting outweighed any benefit from the
long-term employment at that particular place. And it happens again and
again. We have volunteer firefighters who can't volunteer to fight
fires because they can't afford the fuels to get there. It is making a
tremendous impact on our local economy.
And what offer do we hear today, we are going to sell some oil so we
can buy some other oil and that is really going to put us in a better
place. That is an absolute shell game. In order to do this, according
to the Department of Energy, if you want to buy that heavy crude, you
have to go to Venezuela to get it. We send right now $150 million a day
every day to Hugo Chavez, the same guy that is buying attack
submarines, about nine of them according to local press reports, to
interfere with United States shipping, according to his rhetoric. He
buys guns for the FARC in Colombia.
So you--what you are saying is that we are going to spend more money
in Saudi Arabia and we are going to spend more money in Venezuela and
we are going to spend more money in Russia, all of those places who do
harm in one way or another to the United States of America. So your
answer here isn't going to help America but maybe for a few days at the
very expense of our national security.
We beg you for the people who are dying at the pump right now, who
are mortgaging their homes to fill up their tanks and trying to make it
work, come up with a real energy policy, conservation, alternative
fuels and American-made energy that lowers prices, brings jobs back,
and it protects and keeps a billion dollars a day here in the United
States.
Mr. Speaker, this is a shell game that is dangerous and it is
reckless, and I would certainly encourage this body's strong rejection
of sending more money to Hugo Chavez to do more bad things to freedom,
democracy and to threatening the security of the United States.
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, at this time I want to yield 2
minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland).

{time} 1330

Mr. WESTMORELAND. I want to thank my friend from Texas for yielding
the time.
I wanted to ask Mr. Markey a question, Mr. Speaker. I wanted to ask
him how many votes the Democrats have in this Congress, and I believe
it's 233. If I am not badly mistaken, it takes 218 to pass any piece of
legislation in this body.
So I don't understand why we are doing the smoke-and-mirrors game and
the joke game of trying to say that Republicans are blocking this bill.
They have got 218 votes. They can do anything they want to. They have
changed the rules immediately when they want to. They can do anything
with 218 votes, but yet they can't pass this bill.
The reason they can't pass this bill is because they don't want to
give us an opportunity to put forth what 73 percent of the American
people want, and that's to drill here and to drill now. A quote from
Mr. Kanjorski, to give you an idea of what we are talking about, is
with a local newspaper, he was talking about the fact that the
Democrats had promised to end the war and bring the troops home if they
were elected to Congress and it had not come true.
Ms. Pelosi had also promised to have a commonsense plan to bring down
the skyrocketing price of gas. That's when gas was $2.10. It's now
$4.10. And this is what Mr. Kanjorski said: ``We sort of stretched the
truth, and the people ate it up.''
``We sort of stretched the truth, and the people ate it up.'' They're
kind of stretching the truth today to make you believe that they cannot
pass this bill. The reason they don't want to pass this bill is because
they know it's smoke and mirrors. They know it's smoke and mirrors, and
it won't have the immediate effect that they are saying. So what they
are trying to do is to get something to go home to explain to their
constituents why they are not going along with 73 percent of the
American people that's saying drill here, drill now, lower our gas
prices.
They want to have an excuse, and that's their excuse. I think it's
true to form to what Mr. Kanjorski said--``We sort of stretched the
truth, and the people ate it up.''
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
distinguished Speaker of the House, the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Pelosi).
Ms. PELOSI. I thank the gentleman for yielding and commend him for
his excellent management of this legislation on the floor today. I want
to commend him, as well as commending Mr. Lampson for this legislation,
which he has worked on for a very long time and which makes very good
sense for the American people. I also thank Mr. Markey for his
extraordinary leadership on this issue as well.
The choice that we have before us today, my colleagues, is a simple
one. The price at the pump is one that is a problem and challenge to
the paycheck-to-paycheck economic security of America's families. It
must be brought down.
There are two goals that we have in what we are doing here. One is to
protect the consumer. That is a responsibility that we have. And in
order to do that, to increase the supply of oil that will help bring
down the price at the pump.
This week we have the SPR bill to release oil from the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve. Next week we will have the speculation bill which
will address the issue of undue, excessive speculation in the oil
markets and what impact that may have on the price of oil.
In the course of this debate, I think it's important to remember some
fundamentals, and one of them is the following. The United States
Government is sitting on a stockpile of oil, 700 million barrels of
oil. This fact is well known to you in the course of the debate, I
know, 700 million barrels of oil. This is oil that the taxpayers have
paid for and in some cases have paid a very expensive price for, and it
is there.
The President is sitting on that oil. It's called the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve, and it is reserved for an emergency. The difference
of an opinion that we have here is, is it an emergency that the
American people are facing the prices at the pump that they have and
home heating oil and the rest.
We say it's an emergency, but an emergency that would justify our
taking not more than, well, we would take it down to, I think it's 90
percent of what is in the SPR. The SPR, as I said, has 700 million
barrels, and 97.5 percent of this stockpile, this government stockpile,
is filled. It's fuller than it's ever been in history. It's an historic
supply.
So what we are saying to the President is just take a small amount of
that. Free our oil. This oil has been paid for by taxpayers' dollars.
Free our oil, increase the supply on the market, and within 10 days the
price at the pump can come down.
A while back, we asked the President to stop filling the reserve.
Imagine, we were buying oil at top dollar this spring to keep filling
this stockpile. The President refused. This Congress voted
overwhelmingly in both Houses to stop filling the SPR, recognizing that
as we pulled oil out of the supply and into the stockpile, we were
affecting the price at the pump.
This time we are saying it hasn't come down enough, certainly not for

[[Page 16392]]

America's consumers. We need you now to do the reverse, to follow up on
that, not only not fill the stockpile, but to increase the supply in
the marketplace.
Every time this has been done, and it has been done three times in
the last 20 years. Every time this has been done, and you have seen the
charts here, Mr. Markey has those charts. Every time it has been done,
the price of oil has come down.
So it's a proven way to bring the price at the pump down. When the
price of oil comes down in a very sound, market-oriented way, we will
buy oil cheaper to replace this oil that we took out and sold at a
higher price and make a profit on it.
It makes all the sense in the world to do it this way. Those who
oppose this are using this argument that instead of releasing the oil
from the stockpile, government-owned stockpile, paid for by the
consumer and the taxpayer, instead of releasing this oil to increase
the supply in the market, we should be drilling more. We should be
drilling in protected areas.
Even the President has said that that is not any short-term fix.
Everybody recognizes that if you drill, that it takes 10 years to
affect the price at the pump, and only about 2 cents at that.
So instead of saying only drill, only drill and get a 2 percent
benefit 10 years from now, we are saying release the oil from this
stockpile so that we can have a price at the pump result in 10 days,
not 10 years. This is part of what we brought forth last week, too--use
it or lose it.
Democrats support drilling. It's important in this debate to
recognize that there are 68 million acres in our country which have
permits and are ready to go for drilling. So we are saying to the oil
companies, use it or lose it. Use your permits, drill for oil, but
don't say I don't want to drill there where I have an environmental
permit to drill, I want to go drill in some protected area, which is
going to take longer for me to do, by the way. And the reason I'm not
drilling so much where I'm allowed to is I don't have the equipment to
do it.
See this for the hoax on the American people that it is. Yes, we are
saying drill, use it or lose it as a way to increase domestic supply.
We are also saying you increase domestic supply by investing in
renewable energy resources, wind, solar, biofuels and the rest. No less
a stalwart Republican than T. Boone Pickens is saying, ``I'm for
everything.'' He's for drilling, he's for wind, he's for solar, he's
for natural gas, he's for alternatives to foreign oil. We must reduce
our dependence on foreign oil. It is a national security issue, it is
an economic issue, not only for our economy but for the economics of
America's families and for our consumers.
It is an environmental health issue to reduce our dependence on
fossil fuels and especially foreign oil. And it is a moral issue,
because it has an impact on how we preserve our planet. That's why we
have so many evangelicals supporting our efforts for renewables rather
than fossil fuels.
So it is an important debate that we are having, because this
argument that we shouldn't have oil today on the market, which will
reduce the price in 10 days, but, instead, should be drilling where we
are not allowed to and have a 2-cent saving in 10 years, think of it.
This isn't a reason, this is an excuse, and it's an excuse for a failed
energy policy.
It is the energy policy of the Bush administration and some of the
Republicans in Congress, but not all, because many have voted in an
enlightened way on this subject. This is an excuse for their failed
energy policy. These are the same people, George Bush and Dick Cheney,
who brought us over $4 a gallon gasoline at the pump. And now they are
saying more of the same.
We are saying a new direction. And now we can drill, we can increase
the supply, we can invest in renewables, we can end speculation, we can
protect the consumer. As we do all of that, including the drilling, we
can do it now, and we can do it right. The fastest way to help the
consumer is to release the oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve,
but let's think of that as a government stockpile paid for by
taxpayers' dollars that a small amount can have a big impact.
I urge my colleagues to go down the same path you did before when
overwhelmingly over 300 Members of the House and Senate, Democrats and
Republicans alike, voted to stop filling the SPR. Now let's just say
there is so much in there, you can spare some to help the consumer. Do
it right. Do it right now.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on this very important legislation.
Again, I would commend Mr. Markey, Mr. Barrow and Mr. Lampson, the
author of this legislation. I thank you, Mr. Lampson, for your
leadership.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, once again I am going to ask
unanimous consent for an additional 30 minutes for debate purposes
only, equally divided between the majority and minority. I still have
at least six speakers.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
Mr. BARROW. Just a quick question, was it 15 minutes that Mr. Barton
was asking about?
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Thirty minutes total, 15 minutes each side.
Mr. BARROW. We will consent to 15 minutes, but equally divided at the
present time, 7\1/2\ minutes for each side.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I guess that's a start. So we have an additional
15 minutes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman wish to request a 15-
minute unanimous-consent extension?
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Well, we are increasing the supply of time. I
will take 15 minutes right now.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, debate is extended 15
minutes, equally divided between the two sides.
There was no objection.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I thank my colleague from Georgia for his
courtesy.
I would like to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished member of the
Ways and Means Committee, from the great State of Texas, the MVP
Republican of last week's thrilling 11-10 baseball victory, Mr. Brady.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, another day, another energy gimmick,
it must be the 110th Congress. The American public, hammered by high
fuel prices, is getting tired of the Jed Clampett energy plan put forth
by Democrats. You just can't shoot at imaginary targets and hope that
energy is going to come bubbling up.
Look at the record. Look at the record. In this past year Democrats
said, if we can sue OPEC, we will lower gas prices. Have your gas
prices gone down? They said if we pass use it or lose it, which was
laughed at around the world, they said gas prices will go down. Have
your fuel prices gone down?
Earlier they said we'll just stop filling the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve, and your gas prices will go down. Did they? The answer is no.
Today is just another gimmick. Depleting America's emergency oil nest
egg at a time when the world is increasingly unstable in oil-producing
nations like Nigeria, Venezuela and Iran, why, that makes no sense at
all. Tapping our emergency reserves for three measly days of energy,
three, that won't lower prices, nor does it send a signal to the rest
of the world that America is serious about taking responsibility for
our own energy needs. You really believe the world market that uses 85
million barrels a day is going to look at this tiny amount and lower
the prices?
If this bill were to pass--and it won't, it will fail again--at the
end of the drawdown, America would be more dependent on foreign oil
than when we started. And when it's replenished, we will have just
bought oil at a higher price out of taxpayers' money.
So here's the question: How high does gas have to be before Congress
will act? How many families will be hurt? How many small businesses
will go under? How hard will our economy be hit before Speaker Pelosi
allows an up-or-down vote on producing more American-made energy?
We voted on conservation, we voted on renewables. Why can't we vote
on more exploration?

[[Page 16393]]

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I yield the gentleman 30 additional seconds.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. When will we put the special interests aside?
When will the little guy have a vote? When will the little guy, that
doesn't have a lobbyist, and big campaign contributions, when will he
have a say in this public? It's time to vote this gimmick down and let
us have a vote.
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am pleased to yield 2 minutes
to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel).
Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, July 28, 2005, the Republican Congress, the
Republican Senate, President Bush, had an energy policy that they voted
on 3 years ago.
At that time the minority leader said it will lower prices, it will
lower dependency on foreign oil. President Bush, when he signed the
Republican energy plan, said it would lower prices, lower America's
dependency on foreign oil and lead to a great economic boom when we
look back at it.
Well, in 3 short years, gas has gone from about $2.29 a gallon to a
little over $4. By any measurement, dependence on foreign oil, the cost
of energy, by any measurement or economic activity, it has been an
absolute failure.

{time} 1345

They got their way. They wrote the bill they wanted. July 28, 2005,
on this floor, they passed their energy bill, and they promised you
what it was going to do, and you now see the results.
Now, there is enough blame to go around from all sides. Not everybody
has been perfect. We have missed many an opportunity here to deal with
energy, Democratic and Republican alike.
But what is interesting now is their new line. The Republican line,
as it relates to energy policy, is we are for everything. Except for
you are for everything except when you can be for something.
When it came to voting for fuel efficiency standards, raising them
for the first time in 30 years, 163 Republicans voted ``no.'' You
weren't for all of the above then.
When it came to renewable electricity standards, 159 Republicans
voted ``no.'' You weren't for all of the above then.
When it came to alternative technologies, solar, wind, geothermal,
other technologies, the DRILL Act, opening up Alaska, you voted ``no''
then. You weren't for all of the above then.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. BARROW. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. EMANUEL. The Republicans support all of the above, except they
don't have any problem voting ``no'' when it counts.
Today we have a bill on the floor that takes immediate action in
helping us reduce prices. It is not a long-term policy. Reducing and
increasing fuel efficiency standards for cars is a long-term policy.
Making sure that the oil companies who are getting subsidies from
taxpayers drill on the 80 million acres that are open for drilling, and
not stockpiling permits when we could be stockpiling energy sources
here in the United States, that is an energy policy for the future.
I say vote ``yes'' and vote for a new strategy that has worked time
and again in the past.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am going to recognize myself for
2 minutes.
I want to respond to what my good friend from Illinois just said. He
is absolutely right that in July of 2005 we put an Energy Policy Act on
the floor of this body. I would like to point out that that was a
conference report that every relevant committee in the House of
Representatives had had hearings and open markups on; we had a full
conference with the Senate that was open, that the ranking member on
the Democratic side at the time which was in the minority, Mr. Dingell,
signed the conference report. The ranking member in the Senate, Mr.
Bingaman of New Mexico voted for the conference report.
And I said on the House floor when that conference report passed that
it was an excellent bill for stationary energy, but it was not an
excellent bill on mobility energy because we did not have in that
report to drill in ANWR. We did not have in that bill to drill and
explore in the Outer Continental Shelf, for the simple reason we didn't
have the votes, primarily in the other body, to put those things in the
bill.
But the conference report that was voted on was bipartisan, it went
through the regular process, it was not done the night before or the
morning of and put on the floor under a suspension rule. And where it
was, what was in the bill was good and is working today.
But I said on the floor at the time, you can go back and look at it
in the Congressional Record, on mobility energy, it was not as good as
I think it should have been because simply we didn't have the votes.
Today, the American people support drilling in ANWR. Today, the
American people want to drill in the OCS, or at least explore what is
in there, and we can't get those bills to the floor, Mr. Speaker.
So I would ask that, at some point in time, after these political
shams are concluded, we put some of those bills on the floor and see
where the votes are. I think there is a bipartisan majority for those
bills right now on the floor of this House.
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards).
Mr. EDWARDS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, when it comes to reducing gasoline
and energy costs, the American people don't want more talk. They want
action. They want Congress to make a difference. That is what this bill
is all about.
By releasing up to 70 million barrels of oil from the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve, we can lower gasoline prices immediately, not 10
years from now, not 20 years from now, immediately. That is not
speculation. That is not a gimmick. This was done by former President
Bush back in 1991 when he released 17 million barrels from SPR, and
prices went down over 35 percent in just a few days afterwards.
Now, some people may not think we are in an emergency. They say well,
SPR is supposed to be used for emergencies. Well, if being at war, if
Americans, hardworking Americans paying $4 a gallon for gasoline, if
American business is hurting, if our economy teetering on recession,
and many families have been living with the effects in their lives of
recession for months, if not years now, if that is not an emergency,
what is?
You know, I can understand why my colleagues have pushed for long-
term energy policies. I will support a bipartisan long-term energy
policy. But let's not just talk about what we will do that will benefit
Americans 10 years from now. Let's do something today that will benefit
us today; and not just benefits American businesses and hardworking
families, but our Nation's defense.
I co-chair the House Army Caucus, a bipartisan organization. I can
tell you, the United States Army today is paying hundreds of millions
of dollars, if not billions of dollars more because of high energy
costs.
Helping businesses, helping hardworking families meet their budgets
by lowering gasoline costs, supporting our Nation's defense at a time
of war, I think those are excellent reasons to support this tested
process to bring down gasoline costs.
Now, I can understand why oil speculators may not want this bill. But
the American people want it and they deserve it.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I would like to yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished ranking member of the Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee
of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Upton of Michigan.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, we need to send the signal across America
that we are, indeed, going to get serious about this issue. And I was
glad that a few moments ago, Speaker Pelosi referenced Mr. Pickens'
plan, and I sure would like to vote on that. I sure would like to talk
about all the things that

[[Page 16394]]

he wants to do, because it is more than just one. We cannot afford to
not have a plan to increase supply. In 2007, production fell from
125,000 barrels a day worldwide, while demand grew by a million barrels
a day.
I voted a couple of weeks ago to halt oil from going into SPR. But I
believe seriously that it would be terribly unwise to now remove oil
from that reserve.
This bill is going to hurt us if it is enacted, long-term,
particularly if there is a disruption. It is a Band-Aid, at best. It
will remove our insurance policy in case something even worse happens.
Last week, in my district, gasoline fell from $4.21 a gallon to, a
week later, earlier this week, to under $4. It was reflective of the
price of oil at the barrel, where that fell from $140 a barrel to $125
today. Why is that?
One of the reasons I am convinced that the world price of oil fell
was because President Bush took the very first step by saying that he
would lift the moratorium on offshore drilling. But of course we know
it is a two-step process. The executive branch and the legislative
branch have to act.
But what happened was, it got the attention of those speculators on
Wall Street. They might have said, I am convinced that they did, maybe
Congress is going to do something. The President has taken the first
step. Maybe the Congress will follow suit.
So it was no accident that the price at the barrel head fell
dramatically from $140 to under $125 today. Let's send a signal to the
American public that we are going to get serious about this. Let's
defeat this bill.
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green).
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank my Georgia colleague
and member of our Energy and Commerce Committee for yielding to me.
And I stand here in strong support of H.R. 6578, the Consumer Energy
Supply Act for 2008, introduced by my good friend from Texas and a
leader in the House on energy issues, Nick Lampson, as well as my
esteemed colleague on our committee, Representative Ed Markey of
Massachusetts.
Now, I have to admit, I agree--we need everything, Mr. Speaker. We
need to drill more. And frankly, my Michigan colleague, maybe we ought
to drill in the part of Lake Michigan that we are not allowed to drill
in, since Canada drills there and probably exports that gas to us.
But this bill is so important because this is something we can do
immediately. Today's rising petroleum gasoline prices are taking a toll
on our hardworking families, even in our district that produce a lot of
refined products.
And let's be clear. There are no quick fixes or easy answers to the
high price of gas. Prices are set by complex factors like climbing
world demand and geopolitical events.
But for the problems within our control, the proper management of the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve, or the SPR, we need to take steps
necessary to protect the American consumers' interest.
I do not believe the current administration has properly managed the
SPR. The SPR exists to protect us during the energy crisis, and is
almost full to its 227 million barrel capacity.
But while the cost per barrel of oil skyrocketed, the administration
continued to purchase high-priced oil off the market to put in the SPR,
limiting the amount of oil available. Granted, it is a small amount,
but it would still allow for that additional oil to be on the market.
But Congress fixed that when it sent legislation to the President.
And I supported it and it was signed in law to suspend oil additions to
the SPR until the end of the year, unless the price of oil falls below
$75.
I also believe that when oil prices are very high, we should release
SPR oil into the market to increase supply, as the Department of Energy
did in response to Hurricane Katrina.
Consistent with the Government Accountability Office recommendation
to add heavy crude to our national reserves, this bill would modernize
SPR by requiring DOE----
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. BARROW of Georgia. I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. By requiring the DOE to conduct the sale or
exchange within 6 months the 70 million barrels of light crude for
heavy crude. The GAO found that refineries who, if forced to rely
solely on SPR oil during an emergency, would experience a 5 percent
reduction in their production capacity. This bill will increase the
ability of refineries to respond to supply disruption, and optimize our
SPR's effectiveness.
This release would have an immediate impact on the market, reducing
the prices at the pump, and easing the effects of energy market
speculation.
This is a good first step. And I urge my colleagues, make this step,
because we do have a lot of other steps we have to make.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I want to yield 2 minutes to a
distinguished member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Terry of
Nebraska.
Mr. TERRY. We use, in this country, 20 million barrels of oil per
day; 14 of that we import. In fact, a little over 14 million barrels
per day we import.
It is my personal mission and dream that we can displace that 14
million barrels per day that we import, and use our own American-made
resources instead.
This bill here today, releasing 10 percent of the SPR, equals 3\1/2\
days of our total use. Now, that will, using my understanding of
economics, will reduce the price at the pump by a few cents for a few
days. So we have to balance that against the harm that is being caused
by the high gas prices to our constituents, to people on lower income,
especially with our national security needs, which is the intention of
SPR.
It is intended that when we go through an OPEC crisis where they cut
off the supply to us, that we have our domestic reserves ready in case
of such an emergency. And when you look at world politics today, with
Iran and Israel and Nigeria and Venezuela, that is a real issue that we
have to deal with.
Now, the Speaker recognizes now that supply is the issue, that demand
is outstripping world supply of oil, and we have to now add to our
supply. I agree with the Speaker's statement when she says, free our
resources.

{time} 1400

So let's have a vote on freeing our resources. We've got American
resources, whether it's alternative energies, and why don't we make the
tax credit permanent for alternative and renewable energy as opposed to
the 1 year that was brought to us by the Democrat leadership? We can
add, then, additional conservation. And the House did pass conservation
in automobile fuel efficiency, but let's use the resources that we have
with oil and get the resources in the middle of America and in Alaska
and free our resources.
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am pleased to yield an
additional 2 minutes to the author of this legislation, the
distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson).
Mr. LAMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Barrow, for yielding me the time.
You know, advances in technology over the years have led to the
ability to efficiently process heavy oil as it has become a larger part
of the market. In fact, 40 percent of oil accepted last year by
refineries was heavier than the oil contained in the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve. That's a critical point in my opinion.
Earlier we put into the Record the GAO report, and I would like to
submit for the Record the report that was mentioned within the GAO
report that came from the Department of Energy and read just one
paragraph from it:
``To address the compatibility issues of the 11 heavy crude refiners
and provide full protection for the Nation for all disruption
scenarios, the SPR would need for approximately 10 percent of its
inventory to be heavy oil. With consideration being given to a larger
Reserve and additional storage sites, it may be

[[Page 16395]]

desirable, and physically viable to store lower gravity crude than what
is currently stored in the 700 million barrel Reserve.''
The GAO stated that the Department of Energy may have underestimated
this amount in recent testimony. All the more reason why we should be
looking at how we can find a solution to this problem, use an
opportunity that is available to us.
That's exactly what I started out to do in November. When I
approached many of my colleagues at this House, this is something that
we should not be down here using partisan rhetoric over, pointing the
finger at one side not doing something the other side should be doing.
We understand this is a small part of the problem that we're going to
be facing. It is only one thing that needs to be addressed. But it is
one part, and it can make a difference.
And who cares if it's 1 percent or 3 percent or 5 percent or 10
percent? If the American people see the people from this House trying
to do something that will make a difference in their lives, help with
the pain at the pump, isn't it worth the effort? That's what we set out
to do. That's all we set out to do. And there is no reason in the world
why this legislation should not be made law of the land.

Executive Summary

Over the past two decades, many refiners in the United
States (U.S.) have expanded and ramped their refineries to
process higher sulfur, lower gravity crudes to increase their
refining economics and profitability. As a result, overall
U.S. crude oil imports have been consistently moving from the
higher quality crudes toward the lower quality crudes.
The Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) inventory consists of
high quality oils that have been previously determined to be
the best crudes to address oil supply disruptions. However,
the industry's trend toward the use of lower quality crudes
has raised the question about how well the current SPR crude
inventory can meet refiner needs.
This study provides a comprehensive assessment of the
compatibility of the crudes stored in the SPR with respect to
U.S. refining capabilities and likely disruption demands.
Specifically, the study addresses SPR crude compatibility
from two aspects (1) the compatibility and physical
limitations of U.S. refiners to substitute and refine SPR
crude in place of their usual foreign crude supplies, and (2)
the capability of the SPR to meet the Nation's refinery needs
in the event of potential supply disruptions.

a. spr inventory

As of December 31, 2004, the SPR had a total inventory of
681 million barrels (MMBbls) in storage at its four
underground storage sites along the Texas and Louisiana Gulf
Coast.
The SPR storage sites maintain only two crude type
segregations. One is a sweet crude having a sulfur content of
less than 0.5 percent and an API gravity ranging between
35 deg. and 37 deg., and the other is a sour crude having a
sulfur content of approximately 1.4 percent and an API
gravity ranging between 30 deg. and 34 deg.. The SPR's mix of
sweet and sour crudes is roughly 45 percent sweet and 55
percent sour.

compatibility with u.s. refiner processing capabilities

In 2004, the U.S. had 149 operating refineries which
processed an average of 15.3 million barrels of crude oil per
day (MMBbl/D). Of this total, 7.0 MMBbl/D came from U.S.
domestic oilfields or Canada, and are considered secure crude
supplies. The remainder, 8.3 MMBbl/D, was foreign imports
(exclusive of Canadian), for which SPR crude would be
considered a replacement in the event of an import
disruption.
A two step approach was used to evaluate the compatibility
of each of the 149 refineries with respect to SPR crudes. A
screening analysis was then used to classify refiners as (a)
not SPR connected, (b) domestic/Canadian only, (c) fully SPR
compatible, (d) high SPR compatibility, or (e) low SPR
compatibility. An engineering analysis was then used to
determine the maximum volume of SPR crude the refinery can
process and the extent the refinery will be forced to reduce
refinery runs.
In 2005, of the Nation's 149 refineries, 44 refineries were
identified as having compatibility issues with using SPR
crudes. Thirty three of these refineries were classed as
``high compatibility'', where the use of SPR crude would not
substantially impact their refining operations. Eleven of the
refineries were classed as ``low compatibility,'' where the
capability to substitute SPR crude for heavy oil imports was
limited. These 11 refineries are all located in PADD III on
the Gulf Coast and predominantly import crude from Mexico and
Venezuela. If all of this oil were disrupted, these 11
refineries would need to reduce U.S. refining runs by
approxImately 508 MBbl/D (3.3 percent of U.S. refining).
Gasoline production would not be affected, but the production
of distillate fuels (jet and diesel) would be reduced.

c. compatibility with u.s. needs in a disruption

From a world oil market perspective, the study evaluates
the compatibility of SPR crudes with respect to U.S. crude
shortages resulting from five major supply disruptions which
have the potential of occurring within the next 10 years. The
disruption scenarios were: a Persian Gulf oil disruption, a
Saudi Arabia oil disruption, a Nigerian oil disruption, a
Venezuela oil disruption, and a hurricane disruption of the
domestic Gulf of Mexico oil production.
The results show that the SPR crudes are fully capable of
satisfying U.S. refiner demands under four of the five
disruption scenarios. The only disruption case where the SPR
was not fully capable of mitigating the crude loss due to
incompatibility issues was the Venezuela oil disruption. Even
in this case, the SPR sour crude is effective as a blending
stock and will reduce the potential shortfall of U.S. heavy
oil runs from 2,200 MBbl/D to 450 MBbl/D.
The reduced refiner run of 450 MBbl/D will not impact the
production of motor gasoline in the United States, but it
will reduce the production of jet fuel, diesel fuel,
kerosene, residual fuels, and other heavier refined products.

d. conclusions

In general, the crudes currently stored in the SPR are
compatible and desirable for the majority of the U.S.
refineries and are well suited to mitigate most supply
disruptions. There are, however, eleven PADD III refineries
which have been specifically configured for processing heavy
crude largely from Latin America that would be impacted in
the event of a disruption of foreign crude supplies. However,
they would still be able to process a limited quantity of SPR
crude and maintain their full production of gasoline.
To address the compatibility issues of the eleven heavy
crude refiners and provide full protection for the Nation for
all disruption scenarios, the SPR would need for
approximately 10 percent of its inventory to be heavy oil.
With consideration being given to a larger Reserve and
additional storage sites, it may be desirable, and physically
viable to store lower gravity crude than what is currently
stored in the 700 million barrel Reserve.
GAO stated DOE may have underestimated this amount in
recent testimony.

I. Introduction

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) is the largest
government owned stockpile of crude oil in the world. Since
the SPR was authorized in 1975, the reserve has grown to 681
million barrels (MMBbls) by the end of 2004.
The crude is stored in salt caverns at four storage sites
along the Louisiana and Texas Gulf Coast. The sites are known
as West Hackberry, Bryan Mound, Big Hill, and Bayou Choctaw.
The SPR is connected to U.S. refineries by pipeline and by
waterway. Refineries along the Gulf of Mexico are connected
to the SPR by local pipelines. Refineries in Chicago and
other mid-continent areas are connected to the SPR by
interstate pipelines. Refineries along the Atlantic Coast and
West Coast can be supplied with SPR oil using tankers that
load oil through Gulf of Mexico marine terminals. The SPR
distribution system has been carefully developed to serve the
needs of the Nation in the event of a foreign crude oil
supply disruption.
Crude has been acquired from 25 countries over the past 30
years. The quality of the stored oil is classified as light.
This crude quality has been and it remains adequate to
support most foreseeable supply disruptions. In recent years,
however, refineries in the U.S. have imported increasing
quantities of heavy crude largely from Venezuela and Mexico.
The trend toward heavier oil imports raises a question about
how well the current light oil in storage will mitigate
future heavy oil supply disruptions.
This study was undertaken to assess the compatibility of
SPR crude with respect to the current and future crude
requirements of U.S. refineries. The objective of the study
is two-fold:
Assess the capabilities and physical limitations of U.S.
refineries to substitute and refine SPR crude in place of
foreign crude supplies, and
Assess the capability of the SPR to meet U.S. refinery
needs in the event of a supply disruption.
To accomplish these objectives, a methodology was developed
to identify U.S. refineries with crude compatibility issues.
Refinery data were systematically evaluated to determine the
refineries that could not fully use SPR crude because of
crude quality differences. These refineries would need to
reduce crude input into the refinery and this would reduce
the amount of jet fuel and diesel fuel that would be
available during the disruption.
The compatibility assessment results were incorporated
mathematically into models that simulate the world petroleum
market. Five disruption scenarios were identified as having a
high probability of occurring at least once over the next
decade. The scenarios were selected to evaluate the SPR
response capabilities in both volume and in the capability to
provide compatible crude.

[[Page 16396]]

Chapter II summarizes key information about the volume and
quality of oil currently stored by the SPR and how that oil
compares with the oil currently imported by U.S. refiners.
Limits on the capability to substitute SPR crude in an
emergency are addressed.
Chapter III is a comprehensive assessment of the
compatibility of SPR crude with U.S. refineries. The
assessment addresses the physical limitations of the
refineries, the maximum volume of SPR crude that could be
utilized, and the extent the refineries would need to reduce
runs due to compatibility issues.
Chapter IV summarizes the results of five disruption
scenarios. The capability of the SPR to meet refinery demands
under emergency conditions is presented and discussed.
Chapter V addresses the issue of future storage of heavy
oil and the need and rationale to provide a heavy oil
component to meet a future heavy oil disruption.
Chapter VI presents the overall conclusions and
recommendations from the study.
Appendix A contains the analysis results for each of the
149 refineries in the U.S. that processed oil in 2004. The
compatibility of each refinery is presented and the
individual results summarized by region.
Appendix B discusses the two models used in the disruption
analysis. One model establishes the optimal drawdown from the
SPR in response to a supply disruption. The second simulates
the world petroleum market and estimates the impact of the
disruption on the flow of petroleum around the world.
Appendix C is a world map that displays the impact of each
supply disruption on the worldwide flow of petroleum. Data
that support the analysis are also presented.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, can I inquire as to the time
remaining on each side.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Schiff). The gentleman from Texas has
4\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Georgia has 7 minutes
remaining
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, could I ask unanimous consent for
10 additional minutes equally divided between the majority and
minority? That would give me enough time to take the three remaining
speakers that I have. It would be 5 minutes for the majority and 5
additional minutes for the minority.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
Mr. BARROW. I object.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I would yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lungren).
Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I returned to this
House after 16 years because I believed that this was a forum for
dealing with the problems facing the American people. That's why I come
to the this floor so disappointed.
If I were to go to a doctor suffering from cancer and the doctor were
to give me only aspirin, I would say that he would be guilty of medical
malpractice. What we have here on the floor of the House is leadership
malpractice. The American people understand we're suffering from not
enough supply. And so what is the answer we get here today? We're going
to open up the SPR, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. And they say the
reason this works is it's worked three times in the past. But examine
how it has worked in the past.
In each and every instance, we had a temporary disruption of supply.
We were able to affect that because we had a temporary infusion of
supply. What we have here today is a long-term issue of lack of supply.
And the Speaker said and other Members on the other side of the aisle
said, Well, look. We shouldn't be begging foreign countries to give us
more oil.
No. What we're requiring the American people to do is to beg the
Congress to allow us to produce more American oil. And why should the
leadership of this House refuse to allow us to have American workers
using American ingenuity, American creativity to produce more American
energy?
This is the hoax on this floor. To say that somehow taking this out
of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is going to give you any long-term
benefit is nothing more than a hoax. A couple of cents for a couple of
days. It also takes away our ability to respond to temporary
disruptions in the future, which is the reason this was put in in the
first place.
Why should we be afraid of Americans producing American oil? Free
America. Let Americans produce American oil. Let's get rid of this
leadership malpractice we see on the floor today.
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield an additional 2 minutes
to the distinguished coauthor of this legislation, the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
Mr. MARKEY. How did we get here? It's very simple. President Bush and
Dick Cheney were elected 8 years ago. They put together a secret energy
plan. Two oilmen now in the White House. And here is the simple
mathematics. Two oilmen plus two terms in office equals $4 a gallon for
gasoline for every American consumer across the country. Very simple
mathematics.
The Democratic energy plan, on the other hand, is very simple. Right
now deploy the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Put the fear of the Lord
into speculators, into OPEC, into the oil industry. The price will
plummet. It did in 1991 when President Bush's father used it; it did in
2000 when President Clinton used it; it did when President Bush himself
used it after Hurricane Katrina. This is a huge emergency for families
as they look at their pocketbooks. They're being tipped upside down.
The President should use it.
And for the Democrats, after the Republicans controlled Congress for
12 years, in 2007 the Democrats took over. We increased the fuel
economy standard for the vehicles which we have to drive, the
appliance-efficiency standards, the lighting standards, new biofuels
policy. We backed out with that bill that passed in December of 2007,
the Democratic bill, 4.1 million barrels of oil per day over the next
10 to 20 years.
Right now we spend $387 million a day to send American troops over
into the Middle East, and we have to purchase 2.1 million barrels a day
from the Persian Gulf. Our bill in December that President Bush signed
backs out that oil.
But the Republicans had 12 years of control of this Congress to do
something about it. They did not. Now they say we need a renewable
electricity center so electricity is generated from renewables. The
Republicans are saying no.
Vote ``yes'' on this bill. This is the solution the consumers need
before Labor Day.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I'm going to yield 2 minutes to the
gentlelady from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), a member of the Energy and
Commerce Committee.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentleman from Texas for his leadership
on this issue. Indeed, he understands how the people of our great
Nation, and certainly of my district of Tennessee, are suffering with
the increase in the price at the pump that they have seen since January
of 2007. In my district of Tennessee, this has changed. So I have come
to the floor today to oppose this bill because it is the wrong bill at
the wrong time.
And one of the things that we have come to realize, and I think it's
been a painful realization for many people, is they have watched the
Democrat leadership of this House. They have seen that the Democrat
majority is not wanting to take the action that is necessary to address
the issue, whether we're talking about short term for immediate relief,
mid-range so that we can address what is coming next, and then long
term so that little children, like my new grandson who is 2 months old,
will have a consistent steady and dependable energy supply.
Indeed, releasing a portion of the SPR is the wrong move now.
Americans are wanting to see American solutions and American
exploration take place to address this issue.
Congress has the ability to do that, and we continue to be blocked
from taking the necessary actions by the liberal leadership that is
choosing to not take the actions necessary to address this.
Our Nation is being placed at risk. Not only our energy security, but
our national security is placed at risk by the actions of a kick-the-
can Congress who wants to just finish it out, get away for an August
recess, and not address the issue at hand. At $4 a gallon,

[[Page 16397]]

the price at the pump, indeed it is time for us to take action.
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, before proposing accommodation to my friend
from Texas, I would like to confirm the amount of time that we have
left. It's my understanding we have 5 minutes remaining; is that
correct?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is correct.
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, what I propose to do is reserve the balance
of our time and at the same time ask unanimous consent that my friend
from Texas may be allowed to control 3 minutes of our remaining time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from Texas
will control 3 additional minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, is the gentleman from Georgia
prepared to close?
Mr. BARROW. We have no further speakers on our side. I would reserve
the balance of our time.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I have one unanimous consent request, and then
I'm prepared to close.
I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays)
for a unanimous consent request.
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, though
I also support drilling.
I rise in support of H.R. 6578, the Consumer Energy Supply Act, which
would release 70 million barrels of light, sweet crude oil currently
from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and replace it with the same
amount of heavy crude oil within 6 months. That is approximately 10
percent of the 701 million barrels currently in the reserve.
As our demand for oil increases, it is important the SPR reflects our
refining capacity. Forty percent of our refining capacity is heavy
crude oil, and 60 percent is light crude.
This legislation allows us to better manage the SPR by making sure we
are saving some heavy crude oil.
This measure, however, does not replace our need to develop a
comprehensive energy plan. We must increase conservation and energy
efficiency--increasing the fuel economy of cars, minivans, SUVs and
light trucks and improve the efficiency of appliances; build a market
for renewable energy--solar, wind, geothermal, biomass; increase our
domestic supply of oil, natural gas and nuclear power and reduce
speculation in the oil futures market.
The Consumer Energy Supply Act will improve the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve and, in fact, make it more strategic, ensuring we have the type
of crude that better reflects our refining capacity. I urge a yes vote
on H.R. 6578.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have how much time?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas has 3\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I yield myself 3\1/2\ minutes.
First, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend from Georgia for
yielding 3 minutes of his time. I sincerely appreciate it.
I want to point out some of the fallacies in the debate as quickly as
I can.
The first fallacy is that nothing that we do in terms of developing
domestic energy supplies in the United States is going to take effect
for 10 years. That's poppycock. We can convert coal to liquids within
the next 2 years. We can be drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, if
it's allowed, within the next year. We can be doing major pilot
projects on our shale oil resources within the next year. We can be
drilling in parts of Federal lands that are currently snafued because
of Federal permitting within the next year. Those are all things that
can be done very quickly.
Even up in ANWR, it's not going to take 10 years if we give the green
light to drill and develop ANWR. It will definitely take more than 2 to
3 years, but you could have production in ANWR, I'm told, within 5
years.
The thing that we have got to do in this country if we're going to
bring energy prices down and keep them down is change the fundamental
difference between supply and demand in the world oil market. You have
got 85 million barrels of oil we're using worldwide, and we've got
approximately 86 million barrels of oil that's available. That less
than 1 percent supply margin is what brings these high prices.
A gimmick like we have today where we take some oil out of the SPR
for 60 days and then hopefully put it in within the next 6 years is not
going to change that fundamental. If it has a temporary supply price
decrease, that's a positive. I'll admit that.

{time} 1415

But if it has, it's only temporary because you are not changing the
fundamental supply-demand equation on the world oil market.
So what Republicans are saying is, let's have a strategic plan.
Perhaps releasing some oil from the SPR is part of that plan, perhaps.
That's what hearings are about. That's what a regular order process in
the committee system would be about. So we're not saying that we never
want to release any oil from the SPR, but we are saying it ought to be
a part of a strategic plan, and part of that strategic plan has got to
be to develop domestic American energy resources.
And Speaker Pelosi, for some reason, is adamantly afraid of that kind
of a bill coming to the floor. I don't care if it's a Gene Green bill,
a John Dingell bill, a Rick Boucher bill, a Steny Hoyer bill; but let a
bill come up that's got some real domestic energy supply in it and have
an honest debate, and let's see where the votes are. Let's don't have
an energy gimmick of the week.
That's what this is. It's the latest energy gimmick of the week, and
if it has a positive effect--and I say that as an if--it will be
temporary because if you take 70 million barrels--and oh, by the way, I
want to give a hint to my friends on the majority side who drafted the
bill. You've got a drafting error in the bill. It won't do what you
think it will do, but I will let you find it. If it were to become law,
which it won't, but if it were, it won't put 70 million barrels of oil
on the market. So you find the mistake. You developed it in the
midnight. You find the mistake.
With that, vote ``no'' on the bill, and let's bring a rational, long-
term, strategic plan to the floor in the next 2 weeks.
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
In the course of this debate, from time to time it has seemed as
though folks were talking about this as if this was draw-down
authority, as if this was just a pure draw-down from the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve. I think it's important to emphasize this is not a
draw-down proposal.
This legislation proposes a swap. It proposes a swap for that which
is best saved for tomorrow in exchange for that which is best used
today. We propose to put in the ground what we should save for
tomorrow, and put back into the system what we're getting out of the
ground now which is best used today. We should use today what's best
for today and save for tomorrow what's best for tomorrow.
Also, much has been made, or rather, little has been made of the fact
that this is just 3\1/2\ days of national consumption being added into
the supply system. Only 1 percent of national consumption is being
talked about here.
When Mark Twain was born, he was the 100th person born in the town of
Hannibal, Missouri. He said, you know, when I was born, I increased the
population of my town by 1 percent. That's more than most folks can say
in this world.
Well, by this legislation, we can increase the supply of oil and what
we've refined into gas in this country by 1 percent, and that's more
than we can say about most of the pieces of legislation that we get to
vote on from time to time.
Also, it's important to recognize that this 3\1/2\ days, this extra 1
percent, is a far greater percent of the thing on which the world price
rests. The world price rests on the very thin margin between daily
worldwide production and daily worldwide consumption. What is that
margin? That margin is a mere 1 million barrels a day. So we're talking
about putting into the system 70 times the world's daily float, the
difference between daily production and daily consumption.
That is a very significant factor. It is not only a decent percentage
of what

[[Page 16398]]

we consume; it's a very significant factor of that very thin margin
that contributes the most to the runaway cost of gas and oil in the
world today.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I wish to commend my colleague from Texas for
his conduct and debate.
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I will vote for this bill for two
reasons.
First, because it would provide for a quick increase in the supply of
petroleum in our consumer market and so could reduce the likelihood of
further short-term increases in the price of gasoline and other refined
products.
And, second, because it will do this in a way that is both cost-
effective and protective of our national-security interests.
Under the bill, the Energy Department, DOE, within 30 days would
begin selling light grade oil now stored in the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve. At least 20 million barrels would be offered for sale within
30 days after sales begin, and sales would continue for 6 months or
until 70 million barrels have been sold, whichever comes first.
But the draw-down would not be permanent because the bill would
require the Energy Department to acquire, through purchase, using money
from the sales, or exchange, heavy grade petroleum for storage in the
strategic reserve, to replace the light-grade petroleum that would be
sold.
Right now, slightly more than 700 million barrels of oil are stored
in the strategic reserve--so the amount to be sold under the bill would
be only about 10 percent of the amount on hand.
And, importantly, the bill specifies that the amount of oil stored in
the strategic reserve could not drop below 90 percent of the amount
stored when the bill is enacted. The most recent data I have seen
indicate that the reserve is currently filled nearly to capacity, so
the bill will not cause a significant reduction in the amount stored.
Also, the Government Accountability Office, GAO, says that it would
be a good idea to increase the extent to which we store heavy oil in
the reserve. In testimony earlier this year, Frank Rusco, GAO's acting
director for natural resources and environment, said that ``to decrease
the cost of filling the reserve and improve its efficiency . . . DOE
should include at least 10 percent heavy crude oils in the SPR . . .
Having heavy crude oil in the SPR would also make the SPR more
compatible with many U.S. refineries, helping these refineries run more
efficiently in the event that a supply disruption triggers use of the
SPR.''
So, this bill not only is compatible with the national-security
purposes of the SPR, it can actually assist in achieving them.
But, Mr. Speaker, while I think this bill deserves support, I also
think we should recognize that it is not a ``silver bullet'' for the
factors that have led to the current high price of oil and products
such as gasoline that are made from oil.
According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, CRS, it
is not easy to predict exactly how adding 70 million barrels of easily
refined oil from the strategic reserve would affect the market.
CRS's most recent report does point out that ``prices might decline
after additional refined product entered the market,'' but the same
report also notes that oil from the strategic reserve (SPR) ``is not
sold at below-market prices. Bids on SPR oil are accepted only if the
bids are deemed fair to the U.S. government. If the announcement itself
that the SPR is going to be tapped does not prompt or contribute to a
softening of prices, there may be limited interest on the part of the
oil industry in bidding on SPR supply.''
This underlines the need for a more comprehensive approach to energy
issues that combines short-term steps with other changes that will take
effect in a longer time frame.
For example, I think we should reduce the tariff--that is, the tax--
on imported ethanol, so that it will again be a safeguard against
subsidizing foreign blenders rather than a trade barrier against
imports of this fuel that can add to our supplies and thus further
reduce the pressure on prices. I have introduced a bill (H.R. 6234, the
Imported Ethanol Facilitation Act) that would do just that.
In addition, I am open to increasing the extent to which Federal
lands on the outer continental shelf can be subject to exploration for
and development of energy resources, and I support adding a stronger
due-diligence requirement to promote more rapid exploration and
development on existing leases on those lands and onshore as well.
We also need to continue to work to reduce the potential for
artificial increases in prices through improper speculation or other
market-distorting activities.
And we need to keep pushing for continued aggressive development of
alternative sources of energy--especially renewable sources--to reduce
our dependence on petroleum as well as for greater efficiencies in the
way we use energy, so that we can do more with the same or reduced
amounts.
In other words, this bill is not all that is required for a better
energy policy. But I think it does have the potential to assist
consumers in the short run, without harming the national-security
purposes served by maintaining our strategic petroleum reserve. So, I
will vote for it and encourage all our colleagues to do so as well.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, all of us are aware of the soaring cost of
gasoline and the impact it is having on the people we represent. Our
constituents want to know what we're doing to provide relief at the
pump.
Over the initial opposition of the White House, the Congress has
already passed legislation to suspend further oil purchases for the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve this year, freeing up 70,000 gallons of oil
a day for use by consumers. Further action is needed to help the
economy and help consumers.
The bill before the House today takes the next step. It requires the
Energy Department to release 70 million barrels of light, sweet crude
oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in exchange for the same
amount of heavier grade crude oil. Light, sweet crude oil contains less
sulfur and is the easiest oil to refine into gasoline. Under this
legislation, the Secretary of Energy would be directed to deploy 70
million barrels of light crude oil over the next six months. Passage of
this bill would also be a shot across the bow of the speculators who
have been driving up the cost of oil. More than any other action the
Federal Government could take, this proposal has the greatest potential
to reduce gasoline prices in the near term.
I know that some of my colleagues will object to the use of the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve for this purpose. They will protest that
the Reserve is for use in emergencies. Like a broken record, they will
repeat their call to open up the entire Outer Continental Shelf to oil
drilling. I do not agree. Rising oil and gasoline prices are causing
serious damage to our Nation's economy. We have before us the means to
mitigate some of that damage and do so immediately.
Vast areas of the Outer Continental Shelf are already open to
drilling. Less than 2 years ago, and with my support, Congress voted to
open up an additional 8.3 million acres for offshore exploration and
drilling. All told, the oil companies are using only 10.5 million of
the 44 million offshore acres that have already been leased to them. In
any case, according to the Bush Administration's own Energy Information
Administration, even if we repealed the offshore ban today, oil and gas
production would not begin there until 2017 at the earliest; further,
lifting the remaining offshore drilling restrictions and I quote from
the EIA analysis ``would not have a significant impact on domestic
crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.''
We cannot wait until 2030. The need for relief at the pump is
immediate. I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting the
legislation before the House.
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this
legislation.
The proposal before us today would require the President to release
small amounts of sweet, light crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve. That oil would be replaced by heavy crude, at a later date and
at a lower price.
In the face of record high oil prices, this is a common sense step
for a number of reasons.
First, earlier releases from the SPR, by each of the last three
Presidents, brought down oil prices by between 9 percent and 33 percent
within weeks. There is no reason to believe that we won't see a similar
result today. Putting more oil on the market is a sure way to reduce
prices.
Second, we have the SPR in place for national emergencies. The damage
that these high oil prices are doing to individual consumers and to our
economy as a whole certainly qualifies as such an emergency. In
addition, the SPR is already at a record 97 percent of capacity and
this legislation requires that it not drop below 90 percent.
Third, releasing oil from the SPR is one of the few steps that we can
take to actually affect prices immediately. President Bush and his
supporters continue to call for opening our entire coast to new
drilling and to begin exploring in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge.
But this failed ``drill-only'' strategy would have zero effect on oil
prices today and is what has gotten us into this mess in the first
place. It would simply be one more gift for a favored special interest
of this Administration, the oil and gas industry.
Democrats have a better plan. We are working on legislation to crack
down on what appears to be rampant speculation that may be

[[Page 16399]]

driving up prices by as much as 20 percent, according to some experts.
In addition, we have voted to force oil and gas companies to drill on
the lands they have leased or lose access to them and to speed up
construction of a natural gas pipeline in Alaska. If enacted, that
legislation would help increase supply in the medium term.
For the long term, we have enacted expansion of many energy
efficiency measures, such as the first increase in auto efficiency
standards in 32 years, that will help us use less energy across our
economy. And we are moving forward with greater incentives to encourage
the use of alternative and renewable resources. We must continue to
build on these measures so we can begin a much-needed transition away
from an economy based on fossil fuels.
But these measures, as critically important as they are, will take
time. In the meantime we have to move to help consumers today. And that
is what this legislation would do.
Madam Speaker, high gas prices are hurting the American people and
crippling our economy.
While we have seen the price of oil drop by some $20 a barrel in the
last week or two, it is still at ridiculously high levels and prices at
the pump are still way over $4 a gallon in my district and many others.
And while my constituents across the South and Central Coast are
finding it hard to afford to go to the grocery store, take their kids
to soccer and even get to work, the big oil companies are once again
reporting record profits.
This is an absolute disgrace and this Congress is moving to put an
end to that situation with this legislation.
I urge my colleagues to support this common sense bill to help
American consumers.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R.
6578, the Consumer Energy Supply Act, which would require a 70 million
barrel exchange of light oil from the SPR in exchange for heavier crude
at a later date. I introduced similar legislation in May 2008 to
exchange 50 million barrels of light crude oil.
I believe, it is critically important to use the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve, SPR, to address our national energy crisis. The SPR was
created to protect the United States from oil supply disruptions and is
now more than 97 percent full, its highest level ever. Unfortunately,
the Energy Department's Energy Information Administration announced on
July 23, 2008 that non SPR crude oil stocks are down more than 55
million barrels from a year ago and distillate stocks are only a few
million barrels above last year's levels.
As I travel around Connecticut's Second Congressional District and
meet with my constituents, I hear from families, school administrators
and businesses about their concerns with high energy prices. While
gasoline prices continue to hover above $4 per gallon in eastern
Connecticut, residents and heating oil dealers are also concerned about
the price and supply of heating oil this year.
At an April 2008 hearing before the House Select Committee on Energy
Independence and Global Warming, Melanie Kenderdine, with MIT and
formerly of the Energy Department, testified that an exchange of 50
million barrels of light crude from the SPR ``could be expected to
temporarily drive down oil prices without appreciably reducing the
insurance value of the SPR in the near term.''
In 2000, when heating oil stocks were low, the Administration
undertook an exchange of 30 million barrels of oil from the SPR and the
impact on prices was immediate. All of the oil was refined, despite
worries about refining capacity, and crude oil prices dropped almost 20
percent. In addition, there were sufficient heating oil supplies that
winter.
We need more oil on the market now to bring down the price of crude
oil and gasoline and before the cold New England winter sets in. That
is why I introduced my legislation and why I recognize that even more
oil is needed on the market than my bill required. I urge my colleagues
to support H.R. 6578.
Mr. BARROW. I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barrow) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 6578, as amended.
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. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground
that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum
is not present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 268,
nays 157, not voting 10, as follows:

[Roll No. 527]

YEAS--268

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Butterfield
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Cazayoux
Chabot
Chandler
Childers
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fossella
Foster
Frank (MA)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Goode
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hayes
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kingston
Klein (FL)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

NAYS--157

Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Carter
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Ehlers
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Kuhl (NY)
Lamborn
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)

[[Page 16400]]

Putnam
Radanovich
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Scalise
Schmidt
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Stearns
Sullivan
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--10

Bishop (UT)
Boswell
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Cubin
Hinojosa
Hulshof
Jones (OH)
LaHood
Ortiz
Rush

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members have 2 minutes
remaining to vote.

{time} 1444

Messrs. SHUSTER, SAXTON and DAVIS of Virginia changed their vote from
``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. WHITFIELD of Kentucky and Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida changed
their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So (two-thirds not being in the affirmative) the motion was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 527, I inadvertently
missed this vote. I was delayed getting to the floor. Had I been
present, I would have voted ``yea.''

____________________

NATIONAL HIGHWAY BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION AND INSPECTION ACT OF 2008

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1344 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill,
H.R. 3999.

{time} 1444

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 3999) to amend title 23, United States Code, to improve
the safety of Federal-aid highway bridges, to strengthen bridge
inspection standards and processes, to increase investment in the
reconstruction of structurally deficient bridges on the National
Highway System, and for other purposes, with Mrs. Christensen in the
chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Wednesday, July
23, 2008, amendment No. 11 printed in part B of House Report 110-760 by
the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) had been disposed of.

Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Childers

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, the unfinished
business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by
the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Childers) on which further
proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice
vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 10 offered by Mr. Childers:
At the end of section 5, add the following:
(d) Compliance With Immigration and Nationality Act.--None
of the funds appropriated pursuant to subsection (a) may be
used to employ workers in violation of section 274A of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a).

Recorded Vote

The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 416,
noes 1, answered ``present'' 6, not voting 16, as follows:

[Roll No. 528]

AYES--416

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Bordallo
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Cazayoux
Chabot
Chandler
Childers
Christensen
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Hooley
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Jordan
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
Lamborn
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Norton
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sali
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Tsongas
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (FL)

NOES--1

Moore (WI)

ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--6

Clarke
Edwards (MD)
Ellison
Grijalva
Honda
Towns

NOT VOTING--16

Bishop (UT)
Boswell
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Cubin
DeLauro
Faleomavaega
Fortuno

[[Page 16401]]

Hinojosa
Hulshof
Johnson, Sam
LaHood
Ortiz
Rush
Slaughter
Sutton
Young (AK)

{time} 1503

Mr. CRENSHAW changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Chairman, on rollcall No. 528, had I been
present I would have voted ``aye.''
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment in the nature of a
substitute, as amended.
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Schiff) having assumed the chair, Mrs. Christensen, Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3999) to
amend title 23, United States Code, to improve the safety of Federal-
aid highway bridges, to strengthen bridge inspection standards and
processes, to increase investment in the reconstruction of structurally
deficient bridges on the National Highway System, and for other
purposes, pursuant to House Resolution 1344, she reported the bill back
to the House with an amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment
reported from the Committee of the Whole? If not, the question is on
the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.

Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Poe

Mr. POE. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. POE. In its current form, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Poe moves to recommit the bill H.R. 3999 to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure with
instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith
with the following amendment:

SEC. 7. REMOVAL OF CERTAIN STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT BRIDGES ON
FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, a structurally deficient bridge on a Federal-aid highway
with a Federal Highway Administration bridge sufficiency
rating of 5 or less that has also been designated as an
unreasonable obstruction to navigation under section 4 of the
Act entitled ``An Act to regulate the construction of bridges
over navigable waters'', approved March 23, 1906 (33 U.S.C.
494; popularly known as the ``General Bridge Act of 1906'')
shall be removed once a new bridge or other facility is
opened that will carry the vehicular traffic that was once
carried by the structurally deficient bridge.
(b) Penalties.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
upon issuance of an appropriate order by the Secretary of
Transportation, the owner or operator of a structurally
deficient bridge that has not been removed in violation of
subsection (a) shall be subject to penalties under section
5(b) of the Act referred to in subsection (a) (33 U.S.C.
495(b)).
(c) Structurally Deficient Bridge Defined.--In this
section, the term ``structurally deficient bridge'' means a
bridge that has--
(1) significant load-carrying elements that are in poor or
worse condition due to deterioration or damage, or both;
(2) a load capacity that is significantly below current
truckloads and that requires replacement; or
(3) a waterway opening causing frequent flooding of the
bridge deck and approaches resulting in significant traffic
interruptions.

Mr. POE (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to
dispense with the reading.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
Mr. McGOVERN. I object.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
The Clerk will continue to read.
The Clerk continued to read.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. POE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank first of all the chairman of
the committee for his work on this bill and his vast knowledge of
transportation issues, not just with bridges but every other issue
regarding transportation and how he is able to give us that history
lesson every time the committee meets, either in English or Spanish. He
can do both of those.
Today there is a reasonably good system in place for removing old
bridges when they need to be replaced with new bridges, but it is in
the circumventing of that system that causes problems. Old bridges that
have been replaced, if not removed, could cause nationwide problems for
shipbuilders, ship operators, port authorities, terminal operators and
even barge operators.
Under current law, bridges have to come down or be repaired when they
pose an unreasonable obstruction to navigation. This is carried out
through bridge permit requirements, providing that an old bridge must
be torn down when the new bridge is built and the old bridge no longer
serves a transportation function.
One example of where this process is not followed is the Brightman
Street Bridge case. This bridge is 101 years old. New construction
started 10 years ago, but yet the new bridge has still not been built,
and now there are plans to keep the old bridge in place even after the
new bridge is constructed.
There has been a constant increase in the size of ships on our
waterways throughout history. This makes bridges built in the past an
obstruction and danger to navigation. For instance, the width between
the bridge and the pier on the new Brightman Street bridge are much
longer than on the current bridge. And unless old bridges like this are
removed, they will still be navigation problems upriver.
We need to understand that some of the worst, most severely
deteriorated bridges in the country are not only hazardous to vehicular
traffic and people traveling on top of the bridge, but also to maritime
and perhaps rail traffic that are below them. There are bridges deemed
by the Coast Guard to be navigational hazards, and when States build a
replacement bridge, the hazards ought to be removed.
There are roughly 60 bridges with a sufficiency rating of 5 or less,
or what I call 95 percent deficient that are over navigable waters
according to 2007 numbers.
The purpose of this motion to recommit is to be proactive, Mr.
Speaker, and strengthen current policy that when a permit is issued to
build a new bridge it also includes a provision or requirement for
removal of the old bridge. If an exception to this rule is allowed to
continue, it could lead to similar bridges being kept nationwide for
limited transportation purposes. But the sole purpose of using these
old bridges is to really block upstream development, specifically
blocking energy development upstream that has already been approved.
Keeping an old bridge when a replacement has been constructed has
less to do with the condition of the bridge and more to do with the
existence of an unnecessary barrier to navigation. This makes the
dangers of an old bridge worse for the maritime industry.
At this time, Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico.
Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for
bringing this important subject up. It is indeed ironic that we are
considering today a bridge safety bill and the very stimulus of the
bill was a bridge that was approximately 40 years old, and now then we
have this motion to recommit that directs attention to this bridge
which is over 100 years old.
The Massachusetts Highway Department recognized five significant
problems with this particular bridge, the one that is in question under
this motion to recommit; first of all, that it was structurally
deficient; secondly, that the narrow horizontal clearance of the draw
span opening is only 98 feet;

[[Page 16402]]

thirdly, that the location of the channel opening on its side rather
than the center; and then fourth, the vertical clearance through the
draw span is only 27 feet above the mean water level; and fifth, there
are of course traffic congestion problems at the Route 6, 138 and 103
intersection in Somerset.
The provision that was put in to keep this bridge in place was placed
in the bill in order to allow emergency traffic and pedestrian traffic.
Now, the emergency traffic, the large vehicles, the fire trucks, have
already been prohibited from going across this because it's unsafe, and
though still we're going to keep the bridge here, and we have to
understand that with the prices of energy today, that this block has
very little to do with the bridge itself but instead is to do with the
fact that our energy policies have been hijacked by a small group of
extremists who refuse, at any point, to have more energy brought into
this country, either by our own resources or by external resources. And
that is the end result of what is going on with this bridge.
So the motion to recommit simply says that the bridges that are
unsafe as measured by a distinct standard that is available, would be
actually torn down. The U.S. Coast Guard said that we need to tear the
bridge down. The Massachusetts Highway Department said it's unsafe and
would not like to use it. It's going to cost the taxpayers $1.5 million
to keep it open.
Let's pass this motion to recommit. Let's do the right thing and get
more energy into this country.

{time} 1515

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to
recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Minnesota is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. OBERSTAR. I first want to address the underlying bill. There is a
great deal of misinformation coming from some State Departments of
Transportation. Curiously, those who have done the most transferring
money out of their bridge account for other purposes, then come back
and complain that they don't have enough money to repair deficient
bridges.
The language in this legislation, by determination of the
Congressional Budget Office, is not a mandate. There is no
intergovernmental or private sector mandates, as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, first.
Secondly, the bill requires States to inspect structurally deficient
bridges and fractured critical bridges annually. And to do that work,
they can use money out of their bridge account to pay for bridge
inspectors and to undertake the inspections. There is no limitation.
The only limitation is if you have a structurally fractured critical
bridge in your bridge inventory, fix it first before you transfer money
for some other purpose.
Now this pending motion to recommit was rejected in our committee
when we initially considered it in another piece of legislation. It is
really special interest legislation because the company that would
operate the LNG facility would be a principal beneficiary.
To explain the specifics of that intricacy, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to
the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).
Mr. McGOVERN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
With respect to the gentlemen from Texas and New Mexico, they don't
know what they are talking about. I mean, this is ridiculous. We are
talking about a bridge in Fall River, Massachusetts. This is a bridge
that is owned by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. It is not owned by
the Federal Government; it is owned by the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the city of Fall
River and the people of that community have decided that they want to
preserve this bridge. Why, one of the reasons why is for an evacuation
route. And another reason why is they want to turn it into a biking
path and a walking path to help revitalize the waterfront in Fall River
and Somerset.
The community is almost unanimous in their support for this effort.
There is no controversy in Fall River. There is no controversy in
Massachusetts about this.
And as far as the debate about LNG, this is the least of the problems
for a potential LNG facility in the middle of Fall River. The Coast
Guard has said it is an unacceptable risk. The U.S. Navy has said it is
a mistake. The Secretary of Commerce has said it is a bad idea. This
has nothing to do with LNG. This has everything to do with whether or
not we are going to allow some people on that side of the aisle to
attack the hardworking families of Fall River who last week they
verbally assaulted because they said they were not entitled to any kind
of environmental benefit. This week they want to take away a bridge
that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts owns that the people of Fall
River want to protect.
Massachusetts, by the way, in terms of LNG, is doing more than almost
every other State in this country. We have two up and running and
another being licensed. So this has nothing to do with energy. This has
nothing to do with LNG. This has everything to do with whether or not
the people of Fall River, the hardworking people of Fall River, deserve
to determine what to do with a little measly bridge that they want to
preserve to help revitalize their waterfront.
So enough of this nonsense; vote down this motion.
Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. You have heard about the merits; let me
talk about the personal politics.
I just ran over here from a hearing that I called at the request of
the Republicans on the Financial Services Committee because I was
trying to accommodate them.
To have this brought up attacking our district as an ambush with no
notice, with no discussion when we are trying to do business, when I
spent all week trying to work with this administration, and I know all
the people on that side didn't like it. I am about to go to conference
on the flood insurance bill, and a number of Members on both sides of
the aisle have come to me and said we have this issue and that issue. I
have promised to give every consideration.
To have this kind of a political attack on an important issue to our
district with no notice in the midst of our trying to conduct other
business is not worthy of the traditions of this House. And I would be
glad to discuss this at other times.
But I would just advise that if this is the precedent that we are
setting, that we no longer decide that a Member knows best what is in
his or her district, I will be glad to learn that today.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.

Recorded Vote

Mr. POE. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on
the question of passage.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 151,
noes 268, answered ``present'' 5, not voting 10, as follows:

[Roll No. 529]

AYES--151

Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
English (PA)
Fallin
Feeney
Flake
Forbes

[[Page 16403]]

Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
Lamborn
Latham
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas
Mack
Marchant
McCaul (TX)
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Poe
Price (GA)
Putnam
Radanovich
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Scalise
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Smith (NE)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOES--268

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castor
Cazayoux
Chandler
Childers
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Fossella
Foster
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Heller
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pickering
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (OH)
Wittman (VA)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--5

Aderholt
Bonner
Everett
Rogers (AL)
Weller

NOT VOTING--10

Bishop (UT)
Boswell
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Cannon
Cubin
Hinojosa
Hulshof
LaHood
Ortiz
Rush

Moment of Silence Observed in Memory of Officer Jacob J. Chestnut and
Detective John M. Gibson

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ellsworth) (during the vote). Pursuant
to the Chair's announcement of earlier today, the House will now
observe a moment of silence in memory of Officer Jacob J. Chestnut and
Detective John M. Gibson.
Will all present please rise for a moment of silence.

{time} 1542

Messrs. PASTOR, RAMSTAD, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Mrs. CAPPS, Messrs.
FERGUSON, KING of New York, MANZULLO and RANGEL changed their vote from
``aye'' to ``no.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Schiff). The question is on the passage
of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. POE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 367,
nays 55, not voting 12, as follows:

[Roll No. 530]

YEAS--367

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Cazayoux
Chabot
Chandler
Childers
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foster
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta

[[Page 16404]]

Sarbanes
Saxton
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weller
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NAYS--55

Aderholt
Bilbray
Bonner
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Campbell (CA)
Coble
Crenshaw
Culberson
Deal (GA)
Doolittle
Everett
Feeney
Flake
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett (NJ)
Gingrey
Heller
Hensarling
Hoekstra
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
King (IA)
Kingston
Lamborn
Latta
Mack
Marchant
McHenry
Mica
Miller (FL)
Moran (KS)
Neugebauer
Paul
Pence
Pickering
Poe
Price (GA)
Putnam
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rohrabacher
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Smith (NE)
Stearns
Tancredo
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Weldon (FL)

NOT VOTING--12

Bishop (UT)
Boehner
Boswell
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Cannon
Cubin
Hinojosa
Hoyer
Hulshof
LaHood
Ortiz
Rush

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members have 2 minutes
remaining to cast their votes.

{time} 1553

Mr. WELDON of Florida and Mr. HOEKSTRA changed their vote from
``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________

AUTHORIZING THE CLERK TO MAKE CORRECTIONS IN ENGROSSMENT OF H.R. 3999,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION AND INSPECTION ACT OF 2008

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in the
engrossment of H.R. 3999, the Clerk be authorized to correct section
numbers, punctuation, cross-references, and to make such other
technical and conforming changes as may be necessary to accurately
reflect the actions of the House.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Minnesota?
There was no objection.

____________________

TOM LANTOS AND HENRY J. HYDE UNITED STATES GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AGAINST
HIV/AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1362, I call
from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 5501) to authorize
appropriations for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to provide assistance
to foreign countries to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and
for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, and ask for its
immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the Senate
amendment.
The text of the Senate amendment is as follows:

Senate amendment:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Tom Lantos
and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against
HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of
2008''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Definitions.
Sec. 4. Purpose.
Sec. 5. Authority to consolidate and combine reports.

TITLE I--POLICY PLANNING AND COORDINATION

Sec. 101. Development of an updated, comprehensive, 5-year, global
strategy.
Sec. 102. Interagency working group.
Sec. 103. Sense of Congress.

TITLE II--SUPPORT FOR MULTILATERAL FUNDS, PROGRAMS, AND PUBLIC-PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIPS

Sec. 201. Voluntary contributions to international vaccine funds.
Sec. 202. Participation in the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis
and Malaria.
Sec. 203. Research on methods for women to prevent transmission of HIV
and other diseases.
Sec. 204. Combating HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria by
strengthening health policies and health systems of
partner countries.
Sec. 205. Facilitating effective operations of the Centers for Disease
Control.
Sec. 206. Facilitating vaccine development.

TITLE III--BILATERAL EFFORTS

Subtitle A--General Assistance and Programs

Sec. 301. Assistance to combat HIV/AIDS.
Sec. 302. Assistance to combat tuberculosis.
Sec. 303. Assistance to combat malaria.
Sec. 304. Malaria Response Coordinator.
Sec. 305. Amendment to Immigration and Nationality Act.
Sec. 306. Clerical amendment.
Sec. 307. Requirements.
Sec. 308. Annual report on prevention of mother-to-child transmission
of HIV.
Sec. 309. Prevention of mother-to-child transmission expert panel.

TITLE IV--FUNDING ALLOCATIONS

Sec. 401. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 402. Sense of Congress.
Sec. 403. Allocation of funds.

TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 501. Machine readable visa fees.

TITLE VI--EMERGENCY PLAN FOR INDIAN SAFETY AND HEALTH

Sec. 601. Emergency plan for Indian safety and health.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Section 2 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7601) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(29) On May 27, 2003, the President signed this Act into
law, launching the largest international public health
program of its kind ever created.
``(30) Between 2003 and 2008, the United States, through
the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and
in conjunction with other bilateral programs and the
multilateral Global Fund has helped to--
``(A) provide antiretroviral therapy for over 1,900,000
people;
``(B) ensure that over 150,000 infants, most of whom would
have likely been infected with HIV during pregnancy or
childbirth, were not infected; and
``(C) provide palliative care and HIV prevention assistance
to millions of other people.
``(31) While United States leadership in the battles
against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria has had an
enormous impact, these diseases continue to take a terrible
toll on the human race.
``(32) According to the 2007 AIDS Epidemic Update of the
Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS)--
``(A) an estimated 2,100,000 people died of AIDS-related
causes in 2007; and
``(B) an estimated 2,500,000 people were newly infected
with HIV during that year.
``(33) According to the World Health Organization, malaria
kills more than 1,000,000 people per year, 70 percent of whom
are children under 5 years of age.
``(34) According to the World Health Organization, \1/3\ of
the world's population is infected with the tuberculosis
bacterium, and tuberculosis is 1 of the greatest infectious
causes of death of adults worldwide, killing 1,600,000 people
per year.
``(35) Efforts to promote abstinence, fidelity, the correct
and consistent use of condoms, the delay of sexual debut, and
the reduction of concurrent sexual partners represent
important elements of strategies to prevent the transmission
of HIV/AIDS.
``(36) According to UNAIDS--
``(A) women and girls make up nearly 60 percent of persons
in sub-Saharan Africa who are HIV positive;
``(B) women and girls are more biologically, economically,
and socially vulnerable to HIV infection; and
``(C) gender issues are critical components in the effort
to prevent HIV/AIDS and to care for those affected by the
disease.
``(37) Children who have lost a parent to HIV/AIDS, who are
otherwise directly affected by the disease, or who live in
areas of high HIV prevalence may be vulnerable to the disease
or its socioeconomic effects.
``(38) Lack of health capacity, including insufficient
personnel and inadequate infrastructure, in sub-Saharan
Africa and other regions of the world is a critical barrier
that limits the effectiveness of efforts to combat HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria, and to achieve other global health
goals.
``(39) On March 30, 2007, the Institute of Medicine of the
National Academies released a report entitled `PEPFAR
Implementation:

[[Page 16405]]

Progress and Promise', which found that budget allocations
setting percentage levels for spending on prevention, care,
and treatment and for certain subsets of activities within
the prevention category--
``(A) have `adversely affected implementation of the U.S.
Global AIDS Initiative';
``(B) have inhibited comprehensive, integrated, evidence
based approaches;
``(C) `have been counterproductive';
``(D) `may have been helpful initially in ensuring a
balance of attention to activities within the 4 categories of
prevention, treatment, care, and orphans and vulnerable
children';
``(E) `have also limited PEPFAR's ability to tailor its
activities in each country to the local epidemic and to
coordinate with the level of activities in the countries'
national plans'; and
``(F) should be removed by Congress and replaced with more
appropriate mechanisms that--
``(i) `ensure accountability for results from Country Teams
to the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator and to Congress'; and
``(ii) `ensure that spending is directly linked to and
commensurate with necessary efforts to achieve both country
and overall performance targets for prevention, treatment,
care, and orphans and vulnerable children'.
``(40) The United States Government has endorsed the
principles of harmonization in coordinating efforts to combat
HIV/AIDS commonly referred to as the `Three Ones', which
includes--
``(A) 1 agreed HIV/AIDS action framework that provides the
basis for coordination of the work of all partners;
``(B) 1 national HIV/AIDS coordinating authority, with a
broadbased multisectoral mandate; and
``(C) 1 agreed HIV/AIDS country-level monitoring and
evaluating system.
``(41) In the Abuja Declaration on HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis
and Other Related Infectious Diseases, of April 26-27, 2001
(referred to in this Act as the `Abuja Declaration'), the
Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African
Unity (OAU)--
``(A) declared that they would `place the fight against
HIV/AIDS at the forefront and as the highest priority issue
in our respective national development plans';
``(B) committed `TO TAKE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND
PROVIDE LEADERSHIP for the activities of the National AIDS
Commissions/Councils';
``(C) resolved `to lead from the front the battle against
HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Other Related Infectious Diseases
by personally ensuring that such bodies were properly
convened in mobilizing our societies as a whole and providing
focus for unified national policymaking and programme
implementation, ensuring coordination of all sectors at all
levels with a gender perspective and respect for human
rights, particularly to ensure equal rights for people living
with HIV/AIDS'; and
``(D) pledged `to set a target of allocating at least 15%
of our annual budget to the improvement of the health
sector'.''.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

Section 3 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7602) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``Committee on
International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, and the Committee
on Appropriations'';
(2) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (12);
(3) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (5), as
paragraphs (4) through (6), respectively;
(4) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) Global aids coordinator.--The term `Global AIDS
Coordinator' means the Coordinator of United States
Government Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally.''; and
(5) by inserting after paragraph (6), as redesignated, the
following:
``(7) Impact evaluation research.--The term `impact
evaluation research' means the application of research
methods and statistical analysis to measure the extent to
which change in a population-based outcome can be attributed
to program intervention instead of other environmental
factors.
``(8) Operations research.--The term `operations research'
means the application of social science research methods,
statistical analysis, and other appropriate scientific
methods to judge, compare, and improve policies and program
outcomes, from the earliest stages of defining and designing
programs through their development and implementation, with
the objective of the rapid dissemination of conclusions and
concrete impact on programming.
``(9) Paraprofessional.--The term `paraprofessional' means
an individual who is trained and employed as a health agent
for the provision of basic assistance in the identification,
prevention, or treatment of illness or disability.
``(10) Partner government.--The term `partner government'
means a government with which the United States is working to
provide assistance to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, or
malaria on behalf of people living within the jurisdiction of
such government.
``(11) Program monitoring.--The term `program monitoring'
means the collection, analysis, and use of routine program
data to determine--
``(A) how well a program is carried out; and
``(B) how much the program costs.''.

SEC. 4. PURPOSE.

Section 4 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7603) is
amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 4. PURPOSE.

``The purpose of this Act is to strengthen and enhance
United States leadership and the effectiveness of the United
States response to the HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria
pandemics and other related and preventable infectious
diseases as part of the overall United States health and
development agenda by--
``(1) establishing comprehensive, coordinated, and
integrated 5-year, global strategies to combat HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria by--
``(A) building on progress and successes to date;
``(B) improving harmonization of United States efforts with
national strategies of partner governments and other public
and private entities; and
``(C) emphasizing capacity building initiatives in order to
promote a transition toward greater sustainability through
the support of country-driven efforts;
``(2) providing increased resources for bilateral and
multilateral efforts to fight HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria as integrated components of United States development
assistance;
``(3) intensifying efforts to--
``(A) prevent HIV infection;
``(B) ensure the continued support for, and expanded access
to, treatment and care programs;
``(C) enhance the effectiveness of prevention, treatment,
and care programs; and
``(D) address the particular vulnerabilities of girls and
women;
``(4) encouraging the expansion of private sector efforts
and expanding public-private sector partnerships to combat
HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria;
``(5) reinforcing efforts to--
``(A) develop safe and effective vaccines, microbicides,
and other prevention and treatment technologies; and
``(B) improve diagnostics capabilities for HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria; and
``(6) helping partner countries to--
``(A) strengthen health systems;
``(B) expand health workforce; and
``(C) address infrastructural weaknesses.''.

SEC. 5. AUTHORITY TO CONSOLIDATE AND COMBINE REPORTS.

Section 5 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7604) is
amended by inserting ``, with the exception of the 5-year
strategy'' before the period at the end.

TITLE I--POLICY PLANNING AND COORDINATION

SEC. 101. DEVELOPMENT OF AN UPDATED, COMPREHENSIVE, 5-YEAR,
GLOBAL STRATEGY.

(a) Strategy.--Section 101(a) of the United States
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of
2003 (22 U.S.C. 7611(a)) is amended to read as follows:
``(a) Strategy.--The President shall establish a
comprehensive, integrated, 5-year strategy to expand and
improve efforts to combat global HIV/AIDS. This strategy
shall--
``(1) further strengthen the capability of the United
States to be an effective leader of the international
campaign against this disease and strengthen the capacities
of nations experiencing HIV/AIDS epidemics to combat this
disease;
``(2) maintain sufficient flexibility and remain responsive
to--
``(A) changes in the epidemic;
``(B) challenges facing partner countries in developing and
implementing an effective national response; and
``(C) evidence-based improvements and innovations in the
prevention, care, and treatment of HIV/AIDS;
``(3) situate United States efforts to combat HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria within the broader United States
global health and development agenda, establishing a roadmap
to link investments in specific disease programs to the
broader goals of strengthening health systems and
infrastructure and to integrate and coordinate HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, or malaria programs with other health or
development programs, as appropriate;
``(4) provide a plan to--
``(A) prevent 12,000,000 new HIV infections worldwide;
``(B) support--
``(i) the increase in the number of individuals with HIV/
AIDS receiving antiretroviral treatment above the goal
established under section 402(a)(3) and increased pursuant to
paragraphs (1) through (3) of section 403(d); and
``(ii) additional treatment through coordinated
multilateral efforts;
``(C) support care for 12,000,000 individuals infected with
or affected by HIV/AIDS, including 5,000,000 orphans and
vulnerable children affected by HIV/AIDS, with an emphasis on
promoting a comprehensive, coordinated system of services to
be integrated throughout the continuum of care;
``(D) help partner countries in the effort to achieve goals
of 80 percent access to counseling, testing, and treatment to
prevent the transmission of HIV from mother to child,
emphasizing a continuum of care model;
``(E) help partner countries to provide care and treatment
services to children with HIV in proportion to their
percentage within the HIV-infected population in each
country;
``(F) promote preservice training for health professionals
designed to strengthen the capacity of institutions to
develop and implement

[[Page 16406]]

policies for training health workers to combat HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria;
``(G) equip teachers with skills needed for HIV/AIDS
prevention and support for persons with, or affected by, HIV/
AIDS;
``(H) provide and share best practices for combating HIV/
AIDS with health professionals;
``(I) promote pediatric HIV/AIDS training for physicians,
nurses, and other health care workers, through public-private
partnerships if possible, including through the designation,
if appropriate, of centers of excellence for training in
pediatric HIV/AIDS prevention, care, and treatment in partner
countries; and
``(J) help partner countries to train and support retention
of health care professionals and paraprofessionals, with the
target of training and retaining at least 140,000 new health
care professionals and paraprofessionals with an emphasis on
training and in country deployment of critically needed
doctors and nurses and to strengthen capacities in developing
countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, to deliver
primary health care with the objective of helping countries
achieve staffing levels of at least 2.3 doctors, nurses, and
midwives per 1,000 population, as called for by the World
Health Organization;
``(5) include multisectoral approaches and specific
strategies to treat individuals infected with HIV/AIDS and to
prevent the further transmission of HIV infections, with a
particular focus on the needs of families with children
(including the prevention of mother-to-child transmission),
women, young people, orphans, and vulnerable children;
``(6) establish a timetable with annual global treatment
targets with country-level benchmarks for antiretroviral
treatment;
``(7) expand the integration of timely and relevant
research within the prevention, care, and treatment of HIV/
AIDS;
``(8) include a plan for program monitoring, operations
research, and impact evaluation and for the dissemination of
a best practices report to highlight findings;
``(9) support the in-country or intra-regional training,
preferably through public-private partnerships, of scientific
investigators, managers, and other staff who are capable of
promoting the systematic uptake of clinical research findings
and other evidence-based interventions into routine practice,
with the goal of improving the quality, effectiveness, and
local leadership of HIV/AIDS health care;
``(10) expand and accelerate research on and development of
HIV/AIDS prevention methods for women, including enhancing
inter-agency collaboration, staffing, and organizational
infrastructure dedicated to microbicide research;
``(11) provide for consultation with local leaders and
officials to develop prevention strategies and programs that
are tailored to the unique needs of each country and
community and targeted particularly toward those most at risk
of acquiring HIV infection;
``(12) make the reduction of HIV/AIDS behavioral risks a
priority of all prevention efforts by--
``(A) promoting abstinence from sexual activity and
encouraging monogamy and faithfulness;
``(B) encouraging the correct and consistent use of male
and female condoms and increasing the availability of, and
access to, these commodities;
``(C) promoting the delay of sexual debut and the reduction
of multiple concurrent sexual partners;
``(D) promoting education for discordant couples (where an
individual is infected with HIV and the other individual is
uninfected or whose status is unknown) about safer sex
practices;
``(E) promoting voluntary counseling and testing, addiction
therapy, and other prevention and treatment tools for illicit
injection drug users and other substance abusers;
``(F) educating men and boys about the risks of procuring
sex commercially and about the need to end violent behavior
toward women and girls;
``(G) supporting partner country and community efforts to
identify and address social, economic, or cultural factors,
such as migration, urbanization, conflict, gender-based
violence, lack of empowerment for women, and transportation
patterns, which directly contribute to the transmission of
HIV;
``(H) supporting comprehensive programs to promote
alternative livelihoods, safety, and social reintegration
strategies for commercial sex workers and their families;
``(I) promoting cooperation with law enforcement to
prosecute offenders of trafficking, rape, and sexual assault
crimes with the goal of eliminating such crimes; and
``(J) working to eliminate rape, gender-based violence,
sexual assault, and the sexual exploitation of women and
children;
``(13) include programs to reduce the transmission of HIV,
particularly addressing the heightened vulnerabilities of
women and girls to HIV in many countries; and
``(14) support other important means of preventing or
reducing the transmission of HIV, including--
``(A) medical male circumcision;
``(B) the maintenance of a safe blood supply;
``(C) promoting universal precautions in formal and
informal health care settings;
``(D) educating the public to recognize and to avoid risks
to contract HIV through blood exposures during formal and
informal health care and cosmetic services;
``(E) investigating suspected nosocomial infections to
identify and stop further nosocomial transmission; and
``(F) other mechanisms to reduce the transmission of HIV;
``(15) increase support for prevention of mother-to-child
transmission;
``(16) build capacity within the public health sector of
developing countries by improving health systems and public
health infrastructure and developing indicators to measure
changes in broader public health sector capabilities;
``(17) increase the coordination of HIV/AIDS programs with
development programs;
``(18) provide a framework for expanding or developing
existing or new country or regional programs, including--
``(A) drafting compacts or other agreements, as
appropriate;
``(B) establishing criteria and objectives for such
compacts and agreements; and
``(C) promoting sustainability;
``(19) provide a plan for national and regional priorities
for resource distribution and a global investment plan by
region;
``(20) provide a plan to address the immediate and ongoing
needs of women and girls, which--
``(A) addresses the vulnerabilities that contribute to
their elevated risk of infection;
``(B) includes specific goals and targets to address these
factors;
``(C) provides clear guidance to field missions to
integrate gender across prevention, care, and treatment
programs;
``(D) sets forth gender-specific indicators to monitor
progress on outcomes and impacts of gender programs;
``(E) supports efforts in countries in which women or
orphans lack inheritance rights and other fundamental
protections to promote the passage, implementation, and
enforcement of such laws;
``(F) supports life skills training, especially among women
and girls, with the goal of reducing vulnerabilities to HIV/
AIDS;
``(G) addresses and prevents gender-based violence; and
``(H) addresses the posttraumatic and psychosocial
consequences and provides postexposure prophylaxis protecting
against HIV infection to victims of gender-based violence and
rape;
``(21) provide a plan to--
``(A) determine the local factors that may put men and boys
at elevated risk of contracting or transmitting HIV;
``(B) address male norms and behaviors to reduce these
risks, including by reducing alcohol abuse;
``(C) promote responsible male behavior; and
``(D) promote male participation and leadership at the
community level in efforts to promote HIV prevention, reduce
stigma, promote participation in voluntary counseling and
testing, and provide care, treatment, and support for persons
with HIV/AIDS;
``(22) provide a plan to address the vulnerabilities and
needs of orphans and children who are vulnerable to, or
affected by, HIV/AIDS;
``(23) encourage partner countries to develop health care
curricula and promote access to training tailored to
individuals receiving services through, or exiting from,
existing programs geared to orphans and vulnerable children;
``(24) provide a framework to work with international
actors and partner countries toward universal access to HIV/
AIDS prevention, treatment, and care programs, recognizing
that prevention is of particular importance;
``(25) enhance the coordination of United States bilateral
efforts to combat global HIV/AIDS with other major public and
private entities;
``(26) enhance the attention given to the national
strategic HIV/AIDS plans of countries receiving United States
assistance by--
``(A) reviewing the planning and programmatic decisions
associated with that assistance; and
``(B) helping to strengthen such national strategies, if
necessary;
``(27) support activities described in the Global Plan to
Stop TB, including--
``(A) expanding and enhancing the coverage of the Directly
Observed Treatment Short-course (DOTS) in order to treat
individuals infected with tuberculosis and HIV, including
multi-drug resistant or extensively drug resistant
tuberculosis; and
``(B) improving coordination and integration of HIV/AIDS
and tuberculosis programming;
``(28) ensure coordination between the Global AIDS
Coordinator and the Malaria Coordinator and address issues of
comorbidity between HIV/AIDS and malaria; and
``(29) include a longer term estimate of the projected
resource needs, progress toward greater sustainability and
country ownership of HIV/AIDS programs, and the anticipated
role of the United States in the global effort to combat HIV/
AIDS during the 10-year period beginning on October 1,
2013.''.
(b) Report.--Section 101(b) of such Act (22 U.S.C. 7611(b))
is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Report.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than October 1, 2009, the
President shall submit a report to the appropriate
congressional committees that sets forth the strategy
described in subsection (a).
``(2) Contents.--The report required under paragraph (1)
shall include a discussion of the following elements:
``(A) The purpose, scope, methodology, and general and
specific objectives of the strategy.
``(B) The problems, risks, and threats to the successful
pursuit of the strategy.
``(C) The desired goals, objectives, activities, and
outcome-related performance measures of the strategy.

[[Page 16407]]

``(D) A description of future costs and resources needed to
carry out the strategy.
``(E) A delineation of United States Government roles,
responsibility, and coordination mechanisms of the strategy.
``(F) A description of the strategy--
``(i) to promote harmonization of United States assistance
with that of other international, national, and private
actors as elucidated in the `Three Ones'; and
``(ii) to address existing challenges in harmonization and
alignment.
``(G) A description of the manner in which the strategy
will--
``(i) further the development and implementation of the
national multisectoral strategic HIV/AIDS frameworks of
partner governments; and
``(ii) enhance the centrality, effectiveness, and
sustainability of those national plans.
``(H) A description of how the strategy will seek to
achieve the specific targets described in subsection (a) and
other targets, as appropriate.
``(I) A description of, and rationale for, the timetable
for annual global treatment targets with country-level
estimates of numbers of persons in need of antiretroviral
treatment, country-level benchmarks for United States support
for assistance for antiretroviral treatment, and numbers of
persons enrolled in antiretroviral treatment programs
receiving United States support. If global benchmarks are not
achieved within the reporting period, the report shall
include a description of steps being taken to ensure that
global benchmarks will be achieved and a detailed breakdown
and justification of spending priorities in countries in
which benchmarks are not being met, including a description
of other donor or national support for antiretroviral
treatment in the country, if appropriate.
``(J) A description of how operations research is addressed
in the strategy and how such research can most effectively be
integrated into care, treatment, and prevention activities in
order to--
``(i) improve program quality and efficiency;
``(ii) ascertain cost effectiveness;
``(iii) ensure transparency and accountability;
``(iv) assess population-based impact;
``(v) disseminate findings and best practices; and
``(vi) optimize delivery of services.
``(K) An analysis of United States-assisted strategies to
prevent the transmission of HIV/AIDS, including methodologies
to promote abstinence, monogamy, faithfulness, the correct
and consistent use of male and female condoms, reductions in
concurrent sexual partners, and delay of sexual debut, and of
intended monitoring and evaluation approaches to measure the
effectiveness of prevention programs and ensure that they are
targeted to appropriate audiences.
``(L) Within the analysis required under subparagraph (K),
an examination of additional planned means of preventing the
transmission of HIV including medical male circumcision,
maintenance of a safe blood supply, public education about
risks to acquire HIV infection from blood exposures,
promotion of universal precautions, investigation of
suspected nosocomial infections and other tools.
``(M) A description of efforts to assist partner country
and community to identify and address social, economic, or
cultural factors, such as migration, urbanization, conflict,
gender-based violence, lack of empowerment for women, and
transportation patterns, which directly contribute to the
transmission of HIV.
``(N) A description of the specific targets, goals, and
strategies developed to address the needs and vulnerabilities
of women and girls to HIV/AIDS, including--
``(i) activities directed toward men and boys;
``(ii) activities to enhance educational, microfinance, and
livelihood opportunities for women and girls;
``(iii) activities to promote and protect the legal
empowerment of women, girls, and orphans and vulnerable
children;
``(iv) programs targeted toward gender-based violence and
sexual coercion;
``(v) strategies to meet the particular needs of
adolescents;
``(vi) assistance for victims of rape, sexual abuse,
assault, exploitation, and trafficking; and
``(vii) programs to prevent alcohol abuse.
``(O) A description of strategies to address male norms and
behaviors that contribute to the transmission of HIV, to
promote responsible male behavior, and to promote male
participation and leadership in HIV/AIDS prevention, care,
treatment, and voluntary counseling and testing.
``(P) A description of strategies--
``(i) to address the needs of orphans and vulnerable
children, including an analysis of--

``(I) factors contributing to children's vulnerability to
HIV/AIDS; and
``(II) vulnerabilities caused by the impact of HIV/AIDS on
children and their families; and

``(ii) in areas of higher HIV/AIDS prevalence, to promote a
community-based approach to vulnerability, maximizing
community input into determining which children participate.
``(Q) A description of capacity-building efforts undertaken
by countries themselves, including adherents of the Abuja
Declaration and an assessment of the impact of International
Monetary Fund macroeconomic and fiscal policies on national
and donor investments in health.
``(R) A description of the strategy to--
``(i) strengthen capacity building within the public health
sector;
``(ii) improve health care in those countries;
``(iii) help countries to develop and implement national
health workforce strategies;
``(iv) strive to achieve goals in training, retaining, and
effectively deploying health staff;
``(v) promote the use of codes of conduct for ethical
recruiting practices for health care workers; and
``(vi) increase the sustainability of health programs.
``(S) A description of the criteria for selection,
objectives, methodology, and structure of compacts or other
framework agreements with countries or regional
organizations, including--
``(i) the role of civil society;
``(ii) the degree of transparency;
``(iii) benchmarks for success of such compacts or
agreements; and
``(iv) the relationship between such compacts or agreements
and the national HIV/AIDS and public health strategies and
commitments of partner countries.
``(T) A strategy to better coordinate HIV/AIDS assistance
with nutrition and food assistance programs.
``(U) A description of transnational or regional
initiatives to combat regionalized epidemics in highly
affected areas such as the Caribbean.
``(V) A description of planned resource distribution and
global investment by region.
``(W) A description of coordination efforts in order to
better implement the Stop TB Strategy and to address the
problem of coinfection of HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis and of
projected challenges or barriers to successful
implementation.
``(X) A description of coordination efforts to address
malaria and comorbidity with malaria and HIV/AIDS.''.
(c) Study.--Section 101(c) of such Act (22 U.S.C. 7611(c))
is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Study of Progress Toward Achievement of Policy
Objectives.--
``(1) Design and budget plan for data evaluation.--The
Global AIDS Coordinator shall enter into a contract with the
Institute of Medicine of the National Academies that provides
that not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment
of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Reauthorization Act of 2008, the Institute, in consultation
with the Global AIDS Coordinator and other relevant parties
representing the public and private sector, shall provide the
Global AIDS Coordinator with a design plan and budget for the
evaluation and collection of baseline and subsequent data to
address the elements set forth in paragraph (2)(B). The
Global AIDS Coordinator shall submit the budget and design
plan to the appropriate congressional committees.
``(2) Study.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 4 years after the date of
the enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United
States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, the Institute of
Medicine of the National Academies shall publish a study that
includes--
``(i) an assessment of the performance of United States-
assisted global HIV/AIDS programs; and
``(ii) an evaluation of the impact on health of prevention,
treatment, and care efforts that are supported by United
States funding, including multilateral and bilateral programs
involving joint operations.
``(B) Content.--The study conducted under this paragraph
shall include--
``(i) an assessment of progress toward prevention,
treatment, and care targets;
``(ii) an assessment of the effects on health systems,
including on the financing and management of health systems
and the quality of service delivery and staffing;
``(iii) an assessment of efforts to address gender-specific
aspects of HIV/AIDS, including gender related constraints to
accessing services and addressing underlying social and
economic vulnerabilities of women and men;
``(iv) an evaluation of the impact of treatment and care
programs on 5-year survival rates, drug adherence, and the
emergence of drug resistance;
``(v) an evaluation of the impact of prevention programs on
HIV incidence in relevant population groups;
``(vi) an evaluation of the impact on child health and
welfare of interventions authorized under this Act on behalf
of orphans and vulnerable children;
``(vii) an evaluation of the impact of programs and
activities authorized in this Act on child mortality; and
``(viii) recommendations for improving the programs
referred to in subparagraph (A)(i).
``(C) Methodologies.--Assessments and impact evaluations
conducted under the study shall utilize sound statistical
methods and techniques for the behavioral sciences, including
random assignment methodologies as feasible. Qualitative data
on process variables should be used for assessments and
impact evaluations, wherever possible.
``(3) Contract authority.--The Institute of Medicine may
enter into contracts or cooperative agreements or award
grants to conduct the study under paragraph (2).
``(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary
to carry out the study under this subsection.''.
(d) Report.--Section 101 of such Act, as amended by this
section, is further amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(d) Comptroller General Report.--

[[Page 16408]]

``(1) Report required.--Not later than 3 years after the
date of the enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde
United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, the
Comptroller General of the United States shall submit a
report on the global HIV/AIDS programs of the United States
to the appropriate congressional committees.
``(2) Contents.--The report required under paragraph (1)
shall include--
``(A) a description and assessment of the monitoring and
evaluation practices and policies in place for these
programs;
``(B) an assessment of coordination within Federal agencies
involved in these programs, examining both internal
coordination within these programs and integration with the
larger global health and development agenda of the United
States;
``(C) an assessment of procurement policies and practices
within these programs;
``(D) an assessment of harmonization with national
government HIV/AIDS and public health strategies as well as
other international efforts;
``(E) an assessment of the impact of global HIV/AIDS
funding and programs on other United States global health
programming; and
``(F) recommendations for improving the global HIV/AIDS
programs of the United States.
``(e) Best Practices Report.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United
States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, and annually thereafter,
the Global AIDS Coordinator shall publish a best practices
report that highlights the programs receiving financial
assistance from the United States that have the potential for
replication or adaption, particularly at a low cost, across
global AIDS programs, including those that focus on both
generalized and localized epidemics.
``(2) Dissemination of findings.--
``(A) Publication on internet website.--The Global AIDS
Coordinator shall disseminate the full findings of the annual
best practices report on the Internet website of the Office
of the Global AIDS Coordinator.
``(B) Dissemination guidance.--The Global AIDS Coordinator
shall develop guidance to ensure timely submission and
dissemination of significant information regarding best
practices with respect to global AIDS programs.
``(f) Inspectors General.--
``(1) Oversight plan.--
``(A) Development.--The Inspectors General of the
Department of State and Broadcasting Board of Governors, the
Department of Health and Human Services, and the United
States Agency for International Development shall jointly
develop 5 coordinated annual plans for oversight activity in
each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2013, with regard to
the programs authorized under this Act and sections 104A,
104B, and 104C of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2151b-2, 2151b-3, and 2151b-4).
``(B) Contents.--The plans developed under subparagraph (A)
shall include a schedule for financial audits, inspections,
and performance reviews, as appropriate.
``(C) Deadline.--
``(i) Initial plan.--The first plan developed under
subparagraph (A) shall be completed not later than the later
of--

``(I) September 1, 2008; or
``(II) 60 days after the date of the enactment of the Tom
Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization
Act of 2008.

``(ii) Subsequent plans.--Each of the last four plans
developed under subparagraph (A) shall be completed not later
than 30 days before each of the fiscal years 2010 through
2013, respectively.
``(2) Coordination.--In order to avoid duplication and
maximize efficiency, the Inspectors General described in
paragraph (1) shall coordinate their activities with--
``(A) the Government Accountability Office; and
``(B) the Inspectors General of the Department of Commerce,
the Department of Defense, the Department of Labor, and the
Peace Corps, as appropriate, pursuant to the 2004 Memorandum
of Agreement Coordinating Audit Coverage of Programs and
Activities Implementing the President's Emergency Plan for
AIDS Relief, or any successor agreement.
``(3) Funding.--The Global AIDS Coordinator and the
Coordinator of the United States Government Activities to
Combat Malaria Globally shall make available necessary funds
not exceeding $15,000,000 during the 5-year period beginning
on October 1, 2008 to the Inspectors General described in
paragraph (1) for the audits, inspections, and reviews
described in that paragraph.''.
(e) Annual Study; Message.--Section 101 of such Act, as
amended by this section, is further amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(g) Annual Study.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than September 30, 2009, and
annually thereafter through September 30, 2013, the Global
AIDS Coordinator shall complete a study of treatment
providers that--
``(A) represents a range of countries and service
environments;
``(B) estimates the per-patient cost of antiretroviral HIV/
AIDS treatment and the care of people with HIV/AIDS not
receiving antiretroviral treatment, including a comparison of
the costs for equivalent services provided by programs not
receiving assistance under this Act;
``(C) estimates per-patient costs across the program and in
specific categories of service providers, including--
``(i) urban and rural providers;
``(ii) country-specific providers; and
``(iii) other subcategories, as appropriate.
``(2) Publication.--Not later than 90 days after the
completion of each study under paragraph (1), the Global AIDS
Coordinator shall make the results of such study available on
a publicly accessible Web site.
``(h) Message.--The Global AIDS Coordinator shall develop a
message, to be prominently displayed by each program
receiving funds under this Act, that--
``(1) demonstrates that the program is a commitment by
citizens of the United States to the global fight against
HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria; and
``(2) enhances awareness by program recipients that the
program is an effort on behalf of the citizens of the United
States.''.

SEC. 102. INTERAGENCY WORKING GROUP.

Section 1(f)(2) of the State Department Basic Authorities
Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2651a(f)(2)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``, partner country
finance, health, and other relevant ministries,'' after
``community based organizations)'' each place it appears;
(2) in subparagraph (B)(ii)--
(A) by striking subclauses (IV) and (V);
(B) by inserting after subclause (III) the following:

``(IV) Establishing an interagency working group on HIV/
AIDS headed by the Global AIDS Coordinator and comprised of
representatives from the United States Agency for
International Development and the Department of Health and
Human Services, for the purposes of coordination of
activities relating to HIV/AIDS, including--

``(aa) meeting regularly to review progress in partner
countries toward HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care
objectives;
``(bb) participating in the process of identifying
countries to consider for increased assistance based on the
epidemiology of HIV/AIDS in those countries, including clear
evidence of a public health threat, as well as government
commitment to address the HIV/AIDS problem, relative need,
and coordination and joint planning with other significant
actors;
``(cc) assisting the Coordinator in the evaluation,
execution, and oversight of country operational plans;
``(dd) reviewing policies that may be obstacles to reaching
targets set forth for HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and
care; and
``(ee) consulting with representatives from additional
relevant agencies, including the National Institutes of
Health, the Health Resources and Services Administration, the
Department of Labor, the Department of Agriculture, the
Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Peace Corps, and the
Department of Defense.

``(V) Coordinating overall United States HIV/AIDS policy
and programs, including ensuring the coordination of relevant
executive branch agency activities in the field, with efforts
led by partner countries, and with the assistance provided by
other relevant bilateral and multilateral aid agencies and
other donor institutions to promote harmonization with other
programs aimed at preventing and treating HIV/AIDS and other
health challenges, improving primary health, addressing food
security, promoting education and development, and
strengthening health care systems.'';

(C) by redesignating subclauses (VII) and VIII) as
subclauses (IX) and (XII), respectively;
(D) by inserting after subclause (VI) the following:

``(VII) Holding annual consultations with nongovernmental
organizations in partner countries that provide services to
improve health, and advocating on behalf of the individuals
with HIV/AIDS and those at particular risk of contracting
HIV/AIDS, including organizations with members who are living
with HIV/AIDS.
``(VIII) Ensuring, through interagency and international
coordination, that HIV/AIDS programs of the United States are
coordinated with, and complementary to, the delivery of
related global health, food security, development, and
education.'';

(E) in subclause (IX), as redesignated by subparagraph
(C)--
(i) by inserting ``Vietnam,'' after ``Uganda,'';
(ii) by inserting after ``of 2003'' the following: ``and
other countries in which the United States is implementing
HIV/AIDS programs as part of its foreign assistance
program''; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following: ``In designating
additional countries under this subparagraph, the President
shall give priority to those countries in which there is a
high prevalence of HIV or risk of significantly increasing
incidence of HIV within the general population and inadequate
financial means within the country.'';
(F) by inserting after subclause (IX), as redesignated by
subparagraph (C), the following:

``(X) Working with partner countries in which the HIV/AIDS
epidemic is prevalent among injection drug users to
establish, as a national priority, national HIV/AIDS
prevention programs.
``(XI) Working with partner countries in which the HIV/AIDS
epidemic is prevalent among individuals involved in
commercial sex acts to establish, as a national priority,
national

[[Page 16409]]

prevention programs, including education, voluntary testing,
and counseling, and referral systems that link HIV/AIDS
programs with programs to eradicate trafficking in persons
and support alternatives to prostitution.'';

(G) in subclause (XII), as redesignated by subparagraph
(C), by striking ``funds section'' and inserting ``funds
appropriated for HIV/ AIDS assistance pursuant to the
authorization of appropriations under section 401 of the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7671)''; and
(H) by adding at the end the following:

``(XIII) Publicizing updated drug pricing data to inform
the purchasing decisions of pharmaceutical procurement
partners.''.

SEC. 103. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

Section 102 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7612)
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress
that--
``(1) full-time country level coordinators, preferably with
management experience, should head each HIV/AIDS country team
for United States missions overseeing significant HIV/AIDS
programs;
``(2) foreign service nationals provide critically
important services in the design and implementation of United
States country-level HIV/AIDS programs and their skills and
experience as public health professionals should be
recognized within hiring and compensation practices; and
``(3) staffing levels for United States country-level HIV/
AIDS teams should be adequately maintained to fulfill
oversight and other obligations of the positions.''.

TITLE II--SUPPORT FOR MULTILATERAL FUNDS, PROGRAMS, AND PUBLIC-PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIPS

SEC. 201. VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS TO INTERNATIONAL VACCINE
FUNDS.

Section 302 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2222) is amended--
(1) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
``(d) Tuberculosis Vaccine Development Programs.--In
addition to amounts otherwise available under this section,
there are authorized to be appropriated to the President such
sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009
through 2013, which shall be used for United States
contributions to tuberculosis vaccine development programs,
which may include the Aeras Global TB Vaccine Foundation.'';
(2) in subsection (k)--
(A) by striking ``fiscal years 2004 through 2008'' and
inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through 2013''; and
(B) by striking ``Vaccine Fund'' and inserting ``GAVI
Fund''.
(3) in subsection (l), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''; and
(4) in subsection (m), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''.

SEC. 202. PARTICIPATION IN THE GLOBAL FUND TO FIGHT AIDS,
TUBERCULOSIS AND MALARIA.

(a) Findings; Sense of Congress.--Section 202(a) of the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7622(a)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(a) Findings; Sense of Congress.--
``(1) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
``(A) The establishment of the Global Fund in January 2002
is consistent with the general principles for an
international AIDS trust fund first outlined by Congress in
the Global AIDS and Tuberculosis Relief Act of 2000 (Public
Law 106-264).
``(B) The Global Fund is an innovative financing mechanism
which--
``(i) has made progress in many areas in combating HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria; and
``(ii) represents the multilateral component of this Act,
extending United States efforts to more than 130 countries
around the world.
``(C) The Global Fund and United States bilateral
assistance programs--
``(i) are demonstrating increasingly effective
coordination, with each possessing certain comparative
advantages in the fight against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria; and
``(ii) often work most effectively in concert with each
other.
``(D) The United States Government--
``(i) is the largest supporter of the Global Fund in terms
of resources and technical support;
``(ii) made the founding contribution to the Global Fund;
and
``(iii) is fully committed to the success of the Global
Fund as a multilateral public-private partnership.
``(2) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of Congress
that--
``(A) transparency and accountability are crucial to the
long-term success and viability of the Global Fund;
``(B) the Global Fund has made significant progress toward
addressing concerns raised by the Government Accountability
Office by--
``(i) improving risk assessment and risk management
capabilities;
``(ii) providing clearer guidance for and oversight of
Local Fund Agents; and
``(iii) strengthening the Office of the Inspector General
for the Global Fund;
``(C) the provision of sufficient resources and authority
to the Office of the Inspector General for the Global Fund to
ensure that office has the staff and independence necessary
to carry out its mandate will be a measure of the commitment
of the Global Fund to transparency and accountability;
``(D) regular, publicly published financial, programmatic,
and reporting audits of the Fund, its grantees, and Local
Fund Agents are also important benchmarks of transparency;
``(E) the Global Fund should establish and maintain a
system to track--
``(i) the amount of funds disbursed to each subrecipient on
the grant's fiscal cycle; and
``(ii) the distribution of resources, by grant and
principal recipient, for prevention, care, treatment, drug
and commodity purchases, and other purposes;
``(F) relevant national authorities in recipient countries
should exempt from duties and taxes all products financed by
Global Fund grants and procured by any principal recipient or
subrecipient for the purpose of carrying out such grants;
``(G) the Global Fund, UNAIDS, and the Global AIDS
Coordinator should work together to standardize program
indicators wherever possible;
``(H) for purposes of evaluating total amounts of funds
contributed to the Global Fund under subsection (d)(4)(A)(i),
the timetable for evaluations of contributions from sources
other than the United States should take into account the
fiscal calendars of other major contributors; and
``(I) the Global Fund should not support activities
involving the `Affordable Medicines Facility-Malaria' or
similar entities pending compelling evidence of success from
pilot programs as evaluated by the Coordinator of United
States Government Activities to Combat Malaria Globally.''.
(b) Statement of Policy.--Section 202(b) of such Act is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(3) Statement of policy.--The United States Government
regards the imposition by recipient countries of taxes or
tariffs on goods or services provided by the Global Fund,
which are supported through public and private donations,
including the substantial contribution of the American
people, as inappropriate and inconsistent with standards of
good governance. The Global AIDS Coordinator or other
representatives of the United States Government shall work
with the Global Fund to dissuade governments from imposing
such duties, tariffs, or taxes.''.
(c) United States Financial Participation.--Section 202(d)
of such Act (22 U.S.C. 7622(d)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``$1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal
year 2004 beginning on January 1, 2004'' and inserting
``$2,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2009,''; and
(B) by striking ``the fiscal years 2005-2008'' and
inserting ``each of the fiscal years 2010 through 2013'';
(2) in paragraph (4)--
(A) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in clause (i), by striking ``fiscal years 2004 through
2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through 2013'';
(ii) in clause (ii)--

(I) by striking ``during any of the fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``during any of the fiscal years
2009 through 2013''; and
(II) by adding at the end the following: ``The President
may waive the application of this clause with respect to
assistance for Sudan that is overseen by the Southern Country
Coordinating Mechanism, including Southern Sudan, Southern
Kordofan, Blue Nile State, and Abyei, if the President
determines that the national interest or humanitarian reasons
justify such a waiver. The President shall publish each
waiver of this clause in the Federal Register and, not later
than 15 days before the waiver takes effect, shall consult
with the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives
regarding the proposed waiver.''; and

(iii) in clause (vi)--

(I) by striking ``for the purposes'' and inserting ``For
the purposes'';
(II) by striking ``fiscal years 2004 through 2008'' and
inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through 2013''; and
(III) by striking ``prior to fiscal year 2004'' and
inserting ``before fiscal year 2009'';

(B) in subparagraph (B)(iv), by striking ``fiscal years
2004 through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''; and
(C) in subparagraph (C)(ii), by striking ``Committee on
International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) Withholding funds.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this Act, 20 percent of the amounts appropriated
pursuant to this Act for a contribution to support the Global
Fund for each of the fiscal years 2010 through 2013 shall be
withheld from obligation to the Global Fund until the
Secretary of State certifies to the appropriate congressional
committees that the Global Fund--
``(A) has established an evaluation framework for the
performance of Local Fund Agents (referred to in this
paragraph as `LFAs');
``(B) is undertaking a systematic assessment of the
performance of LFAs;
``(C) has adopted, and is implementing, a policy to publish
on a publicly available Web site--
``(i) grant performance reviews;
``(ii) all reports of the Inspector General of the Global
Fund, in a manner that is consistent

[[Page 16410]]

with the Policy for Disclosure of Reports of the Inspector
General, approved at the 16th Meeting of the Board of the
Global Fund;
``(iii) decision points of the Board of the Global Fund;
``(iv) reports from Board committees to the Board; and
``(v) a regular collection and analysis of performance data
and funding of grants of the Global Fund, which shall cover
all principal recipients and all subrecipients;
``(D) is maintaining an independent, well-staffed Office of
the Inspector General that--
``(i) reports directly to the Board of the Global Fund; and
``(ii) compiles regular, publicly published audits of
financial, programmatic, and reporting aspects of the Global
Fund, its grantees, and LFAs;
``(E) has established, and is reporting publicly on,
standard indicators for all program areas;
``(F) has established a methodology to track and is
publicly reporting on--
``(i) all subrecipients and the amount of funds disbursed
to each subrecipient on the grant's fiscal cycle; and
``(ii) the distribution of resources, by grant and
principal recipient, for prevention, care, treatment, drugs
and commodities purchase, and other purposes;
``(G) has established a policy on tariffs imposed by
national governments on all goods and services financed by
the Global Fund;
``(H) through its Secretariat, has taken meaningful steps
to prevent national authorities in recipient countries from
imposing taxes or tariffs on goods or services provided by
the Fund;
``(I) is maintaining its status as a financing institution
focused on programs directly related to HIV/AIDS, malaria,
and tuberculosis;
``(J) is maintaining and making progress on--
``(i) sustaining its multisectoral approach, through
country coordinating mechanisms; and
``(ii) the implementation of grants, as reflected in the
proportion of resources allocated to different sectors,
including governments, civil society, and faith- and
community-based organizations; and
``(K) has established procedures providing access by the
Office of Inspector General of the Department of State and
Broadcasting Board of Governors, as cognizant Inspector
General, and the Inspector General of the Health and Human
Services and the Inspector General of the United States
Agency for International Development, to Global Fund
financial data, and other information relevant to United
States contributions (as determined by the Inspector General
in consultation with the Global AIDS Coordinator).
``(6) Summaries of board decisions and united states
positions.--Following each meeting of the Board of the Global
Fund, the Coordinator of United States Government Activities
to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally shall report on the public
website of the Coordinator a summary of Board decisions and
how the United States Government voted and its positions on
such decisions.''.

SEC. 203. RESEARCH ON METHODS FOR WOMEN TO PREVENT
TRANSMISSION OF HIV AND OTHER DISEASES.

(a) Sense of Congress.--Congress recognizes the need and
urgency to expand the range of interventions for preventing
the transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV),
including nonvaccine prevention methods that can be
controlled by women.
(b) NIH Office of AIDS Research.--Subpart 1 of part D of
title XXIII of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
300cc-40 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 2351
the following:

``SEC. 2351A. MICROBICIDE RESEARCH.

``(a) Federal Strategic Plan.--The Director of the Office
shall--
``(1) expedite the implementation of the Federal strategic
plans required by section 403(a) of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 283(a)(5)) regarding the conduct and support
of research on, and development of, a microbicide to prevent
the transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus; and
``(2) review and, as appropriate, revise such plan to
prioritize funding and activities relative to their
scientific urgency and potential market readiness.
``(b) Coordination.--In implementing, reviewing, and
prioritizing elements of the plan described in subsection
(a), the Director of the Office shall consult, as
appropriate, with--
``(1) representatives of other Federal agencies involved in
microbicide research, including the Coordinator of United
States Government Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally, the
Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
and the Administrator of the United States Agency for
International Development;
``(2) the microbicide research and development community;
and
``(3) health advocates.''.
(c) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases.--Subpart 6 of part C of title IV of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285f et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 447C. MICROBICIDE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

``The Director of the Institute, acting through the head of
the Division of AIDS, shall, consistent with the peer-review
process of the National Institutes of Health, carry out
research on, and development of, safe and effective methods
for use by women to prevent the transmission of the human
immunodeficiency virus, which may include microbicides.''.
(d) CDC.--Part B of title III of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 243 et seq.) is amended by inserting after
section 317S the following:

``SEC. 317T. MICROBICIDE RESEARCH.

``(a) In General.--The Director of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention is strongly encouraged to fully
implement the Centers' microbicide agenda to support research
and development of microbicides for use to prevent the
transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus.
``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary
for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to carry out this
section.''.
(e) United States Agency for International Development.--
(1) In general.--The Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development, in coordination with
the Coordinator of United States Government Activities to
Combat HIV/AIDS Globally, may facilitate availability and
accessibility of microbicides, provided that such
pharmaceuticals are approved, tentatively approved, or
otherwise authorized for use by--
(A) the Food and Drug Administration;
(B) a stringent regulatory agency acceptable to the
Secretary of Health and Human Services; or
(C) a quality assurance mechanism acceptable to the
Secretary of Health and Human Services.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--Of the amounts
authorized to be appropriated under section 401 of the United
States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7671) for HIV/AIDS assistance, there
are authorized to be appropriated to the President such sums
as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009 through
2013 to carry out this subsection.

SEC. 204. COMBATING HIV/AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA BY
STRENGTHENING HEALTH POLICIES AND HEALTH
SYSTEMS OF PARTNER COUNTRIES.

(a) In General.--Title II of the United States Leadership
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22
U.S.C. 7621) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 204. COMBATING HIV/AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA BY
STRENGTHENING HEALTH POLICIES AND HEALTH
SYSTEMS OF PARTNER COUNTRIES.

``(a) Statement of Policy.--It shall be the policy of the
United States Government--
``(1) to invest appropriate resources authorized under this
Act--
``(A) to carry out activities to strengthen HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria health policies and health systems;
and
``(B) to provide workforce training and capacity-building
consistent with the goals and objectives of this Act; and
``(2) to support the development of a sound policy
environment in partner countries to increase the ability of
such countries--
``(A) to maximize utilization of health care resources from
donor countries;
``(B) to increase national investments in health and
education and maximize the effectiveness of such investments;
``(C) to improve national HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria strategies;
``(D) to deliver evidence-based services in an effective
and efficient manner; and
``(E) to reduce barriers that prevent recipients of
services from achieving maximum benefit from such services.
``(b) Assistance To Improve Public Finance Management
Systems.--
``(1) In general.--Consistent with the authority under
section 129 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C.
2152), the Secretary of the Treasury, acting through the head
of the Office of Technical Assistance, is authorized to
provide assistance for advisors and partner country finance,
health, and other relevant ministries to improve the
effectiveness of public finance management systems in partner
countries to enable such countries to receive funding to
carry out programs to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria and to manage such programs.
``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--Of the amounts
authorized to be appropriated under section 401 for HIV/AIDS
assistance, there are authorized to be appropriated to the
Secretary of the Treasury such sums as may be necessary for
each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to carry out this
subsection.
``(c) Plan Required.--The Global AIDS Coordinator, in
collaboration with the Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development (USAID), shall develop
and implement a plan to combat HIV/AIDS by strengthening
health policies and health systems of partner countries as
part of USAID's `Health Systems 2020' project. Recognizing
that human and institutional capacity form the core of any
health care system that can sustain the fight against HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, the plan shall include a
strategy to encourage postsecondary educational institutions
in partner countries, particularly in Africa, in
collaboration with United States postsecondary educational
institutions, including historically black colleges and
universities, to develop such human and institutional
capacity and in the process further build their capacity to
sustain the fight against these diseases.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents for the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7601 note) is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 203, as added by
section 203 of this Act, the following:

[[Page 16411]]

``Sec. 204. Combating HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria by
strengthening health policies and health systems of
partner countries.''.

SEC. 205. FACILITATING EFFECTIVE OPERATIONS OF THE CENTERS
FOR DISEASE CONTROL.

Section 307 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
242l) is amended--
(1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
``(a) The Secretary may participate with other countries in
cooperative endeavors in--
``(1) biomedical research, health care technology, and the
health services research and statistical analysis authorized
under section 306 and title IX; and
``(2) biomedical research, health care services, health
care research, or other related activities in furtherance of
the activities, objectives or goals authorized under the Tom
Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization
Act of 2008.''; and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (7), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon at the end;
(B) by striking ``The Secretary may not, in the exercise of
his authority under this section, provide financial
assistance for the construction of any facility in any
foreign country.''
(C) in paragraph (8), by striking ``for any purpose.'' and
inserting ``for the purpose of any law administered by the
Office of Personnel Management;''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``(9) provide such funds by advance or reimbursement to the
Secretary of State, as may be necessary, to pay the costs of
acquisition, lease, construction, alteration, equipping,
furnishing or management of facilities outside of the United
States; and
``(10) in consultation with the Secretary of State, through
grant or cooperative agreement, make funds available to
public or nonprofit private institutions or agencies in
foreign countries in which the Secretary is participating in
activities described under subsection (a) to acquire, lease,
construct, alter, or renovate facilities in those
countries.''.
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) by striking ``1990'' and inserting ``1980''; and
(B) by inserting or ``or section 903 of the Foreign Service
Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 4083)'' after ``Code''.

SEC. 206. FACILITATING VACCINE DEVELOPMENT.

(a) Technical Assistance for Developing Countries.--The
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development, utilizing public-private partners, as
appropriate, and working in coordination with other
international development agencies, is authorized to
strengthen the capacity of developing countries' governmental
institutions to--
(1) collect evidence for informed decision-making and
introduction of new vaccines, including potential HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria vaccines, if such vaccines are
determined to be safe and effective;
(2) review protocols for clinical trials and impact studies
and improve the implementation of clinical trials; and
(3) ensure adequate supply chain and delivery systems.
(b) Advanced Market Commitments.--
(1) Purpose.--The purpose of this subsection is to improve
global health by requiring the United States to participate
in negotiations for advance market commitments for the
development of future vaccines, including potential vaccines
for HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria.
(2) Negotiation requirement.--The Secretary of the Treasury
shall enter into negotiations with the appropriate officials
of the International Bank of Reconstruction and Development
(World Bank) and the GAVI Alliance, the member nations of
such entities, and other interested parties to establish
advanced market commitments to purchase vaccines to combat
HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and other related infectious
diseases.
(3) Requirements.--In negotiating the United States
participation in programs for advanced market commitments,
the Secretary of the Treasury shall take into account whether
programs for advance market commitments include--
(A) legally binding contracts for product purchase that
include a fair market price for up to a maximum number of
treatments, creating a strong market incentive;
(B) clearly defined and transparent rules of program
participation for qualified developers and suppliers of the
product;
(C) clearly defined requirements for eligible vaccines to
ensure that they are safe and effective and can be delivered
in developing country contexts;
(D) dispute settlement mechanisms; and
(E) sufficient flexibility to enable the contracts to be
adjusted in accord with new information related to projected
market size and other factors while still maintaining the
purchase commitment at a fair price.
(4) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act--
(A) the Secretary of the Treasury shall submit a report to
the appropriate congressional committees on the status of the
United States negotiations to participate in programs for the
advanced market commitments under this subsection; and
(B) the President shall produce a comprehensive report,
written by a study group of qualified professionals from
relevant Federal agencies and initiatives, nongovernmental
organizations, and industry representatives, that sets forth
a coordinated strategy to accelerate development of vaccines
for infectious diseases, such as HIV/AIDS, malaria, and
tuberculosis, which includes--
(i) initiatives to create economic incentives for the
research, development, and manufacturing of vaccines for HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and other infectious diseases;
(ii) an expansion of public-private partnerships and the
leveraging of resources from other countries and the private
sector; and
(iii) efforts to maximize United States capabilities to
support clinical trials of vaccines in developing countries
and to address the challenges of delivering vaccines in
developing countries to minimize delays in access once
vaccines are available.

TITLE III--BILATERAL EFFORTS

Subtitle A--General Assistance and Programs

SEC. 301. ASSISTANCE TO COMBAT HIV/AIDS.

(a) Amendments to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.--
(1) Finding.--Section 104A(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-2(a)) is amended by inserting
``Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America'' after
``Caribbean,''.
(2) Policy.--Section 104A(b) of such Act is amended to read
as follows:
``(b) Policy.--
``(1) Objectives.--It is a major objective of the foreign
assistance program of the United States to provide assistance
for the prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS and the care of
those affected by the disease. It is the policy objective of
the United States, by 2013, to--
``(A) assist partner countries to--
``(i) prevent 12,000,000 new HIV infections worldwide;
``(ii) support--

``(I) the increase in the number of individuals with HIV/
AIDS receiving antiretroviral treatment above the goal
established under section 402(a)(3) and increased pursuant to
paragraphs (1) through (3) of section 403(d); and
``(II) additional treatment through coordinated
multilateral efforts;

``(iii) support care for 12,000,000 individuals infected
with or affected by HIV/AIDS, including 5,000,000 orphans and
vulnerable children affected by HIV/AIDS, with an emphasis on
promoting a comprehensive, coordinated system of services to
be integrated throughout the continuum of care;
``(iv) provide at least 80 percent of the target population
with access to counseling, testing, and treatment to prevent
the transmission of HIV from mother-to-child;
``(v) provide care and treatment services to children with
HIV in proportion to their percentage within the HIV-infected
population of a given partner country; and
``(vi) train and support retention of health care
professionals, paraprofessionals, and community health
workers in HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care, with the
target of providing such training to at least 140,000 new
health care professionals and paraprofessionals with an
emphasis on training and in country deployment of critically
needed doctors and nurses;
``(B) strengthen the capacity to deliver primary health
care in developing countries, especially in sub-Saharan
Africa;
``(C) support and help countries in their efforts to
achieve staffing levels of at least 2.3 doctors, nurses, and
midwives per 1,000 population, as called for by the World
Health Organization; and
``(D) help partner countries to develop independent,
sustainable HIV/AIDS programs.
``(2) Coordinated global strategy.--The United States and
other countries with the sufficient capacity should provide
assistance to countries in sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean,
Central Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America, and other
countries and regions confronting HIV/AIDS epidemics in a
coordinated global strategy to help address generalized and
concentrated epidemics through HIV/AIDS prevention,
treatment, care, monitoring and evaluation, and related
activities.
``(3) Priorities.--The United States Government's response
to the global HIV/AIDS pandemic and the Government's efforts
to help countries assume leadership of sustainable campaigns
to combat their local epidemics should place high priority
on--
``(A) the prevention of the transmission of HIV;
``(B) moving toward universal access to HIV/AIDS prevention
counseling and services;
``(C) the inclusion of cost sharing assurances that meet
the requirements under section 110; and
``(D) the inclusion of transition strategies to ensure
sustainability of such programs and activities, including
health care systems, under other international donor support,
or budget support by respective foreign governments.''.
(b) Authorization.--Section 104A(c) of such Act is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and other countries and
areas.'' and inserting ``Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin
America, and other countries and areas, particularly with
respect to refugee populations or those in postconflict
settings in such countries and areas with significant or
increasing HIV incidence rates.'';
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and other countries and
areas affected by the HIV/AIDS pandemic'' and inserting
``Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, and other
countries and areas affected by the HIV/AIDS pandemic,
particularly with respect to refugee populations or those in
post-conflict settings in such countries

[[Page 16412]]

and areas with significant or increasing HIV incidence
rates.''; and
(3) in paragraph (3)--
(A) by striking ``foreign countries'' and inserting
``partner countries, other international actors,''; and
(B) by inserting ``within the framework of the principles
of the Three Ones'' before the period at the end.
(c) Activities Supported.--Section 104A(d) of such Act is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) by inserting ``and multiple concurrent sexual
partnering,'' after ``casual sexual partnering''; and
(ii) by striking ``condoms'' and inserting ``male and
female condoms'';
(B) in subparagraph (B)--
(i) by striking ``programs that'' and inserting ``programs
that are designed with local input and''; and
(ii) by striking ``those organizations'' and inserting
``those locally based organizations'';
(C) in subparagraph (D), by inserting ``and promoting the
use of provider-initiated or `opt-out' voluntary testing in
accordance with World Health Organization guidelines'' before
the semicolon at the end;
(D) by redesignating subparagraphs (F), (G), and (H) as
subparagraphs (H), (I), and (J), respectively;
(E) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following:
``(F) assistance to--
``(i) achieve the goal of reaching 80 percent of pregnant
women for prevention and treatment of mother-to-child
transmission of HIV in countries in which the United States
is implementing HIV/AIDS programs by 2013; and
``(ii) promote infant feeding options and treatment
protocols that meet the most recent criteria established by
the World Health Organization;
``(G) medical male circumcision programs as part of
national strategies to combat the transmission of HIV/
AIDS;'';
(F) in subparagraph (I), as redesignated, by striking
``and'' at the end; and
(G) by adding at the end the following:
``(K) assistance for counseling, testing, treatment, care,
and support programs, including--
``(i) counseling and other services for the prevention of
reinfection of individuals with HIV/AIDS;
``(ii) counseling to prevent sexual transmission of HIV,
including--

``(I) life skills development for practicing abstinence and
faithfulness;
``(II) reducing the number of sexual partners;
``(III) delaying sexual debut; and
``(IV) ensuring correct and consistent use of condoms;

``(iii) assistance to engage underlying vulnerabilities to
HIV/AIDS, especially those of women and girls;
``(iv) assistance for appropriate HIV/AIDS education
programs and training targeted to prevent the transmission of
HIV among men who have sex with men;
``(v) assistance to provide male and female condoms;
``(vi) diagnosis and treatment of other sexually
transmitted infections;
``(vii) strategies to address the stigma and discrimination
that impede HIV/AIDS prevention efforts; and
``(viii) assistance to facilitate widespread access to
microbicides for HIV prevention, if safe and effective
products become available, including financial and technical
support for culturally appropriate introductory programs,
procurement, distribution, logistics management, program
delivery, acceptability studies, provider training, demand
generation, and postintroduction monitoring.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (C)--
(i) by inserting ``pain management,'' after ``opportunistic
infections,''; and
(ii) by striking the period at the end and inserting a
semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) as part of care and treatment of HIV/AIDS, assistance
(including prophylaxis and treatment) for common HIV/AIDS-
related opportunistic infections for free or at a rate at
which it is easily affordable to the individuals and
populations being served;
``(E) as part of care and treatment of HIV/AIDS, assistance
or referral to available and adequately resourced service
providers for nutritional support, including counseling and
where necessary the provision of commodities, for persons
meeting malnourishment criteria and their families;'';
(3) in paragraph (4)--
(A) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (D), by striking the period at the end
and inserting a semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(E) carrying out and expanding program monitoring, impact
evaluation research and analysis, and operations research and
disseminating data and findings through mechanisms to be
developed by the Coordinator of United States Government
Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally, in coordination with
the Director of the Centers for Disease Control, in order
to--
``(i) improve accountability, increase transparency, and
ensure the delivery of evidence-based services through the
collection, evaluation, and analysis of data regarding
gender-responsive interventions, disaggregated by age and
sex;
``(ii) identify and replicate effective models; and
``(iii) develop gender indicators to measure outcomes and
the impacts of interventions; and
``(F) establishing appropriate systems to--
``(i) gather epidemiological and social science data on
HIV; and
``(ii) evaluate the effectiveness of prevention efforts
among men who have sex with men, with due consideration to
stigma and risks associated with disclosure.'';
(4) in paragraph (5)--
(A) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D);
and
(B) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
``(C) Mechanism to ensure cost-effective drug purchasing.--
Subject to subparagraph (B), mechanisms to ensure that safe
and effective pharmaceuticals, including antiretrovirals and
medicines to treat opportunistic infections, are purchased at
the lowest possible price at which such pharmaceuticals may
be obtained in sufficient quantity on the world market,
provided that such pharmaceuticals are approved, tentatively
approved, or otherwise authorized for use by--
``(i) the Food and Drug Administration;
``(ii) a stringent regulatory agency acceptable to the
Secretary of Health and Human Services; or
``(iii) a quality assurance mechanism acceptable to the
Secretary of Health and Human Services.'';
(5) in paragraph (6)--
(A) by amending the paragraph heading to read as follows:
``(6) Related and coordinated activities.--'';
(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(C) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) coordinated or referred activities to--
``(i) enhance the clinical impact of HIV/AIDS care and
treatment; and
``(ii) ameliorate the adverse social and economic costs
often affecting AIDS-impacted families and communities
through the direct provision, as necessary, or through the
referral, if possible, of support services, including--

``(I) nutritional and food support;
``(II) safe drinking water and adequate sanitation;
``(III) nutritional counseling;
``(IV) income-generating activities and livelihood
initiatives;
``(V) maternal and child health care;
``(VI) primary health care;
``(VII) the diagnosis and treatment of other infectious or
sexually transmitted diseases;
``(VIII) substance abuse and treatment services; and
``(IX) legal services;

``(E) coordinated or referred activities to link programs
addressing HIV/AIDS with programs addressing gender-based
violence in areas of significant HIV prevalence to assist
countries in the development and enforcement of women's
health, children's health, and HIV/AIDS laws and policies
that--
``(i) prevent and respond to violence against women and
girls;
``(ii) promote the integration of screening and assessment
for gender-based violence into HIV/AIDS programming;
``(iii) promote appropriate HIV/AIDS counseling, testing,
and treatment into gender-based violence programs; and
``(iv) assist governments to develop partnerships with
civil society organizations to create networks for
psychosocial, legal, economic, or other support services;
``(F) coordinated or referred activities to--
``(i) address the frequent coinfection of HIV and
tuberculosis, in accordance with World Health Organization
guidelines;
``(ii) promote provider-initiated or `opt-out' HIV/AIDS
counseling and testing and appropriate referral for treatment
and care to individuals with tuberculosis or its symptoms,
particularly in areas with significant HIV prevalence; and
``(iii) strengthen programs to ensure that individuals
testing positive for HIV receive tuberculosis screening and
to improve laboratory capacities, infection control, and
adherence; and
``(G) activities to--
``(i) improve the effectiveness of national responses to
HIV/AIDS;
``(ii) strengthen overall health systems in high-prevalence
countries, including support for workforce training,
retention, and effective deployment, capacity building,
laboratory development, equipment maintenance and repair, and
public health and related public financial management systems
and operations; and
``(iii) encourage fair and transparent procurement
practices among partner countries; and
``(iv) promote in-country or intra-regional pediatric
training for physicians and other health professionals,
preferably through public-private partnerships involving
colleges and universities, with the goal of increasing
pediatric HIV workforce capacity.''; and
(6) by adding at the end the following:
``(8) Compacts and framework agreements.--The development
of compacts or framework agreements, tailored to local
circumstances, with national governments or regional
partnerships in countries with significant HIV/AIDS burdens
to promote host government commitment to deeper integration
of HIV/AIDS services into health systems, contribute to

[[Page 16413]]

health systems overall, and enhance sustainability,
including--
``(A) cost sharing assurances that meet the requirements
under section 110; and
``(B) transition strategies to ensure sustainability of
such programs and activities, including health care systems,
under other international donor support, or budget support by
respective foreign governments.''.
(d) Compacts and Framework Agreements.--Section 104A of
such Act is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (e) through (g) as
subsections (f) through (h); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
``(e) Compacts and Framework Agreements.--
``(1) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
``(A) The congressionally mandated Institute of Medicine
report entitled `PEPFAR Implementation: Progress and Promise'
states: `The next strategy [of the U.S. Global AIDS
Initiative] should squarely address the needs and challenges
involved in supporting sustainable country HIV/AIDS programs,
thereby transitioning from a focus on emergency relief.'.
``(B) One mechanism to promote the transition from an
emergency to a public health and development approach to HIV/
AIDS is through compacts or framework agreements between the
United States Government and each participating nation.
``(2) Elements.--Compacts on HIV/AIDS authorized under
subsection (d)(8) shall include the following elements:
``(A) Compacts whose primary purpose is to provide direct
services to combat HIV/AIDS are to be made between--
``(i) the United States Government; and
``(ii)(I) national or regional entities representing low-
income countries served by an existing United States Agency
for International Development or Department of Health and
Human Services presence or regional platform; or
``(II) countries or regions--

``(aa) experiencing significantly high HIV prevalence or
risk of significantly increasing incidence within the general
population;
``(bb) served by an existing United States Agency for
International Development or Department of Health and Human
Services presence or regional platform; and

``(cc) that have inadequate financial means within such
country or region.

``(B) Compacts whose primary purpose is to provide limited
technical assistance to a country or region connected to
services provided within the country or region--
``(i) may be made with other countries or regional entities
served by an existing United States Agency for International
Development or Department of Health and Human Services
presence or regional platform;
``(ii) shall require significant investments in HIV
prevention, care, and treatment services by the host country;
``(iii) shall be time-limited in terms of United States
contributions; and
``(iv) shall be made only upon prior notification to
Congress--

``(I) justifying the need for such compacts;
``(II) describing the expected investment by the country or
regional entity; and
``(III) describing the scope, nature, expected total United
States investment, and time frame of the limited technical
assistance under the compact and its intended impact.

``(C) Compacts shall include provisions to--
``(i) promote local and national efforts to reduce stigma
associated with HIV/AIDS; and
``(ii) work with and promote the role of civil society in
combating HIV/AIDS.
``(D) Compacts shall take into account the overall national
health and development and national HIV/AIDS and public
health strategies of each country.
``(E) Compacts shall contain--
``(i) consideration of the specific objectives that the
country and the United States expect to achieve during the
term of a compact;
``(ii) consideration of the respective responsibilities of
the country and the United States in the achievement of such
objectives;
``(iii) consideration of regular benchmarks to measure
progress toward achieving such objectives;
``(iv) an identification of the intended beneficiaries,
disaggregated by gender and age, and including information on
orphans and vulnerable children, to the maximum extent
practicable;
``(v) consideration of the methods by which the compact is
intended to--

``(I) address the factors that put women and girls at
greater risk of HIV/AIDS; and
``(II) strengthen elements such as the economic,
educational, and social status of women, girls, orphans, and
vulnerable children and the inheritance rights and safety of
such individuals;

``(vi) consideration of the methods by which the compact
will--

``(I) strengthen the health care capacity, including
factors such as the training, retention, deployment,
recruitment, and utilization of health care workers;
``(II) improve supply chain management; and
``(III) improve the health systems and infrastructure of
the partner country, including the ability of compact
participants to maintain and operate equipment transferred or
purchased as part of the compact;

``(vii) consideration of proposed mechanisms to provide
oversight;
``(viii) consideration of the role of civil society in the
development of a compact and the achievement of its
objectives;
``(ix) a description of the current and potential
participation of other donors in the achievement of such
objectives, as appropriate; and
``(x) consideration of a plan to ensure appropriate fiscal
accountability for the use of assistance.
``(F) For regional compacts, priority shall be given to
countries that are included in regional funds and programs in
existence as of the date of the enactment of the Tom Lantos
and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against
HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of
2008.
``(G) Amounts made available for compacts described in
subparagraphs (A) and (B) shall be subject to the inclusion
of--
``(i) cost sharing assurances that meet the requirements
under section 110; and
``(ii) transition strategies to ensure sustainability of
such programs and activities, including health care systems,
under other international donor support, and budget support
by respective foreign governments.
``(3) Local input.--In entering into a compact on HIV/AIDS
authorized under subsection (d)(8), the Coordinator of United
States Government Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally
shall seek to ensure that the government of a country--
``(A) takes into account the local perspectives of the
rural and urban poor, including women, in each country; and
``(B) consults with private and voluntary organizations,
including faith-based organizations, the business community,
and other donors in the country.
``(4) Congressional and public notification after entering
into a compact.--Not later than 10 days after entering into a
compact authorized under subsection (d)(8), the Global AIDS
Coordinator shall--
``(A) submit a report containing a detailed summary of the
compact and a copy of the text of the compact to--
``(i) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;
``(ii) the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate;
``(iii) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives; and
``(iv) the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives; and
``(B) publish such information in the Federal Register and
on the Internet website of the Office of the Global AIDS
Coordinator.''.
(e) Annual Report.--Section 104A(f) of such Act, as
redesignated, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Committee on
International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following:
``(C) a detailed breakdown of funding allocations, by
program and by country, for prevention activities; and
``(D) a detailed assessment of the impact of programs
established pursuant to such sections, including--
``(i)(I) the effectiveness of such programs in reducing--

``(aa) the transmission of HIV, particularly in women and
girls;
``(bb) mother-to-child transmission of HIV, including
through drug treatment and therapies, either directly or by
referral; and
``(cc) mortality rates from HIV/AIDS;

``(II) the number of patients receiving treatment for AIDS
in each country that receives assistance under this Act;
``(III) an assessment of progress towards the achievement
of annual goals set forth in the timetable required under the
5-year strategy established under section 101 of the United
States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Act of 2003 and, if annual goals are not being met, the
reasons for such failure; and
``(IV) retention and attrition data for programs receiving
United States assistance, including mortality and loss to
follow-up rates, organized overall and by country;
``(ii) the progress made toward--

``(I) improving health care delivery systems (including the
training of health care workers, including doctors, nurses,
midwives, pharmacists, laboratory technicians, and
compensated community health workers, and the use of codes of
conduct for ethical recruiting practices for health care
workers);
``(II) advancing safe working conditions for health care
workers; and
``(III) improving infrastructure to promote progress toward
universal access to HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care
by 2013;

``(iii) a description of coordination efforts with relevant
executive branch agencies to link HIV/AIDS clinical and
social services with non-HIV/AIDS services as part of the
United States health and development agenda;
``(iv) a detailed description of integrated HIV/AIDS and
food and nutrition programs and services, including--

``(I) the amount spent on food and nutrition support;
``(II) the types of activities supported; and
``(III) an assessment of the effectiveness of interventions
carried out to improve the health status of persons with HIV/
AIDS receiving food or nutritional support;

``(v) a description of efforts to improve harmonization, in
terms of relevant executive branch

[[Page 16414]]

agencies, coordination with other public and private
entities, and coordination with partner countries' national
strategic plans as called for in the `Three Ones';
``(vi) a description of--

``(I) the efforts of partner countries that were
signatories to the Abuja Declaration on HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis and Other Related Infectious Diseases to adhere
to the goals of such Declaration in terms of investments in
public health, including HIV/AIDS; and
``(II) a description of the HIV/AIDS investments of partner
countries that were not signatories to such Declaration;

``(vii) a detailed description of any compacts or framework
agreements reached or negotiated between the United States
and any partner countries, including a description of the
elements of compacts described in subsection (e);
``(viii) a description of programs serving women and girls,
including--

``(I) HIV/AIDS prevention programs that address the
vulnerabilities of girls and women to HIV/AIDS;
``(II) information on the number of individuals served by
programs aimed at reducing the vulnerabilities of women and
girls to HIV/AIDS and data on the types, objectives, and
duration of programs to address these issues;
``(III) information on programs to address the particular
needs of adolescent girls and young women; and
``(IV) programs to prevent gender-based violence or to
assist victims of gender based violence as part of, or in
coordination with, HIV/AIDS programs;

``(ix) a description of strategies, goals, programs, and
interventions to--

``(I) address the needs and vulnerabilities of youth
populations;
``(II) expand access among young men and women to evidence-
based HIV/AIDS health care services and HIV prevention
programs, including abstinence education programs; and
``(III) expand community-based services to meet the needs
of orphans and of children and adolescents affected by or
vulnerable to HIV/AIDS without increasing stigmatization;

``(x) a description of--

``(I) the specific strategies funded to ensure the
reduction of HIV infection among injection drug users;
``(II) the number of injection drug users, by country,
reached by such strategies; and
``(III) medication-assisted drug treatment for individuals
with HIV or at risk of HIV;

``(xi) a detailed description of program monitoring,
operations research, and impact evaluation research,
including--

``(I) the amount of funding provided for each research
type;
``(II) an analysis of cost-effectiveness models; and
``(III) conclusions regarding the efficiency,
effectiveness, and quality of services as derived from
previous or ongoing research and monitoring efforts;

``(xii) building capacity to identify, investigate, and
stop nosocomial transmission of infectious diseases,
including HIV and tuberculosis; and
``(xiii) a description of staffing levels of United States
government HIV/AIDS teams in countries with significant HIV/
AIDS programs, including whether or not a full-time
coordinator was on staff for the year.''.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 301(b) of the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7631(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''; and
(2) in paragraph (3), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''.
(g) Relationship To Assistance Programs To Enhance
Nutrition.--Section 301(c) of such Act is amended to read as
follows:
``(c) Food and Nutritional Support.--
``(1) In general.--As indicated in the report produced by
the Institute of Medicine, entitled `PEPFAR Implementation:
Progress and Promise', inadequate caloric intake has been
clearly identified as a principal reason for failure of
clinical response to antiretroviral therapy. In recognition
of the impact of malnutrition as a clinical health issue for
many persons living with HIV/AIDS that is often associated
with health and economic impacts on these individuals and
their families, the Global AIDS Coordinator and the
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development shall--
``(A) follow World Health Organization guidelines for HIV/
AIDS food and nutrition services;
``(B) integrate nutrition programs with HIV/AIDS activities
through effective linkages among the health, agricultural,
and livelihood sectors and establish additional services in
circumstances in which referrals are inadequate or
impossible;
``(C) provide, as a component of care and treatment
programs for persons with HIV/AIDS, food and nutritional
support to individuals infected with, and affected by, HIV/
AIDS who meet established criteria for nutritional support
(including clinically malnourished children and adults, and
pregnant and lactating women in programs in need of
supplemental support), including--
``(i) anthropometric and dietary assessment;
``(ii) counseling; and
``(iii) therapeutic and supplementary feeding;
``(D) provide food and nutritional support for children
affected by HIV/AIDS and to communities and households caring
for children affected by HIV/AIDS; and
``(E) in communities where HIV/AIDS and food insecurity are
highly prevalent, support programs to address these often
intersecting health problems through community-based
assistance programs, with an emphasis on sustainable
approaches.
``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--Of the amounts
authorized to be appropriated under section 401, there are
authorized to be appropriated to the President such sums as
may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009 through
2013 to carry out this subsection.''.
(h) Eligibility for Assistance.--Section 301(d) of such Act
is amended to read as follows:
``(d) Eligibility for Assistance.--An organization,
including a faith-based organization, that is otherwise
eligible to receive assistance under section 104A of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, under this Act, or under any
amendment made by this Act or by the Tom Lantos and Henry J.
Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, for
HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, or care--
``(1) shall not be required, as a condition of receiving
such assistance--
``(A) to endorse or utilize a multisectoral or
comprehensive approach to combating HIV/AIDS; or
``(B) to endorse, utilize, make a referral to, become
integrated with, or otherwise participate in any program or
activity to which the organization has a religious or moral
objection; and
``(2) shall not be discriminated against in the
solicitation or issuance of grants, contracts, or cooperative
agreements under such provisions of law for refusing to meet
any requirement described in paragraph (1).''.

SEC. 302. ASSISTANCE TO COMBAT TUBERCULOSIS.

(a) Policy.--Section 104B(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-3(b)) is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Policy.--It is a major objective of the foreign
assistance program of the United States to control
tuberculosis. In all countries in which the Government of the
United States has established development programs,
particularly in countries with the highest burden of
tuberculosis and other countries with high rates of
tuberculosis, the United States should support the objectives
of the Global Plan to Stop TB, including through achievement
of the following goals:
``(1) Reduce by half the tuberculosis death and disease
burden from the 1990 baseline.
``(2) Sustain or exceed the detection of at least 70
percent of sputum smear-positive cases of tuberculosis and
the successful treatment of at least 85 percent of the cases
detected in countries with established United States Agency
for International Development tuberculosis programs.
``(3) In support of the Global Plan to Stop TB, the
President shall establish a comprehensive, 5-year United
States strategy to expand and improve United States efforts
to combat tuberculosis globally, including a plan to
support--
``(A) the successful treatment of 4,500,000 new sputum
smear tuberculosis patients under DOTS programs by 2013,
primarily through direct support for needed services,
commodities, health workers, and training, and additional
treatment through coordinated multilateral efforts; and
``(B) the diagnosis and treatment of 90,000 new multiple
drug resistant tuberculosis cases by 2013, and additional
treatment through coordinated multilateral efforts.''.
(b) Priority To Stop TB Strategy.--Section 104B(e) of such
Act is amended to read as follows:
``(e) Priority To Stop TB Strategy.--In furnishing
assistance under subsection (c), the President shall give
priority to--
``(1) direct services described in the Stop TB Strategy,
including expansion and enhancement of Directly Observed
Treatment Short-course (DOTS) coverage, rapid testing,
treatment for individuals infected with both tuberculosis and
HIV, and treatment for individuals with multi-drug resistant
tuberculosis (MDR-TB), strengthening of health systems, use
of the International Standards for Tuberculosis Care by all
providers, empowering individuals with tuberculosis, and
enabling and promoting research to develop new diagnostics,
drugs, and vaccines, and program-based operational research
relating to tuberculosis; and
``(2) funding for the Global Tuberculosis Drug Facility,
the Stop Tuberculosis Partnership, and the Global Alliance
for TB Drug Development.''.
(c) Assistance for the World Health Organization and the
Stop Tuberculosis Partnership.--Section 104B of such Act is
amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (h); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following:
``(f) Assistance for the World Health Organization and the
Stop Tuberculosis Partnership.--In carrying out this section,
the President, acting through the Administrator of the United
States Agency for International Development, is authorized to
provide increased resources to the World Health Organization
and the Stop Tuberculosis Partnership to improve the capacity
of countries with high rates of tuberculosis and other
affected countries to implement the Stop TB Strategy and
specific strategies related to addressing multiple drug
resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) and extensively drug
resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB).''.
(d) Annual Report.--Section 104B of such Act is amended by
inserting after subsection (f), as added by subsection (c) of
this section, the following:

[[Page 16415]]

``(g) Annual Report.--The President shall submit an annual
report to Congress that describes the impact of United States
foreign assistance on efforts to control tuberculosis,
including--
``(1) the number of tuberculosis cases diagnosed and the
number of cases cured in countries receiving United States
bilateral foreign assistance for tuberculosis control
purposes;
``(2) a description of activities supported with United
States tuberculosis resources in each country, including a
description of how those activities specifically contribute
to increasing the number of people diagnosed and treated for
tuberculosis;
``(3) in each country receiving bilateral United States
foreign assistance for tuberculosis control purposes, the
percentage provided for direct tuberculosis services in
countries receiving United States bilateral foreign
assistance for tuberculosis control purposes;
``(4) a description of research efforts and clinical trials
to develop new tools to combat tuberculosis, including
diagnostics, drugs, and vaccines supported by United States
bilateral assistance;
``(5) the number of persons who have been diagnosed and
started treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in
countries receiving United States bilateral foreign
assistance for tuberculosis control programs;
``(6) a description of the collaboration and coordination
of United States anti-tuberculosis efforts with the World
Health Organization, the Global Fund, and other major public
and private entities within the Stop TB Strategy;
``(7) the constraints on implementation of programs posed
by health workforce shortages and capacities;
``(8) the number of people trained in tuberculosis control;
and
``(9) a breakdown of expenditures for direct patient
tuberculosis services, drugs and other commodities, drug
management, training in diagnosis and treatment, health
systems strengthening, research, and support costs.''.
(e) Definitions.--Section 104B(h) of such Act, as
redesignated by subsection (c), is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking the period at the end and
inserting the following: ``including--
``(A) low-cost and effective diagnosis, treatment, and
monitoring of tuberculosis;
``(B) a reliable drug supply;
``(C) a management strategy for public health systems;
``(D) health system strengthening;
``(E) promotion of the use of the International Standards
for Tuberculosis Care by all care providers;
``(F) bacteriology under an external quality assessment
framework;
``(G) short-course chemotherapy; and
``(H) sound reporting and recording systems.''; and
(2) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (6); and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:
``(5) Stop tb strategy.--The term `Stop TB Strategy' means
the 6-point strategy to reduce tuberculosis developed by the
World Health Organization, which is described in the Global
Plan to Stop TB 2006-2015: Actions for Life, a comprehensive
plan developed by the Stop TB Partnership that sets out the
actions necessary to achieve the millennium development goal
of cutting tuberculosis deaths and disease burden in half by
2015.''.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 302 (b) of
the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis,
and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7632(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``such sums as may be
necessary for each of the fiscal years 2004 through 2008''
and inserting ``a total of $4,000,000,000 for the 5-year
period beginning on October 1, 2008.''; and
(2) in paragraph (3), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013.''.

SEC. 303. ASSISTANCE TO COMBAT MALARIA.

(a) Amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.--
Section 104C(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2151-4(b)) is amended by inserting ``treatment,''
after ``control,''.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 303 of the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7633)
is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``such sums as may be
necessary for fiscal years 2004 through 2008'' and inserting
``$5,000,000,000 during the 5-year period beginning on
October 1, 2008''; and
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Statement of Policy.--Providing assistance for the
prevention, control, treatment, and the ultimate eradication
of malaria is--
``(1) a major objective of the foreign assistance program
of the United States; and
``(2) 1 component of a comprehensive United States global
health strategy to reduce disease burdens and strengthen
communities around the world.
``(d) Development of a Comprehensive 5-Year Strategy.--The
President shall establish a comprehensive, 5-year strategy to
combat global malaria that--
``(1) strengthens the capacity of the United States to be
an effective leader of international efforts to reduce
malaria burden;
``(2) maintains sufficient flexibility and remains
responsive to the ever-changing nature of the global malaria
challenge;
``(3) includes specific objectives and multisectoral
approaches and strategies to reduce the prevalence,
mortality, incidence, and spread of malaria;
``(4) describes how this strategy would contribute to the
United States' overall global health and development goals;
``(5) clearly explains how outlined activities will
interact with other United States Government global health
activities, including the 5-year global AIDS strategy
required under this Act;
``(6) expands public-private partnerships and leverage of
resources;
``(7) coordinates among relevant Federal agencies to
maximize human and financial resources and to reduce
duplication among these agencies, foreign governments, and
international organizations;
``(8) coordinates with other international entities,
including the Global Fund;
``(9) maximizes United States capabilities in the areas of
technical assistance and training and research, including
vaccine research; and
``(10) establishes priorities and selection criteria for
the distribution of resources based on factors such as--
``(A) the size and demographics of the population with
malaria;
``(B) the needs of that population;
``(C) the country's existing infrastructure; and
``(D) the ability to closely coordinate United States
Government efforts with national malaria control plans of
partner countries.''.

SEC. 304. MALARIA RESPONSE COORDINATOR.

Section 304 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7634)
is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 304. MALARIA RESPONSE COORDINATOR.

``(a) In General.--There is established within the United
States Agency for International Development a Coordinator of
United States Government Activities to Combat Malaria
Globally (referred to in this section as the `Malaria
Coordinator'), who shall be appointed by the President.
``(b) Authorities.--The Malaria Coordinator, acting through
nongovernmental organizations (including faith-based and
community-based organizations), partner country finance,
health, and other relevant ministries, and relevant executive
branch agencies as may be necessary and appropriate to carry
out this section, is authorized to--
``(1) operate internationally to carry out prevention,
care, treatment, support, capacity development, and other
activities to reduce the prevalence, mortality, and incidence
of malaria;
``(2) provide grants to, and enter into contracts and
cooperative agreements with, nongovernmental organizations
(including faith-based organizations) to carry out this
section; and
``(3) transfer and allocate executive branch agency funds
that have been appropriated for the purposes described in
paragraphs (1) and (2).
``(c) Duties.--
``(1) In general.--The Malaria Coordinator has primary
responsibility for the oversight and coordination of all
resources and international activities of the United States
Government relating to efforts to combat malaria.
``(2) Specific duties.--The Malaria Coordinator shall--
``(A) facilitate program and policy coordination of
antimalarial efforts among relevant executive branch agencies
and nongovernmental organizations by auditing, monitoring,
and evaluating such programs;
``(B) ensure that each relevant executive branch agency
undertakes antimalarial programs primarily in those areas in
which the agency has the greatest expertise, technical
capability, and potential for success;
``(C) coordinate relevant executive branch agency
activities in the field of malaria prevention and treatment;
``(D) coordinate planning, implementation, and evaluation
with the Global AIDS Coordinator in countries in which both
programs have a significant presence;
``(E) coordinate with national governments, international
agencies, civil society, and the private sector; and
``(F) establish due diligence criteria for all recipients
of funds appropriated by the Federal Government for malaria
assistance.
``(d) Assistance for the World Health Organization.--In
carrying out this section, the President may provide
financial assistance to the Roll Back Malaria Partnership of
the World Health Organization to improve the capacity of
countries with high rates of malaria and other affected
countries to implement comprehensive malaria control
programs.
``(e) Coordination of Assistance Efforts.--In carrying out
this section and in accordance with section 104C of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-4), the
Malaria Coordinator shall coordinate the provision of
assistance by working with--
``(1) relevant executive branch agencies, including--
``(A) the Department of State (including the Office of the
Global AIDS Coordinator);
``(B) the Department of Health and Human Services;
``(C) the Department of Defense; and
``(D) the Office of the United States Trade Representative;
``(2) relevant multilateral institutions, including--

[[Page 16416]]

``(A) the World Health Organization;
``(B) the United Nations Children's Fund;
``(C) the United Nations Development Programme;
``(D) the Global Fund;
``(E) the World Bank; and
``(F) the Roll Back Malaria Partnership;
``(3) program delivery and efforts to lift barriers that
would impede effective and comprehensive malaria control
programs; and
``(4) partner or recipient country governments and national
entities including universities and civil society
organizations (including faith- and community-based
organizations).
``(f) Research.--To carry out this section, the Malaria
Coordinator, in accordance with section 104C of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 1151d-4), shall ensure that
operations and implementation research conducted under this
Act will closely complement the clinical and program research
being undertaken by the National Institutes of Health. The
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention should advise the
Malaria Coordinator on priorities for operations and
implementation research and should be a key implementer of
this research.
``(g) Monitoring.--To ensure that adequate malaria controls
are established and implemented, the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention should advise the Malaria Coordinator
on monitoring, surveillance, and evaluation activities and be
a key implementer of such activities under this Act. Such
activities shall complement, rather than duplicate, the work
of the World Health Organization.
``(h) Annual Report.--
``(1) Submission.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United
States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, and annually thereafter,
the President shall submit a report to the appropriate
congressional committees that describes United States
assistance for the prevention, treatment, control, and
elimination of malaria.
``(2) Contents.--The report required under paragraph (1)
shall describe--
``(A) the countries and activities to which malaria
resources have been allocated;
``(B) the number of people reached through malaria
assistance programs, including data on children and pregnant
women;
``(C) research efforts to develop new tools to combat
malaria, including drugs and vaccines;
``(D) the collaboration and coordination of United States
antimalarial efforts with the World Health Organization, the
Global Fund, the World Bank, other donor governments, major
private efforts, and relevant executive agencies;
``(E) the coordination of United States antimalarial
efforts with the national malarial strategies of other donor
or partner governments and major private initiatives;
``(F) the estimated impact of United States assistance on
childhood mortality and morbidity from malaria;
``(G) the coordination of antimalarial efforts with broader
health and development programs; and
``(H) the constraints on implementation of programs posed
by health workforce shortages or capacities; and
``(I) the number of personnel trained as health workers and
the training levels achieved.''.

SEC. 305. AMENDMENT TO IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT.

Section 212(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(1)(A)(i)) is amended by striking ``,
which shall include infection with the etiologic agent for
acquired immune deficiency syndrome,'' and inserting a
semicolon.

SEC. 306. CLERICAL AMENDMENT.

Title III of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7631 et
seq.) is amended by striking the heading for subtitle B and
inserting the following:

``Subtitle B--Assistance for Women, Children, and Families''.

SEC. 307. REQUIREMENTS.

Section 312(b) of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C.
7652(b)) is amended by striking paragraphs (1), (2), and (3)
and inserting the following:
``(1) establish a target for the prevention and treatment
of mother-to-child transmission of HIV that, by 2013, will
reach at least 80 percent of pregnant women in those
countries most affected by HIV/AIDS in which the United
States has HIV/AIDS programs;
``(2) establish a target that, by 2013, the proportion of
children receiving care and treatment under this Act is
proportionate to their numbers within the population of HIV
infected individuals in each country;
``(3) integrate care and treatment with prevention of
mother-to-child transmission of HIV programs to improve
outcomes for HIV-affected women and families as soon as is
feasible and support strategies that promote successful
follow-up and continuity of care of mother and child;
``(4) expand programs designed to care for children
orphaned by, affected by, or vulnerable to HIV/AIDS;
``(5) ensure that women in prevention of mother-to-child
transmission of HIV programs are provided with, or referred
to, appropriate maternal and child services; and
``(6) develop a timeline for expanding access to more
effective regimes to prevent mother-to-child transmission of
HIV, consistent with the national policies of countries in
which programs are administered under this Act and the goal
of achieving universal use of such regimes as soon as
possible.''.

SEC. 308. ANNUAL REPORT ON PREVENTION OF MOTHER-TO-CHILD
TRANSMISSION OF HIV.

Section 313(a) of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C.
7653(a)) is amended by striking ``5 years'' and inserting
``10 years''.

SEC. 309. PREVENTION OF MOTHER-TO-CHILD TRANSMISSION EXPERT
PANEL.

Section 312 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7652)
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Prevention of Mother-to-Child Transmission Expert
Panel.--
``(1) Establishment.--The Global AIDS Coordinator shall
establish a panel of experts to be known as the Prevention of
Mother-to-Child Transmission Panel (referred to in this
subsection as the `Panel') to--
``(A) provide an objective review of activities to prevent
mother-to-child transmission of HIV; and
``(B) provide recommendations to the Global AIDS
Coordinator and to the appropriate congressional committees
for scale-up of mother-to-child transmission prevention
services under this Act in order to achieve the target
established in subsection (b)(1).
``(2) Membership.--The Panel shall be convened and chaired
by the Global AIDS Coordinator, who shall serve as a
nonvoting member. The Panel shall consist of not more than 15
members (excluding the Global AIDS Coordinator), to be
appointed by the Global AIDS Coordinator not later than 1
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, including--
``(A) 2 members from the Department of Health and Human
Services with expertise relating to the prevention of mother-
to-child transmission activities;
``(B) 2 members from the United States Agency for
International Development with expertise relating to the
prevention of mother-to-child transmission activities;
``(C) 2 representatives from among health ministers of
national governments of foreign countries in which programs
under this Act are administered;
``(D) 3 members representing organizations implementing
prevention of mother-to-child transmission activities under
this Act;
``(E) 2 health care researchers with expertise relating to
global HIV/AIDS activities; and
``(F) representatives from among patient advocate groups,
health care professionals, persons living with HIV/AIDS, and
non-governmental organizations with expertise relating to the
prevention of mother-to-child transmission activities, giving
priority to individuals in foreign countries in which
programs under this Act are administered.
``(3) Duties of panel.--The Panel shall--
``(A) assess the effectiveness of current activities in
reaching the target described in subsection (b)(1);
``(B) review scientific evidence related to the provision
of mother-to-child transmission prevention services,
including programmatic data and data from clinical trials;
``(C) review and assess ways in which the Office of the
United States Global AIDS Coordinator collaborates with
international and multilateral entities on efforts to prevent
mother-to-child transmission of HIV in affected countries;
``(D) identify barriers and challenges to increasing access
to mother-to-child transmission prevention services and
evaluate potential mechanisms to alleviate those barriers and
challenges;
``(E) identify the extent to which stigma has hindered
pregnant women from obtaining HIV counseling and testing or
returning for results, and provide recommendations to address
such stigma and its effects;
``(F) identify opportunities to improve linkages between
mother-to-child transmission prevention services and care and
treatment programs; and
``(G) recommend specific activities to facilitate reaching
the target described in subsection (b)(1).
``(4) Report.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date on
which the Panel is first convened, the Panel shall submit a
report containing a detailed statement of the
recommendations, findings, and conclusions of the Panel to
the appropriate congressional committees.
``(B) Availability.--The report submitted under
subparagraph (A) shall be made available to the public.
``(C) Consideration by coordinator.--The Coordinator
shall--
``(i) consider any recommendations contained in the report
submitted under subparagraph (A); and
``(ii) include in the annual report required under section
104A(f) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 a description
of the activities conducted in response to the
recommendations made by the Panel and an explanation of any
recommendations not implemented at the time of the report.
``(5) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to the Panel such sums as may
be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2011
to carry out this section.
``(6) Termination.--The Panel shall terminate on the date
that is 60 days after the date on which the Panel submits the
report to the appropriate congressional committees under
paragraph (4).''.

[[Page 16417]]

TITLE IV--FUNDING ALLOCATIONS

SEC. 401. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) In General.--Section 401(a) of the United States
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of
2003 (22 U.S.C. 7671(a)) is amended by striking
``$3,000,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2004 through
2008'' and inserting ``$48,000,000,000 for the 5-year period
beginning on October 1, 2008''.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that the appropriations authorized under section 401(a) of
the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis,
and Malaria Act of 2003, as amended by subsection (a), should
be allocated among fiscal years 2009 through 2013 in a manner
that allows for the appropriations to be gradually increased
in a manner that is consistent with program requirements,
absorptive capacity, and priorities set forth in such Act, as
amended by this Act.

SEC. 402. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

Section 402(b) of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C.
7672(b)) is amended by striking ``an effective distribution
of such amounts would be'' and all that follows through ``10
percent of such amounts'' and inserting ``10 percent should
be used''.

SEC. 403. ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.

Section 403 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7673)
is amended--
(1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
``(a) Balanced Funding Requirement.--
``(1) In general.--The Global AIDS Coordinator shall--
``(A) provide balanced funding for prevention activities
for sexual transmission of HIV/AIDS; and
``(B) ensure that activities promoting abstinence, delay of
sexual debut, monogamy, fidelity, and partner reduction are
implemented and funded in a meaningful and equitable way in
the strategy for each host country based on objective
epidemiological evidence as to the source of infections and
in consultation with the government of each host county
involved in HIV/AIDS prevention activities.
``(2) Prevention strategy.--
``(A) Establishment.--In carrying out paragraph (1), the
Global AIDS Coordinator shall establish an HIV sexual
transmission prevention strategy governing the expenditure of
funds authorized under this Act to prevent the sexual
transmission of HIV in any host country with a generalized
epidemic.
``(B) Report.--In each host country described in
subparagraph (A), if the strategy established under
subparagraph (A) provides less than 50 percent of the funds
described in subparagraph (A) for activities promoting
abstinence, delay of sexual debut, monogamy, fidelity, and
partner reduction, the Global AIDS Coordinator shall, not
later than 30 days after the issuance of this strategy,
report to the appropriate congressional committees on the
justification for this decision.
``(3) Exclusion.--Programs and activities that implement or
purchase new prevention technologies or modalities, such as
medical male circumcision, public education about risks to
acquire HIV infection from blood exposures, promoting
universal precautions, investigating suspected nosocomial
infections, pre-exposure pharmaceutical prophylaxis to
prevent transmission of HIV, or microbicides and programs and
activities that provide counseling and testing for HIV or
prevent mother-to-child prevention of HIV, shall not be
included in determining compliance with paragraph (2).
``(4) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States
Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Reauthorization Act of 2008, and annually thereafter as part
of the annual report required under section 104A(e) of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-2(e)), the
President shall--
``(A) submit a report on the implementation of paragraph
(2) for the most recently concluded fiscal year to the
appropriate congressional committees; and
``(B) make the report described in subparagraph (A)
available to the public.'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``fiscal years 2006 through 2008'' and
inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through 2013''; and
(B) by striking ``vulnerable children affected by'' and
inserting ``other children affected by, or vulnerable to,'';
and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Funding Allocation.--For each of the fiscal years
2009 through 2013, more than half of the amounts appropriated
for bilateral global HIV/AIDS assistance pursuant to section
401 shall be expended for--
``(1) antiretroviral treatment for HIV/AIDS;
``(2) clinical monitoring of HIV-seropositive people not in
need of antiretroviral treatment;
``(3) care for associated opportunistic infections;
``(4) nutrition and food support for people living with
HIV/AIDS; and
``(5) other essential HIV/AIDS-related medical care for
people living with HIV/AIDS.
``(d) Treatment, Prevention, and Care Goals.--For each of
the fiscal years 2009 through 2013--
``(1) the treatment goal under section 402(a)(3) shall be
increased above 2,000,000 by at least the percentage increase
in the amount appropriated for bilateral global HIV/AIDS
assistance for such fiscal year compared with fiscal year
2008;
``(2) any increase in the treatment goal under section
402(a)(3) above the percentage increase in the amount
appropriated for bilateral global HIV/AIDS assistance for
such fiscal year compared with fiscal year 2008 shall be
based on long-term requirements, epidemiological evidence,
the share of treatment needs being met by partner governments
and other sources of treatment funding, and other appropriate
factors;
``(3) the treatment goal under section 402(a)(3) shall be
increased above the number calculated under paragraph (1) by
the same percentage that the average United States Government
cost per patient of providing treatment in countries
receiving bilateral HIV/AIDS assistance has decreased
compared with fiscal year 2008; and
``(4) the prevention and care goals established in clauses
(i) and (iv) of section 104A(b)(1)(A) of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-2(b)(1)(A)) shall be
increased consistent with epidemiological evidence and
available resources.''.

TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

SEC. 501. MACHINE READABLE VISA FEES.

(a) Fee Increase.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law--
(1) not later than October 1, 2010, the Secretary of State
shall increase by $1 the fee or surcharge authorized under
section 140(a) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act,
Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (Public Law 103-236; 8 U.S.C. 1351
note) for processing machine readable nonimmigrant visas and
machine readable combined border crossing identification
cards and nonimmigrant visas; and
(2) not later than October 1, 2013, the Secretary shall
increase the fee or surcharge described in paragraph (1) by
an additional $1.
(b) Deposit of Amounts.--Notwithstanding section 140(a)(2)
of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994
and 1995 (Public Law 103-236; 8 U.S.C. 1351 note), fees
collected under the authority of subsection (a) shall be
deposited in the Treasury.

TITLE VI--EMERGENCY PLAN FOR INDIAN SAFETY AND HEALTH

SEC. 601. EMERGENCY PLAN FOR INDIAN SAFETY AND HEALTH.

(a) Establishment of Fund.--There is established in the
Treasury of the United States a fund, to be known as the
``Emergency Fund for Indian Safety and Health'' (referred to
in this section as the ``Fund''), consisting of such amounts
as are appropriated to the Fund under subsection (b).
(b) Transfers to Fund.--
(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
the Fund, out of funds of the Treasury not otherwise
appropriated, $2,000,000,000 for the 5-year period beginning
on October 1, 2008.
(2) Availability of amounts.--Amounts deposited in the Fund
under this section shall--
(A) be made available without further appropriation;
(B) be in addition to amounts made available under any
other provision of law; and
(C) remain available until expended.
(c) Expenditures From Fund.--On request by the Attorney
General, the Secretary of the Interior, or the Secretary of
Health and Human Services, the Secretary of the Treasury
shall transfer from the Fund to the Attorney General, the
Secretary of the Interior, or the Secretary of Health and
Human Services, as appropriate, such amounts as the Attorney
General, the Secretary of the Interior, or the Secretary of
Health and Human Services determines to be necessary to carry
out the emergency plan under subsection (f).
(d) Transfers of Amounts.--
(1) In general.--The amounts required to be transferred to
the Fund under this section shall be transferred at least
monthly from the general fund of the Treasury to the Fund on
the basis of estimates made by the Secretary of the Treasury.
(2) Adjustments.--Proper adjustment shall be made in
amounts subsequently transferred to the extent prior
estimates were in excess of or less than the amounts required
to be transferred.
(e) Remaining Amounts.--Any amounts remaining in the Fund
on September 30 of an applicable fiscal year may be used by
the Attorney General, the Secretary of the Interior, or the
Secretary of Health and Human Services to carry out the
emergency plan under subsection (f) for any subsequent fiscal
year.
(f) Emergency Plan.--Not later than 1 year after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General, the Secretary
of the Interior, and the Secretary of Health and Human
Services, in consultation with Indian tribes (as defined in
section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education
Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b)), shall jointly establish an
emergency plan that addresses law enforcement, water, and
health care needs of Indian tribes under which, for each of
fiscal years 2010 through 2019, of amounts in the Fund--
(1) the Attorney General shall use--
(A) 18.5 percent for the construction, rehabilitation, and
replacement of Federal Indian detention facilities;
(B) 1.5 percent to investigate and prosecute crimes in
Indian country (as defined in section 1151 of title 18,
United States Code);
(C) 1.5 percent for use by the Office of Justice Programs
for Indian and Alaska Native programs; and
(D) 0.5 percent to provide assistance to--
(i) parties to cross-deputization or other cooperative
agreements between State or local governments and Indian
tribes (as defined in section 102 of the Federally Recognized
Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a)) carrying out
law enforcement activities in Indian country; and

[[Page 16418]]

(ii) the State of Alaska (including political subdivisions
of that State) for carrying out the Village Public Safety
Officer Program and law enforcement activities on Alaska
Native land (as defined in section 3 of Public Law 103-399
(25 U.S.C. 3902));
(2) the Secretary of the Interior shall--
(A) deposit 15.5 percent in the public safety and justice
account of the Bureau of Indian Affairs for use by the Office
of Justice Services of the Bureau in providing law
enforcement or detention services, directly or through
contracts or compacts with Indian tribes under the Indian
Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C.
450 et seq.); and
(B) use 50 percent to implement requirements of Indian
water settlement agreements that are approved by Congress (or
the legislation to implement such an agreement) under which
the United States shall plan, design, rehabilitate, or
construct, or provide financial assistance for the planning,
design, rehabilitation, or construction of, water supply or
delivery infrastructure that will serve an Indian tribe (as
defined in section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and
Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b)); and
(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting
through the Director of the Indian Health Service, shall use
12.5 percent to provide, directly or through contracts or
compacts with Indian tribes under the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450 et
seq.)--
(A) contract health services;
(B) construction, rehabilitation, and replacement of Indian
health facilities; and
(C) domestic and community sanitation facilities serving
members of Indian tribes (as defined in section 4 of the
Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25
U.S.C. 450b)) pursuant to section 7 of the Act of August 5,
1954 (42 U.S.C. 2004a).

Motion Offered by Mr. Berman

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I offer the motion at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the motion.
The text of the motion is as follows:

Motion offered by Mr. Berman:
Mr. Berman moves that the House concur in the Senate
amendment.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1362, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) and the gentlewoman from Florida
(Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill, and I
yield myself 7 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, a few short months ago the House gave its strong
bipartisan approval to H.R. 5501, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde
Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Reauthorization Act of 2008. Last Thursday, the Senate followed suit,
approving its amendment to the House bill by an overwhelming margin of
80-16.
We meet today to take up the Senate amendments and to send this
bipartisan legislation to the President for his signature. The measure
before the House today is a compromise, a compromise between Democrats
and Republicans, between the House and the Senate, and between Congress
and the executive branch. The fact that compromise was achievable in
this highly politicized era is a testament to the bipartisan roots of
this legislation.
Five years ago, Tom Lantos and Henry Hyde, our dear deceased
colleagues, working closely with the White House, crafted a global HIV/
AIDS bill that enjoyed broad bipartisan support. This groundbreaking
legislation had a clear and achievable goal, to respond with compassion
to those who were dying of AIDS, dramatically increase our Nation's
efforts to stop the spread of HIV virus, provide care to children
orphaned by AIDS, and get lifesaving medications immediately to those
in need.
As a result, our Nation has provided lifesaving antiretroviral
medicines to nearly 1\1/2\ million men, women and children, supported
care for nearly 7 million people, including nearly 3 million orphans
and vulnerable children, and prevented an estimated 150,000 infant
infections around the world.
Most importantly, the United States has given hope to millions
infected with the HIV virus, which just a few short years ago was
tantamount to a death sentence.
This law worked well as an emergency intervention to deal with the
rapidly expanding HIV/AIDS crisis. But the nature of that disease has
changed significantly since then. We now have 5 years of experience in
grappling with this pandemic on a global scale, and the reauthorization
bill before us reflects what we have learned.
The law we passed in 2003 was designed to deal with the emergency
phase of the HIV/AIDS crisis. This legislation moves our programs
towards long-term sustainability that will keep the benefit of U.S.
global HIV/AIDS programs flowing to those in need. With this
reauthorization, host governments will also gain the ability to plan,
direct and manage prevention, treatment and care programs that were
originally established with U.S. assistance.
The reauthorization bill authorizes nearly $50 billion over 5 years
for these three pandemics. These additional funds allow us to
significantly boost the health care workforce in those countries hard
hit by HIV/AIDS with new professional and paraprofessional training
programs, and to increase the number of HIV positive individuals
receiving lifesaving medicine.
The 2003 law focused on creating new programs to tackle the crisis.
The reauthorization bill increases the number of individuals receiving
prevention treatment and care services. It builds stronger linkages
between the global HIV/AIDS initiative and existing programs designed
to alleviate hunger among those treated. It helps to improve health
care and bolster HIV education in schools.

{time} 1600

The 2003 law began to address the needs of women and girls. But given
the changing nature of the epidemic, we clearly did not go far enough
to meet these needs.
The new legislation remedies this situation by strengthening
prevention and treatment programs aimed at this extremely vulnerable
population. The Lantos-Hyde bill eliminates the one-third abstinence-
only earmark, but requires a balanced approach to sexual transmission
programs and a report regarding this approach in countries where the
epidemic has become generalized.
In an effort to ensure that our contributions to the global fund are
being wisely spent, the bill provides for certain benchmarks to improve
the transparency and the accountability of the fund. The bill
incorporates tuberculosis prevention from H.R. 1567 sponsored by
Congressman Engel. It seeks to further integrate HIV/AIDS programs with
TB and malaria programs and create linkages and referrals between these
programs for patients.
H.R. 5501 heightens U.S. efforts to combat malaria by requiring the
development of a comprehensive 5-year strategy to combat this disease.
It creates a new U.S. Government Malaria Coordinator, and it enhances
support for clinical research for new diagnostics, treatments, and
interventions to prevent, cure, and control malaria.
The Senate made several changes in our bill. It overturned the
existing visa ban on HIV-positive individuals. It targeted $2 billion
of the $50 billion authorization for Indian health care, water
resources, and law enforcement issues. It modified the goal for people
living with AIDS and removed a linkage between the global HIV/AIDS
program and family planning.
Despite these changes, the language before the House today is very
close to what we approved last April. With passage of this
reauthorization bill, Congress signals to the world that the United
States would exercise continued leadership in the global battle against
malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS.
So what we have here is a bipartisan bill providing nearly $50
billion for the battle against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, a
bill that has strong bipartisan support, and one that the President has
indicated he will sign into law.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I want to take
special note that in the short time that I have been chairing this
committee, I want to mention two particular people who have both helped
educate me, two Members, colleagues on the committee who have played a
major role in helping to guide this legislation and the earlier
legislation: the chairman of the Africa Subcommittee, Don Payne, and

[[Page 16419]]

Congresswoman Barbara Lee, both of whom have been involved in this
legislation and the previous legislation from the beginning and were
pushing for this even long before that passed.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, many of us seek a place in this hallowed institution to
serve our country and our constituents, to make a difference, to help
change the world for the better. Mr. Speaker, today we are given an
opportunity to edge ever closer to the accomplishment of these goals.
Today we have an opportunity to positively impact the lives of
countless human beings worldwide by recommitting ourselves to fighting
and eliminating a great threat to our international security, and that
is the global AIDS pandemic.
The bill before us reauthorizes the United States Leadership Against
HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003. Before this bill was
enacted, known as PEPFAR, only 55,000 people living in sub-Saharan
Africa were receiving life-saving treatment, but according to the
Office of the Global AIDS Coordinator, through PEPFAR, the United
States now has supported treatment for 1.68 million people in Africa
and 1.73 million people worldwide.
Further, the United States has provided prevention of mother-to-child
HIV transmission services for women enduring nearly 12.7 million
pregnancies. We have also prevented an estimated 194,000 infant
infections. We have supported care for more than 6.6 million people in
need, including more than 2.7 million orphans and vulnerable children.
We have supported over 33 million counseling and testing sessions to
date for men, women, and children.
These successes are truly remarkable and serve as a testament that
all can be accomplished when Members from the House and the Senate on
both sides of the aisle work together to find solutions to one of the
world's most pressing challenges.
The 2008 reauthorization seeks to consolidate and advance the
successes of the past 5 years by providing the funding and the
framework to transform this from an emergency program to a sustainable
program. It stands as a noble legacy of the late Henry J. Hyde and Tom
Lantos who spearheaded this mission of mercy 5 years ago, and I am
proud that the bill bears their names.
The stakes for this initiative, Mr. Speaker, are higher than ever.
Despite the best efforts of responsible nations to confront the global
AIDS pandemic, there are now over 33 million people around the world
living with this disease. An estimated 7,000 new infections occur every
day. In its wake, the HIV/AIDS pandemic is leaving a trail of poverty,
of despondency, of death, which has destabilized societies and
undermined the security of entire regions.
Our former House colleague and current ambassador to Tanzania, the
Honorable Mark Green, wrote to me highlighting the threat that HIV/AIDS
poses to the security of our country. And he said, ``In tearing apart
the social fabric and leaving a generation of orphans, the scourge of
HIV/AIDS could create a long-term breeding ground for radicalism.''
So it is therefore incumbent upon us, Mr. Speaker, to advance this
critical program which not only saves lives and exemplifies the
generous humanitarian nature of the American people, but it also helps
to preserve our national security.
It is important to note that even in the most remote areas of Kenya
or Haiti, for example, people know about the PEPFAR program. They know
from where the test kits, the medicines, and other life-saving support
is coming. They recognize the leadership and the resources that the
United States has provided in an effort to fight this deadly disease,
and they are deeply appreciative. This is not just a health program.
This is a public diplomacy program as well, and it has greatly enhanced
global understanding of the true nature and the essence of the American
people at a critical time in our Nation's history. We have led by
example, and our success has been measured in human lives saved.
Now, the House has debated and adopted this bill by an overwhelming
margin in April of this year. This House text was the product of a
bipartisan compromise that preserved the spirit of the 2003 Act while
balancing a number of congressional imperatives. Just as in the House,
our Senate colleagues sought to produce legislation that would
capitalize and expand upon the success of the energy plan while
maintaining the bipartisan political consensus that has guided this
program from its inception.
After 3 months of negotiations, the amendment before us was approved
in the Senate by a margin of 80-16, demonstrating the strong bipartisan
commitment of the Senate of their own carefully constructed compromise.
The Senate amendment contains numerous modifications to the text
approved by the House in April. It reduces the authorization of HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria programs from $50 billion to $48
billion. It allows for a gradual increase of resources over time rather
than authorizing $10 billion for each of the fiscal years 2008 through
2013. It requires more than half of all funding appropriated for
bilateral HIV/AIDS assistance be expended for treatment and care. It
replaces the hard target for treatment with a sliding scale whereby the
treatment target will increase over $3 million in direct proportion to
increased appropriations. And further, it authorizes the use of
compacts as further vehicles for HIV/AIDS assistance in an effort to
promote sustainability.
Mr. Speaker, the Senate amendment preserves and strengthens other
critical provisions that were at the heart of the House compromise
overwhelmingly adopted in April. For example, it corrects an unintended
omission by including care under the conscience clause which allows
faith-based organizations to disassociate themselves from any program
or activity to which they have a religious or moral objection. Also, it
amends the abstinence and fidelity language contained in section 403 by
striking behavior change programs including abstinence and fidelity,
and inserting activities promoting abstinence and fidelity. This
modification provides clarity to the compromise reached in the House
last spring.
The Senate amendment also includes two provisions that have raised
some concern, including the establishment of a $2 billion emergency
plan for Indian safety and health, and the lifting of certain
restrictions under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The first provision, the Indian Safety and Health title of the Senate
amendment initially raised concerns about mandatory spending and
unfunded mandates. However, the Congressional Budget Office has
verified that the language in question is an authorization and does not
have implications for direct spending.
It also bears mentioning that the health programs will be implemented
through the Indian Health Service which is subject to the rules and
regulations of the Department of Health and Human Services.
With respect to the second item, Mr. Speaker, lifting the ban is
largely symbolic because the authority to waive the restriction already
exists and is routinely exercised, albeit on a case-by-case basis.
Furthermore, an alien with HIV would still be inadmissible under
current HHS recommendations on communicable diseases of public health
significance, and this would continue to be the case until and unless
the regulations are changed. The Senate amendment includes offsets for
the estimated additional costs involved with the processing of these
new visas.
Throughout this process, Members on both sides of the aisle have been
forced to make difficult choices to arrive at a consensus that
carefully balances U.S. priorities and the range of congressional
concerns. The challenges have been great and at times have seemed
insurmountable. But a failure to act now would imperil our ability to
provide life-saving support to millions of people in need around the
world and will ultimately undermine what is arguably the most
successful United

[[Page 16420]]

States foreign assistance and public diplomacy program today.
We have been given a unique opportunity to help make the world a
better place for those who have been victimized by the AIDS pandemic
while simultaneously enhancing our own Nation's security.
I urge my colleagues to support the Senate amendment to the Tom
Lantos and Henry Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008 so that this bill
can be signed by the President without further delay and we can get to
work on saving even more lives.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady very much for her
great words, and more importantly, for her really complete commitment
to this project before and now.

General Leave

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ross). Is there objection to the request
of the gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am now very pleased to yield 5 minutes to
the gentleman I referenced earlier, the chairman of the Africa
Subcommittee, Mr. Payne of New Jersey.
Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And let me begin by
thanking you for your strong leadership in bringing this legislation
through the House and advocating it through the Senate and our ranking
member, Ms. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, for her support, and as you mentioned
before, Representative Barbara Lee and Donna Christensen.
As chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health, this
bill, the Tom Lantos and Henry Hyde United States Global Leadership
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of
2008, is very timely.
This bill is important. In the 5 years since I have been in Congress,
the original legislation authorized by the President's Emergency Plan
for Aids Relief, or PEPFAR, as it is known, has become a historical
program.

{time} 1615

The road toward serious consideration regarding HIV and AIDS was a
long journey. The Congressional Black Caucus began advocating for a
sound domestic and international effort during the late 1980s with
little success. Pressure continued through the executive branch, and in
the Clinton years, an office was established headed by Ms. Thurman on
the President's initiative on HIV and AIDS. However, adequate funding
was still lacking, especially on the international focus.
And so I must say that PEPFAR is destined, in my view, to be
remembered as the single most significant achievement of the Bush
administration's two terms in office because it was there that we
catapulted the funding of this legislation.
Over 800,000 people who would otherwise have no access to treatment
are receiving anti-retroviral medication in PEPFAR's 15 focus
countries. Twelve of those countries are in sub-Saharan Africa.
Such progress is remarkable. However, we still have a lot of work
ahead of us. Despite our best efforts, only 28 percent of Africans
needing anti-retrovirals are receiving them.
A mere 11 percent of HIV-positive women on the continent who need
drugs to prevent mother-to-child transmission is getting it.
Shockingly, over 85 percent of Africa's children who need ARVs are
going without it.
This is why Congress is taking such an extraordinary step of
authorizing close to $50 billion to transform PEPFAR from an emergency
response to a sustainable program. It represents the best efforts to
turn those statistics around.
The new bill transforms PEPFAR by expanding the program beyond a
series of medical interventions. For example, the lack of food and
nutrition support for people on ARVs have been, up to now, a major
impediment to the adherence to AIDS treatment regimens. The lack of
adherence limits PEPFAR's effectiveness.
Fortunately, the new component will help ease the nutrition problem.
The Senate bill has incorporated elements of the provision which I
authored that were in the original House bill related to addressing the
nutrition needs of HIV patients, their families, and communities. When
I introduced the nutrition component a year ago, no one could have
accurately predicted the tremendous food security problem which besets
us today worldwide.
The Senate bill also contains a provision to build and strengthen
health systems in developing countries.
Like the House bill, it eliminates cumbersome earmarks that the
Government Accountability Office and the Institute of Medicine have
said limits program efficacy.
Just as important as the money and programs for HIV and AIDS, the
bill we are voting on today also authorizes $9 billion to fight two
other diseases that have wrought havoc in the developing world: malaria
and tuberculosis.
Malaria kills a child in Africa every 30 seconds. It contributes to
the death of an estimated 10,000 pregnant women and up to 200,000
infants each year on the continent. And what is astonishing is that
malaria is preventable. With education, providing bed nets and
spraying, malaria can be eliminated.
TB is just as deadly. Nearly 20 percent of the people who develop
full-blown TB die of the disease. They cannot get a simple, low-cost
cure which is available.
And those with HIV and AIDS are very vulnerable to TB infections due
to lowered immunity factors. In fact, TB is the number one killer of
people with AIDS. With the new cases of MDR and XDR TB, a more radical
strain that is much more difficult to treat, the new emphasis on TB is
very important. In South Africa in a village, 52 of 53 people who had
contracted MDR TB died within a 2-week period.
Mr. Speaker, given the aforementioned toll that AIDS, TB and malaria
has taken around the globe, and how much we still need to do to fight
all three deadly diseases, it is imperative that we redouble our
efforts.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from New Jersey
has expired.
Mr. BERMAN. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. PAYNE. As I conclude, we must do so for the obvious reason: U.S.-
funded programs save lives. We have a moral obligation to continue
them. We should also do so for a less obvious reason: to counter a
growing perception in the world that the United States does not care
about anything but counterterrorism.
Fairly or not, I think that this bill will go far to continue to
uplift the image of the United States. It's saving lives, and it's
doing the right thing.
I urge my colleagues to support the bill.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman
from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), the ranking member of the
Subcommittee on International Organization, Human Rights, and
Oversight.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R.
5501.
During this time of economic difficulty, this bill is humanitarianism
gone wild. It's irrational benevolence that we cannot afford.
Where are we going to get the $48 billion for combating AIDS and the
$2 billion for Native American programs? Well, we can get it out of
programs by gutting programs that are for our own people. We can raise
taxes, which would likely throw us into a recession that would leave us
with even less of a tax base for our people at home, or of course, we
can borrow it and let our grandchildren pay for it in some way. And
yes, if we borrow it, it will probably come from Communist China,
making ourselves even more vulnerable to their pressure.
Mr. Speaker, we have big hearts, but we need to use our brains. We
cannot afford $50 billion of generosity to foreigners. This will cost
the American people. It will cost them their health care and the
education for their children. It will cost the veterans, and it will
cost our seniors.

[[Page 16421]]

Our economy is facing a catastrophic setback because of the
irresponsible spending and taxing policies of the Federal Government,
and now we're going to exacerbate that problem with a $50 billion
commitment to provide a health care package to Africa.
Concerning my friends on my side of the aisle, Mr. Speaker, I say to
those who oppose earmarks in the name of fiscal responsibility, they
should not be expected to be taken seriously if they support this
enormously expensive, feel-good spending. This $50 billion burden will
be shouldered by our veterans, by our elderly, and by our children.
My friends on the other side of the aisle often remind us America
does not spend enough on our own people. More funds are needed, we are
repeatedly told, for our veterans, our elderly, and yes, for our
children. When we are already at a high level of deficit spending, how
then can we advocate spending an additional $50 billion overseas?
And we're not fooling anybody. When we have spending like this, it
comes right out of the pot of limited resources that are available to
Americans.
This expenditure is not going to cure AIDS in the end. I wish I could
say that I was very confident that it would succeed in that, but I'm
not confident with that. What I am confident is that it will break our
back. This could well be the 2-ton tree trunk that broke the camel's
back, the item that finally destroyed the hope for responsible spending
policies by Congress.
I ask my colleagues to vote against this kind of generosity that is
perhaps good-hearted but totally irrational. I say our number one job
here is to watch out for the well-being of the American people. This
bill is not in the well-being of our people. It will undermine the
well-being of our people.
Mr. BERMAN. I yield myself 30 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, without joining issue with the gentleman on his other
comments, the suggestion that this is not curing AIDS is directly
contrary to the evidence I saw firsthand in Africa earlier this month.
There are huge numbers of people there who would now be dead, who are
alive simply because of the drugs that this money allowed them to get.
I don't know what the definition of the gentleman's cure is, but they
are living normal, active lives as a result of the drug therapies.
I insert a Statement of Legislative Intent regarding nutrition into
the Record at this time.
On behalf of Chairman Payne, Mr. McGovern, and Mrs. Emerson, I would
like to make the following statement regarding the intent of the House
on H.R. 5501.
H.R. 5501 and the Senate amendment to H.R. 5501 provide clear and
specific instructions to the USAID Administrator and the Global AIDS
Coordinator to address the food and nutrition needs of individuals with
HIV/AIDS and other affected individuals, including orphans and
vulnerable children; and to fully integrate food and nutrition support
in HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care programs carried out under
this act.
We are concerned about the negative effect rising costs are having on
our long-term and emergency food aid programs. This is a matter that
affects a wide array of our food aid and development programs,
including the effectiveness and success of our Global HIV/AIDS
programs.
On behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and members who have
been very involved in international nutrition, we wish to state that it
is the legislative intent of H.R. 5501 and the Senate amendment to H.R.
5501 that food security and nutrition programs, especially those
referred to as wrap-around services, are not to be funded with monies
diverted from other standing commitments to address food insecurity
elsewhere in the world or in these countries.
I'm very pleased to yield 5 minutes to my friend, just a major
architect of this whole program, the gentlelady from California (Ms.
Lee).
Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, first, let me thank Chairman Berman for your
leadership and for your commitment to addressing this very devastating
public health crisis, humanitarian crisis, and national security
crisis.
I also want to thank Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen, Chairman Payne,
Ranking Member Smith, Chairman Waxman, and Congresswoman Donna
Christensen for working together to bring this bipartisan bill to the
floor.
Our Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, has been such a leader early on in
addressing the HIV and AIDS crisis, and without her support, we would
not have such an important bill before us today.
As an original coauthor of both the initial legislation establishing
PEPFAR and of this new bill reauthorizing PEPFAR, I am pleased that
today we will complete action on this important initiative and send it
to the President for his signature.
Each of us has witnessed, as Mr. Berman indicated earlier, the
devastation that AIDS has caused in Africa and in the developing world,
and we've seen the very dramatic impact of our AIDS programs over the
last 5 years in actually saving lives. And this bill will save millions
more in terms of life-saving drugs and treatment and care.
And, yes, to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), I
believe that spending $50 billion to address a global health emergency
makes more sense than spending over 600-700 billion dollars on a war,
quite frankly, that did not have to be fought.
Quite simply, by enacting this bill, we will help change the lives of
millions of people around the world for the better.
This bill is a model of compromise and stands as a testament to what
true bipartisanship can accomplish.
Let me remind this body that it is the latest in a long string of
initiatives on HIV and AIDS that have been born out of a willingness to
work together and put the United States on the right side of history
when it comes to this global pandemic.
First, in 2000, we passed and President Clinton signed into law the
Global AIDS and Tuberculosis Relief Act. This important bill provided
the founding contribution and framework for the Global Trust Fund. It
was inspired, really, by my colleague, my predecessor, Congressman Ron
Dellums, now-Mayor Ron Dellums of Oakland, California, and supported by
former Chairman Jim Leach of Iowa.
In 2001, working with both former Chairman Hyde and Chairman Lantos,
we drafted H.R. 2069, the Global Access to HIV/AIDS Prevention,
Awareness, Education and Treatment Act. This was the first bill that
dared to provide a large scale antiretroviral therapy to people living
in the developing world. Unfortunately, it wasn't enacted because we
couldn't reach a conference agreement with the Senate.
At the end of 2002, the Congressional Black Caucus, along with
practically every advocacy group in the United States, sent a letter to
President Bush urging him to create a presidential initiative to fight
AIDS in Africa.
In January of 2003, the President stepped up to the plate and
promised $15 billion to fight AIDS during his State of the Union
address.
Within 5 months, working with Chairman Hyde and Chairman Lantos, we
passed H.R. 1298, the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis and Malaria Act of 2003, which created PEPFAR.
In 2005, we took yet another step forward when we passed H.R. 1409,
the Assistance for Orphans and Vulnerable Children in Developing
Countries Act, again with Chairman Hyde and Chairman Lantos and
Chairman Berman and Chairman Payne. This bill fine-tuned our programs
to meet the needs of children orphaned and made vulnerable by AIDS.
So, Mr. Speaker, I lay out some of the history of our work on this
very important issue because it speaks volumes about what is possible
when we come together in the spirit of bipartisan compromise.

{time} 1630

It is that bipartisan spirit that is again on display today as we
honor the legacy of both Chairman Lantos and Chairman Hyde through this
legislation. I'm saddened that both of them are not with us, like all
of us are, to witness this moment, but I know that they would have been
very, very pleased.
As I have said, this bill is a compromise. And as in all compromises,
each side did not get everything it wanted, but that's what compromise
is about.

[[Page 16422]]

I want to mention just a few important items that I worked on which
have been included in this bill. First, it takes language from H.R.
1713, the PATHWAY Act, to strike the 33 percent abstinence-until-
marriage and helps address the needs of women and girls in a
comprehensive fashion--abstinence, be faithful, use condoms.
Comprehensive.
It includes language taken from H.R. 3812, the African Health
Capacity and Investment Act, to build health capacity by recruiting,
training and retaining health professionals and strengthening health
care systems.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman from California
has expired.
Mr. BERMAN. I am pleased to yield the gentlelady an additional
minute.
Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
I am also very grateful that the Senate added language that I
originally authored in H.R. 3337, the HIV Nondiscrimination in Travel
and Immigration Act, to remove this, quite frankly, unjust and
discriminatory statutory ban on travel and immigration for people
living with HIV/AIDS. I'm especially pleased that we are lifting this
statutory ban just prior to this year's International AIDS Conference
in Mexico City. As a delegate to the last four conferences, I look
forward to bringing this good news to Mexico City.
While I support the underlying compromise, there are many, many items
that I wish had been included: Eliminating the prostitution pledge
loyalty oath, recognizing the public health benefits of linking our
HIV/AIDS programs with family services, recognizing the need to engage
with communities that are at the forefront of this pandemic, such as
men who have sex with men, and injection drug users, and clearly
committing to provide lifesaving AIDS drugs to no less than 3 million
people. So let me just thank you again, Chairman Berman.
I want to thank our staff, especially Christos Tsentas of my office.
And I would like to insert for the the Record all of our staff members'
names who worked on this bill.

List of Staff Who Worked on PEPFAR

HOUSE

Dr. Pearl Alice Marsh, Kristin Wells, David Abramowitz,
Peter Yeo, and Bob King from Chairman Berman's staff of the
House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Yleem Poblete, Mark Gage, Sarah Kiko and Joan Condon from
Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen's staff on the House Foreign
Affairs Committee.
From the Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health, Heather
Flynn with Chairman Donald Payne and Sheri Rickert with
Ranking Member Chris Smith.
Naomi Seiler and Jesseca Boyer from Mr. Waxman's staff on
Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
And Christos Tsentas of my staff.

SENATE

Shannon Smith, Brian McKeon with Chairman Biden's staff on
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Shellie Bressler, Paul Foldi, and Dan Diller from Senator
Lugar's staff on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Alexandra Nunez with Senator Kerry's office.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman
from Indiana (Mr. Pence), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on the
Middle East and South Asia.
(Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5501, the Tom
Lantos and Henry Hyde Global AIDS bill. As Congresswoman Barbara Lee
just eloquently stated, it is poignant to those of us who knew these
two great legislators to see the important expansion of this
legislation occur after both of them have gone home to be with the
Lord. But I can think of no better tribute to these men of character
and vision and compassion than this legislation.
I commend Chairman Berman and Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen for their
strong leadership. I also want to commend my colleague, Chris Smith,
for his yeoman's work in preserving a delicate balance of this bill.
Also Mr. Speaker, let me publicly acknowledge the work of our
President, George W. Bush. Mr. President, because of your moral
leadership and compassion, Africa will never be the same, and history
will record your work.
The Bible tells us, ``To whom much is given much is expected.'' I
believe the United States has a moral obligation to lead the world in
confronting the pandemic of HIV/AIDS.
The dimensions of this crisis are truly staggering. The HIV/AIDS
pandemic has infected more than 60 million people worldwide, killed
more than 25 million, a number that grows grievously every day by
nearly 9,000. HIV/AIDS has orphaned some 14 million children. And
today, 70 percent of the people in the world with HIV/AIDS reside in
Africa. More startling, if current infection rates continue, new
epicenters for the disease are likely to arise out of India, China and
eastern Europe.
The threat this pandemic poses to our security is real. If not
addressed, this plague will continue to undermine the stability of
nations throughout the third world, leaving behind collapsing
economies, tragedy, and desperation, which we all know is a breeding
ground for extremist violence and terrorism. This is truly a global
crisis. And because the United States of America can render timely
assistance, I believe we must.
You know, every so often in this place we have the opportunity to do
something, not just for the American people, but for humanity, and this
is such a time. And this global AIDS bill seeks to address this crisis
not only by providing medicine and health care to those in need, but
also by providing funding resources for evidence-based programs that
have been successful in preventing infection.
It's imperative, I believe, that we not only send our resources, but
that we send them in a manner that is consistent with our values. We
cannot send billions of dollars to Africa without sending values-based
safeguards and techniques that work to fight the spread of HIV/AIDS by
changing behavior, and this current version of the global AIDS bill
includes those safeguards.
It was essential that we preserve these prevention methods that focus
on behavioral change, and that we continue to work with faith-based,
nongovernmental organizations that promote programs, including the ABC
model, which has produced such undeniable results.
But as a conservative let me say, as we tend to the suffering abroad,
we also have to figure out how to pay for it. The Federal budget, I
believe, is filled with opportunities to responsibly fund this program,
and I look forward to finding the right priorities to do just that.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5501, the ``Tom Lantos
and Henry J. Hyde Global AIDS Bill.''
The Bible tells us, `to whom much is given, much is expected,'' and I
believe the United States has a moral obligation to lead the world in
confronting the pandemic of HIV/AIDS.
The dimensions of this crisis are truly staggering. The HIV/AIDS
pandemic has infected more than 60 million people worldwide. It has
killed more than 25 million, a number which grows grievously every day
by more than 8,500. HIV/AIDS has orphaned some 14 million children. And
today, 70 percent of the people in the world with HIV/AIDS reside in
Africa. Within that continent there are entire countries where more
than one-third of the adult population is infected.
More startling, if current infection rates continue, new epicenters
for the disease are likely to arise out of India, China and Eastern
Europe, with numbers that could surpass Africa in a few short years.
And the threat that this pandemic poses to our security is also real.
If not addressed, this plague will continue to undermine the stability
of nations throughout the third world, leaving behind collapsing
economies and tragedy and desperation--a breeding ground for extremist
violence and terrorism.
This is truly a global crisis and because the United States can
render timely assistance, I believe we must.
You know, every so often in this place, we have the opportunity to do
something for humanity and serve the American people--and this is such
a time.
I thank Chairman Berman and Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen for their
strong leadership. I commend my colleague, Mr. Chris

[[Page 16423]]

Smith, in particular for his yeoman's work on carefully preserving the
delicate balance of this legislation.
And I'd also like to publicly acknowledge the work of our President,
George W. Bush. Mr. President, because of your moral leadership and
compassion, Africa will never be the same, and history will record your
work.
And this Global AIDS bill seeks to address the crisis, not only by
providing medicine and health care to those in need, but also by
providing funding resources for evidence-based programs that have been
successful in preventing infection. It is imperative, I believe, that
we not only send our resources but also that we send them in a manner
that is consistent with our values. We cannot send billions of dollars
to Africa without sending values-based safeguards and techniques that
work to fight the spread of HIV/AIDS by changing behavior.
Within the current version the Global AIDS bill that the Senate
recently passed, these pivotal provisions exist in the form of a
requirement to provide `balanced funding for prevention activities for
sexual transmission of HIV/AIDS,' and to ensure that abstinence and
faithfulness programs `are implemented and funded in a meaningful and
equitable way.' This is enforced by requiring the Global AIDS
Coordinator to report to the appropriate Congressional committee if
funding for abstinence, delay of sexual debut, monogamy, or fidelity
programs drops below 50 percent of the total sexual prevention program
funding.
It was essential that we preserve prevention methods that focus on
behavioral change, and that we work with faith-based and non-
governmental organizations at the local level, in particular through
the ABC Model, which has produced undeniable results.
As we tend to the suffering, through, we always have to figure out
how we're going to pay for it.
The federal budget, I believe, is packed with wasteful and bloated
programs, which could supply more than enough opportunities to cover
the cost of the Lantos/Hyde Global AIDS bill.
When it comes time to fund this program in the appropriations
process, I believe Congress should make the hard choices necessary to
ensure that this global health crisis does not become a crisis of debt
for our children and grandchildren.
I believe it is possible to be both responsible to our fiscal
constraints while being obedient to our moral calling. The greatest of
all human rights is the right to live. America is a nation of great
wealth--wealth of resources, but more importantly, a wealth of
compassion. The history of the world is filled with telling moments
regarding the character of a people. Sometimes we are witness to
mankind's great inhumanities. Other times we marvel at the beauty of
mankind's selfless acts of compassion, when we rise above politics and
raise up those in dire need. Let this be such a day.
I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation.
Mr. PAYNE. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from California, a
member of the Africa Subcommittee, Congresswoman Woolsey.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank Chairman Berman and
Chairman Payne and Ranking Members Ros-Lehtinen and Smith for their
excellent leadership on global health issues and on this AIDS bill.
I support H.R. 5501 because it is so very necessary. The statistics
are staggering. In 2007, there were nearly 35 million people worldwide
living with HIV/AIDS. In that year alone, 2.5 million people became
infected with HIV, 420,000 were children under the age of 15. And most
tragically, there were 2.1 million deaths, 330,000 children under the
age of 15.
But Mr. Speaker, this is not only about statistics. This is about the
child who must stay home from school to take care of her siblings when
a parent dies of AIDS. We're talking about the mother, the mother who,
because she lacked prenatal care, passed the disease onto her unborn
child.
Today we can make a difference. We can say that one more diagnosis of
HIV, one more AIDS death, one more malaria case is absolutely
unacceptable. I urge my colleagues to support this bill and take a
strong stand against this horrific pandemic.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Smith), the ranking member of the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I, in turn, thank the gentlewoman
and the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee for yielding me
time.
Mr. Speaker, I recognize that there are good arguments for and
against this bill, but I want to focus on a provision that many Members
may not be aware of.
Under current law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services is
required to consider HIV/AIDS a communicable disease of public health
significance; as a result, aliens with HIV/AIDS are inadmissible.
Section 305 of the bill rescinds the statutory designation of HIV/AIDS
as a communicable disease. This change would allow the current or a
future administration to decide that HIV/AIDS is not a communicable
disease of public health significance, and immigrants with HIV/AIDS
would be admitted.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this provision will
result in the entry of thousands of persons with HIV/AIDS. This change
of policy inevitably will threaten the health and lives of many
Americans. The CBO also estimates that allowing entry of thousands of
persons with HIV/AIDS will cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars.
The cost of health care for each person with HIV/AIDS averages more
than $600,000. Mr. Speaker, this provision removes a safeguard that
protects the health of Americans and costs many millions of dollars.
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the
State of Washington, the father of the AGOA legislation and a health
provider for USAID for many years, Mr. McDermott.
(Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, today the people's House will say
eloquently and unequivocally that America's interest to exert its moral
leadership in the world is back, that all Americans stand united in
fighting this global epidemic.
As we've done in times of the past in great trial, we set aside our
differences and declare that America stands with commitment, compassion
and conviction against the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
The Senate has already passed this legislation. And the President has
announced that he will sign the legislation, which is one of his top
priorities. I give him high credit for that decision.
But beyond the money, beyond the $50 billion, is the fact that we are
ending the unspoken fear and discrimination in our own country by
eliminating the travel ban restriction that has stopped scientists and
others infected with HIV/AIDS from crossing our borders to attend
medical or educational conferences, or to visit family and friends.
I was at the United Nations a few months ago, and Members of
Parliaments all over the world said, how can we end the stigma of AIDS
if you, in the United States, will not allow someone with AIDS to come
in? We know how to treat AIDS, we know how to diagnose it, but the
United States is the example: Today, we are making a statement that we
want to end the stigma of AIDS. That makes it possible for people to
come in and be tested, for people to come forward and receive
medication. As long as people have to keep AIDS in the background or
hide it, we will not end this epidemic. So this provision alone makes
it possible.
Representative Granger and I have some legislation in here that ends
some of the problems with mother-to-child transmission. These
provisions will make it possible for us to prevent AIDS spread and have
a generation without AIDS in the future.
This legislation will provide the resources policies necessary to
take the fight against HIV/AIDS to the next level. An increase in
funding to $48 billion over 5 years will provide the resources to
sustain the fight on so many fronts in so many countries especially
hard hit by the pandemic.
Our provisions included in this legislation will provide training and
education, integrate services into maternal health care and ensure that
women and children have access to early screening and life-saving drug
therapies.
We know that providing a short regimen of anti-retroviral drugs to
the mother and newborn reduces transmission by 50 percent. And now we
will have the means to do it.
H.R. 5501 also includes my provision to establish two 5-year targets
to protect the next generation. The first goal is that 16 percent of

[[Page 16424]]

those receiving treatment under PEPFAR be children, which is
significantly higher than the children receiving treatment under
current PEPFAR programs.
The second goal is that 80 percent of pregnant women in the most
affected countries receive HIV counseling and testing and where
necessary, antiretroviral treatment to prevent mother to child
transmission.
We know how to stop transmission and, over time, we can achieve the
goal of a generation born free of HIV/AIDS.
This legislation addresses the fatal connection between HIV and TB,
which itself has claimed 1.7 million lives directly or through HIV-
associated TB. I'm proud that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in
Seattle is a leader in the fight against TB as it is in reversing other
global medical crises.
My community rightly swells with pride over the local leadership and
resources being devoted to fighting on behalf of all humanity.
We have come a long way in a short period of time. H.R. 5501 will
build on the systems and success we have had so far by integrating
additional services and providing the vital funding needed to train
health care professionals and community workers.
Trained medical personnel, on the ground in country, are the front
line in this fight and this legislation gives us the ability to send in
reinforcements to help fight a war against this disease. There is so
much to say about what this day means. Above all, it means we are going
to save lives.
We are going to provide global leadership and real hope. The day will
come when medical science will discover a vaccine that will end this
scourge once and for all. Until then, let us stand together as one
Nation and one world, united in one common goal--in the fight against
HIV/AIDS.
I cast my vote for passage on behalf of every person in Seattle, in
Africa, China, India and elsewhere who lives with or is threatened by
the HIV/AIDS pandemic. I urge my colleagues to support this
legislation.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I'm proud to yield 5 minutes to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the ranking member of the
Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I want to thank my good friend for yielding,
and thank her for her great work on this legislation, as well as
Chairman Berman and my good friend, Don Payne, and so many others who
have made this day possible in this launching of a new initiative,
building on the old.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5501, as amended, will literally mean the
difference between life or death to millions, especially in Sub-Saharan
Africa. As Members know, close to 70 percent of the estimated 33
million people with HIV live in Sub-Saharan Africa. Of the 2.5 million
children afflicted with this dreaded disease, 90 percent of them live
in Africa as well.
When combined with opportunistic infections like tuberculosis--the
number one killer of individuals with HIV--and malaria, which kills at
least one million people a year--again, mostly in Africa--the HIV/AIDS
pandemic compares among humanity's worst.
Our distinguished late chairman, Henry Hyde, prime sponsor of the
original PEPFAR program, frequently compared the sickness to the
bubonic plague--the black death--an epidemic that claimed the lives of
over 25 million during the mid-1300s.
So with that much at stake, I want to remind my colleagues how
important it is that we get this right. And I think, after a lot of
hard work, we have managed to come to a consensus, first in the House,
and now also in the Senate, and I hope it will be a sustainable
consensus.
I want to note that Congress has unequivocally rejected the attempts
of abortion-promoting organizations who wanted to hijack the Global
AIDS program and link their abortion agenda to the compassionate effort
to prevent this illness or to relieve the deleterious effects of HIV/
AIDS.
Look at the progression of this bill. The congressional intent is
clear with respect to diverting HIV funding to reproductive health/
family planning programming: It was rejected. In the first House
drafts, there were numerous provisions mandating not only
``integration'' and ``linkages'' between HIV programming and
reproductive health and family planning services, but even explicit
authorization to fund those services. This priority is wrong. We are
trying to prevent HIV/AIDS, not children.
I know some Members are likely to wince at the cost of the bill, $48
billion over 5 years. But that sum of money will likely provide
treatment for millions suffering from the disease, prevent some 12
million new HIV infections worldwide, support care for 12 million
individuals with HIV/AIDS, including five million orphans and
vulnerable children, and will help train and deploy at least 140,000
new health care professionals and workers for HIV/AIDS prevention,
treatment and care.
On the prevention side, the legislation requires that the Global AIDS
Coordinator provide balanced funding for sexual transmission prevention
activities that promote abstinence, delay of sexual debut, monogamy,
fidelity, and partner reduction. If less than 50 percent of sexual
transmission prevention monies are spent on the abstinence and be
faithful part of the ABC model, the coordinator must provide a written
justification.
Five years after PEPFAR first began, the efficacy and importance of
promoting abstinence and be faithful initiatives has been demonstrated
beyond any reasonable doubt.
The legislation before us also retains the antiprostitution/sex
trafficking pledge, an amendment I sponsored in 2003 designed to ensure
that pimps and brothel owners don't become, via an NGO that supports
such exploitation, U.S. Government partners.

{time} 1645

Current law ensures that the U.S. Government is not in the position
of ``promoting or advocating the legalization of prostitution or sex
trafficking.'' Prostitution and sex trafficking exploit and degrade
women and children and exacerbate the HIV/AIDS pandemic.
Finally, we have come a long way since 2003 when significant
opposition materialized against an amendment that I offered to include
faith-based providers with conscience clause protection. The conscience
clause in H.R. 5501, as amended, restates, improves, and expands
conscience protection in a way that ensures that organizations like
Catholic Relief Services, which has a remarkable record of HIV/AIDS
prevention, treatment, and care, are not discriminated against or in
any way precluded from receiving public funds.
This legislation is clearly a great legacy and a great honor to our
former Members Tom Lantos and Henry Hyde and certainly to President
Bush, who led so ably and so nobly on this initiative.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to submit several items of clarification
for the Record concerning a provision in HR 5501, the Tom Lantos and
Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008. One of the major
differences in this bill today from when we voted on it in April, is an
amendment that adds Title VI--an Emergency Plan for Indian Safety and
Health. Because it is a new addition and because there has been some
confusion about how this Title should be read and how it would be
implemented, I wanted to make the intent of Congress clear with these
submissions to the Record.
First, I have been told by the Congressional Budget Office that this
amendment is an authorization of appropriations and consequently has a
score of 0 since there is ``no direct spending or revenues
implications.'' Since there has been some confusion on this point, I
want to restate that Title VI of HR 5501 is exclusively an
authorization of appropriations and a further act of Congress would be
necessary before any money could be provided to this Emergency Fund.
Second, I also want to clarify that according to the author of this
amendment, Senator John Thune of South Dakota, the Emergency Fund,
including all health-related contracts or compacts, programs, or other
services authorized in this amendment will be conducted exclusively as
programs of the Indian Health Service, subject to all regulations and
restrictions that ordinarily apply to the Indian Health Service. This
is what the amendment language means and I want that to be clear, so
I'm including the letter I received from Senator Thune which clarified
this point.
Last, I would also like this letter from the Department of Health and
Human Services to be included in the Record. This letter makes it clear
that the Administration and the relevant Department also understand
that this amendment does not appropriate funds and that all health-
related programs that will later receive

[[Page 16425]]

appropriations will be administered through the Indian Health Service.
They go on to explain that this Emergency Fund is, by legislative
requirement, subject to the provisions of the Hyde Amendment, which are
currently set forth in section 507 of the FY08 L/HHS/ED appropriations
act as referenced by 25 U.S.C. Section 1676.

U.S. Senate,

Washington, DC, July 23, 2008.
Hon. Chris Smith,
Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Congressman Smith: Thank you for your interest in my
Amendment # 5076 to S. 2731, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde
United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008. As you
may know, my amendment, which was accepted by voice vote,
authorizes $2 billion in appropriations over the next five
years to tribal public safety, health, and water projects.
My amendment requires that the Attorney General, the
Secretary of Interior, and the Secretary of Health and Human
Services establish an emergency plan to address the law
enforcement, health, and safe drinking water needs of Native
Americans across the nation. Specifically, the amendment
provides an authorization totaling $750 million, to be used
by the Attorney General and Secretary of Interior, to address
tribal law enforcement, court, and detention facility needs.
Additionally, the Amendment established $250 million in
authorization to be used by the Secretary of Health and Human
Services, acting through the Director of the Indian Health
Service (IHS), to provide IHS contract care, health facility
construction and rehabilitation, and sanitation facilities.
Finally, $1 billion in authorization is to be used to
implement Indian drinking water projects that have been
approved by Congress.
Again, thank you for your interest in my amendment. Once
enacted, I am hopeful that this modest authorization will
begin to meet the critical public safety, health, and water
needs that many of our nation's reservations face subject to
future appropriations by Congress.
Sincerely.
John Thune,
United States Senate.
____

Department of Health

and Human Services,

Washington, DC, July 22, 2008.
Hon. Chris Smith,
Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Smith: We understand that concerns have been
raised regarding whether the Hyde Amendment will attach to
funds used for Indian Health purposes under Section 601 of
H.R. 5501, the Senate bill that seeks to reauthorize the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003. The Department's position is that the
Hyde Amendment will attach to funds appropriated for Indian
Health purposes.
Section 601 of H.R. 5501 would establish in the Treasury an
Emergency Fund for Indian Safety and Health (the ``Fund'').
Under Section 601(t)(3), the Secretary of Health and Human
Services shall use 12.5 percent of the Fund to provide health
services and improve health and sanitation facilities for
members of Indian tribes. The Secretary must act ``through
the Director of the Indian Health Service,'' thus, such
activities will be conducted as programs of the Indian Health
Service. Although Section 601 authorizes the establishment of
the Fund, it does not actually appropriate money to the Fund.
Subsequent legislation is necessary to appropriate money to
the Indian Health Service for Indian Health purposes as
authorized by the Fund.
The Hyde Amendment, which is currently set forth in section
507 of the FY08 L/HHS/Ed appropriations act, will attach to
money appropriated to the Fund for Indian Health purposes
under section 601(f)(3). If the L/HHS/Ed appropriations act
contains the Hyde Amendment, and Congress appropriates money
to the Fund in another act, then the money used for the
Indian Health Service will be subject to the Hyde Amendment
because 25 U.S.C. Sec. 1676 will apply. 25 U.S.C. Sec. 1676
states that ``[a]ny limitation on the use of funds contained
in an Act providing appropriations for the Department of
Health and Human Services for a period with respect to the
performance of abortions shall apply for that period with
respect to the performance of abortions using funds contained
in an Act providing appropriations for the Indian Health
Service.'' Because an act that appropriates money to the Fund
would ``provid[e] appropriations for the Indian Health
Service,'' the Hyde Amendment contained in the L/HHS/Ed
appropriations act would be applicable to money used for
Indian health purposes under section 601(f)(3).
Sincerely,
Charles E. Johnson,
Assistant Secretary for Resources and Technology.

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Engel), chairman of the Western Hemisphere Committee, for
2 minutes.
Mr. ENGEL. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support for H.R. 5501.
While most widely recognized for renewing our commitment to global
AIDS relief, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde Global Leadership against
HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008
reauthorizes provisions on all three of these deadly diseases of
poverty.
The World Health Organization reports that 1.7 million people died of
tuberculosis in 2006, with 200,000 dying from HIV-associated TB. The
emergence of multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant TB,
known as MDR and XDR, pose a grave risk to global health. These strains
are far deadlier than normal TB and are much more difficult and
expensive to treat. A contagious, airborne disease, TB knows no
barriers or borders and can only be successfully controlled in the
United States by also controlling it overseas.
The Lantos-Hyde Act declares TB control a major objective of U.S.
foreign assistance programs. The legislation requires a 5-year plan to
support the treatment of 4.5 million tuberculosis patients and 90,000
new MDR-TB cases.
This bill incorporates substantial portions of my bill, H.R. 1567,
the Stop Tuberculosis Now Act. The Lantos-Hyde Act prioritizes the Stop
TB Partnership's strategy, including expansion of the successful
treatment regimen for both standard TB and drug-resistant TB. It
further promotes research and development of new tools.
Recognizing the deadly synergy between tuberculosis, an opportunistic
infection, and HIV/AIDS, the Lantos-Hyde Act authorizes assistance to
strengthen the coordination of HIV/AIDS and TB programs. TB is the
leading killer of people with HIV/AIDS, and the explosion of drug-
resistant TB in sub-Saharan Africa threatens to halt and roll back our
progress in combating both diseases.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman 20 seconds.
Mr. ENGEL. I'll talk fast.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, the legislation authorizes assistance for the
development of new vaccines for TB. The current TB vaccine is more than
85 years old and is unreliable against pulmonary TB, which accounts for
most of the worldwide disease burden. New TB vaccines have the
potential to save millions of lives and would lead to substantial cost
savings.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``aye'' on H.R. 5501 today. We can
control and win the fight against AIDS and TB.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham), a member of the Committee on
Appropriations.
Mr. LATHAM. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding the time.
Mr. Speaker, this bill is very important. Helping people in need
overseas has always been a national priority, and I stand in favor of
H.R. 5501. However, I must say that helping American taxpayers hurt by
natural disasters should be our highest priority. This Congress is
letting them down.
According to the House and Senate leadership, there simply isn't
enough time for Congress to pass emergency aid to help Midwestern
States affected by the devastating floods last month.
Not enough time?
When Hurricane Katrina hit the gulf on Monday, August 29, 2005,
Congress began working. On Friday of that same week, the House and
Senate introduced, passed, and had a supplemental appropriation bill
signed into law that same day. Five days later another supplemental
bill was introduced and was signed into law the very next day. And in
2004 after Hurricanes Charlie and Frances landed, the Congress passed a
supplemental appropriations bill and had it signed into law in 1 week.
Yet here I stand almost 2 months after the most damaging natural
disaster in Iowa's history began and the Democrat leadership in the
House and the Senate are telling the people up and down the Mississippi
River that

[[Page 16426]]

they can wait until there is frost on the beans until we decide on
additional aid.
Earlier this week the Governor of Iowa told the leadership of this
House that Iowa alone needs an additional $1.2 billion more than FEMA
can provide. Iowa has suffered a loss of $10 billion. Now we are told
we will be waiting until September for a bill.
Where's the outrage? Well, I will tell you. It's in Iowa. It's with
the 25,000 homeless Iowans. It's with the small business owners, the
employers, the people who sacrificed their homes to help their
neighbors.
This House has had time since the first waters started flowing
through Midwestern homes to vote on numerous bills under the suspension
calendar. We have had time to designate the ``National Day of the
Cowboy'' and the ``National Carriage Driving Month.'' And 348 Members
of Congress walked over here to vote to honor the life of a musician
who had a number one hit entitled ``What's the Use of Getting Sober,
When You're Gonna Get Drunk Again?''
Well, it appears that Congress needs to sober up and help the people
of the Midwest. The House should not leave for the August recess until
we finish our work and help the victims of the Midwest.
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the
State of Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank the gentleman from New Jersey
for his leadership and the ranking member, the chairperson of the full
committee, Mr. Berman, and pay tribute to our good friends the late Tom
Lantos and Henry J. Hyde, who have captured, in essence, what our war
against HIV/AIDS is all about. It has to be comprehensive and
expansive. It has to recognize the overlapping impact of tuberculosis
and malaria.
Mr. Speaker, I think one of the most telling scenes that I was able
to experience, sadly so, was walking into a little hut in Zambia and
seeing an emaciated body or person, if you will, being taken care of by
a 4 year old. That individual had HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis.
So this legislation is crucial in the overall comprehensive war
against the devastating diseases when there is no water, no nutrition,
and poverty. This targets 12 million new HIV infections. It is treating
millions of people. It's supporting care for 12 million. It has a focus
on women and girls. It provides a focus on the anti-retroviral
treatment that is so important that goes after opportunistic
infections. It provides a certain amount of money, $9 billion, for
malaria and tuberculosis over 5 years. It goes to the very essence of a
4 year old being the only remaining healthy person in his family having
to care for sick relatives suffering from HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis and
many suffering from malaria.
This is an important step forward. And, yes, we have many
responsibilities in this Congress. I join my friend from Iowa. We will
be working hard to provide the support systems that those individuals
need. But at the same time, this is a tribute to great leaders like our
former and late chairpersons of this committee, Chairman Hyde and
Chairman Lantos, who recognized that to those who are given much, much
is expected.
This bill responds to the devastation and need around the world. I
ask my colleagues to support this legislation.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to speak on not only an
important issue in this country but around the world. I can only note
that it gives me great pause that my colleague, Congressman Tom Lantos,
did not live to see the fruit of his hard work on this bill. However, I
know his family and his colleague Congressman Henry Hyde have kept this
legislation alive and moving through this Congress.
Mr. Speaker, thank you for allowing for H.R. 5501, the Tom Lantos and
Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008 on PEPFAR to come
to the floor today.

jackson-lee amendment

I would also like to thank both Chairman Berman and the Chairman of
the Subcommittee on African and Global Health, Congressman Payne, for
working with me to include important language in this legislation. My
language, in Section 301 of this bill, addresses the necessity of
making children a priority among individuals with HIV for proper food
and nutritional support. Section 301, with my language included, states
that it is the sense of Congress that ``for the purposes of determining
which individuals infected with HIV should be provided with nutrition
and food support--(i) children with moderate or severe malnutrition,
according to WHO standards, shall be given priority for such nutrition
and food support; and (ii) adults with a body mass index, BMI, of 18.5
or less, or at the prevailing WHO-approved measurement for BMI, should
be considered `malnourished' and should be given priority for such
nutrition and food support;''
Mr. Speaker, as Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I
believe that this language is crucial, and I thank the Chairman for
including it in the text of the bill. HIV-infected children have been
underrepresented among beneficiaries of PEPFAR-supported programs. As
this legislation cites in the findings section, ``of those infected
with HIV, 2.5 million are children under 15 who also account for
460,000 of the newly-infected individuals.'' And even these large
numbers are deceiving, as children die much quicker from AIDS than do
adults. I am pleased to see this language, which focuses attention on
the plight of these children, and makes serving their needs a priority.

pepfar

In January 2003, President Bush announced the President's Emergency
Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR. As its name implies, PEPFAR was
envisioned as an emergency response; we are here today to discuss how
to transition to a sustainable program to address these global
epidemics.
HIV/AIDS continues to represent a serious and large-scale challenge
throughout much of the world. It goes far beyond a simple health
problem, and it hinders attempts to foster economic development and
political stability. As we begin the process of reauthorizing PEPFAR, I
believe it is crucial that we emphasize the long-term sustainability of
our HIV efforts, and that we integrate AIDS prevention and treatment
within our larger-scale development initiatives.
Though we have drugs that are effective in managing infections and
reducing mortality by slowing the progression to AIDS in an individual,
they do little to reduce disease prevalence and prevent new infections.
For this reason, there is growing consensus among health experts that
we must put greater emphasis on prevention programs, which are perhaps
the most critical aspect of any initiative to combat global HIV/AIDS.
Even as increasing numbers of people have access to anti-retroviral
drugs, ARVs, an estimated 5.1 million people who needed treatment did
not receive it in 2006.

tuberculosis

The World Health Organization, WHO, estimates that throughout the
world someone contracts TB every second and that one third of all
people in the world are currently infected with TB. Tuberculosis
spreads easily from one person to another: when the infected person
coughs, the bacilli or TB germs are spread into the air and another
person need only to inhale a small number of the bacilli to be
infected. The World Health Organization, WHO, estimates that each
person left untreated with active TB will infect, on average, between
10 and 15 people every year. Although the TB bacilli can lie dormant in
the body for years and its effects may not be immediately felt, if one
has a weakened immune system, such as through HIV/AIDS, the chances of
becoming sick will increase.
In 2005, nearly 9 million people contracted tuberculosis, of which 84
percent occurred in high burden countries, with all but two of the high
burden countries in Africa and Asia. This demonstrates the necessity
for special attention to these high burden countries, particularly in
Africa. Among the 15 countries with the highest estimated TB incidence
rates, 12 were in Africa, due in part to relatively high rates of HIV
co-infection. About 80 percent of all cases in the world were found in
22 countries, all but 4 were found in Africa or Asia.
Some 2.97 million people in Southeast Asia were newly infected with
TB and about 2.57 million in sub-Saharan Africa. In 2004, sub-Saharan
Africa was the only region in the world where TB prevalence was
growing; elsewhere the number of cases was stable or falling. Despite
our concerted efforts, we continue to face a serious and persistent
health threat. I believe that it is imperative that we ensure that
American taxpayer dollars are used to greatest effect, not to bolster
ideology.
Current restrictions on PEPFAR mandating that \1/3\ of all prevention
funds must be used on abstinence-only education neglect the real needs
of populations both in America and abroad. These stipulations hurt the
ability of PEPFAR to adapt its activities in accordance

[[Page 16427]]

with local HIV transmission patterns, and they impair efforts to
coordinate with national health plans. Though AIDS is clearly a global
problem, it does not affect every nation equally or in the same manner.
Removing these stipulations would allow PEPFAR to better address the
requirements of each country, making more efficient and effective use
of taxpayer dollars in serving the millions affected by this disease.
In addition, I believe it is crucial that we dedicate greater
attention to strengthening local health infrastructure. Health experts
have expressed concern that the high amount of spending directed toward
HIV/AIDS initiatives has drawn health workers away from public health
facilities and other important programs. This merely compounds a
chronic shortage of qualified health workers, which, according to WHO's
2006 World Health Report, is the single most important health issue
facing countries today. This need is felt particularly sharply in
Southeast Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.
Many health experts also continue to advocate greater integration
between PEPFAR and other health programs, including those focused on
nutrition, maternal and child heath, and other infectious diseases.
These experts note that HIV is intricately linked to these other areas
of concern; for example, malnutrition and lack of food may heighten
exposure to HIV, raise the likelihood of engaging in risky behavior,
increase susceptibility to infection, and complicate efforts to provide
anti-retroviral, ARV, medication. Further, an HIV epidemic will likely
worsen food insecurity, by depleting the agricultural workforce. I
believe it is necessary, to ensure maximum effectiveness, that we
integrate PEPFAR with other aspects of our international health
outreach and development programs.
Mr. Speaker, if we are to turn the tide of turmoil and tragedy that
HIV/AIDS causes to millions around the world, and hundreds of thousands
right here in our backyard, it is imperative that we continue to fund
and expand medical research and education and outreach programs.

hiv/aids

I want to share briefly the importance of continued action in
awareness for this virulent disease and the nexus between TB and HIV/
AIDS, another issue which I am passionate about and would like to see
eradicated as I am sure many of my colleagues would. According to the
World Health Organization, there were 33.2 million people living with
HIV/AIDS worldwide in 2007.
People living with HIV/AIDS are at a greater risk of becoming
infected with TB because of their weakened immunity. In 2004, out of
the more than 740,000 people who contracted TB and were co-infected
with HIV/AIDS, 600,000 of those co-infected were found in sub-Saharan
Africa.
Similar to TB, HIV/AIDS has risen to epidemic levels particularly for
our African countrymen. According to UNAIDS, in 2005, there were 3.2
million newly infected Africans and 2.4 million Africans who died of
HIV/AIDS related complications. The current life expectancy for a
person living with AIDS in Africa is 47 years old.
Such high rates of infection can be prevented. The transmission of
HIV can be reduced through proper education and resources.
Additionally, proper resources can help the treatment of HIV. We must
make these resources more accessible to those who need it most.

malaria

Malaria is another disease that must be addressed. According to the
World Health Organization, more than 500 million people become severely
ill with malaria and more than one million people die of malaria every
year, mostly infants, young children and pregnant women. Perhaps most
shocking is WHO's estimate that a child dies of malaria every 30
seconds. More than 90 percent of malaria cases occur in sub-Saharan
Africa.
Mr. Speaker, malaria is both preventable and curable. Early and
effective treatment can shorten its duration and prevent the
development of complications and the great majority of deaths.

concluding statements

Key factors that contribute to continuing high rates of HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria include: weak health care systems, poor
access to health facilities, insufficient staffing and other human
resource constraints, ill equipped and substandard laboratory services,
and little collaboration between TB and HIV programs.
Mr. Speaker, what is so striking about these factors is that they are
all preventable. We must address and work to rectify these human
factors that have led to such unnecessarily high fatality rates
throughout the world, particularly in African nations. I urge my fellow
colleagues to join me in support of PEPFAR and H.R. 5501.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), a member of the Committee on
Appropriations.
Mr. KIRK. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, 23 years as a staff member, I heard from WHO that AIDS
was not an epidemic based in New York, San Francisco, or Haiti, as we
thought back in 1985, but instead was an epidemic that raged in Zaire
for years.
I got my then boss, John Porter, and Democratic Congressman Bob
Mrazek to begin the foreign AIDS program. We were told by the leaders
of the Appropriations Committee that we could not do this, but we did.
We started with just a $25 million funding level, and as recently as
1999, I had a tough time even getting members to show up for a hearing
on this subject. I feel a bit like a country music singer who worked in
every honky-tonk for years before hitting the big time. But this bill
is the big time. It's the largest investment in health of another
country from just one country, the United States of America. The
original legislation put too many congressional restrictions on this
program. This frees up those restrictions.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I yield the gentleman 30 seconds, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, this legislation takes us in the right
direction by freeing up restrictions because we knew even back in 1985
that to save the most lives this program should be run by doctors and
not politicians.
Now, 23 years ago John Porter, Bob Mrazek, and I had no idea how
large and successful this program would be. My only wish is the head of
the Harvard Public School of Health, our first director of this early
program, Dr. Jonathan Mann, could be with us. Dr. Mann was killed in a
tragic airline accident, but I wish he could see us now.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to my
good friend from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).
Mr. SHAYS. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5501, the Tom Lantos and Henry
Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis,
and Malaria Reauthorization Act. I am pleased the committee named this
bill after two great leaders of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Chairmen
Lantos and Hyde, who guided the original 2003 act into law.
An estimated 38.6 million people are infected with HIV/AIDS
throughout the world today. The majority of them are women and girls.
In sub-Saharan Africa, women and girls make up 60 percent of those
infected with HIV/AIDS.
It is impossible to overstate the importance of ensuring we are doing
all we can to address the spread of this dreaded disease around the
world. It is heart breaking to think of children going to school with
no teachers, coming home to no parents.
H.R. 5501 would authorize $48 billion over 5 years to treat AIDS and
other global diseases and another $2 billion for Native American health
care, law enforcement, and drinking water programs.
America faces a new generation of threats in the 21st century,
including global health pandemics, terrorism, and climate change.
Today's legislation and other critical foreign assistance programs are
absolutely vitally important to our national interests and security.
Legislation like this helps make our country more secure and, just as
importantly, more humane.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield myself the
balance of my time.
I believe that PEPFAR is the most successful example of American
foreign assistance since the Marshall Plan. Just as the Marshall Plan
protected American lives by helping to stabilize a continent ravaged by
war, PEPFAR

[[Page 16428]]

is protecting American lives today by helping to stabilize a continent
ravaged by disease.

{time} 1700

More than just express American compassion, PEPFAR also protects
American security. Let us give our strong support to H.R. 5501.
In closing, I would like to thank the following staff members of our
Foreign Affairs Committee who have dedicated many long hours to
ensuring that this bill is signed into law and we can continue U.S.
efforts to save lives. For the majority, Dr. Bob King, Peter Yeo, Dr.
Pearl Alice Marsh, David Abramowitz and Kristin Wells. On our side, the
Republican side, Joan Condon, Mark Gage, Doug Anderson, Sarah Kiko, Sam
Stratman, Sheri Rickert, and our fabulous GOP staff director, Dr. Yleem
Poblete. Thank you so much.
Mr. Speaker, I hope that our colleagues will see the meritorious
nature of this proposal, because the HIV/AIDS pandemic is a significant
threat to global health. It's also a leading threat to global
stability. We can help fill this void. We can help stabilize the
continent. We can help save lives by passing this bill today and
sending it to the President's desk. As soon as tomorrow, we can have it
on the President's desk and have a bill signed by next week.
We are in a position where we can make a difference, because this
virus is killing millions of people in the prime of life. These are
parents. These are teachers. These are government officials, public
health workers and military officers, people who hold the fabric of
life together for their community. We have an opportunity to rise to
the challenge, pass this bill and save their lives and save a
generation of lives around the world.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.
The bill has been described, and its consequences have been
discussed. But I can't help but come back to the comments from my
friend from California (Mr. Rohrabacher) with respect to the effects of
this bill. The notion that there are now pregnant women who, because of
new discoveries in medicine, can take drugs which allow their baby to
be born without being HIV positive, I call that saving lives and curing
the problem. This is happening all over the countries where these
programs are working. The notion that the United States is helping to
take care of the orphans and other vulnerable children who are left
without parents as a result of this epidemic I call saving lives and
curing a problem.
And as the ranking member said in her opening comments, the effect on
these people and their recognition of the role the United States is
playing is having a--it's a secondary question, but it's an important
one--it's having a massive impact on how they perceive this country at
a time when, for many other reasons, this country has not been
perceived well in this world.
This has been a remarkable program that has gone on. And I want to
add my compliments to the staff, all the staff on the minority who
worked on it, as well as Peter Yeo and Pearl-Alice Marsh and David
Abramowitz, Kristin Wells, Heather Flynn with Chairman Don Payne,
Christos Tsentas with Congresswoman Lee, as well as Mark Synnes with
legislative counsel, Naomi Seiler and Jessica Boyer from the Oversight
Committee staff, and on the Senate Foreign Relations majority staff,
Brian McKeon and Shannon Smith. These are people who not only helped
put this bill together, not only invested huge amounts of their time in
working with the outside coalition forces, who have been working on the
ground on these issues in Africa and other places, and also dealt with
the administration, these are people who, when I got thrown into this
issue, helped educate me. And I'm very grateful for all they have done
to make this happen.
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5501.
Every day, 6,000 people become infected with HIV, over 1,000 of whom
are babies.
We have made terrific advancements in treating and preventing HIV/
AIDS, but they mean nothing unless we ensure that the most vulnerable
populations have access to them.
Since its inception, the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief,
PEPFAR, has saved countless lives and increasing our investment through
this reauthorization will save millions more.
I am especially proud to see that this reauthorization places
stronger emphasis on prevention.
Without increased efforts to prevent the transmission of HIV/AIDS, we
will never adequately address the long-term needs of the global HIV/
AIDS population and global health overall.
This bill takes important steps to increase prevention efforts by
overturning the ineffective one-third abstinence-only requirement that
currently applies to global HIV/AIDS prevention funding; providing an
increased focus on women and girls who are at-risk; and setting a
target for PEPFAR to provide 80 percent of pregnant women with the
tools they need to prevent maternal-to-child transmission of HIV.
Finally I am thrilled to see an increased investment in helping
countries to expand their healthcare workforce as they face drastic
shortages in skilled healthcare workers.
During my recent visit to Africa with the House Democracy Assistance
Commission, I had the opportunity to visit with doctors, nurses and
ministries of health in several countries.
They are desperate for more professionals who can treat individuals
affected with HIV/AIDS, especially in countries like Malawi where 15
percent of the population suffers from HIV/AIDS.
Our investments and improvements of PEPFAR fulfill a moral
responsibility that we are accountable to.
Our steadfast commitment to PEPFAR is also one of our proudest
foreign policy accomplishments over the past few years as we provide
the necessary humanitarian assistance required for countries to sustain
themselves in the long-term.
Finally, I would like to also applaud the provision removing the ban
on visas for HIV-infected individuals wishing to come to the United
States. This mean spirited statute should have been repealed long ago
and I am glad to see that it is finally being ended. Only a few
countries have such a policy and America should not be one of them.
I urge my colleagues to enthusiastically support this legislation and
I look forward to the success we are sure to see in addressing the
global HIV/AIDS epidemic.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, as one of the original cosponsors of the
House version of this bill, I am happy to see that it is about to
become law. This reauthorization affirms to our partners around the
world that we are with them for the long haul in the fight against HIV,
TB, and malaria.
The bill retains many of the important provisions of the House
version. It authorizes strengthening of local health systems and health
care workforces. It supports fiscal responsibility by directing the
purchase of safe drugs at the lowest available prices. And it
encourages operational research and the translation of lessons learned
into effective programming.
The bill incorporates Congresswoman Barbara Lee's legislation to
eliminate the HIV travel ban. This is an important policy step. And it
is an important message that we reject this relic of a time when fear
and stigma drove much of the nation's' response to AIDS.
But unfortunately, fear and stigma around HIV are still very real,
particularly when we talk about prevention. This bill notes the
importance of supporting healthy behavior change, and encourages the
expansion of male circumcision as an effective prevention method. But I
think there are parts of this bill where Congress could have spoken
more directly to the need for honest, evidence-based prevention
programming.
Injection drug users around the world are among the most vulnerable
to HIV prevention. This bill makes only brief mention of the need for
prevention strategy and other programs for this population. Our
implementers should understand how crucial this focus is to fighting
the epidemic, not only in countries with HIV driven mainly by drug use,
but also in countries with emerging, concentrated drug-related
epidemics.
The same applies to men who have sex with men. Due to stigma and
denial, the HIV prevention, treatment, and care needs of sexual
minorities are often unmet. This bill makes only passing reference to
men who have sex with men, but the program should be implemented in a
way that truly recognizes the needs of this population.
People involved in sex work are also very vulnerable to HIV
infection, along with many other health and social risks. I'm
disappointed that we haven't eliminated the current requirement that
recipients sign an ``anti-prostitution

[[Page 16429]]

pledge.'' The requirement has reportedly had the unintended consequence
of scaring grantees away from doing effective outreach programs for sex
workers. But U.S. officials, and all of our partners, should know that
Congress wants this law implemented in a way that best respects the
public health needs of this severely marginalized group.
Finally, I have concerns about integration of activities. I am
particularly disappointed that the bill does not explicitly encourage
the close integration of HIV programs with family planning and other
reproductive health services. What's more, language added to the bill's
``conscience clause'' could hinder effective integration, when we
should be doing everything we can to encourage referrals to important
health services.
All of these concerns do not outweigh my deep respect for what the
global AIDS program has accomplished, and my strong support of its
reauthorization. They do underscore the need for ongoing oversight of
how the program is designed and implemented, particularly in efforts to
reduce HIV transmission.
The first 5 years of PEPFAR showed that a remarkable scale-up of
effective treatment was possible in the developing world. It's time to
use all of the public health knowledge and resources we have to do the
same for prevention.
Mr. SIRES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5501, the Tom
Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008.
The passage of this bipartisan bill will continue Congress'
commitment to the fight against HIV, TB and malaria around the world.
This bill will dramatically boost HIV/AIDS and health care programs for
women and girls, as well as strengthen health and education systems in
nations hard-hit by the HIV virus.
H.R. 5501 also provides funding for orphans and vulnerable children,
as well as food and nutrition programs.
The World Health Organization estimates that over 38 million people
are living with HIV/AIDS and 95 percent of those people live in the
developing world.
We must be leaders in combating the global AIDS crisis and this bill
allows maximum flexibility for our staff on the ground. H.R. 5501
provides needed funding and support to transition the very successful
PEPFAR program from the emergency phase to the sustainability phase. I
urge all my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Senate
amendments to the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization
Act of 2008.
Five years ago, Congress showed leadership and passed legislation on
a bipartisan basis to address the global pandemics of HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis and malaria. While enormous progress has been made since
2003, the number of people who are affected by these diseases is still
staggering. The United Nations estimates that thirty-three million
people are living with HIV/AIDS worldwide, with AIDS causing
approximately 1.6 million deaths in sub-Saharan Africa in 2007.
We have a moral obligation to lead the fight against these global
diseases. This legislation will authorize $48 billion over five years
for our global HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria efforts. It will
allow the United States to provide continued assistance for these
pandemics in developing countries and will strengthen the health
systems in host countries by giving them more flexibility to plan,
direct, and manage prevention, treatment and care programs. I am also
pleased that this legislation includes a provision that authorizes
funding for the research and development of new tuberculosis vaccines,
which have the potential to save millions of lives.
Mr. Speaker, we still have much work to do. I urge my colleagues to
continue and reaffirm America's commitment to combating HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria by supporting this much-needed bipartisan and
bicameral legislation.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, five years ago, the United States made an
unprecedented commitment to the people of the world who suffer from
HIV/AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis. We pledged $15 billion--and with
that funding, we have: Provided life-saving drugs to almost 1.5 million
people; funded care for over 2 million orphans and vulnerable children;
and provided mother-to-child transmission prevention services during
more than 6 million pregnancies.
For millions, HIV/AIDS has been transformed from a death sentence to
a manageable condition--and Congress has played a very real role in
making that happen. On this issue, our moral obligation and our self-
interest speak with one voice. Not only do we have the opportunity to
save millions of lives--failing to do so will help proliferate disease
and instability, spreading bloodshed across borders.
Today, with the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde Global LeadershipAgainst
HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Reauthorization Act, we raise our
commitment to eradicating those diseases to a total of $48 billion. In
addition to expanding our prior efforts, this carefully negotiated
legislation will:
Strengthen HIV -related health care delivery systems and increase
health workforce capacities;
Foster stronger relationships between HIV/AIDS initiatives and other
support programs, including those that promote better nutrition and
education;
Allow HIV/AIDS testing and counseling to be provided as part of the
U.S. bilateral family planning program; and
Enhance prevention and treatment programs targeting women and girls.
This bill also eliminates a requirement that \1/3\ of prevention
funds be spent on abstinence--a requirement that has proven
ineffective. Instead, we have directed the Administration to create a
``balanced'' approach, requiring behavioral change programs to receive
50 percent of the funds devoted to the prevention of sexual
transmission of HIV. In the face of the AIDS pandemic, this bill will
show the world, unambiguously, that America accepts its obligation to
act.
Last year alone, 2.5 million people contracted HIV--roughly 6,800
every single day. And last year alone, 2.1 million AIDS victims were
added to the rolls of the dead. We are confronting a scourge far too
pressing, far too powerful, to be made the object of political
inaction. We have rarely faced a greater global challenge. We have
rarely needed a greater global solution.
I want to thank Congresswoman Barbara Lee for her hard work to shape
that solution. But most of all, I want to honor Tom Lantos. This bill,
in many ways, was the culmination of his career, his lifetime of
service. I wish he could be here to see it. But how perfect that Tom's
work, which began in the fight against tyranny in his homeland,
expanded to encompass the whole world, and the world's struggle against
the tyrannies of disease and poverty.
Chastened by the vast challenge of AIDS--but inspired by Tom's
example, and Henry Hyde's, as well--let us come together across the
aisle and join the struggle with all the force America can muster. Let
us pass this bill.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I in rise opposition to this irresponsible
legislation, which will ship $48 billion overseas as foreign aid at a
time when Americans are feeling the pressure of rapidly increasing
inflation and a weakened dollar. It is particularly objectionable to
ship money to fund healthcare overseas when so many Americans either
struggle with high healthcare costs or avoid seeking medical assistance
altogether due to lack of insurance or funds.
As we know, the Federal Government does not have $48 billion to send
overseas so it will have to print the money. It is a cruel irony that
this will add to inflation at home which will increase even further the
costs of healthcare in the United States.
Mr. Speaker, I am saddened by the prevalence of disease in
impoverished countries overseas. I certainly encourage every American
concerned about HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria overseas to
voluntarily provide assistance to help alleviate the problem. But I do
not believe it is appropriate--nor is it constitutional--to forcibly
take money from American citizens to send abroad. I urge my colleagues
to reject this and all foreign aid legislation.
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, this bill underscores the
United States' position as the world leader in the fight against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria.
In addition to all that the bill does to fight the three diseases on
a global level, the bill finally does away with an outdated and
unnecessary provision in immigration law that prevents persons with HIV
from visiting or immigrating to the United States.
This provision, in place for over 20 years, has kept parents from
children and sisters from brothers. It has slowed research and
discourse by preventing many researchers and other experts in the field
from entering the country. And it has significantly undermined our
leadership in the fight against HIV.
The U.S. is one of only 12 countries in the world to have such harsh
HIV-based restrictions on entry. The others include Sudan, Libya,
Russia and Saudi Arabia. Even China has recently overturned its ban.
This discriminatory policy has no basis in public health, and it
should have been stricken long ago.
Our immigration laws have long prevented the admission of persons who
have communicable diseases that HHS believes are of

[[Page 16430]]

``public health significance.'' In 1993, HHS sought to remove HIV from
this list. But Congress, in a time of fear and ignorance about the
disease, kept it in.
HIV is now the only medical condition permanently listed in the INA
as a basis for inadmissibility. For any other disease, HHS retains the
discretion to determine, with the wealth of medical and public health
expertise at its disposal, whether that illness should be a bar to
admission.
HHS does not believe that HIV should present such a bar. Neither do
the American Medical Association, the Centers for Disease Control, the
World Health Organization, and other public health organizations. These
experts agree that there is no medical or public health rationale for
this policy.
The policy also keeps world-renowned experts, doctors, and
researchers from participating in U.S. hosted efforts to combat the
epidemic. Indeed, since 1993, the International Conference on AIDS has
not been held on U.S. soil.
It is time we end this discriminatory policy.
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support
for H.R. 5501, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization
Act of 2008.
This important piece of legislation outlines the United States'
efforts to combat the devastating effects of AIDS, Malaria, and
Tuberculosis on our global community.
I am extremely encouraged that this bill declares Tuberculosis
control a major objective of U.S. foreign assistance programs--
particularly, that this bill will encourage the development of a TB
vaccine.
TB is the leading killer of people with HIV/AIDS, and the explosion
of drug-resistant TB in sub-Saharan Africa threatens to halt and roll
back our progress in combating both diseases.
In fact, the World Health Organization (WHO) reports that 1.7 milion
people died of tuberculosis in 2006, with 200,000 dying from HIV-
associated TB.
The TB germ is constantly changing and drug resistant strains have
been found in 28 countries on 6 continents.
Our current TB Vaccine, BCG, is more than 85 years old and is not
compatible against pulmonary TB, which accounts for most TB cases.
Even right here in the United States, it is estimated that 10 to 15
million people in the U.S. have latent TB.
Therefore, developing a vaccine has important implications both
internationally and domestically.
Studies also show that the ten year economic benefits of a TB vaccine
that was only 75 percent effective could result in an estimated savings
of $25 billion; no one can deny that this is a significant amount.
This legislation is a good start in our critical battle against TB
and we as a legislative body need to continue to work on TB efforts
both internationally and right here at home.
I strongly urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased that Congress has come
together in a bipartisan and bicameral way to address the devastating
impact ofHIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. The Tom Lantos and Henry
J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis,
and Malaria Reauthorization Act reaffirms our commitment to fighting
the causes and the spread of these terrible and largely preventable
diseases.
Treating HIV/AIDS is more than taking prescription drugs. I applaud
my colleagues in the House and Senate, particularly Chairman Berman and
Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen, for recognizing that fighting HIV/AIDS
means treating the person and not just the disease. The latest
breakthrough medicines are worthless without access to food, water, and
security.
This legislation makes the connection and contains an important
section to address barriers that limit the start of and adherence to
treatment services. There is specific recognition of the direct
linkages between efforts to treat HIV/AIDS and nutrition, income
security, and drinking water and sanitation programs.
We cannot treat HIV/AIDS without clean water. There is terrible irony
in providing patients with advanced antiretroviral agents, and asking
them to wash the life-saving pills down with a glass of water that may
infect them with a life-threatening, water-bourne illness. I am
particularly proud that my simple amendment to add safe drinking water
to the list of related activities vital to treatment is included here.
This small addition shapes our approach to treatment in a realistic and
profoundly positive way.
Much more must be done to deal with the global HIV/AIDS pandemic and
the problem of lack of access to safe drinking water and sanitization,
the world's leading preventable cause of death. The recognition of
these important linkages is a critical step forward in our
understanding and treatment of these diseases.
This bill is an important part of the tribute to our late colleagues,
Chairman Lantos and Chairman Hyde.
Mr. HONDA. Mr. Speaker, today the House of Representatives will vote
on H.R. 5501 the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization
Act of 2008.
As the Chairman of the Congressional Ethiopia and Ethiopian American
Caucus, I strongly support this critical reauthorization of the
President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). Although PEPFAR
supports a global effort, no one can argue against the fact that the
African continent has borne the brunt of the HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria
epidemics. The litany of grim statistics documenting the ravages of
HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria on dozens of African countries and millions
of people is familiar to all of us committed to a morally righteous
global war on poverty and disease. I have traveled to Ethiopia and
witnessed first-hand the courage of a people nurturing a fledgling
democracy in the face of terrible obstacles.
For me, what those statistics come down to is the human cost of
disease, countless orphans, hollow-eyed children raising children in
villages, cities, and countries devastated economically and spiritually
by death and fear. I have seen the resiliency and courage of people
who, with access to medicine and food, have raised themselves out of
abject poverty. As the wealthiest country in the world we have an
obligation to invest in the global community, and I support the passage
of this bill.
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Tom Lantos
and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008 (H.R. 5501) to
authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to provide
assistance to foreign countries to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria, and for other purposes.
I would first like to thank Honorable Howard L. Berman for
introducing this important legislation. The devastation of the HIV/AIDS
disease does not discriminate, and impacts the lives of us all. Recent
reports from the United Nations state that more than thirty-three
million people globally have been infected with HIV/AIDS.
This legislation takes a comprehensive approach to combating global
infectious diseases, specifically HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis by
providing funding for the prevention, education, testing, and
treatment. I support and applaud the substantial funding that H.R. 5501
provides to fight infectious diseases around the world. I am happy to
see that this bill authorizes $48 billion in spending over five years
for AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis. The bill would also authorize
operational research and health workforce strengthening initiatives,
and would eliminate the ban on HIV positive visitors and otherwise
qualified immigrants from entering the United States.
The HIV/AIDS pandemic has erased decades of progress in improving the
lives of families in the developing world and has claimed over 20
million lives since its inception. By supporting H.R. 5501, the U.S.
government has taken another major step in keeping its commitment to
the global AIDS response.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the Tom Lantos and
Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008.
The bill, which would reauthorize and expand the President's
Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, would provide $48 billion over five
years for programs to combat these three lethal diseases around the
world. President Bush is expected to sign the bill into law.
President Bush deserves credit for his work on this issue. I have
long supported this bold initiative that has made the U.S. a leader in
this critical health and moral issue of our time. By expanding its
scope, we would reach far more people around the world and save them
from these terrible diseases.
While the first five years of the initiative operated on an emergency
response policy, the bill's new provisions would allow for the
transition to long-term sustainability programs that can be maintained
by the host countries. It would increase HIV/AIDS programs focusing on
women and girls, work to better integrate the tuberculosis and malaria
programs with the HIV/AIDS programs, double the U.S. contributions to
the Global Fund, and strengthen language on countering HIV/AIDS for
victims of sex trafficking.
Since its inception in 2003, the United States has invested more than
$19 billion to

[[Page 16431]]

combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria and helped provide anti-
retroviral drug treatments to approximately 1.5 million people with
AIDS. It has also supported care for 6.6 million people--including 2.7
million orphans and vulnerable children--and helped to prevent more
than 157,000 infant infections.
Upon passage, over the next five years, the bill would greatly expand
funding for the initiative, authorizing $39 billion for HIV/AIDS
programs, $5 billion for malaria programs, and $4 billion for
tuberculosis programs. By 2013, U.S. support provided through PEPFAR
could help prevent 12 million new HIV infections, provide medical and
non medical care for 12 million people (including 5 million orphans),
and train 140,000 new health care workers.
I have heard from numerous Central New Jersey residents who are
concerned about the growing AIDS epidemic. This legislation
demonstrates the immense compassion Americans hold for the struggles we
share as a global community. When 6,000 people become infected with HIV
everyday, we must offer a full commitment to fighting the disease.
Mr. BERMAN: I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1362, the previous question is ordered.
Pursuant to section 2 of House Resolution 1362, further proceedings
on the motion will be postponed.

____________________

RELATING TO THE HOUSE PROCEDURES CONTAINED IN SECTION 803 OF THE
MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG, IMPROVEMENT, AND MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2003

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee
on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1368 and ask for its immediate
consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

H. Res. 1368

Resolved, That section 803 of the Medicare Prescription
Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 shall not
apply during the remainder of the 110th Congress.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for
1 hour.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. For the purpose of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to my good friend, the ranking Republican of the
Rules Committee, Representative Dreier.
All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.
I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I also ask unanimous consent, Mr. Speaker, that all Members be given
5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on
House Resolution 1368.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, as the Clerk just read, House
Resolution 1368 provides that section 803 of the Medicare Prescription
Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 shall not apply during
the remainder of the 110th Congress.
This resolution is needed today because of a procedural gimmick which
was stuck into the Republican Medicare prescription drug bill in the
dead of night shortly before the bill found its way to the floor back
in 2003. The provision was a way for Republicans to get conservatives
in their party to support an unpopular bill that may very well be the
largest campaign donor payback program in the history of this
institution. However, even this provision failed to prevent one of the
most shameful nights in the history of this institution as arms were
twisted and threats delivered into the wee hours of the morning to get
the votes needed to pass this bill.
Under current law, when the Medicare trustees project in two
consecutive trustee reports that general revenues will exceed 45
percent of Medicare spending within a 7-year window, an expedited
process is triggered to reduce the percentage. This expedited process,
however, bypasses regular order in the House, as well as the Rules
Committee. Once the percentage of Medicare funding coming from general
revenues reaches 45 percent, the President is required to send
legislation to the House and Senate that will address the matter. That
bill must then be introduced by the House majority and minority leaders
and referred to the appropriate committees.
The process by which that bill, or any bill meeting the requirements
of the trigger, moves through the committee process and is discharged
to the floor includes a privileged motion. The privileged motion
requires only one-fifth of the House, or just 87 Members, to second the
motion and force a vote on that motion that would bring the bill itself
to the floor for a vote. Under the trigger, if this small minority of
the House is successful and the motion passes the House, the bill would
come to the floor within 3 legislative days and can be debated with up
to 5 hours of general debate and 10 hours of debate on amendments.
Adding to the unprecedented nature of this provision, amendments are
given blanket waivers with the only requirement being certification by
the Budget Committee that the bill will eliminate excess Medicare
spending from general revenues. Astonishingly, the trigger waives the
rules of the House and blocks Members from raising points of orders
against the bill for earmark, PAYGO, or any other violation of House
rules. All that a Member needs to do to force a vote on discharging a
bill is introduce a bill titled ``To Respond to a Medicare Funding
Warning.'' As long as that bill meets the requirements of the Budget
Committee, then anyone, Democrat or Republican, may seek to disrupt the
proceedings of the House. Realize, if the House fails to pass this
resolution today, it will leave itself vulnerable to chaos and
extraordinary political gamesmanship.
We will lay the groundwork to effectively becoming the Senate,
stalled and unable to act as a victim of its own rules and procedures.
Every moment of every day here in session, under the guise of trying to
fix Medicare, a Member could move to discharge a bill which includes
provisions that have nothing to do with Medicare. The only way to avoid
this chaos and potential shutdown of the House in the 110th Congress is
for the House to pass this resolution today.
What is perhaps most troubling about this entire process, Mr.
Speaker, is that Congress fixed the revenue problem in a more
comprehensive manner last week when the House and Senate both voted to
override the President's veto on the Medicare Improvements for Patients
and Providers Act. In that bill, Democrats, in a bipartisan fashion,
removed waste, fraud and abuse in the Medicare advantage plan without
hurting seniors. Under our leadership, seniors continue to have access
to their doctors and prescription drugs without having their premiums
raised or coverage reduced.
Very occasionally, Mr. Speaker, many of us talk with different people
in our constituency. Last week I had an opportunity to talk with a
physician in this city named Stern. And Dr. Stern indicated to me that
I should, among other things, fight real hard to have people understand
how effective Medicare is and what a single payer plan could do for
this Nation. We talked considerably about this, and I'm delighted that
I had an opportunity to be edified by someone that is in this
profession.
But because of this Medicare trigger provision, a provision which was
not in the House or Senate bill and was slipped in the conference, I
will repeat, slipped in the conference during the dead of night, and I
was here, Pete Stark and David Dreier, all of us were here when this
happened, forced to deal with the legacy of, in my opinion, the
misguided former majority.
I urge my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, to do the right thing and support
this resolution.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume.
Let me begin by expressing my appreciation to my good friend, my
Rules Committee colleague from Fort Lauderdale, for yielding me the
customary 30 minutes. And I have to say that I rise in strongest
possible opposition to this rule. Only under this new majority, Mr.
Speaker, could an attempt to

[[Page 16432]]

ensure fiscal responsibility be described as nothing more than a
procedural gimmick, and only under this new majority, Mr. Speaker, can
we once again be taking action that totally subverts what we're all
about here, and that is an open and fair debate.
At issue today is a provision enacted by Republicans to ensure that
Medicare is administered in an effective and a responsible way. When we
created the prescription drug benefits for seniors, we included a
provision to require regular reports on how Medicare is funded. We
wanted to know, is the Medicare trust fund sufficient to cover the
costs? Or are we drawing from the general Treasury to pay for it? And
if we are, how much? If two consecutive reports indicated that over 45
percent of Medicare's costs would come from the general Treasury over
the next 7 years, Congress would have to act. We did not mandate what
steps Congress would have to take. We simply required that solutions be
examined, debated and brought to a vote, something that seems to be
anathema to this new majority.
We believed this provision was critically important because we, as
Republicans, have two very important goals for Medicare.

{time} 1715

First, it must effectively provide health care coverage for our
seniors. Second, Mr. Speaker, it must be run efficiently and
responsibly.
Today we are confronting exactly the scenario that concerned us and
led to this point. We have had two consecutive reports indicating that
Medicare will exceed the cost threshold for years to come. In
accordance with the law, the President submitted a proposal to restore
fiscal discipline while ensuring that seniors continue to receive high
quality care. Under the rules of the House, we are approaching the
deadline to consider the proposal. But this new majority leadership,
unable or unwilling to address runaway costs, simply wants to make this
attempt at good governance go away, completely vanish. The rule before
us today would quash the provision requiring us to consider a
legislative fix. It allows runaway entitlement spending to continue
unabated.
Naturally, our good friends on the other side of the aisle are going
to try to distract us from the facts today.
They are going to rail against the circumstances, as we have already
heard from my friend from Fort Lauderdale surrounding the original
prescription drug vote in an attempt to obscure the real issue. This is
a favorite trick of theirs, Mr. Speaker. The Democratic majority
leadership cannot defend their own actions, so they stir up fights
about Republicans. They can thunder away about 5-year-old fights all
they want, but it won't absolve them of the actions that they are
trying to take here today. Today they are in charge. They are
responsible for their actions as the majority. They cannot distract the
American people from the fact when they were presented with a proposal
for reforming the cost of Medicare, they decided to change the rules
and ignore the problem. That's exactly what is happening here.
Mr. Speaker, we have a legislative fix that was submitted by the
President of the United States and introduced by the majority and the
minority leaders as required by the fiscal discipline procedures put
into place by Republicans in this important bill. It recommends two
steps to rein in skyrocketing costs. One, it lowers the government
subsidy for prescription drug coverage for high-income seniors to save
$3.2 billion over 5 years. Second, it reforms the medical liability
system and puts patients before trial lawyers, saving nearly $4
billion.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I don't know that that is the panacea, but those
are a good start and those are the proposals that the majority leader
and the minority leader introduced as required under this law.
I know some people may not like those savings. Some of my friends on
the other side of the aisle are enamored with the present liability
system and believe that we need more litigation, not less. Others may
feel that everyone, regardless of income, should get the full
prescription drug subsidy.
There may be disagreement on these issues, but they are worthy of
consideration and debate, which is what this institution is all about.
Debate is exactly what was envisioned by this proposal. It provided for
at least ten separate alternatives, each debatable for up to an hour.
My friend is absolutely right, it could take 10 hours, but God forbid
we spend 10 hours discussing an issue as important as this. We imposed
no restrictions. Any proposal for reining in costs could be considered
and debated. This is a foreign concept in the 110th Congress, but we
actually believe that open, rigorous debate is the key to finding
solutions to our most difficult challenges.
Unfortunately, the rule before us today continues a very troubling
pattern: the Democratic majority leadership would rather duck and cover
than stand and deliver on a very important issue for the American
people.
In case the American people haven't noticed, Mr. Speaker, the House
of Representatives has been locked in a legislative holding pattern. We
have at least five appropriations bills which have been ordered
reported by the Appropriations Committee. How many have been considered
on the floor during this very important traditional appropriation
month? Not a single one. Zero. Nada. None.
The same is true for real energy legislation. Oh, we've had fig
leaves on the floor like the one we had just a couple of hours ago. But
the majority is not interested in debate on these measures. They bring
controversial energy legislation that no one has ever seen to the
floor, and then they impose ultra-restrictive rules so that
Republicans, or Democrats, cannot offer their own ideas.
These flawed bills fail, of course, but the Democrats get to avoid a
real debate on the important issues of conservation, alternative energy
sources, and yes, new domestic supplies of oil.
This pattern continues today with this rule. Instead of having a real
debate on legislation to reform the Medicare program, we are using the
rules to completely avoid the program altogether.
The reason, Mr. Speaker, is simple. The Democratic majority
leadership is more concerned about protecting their Members from tough
votes than engaging in the honest and open debate they promised the
American people when they won the majority nearly 2 years ago. They are
more interested in maintaining their electoral fortunes than tackling
the tough business of actually governing.
Now if press reports are to be believed, the Democratic majority
plans to avoid the most basic responsibility we have as legislators:
making decisions about our spending priorities. Instead of doing the
business of passing appropriations bills and considering legislation on
key issues like how we can get gasoline prices down and how we deal
with Medicare, they are going to punt all of the tough choices until
the next administration. I am just shaking my head and asking, Mr.
Speaker, what is it that we are doing here and what is it that we are
afraid of when it comes to doing our work in this 110th Congress?
We have an opportunity right here and right now to break this
pattern. If we defeat this rule, we can have a real debate on
alternatives to reform Medicare spending. We can start the business of
governing and have a real debate on the real issue of fiscal
responsibility, which is exactly what this provision is all about.
But if we pass this rule, it is another blow to responsible
government. It is another example of how far the Democratic majority
leadership has fallen from the principles that they ran on and promised
the American people nearly 2 years ago.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous
question and vote ``no'' on this rule.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
I want to say to my friend, the ranking member, everything debated in
this House doesn't have to be a battle.

[[Page 16433]]

Turning off this provision is the correct thing to do, and I will tell
you why.
The perceived problem with Medicare funding has already been
addressed. Let me repeat that. The perceived problem with Medicare
funding has already been addressed. The recently enacted Medicare
Improvements for Patients and Providers Act fixed the funding of
Medicare to keep it below the 45 percent trigger.
Let me refresh your memory. On July 15, the House voted to override
the President's veto of this important legislation. Every single member
of the Rules Committee, Democrat and Republican, voted to override.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee
and a champion of SCHIP, which required overriding twice a veto by the
President.

Announcement By the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their
remarks to the Chair.
Mr. PALLONE. I thank my friend from Florida, and I rise in support of
this rule.
Since its inception, Democrats have been the party to keep Medicare
working for America's seniors and disabled. Contrast that with
Republicans when they were in charge. During their majority, Medicare
funding increased dramatically so they could shower their pals in the
insurance industry with higher reimbursements than regular Medicare,
all in an effort to privatize the program.
Republicans are willing to look past all of that, pat themselves on
the back and call themselves the party of fiscal responsibility because
of some arbitrary policy that they inserted into the Medicare
Modernization Act that pretends to address Medicare financing. This
provision is more about smoke and mirrors than it is about ensuring
Medicare remains intact.
Republicans say it is about cost containment; I say it is about cost
shifting. The sad truth is that the 45 percent trigger is designed to
reduce the obligation of the Federal Government to fund part of
Medicare, thereby shifting more costs to beneficiaries.
Since taking control of Congress, Democrats have set out to put
Medicare on a sustainable track. During our first year in charge, the
House passed the CHAMP Act which would have extended Medicare solvency
by 2 years by reducing wasteful overpayments to Medicare Advantage
plans. And just a couple of weeks ago, we enacted the Medicare
Improvements for Patient and Providers of 2008 against the President's
objections.
According to the CBO, under that bill the 45 percent threshold would
be first crossed in fiscal year 2014, 1 year later than under the prior
law. So I say contrary to what my friends on the other side of the
aisle are saying, the fact of the matter is that Democrats are being
fiscally responsible. Democrats are confronting Medicare's challenges,
and we don't need an arbitrary policy that is a relic of the previous
majority in order to do that.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 1 minute to the very
distinguished gentleman from Westchester, Ohio, our distinguished
Republican leader, Mr. Boehner.
Mr. BOEHNER. I thank my colleague from California for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, just as the Democrat leadership of this Congress is
sticking its collective head in the sand when it comes to energy
legislation, it is doing the same with the entitlement crisis that we
face.
My colleagues, ignoring this crisis won't make it go away. But this
is just what the measure before us will do, allow us to ignore this big
problem for just a little while longer.
Earlier this year, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
warned that if Congress doesn't act, government health care spending
will grow to over $2 trillion by 2017. Medicare alone will account for
almost one-quarter of this total. We can't afford that, our children
can't afford that, and most certainly our grandchildren can't afford
it.
But today, the majority is saying, well, we are just going to wait
for the next generation of lawmakers to deal with this problem instead
of doing what we should do now. The majority is also saying something
else. They are saying thank you to their trial lawyer allies. This is
something that they have said quite often during the last 2 years, as
we all know. By not addressing the Medicare funding crisis in a
comprehensive way, we are dodging fundamental liability reform that the
entire health care system needs so sorely. Who gains? Trial lawyers.
Who loses? Patients, doctors and taxpayers.
The majority leader said several months ago that he believed Medicare
reform would be one of the most important issues for the next Congress
and the next administration. Well, with the bill before us, it is clear
that the majority leader meant what he said. But I think it is
regrettable. It is irresponsible, and it is unfair to our children and
theirs, not to mention the seniors who rely on this program today. They
are going to bear the consequences of our refusal to step up and do the
right thing.
I urge my colleagues to defeat this. Let's have the courage to do
what the American people sent us here to do: to solve this entitlement
crisis in a fair and bipartisan way.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, before I yield to the next
speaker, I won't respond to the distinguished minority leader, but I
would like to submit the statements of the AARP and the National
Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare in support of this
resolution.

National Committee To Preserve Social Security and Medicare,

Washington, DC, July 24, 2008.
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative: On behalf of the millions of members
and supporters of the National Committee to Preserve Social
Security and Medicare, we strongly urge you to support H.
Res. 1368 when it comes to the House Floor. H. Res. 1368
would suspend section 803 of the Medicare Modernization Act
of 2003 (known as the Medicare ``trigger'') for the remainder
of the 110th Congress.
The Medicare ``trigger'' requires the Medicare Trustees to
include a finding in their annual report whenever they
project that general revenues will make up more than 45
percent of total Medicare funding within the first seven
years of the 75 year valuation period. This finding was made
in the two most recent annual reports, thus requiring the
President to submit legislation to Congress to bring the
federal contribution to Medicare down below the 45 percent
threshold. The legislation is subject to expedited procedures
designed to hasten its consideration. H. Res. 1368 would
suspend the Medicare ``trigger'' through the remainder of the
110th Congress.
The 45 percent threshold at which the ``trigger'' is set
was a completely arbitrary limit included in the Medicare
Modernization Act. There has never been a public debate on
whether it is appropriate to establish a cap on the federal
revenue contribution to the Medicare program at any level,
nor has any policy rationale been identified for selecting 45
percent as that federal contribution limit. The fact that
more than 45 percent of Medicare financing may come from
general revenues poses no more of a problem in itself than
the fact that 100 percent of the financing for defense,
veterans' benefits, education or most other federal programs
comes from general revenues. The problem facing Medicare is
the cost of health care, not how the cost is allocated
between revenue sources.
Limiting the federal government's contribution to the
Medicare program ignores Medicare's financing structure,
which was designed to rely on general revenues to finance
about 75 percent of Part B and Part D. This structure allows
the revenue raised by income taxes to shoulder a higher
portion of the responsibility for Medicare's funding, placing
the burden on a revenue source which is relatively
progressive and taxes all income.
If general revenue contributions are limited, the burden
would shift to beneficiaries, who are typically retirees on
fixed incomes or the disabled, generally the least able to
shoulder the burden of increased costs. In fact, about 70
percent of Medicare beneficiaries have incomes under $25,000
and 85 percent have incomes under $40,000. Nearly two-thirds
of older households have incomes under $20,000, and they are
already spending 30-50 percent of their incomes on health
care.
Arbitrarily cutting Medicare without getting at the root of
the continuing upward trend of health care costs is a
strategy for failure. It has real impacts on real people--
most of whom have nowhere else to go for coverage and limited
ability to pay higher medical costs, accounting for rising
senior bankruptcies.

[[Page 16434]]

Measuring Medicare's financial health solely by considering
the percentage of general revenues contributed to the program
produces a meaningless number, which will nonetheless be used
as a catalyst for policy decisions that could have a
devastating effect on the health care of seniors and people
with disabilities. For example, the 45 percent limit has been
triggered, in part, because more beneficiaries are being
treated in outpatient settings than in hospitals. While this
shift may disproportionately increase costs for Medicare Part
B, which accelerates the date at which the cap will be
reached, when compared with Part A, which is not counted in
the limit, it is generally considered a positive development
in health care.
A second major reason the cap was triggered is the Part D
prescription drug program. Although Part D is providing
needed drugs to millions of seniors, the cost of these drugs
is still rising much faster than general inflation. We
believe this is the result of the lack of a traditional
Medicare drug option, which the Medicare Modernization Act
specifically prohibited. In addition, the Act provided
billions of dollars in subsidies in order to entice private
insurance and drug companies into the Medicare program. While
passage last week of H.R. 6331 helped trim some of the most
egregious overpayments, billions in subsidies continue to
flow to private companies. Both the rising cost of drugs and
the private sector subsidies provide little or no benefit to
Medicare enrollees, yet they contribute to the rise in costs
both for beneficiaries and the federal government--and
accelerated the date at which the cap was reached.
Finally, the legislation submitted by the President in
response to the ``trigger'' could have devastating
consequences to Medicare beneficiaries with little oversight
by Congress. For example, Section 101(d) of the implementing
legislation directs the Secretary of the Department of Health
and Human Services to design and implement a new performance-
based reimbursement system for all Medicare providers as well
as a new ``incentive'' program intended to drive Medicare
beneficiaries to selected providers under this new system.
With this one provision, Congress would delegate to the
Secretary unprecedented authority to change the way the
Medicare program operates through the regulatory process,
rather than reserving such important decisions for Congress
and the Committees of jurisdiction.
The President's legislation also would dramatically expand
Medicare means-testing through a provision that has been
proposed repeatedly as part of the President's budget
submission only to be rejected by Congress. Section 301 of
the President's bill would expand means-testing to include
the Part D program, a policy which many experts believe would
be extremely difficult to administer, and further would not
allow the income limits to rise to reflect inflation. Income
limits that are not indexed ultimately affect far more people
than the ``wealthy'' they are originally designed to cover--a
fact well demonstrated by the current reach of the
Alternative Minimum Tax.
Medicare faces challenges in the future, but they are not
unique to the Medicare program--they reflect the same
pressures driving health care costs for those under age 65.
Addressing these challenges will not be advanced by a
contentious debate on the share of program costs funded
through general revenues. In fact, such a debate will
distract from the true challenge of Medicare: determining how
to provide high-quality health care for an aging population
in an era of rising health care costs.
We strongly urge the House to suspend the Medicare
``trigger'' by passing H. Res. 1368 and focus instead on
making health care affordable for all Americans.
Cordially,
Barbara B. Kennelly,
President & CEO.
____

AARP: Medicare Trigger Ignores Real Problem--Skyrocketing Health Care
Costs

Washington--David Sloane, AARP's Senior Vice President for
Government Relations and Advocacy, issued the following
statement on a scheduled vote today in the House of
Representatives to consider a bill brought on by the Medicare
``trigger'':
``The Medicare trigger is an unfortunate and misguided
effort that could do more harm than good. That's why AARP
supports the legislation being considered today by the House
that would delay trigger action.
``Medicare's financial woes are symptomatic of the runaway
costs of the overall health care system. Medicare's troubles
can only be solved by systemic health care reforms.
``Arbitrary Medicare cuts will needlessly hurt millions of
Americans without addressing the core problems. If Congress
is serious about controlling spiraling health care costs, the
way to go about it is to have a thoughtful debate on the
systemic drivers of health care costs in this country, not to
take a meat axe to Medicare in the middle of the night.
Congress is gearing up for that debate next year, and we look
forward to working on serious, bipartisan efforts to reform
our health care system.''

Mr. Speaker, I yield at this time 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Arkansas (Mr. Berry), a member of the Budget Committee.
Mr. BERRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for
yielding.
I never rise that I don't encourage anyone that can hear me to keep
in their hearts and minds and in their prayers our men and women in
uniform and their families, and especially those on the battlefield
today.
Having said that, it is interesting to hear our colleagues on the
other side of the aisle talk about fiscal responsibility. It is
interesting to hear them suddenly have an attack of concern about our
children and grandchildren and the debt that is going to be passed on
to them which includes pretty close to $8 trillion that their party has
built up and their Presidents have built up.
It is clear and has been for many years that the Republican Party
intends to destroy Medicare any way it can. ``Let it wither on the
vine'' were the very words that they used.
The interesting thing about this is we know how to fix these things.
Health care is not so complicated we can't fix it. It is a matter of
getting the collective, bipartisan political willpower to do the right
thing.

{time} 1730

This particular problem can be fixed with a very simple thing, just
do away with the overpayment to the private health care plans, $4.6
billion we overpay the private plans. Why would we want to be so
generous to the insurance companies?
I certainly don't like the idea of my children and grandchildren
having to pay off a debt that we incurred because we overpaid the
insurance companies. What is so special, I wonder, about the insurance
companies that we can't resist to take care of them over and over
again?
I urge my colleagues to vote against this provision.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 3 minutes
to the very distinguished ranking Republican on the Committee on Ways
and Means, the gentleman from Shreveport, Louisiana (Mr. McCrery).
Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I have some prepared remarks, but I want to
address a couple of things that have been said, because I think it's
important for the House to understand.
Number one, the gentleman from Florida said that we have already
solved this problem, and he is right in one sense. There was enough of
a pay-for in the last Medicare bill that we passed, that had we couched
it properly, we could have used as a pay-for to get us within the
window required by MMA, but we didn't do that. We didn't go through the
proper procedure. So to suggest that we now can just do away with the
rule because in some other bill we created enough funding that would
have worked had we followed the proper procedure, I think, is a very
tenuous argument.
The whole purpose of the provision, and the second thing I want to
address, is this notion that this was slipped in in the dead of night,
and it was just totally a Republican effort to somehow kill Medicare. I
would say to the House that this suggestion was first made by the
National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare that was
chaired by Bill Thomas and John Breaux, a Republican and a Democrat.
So we didn't come up with this in the dead of night. It is something
that had been circulating, and I thought it was a good idea then, I
think it's a good idea now. It's regrettable that the House stands
ready today to dispose of this very worthwhile rule.
All the rule was intended to do, it wasn't intended to kill Medicare.
What it was intended to do is force us to face the problem every year,
because we all know, those of us who are familiar with the program,
familiar with the structure of the program and the financing of the
program, know that more than 45 percent of general revenues are going
to be used to pay the costs of this program very soon. Then it will be
every year, and it will grow.
In fact, if we allow this program to go on autopilot, it will grow
from about 2.7 percent of GDP this year to

[[Page 16435]]

over 14 percent of GDP by the end of the 75-year CBO window, over 14
percent. We only take in in revenues, total revenues, between 18 and 19
percent of GDP. So if we allow this program to just go like it is now
without discussion or debate or reform, we are going to have to do away
with most spending for defense, education, roads, highways, unless, of
course, we have a dramatic increase in taxes.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to tell this House that the
product would be irresponsible.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this
irresponsible change in the rules of the House.
The resolution before us today would prevent the House from having to
hold any debate about the looming financial crisis facing the Medicare
program. Apparently, the Democrats don't want to talk about reforming a
program that is slated to go bankrupt in 2019.
This rules change isn't about a specific proposal to change Medicare.
What it would do is repeal a bipartisan provision that would force
Congress to at least take note of Medicare's increasingly unsustainable
financial situation and begin to consider solutions.
But instead of having an open discussion about how to address the
out-of-control costs of this program, today's resolution allows the
Congress to bury its head in the sand and kick the can down the road,
letting a future Congress deal with this ever worsening problem. This
is irresponsible.
The facts are clear. Medicare is facing bankruptcy. The combination
of rising health care costs and an aging population have created a
financial hurricane on the not-too-distant horizon.
Last year, Medicare spending totaled about 2.7 percent of our GDP.
That figure will more than double by 2030 and hit 14.8 percent by the
end of the CBO's 75-year budget window. Since total federal revenues,
historically, have been between 18-19 percent, it is clear we cannot
let Medicare spending increase on auto-pilot unless we are willing to
substantially raise taxes or cut all other government spending.
The need for structural reform of Medicare is not just Republican
rhetoric. In recent testimony before the Ways and Means Health
Subcommittee, the non-partisan Medicare Payment Advisory Committee
(MedPAC), which was created by Congress to advise us on Medicare
payment issues, said that, ``The [Medicare] program's shaky financial
outlook is a strong impetus for change.''
Now my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will claim that this
45 percent trigger was created by Republicans as a way to privatize or
block grant the Medicare program. Let me remind them that this policy
was first suggested by a bipartisan Medicare task force that was
chaired by Democratic Senator John Breaux.
And let me also point out that there are many ways that we could
solve this problem. But ducking it is surely not on that list.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this rule change. This
problem will not go away just because we ignore it. The longer we wait
to address it, the more difficult the solution will be.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am very pleased
to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from North Dakota, a
friend of mine and classmate, a member of the Committee on Ways and
Means, Mr. Pomeroy.
Mr. POMEROY. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I have a great deal of respect for the preceding
speaker, the ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee. The facts
of what he said are absolutely correct. Health care costs are out of
control. They are threatening the future of the Medicare program. They
are threatening the future of U.S. health care.
But the issue before us is a trigger which would have one of two
results, only one of two results, cut Medicare benefits or raise
Medicare premiums on our seniors. Now, if we are going to address, and
we need to address the underlying systemic problems in our health care
system, but this trigger, which would simply cut Medicare or raise
seniors' premiums, is not the way to systemically address our problems.
I believe that it's incorrect to single out Medicare for this
treatment, to single out seniors for the overall problem of broader
health reform. We need to work together on health reform. I hope the
next Congress will give us an opportunity to do that, but the months
remaining in this Congress don't.
Look, we had to override the President's veto to prevent a 10 percent
cut in physician reimbursements under Medicare, cuts that would have
threatened universal access of our seniors under Medicare. We had to
override a veto. So moving forward with a trigger mechanism that at
this hour in the administration is going to cut Medicare or raise
seniors' premiums is certainly not the way to address the broader
issues of health care costs.
I look forward, as a member of the Ways and Means Committee, to
working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle as we address
health care costs. Let's not have this trigger.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say we have a wide range of
choices as to how we can cut spending.
At this time I am happy to yield 2 minutes to my very distinguished
friend, the gentleman from Springfield, our distinguished Republican
whip, Mr. Blunt.
Mr. BLUNT. I thank my good friend for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I heard my good friend say we ought to deal with this in
the next Congress, and I wonder why, why the next Congress. Why not
this Congress? The reason we are having this critical we must vote
today, vote right now, is that we haven't taken advantage of this
opportunity to move forward on reform. The notice came up weeks ago. In
fact, the notice came up months ago, and that's when the majority could
have brought a great debate to the floor instead of the debate about
whether we should debate or not.
Over a decade ago, Congress created the National Bipartisan
Commission on the Future of Medicare. One of the recommendations of the
commission was to require a trigger so that the Medicare trustees in
Congress will have to publicly debate whenever the Medicare program is
in danger of becoming insolvent. The trigger is one of the many
recommendations of this commission, not ideas just out of thin air,
recommendations of this commission that were formally adopted as part
of the Medicare prescription drug bill in 2003.
But this Congress seems to never miss an opportunity to miss an
opportunity. I am very disappointed that the Democrat leadership has
halted consideration of key legislation designed to safeguard the
future of Medicare, reconsideration, in fact, that's required by law
unless we today vote to say we are not obeying that law. If not obeying
that law is the right thing to do, I don't know what could be more
important than having a discussion on the future of Medicare, unless it
would be the future of energy, and we are not having that discussion
either.
Let's debate it, let's talk about it, let's see what we can do. One
of the ideas that we have put forward that apparently is particularly
fearsome is medical liability reform. If this rule passes, we will
avoid being forced to debate and vote on lawsuit abuse and its impact
on seniors, taxpayers and doctors. Such a reform will lower health care
costs for all Americans and save Medicare $4.8 billion over the next
decade.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Missouri has
expired.
Mr. DREIER. I am happy to yield my friend an additional minute.
Mr. BLUNT. They don't want to debate means testing for wealthy
seniors or more competition to serve patients. We could be doing all of
those things today. We could be doing none of those things today. We
could be debating whatever the majority wants to debate.
The point is we could be having a debate about the future of
Medicare. First, we are afraid to debate energy. Now we are afraid to
debate Medicare. What are we willing to debate on the floor of this
House?
I want to have that debate. I oppose this vote to run away from those
solutions.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit in the Record the statement of
the Health Coalition on Liability and Access on this legislation. That
states that medical liability reforms are a central part of reducing
costs and improving access and quality in the Medicare program.

[[Page 16436]]

[From the Health Coalition on Liability and Access, July 24, 2008]

Statement From HCLA Chair on Medicare and Medical Liability Reform

Washington, DC.--HCLA Chair Shawn Martin issued the
following statement regarding today's Congressional vote on
Medicare:
``Today Congress will consider legislation pertaining to
the so-called ``trigger'' provision of the Medicare
Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003.
Complying with the law's requirements, the President has put
forward legislation, which includes medical liability
reforms, to address the Medicare funding issue. The Health
Coalition on Liability and Access believes that medical
liability reforms are a central part of reducing costs and
improving access and quality in the Medicare program.
``Medical lawsuit abuse drives up the cost of medicine for
everyone. In fact, it's estimated that medical liability
reform would save Medicare $4.8 billion annually, not
including savings from reductions in the practice of
defensive medicine.
``Comprehensive medical liability reforms have a proven
track record of success at the state level of reducing health
care costs and increasing patient access to quality medical
care. Controlling our nation's Medicare costs is one more
reason America needs national medical liability reform.''

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased at this time
to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina,
who is the chairperson of the Budget Committee, my good friend, Mr.
Spratt.
Mr. SPRATT. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, we are here today because the Medicare Modernization Act
of 2003 includes a trigger. That trigger is exercised when general fund
revenues, as opposed to trust fund revenues, premiums and payroll
taxes, exceed 45 percent of the Medicare program.
Once the Medicare trustees determine in two back-to-back reports that
the 45 percent threshold will be crossed within 7 years, the
administration must submit legislation ``eliminating excess general
revenue Medicare funding.''
The trustees submitted their first such report last year, projecting
that general revenues would fund 45.07 percent of Medicare in 2013, the
last year of the 7-year window. This year the trustees issued a similar
warning, and the administration sent Congress a bill to keep general
revenues below 45 percent through 2013. According to CBO's analysis,
the administration's bill will hold general revenues below 45 percent
until 2014 by charging higher premiums to Medicare beneficiaries who
make above a certain income level.
Instead of enacting the administration's proposals, the House and
Senate enacted last week into law the Medicare Improvements for
Patients and Providers Act of 2008 over the President's veto. CBO
calculates that this new law will keep general revenues below the 45
percent threshold through 2014, just as the administration's bill would
have. So substantively and for all practical purposes, we have met the
trigger's financial requirements, and we have made this issue moot for
the rest of this Congress.
I support the rule before us which would turn off the Medicare
trigger for the remainder of this Congress. I find, as the chairman of
the Budget Committee, the legislation we have just enacted ``eliminates
excess general revenue Medicare spending'' and complies with the
Medicare law's financial test. Consequently, there is no need or reason
to exercise the trigger.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Cuellar). The time of the gentleman has
expired.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. SPRATT. I thank the gentleman.
I would add that the Children's Health and Medicare Protection Act
would have accomplished and satisfied the law's requirement, also, if
for technical reasons it had been entitled ``a bill to respond to
Medicare funding warning.''
I support this resolution and urge its adoption.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the Chair how much time is
remaining on each side.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 14
minutes. The gentleman from Florida has 15.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, obviously, through this extraordinary
process, there is such a demand for time. We have so many committees of
jurisdiction. It is a real challenge. We have only 14 minutes
remaining; is that it?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is correct.
Mr. DREIER. At this time I am happy to yield 3 minutes to the
distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Budget, the gentleman
from Janesville, Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan).
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Speaker, my chairman of the Budget Committee just spoke, and,
yes, he did read that the CBO said that the bill that passed on the doc
fix, according to the CBO, does satisfy the trigger.
So if you are satisfying the trigger, then why are you turning it
off? If you are actually accomplishing the objective set out with this
law, then why are you getting rid of this trigger? Why do we have this
trigger?
We have this trigger. It's a funding warning because Medicare is
going bankrupt. Medicare is a $36 trillion unfunded liability. You know
what it's going to be next year by this time? It's going to be $38.4
trillion. Do you know what will happen in 5 years if we do nothing to
save Medicare as the Democratic budget proposes to do? $48 trillion
unfunded liability.
The preceding paragraph in this CBO report goes on to specify that
the judgment, the referee of the trigger, are the trustees. So why
don't we take this bill off the floor, have the trustees verify what
CBO says that maybe, in fact, this bill that you just passed, that we
all passed, does satisfy the trigger, and don't turn off this funding
warning. Turning off this funding warning is basically saying, ignore
the fact that Medicare is going bankrupt. Make sure that Congress does
nothing to fix this problem.
I might add that this CBO estimate relies on the fact that next year
we are going to cut doctors by 21 percent in Medicare. The only reason
this estimate holds up is if we guarantee a 21 percent payment cut to
all doctors servicing Medicare. That's why we are in conformity with
this trigger as CBO says.
CBO is not the referee of this. The trustees are, the trustees of
Medicare.
Turning off this trigger is basically saying that we have no fiscal
discipline, we have no intention of saving Medicare from bankruptcy, we
have no intention of being good stewards of the taxpayer dollars, we
have no intention of controlling spending.

{time} 1745

We have every intention of making matters worse, not only by doing
nothing, but adding more spending. That is reckless. That is fiscal
abandonment.
The trigger was a bipartisan idea. A Democrat in the Senate and a
Republican in the House came up with this idea to make sure that
Congress saw fair warning and actually addressed these issues before it
got out of control.
And so, instead of addressing these warnings, instead of bringing
Medicare toward solvency, instead of making sure we can guarantee this
program for seniors in the next generation, what are we doing in this
Congress? We are sticking our heads in the sand. That is wrong. This
shouldn't pass. You know better.
More to the point, if you think you are satisfying it, then why are
you turning it off? That makes no sense.
The only opportunity, the only explanation is you don't want to have
this tool of fiscal discipline. You don't want the American people
knowing that you are actually contributing to the insolvency of
Medicare, that you are actually making matters worse. That is wrong,
and I urge defeat of this.

Announcement By the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their
remarks to the Chair.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am very pleased
to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California, who
is the chairman of the Health Subcommittee, Mr. Stark.
Mr. STARK. I can only say that I have never heard people who have
just

[[Page 16437]]

won whine so loudly about the fact that they won. They didn't do it
when they won the baseball game. I guess if I had a trophy for them,
they might be happier.
But you are right. My friend, Mr. McCrery, and my friend, Mr. Ryan,
are both right. We did solve, in 6331, all of the Rules Committee
Democrats, the Republicans voted for it. The majority of the Ways and
Means Republicans voted for it. The majority of the Energy and Commerce
Republicans voted for it. We solved it.
They may be unhappy with the fact that we solved it because most
Republicans would like to see Medicare privatized, and this was a plan
that did not get enough votes out of the commission to be recommended.
A couple of wild hares on the commission suggested it, but they
couldn't get enough votes to make it a recommendation. So it has never
been.
If you wanted to have a trigger for the Defense Department, and you
wouldn't, I might support it. But you don't.
This is just, the trigger was just a method to try and privatize
Medicare and let it wither on the vine. So you won. We have met the
requirements in terms of the funds saved in 6331, the Republican
speakers have attested to that.
So I would say, let's go home. We do have problems in Medicare. We
are vastly overpaying Medicare Advantage and getting nothing for it. We
are vastly overpaying for the drug benefit because the Republicans
wouldn't allow the Secretary to bargain for better prices. The
Republicans have frustrated every attempt to save money in Medicare and
make it a more efficient system. So I am willing to have that debate
any time. And I think we will have to come back and do it.
But for now we have satisfied the requirements of the trigger. We
were unable to get it done in a timely fashion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. STARK. I urge the adoption of this rule, which will save us the
problem of seeing beneficiaries pay more in taxes, which I don't think
the Republicans want to do. And I think that it is time that we
recognize that we, by a vast bipartisan majority, solved the issue,
temporarily though it may be, and we will have to revisit it next year
to make Medicare a more effective system.
Mr. DREIER. I yield myself 10 seconds, Mr. Speaker, to say to my very
good friend that if, in fact, he is willing to have a debate any time
on this issue, what he needs to do is vote ``no'' on this rule so that
we can proceed with that debate.
At this time I am happy to yield 3 minutes to the very distinguished
chairman of the Republican Study Committee, my friend from Dallas, Mr.
Hensarling.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, before the Democrats became the majority
party in this institution, they waxed eloquent about fiscal
responsibility. The now-Speaker, Nancy Pelosi of California, the
gentlelady said, ``It is just absolutely immoral, immoral for us to
heap those deficits on our children. No new deficit spending.''
And before he became the majority leader, the distinguished gentleman
from Maryland said, ``There is no more single burden of responsibility
more crucial to bear than tackling the deficit honestly and head on.''
Mr. Speaker, that is what they said before they became the majority
party. We have discovered, Mr. Speaker, their words were cheap. Their
deeds are very expensive.
Since becoming the majority party 18 months ago, we have seen, under
their watch, the Federal deficit double.
Mr. Speaker, under the Democrats' watch we have seen the single
largest 1-year increase in the Federal debt.
Mr. Speaker, under the Democrats' watch we have seen the Federal
Government's unfunded obligations go to the largest number ever, $57.3
trillion.
Mr. Speaker, under the Democrats' watch we have seen the largest
Federal budget ever.
Mr. Speaker, under the Democrats' watch, just yesterday, just
yesterday a blank check was given to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that
ultimately could cost the taxpayer $5 trillion.
And not to be outdone, Mr. Speaker, today the Democrat majority turn
off, turn off the Medicare trigger designed to save the program for the
next generation. Again, Mr. Speaker, the Democrats' words were cheap.
Their deeds are very, very expensive.
The trigger means that we begin the reform process in Medicare, and
it also means that we will spend $178 billion, almost a 7 percent
increase, over the next 5 years. And how do we reform it?
Mr. Speaker, we ask that this body put patients and doctors before
personal injury trial attorneys. That is what we do. And we ask that
maybe the upper income of our Nation be able to pay a little bit more
for their prescription drugs.
Now, what happens, Mr. Speaker, when the Democrats do nothing?
Well, according to the General Accountability Office, ``The rising
cost of government entitlements are a fiscal cancer that threatens
catastrophic consequences for our country and could bankrupt America.''
Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, join
with us, put the next generation above the next election. Work with us
to ensure that we can get better healthcare at a more reasonable cost.
Do not get rid of this Medicare trigger that so many of us worked so
hard to place in this valuable program.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would yield to
my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr.
Thompson), who is a member of the Ways and Means Committee, 2 minutes.
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this
rule. The trigger is an arbitrary way to try and reform Medicare.
Moreover, no hearings were ever held to determine whether the trigger
was set at the right level of general revenues. The trigger was
literally added in the back room during conference on the Medicare
Modernization Act. It wasn't in the House bill. It wasn't in the Senate
bill.
The chief actuary from the nonpartisan Centers for Medicare and
Medicaid Services testified before our committee that the trigger is
judgmental, not scientific. He said there is no analytical
rationalization for setting the trigger level funding at 45 percent.
This trigger is politically, not policy, based.
We need to focus on system-wide issues to address costs in both
private insurance and Medicare. The trigger is no substitute for real
reform. We have taken important steps in this Congress to assure
Medicare solvency. The CHAMP Act, which was passed last year by the
House, included significant Medicare cost savings and extended the
solvency of the hospital trust fund.
The bipartisan Medicare bill, the bill that became law after we
overrode the President's veto, extended that solvency of Medicare and
pushed back the date the trigger is pulled, while providing $18 billion
in beneficiary improvements for seniors.
I urge everyone to support this rule change so we can continue to
work towards real reform in the next Congress.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 1\1/2\
minutes to my very good friend from Midland, Michigan, a hardworking
member of the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Camp.
Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I come from a large family. My
wife and I have three children of our own, so I have seen little kids
stick their fingers in their ears and shout ``I can't hear you.''
I never thought I would see the Congress do it, but that is exactly
what the Democrats are asking us to do today, stick our fingers in our
ears and shout at the Medicare trustees that we can't hear their
warning. We couldn't hear it the first time they said it. We couldn't
hear it the second time they said it, and we certainly don't hear it
the third time they have said it.
The Democrats' response to the looming Medicare crisis is as childish
as it is irresponsible. By repealing the Medicare warning, as this rule
change would have us do, it is akin to be

[[Page 16438]]

warned you are out of money and still going out for an expensive dinner
and leaving the bill for the next group to sit down.
You know who gets stuck with the tab in this scenario? The American
taxpayer, and it is a $1.5 billion tab in the first year alone. But
that is just the tip of the iceberg. Every year we fail to address
entitlement reform, future generations are saddled with an additional
$2 trillion worth of debt.
With the Medicare Hospital Trust Fund set to go bankrupt in a decade,
I, for one, cannot ignore, and I urge my colleagues not to ignore these
Medicare warnings. We should reject this resolution, and we should
begin to transform Medicare so it can continue to benefit future
seniors.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am very pleased
and privileged to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York, who I
feel knows as much or more about this issue than anyone, the chairman
of the Committee on Ways and Means, Mr. Rangel.
Mr. RANGEL. My colleagues, as we move toward the end of this
legislative session, I would hope, at some point, that the minority
just not be guided by blind ideology and to see whether we can prepare
ourselves to work together in the future. In all of the years that we
have had this administration, they have talked about the unfairness of
taxes, and yet they have not seen their way clear even to suggest what
we should do about it.
I know they are busy starting wars in various places, but it would
seem as though the executive could take a deep breath.
They talk about entitlements, how we have to get rid of them, that it
is causing us to go into bankruptcy. And unless I missed something
during my brief illnesses, they have never suggested what you do with
Social Security; not a note, not anything private, not a call from
Paulson saying, can we talk?
And now we talk about----
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield? I would be happy
to yield additional time if my friend would yield to me.
Mr. RANGEL. Well, why don't you give me the additional time and----
Mr. DREIER. You yield to me, and then I would be happy to yield
additional time.
Mr. RANGEL. How much time are you ready to negotiate here? We can
work out something.
Mr. DREIER. That is exactly what my friend is arguing, and I am here
and willing to do just that, on this issue and every single other
issue.
Mr. RANGEL. Why would you wait until the last day? You know, you guys
have been in office all this time, and now you want to talk. This is
absolutely ridiculous. And we should resolve the problem by having a
trigger, and cut across the board. Just have a trigger? Is that the way
you think we are going to have a system?
How much time do you yield to me, my dear friend from California?
Mr. DREIER. I am happy to yield to my friend 30 seconds.
Mr. RANGEL. Thirty seconds? That is no time.
Mr. DREIER. I took 2 seconds and I'm yielding him 30. That's a pretty
fair deal.
Mr. RANGEL. Well, all I am saying is that you are not setting a tone
that we can work next year in an administration that totally are not
blinded, whether you call it entitlements. We are talking about
providing services for the 40 million people who really don't have it.
So let's stop talking about what the heck you intend to accomplish in 2
weeks. It's over. Get over it. Forget about it. Do what you have to do
politically, see what you can salvage, and let's come back next year
and get the job done.

{time} 1800

Mr. DREIER. May I inquire of the Chair how much time we have
remaining on each side.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida has 9 minutes.
The gentleman from California has 6 minutes and 20 seconds.
Mr. DREIER. At this time I am happy to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my
very good friend who is a former member of the Rules Committee, Mr.
Gingrey.
Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I
won't take all of my time.
I just want to say that I am tremendously opposed to this resolution.
When we passed Medicare Modernization and the Prescription Drug Act
back in November of 2003, I was a freshman Member of the House, a
physician Member of the House, and I felt very strongly that we needed
to give our seniors a prescription drug benefit. They had been asking
for it for years. The Democrats were in the majority most of those
years. And yet in 2003, most of my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle voted ``no.'' I think it was their feeling, most of them, that
the prescription drug benefit didn't go far enough.
On our side of the aisle, though, Mr. Speaker, there was great
concern of cost, and I truly believe that the prescription drug part D
and Medicare modernization would not have passed this body had not
section 803 been in there, that trigger to say when we have spent so
much, the President would have to come back and offer a solution to try
to control the cost and no better way than the medical liability reform
to cut down on all of the defensive medicine that doctors practice.
It's not the premiums that they pay for malpractice, it is the
defensive medicine. All of these tests that are unnecessary.
And then, of course, to means-test part D, just as it would have
mean-tested part B for these so many years, if we were not means-
testing part B, the monthly premium would still be $15 a month instead
of $96.
Defeat this resolution. Bring fiscal responsibility to this body.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1
minute to the very distinguished gentleman from Texas, a member of my
class and a member of the Committee on Ways and Means, Mr. Doggett.
Mr. DOGGETT. The President offers a very simple Medicare fix: Seniors
pay more. Taking a bigger cut from our seniors and our disabled
individuals for their drug benefit premiums is hardly a true fix.
You know, down in Texas, Mr. Speaker, we have steers that have been
cut. They've been fixed. They've been fixed for all time, and that's
the kind of fix that I think these Republicans have in mind for
Medicare.
Contrast the President's fix on Medicare this week with the
President's veto on Medicare last week. These Republicans are so eager
to privatize Medicare, they're willing to spend $1,000 of taxpayers'
money every year for every person that they can get to leave
traditional Medicare. By our overriding the President's veto, we saved
billions of dollars in unnecessary waste. But there are tens of
billions of dollars of additional waste right there in the system. And
you know what? They deserve a Texas-type fix. They need to be fixed and
removed.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield the gentleman an additional 1
minute.
Mr. DOGGETT. The Medicare actuary's own reports show that that this
$1,000 waste per person per year that the Republicans insist on, that
kind of waste, tens of billions of dollars of waste, does not produce
any quantifiable benefit, any quantifiable saving through this failed
Republican experiment in privatizing Medicare.
Improving Medicare's finances requires more than a trigger like the
President talks about to extend it for a year. We need a willingness to
pull the trigger on Medicare waste that these Republicans have plugged
in with these unnecessary subsidies that cost more and deliver less.
I say it has something to do with the energy bill, and they're right.
These seniors have been drilled by the Republicans for the last 7\1/2\
years. Drill here, drill now. These seniors get drilled when they go to
the gas station. They get drilled when they go to the grocery store.
What this resolution is about is preventing the President from drilling
them on their Medicare also.
Let's approve this resolution.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, may I just inquire of my friend how many
speakers he has on his side.

[[Page 16439]]

I have got to say that before I do, Mr. Speaker, we have the
Committee on the Budget, Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce, the Rules
Committee, all of which have jurisdiction on this. We've been limited
to 30 minutes of debate on this side, and I just wondered if he might
be interested in propounding a unanimous consent request that we extend
the debate by maybe 5 minutes on each side.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I do not yield for that purpose.
Mr. DREIER. The gentleman is going to have to object. I was asking
unanimous consent if we might.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I object.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, so may I inquire again as to how much time
is remaining on each side, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 4 minutes
and 50 seconds. The gentleman from Florida has 7 minutes.
Mr. DREIER. May I just inquire how many speakers are on the other
side.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I am going to be the last speaker.
Mr. DREIER. At this time, Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 2 minutes
to my very good friend from Georgia (Mr. Price).
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank my friend and leader from California
for yielding.
This do nothing, no energy Congress has perfected changing the rules
to suit themselves. But this may take first prize.
Virtually all of us talk about the need for entitlement reform.
Entitlement, that's those programs that comprise about 55 percent of
the budget. I call it a ``yes'' moment at home. It's when the crowds
say, Yes, yes, please. Some reform is needed. And the rules currently
in place would allow for some real reform, especially in the area of
lawsuit abuse reform, not cuts in Medicare. Not an increase in
premiums.
As a physician for nearly 30 years, I understand clearly the need for
liability reform, and it's imperative not just to decrease malpractice
costs but to end the practice of defensive medicine estimated to be
greater than $300 billion annually. That's $300 billion of savings
without any Medicare cut, without any increase in premiums.
Mr. Speaker, make no mistake, this vote today is about fiscal
responsibility and ending frivolous lawsuit abuse. Let's work together.
Americans want action on this issue, and they want it now. This
proposed rules change means no reform.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, at this time I did have an
additional speaker, and I would ask to yield 1 minute to the
distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Stark).
Mr. STARK. I thank my friend from Florida for yielding, and I just
wanted to make a point. It's been suggested several times by my friends
across the aisle that over 75 years, the unfunded cost of Medicare, as
they calculate it, is $36 trillion. You know what? They're right.
But what they don't tell you is by the same calculation, the unfunded
cost of the McCain-Bush tax cuts is more than $100 trillion. So if you
weren't giving away all of this money to the rich people and all of the
Republicans who inherited money from their parents and never had a real
job in their lives, maybe we could solve it. It would just take a third
of the Bush-McCain tax cuts to solve the unfunded liability for the
next 75 years for Medicare.
So when you talk about these things, folks, let's include all the
other goodies that you're giving away.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to make their remarks
to the Chair.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 20 seconds to say to my
friend that we have been constantly arguing that we're willing to sit
down and talk about this and debate these issues at any time. And we're
willing, and the two top dogs on the Ways and Means Committee have both
said they're willing to do that; and we've been willing all along. And
that's exactly what this provision is all about.
The fact of the matter is the tax cuts that have been put into place
dramatically surge the flow of revenues to the Federal Treasury. We all
know that. And we have a responsibility to look at anything we possibly
can to bring about a fiscally responsible Medicare program and we're
going to do that.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 1 minute to my very
good friend from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, you know, it is so interesting serving
on the Health Subcommittee at Energy and Commerce, and one of the
things that we look at and are very concerned about, 11 years from now
the Medicare trust fund could go bankrupt. That's what we hear from the
trustees. Health care spending is going to be 20 percent of the GDP as
we go through the next 10 years.
And here we had a trigger, something that is a nugget of good
government that is put into an entitlement bill. And look at what is
happening? This is what you're wanting to take away. It is put there to
look at the long-term solvency of this problem. And that is one of the
things that we hear from our constituents every day. They have their
money that they have earned, that they are putting in every month so
that Medicare will be there for them when they retire.
And what do they get from you all? You're not wanting to come in and
address this issue. You want to pull the trigger back.
I think it is irresponsible. I do think it is an abdication of our
responsibility, and I would encourage those here to oppose that
resolution.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would inquire of my friend
from California if he has any remaining speakers. I am the last speaker
for our side, and I'm going to reserve my time until you have closed
for your side.
Mr. DREIER. Let me say, Mr. Speaker, that we very clearly have an
opportunity before us. We have an opportunity to defeat this rule so
that we can do what it is that we came here to do. We have had a wide
range of recommendations that have come here from the Medicare
commission. And we have a proposal that is before us submitted by the
majority leader and the minority leader as required under this law. It
made two very important recommendations dealing with liability reform
in ways which we could bring about fiscal responsibility of Medicare.
That's what our charge is. That is what our job is as Members of the
United States Congress.
The action that we are about to take in this House is to simply sweep
it under the rug and pass off to the future what we were sent here to
do right now. We're rapidly approaching the date by which time we need
to begin taking action. That is July 30. And our colleagues,
unfortunately, have chosen to turn their back on those who want to
bring about a fiscally responsible solution to a challenge that we all
know is looming.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat this rule so that we can
move ahead and do the right thing for our seniors and for future
generations.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of
the time.
Mr. Speaker, I have sat and stood here with great amusement as my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle have come to the floor to
oppose this resolution. After all, if it were not for their actions,
this resolution wouldn't even be necessary.
The ``45 percent Medicare trigger'' was nothing more than a gimmick
designed to gain the votes of conservative Republicans for their
Medicare prescription drug bill. It was drafted behind closed doors. I
was here, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Rangel tried to get into their conference.
They locked the doors without any consultation with Mr. Rangel of the
Ways and Means Committee, members that were in the minority without any
involvement or notification to the minority. It was then slipped into
the conference at the last minute and had not passed the House or the
Senate.
It's amazing, Mr. Speaker. My friends on the other side agreed to
this trigger and preach fiscal responsibility and are

[[Page 16440]]

now supporting a process which could force the House to allow
legislation to the floor in clear violation of its PAYGO and earmark
rules.
I was really amused that the distinguished gentleman that is head of
the Republican Study Committee came in here as much as he talks about
earmarks and is going to come here and talk about fiscal
responsibility.
I was also amused that the last lady speaker who took it upon herself
to talk about this measure but forgot, I guess, that she voted to
override the President's veto last week.
But now they come to the floor to complain because their Members
bought a pig in a poke. Give me a break.

{time} 1815

The last time I checked, they were the dealer with all the cards in
2003.
Mr. Speaker, next Wednesday, Medicare will turn 43 years old. Since
its founding, the program has provided health care to hundreds of
millions of seniors, including my momma and my grandpapa.
Almost 35 percent of the people living in my district are senior
citizens, and the overwhelming majority of them depend on Medicare.
Members have a choice today between reviving the Republican legacy of
political and procedural gimmickry or standing up for seniors and sound
public policy.
While Republicans choose to play games and engage in political
hyperbole, my Democratic colleagues and I have chosen America's
seniors.
I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in the strongest opposition to
this dangerously irresponsible resolution.
For over 40 years, millions of seniors across America have enjoyed
longer and healthier lives as a result of the health care provided
through the Medicare program. Yet as a result of demographic changes
and rising health care costs, Medicare is now in dire financial
straits. The numbers are absolutely staggering. According to the most
recent report by Medicare's Board of Trustees, Medicare's unfunded
obligations have surpassed $85 trillion. That's more than six times the
annual output of our entire economy, and more than fifteen times the
current federal debt held by the public.
We have a choice to make: Are we going to take action now to save
Medicare for the future? Or are we going to ignore the problem and hope
that it just goes away? I understand that many members might prefer not
to deal with this issue in an election year. But the Medicare funding
warning trigger was designed precisely to force Congress to confront an
issue that many would rather ignore. And that's what the American
people sent us here to do: confront the tough challenges facing our
country's future. Even when that means taking some political risks.
The President has proposed some fairly modest reforms to begin
shoring up Medicare's future. I personally thought his suggestions made
sense. But under the trigger rules, the Majority was entirely free to
reject the President's ideas and develop their own proposal for reining
in the growth of Medicare. Instead, the Majority has chosen to take the
easy way out and do nothing. Today, we are sending a message to the
American people that this Congress is simply not up to the task of
solving our nation's problems.
The truth is, Mr. Speaker, we are gambling with our future. I believe
we have an obligation to do our best to leave America better off for
the generations that will follow us. I urge every member of Congress
who feels the same way to join me in voting ``no'' on this resolution.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I want to first take a minute
to thank my colleague Congressman Alcee Hastings from Florida for
working with leadership to this important legislation to the floor.

background on the legislation

In 2003, The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and
Modernization Act, MMA, was signed into law having a significant impact
on Medicare beneficiaries and State Medicaid programs through changes
affecting those dually eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid. The
purpose of the section was to:
1. Provide a concise summary of the key provisions affecting those
dually eligible and the States, and
2. Provide details of the demographic and Medicaid expenditure
characteristics of the dually eligible, using data from ten States.
The MMA used to require that States take a practical new look at
their programs in order to better prescription drug spending. Beginning
in 2006, States will no longer provide and manage drug coverage for
patients that currently represent, on average, about 50 percent of the
State's Medicaid spending for drugs. This significant shift would have
required that States reassess available resources and the most cost-
efficient ways for employing those resources.
A determination of excess general funding, as required by Sec. 801 of
P.L. 108-173. the MMA, is issued if general revenue Medicare funding is
expected to exceed 45 percent of Medicare outlays for the current
fiscal year or any of the next six fiscal years. If the determination
is issued for two consecutive years, a warning is issued requiring
certain presidential and congressional action (Sec. 802-Sec. 804 of
MMA).
The warning alerts policy makers of one measure of the financial
health of Medicare. It attempts to focus on the impact of Medicare
revenues and outlays on the federal budget, by looking at Medicare's
burden on the Treasury. However, such a determination was issued in
both the 2006 and 2007 Medicare Trustee's reports and the
Administration was required to submit a legislative proposal to this
body to lower the ratio to the 45 percent level.
Section 803 of the MMA is also known as the Medicare Trigger because
it expedites the process for considering legislation to cut Medicare
provider payments or increase payroll taxes or beneficiary costs.
What we must ask ourselves is why some of our colleagues can vote
against the MMA trigger while we struggle to provide coverage to the
over 47 million uninsured and over 50 million underinsured in this
country .
The ``45 percent trigger'' is a completely subjective measure.
Medicare program was designed to be substantially financed by general
revenues rather than payroll taxes. The fact that a sizable portion of
Medicare's financing comes from general revenues is no more problematic
than the fact that 100 percent of the defense budget comes from general
revenues. Moreover, the reforms in Medicare included in the Medicare
Improvements for Patients and Providers Act, MIPPA, which Democrats
just enacted over the President's veto satisfy the 45 percent trigger
test earlier this year, only fails to comply with certain technical
requirements of the trigger provision (such as the name of the
statute). Therefore, this is just another reason why it makes sense to
suspend the Medicare trigger for the remainder of this Congress.

Overview of how the 45 percent trigger works

The 45 percent trigger was slipped into the GOP-drafted Medicare
Modernization Act (MMA) at the last minute in 2003.
The MMA defined what the 45 percent trigger was and, when it was
triggered, required ``Medicare Funding Warnings'' and presidential
legislation.
The 45 percent trigger is completely arbitrary and is not a sound
measure of Medicare's fiscal health.
The 45 percent trigger was triggered by two consecutive Trustees
Reports in 2007.
The President's proposed bill hits beneficiaries, rather than scaling
back the overpayments to private Medicare Advantage plans.
Unlike the President's flawed bill, the Democratic-led Congress has
just enacted a law that satisfies the 45 percent trigger, while
protecting beneficiaries.
Furthermore, the Democratic-led Congress is committed to keeping
Medicare strong and solvent well into the future.

Healthcare Crisis

The American health care crisis affects more than the Medicare
recipients and indigent persons. It affects the millions of families
who must decide between food, housing, and health coverage. Healthcare
costs in the United States are increasing about 7 percent a year, twice
the rate of inflation.
In Texas alone it has been estimated that we waste $98 billion on
administrative health costs. Administrative costs constitute 31 percent
of health care expenditures. The deteriorating U.S. health care system
is not only harming patients, but also businesses, and the economy with
healthcare costs consuming over 15 percent of GDP. It affects thousands
of small businesses who have to close their doors due to the
overwhelming cost of not only providing health coverage to their
employees, but to securing their own health insurance.
Across this great nation the health disparities between minority and
majority populations are staggering. Most major diseases: diabetes,
heart disease, prostate cancer, HIV/AIDS, low-birth weight babies--all
hit the minority communities harder. Minorities consistently have
decreased access to care, and receive lower quality care, when they do
have access. As the economy continues to falter and as the unemployment
rate spikes, millions of Americans are losing their health insurance.
That state of affairs will only make the health disparities worse.

[[Page 16441]]

Since I took office over a decade ago, I have worked to secure and
support legislation to address the healthcare crisis particularly those
facing our struggling Medicare and Medicaid recipients.
I have worked tirelessly to expand health coverage, improve the
diversity of our health workforce, improve data collection on health
disparities and then help reduce those disparities by promoting
accountability and strengthening the institutions that serve minority
communities. We must close the gap in our minority, immigrant, and
rural communities by addressing the disparities that currently exist.

Health Legislation Sponsored/Cosponsored

As a Member of the H.R. 676 Universal Healthcare Caucus lead by
Congressman Conyers, the Women's Caucus, and the Children's Caucus, I
have continued to carry the flag of Universal Health Care by
introducing or supporting legislation that will help lay the groundwork
towards universal access and quality healthcare.
In June, I introduced a health care reform bill that addressed some
of the issues that continue to plague our health care system. The
MEDICS Act is a House companion bill to Senator Baucus's Medicare
legislation that sought to unite Congress on a push for crucial
Medicare reform.
I am happy to announce that this legislation puts our health care
system on the correct path of providing proper medical assistance for
our Nation's low income, minority and rural populations. It also works
toward resolving the primary care physician shortages as well as the
racial and ethnic health disparities.
I have also supported national healthcare legislation such as H.R.
3014 and H.R. 676 which support the elimination of healthcare
disparities and universal healthcare based on a single-payer model.
As Americans, we have a strong history, through science and
innovation, of detecting, conquering and defeating many illnesses.
Quality measures must continue to be adequately funded in order to
promote quality, cost-effective health care for consumers and
employers.
The Medicare/Medicaid system as well as the private insurance system
is still not adequately addressing the cost, population growth, and
patient population complexity of Americans. That is why we must look
towards another solution.
I urge my colleagues to support our Medicare and Medicaid dependents
and vote in support of H. Res. 1368.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, today we protect Medicare's future. The
rule addresses a provision that was slipped into the Republican
Medicare Modernization Act, MMA, in the dark of night. It was not in
the version of the bill that was passed by the House or by the Senate.
It is yet another example of Republican efforts to choke off Medicare--
an automatic ``trigger'' that requires cuts to the program if general
revenues contribute more than 45 percent of Medicare's revenues.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have long tried to end
Medicare, and failing that, to let it wither slowly on the vine. Newt
Gingrich said as much in the 1990s, when he was Speaker of the House.
As required by the MMA provision, the President sent a bill to
Congress in February with his proposal to meet the trigger
requirements. His bill simply shifted costs to patients, and made no
improvements to Medicare; a good example of why this ``trigger''
doesn't work.
Democrats know how to manage Medicare--my father wrote the original
bill creating it, and we have been fighting to preserve, improve, and
protect the program for nearly 50 years. We do not need gimmicks like
an arbitrary ``trigger'' to do so.
Medicare has protected seniors, improved their health, and helped
lift people out of poverty. We must ensure that Medicare beneficiaries
continue to have access to their doctor of choice, high-quality
hospital care, and prescription drug services.
I support this rule; and I urge my colleagues to eliminate the
``trigger'' requirements for the remainder of the year.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. DREIER. 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, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

____________________

REPORT ON H.R. 6599, MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND VETERANS AFFAIRS
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2009

Mr. EDWARDS of Texas, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted
a privileged report (Rept. No. 110-775) on the bill (H.R. 6599) making
appropriations for military construction, the Department of Veterans
Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30,
2009, and for other purposes, which was referred to the Union Calendar
and ordered to be printed.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 1, rule XXI, all points
of order are reserved on the bill.

____________________

TOM LANTOS AND HENRY J. HYDE UNITED STATES GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AGAINST
HIV/AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008

Motion Offered by Mr. Berman

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 2 of House Resolution
1362, proceedings will now resume on the motion by the gentleman from
California (Mr. Berman) to concur in the Senate amendment to the bill,
H.R. 5501.
The Clerk will redesignate the motion.
The Clerk redesignated the motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. When proceedings were postponed earlier
today, all time for debate had expired and the previous question was
ordered.
The question is on the motion by the gentleman from California.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. BERMAN. 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, this 15-
minute vote on the motion to concur will be followed by 5-minute votes
on adoption of H. Res. 1368; and motion to suspend the rules and adopt
H. Res. 1296.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 303,
nays 115, not voting 17, as follows:

[Roll No. 531]

YEAS--303

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Cazayoux
Chandler
Childers
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foster
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan

[[Page 16442]]

Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pickering
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiahrt
Tierney
Tsongas
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Wexler
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (FL)

NAYS--115

Akin
Bachmann
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bilbray
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cantor
Carter
Chabot
Coble
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Deal (GA)
Doolittle
Drake
Duncan
Feeney
Flake
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hunter
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
Kingston
Lamborn
Latta
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Paul
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Poe
Price (GA)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Scalise
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiberi
Walden (OR)
Wamp
Westmoreland
Whitfield (KY)
Wittman (VA)
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--17

Bishop (UT)
Boswell
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Cannon
Cubin
Everett
Fallin
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hooley
Hulshof
LaHood
Ortiz
Rush
Salazar
Saxton
Towns

{time} 1842

Messrs. ROGERS of Michigan, CALVERT and SOUDER changed their vote
from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Messrs. LEWIS of California, TIAHRT, BOOZMAN, KUHL of New York,
BONNER, ALEXANDER, FORBES and McCOTTER changed their vote from ``nay''
to ``yea.''
So the motion was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr. McINTYRE. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 531 on H.R. 5501,
I mistakenly recorded my vote as ``no'' when I should have voted
``yes.''

____________________

RELATING TO THE HOUSE PROCEDURES CONTAINED IN SECTION 803 OF THE
MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG, IMPROVEMENT, AND MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2003

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on
adoption of House Resolution 1368, on which the yeas and nays were
ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 231,
nays 184, not voting 19, as follows:

[Roll No. 532]

YEAS--231

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boucher
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castor
Cazayoux
Chandler
Childers
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Costa
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Goode
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Langevin
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tsongas
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

NAYS--184

Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Cooper
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
Lamborn
Lampson
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Poe
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Scalise
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shays
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield (KY)

[[Page 16443]]

Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--19

Bishop (UT)
Boswell
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Cannon
Costello
Cubin
Everett
Fallin
Hinojosa
Hobson
Holt
Hulshof
LaHood
Ortiz
Pascrell
Rush
Salazar
Saxton
Towns

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining in this vote.

{time} 1850

Mrs. DRAKE changed her vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________

SUPPORTING THE DESIGNATION OF A NATIONAL CHILD AWARENESS MONTH

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the
motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1296,
as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) that the House suspend the rules
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1296, as amended.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 404,
nays 0, not voting 30, as follows:

[Roll No. 533]

YEAS--404

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Cazayoux
Chabot
Chandler
Childers
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Jordan
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
Lamborn
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sali
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Tsongas
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--30

Akin
Bishop (UT)
Boswell
Brady (TX)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Cannon
Conyers
Costello
Cubin
DeFazio
Dicks
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Graves
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hulshof
LaHood
LaTourette
Miller, George
Ortiz
Pascrell
Pryce (OH)
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Saxton
Towns
Wexler

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members have 2 minutes
remaining in this vote.

{time} 1858

So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and
the resolution, as amended, was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Speaker, today, July 24th, I had an unexpected
emergency that required me to return to my Congressional District and I
regretfully missed the last two rollcall votes of the day. Had I been
present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote No. 532 on
agreeing to the resolution H. Res. 1368--Relating to the House
procedures contained in section 803 of the Medicare Prescription Drug,
Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003. Had I been present I would
have also voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote No. 533 On Motion to Suspend
the Rules and Agree, as Amended to H. Res. 1296--National Child
Awareness Month.

____________________

APPOINTMENT OF HON. STENY H. HOYER AND HON. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN TO ACT AS
SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE TO SIGN ENROLLED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
THROUGH JULY 28, 2008

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ellsworth) laid before the House the
following communication from the Speaker:

Washington, DC,

July 24, 2008.
I hereby appoint the Honorable Steny H. Hoyer and the
Honorable Chris Van Hollen to act as Speaker pro tempore to
sign enrolled bills and joint resolutions through July 28,
2008.
Nancy Pelosi,
Speaker of the House of Representatives.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the appointment is
approved.
There was no objection.

[[Page 16444]]

____________________

REMOVAL OF NAME OF MEMBER AS COSPONSOR OF H.R. 4789

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove my name as a
cosponsor of H.R. 4789.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Tennessee?
There was no objection.

____________________

APPOINTMENT OF INDIVIDUALS TO GOVERNING BOARD OF THE OFFICE OF
CONGRESSIONAL ETHICS

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ellsworth). Pursuant to section 1(b) of
House Resolution 895, 110th Congress, and the order of the House of
January 4, 2007, the Chair announces the appointment of the following
individuals to serve as the Governing Board of the Office of
Congressional Ethics: Nominated by the Speaker with the concurrence of
the Minority Leader:
Mr. David Skaggs, Colorado, Chairman
Mrs. Yvonne Brathwaite Burke, California, subject to section
1(b)(6)(B)
Ms. Karan English, Arizona, subject to section 1(b)(6)(B)
Mr. Abner Mikva, Illinois, Alternate Nominated by the Minority Leader
with the concurrence of the Speaker:
Mr. Porter J. Goss, Florida, Cochairman
Mr. James M. Eagen, III, Colorado, subject to section 1(b)(6)(B)
Ms. Allison R. Hayward, Virginia, subject to section 1(b)(6)(B)
Mr. Bill Frenzel, Virginia, Alternate

____________________

{time} 1900
LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

(Mr. BLUNT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend from Maryland, the
majority leader, to tell us about next week's schedule.
Mr. HOYER. I thank my friend, the Republican whip.
On Monday, the House will meet in pro forma session at 11 a.m. On
Tuesday, the House will meet at 10:30 a.m. for morning hour and 12 p.m.
for legislative business with votes postponed until 6:30 p.m. On
Wednesday and Thursday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for legislative
business. On Friday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative
business.
We will consider several bills under suspension of the rules. The
complete list of suspension bills will be announced by the close of
business tomorrow, as is the custom.
I tell the Members that we will also consider the Military
Construction and Veterans Affairs fiscal 2009 appropriations bill; H.R.
1338 the Paycheck Fairness Act; additional energy legislation; and any
conference report available, possibly including the Higher Education
conference report, the Amtrak conference report and the Consumer
Product Safety Commission conference report.
Mr. BLUNT. I thank my friend for the information.
On the first bill under a rule, the Military Construction and
Veterans Affairs appropriations bill, will that be an open rule?
Mr. HOYER. We expect it to be an open rule, but we do expect to ask
that amendments be prefiled so that Members will have notice of
amendments.
Mr. BLUNT. I thank my friend for that.
In the past, we've had in previous Congresses an open rule on these
appropriations bills. I don't recall a prefiling requirement, though
I'm sure we will talk about that in the Rules Committee. In
appropriations, whatever the amendment is has to be paid for out of the
bill so it has always been felt that that provides its own level of
constraint. We would certainly argue for that kind of open rule.
I would yield.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Our thought is that both sides should have notice of what amendments
are going to be considered, that all Members have notice of what is
going to be considered. Obviously, there is no constraint on what
amendment somebody might want to offer, but we believe that it would be
helpful if Members had notice of what the substance of the amendments
are so they can, if they want to support it, support it on the floor,
if they want to oppose it, have the opportunity to come here and do so.
But I think it will be our intention to ask that there be a notice
requirement without restriction on the amendments that are asked but
simply to give notice as to what the amendments are going to be.
Mr. BLUNT. I thank you for that information.
This will be the first appropriations bill on the floor this year. Do
you anticipate other bills in September?
I would yield.
Mr. HOYER. Thank you for yielding.
I would certainly anticipate more appropriations legislation coming
to the floor in September, yes.
Mr. BLUNT. On that topic of September, since at the end of next week
we wouldn't have a chance to talk about the upcoming schedule, does the
gentleman have a sense of some of the priority legislation that we
might consider in September?
Mr. HOYER. We have a number of pieces of legislation that are
obviously pending. First of all, we are very hopeful that we will pass
the extenders legislation which we sent to the Senate some, actually
months ago, a couple of months ago, I think, which, as you know,
ensures tax credits for alternative energy. Wind is particularly
important. Boone Pickens was here, as you know, on the Hill talking to
both Democrats and Republicans, the importance of that. Others have
talked about that as well. As you know, they're trying to dispose of
some of the ``Coburn holds'' as we call them. Some of those may be
back. Obviously we will have to consider a funding resolution for
government after we leave. My expectation is that will be a point of
business. We're also talking about obviously, as you have read in the
paper, and as I think, I'm not sure you and I have talked about a jobs
bill and some continuing economic assistance to make sure our economy
hopefully grows and does not certainly fall any deeper into recession.
Those are some of the pieces of legislation.
I have mentioned some of the things that we hope to get from
conference next week, mental health parity being one of those, higher
education, the consumer products safety. Hopefully many of those may be
dealt with next week. But if they were not, it is my expectation we
would do those in September as well.
So those are some of the major things that I foresee for September.
What we will have done next week obviously won't be on September, but
if we haven't done them we will try to get them done in September.
Mr. BLUNT. On the extenders package, I'm hopeful we see that bill
back here because it is one of the things we could do that would have
energy impact. And I hope we could even consider whatever is the
maximum time that we would be able to do there is what we should do.
On energy generally, yesterday, Mr. Boehner from Ohio and I, Mr.
Cantor, Mr. Putnam and others introduced a bill, the American Energy
Act. It's a bill that is broad based and designed to promote American
energy, conservation and invest in the future. Is there any opportunity
for that act or other acts that we've had discharge petitions on, other
bills, coming to the floor? And if not, what kind of energy legislation
do you anticipate?
Mr. HOYER. As you know, we have considered a number of pieces of
legislation which we were hopeful would move us in the direction of, A,
producing more domestic energy through encouraging further drilling in
those leaseholds already available, approximately 88 million acres that
are currently available. We considered the Consumer Energy Supply Act
today. Unfortunately, that didn't get sufficient votes. It got a lot of
votes. It got a significant majority of the House. It did not get the
two-thirds so we could move it to the Senate. We considered the DRILL
Act which also received a majority of the votes which provided

[[Page 16445]]

for both the 10.4 million acres in Alaska and the National Petroleum
Reserve to be encouraged to be moved forward as quickly as possible to
drill in that area, produce oil and petroleum in that area, which also
encouraged, as you recall, the building of additional pipelines, both
for natural gas and for petroleum products.
Next week, we will be considering--many people are very concerned
about the fact that the price spikes which don't seem to go down
consistent with the price of oil by the barrel, which has reduced
significantly, but the gasoline price hasn't reduced. There is
significant concern about the impact of speculation. We are going to
consider that bill, I think, next week, as I indicated.
You say you have introduced this bill. I'm sure it will go to the
committee. I haven't seen the bill. I will certainly talk to the
various chairmen. I don't know how many committees will have
jurisdiction over the bill. You say it's a comprehensive bill, maybe
multijurisdictional, but I will certainly talk to the Chairs about the
substance of the bill.
Let me say, the American public is obviously very concerned. Our
position is we ought to drill. We ought to drill where we've given
leases that exist. Your position essentially is, well, that is fine,
but there are other places where we could drill as well. We believe
that is accurate as well. It's been very controversial. As you know,
Governor Schwarzenegger, the Republican Governor of California, is not
too interested in proceeding with drilling off his shore. There are
differences of opinion. We really do believe that we ought to drill, we
ought to drill now and we ought to drill where there is not controversy
and where we do have leases. I think that is the difference between us,
apparently, not that any of us oppose drilling. It is where you drill
first. If that proves, from my perspective, not to be fruitful, then
perhaps at that time we ought to look at alternatives. But the
President, of course, has indicated and made it very clear that he
believes wherever you drill is not going to make a substantial
difference in the next 5 to 10 years.
So we believe we ought to start drilling right now so that we can
move ahead as soon as possible. There are 107 billion barrels currently
speculated to be in the identified areas of that 88 million acres to be
available. We use about 21 million a day, about 14 billion a year. That
is a pretty good supply, about 7\1/2\ years of supply. We would hope we
would move ahead on that. But we haven't done that yet. We understand
that.
But we ought to have a legitimate debate on it. I think all of us
want to get to the same place--energy independence for our country and
the use of alternative and renewable energy sources to not only help
our energy supply but also help our environment. So I will certainly
encourage the committee to look at that bill.
Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman for that.
We have other bills that we've started discharge petitions on, some
sponsored by Democrats, that we think are part of the solution here.
Clearly, based on the understood facts that some of this oil and
natural gas gets online quicker than others, it seems to me that that
is one of the principal reasons to get started everywhere that is
reasonable for us to go as quickly as you can. We're the only country
in the world that has the potential for offshore drilling, deepwater
drilling, that doesn't do it. And I think any proposal that we've
advanced through the Senate in previous years or anybody is making now
involves the Governors or the State governments of the affected States
having to agree. So if Governor Schwarzenegger and the people of
California don't want to drill, don't want the revenue, in fact, even
if they don't want the Federal Government to have the revenue from that
drilling, they wouldn't have to drill. But if the people of Virginia or
North Carolina or any other State did, they're part of that decision-
making process.
And other countries do this. Some of that oil, particularly in the
deep water, is going to come online quicker than others. But geologists
believe in the deepwater drilling there is roughly an 18-year supply of
natural gas and oil. So it doesn't all have to come online at once.
Also, my view has been, as my friend knows, that if we just announce
that as a country that has some of the most known and plentiful
reserves in oil and natural gas that we were going to start in a real
effort to go after all of it that was reasonably and safely achievable,
that that would have impact on price.
Mr. HOYER. Will my friend yield?
Mr. BLUNT. Let me say one other thing, and then I will yield.
The other thing I would say about a full and fair debate, these bills
that come under suspension obviously narrow the debate. I guess I
understand that. We have had some discussion on the floor, well, let's
have all these ideas out there and just see who a majority is for, but
20 minutes of debate on a side of an issue really isn't the kind of
full and fair debate we need.
I would like to see a bill come with plenty of debate, with plenty of
opportunities for every Democrat that wants to make an amendment to
make an amendment, for every Republican, it could be prefiled, it could
be anything, and the will of the House would determine which direction
the country goes in this real desire for energy, more American energy,
American energy created by and producing American jobs. I hope we can
get there. There is a real demand in the country for that.
A Member just has to go home to know what is the number one economic
issue in a country where people are concerned right now about what to
do about the economy.
I would yield.
Mr. HOYER. I thank my friend for yielding.
As my friend clearly knows, as you know, we've been operating under
two moratoria: One has been the executive moratorium which was just
lifted which was placed on by the first President Bush. As you know as
well in the Interior bill year after year in the 6 years your party was
in charge and then last year in the Interior bill, that moratorium was
continued. So under both parties, Governor Schwarzenegger, Governor
Bush of Florida, both very, very strong proponents effectively of not
drilling off their shores. So this is not a Republican-Democratic
difference. In fact, both parties were supporting--I presume, I don't
want to speak for your party--our party was supporting drilling where
we have current leases.

{time} 1915

I would disagree with my friend, and we may disagree on the
definition of deep water. They are drilling now in the Gulf of Mexico,
as you know, at depths of 1,000 feet. Additionally, there are 33
million acres available in the gulf now on the Outer Continental Shelf
and available for drilling right now.
I would say further to my friend, if you wanted to drill tomorrow
anywhere, there is not a drill available in the world. Now my
presumption is there is not a drill available in the world that is not
being used because they are pretty pricey items and you can make a
pretty good profit providing those drills. My presumption is that
people have not requested those drills be made available and have not
asked to purchase them. As you heard me say, Exxon made $40 billion.
These drills are pretty expensive items, and they bought no drills with
that $40 billion.
So as a practical matter, tomorrow, if everything were available,
there would be no drilling because there are no drills available. My
presumption is that the oil companies believe there is sufficient
supply available. There are no lines at any of the gas stations that I
go to. I have not seen any gas lines. I am old enough, I know you're
not, but I'm old enough to remember the lines in the 1970s. They were
long. That was an artificially created shortage by OPEC, as you recall.
But notwithstanding that, I don't see any lines. I don't see any
shortage of product available. What I see is a healthy price at the
pump. And in my opinion, when you get more supply, the price comes
down. I think some people are pretty happy with the price. None of my
consumers are happy with the price. None

[[Page 16446]]

of the people who pull up to the pumps in my district are happy with
the price, but I can't believe that the oil companies are unhappy about
the price. I don't see them complaining about their high profits.
So when you say if we could drill in the deep water, I don't know
what you mean by deep water. It could be more than 1,000 feet which is
where we are drilling now in some places in the Gulf of Mexico. But we
do have 33 million acres available on the Outer Continental Shelf in
the Gulf of Mexico available for drilling right now. And if the drills
were available and the inclination were available, I would hope that
the companies would pursue, either the large companies or small
companies. The problem with small companies is that it is a very
expensive proposition, as the gentleman knows.
Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman for that observation.
I would say in terms of deep water, I think sometimes I say that
rather than make the point that when we talk about drilling on the
coast, and the Atlantic and Pacific coast which is where we restrict,
and no one else restricts their coastal drilling, I am always talking
about something way beyond the line of sight. I can say that as well as
deep water.
I think there is drilling in the gulf even significantly deeper than
the 1,000 feet to the floor and below that. But there is potential
there. If, in fact, people of the various States don't want to drill
well beyond their shores even though they get part of the revenue, that
is a decision they'd get to make. I do think that is an issue that is
dramatically changing.
I also believe firmly, and every economist that I have read on this
topic agrees, that if we announced we were going to drill, it wouldn't
matter if anybody had a drill or not. That one signal from the United
States where we have at least twice as much readily available oil shale
in the Rockies as Saudi Arabia has in its known reserves, readily
available, not to count the other amounts that could be available
later, just if we were to announce that we were going after that
supply, it would have an impact on price.
We had a hearing a couple of weeks ago where we had people from
Interior talk about that particular supply, a lot of supply well off
the coast on the Atlantic and Pacific coast. And if there is
speculation here, I think the best way to deal with speculators would
be to get them caught on the wrong side of a market that is going the
other way because the United States of America has announced it is
going to go after its own resources in a more dramatic way.
There are two prohibitions on the appropriations bill. One is coastal
drilling on the Atlantic and Pacific coast, no money can be used to
issue a lease, which is another way that legislators say you are not
going to get a lease, and one in the oil shale in the Rockies. Removing
both of those prohibitions would have a huge impact on price. It would
start us in the right direction. The idea that some of this oil won't
be available for 3 years, some of it for 5, some of it for 10, we are
still going to need oil 10 years from now. Oil that is not available
for 10 years is not an unacceptable goal because we know we are going
to need oil 10 years from now.
I am convinced, I will tell my good friend, and we are good friends,
I am convinced that if we just announced we were going to take those
steps, it would have an immediate impact on price at the pump. We both
know the reason there is no line at the pump. I went to 12 gas stations
in my district on Friday and Saturday. There was no line anywhere, but
every person that I talked to, whether they were traveling to Branson,
Missouri, on vacation, or filling their car up in Andersonville or
Neosho, Missouri, they all had a story as to how these gas prices were
affecting their lives in other ways. Members have those stories. We can
do something about them. But to do that, it is going to take more than
a 20-minute debate on whether we release oil that we have already
bought in the short term. If supply matters, long term going after that
supply really matters.
I yield to my friend.
Mr. HOYER. We agreed with your premise, and we offered a bill to have
that happen, and it was Use It or Lose It which said we have 107
billion barrels identified, speculated to be available on presently
held leases, a 14-year supply in the United States of America. And what
we wanted to direct the administration to do was start leasing that
land right now because we agreed with your premise that the
psychological effect would be that those who have the petroleum and are
frankly selling it very dear, and many of our consumers are being
really hurt, we understand that, our premise was either by drilling in
the National Petroleum Reserve now or drilling in the 68 million acres
available in the lower 48, including 33 million in the gulf now, that
it would have exactly the effect that you projected.
Unfortunately, we also believe that releasing oil from the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve, which in 1991 and two other years, I don't have the
exact years, we have done it three times, including once under this
administration after Hurricane Katrina, in 1991 price went down 33
percent. It went down less when SPR was released after Hurricane
Katrina.
Our view is you are correct. Psychologically, that would have a real
effect on the market. Unfortunately, we couldn't pass that. We wanted
to pass it as quickly as possible. How do you pass something as quickly
as possible? You put it on suspension and give it to the Senate.
Unfortunately, large numbers on your side of the aisle determined that
was not a policy that they wanted to pursue. So they had no
psychological effect, which we thought would have been, as you do, a
psychological effect and may well have had an immediate impact on
pricing by the barrel, and hopefully then would be converted to price
at the pump.
Mr. BLUNT. I just advance the idea that the moment we are in right
now is not a Katrina-analogous moment. There is no temporary disruption
of supply that you need to do something about. There is a long-term
problem that needs to be solved. In fact, you mentioned those gas
lines. Those gas lines in the seventies, the embargo in the seventies,
that led us to this idea of a Strategic Petroleum Reserve. And at the
time we set the reserve up, it is the same size it is now, or when
Congress set it up, before many of us were here, at least, at the time
Congress set it up, it had a 117-day supply. That same amount of oil is
now a 56-day supply because of the amount we now use.
Taking 3 days out of that 56-day supply only postpones, in the view
of many of us, the reality of dealing with the long-term challenge that
we face. We would like to have a debate on that.
You could bring that bill back to the floor next week under a rule.
If a majority wanted to send it to the Senate, they could. But the
chance you take is that others with another idea would get at least one
amendment on the floor, and that's why we are here with suspension
bills as opposed to rule bills because it's a take-it-or-leave-it-this-
is-all-of-the-debate kind of approach.
I yield back.

____________________

ADJOURNMENT TO MONDAY, JULY 28, 2008

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House
adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 11 a.m. on Monday next; and
further, when the House adjourns on that day, it adjourn to meet at
10:30 a.m. on Tuesday, July 29, for morning-hour debate.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Maryland?
There was no objection.

____________________

DISPENSING WITH CALENDAR WEDNESDAY BUSINESS ON WEDNESDAY NEXT

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the business in
order under the Calendar Wednesday rule be dispensed with on Wednesday
next.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Maryland?
There was no objection.

[[Page 16447]]

____________________

WELCOMING BRADEN ALEXANDER HEWLETT

(Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to address
the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, Members of Congress do not like
to miss votes on the House floor, and I agree with that feeling. There
is sometimes very good reason Members do miss votes, whether it is
illness or important business in our district.
This last week, I missed both Tuesday and Wednesday due to an
important reason: my wife and I became grandparents for the third time.
Our grandson was born Tuesday, July 22, at 3:20 p.m. at Christus St.
John's Hospital in Houston. Braden Alexander Hewlett weighed in at 8
pounds, 1 ounce, and 19 inches long.
Our daughter, Dr. Angela Hewlett, and her husband, father Dr. Alex
Hewlett, and now big sister, Lauren, who is all of 3 years old, and
Braden are doing well, and I want to congratulate their growing family.

____________________

HONORING CAPTAIN BARRY K. CAVER

(Mr. CONAWAY asked and was given permission to address the House for
1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Captain Barry K.
Caver, commander of the Texas Ranger Company E, as he retires from his
long and distinguished career of service to the public.
Ranger Captain John Ford once described the Texas Rangers and said of
them: ``They knew their duty and they did it. While in a town, they
made no braggadocio demonstration. They did not gallop through the
streets, and shoot and yell. They had a specie of moral discipline
which developed moral courage. They did right because it was right.''
To be a Ranger is to stand in long shadow cast by some of our
Nation's most famous lawmen. The tradition of the Rangers is one of
intelligence, duty, honor, toughness, and self-reliance. I can think of
few better images of the modern Texas Ranger than Captain Caver.
I am pleased to call this great lawman a friend, to salute him, and
to thank him for his service to the people of Texas. His leadership and
experience will be irreplaceable to the Rangers and he will be sorely
missed by all west Texans, whether they knew him or not.
It is my honor to represent Captain Caver here in Washington. I wish
him well as he finds and explores the new challenges in his life.

____________________

SALUTING NATIONAL BAR ASSOCIATION

(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to address
the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to salute the
National Bar Association that will hold its 83rd national convention in
Houston, Texas. Many of its activities will be in the 18th
Congressional District. The National Bar Association was formulated
when its membership or its members were rejected in their attempt to be
members of the American Bar Association.
Out of that creation came the opportunity to be at the cutting edge
of civil rights legislation and litigation.
I want to salute the Houston Lawyers Association, salute the past
presidents, the president and board of directors, and particularly I
want to salute the National Bar Association for its enormous history of
civil rights fighting, fighting for those who cannot speak for
themselves.
Lawyers of the National Bar Association are patent lawyers,
prosecutors, defense lawyers, and most of all, the holders and
protectors of the Constitution. They have fought the cases in
desegregating schools. They have provided opportunities for those who
have sought equal employment. Yes, Mr. Speaker, they are in fact the
conscience holders of the legal bar because the National Bar
Association continues to stand for justice and equality and
opportunity.
I am so proud that they are coming to Houston, Texas, to celebrate
the 83rd annual convention, an organization of lawyers that have put
forward the cause of justice. I salute them and congratulate them.

____________________

{time} 1930
HIGH ENERGY PRICES

(Mr. SALI asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. SALI. Mr. Speaker, today the low-income families and other
disadvantaged Americans are disproportionately affected by high energy
prices.
Just to be clear, this is about low income. It's about the poor. It's
about veterans, seniors and children. We have reached a point where our
poorer citizens are spending greater and greater percentages of their
limited income on energy.
With the average cost of fuel more than $4.05 per gallon, some now
have to determine whether they can get to work or even buy food. This
price tag and the fact that this body hasn't done anything about it are
wreaking havoc on the daily lives of Idahoans and Americans across the
Nation.
Just last week I talked to a woman from Idaho whose husband is
disabled and not eligible to receive disability benefits. She is the
sole source of income for her family. She was worried about just being
able to afford to get to work.
It's time for partisanship to be put aside. It's time for Congress to
act, and it's time to increase American production of crude oil and
natural gas.

____________________

HONORING FIRE CHIEF FRANK WICHLACZ

(Mr. KAGEN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. KAGEN. Mr. Speaker, it has been said that when a man becomes a
fireman, his greatest act of bravery has been accomplished. What he
does after that is all in the line of work.
Well, yesterday in my district in northeast Wisconsin, the Pulaski
community began to mourn the tragic death of Fire Chief Frank Wichlacz,
a volunteer firefighter who died in a freak accident on Wednesday. The
76 year-old Chief Wichlacz gave 50 years of service to the department,
which serves parts of Brown, Oconto, and Shawano counties. The last 20
years he served as chief.
In 2007, Chief Wichlacz was honored as an Everyday Hero by the Green
Bay Press-Gazette newspaper for his long years of service to his
community. You know Winston Churchill said, ``You make a living by what
you get, but you make a life by what you give.'' Frank Wichlacz lived
those words.
His service, not only as a volunteer firefighter, but as a fire
chief, made the Pulaski community a safer and better place to live. On
behalf of the people of the Eighth District in northeast Wisconsin,
allow me to express my deepest sympathy to his family and friends and
to all in the Pulaski community.
May God bless Chief Wichlacz.

____________________

NEW HAMPSHIRE STORM

(Ms. SHEA-PORTER asked and was given permission to address the House
for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Mr. Speaker, today a terrible storm hit across the
State of New Hampshire. There has been death and destruction in five
counties, and we have declared a state of emergency there. I am asking
for the prayers of this country for the people of New Hampshire.
They're a strong lot. For ages they have helped one another build their
homes, their barns, their stone walls, their businesses. I know that
they will find the resources once again to help each other through this
calamity.
I ask the people of the country and the Congress to keep their
thoughts

[[Page 16448]]

and prayers on the people of New Hampshire tonight.

____________________

SPECIAL ORDERS

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 18, 2007, and under a previous order of the House, the
following Members will be recognized for 5 minutes each.

____________________

OUR ROLE AS THE WORLD'S INDISPENSABLE NATION

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, tonight I rise to continue my series of
discussions about the future of American grand strategy. Last week I
suggested that we strive to remain and even bolster our role as the
world's indispensable nation, and that should guide our thinking as we
consider the imperatives that define our national interest.
Indispensable nation is a term with significant potential for
misunderstanding, particularly in this time when our global credibility
has ebbed. We must be careful how we explain our intent. Most
importantly, we must ensure that our actions meet our words.
Just as a person cannot demand respect, only earn it, so it is for
nations too. So we should define indispensable to mean that we inspire
by our standards, not coerce, with our demands. We should strive to be
indispensable, not because our wrath is feared, but because our
strength is valued.
The point is, it's a fine one but essential nonetheless that our role
as the world's indispensable nation cannot come by internal
proclamation, but rather by external validation.
The engines of our claim to leadership in the future are the engines
that made this country great in the first place, our robust economy
that provides opportunity while connecting us with the rest of the
world in productive partnerships and in our unceasing pursuit of what
is right, fair and just, even when we fall short of those ideals. To
the extent we veered off course in those areas, whether because of
crippling energy dependence, unprecedented levels of foreign debt, our
departure from sound constitutional practices, or even when and how we
marshal our forces for war, we must refocus internally to address those
challenges and master them once again.
If we redouble our efforts, we can recapture the international
prestige that more than anything else translates our unmatched power
into the ability to alter the course of world events. As part of this
course correction, we must recall the essential truths about war and
international relations that were stated so well by Clausewitz and Sun
Tzu. I mentioned several of these to our current president in 2002, but
we lost sight of these truths in Iraq.
As we do that, there is no reason why we cannot gain the confidence
to understand that the term ``challenge,'' even in the international
context, need not always have an adversarial meaning. In our daily life
we are challenged by those around us, and we come out the better for
it.
We are challenged by our professors to be better students. We are
challenged by our coaches to be better athletes. We are challenged by
our clergy to be better people. We are challenged by our spouses to be
better partners.
All of these relationships help refine us, and, in so doing, enrich
our lives so that all benefit. We might regard many of our
international challenges in much the same way. In the free marketplace
of ideas, are those ideas that the United States exemplifies clearly
superior? Do we remain the guarantor of liberty and the natural ally
against tyranny? Do we provide the best economic and social
opportunities for all people with whom we interact?
We need not see that as solely an external challenge. It's also a
challenge within ourselves, and we should not miss the opportunity to
refine the good things about America so that we remain the obvious, the
indispensable choice for a continued global leadership role.

____________________

SOLVE THE ENERGY CRISIS

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, another week has gone by, and we
have taken no action whatsoever, no action whatsoever to solve the
energy crisis. I listened to the majority leader during the 1-minute
talking about what's going on next week as far as legislative action is
concerned, and he said that even if there were more oil leases
available, he said there are no drills available.
Well, if there are no drills available and the oil companies feel
that there is oil down there, they are going to make drills that would
be available. The problem is on the oil leases that are available right
now, the oil companies aren't finding sufficient oil to be able to put
up a $2 billion oil platform to drill, and we are only using 3 percent
of our Outer Continental Shelf for drilling purposes and for these
leases.
If we make more of the continental shelf available these oil
companies are going to get out there, they are going to get these oil
leases, and they will find oil. Geologically they will survey it. They
will find oil, and they will drill. They will find the drilling
capacity, they will find the drilling equipment, they will build the $2
billion platforms, and they will drill. But they will have to make sure
it's economically feasible, or they won't do that.
You know, if we have more production, we are going to have lower gas
prices, there is just no question about that. Every week that we go out
of here like today, we are ending another week, we are going home, we
haven't done anything to increase the supply which will lead to lower
gas prices and lower energy prices.
I listened to the hyperbole during these talks on the floor. I
listened to everybody giving reasons why we are not doing this or why
we are not doing that, and the fact of the matter is we are not doing
anything, and the American people are still suffering. They are
spending $70, $80, $90 just to fill their gas tanks. They don't know
what they are going to do. They can't get to work, they can't take
their kids to school. It's affecting everything that we buy, our
clothes, our food, everything.
As a result, we are facing not only energy problems, we are facing an
economic problem, an inflationary problem. We are not doing a darn
thing about it.
We need to drill wherever we can to find oil, in the ANWR, if
necessary, off the continental shelf. We need to open up the other 97
percent of the continental shelf to drilling. If we do that I guarantee
you, I guarantee there will be leases, and the oil companies will find
the platforms necessary and the drilling equipment necessary to drill
for that oil. If they can make money doing it, they are going to do it.
The leases they have right now, if they are not going to find oil
down there, it's not sufficient, they are not going to put a $2 billion
platform down there and drill for that oil. That's why we need to open
up more of these areas of the continental shelf for drilling.
Remember, and I hope the American people listen to this, 97 percent
of the continental shelf is not being explored or even allowed to be
explored. That's terrible. We know we need energy, and we are sending
$700 billion to the Saudis, to South America and other countries when
we had that energy right here in America.
Somebody said, well, it will take 10 years to get that oil to market
if we drill for it. Well, I don't think it will take that long, but
let's say it does. We need to get started sometime, and we were going
to start in the 1970s, and we didn't do anything. We are in a worse
situation today than when we had the oil embargo.
We need to start. We need to move toward energy independence.
I will submit to you that before the end of this session, before
September 30, we have an opportunity to end the

[[Page 16449]]

moratorium on drilling off the continental shelf and elsewhere. The
moratorium on drilling off on the continental shelf and elsewhere in
this country expires September 30. The only way that moratorium can
continue is if we pass legislation to continue it. So I believe, and I
know that there will be legislation before this body and the end of
September that will extend that moratorium.
I would like to say to my colleagues, both Democrat and Republicans,
we need to vote against that moratorium extension. If it's in a
spending bill or any other kind of a bill, we need to stop that bill
from being passed as long as that moratorium is in there, because the
American people are demanding, demanding that we do something about
this energy crisis. They are demanding that we move toward energy
independence.
They want alternative fuels. They want alternative sources of energy.
They want solar, they want wind, they want all of that. We have seen
all of that on television, but during this transition period, they want
energy. The only way we are going to get it is to drill for gas and
oil.
We can do that if we end that moratorium. I would like to say to my
colleagues, Democrat and Republican, let's get together in the next
month, end that moratorium, not allow any legislation to go through
that will extend that moratorium, so we can move toward energy
independence.
If you don't believe that the people in this country are concerned
about it, go to any gas station in this country, the next week when you
are home or next weekend when you are home, and you will find that
everybody is madder than hell about this. I was getting gas the other
day, and I heard a guy say to his child, ``Come here, son, do you want
to help me spend some of your college education?''
I am not kidding. He didn't know I was there. He had a pickup truck,
and he said to his son, ``Come here, I want you to see how we are
spending part of your college education.'' We need to move toward
energy independence, we need to drill, and we need to do it now.

____________________

{time} 1945
34TH YEAR SINCE THE INVASION AND OCCUPATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark the 34th year since
the invasion and occupation of the Republic of Cyprus. Since 1974,
Turkish military forces have illegally occupied the northern part of
the island republic. The Turkish occupation forcibly divides peaceful
communities and deprives a sovereign nation the exercise of democratic
independence in all of its territory.
The Turkish invasion divided Greek-speaking and Turkish-speaking
Cypriots into two physically distinct communities for the first time in
the island nation's history. The unlawful occupation of 37 percent of
the territory of Cyprus continues unabated to this day. There are
currently 43,000 Turkish troops garrisoned in the occupied areas, and
Turkey has resettled over 100,000 mainland Turkish citizens into those
areas.
The continued Turkish occupation of the island republic subverts the
indigenous effort to establish a democratically free and culturally
unique Cypriot nation. All that stands in the way of Cypriots
celebrating their unique and diverse national heritage within the
expanded borders of the European Union is the presence of the Turkish
occupation forces.
Today, thousands of Cypriots continue to be refugees in their own
land, blocked from the homes and the communities they inhabited for
generations. Some have been marooned in tiny enclaves trapped by the
occupation forces, cut off from the outside world and basic human
rights. A new generation of Cypriots has inherited the terrible
dislocation that military occupation brings.
In the face of all this, the Republic of Cypress has struggled and
succeeded in building a strong society, one whose economic progress,
development of democratic institutions and capable governance led to
membership in the European Union in May 2004. Sadly, until there is an
end to the occupation, the occupied areas of Cyprus will be denied the
full benefits of EU membership.
For the United States, there is a clear imperative to resolve the
situation in Cyprus as a matter of justice and the rule of law,
principles we hold dear. But beyond that, achieving reunification of
the island is critical to the strategic interests of the United States.
The Cyprus problem pits American allies against one another. The
strategic interest in facilitating a negotiated settlement is
significant for the region, but also for the world. Cyprus can either
fester as a potential flash point or become a starting point for
reconciliation.
Reconciliation talks are now underway between the leadership of the
two Cypriot communities. The opportunity for reconciliation is real.
Since Cyprus' entry to the EU, many checkpoints along the infamous
green-line have been opened. After nearly 30 years of complete
separation, there have been more than 13 million bi-communal crossings
without any serious incident.
Everyday Cypriots of the Turkish-speaking community cross into the
free areas of the Republic of Cyprus to go to work. Indeed, nearly 3
percent of the Turkish-speaking Cypriot community is employed in the
free areas of the Republic of Cyprus, and more than 35,000 have applied
for and received passports from the Republic of Cyprus.
The Cypriot people want an end to the division of their island. Their
efforts to negotiate reconciliation through the good offices of the
United Nations must be free of Turkish interference. It is no secret
that successive Turkish governments and, in particular, the Turkish
military, use Cyprus as a shibboleth to rouse extremist and nationalist
sentiment to enhance their own domestic standing.
We, in the House of Representatives, should heed the political storm
engulfing Turkey. Today, in Turkey democratic expression is challenged
at every turn. Today, in Turkey religious and ethnic minorities live in
a state of credible fear and harm of persecution. Today and for more
than 80 years, the Turkish military holds itself out as the primary
political actor existing beyond the bounds of democratic
accountability.
Mr. Speaker, the United States should not yield to violations of
human rights and the rule of law by the government of Turkey or the
Turkish military. The United States, and its allies, particularly the
European Union, must stand in solidarity with all Cypriots and support
their commendable efforts to reconcile their differences and establish
a bi-communal, bi-zonal federation.
With the support of this body, it should be made clear to Turkey that
perpetuating the status quo on Cyprus hurts its relations with the
United States and the rest of the world. Worst of all, it forecloses
Turkey's prospects for accession to the European Union.
I ask my colleagues to support the reconciliation efforts now
underway, and demand from our Turkish ally that it refrain from
interfering in the reconciliation efforts now underway. With a truly
concerted effort by this body, next year we will commend the Cypriots
on their courageous reconciliation, instead of observing the 35th year
of Turkish military occupation.

____________________

THE 73 PERCENT MAJORITY, A PLAN FOR INDEPENDENCE

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. POE. Mr. Speaker, in our country, Americans debate, argue and
discuss all types of issues. And because of the type of people we are,
we seldom agree on everything. Almost any issue you bring before the
American public, it is evenly split on most issues, about 50/50,
sometimes a little more than others.

[[Page 16450]]

But today, 73 percent of all Americans believe we ought to drill
offshore. That is a phenomenal number. 73 percent of Americans don't
really agree on hardly anything, but they agree on drilling offshore
because the American public gets it. They understand we need more crude
oil, Mr. Speaker. And the only way we can get gasoline is from crude
oil. And the offshore drilling ban by the President has been lifted.
The only thing standing between us and energy independence offshore
is Congress. Congress has handcuffed the American public's will to
drill offshore.
This map shows where we drill currently, Mr. Speaker. The section
down here in the Southeast, where the blue markers are, now, I
represent part of the State of Texas, and proud to do so. But we only
drill in this country off the shore of Texas, Louisiana, parts of
Mississippi, and parts of Alabama.
But yet, you see all of this red section, off of our shores, and in
all of those areas there are places where there is crude oil on the
bottom of the ocean. But yet, Congress won't let us drill there. There
are a lot of reasons for that. They are all political, and they are all
nonsense because there is oil out there.
Seventy-three percent of the American public say we ought to drill.
We need help. Gasoline prices are too high. We can't afford to go to
work. And even in California, 53 percent of the people who live on the
West Coast in California say, for the first time in recent memory, that
we ought to drill off that coast as well because there is crude oil out
there in the Pacific. But because of political reasons and reasons that
really don't make much sense we are not taking care of ourselves.
One argument is that we can't drill safely, that those oil rigs out
there in the Gulf of Mexico and off the east and west coast will cause
environmental damage because there will be pollution from that crude
oil that would seep from those oil rigs. That is not correct, Mr.
Speaker.
Give you the best example. In 2005, two hurricanes came blasting
through my congressional district in Southeast Texas. Their names were
Katrina and Rita. They came from Louisiana and Texas. Hundreds of
offshore rigs in this area where we do drill were damaged or completely
destroyed. But yet, we didn't hear 1 word about those rigs causing
pollution from crude oil seepage from the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico,
and the reason was it didn't happen. Those massive valves that sit on
the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico called Christmas trees, that are made
in Houston, Texas, by the way, they shut down. That crude oil was not
allowed to escape and there was no environmental damage.
But still we hear this hue and cry. We can't drill safely. There is
pollution. Crude oil will pollute our shores. Let's look at some facts
instead of hysteria.
Pollution from crude oil. Here is where it comes from off our shores.
Mother Nature is the biggest culprit. 63 percent of the pollution of
crude oil that comes a shore is from Mother Nature.
The second is boating, 32 percent. Tankers cause 3 percent. And if
you look at that little bitty line over there on the end, Mr. Speaker,
2 percent comes from offshore drilling. Mother Nature is the culprit,
not offshore drilling. We can drill offshore safely.
We need to take care of ourselves. If we allow the opening of the
Outer Continental Shelf, two good things will happen. Those oil
companies will have to pay a lot of money for the right to drill
offshore. That brings revenue into the Federal Treasury, to the
taxpayers. And we ought to let States that do allow offshore drilling,
no matter which State it is, get a portion of that offshore lease
revenue, and let them use it in their states for whatever they wish,
like education, transportation, health care, whatever they wish.
Secondly, thousands, literally thousands of high-paying jobs will be
created if we allow offshore drilling, plus we will have the crude oil,
then the gasoline and be able to reduce the price. That is not the only
answer, offshore drilling, but it is one of the answers.
And we are not doing anything. Like my grandfather used to say, when
all is said and done, more is said than done. And we haven't done
anything this week. We could be 1 week up on offshore drilling if we
just took the handcuffs off of America and allowed offshore drilling.
$425 million dollars a day goes to Saudi Arabia from the American
taxpayers to buy crude oil. $425 million. That money needs to stay
home. We need to take care of ourselves.
And that's just the way it is.

____________________

SETTING A FIRM TIMETABLE FOR IRAQ REDEPLOYMENT

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, support is growing, finally, for setting a
timetable for the responsible redeployment of American troops and
military contractors from Iraq. Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki supports a
timetable. A majority of the Iraqi Parliament supports a timetable.
Both Houses of Congress have voted for a timetable. There is growing
evidence that the majority of the Iraqi people support a timetable. And
the American people certainly support a timetable.
Even the administration, which has spent more than 5 years turning a
deaf ear to the American people, can finally hear the steady drumbeat
of support for a timetable. Last week the administration agreed to what
it called a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals in
Iraq. This kind of statement is actually better than ``stay the
course,'' which we have heard like a broken record from the White House
for years. And it represents a victory for those who have been
demanding a new direction in Iraq.
But the administration's position still falls far short of what is
needed. A general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals is far
too vague. When would the time horizon be reached? Nobody knows.
What is an aspirational goal? Nobody knows.
I believe the fuzzy wording is deliberate. It is obvious that the
administration wanted to say something that sounds like a withdrawal
but isn't a withdrawal. The loopholes in the administration's position
are big enough to drive a truck through. I am afraid that a general
time horizon for meeting aspirational goals may just be another way of
saying ``permanent occupation.''
Mr. Speaker, we need clarity in our policy. We need to set a firm
timetable for redeployment and a firm date for complete redeployment.
These dates should be set in a way that ensures the safety of our
troops and guarantees that the redeployment will be orderly and
responsible. And we need a clear statement that there will be no
permanent U.S. bases in Iraq.
A firm timetable for redeployment will accomplish many important
goals. It will return full sovereignty to the Iraqi people. It will
give the Iraqis incentives to step up the pace for political
reconciliation. It will hasten the day that the Iraqis are capable of
taking full responsibility for their own security. It will take an
enormous strain off our own military, which has been stretched to the
breaking point by the occupation of Iraq. It will relieve the strain on
our overburdened military families. It will help to stabilize the
Middle East, and help the United States to be a more effective broker
in peace talks between the Israelis and Palestinians.

{time} 2000

It will allow us to focus on a solution for Afghanistan, a solution
that can win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. It will allow
us to take billions of dollars that are being spent on the Iraq
occupation and use that money instead for domestic needs and to help
the American people deal with current hard times.
It will open the door for regional and for international partners to
come into Iraq and to help with the reconstruction of that shattered
nation. It will restore America's moral leadership in

[[Page 16451]]

the world, and it will make us a more credible leader in the fight
against terrorism. It will send a signal to the rest of the world that
America is ready to be America again. That means a nation which
respects the rule of law, that has compassion of the people of the
world and that prefers peace over war.
Mr. Speaker, the administration's time horizon isn't enough. After
more than 5 years of occupation, the only thing that should be on the
horizon is a firm timetable for redeployment. That's what the American
people and the Iraqi people want.

____________________

OIL EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION IN AMERICA

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren) is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I have the
privilege of representing the Third Congressional District of
California. It is in the Greater Sacramento area. I live in a wonderful
community called Gold River along the American River, near the site of
the finding of gold in the 1800s, which began the great gold rush in
California.
When I was home in my district over the last several weekends, I had
an opportunity to speak to a number of people in that district, and the
issue that they were most concerned about was that of energy.
This is of some interest to me, not only because of the legitimate
concerns of the people of my district--the problems that are besetting
them as a result of the higher and higher prices of energy,
particularly with respect to gasoline, the embedded transportation
costs and many other things, such as food--but because, before I moved
to that area some now 20 years ago, I for most of my life lived in Long
Beach, California, and I'd had the privilege of representing that area
and the adjoining areas for 10 years in this Congress during my first
tenure here. Although I was not involved in the energy industry nor
were my parents nor were other members of my family, I did go to school
with a number of people who were either involved or whose parents were
involved in that industry.
The community of Signal Hill is completely surrounded by my hometown
of Long Beach--Signal Hill, one of the longest producing oil fields in
the United States. As I grew up, I saw offshore drilling, some very
close to shore on the manmade islands in San Pedro Bay and Long Beach
Harbor, where the drilling of a resource that had been counted to be,
perhaps, as large as 2 billion barrels of oil was a reality during the
years I grew up, and it continues to this day.
As a matter of fact, every school district in California benefited
from that as they got a bit of the royalties that were achieved because
these are considered State lands, tidelands.
I also saw some rigs further out off the shores of the Long Beach and
Huntington Beach areas that I represented, and I noted that we didn't
have problems with oil seepage or with the loss of oil to any
measurable amount during those years that I saw it there.
I also understood from those who worked in the fields and from those
who worked in the refineries that this is tough work, difficult work,
but it is proud work, hard work, blue-collar work, American work. I
remember some of my friends having parents who were called wildcatters.
It wasn't a derisive term at the time. It was a term of some pride.
These were people who took risks to go out and attempt to find oil, not
only in California but in other places around the United States, and
somehow during the period of time or from the period of time that I was
a child to the present time, these people have gotten a bad name, that
somehow anything that is touched by the oil industry is dirty and
befouls the environment.
Yet what we have seen over the last 30 to 40 years is a remarkable
improvement in technology and tremendous attention to detail with
respect to the protection of the environment. So it not only surprises
but it saddens me that on this floor we can't have debate about bills
that would allow us to discover, uncover and produce the natural
resources that are available to us at this present time for ourselves,
for our children and for our grandchildren.
We are here on a Thursday evening once again. We are not here for a
5-day week but for barely a 3-day week, coming up next week for our
last week before we leave for the August recess, and we have not had
one serious piece of legislation dealing with increased supply. We've
had shell game legislation like today's legislation on the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve. We'll remove some now, put it back later. The net
result is no increase in supply worldwide, and that is the answer, in
part, to the energy problem.
I have supported wind, and I have supported solar, and I have
supported nuclear, and I have supported geothermal, and I have
supported hydroelectric. I continue to support that, but the fact of
the matter is, if you look at the real world, we very much rely on oil,
natural gas and oil, and we have tremendous reserves in and around this
country that we have put off limits. It doesn't make sense. It makes
less and less sense every day, and yet we fail to move.
I would just hope that, before we leave next Friday, we would at
least have a single vote on this floor to open up greater areas for
exploration and for the production of American oil produced by American
men and women for American men and women.

____________________

IN RECOGNITION OF THE CITY OF BRUNSWICK

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of the
City of Brunswick, one of the ``10 Best Towns for Families'' in the
United States.
The City of Brunswick has been recognized by Family Circle magazine
from over 1,850 communities as one of the ``10 Best Towns for
Families.'' But this is hardly a surprise for anyone who lives there.
With family-friendly neighborhoods and child-friendly parks, like
Mooney Park, where hundreds of boys and girls fill summer evenings
playing baseball and softball, we have long known that Brunswick is one
of the best towns for families.
Now, Mr. Speaker, the rest of America will know about the vision
Brunswick's community leaders and their citizens have pursued to create
a community of excellence.
Communities throughout this Nation can look to Brunswick for examples
of how to green their communities. With their Tire Adoption program,
over $25,000 was raised to recycle 20,000 tires, converting old
junkyard into park land.
In addition, the Brunswick Art Works recently held the second annual
Eco-Arts Chalk Festival in North Park. At this event, children not only
competed in chalk art sidewalk drawing contests, but they also made
their own rain collection barrels out of recycled plastic drums.
Let us not forget that the Nation's first LEED-certified grocery
store calls Brunswick, Ohio in the Brunswick Town Center its home.
Mr. Speaker, once again, I am so pleased to honor Brunswick, Ohio,
part of my district, as one of the 10 best towns in America for
families.

____________________

THE FIGHT FOR OUR FUTURE

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, in the days after the 9/11 attacks,
politicians, journalists and assorted experts rushed to claim that
America and the world had entered a new era and that the battle with al
Qaeda would define the first decades of the 21st century.
As the fight against al Qaeda has continued and intensified, we have
come to see the impact of that fight on a key national security
paradigm of the post Cold War era: the quest for energy security in an
industrializing and ever-flattering world.
The United States has long recognized that our global leadership and

[[Page 16452]]

economic strength depended on cheap, abundant energy from the Middle
East. Disruptions to that supply as a result of the 1973 oil embargo,
the Iranian revolution of 1979 and the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait
had demonstrated our vulnerability to events halfway around the world.
Rather than taking the steps necessary to wean ourselves from Middle
East oil, we sought to create stability in the region by aligning
ourselves with pro-Western autocrats whose powerful internal security
forces kept restive populations in check.
Capacity and price, the first high and the second low, stayed our
hand. Cheap and plentiful oil powered the American economy to
preeminence while solar, wind and biomass energy were expensive.
Environmental concerns, including increasing evidence that the burning
of fossil fuels was altering the Earth's climate, were relegated to
secondary status.
All of that has now changed. The 9/11 attacks and the Iraq war have
highlighted the seething political instability in the Middle East. The
rise of China and India have increased competition for oil even as the
global supply has remained stable. Finally, the Earth's climate is
changing more rapidly and more profoundly than many scientists had
forecasted, leading to a global consensus that humanity must take
immediate steps to curtail the emission of carbon dioxide and other
greenhouse gasses.
This confluence of political, economic and environmental factors is
one of the greatest challenges that this Nation has faced in its
history, but just as we have risen to meet other challenges--from the
Revolution to the Civil War to the Great Depression and the
totalitarian dictatorships of the 20th century--I am confident that we
will emerge from this crisis stronger and better positioned than our
economic rivals to prosper in this new world.
As for the other problems that we have faced, finding a solution will
require us to put our faith in American ingenuity and in our enormous
capacity to fund and focus research and development efforts. In the
last 2 years, we have dramatically increased funding for research into
renewable energy, but we must do even more by declaring a new Apollo
Project for energy independence.
Even as we provide incentives to accelerate scientific research into
reducing the cost of renewable energy, we must also act now to reduce
our fossil fuel imports. The cheapest and quickest way to accomplish
this is to reduce energy and fuel use through fuel efficiency, energy
efficiency, conservation, and green development. We can also reduce our
dependence on fossil fuels and foreign oil in the short term by a
responsible increase in domestic production, but this must be viewed
for what it is--a short-term expedient and a bridge to a future based
on renewable energy.
We cannot convert our economy from one dependent on fossil fuels to
one that is based on renewable energy overnight, but we must take the
position that our continued use of oil and gas will be largely phased
out in the coming decades and that renewed, environmentally responsible
exploration is intended to ease the conversion to a post-fossil fuel
economy.
As a threshold matter, we must improve the fuel efficiency of our
cars and trucks, as Congress mandated last December, and develop plug-
in hybrid vehicles to drive further efficiency. Doing this will not
only break our addiction to oil, it will also reduce greenhouse gas
emissions by 30 percent.
This effort should be undertaken in conjunction with the national
effort to improve our public transportation system, which still
receives just a fraction of the investment that we put into roads.
Congress has acted to increase public transit, but more needs to be
done both at a local level and, more importantly, at State and regional
levels.
We must also make our homes more energy efficient by installing
rooftop solar panels, switching to energy-efficient appliances and
enabling consumers and businesses to pay lower prices for electricity
at night so that we can reduce the daytime spike in electricity usage
that requires utilities to keep high-price power generation on call.
Companies have invested and workers have trained themselves in
industries that were supported by our past Tax Code and its provisions.
Climate change legislation will change those incentives, and while many
high-tech American industries will prosper, some industries will
suffer. For example, in my home State of California, solar and
geothermal are growing by leaps and bounds. There are start-ups
throughout the State building solar energy plants and installing solar
energy systems. The silicon shortage that has slowed solar development
in the last 3 years is fading as new factories come online.
But this new development is still dependent on the tax incentives
that Congress has still not extended past the end of the year. We must
not let these tax incentives expire and, instead, extend them for
several years so that this expanding industry can become a driver in
the economy.
Mr. Speaker, my constituents are telling me they want Congress to
take the steps necessary to transition our Nation to clean, renewable
energy. I urge us to do exactly that.
They have told me that the energy crisis has imposed enormous
hardship on them and on millions of other Americans. But, as in crises
past, they also believe that our ingenuity, our can-do spirit and
optimism will enable us to bequeath to our children and grandchildren a
world that is cleaner and more prosperous. I share their hopes and
their determination.

____________________

{time} 2015
30-SOMETHING WORKING GROUP

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) is recognized for
60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to come
down once again with my good friend from western PA, just over the
border, Mr. Altmire from Pennsylvania, to just kind of clear up the
record here a little bit and talk a little bit about what we have been
doing here over the past year-and-a-half in Congress, to talk a little
bit about the hole our country is in and how it has led to a lot of the
stress that most American families are feeling now, most small
businesses are feeling now.
But I'm going to take some liberties here, Mr. Speaker, and
congratulate my brother and my sister-in-law. A few days ago, Andrea
Maria was born to my brother and sister-in-law, and now my godchild,
Nicolas, and the second-in-command, Dominick, now have a little baby
sister. So I wanted to congratulate my mom and Joe and Shari Burkey,
the grandparents, and my brother and sister-in-law for having another
one, three for three. So, if the gentleman has a few kids of his own,
he knows they're not getting much sleep, but the baby is healthy.
Also, I want to talk about, I think with that in mind, is what kind
of legacy we're leaving to this next generation of Americans. And our
friends today who spoke before us and spoke on the floor a little bit
earlier today, you know, were talking about the importance of getting
oil into the market and how if we would get oil into the market that it
would reduce the cost of a gallon of gas.
And what the Democratic leadership has done--and just today we voted
on taking 70 million barrels of oil out of the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve, which is what we have as a country, 700 million barrels of
oil, just in case, if there's some kind of catastrophe, if there's some
kind of crisis, that we can go to this oil and use it for whatever
purposes we deem necessary.
So, a few months ago, as we put oil into this reserve every day and
every month, we said, as Democrats, that starting I think on June 30
that this oil would not go into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve every
day; instead, we would divert it out of the reserve and into the
market. And analysts were telling us that that would have some short-
term effect in bringing the cost down.
We have seen the cost of a gallon of gas go down in the past few
days, not

[[Page 16453]]

significantly enough, but we feel like that strategic move that we made
is having some effect.
So, today, we wanted to take that to the next step and say that we're
going to take 10 percent of this reserve, 70 million barrels of oil,
and pump it right into the market, and it would affect all the
speculation that's going on through the Enron loophole, and it would
inject oil into the market.
And today, we had a vote. And a lot of our friends, who were down on
this floor, Mr. Speaker, just minutes and hours ago and have been
railing on how we need to get oil into the market, voted against this
oil going directly into the market. And you can't have it both ways,
Mr. Speaker. You can't say you want more supply of oil into the market,
and then when we bring up a bill and just cause the Democrats bring the
bill up and say take 70 million barrels of oil and put it into the
market to drive down costs immediately, our friends all voted against
it. You can't have it both ways. Either you want oil into the market,
you want more supply, or you don't. And just because the Democrats say
use the reserve and put it in to stop the speculation and drive the
price down, our friends voted against it.
I yield to my friend.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I thank the gentleman, and I do congratulate him on his
new niece as well.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Thank you.
Mr. ALTMIRE. And the gentleman is correct, and we were sitting here
listening to some of the Members that came before us talk about the
importance of supply, and there's a couple of issues.
One is the fact that we are dealing with folks who are advocating
increasing supply 10 and 20 years from now. The policies of drilling
off the coasts and opening up new areas of the Outer Continental Shelf,
opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, the first
drop of oil does not come for 10 years. We don't achieve peak capacity
in either of those areas for at least 20 years, according to the
Department of Energy, President's Bush own Department of Energy. Those
aren't our numbers; that's their numbers.
So the issue of increasing supply--and they have a really nice slogan
that they like to use: Drill here, drill now. And we'll see them
wearing their buttons, and you hear some of the radio talk show hosts
around the country: Drill here, drill now. And that's a great slogan,
but that's not what ANWR is. That's not what opening up new areas of
the Outer Continental Shelf is. If you are advocating that policy, if
that's your energy policy, then your slogan ought to be: Drill here,
drill in 10 years, drill in 20 years. So that's one side of the
equation.
But to what the gentleman talks about, if you're going to make the
argument that the only way to solve this energy crisis is to increase
the supply of oil, domestic supply, let's get more oil on to the
market--and again, what they're advocating isn't doing it immediately--
but if you're saying we need to do it immediately, well, there is one
way to do it immediately, and let's take a look at the history.
The gentleman talked about, effective July 1, the 70,000 barrels a
day every day that this country was placing into the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve is now going into the private market, effective July
1. What's been the impact? Well, on July 7, which was that first day
after the July 4 holidays, the price of gas was at an all-time high. I
believe it was four-eleven-and-a-half, highest it's ever been. We're
right now about 6 cents less than that, not a substantial decrease. But
instead of the exponential increase that we had seen for months,
trajectory of price straight up, we've now seen a very slight decrease,
but a decrease nonetheless. Certainly, some stability in the market
where none existed before as a direct result of the action this
Congress took to begin withholding shipments in the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve, and now we've seen the impact. It has reduced the price.
Well, what do you think the impact would be instead of 70,000 barrels
a day, how about taking 70 million barrels out of the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve, over a certain period of time, not all at once, but
putting 70 million barrels into the market? You would see an amazing
decrease in the price, as the gentleman knows, and that's what we
advocated here today.
And while we were sitting here listening to the Members that came
before us, a couple of them in particular talked about how this
Congress has done nothing advocating increasing supply. Well, today,
not last week or last year, today before we came on the floor for this
speech, this whole House took a vote a couple of hours ago on releasing
70 million barrels. You want to talk about now, that's now, 70 million
barrels from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, put it into the market.
It would have an incredible effect, not only on decreasing gas prices
because you have more supply, but maybe even more importantly, on these
speculators who are betting on the price of oil continuing to go up and
manipulating the price in the market, and that's a very real issue.
It's a very big part of why gas prices have gone up as high as they
have because of this market speculation. They wouldn't know how to
react if we put 70 million barrels in a time sequence over time into
the market. That would have real impact on their ability to continue to
manipulate, and they would lower the cost in the market as well. It
would have two impacts.
And how do those Members who talk about increasing supply and the
need of this Congress to do something about gas prices--it's all they
talk about. Well, what did they do? Well, most all of them voted
against it. We have the numbers here on the vote. 157 Republicans
opposed that vote today. 157 voted against increasing domestic supply
of oil. After all the lectures we've had to endurefor the last several
months about how we need to put more oil in the market, we had a vote
to do just that today. A hundred plus of them voted against it.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. And that's the thing. We get a card, you've got a
vote, the board lights up, your name's up there, you either hit the
green button for ``yes'' and the red button for ``no.'' And the same
people that said, you know, we've got to get oil, we've got to put it
on the market, voted against it. And as you said 157 Republicans.
Now, we're big on third party validators here with our 30 Something
because we know you may not necessarily believe everything that we are
saying so we make sure that we back some of this up.
Now, here is the statistics, and I will share also some quotes. This
is what's happened in the past when we've taken out of the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve this oil that's just sitting there and we've put it
into the market.
In 1991, this was done by the first President Bush, and prices went
down by 33 percent. In 2000, it was done again, 18.7 percent prices
went down, and it was done in 2005, which is 9 percent. So any of these
examples in which we took directly out of the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve and put it into the market has driven costs down and in 1991 to
the tune of 33 percent, but even if it was 10 percent, you're talking
about immediately knocking 40 cents a gallon off of a gallon of gas.
And that's what we tried to pass today, and 157 Republicans prevented
that from happening. That's the bottom line. And so you can't say one
thing and then do the other.
So you know Mr. Altmire is saying this. I'm saying this. Speaker
Pelosi is saying this. But that's not it. We're not the only ones
saying it. Former Speaker Newt Gingrich says, First thing is dump about
half the Strategic Petroleum Reserve into the world market. You can
pump about 2 million barrels a day. The marginal effect of that will
bring down the price of oil very substantially.
Mr. ALTMIRE. If the gentleman would yield, to put that in
perspective, former Speaker Gingrich by that quote is advocating--did
he say half the Strategic Petroleum Reserve?
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Yeah.
Mr. ALTMIRE. To put that in perspective to what we did today, half of
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve would be approximately 350 million
barrels. We voted today on 70 million barrels, time released over time.
Speaker Gingrich recommended a much more drastic

[[Page 16454]]

course of action, 350 million barrels, and again, 157 Republicans voted
against a much smaller version of that today.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Right. So we had an opportunity today to do this,
and the Republicans have prevented it. You can surmise why maybe they
wanted to do that, but we have experts who we try to listen to when
it's coming to these major economic decisions that are going to reduce
the price at the pump, and we had the opportunity to do that today and
it was prevented. So it wasn't just Speaker Gingrich.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I'm sorry, if the gentleman will yield, because I hadn't
seen this quote before we came on today, that quote--because people at
home might say, well, when was that from? Was that from 1996? What are
we talking about? That quote was from June 12 of this year. Last month
is when that quote came from. So that's a real-time quote, talking
about half the Strategic Petroleum Reserve as a course of action.

{time} 2030

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Absolutely. So just a few days ago, our good friend
from Tennessee, Representative Wamp--who I sit on the Energy and Water
Subcommittee of Appropriations with--Rodney Alexander, a Republican
from Louisiana, Johnny Isakson, Republican from Georgia, there are some
Republicans who are saying, ``put this into the market,'' but not
enough to actually have the kind of impact to actually get this done,
not as many as we need.
And when you look at the American Trucking Association, when you look
at the National Farmers Union, when you look at the Air Transportation
Association, all of these groups wanted us to do this today. We did it,
and it was prevented from happening: 70 million barrels of oil going
into the market today.
But part of it--and I know the gentleman wants to talk a little bit
about this as well--is what is happening with the dollar and how the
dollar has been, because of its weakness at this point, the dollar has
increased the cost of a lot of these commodities.
And I'd like to yield to my friend.
Mr. ALTMIRE. And I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
And I would put it in the perspective of, let's take a look at how we
got where we are today, take a little walk down memory lane. And why
have gas prices gone up so dramatically? And the speakers on the other
side will bring up their charts with their timelines and try to point
fingers and cast blame.
The three major reasons that gas prices have increased so
dramatically over the past several months is the increased demand for
growing economies like China and India. There is nothing we can do
about that; that is going to continue to grow, it's going to continue
to be a problem. And we're going to have to continue to deal with that,
the increased demand in growing economies.
However, two of the other main reasons why the price of gas has gone
up so much over the past several months, the speculators in the market
manipulating the price, driving it up beyond reasonable levels because
they're betting that the cost of oil is going to continue to go up.
That's something we can do something about, something we are going to
do something about.
And the other factor, a major reason for the price of oil in the
market having risen to all-time record highs--before we stopped the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve shipments, which has led to the decrease in
recent weeks, but it's still at a near record high for the price of
oil--is the U.S. dollar and the low dollar around the world.
Oil is traded in the world market with the U.S. dollar. Obviously we
use the U.S. dollar, so we're going to pay more for oil as a result of
the deflation that has taken place with the dollar at near record lows
in relation to other currencies around the world. Anyone who has
traveled this summer to other countries can see the impact of the low
dollar on your exchange rate.
Well, let's take a look at why that happened. Why do we have such a
low dollar? Two of the main reasons:
Our trade deficit, the imbalance in trade from what we're shipping
out overseas to what we're bringing in. We're bringing in a lot more
from overseas than we're exporting. The trade imbalance plays a huge
role in that.
And of course the debt, the national debt. And we've talked many
times--I won't give you the long lecture on it. But suffice it to say 8
years ago we were looking at a $5.5 trillion surplus over the next 10
years, could have paid off the entire national debt. Because of the
economic policies of this administration and the previous Congresses
when they controlled both the White House and Congress on the other
side, the decisions that were made have led to a skyrocketing national
debt, deficits every year, deficits as far as the eye can see. And now,
instead of having paid off the entire national debt, what do we have?
We have a debt ceiling that's now over $10 trillion. That's why the
dollar is at an all-time low. That's one of the big reasons why oil has
skyrocketed in the world market.
So the very people who made those decisions, the very people who are
responsible for those economic policies and those trade policies that
have led to devaluation of the dollar in the world-wide market, the
very same people who made those decisions are now coming forward with
their ideas on what to do with regard to the energy crisis. And we
should take that with a grain of salt, at minimum, because we've seen
the impact of their policies, we know what happened. The American
people have cast judgment on what they thought about those policies.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Well, let's think about it. When the second
President Bush got in in 2000, two oilmen in the White House, and Vice
President Cheney has this secret meeting--that nobody was allowed to
know about--to begin to implement the energy policy of this
administration, Republican House, Republican Senate, Republican White
House, and here we go, here comes the energy policy.
Now, an energy policy that we agree on today doesn't necessarily have
an effect today. Moving barrels out of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve
is a unique example of something having an immediate effect. But with
energy policies, today's decisions have an effect years later. And so
in 2000, when the Bush administration came, Mr. Speaker, and
implemented this policy, headed up by the Vice President, we are now
feeling the effects of it.
There was no massive move towards alternative energy. There was no
expansion of nuclear. There was no expansion of biodiesel. There was no
significant investment into alternative energies so that we can become
independent. And when you look at the fact that we import--nearly 70
percent of the oil that we use in this country is imported from other
sources, completely dependent on the Middle East and other countries in
South America.
So they have implemented their energy policy, and today we have $4 a
gallon gas. And the comments saying somehow that it's not their fault,
it's not their responsibility, when their policies have been
implemented, is ridiculous.
Mr. ALTMIRE. And I would remind our colleagues and the gentleman--he
probably was sitting here when President Bush stood right behind him at
that podium in this House for his State of the Union Address--probably
2005, I think--and talked about our addiction to oil, spent most of his
speech talking about our addiction to oil and how we need to do
everything we can and have a national priority to get away from our
addiction to oil. Well, his energy plan is inconsistent with that
rhetoric because his energy plan is all about furthering our addiction
to oil, cementing it----
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Right.
Mr. ALTMIRE.--in a way that we have never seen before in this
country, where everything they want to do has to do with expanding our
dependence on oil, making us more dependent.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. And if you think about what, in my estimation,
great leaders would have done after 9/11, and you think about what the
Lincolns and the Roosevelts and the Kennedys would have done in that
particular situation,

[[Page 16455]]

we had so much political clout in the world after 9/11. President
Bush's approval ratings were off the charts. He failed to seize that
opportunity to call up the oil companies, sit them down in the Cabinet
room and say, boys, the party's over. We're all getting together, it's
going to be a public/private partnership, and we're going in the
alternative energy realm together as a country, public and private. He
didn't do that. He asked everyone to go shopping; that was the big,
creative challenge to the country. And that was a missed opportunity
that few Presidents ever get, and he got it.
Mr. ALTMIRE. And we would be 7 years down the road of that initiative
right now.
You think about the Apollo moon landing and the Manhattan Project,
when Americans came together, worked towards a common goal, put our
best and brightest and all of our resources on the task, and we got the
job done. So we would be 7 years into that right now. We would have
made such tremendous progress.
And it wouldn't have just been us, it would be the entire world. The
people at Honda and Toyota are putting out hydrogen fuel cell cars and
hybrid battery-operated cars. The hybrid car in the 2010 model for
Toyota is going to get 90 miles for the gallon. And there are going to
be kinks and they're going to be too expensive at first, but we're
getting there, we're making progress. Imagine 7 years ago, if we had
had a national and worldwide commitment led by the United States of
America, how different things would be today instead of paying $4 a
gallon for gas.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. And when you think about that, and we had T. Boone
Pickens in our caucus this week, he was on the Hill talking to both
Democrats and Republicans--many people may have seen his commercials
about his plan for transferring energy from being oil-based into some
of these alternative energy fields, including wind, primarily, for
him--but here's a geologist from Oklahoma University who is worth $4
billion in the oil industry, kind of understands what's going on,
telling us ``You can't drill your way out of this.''
But his main point was, not only that we're importing 70 percent of
our oil, but there's a $700 billion transfer of wealth from the United
States into these other countries. And what we're saying is that $700
billion, that should be put to work here in the United States of
America building windmills, building nuclear facilities, moving forward
with a lot of these other alternative energy sources that are clean and
renewable.
And you add to that what we're spending on the war in Iraq, $10 to
$12 billion a month in Iraq. This is going to be a trillion dollar war,
at the end of the day it's going to cost us $3 trillion when you factor
in the cost of dealing with a lot of the veterans who have come back,
who we have an obligation to take care of in order to honor their
service. If that money was spent focusing on investments in alternative
energy here in the United States 7 years ago, we would be so far down
the path. We would have a green country. We would have green energy. We
would have control of the lithium batteries that are being made. You
would have plug-in cars. This all could have happened in the last 5 or
6 years.
And so we need to get out of this mentality that somehow we're stuck.
And I think for public officials to tell us that somehow, when you only
have 4 percent of the world's oil reserves, you can somehow drill your
way out of this problem is misleading. And Boone Pickens said that,
``They mislead the public.'' This is what he said the other day when he
was here, July 23, ``They mislead the public.'' The public thinks we
can go and drill and they mislead it, and that we're going to get $2 a
gallon in gas.
Let's have an honest conversation about how we can prevent us from
getting into the same situation a decade from now, where you and I--
maybe here, maybe not here--that we're not having the same
conversation.
And we have an opportunity to do that now. Speaker Pelosi, we've put
hundreds of millions of dollars into research and development for these
alternative energy sources, and some are starting to come online. But
this should have been done 30 years ago, but especially 7 years ago.
Mr. ALTMIRE. The gentleman is correct. We had an energy crisis 35
years ago where people had to wait in line for their gas, and depending
on whether you had an even or odd number ending your license plate, you
had to alternate days to even have the right to buy gas. And when that
crisis subsided, this country, unfortunately, took a sigh of relief and
said, well, I'm glad that's over. Let's keep doing it the way we're
doing it, let's keep doing what we're doing. And we are not going to
let that happen again.
We are not going to leave this for people like your niece, who was
just born that you're talking about. We are going to address the
problem now. We're going to take the steps, in a very long-term away,
to be thoughtful, and take an approach that's not going to continue our
addiction to oil, that's not going to continue our dependence on oil.
We're going to move forward in a way that's going to move us away from
oil and look at every possible source.
Mr. Pickens, who you have the chart behind you, the gentleman from
Ohio, he has his ideas on how to do that. And I don't know if it's
going to be windmills--which is what Mr. Pickens advocates. I don't
know if it's going to be hydrogen fuel cell or hybrid cars or solar or
nuclear or clean burning coal or something we haven't thought of, but
let's put everyone we have, all of our resources, the best and
brightest, on the job. Let's get it done.
And the mission should be to get us off of oil. That's where we want
to go. That's something we didn't do 35 years ago and, unfortunately,
we're the worse off for it. It's something we didn't do 7 years ago
when we had a national crisis where we could have made that step in the
right direction, we didn't do it. But we are here now, and we are not
going to let the same mistakes be made this time that were made in the
past.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. And when you look at--and you mentioned it
earlier--when you look at a lot of the situations that we have to deal
with, that hopefully we can fix in time that my nieces and nephews
don't have to deal with, but the debt, just in the last few years, $3
trillion increase in the debt ceiling here to $10 trillion. So we're
borrowing this money because of the irresponsible tax cuts that the
Bush administration passed when they got in, giving tax cuts primarily
to the wealthiest people in the country who are making billions of
dollars a year, benefiting from the system we have, and increasing the
pressure with health care and energy costs on the middle class at the
same time. And so these increases and the money that we're borrowing is
coming from China, is coming from Japan, is coming from OPEC countries.
So when you think about the situation we're in now and you're paying
$4 at the pump because the Bush energy plan, the Bush/Cheney energy
plan has been implemented, you're paying $4 at the pump, and then you
realize that your country is borrowing money for the war and the debt
and the tax cuts that are going primarily to the top 1 percent, and
that money that you're borrowing is coming from China and oil-producing
countries--so they're loaning you the money, and they're getting
interest, you're paying them interest on it just like you would do to
the bank--and the oil-producing countries are producing moringe oil and
shipping more over here, so we have a $700 billion transfer of payments
over to these oil producing countries. When you think about borrowing
money from China, paying them interest on the money, and they take the
interest that they make off the money you're borrowing and they invest
that into basically state-run operations over there, whether it's
steel, or any other kind of manufacturer that they lure over with the
money that they get from the Americans to build industrial parks, to
build roads and bridges so that companies will move over there, to
build Navy ships so that they can have a

[[Page 16456]]

strong fleet in the Pacific, we're funding all this because of the
irresponsible practices.

{time} 2045

So we're trying to dig ourselves out of this hole, and we're still
getting resistance. Even to the tune of trying to put 70 million
barrels of oil on the market, we have trouble getting that passed
because our Republican friends, Mr. Speaker, continue to prevent us
from doing that.
I yield to my friend.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I will tell you what else is irresponsible. The
gentleman from Ohio has a chart behind him that has quotes from T.
Boone Pickens about the oil industry and advocates of this ANWR and
offshore drilling, ``Drill Here, Drill Now,'' and we have talked about
that, and he says, ``They mislead the public.'' That's Mr. Pickens'
quote. That's what's irresponsible. It's irresponsible to put forward a
policy that is specifically designed to score political points; to, in
a very cheap way, take advantage of the American people's exasperation
with the fact that gas prices have skyrocketed out of control in recent
months.
So instead of trying to solve the problem, instead of joining us in
voting today to release 70 million barrels of oil into the market
immediately, instead of joining us to force the oil companies to use
the nearly 90 million acres that are already permitted and leased and
ready to go and force them to drill on it right now or we're going to
give that lease to somebody who will, instead of joining us in these
efforts, they oppose it, and we have been unable to pass them out of
the House because of their opposition, when we have almost unanimously
on our side supported it. That's what is going on here, and that is why
Mr. Pickens talks about the public being misled on this because when
your slogan here is ``Drill Here, Drill Now'' and the only policy that
you're advocating for doesn't create the first drop of oil for at least
10 years, there's a disconnect there and you are misleading the public.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. And from my perspective, I certainly don't want to
put the philosophy that got us into the problem that we are in and
reaffirm it and continue to go down that road. We only have 4 percent
of the world's oil reserves. What don't you get about that picture, Mr.
Speaker?
Mr. ALTMIRE. And we use 25 percent oil.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. And we use 25 percent. So we only have 4 percent
and we use 25 percent, and we're shipping $700 billion a year to those
countries that are sending their oil over here, and we can't drill
enough. Even if we open everything up, we still can't get enough oil to
solve the problem. It is simple math and it's disingenuous, Mr.
Speaker, to somehow mislead the American public, in the words of T.
Boone Pickens, who is an oilman from Texas who is saying the same
thing. It is misleading to say that we can drill our way out of this.
There are 68 million acres that the oil companies now have, up to 90
million. They've done the research as to where they wanted to purchase
the lease. They think there is oil there. They know there's oil there.
Go and drill it and stop the political games of trying to say that
somehow some of the American people are against it. Go ahead and drill.
But that is not going to solve the problem.
And I know in your district and I know the people that vote for me in
my district want me to come down here to solve problems, not to mislead
them and score political points.
When I am eating at Vernon's Restaurant about two blocks from me, the
best Italian restaurant on the planet, Mr. Speaker, people want to know
exactly what we are going to do to solve the problem. And if you
explain to them that we don't have enough oil reserves to keep this
train going, they're smart enough to realize that they know how the
movie ends, and it's not pretty because now we're 10 years from where
we are today, gas is at $8 a gallon, and we are more dependent on oil
from the Middle East, and we have done nothing with wind and nuclear
and biodiesel; so we are in a worse spot than we are today.
Now, I would love to go to my friends who are at Vernon's Restaurant
and say, ``If we just keep drilling, we're going to be okay.'' But
that's not the reality. Those aren't the facts. And the facts have got
to dictate what public policy is or we are not doing our job for the
American people.
Mr. ALTMIRE. And there may be some, Mr. Ryan, who are watching us
today among our colleagues who would say, well, what are the facts?
You're giving your set of facts and figures. How do I know that what
you're saying is true?
I would encourage any of our colleagues who are watching this to go
to the Department of Energy's Web site, pull up EIA, the Energy
Information Administration, which is where all these figures that we
talk about come from. That's President Bush's own Department of Energy
that is telling us what numbers we're using today.
And when you hear us talk about the 68 million acres, we are talking
about in the Continental United States, areas that are leased, ready to
go. The oil companies have in an auction bought those leases. Clearly
they think there's oil there. They are paying rent on those leases
right now for the right to keep that land. They would not do that if
they didn't think there is oil there. But our friends on the other side
will still come one by one and parade up and say, well, there's no oil
there. Those are dry holes and there's nothing there. They're wrong,
but let's just let that go and say, okay, let's talk about the 20
million acres in Alaska that we also talk about where there's a
similar, though not identical, circumstance where the Congress has
approved the ability of the oil companies to lease and start drilling
there. We're not standing in the way. We have opened it up. The oil
companies can drill there. It's the Department of the Interior that has
dragged their feet in getting these leases out. We want them to have
the lease sales and the auctions to get the process going. It's closer
to Prudhoe Bay than ANWR; so the pipeline construction wouldn't take as
long, and it's estimated that we could pull oil out of this area in 3
to 4 years instead of the 10 years it would take to pull it out of
ANWR, which is a little bit further away.
So what's the point of all this? The point of all this is our friends
on the other side will say the same thing: There's no oil there. That's
not the fruitful area. It's ANWR where the oil is, the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge.
Well, you might buy that argument except for fact what is the name of
this territory that we're talking about in Alaska? The name of the 20
million acres that we are talking about is the National Petroleum
Reserve. Now, it would seem to me that if the name of the area is the
``National Petroleum Reserve,'' there's probably some oil there. I
think that's a pretty safe guess. So you would have a pretty hard time
saying that's the reason why we're not pulling oil out of the ground,
because it's not there, in the National Petroleum Reserve.
So we brought to the floor last week a bill that said the Department
of Interior is directed to hold the lease auctions, to get the process
going. The big oil companies are encouraged and, in fact, more than
encouraged. They will either use the land for drilling or they will
lose the right and we will give it to somebody who will. And we brought
that bill to the floor. And as the gentleman knows, what happened? All
those same people who stand over on the other side and lecture us about
the need to increase domestic supply, ``Drill Here, Drill Now,'' they
voted against it. Not all but most. The vast majority voted against it.
Now, that seems pretty inconsistent to me.
So what's the motivation? Well, I'm not going to speculate on
individual Members' motivation. But if your mantra, if your cause
celebre is ``Drill Here, drill now, increase domestic production, let's
get more oil on the market,'' and when the Congress brings to the floor
a bill that does exactly that and sooner than the course of action that
you advocate, I think you need to go home and explain to your
constituents why you voted against that bill.

[[Page 16457]]

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I agree. But it's important for us to realize too
that we are moving on the energy issues. We are trying to fix it, short
term and long term. Short term by releasing the barrels of oil out of
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, have a short-term impact, reduce the
cost; and then long term, invest in these alternative energy sources
with different kinds of cars and incentives and tax credits for
renewables and all of these different policies that will help stimulate
a lot of the renewable energy fields long term.
We are also trying to do other things along public policy areas that
will have an effect for families who are getting hurt today and getting
squeezed because of energy and because of health care and because of
tuition.
One of the things I would like to talk about that we have been doing,
families want their kids to have a better life than they had, and they
want their kids to move further on in life than they have. And the key
in 2008 for that is an education. And what has happened just a week or
so ago, one of the policies that we have implemented is reducing the
cost of student loans. The cost of a student loan used to be 6.8
percent, or the interest rate on a student loan used to be about 6.8
percent last year. As of just a few days ago, this went down to 6
percent. And this is going to continue to go down over the course of
the next few years to about 3.4 percent for a student loan because when
we got in, when the Democrats got in, and Speaker Pelosi has a major
priority and a major emphasis on education, this is where we put our
resources. This is where we made the investment.
So for my friends, Mr. Speaker, who don't seem to think there is a
difference between the two parties, when you go to get a student loan
and its .8 percent less this year than it was last year, that's because
the Democrats are in and it was a priority for us to reduce the
interest rate on a student loan. And when you go next year and it's
even lower and when you go the following year and I think by 2010 it's
down to 3.4 percent, the average student loan is going to be reduced by
about $4,400. So when you take the $4,400, you take the increase in the
minimum wage, you look at all of these different little policies that
we have, they add up to where families and kids can have a better, more
prosperous future than their parents had. But those are the kinds of
investments that we're making. And just today the minimum wage went up
again because of what the Democrats have done.
There's a clear focus and a clear philosophy of what we are trying to
implement here, and that's for middle class families to have success
and for them to move forward and have their kids have more opportunity
than they had. Whether it's energy or health care or education, that's
where we are moving towards to make sure that we can advance that
cause.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I thank the gentleman. That is something that we have
worked on in this Congress and something that we have a great record of
achievement is higher education. When you look at families struggling
with the economy and look at the problems that we have with increased
health care costs, certainly gas prices like we're talking about, the
cost of higher education is right there with the struggles that most
middle class families or many middle class families in this country are
facing. And this Congress took, in the very early days, a step, a very
big step, to help families.
We cut in half the interest rates on student loans from 6.8 percent
to 3.4 percent. And as the gentleman indicates, that by itself is going
to save the average student borrower in this country $4,400 over the
lifetime of the loan.
But we didn't stop just there. We increased Pell grants to their
highest level in history, and we capped at 15 percent of income the
amount of discretionary income that the borrower after they graduate
will be required to pay, which will help them minimize their debt,
prevent them from getting overextended with their debt obligations when
they're not making a lot of money right from the start, and avoid some
of the problems that we have seen in the credit market now where
people's homes have been foreclosed because they got overextended.
Those are real accomplishments on real issues that matter to the
American people and matter to American families, and that's something
that we have to stand on when we talk about what this Congress has done
proactively.
We're talking about gas prices, and something we didn't even mention,
which is a major reform, hadn't been done in 30 years, we increased the
average miles-per-gallon standards, the fuel efficiency standards, from
24 miles per gallon on average to 35 miles per gallon. The first time
it had been raised for American-made cars or cars sold in America in
30-plus years. So that's another real accomplishment of this Congress.
And we could go on. The gentleman talks about the minimum wage and
others. So we are taking steps to help American families and people
struggling in this downturn economy.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. And that's the best thing from our vantage point:
Prove to the American people as to what your beliefs are and how it's
going to affect their lives. And if you have a couple of jobs and
you're making the minimum wage, you got a pay raise twice already in
the last year, just over the last year. If you're going to school,
there is more grant money available for you to go get an education.
There is a lower interest rate on the loan that you're going to take
out or your parents may take out to send you to school.

{time} 2100

Those are significant investments that Democrats have made into the
future of our country so that middle-class people can be successful and
take advantage of these tools. We can't do it for anybody. But these
are tools that average families will use and implement to move forward.
Two of the things that we can't forget, we have also passed the GI
Bill out of the House which will say that if you served this country in
Iraq or Afghanistan over the past 3 or 4 years that you will have all
expenses paid to go to college. In Ohio, there is a policy now that the
Governor has implemented that you can come to Ohio, any veteran around
the country, can come to Ohio and have in-State tuition rates if you're
a veteran.
And look at what we've done for veterans' health care. The largest
investment in the 77-year history of the VA was made by the Democratic
Congress when we got in here. A lot of us weren't for the war. And I
will be the first to say I wasn't for it. But what we all are for is
honoring the service of the veterans who go over there and make the
great sacrifice and the sacrifices that their family makes. So we have
made that investment into the VA program so that the vets have the
benefits that they need. And we're honoring their service by making
that investment.
And if you look to the previous 7 years or 6 years, what the
President made, Mr. Speaker, and what the Republican Congress made, it
was $14 billion in corporate welfare to the oil companies. It was tax
cuts to people who make millions and millions of dollars a year. It was
an energy policy that got us $4 a gallon gas. It was a health care
policy that gets 15 or 20 percent increase on your health care. A
dramatic difference. And I'm proud to stand up here and talk a little
bit about what we've done and what we're going to continue to do,
because I feel like we're just getting started. And we have an election
coming up now in November. And I think there is an opportunity for us
to really move forward.
So, I'm honored again to be with the gentleman from Pennsylvania. And
Mr. Speaker, we're going to wrap up. Again, congratulations to my
brother and sister-in-law, they're grandparents to Andrea. And we will
yield back the balance of our time.

____________________

ENERGY IN AMERICA, NOW AND IN THE FUTURE

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Space). Under the Speaker's announced

[[Page 16458]]

policy of January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta) is
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, the American people are demanding action. And
that action is about what they know more about than this Congress does.
The American people want us to act, because they're hurting at home, at
the pump and at work.
My district is the Fifth Congressional District in Ohio. I have,
according to the National Manufacturers' Association, a district that
is number nine in manufacturing jobs across the entire Congress. And I
represent the number one agricultural district in the State of Ohio. My
district also has a great distinction in that we have I-75 and the Ohio
Turnpike intersecting in northern Wood County. And with that
intersection, we have been told that we are within about 60 percent of
the United States population in a good hard day's drive. So we rely a
lot on transportation. We rely a lot when it comes to having to have
energy. And without that energy, we're not going to be working. And
without that energy, people are going to be saying that we're paying so
much for gasoline. We have to pay so much for home heating oil this
winter, more for natural gas, more for when it comes to having to pay
for groceries. And not because it's the farmers' fault, because those
farmers are out in those fields right now having to pay more for
diesel. And the chemicals they put on their yard are petroleum based.
The fertilizers are.
So what we have to do is we have to get an energy policy. And we have
to get it now. Our national security depends on having a strong
economy. And not only do we need a strong economy, but we want to make
sure that the folks back home are saving some dollars for their future
to be able to make sure that their kids get a good college education
that they can help them with. I have in my district a Whirlpool plant
in Clyde, Ohio, which is the number one washing machine factory in the
world where they produce over 5 million washing machines a year. Twenty
percent of those washing machines are exported. That helps balance our
trade. We have to make sure we're doing that.
And right now, a lot of people are talking about what's happening
with all the energy. Well, the United States consumes between 21 to 24
percent of all the energy in the world. And with that, we were king of
the hill for a long time. But the rest of the world is catching up. And
they're catching up fast. Look at this chart. Look at 2010. Right now
the United States is ahead of the combination of India and China. In
2015, those countries are passing us. And when you look at the chart,
in 2020, China alone is going to be consuming more energy than the
United States. And when you look at the populations of those two
countries and you look at the United States having about 300 million
people and those countries having 1.3 and 1.1 billion individuals,
respectively, they are going to be consuming more. They want to consume
more because they're getting more of a middle class there. And that
middle class is demanding more when it comes to the better things in
life. And a lot of the folks, you will notice, in China are buying more
and more automobiles. And with those automobiles, what are they doing?
They're consuming energy, especially on the petroleum-based site.
So we have to have a policy. The American people are demanding it
right now. It has to happen. And it can't happen in this country if
this country is importing 65 to 70 percent of its oil. Because with
that, our balance of trade is out of whack. And how out of whack is it?
If we just talk about our debt in this country being over $9 trillion,
and with that, who is buying our paper? Well, we're having to rely more
and more and more on foreign governments. In fact, $2.6 trillion is
owned by foreign countries. And who is one of the largest holders of
our paper? Well, it's China with over $500 billion. And it keeps going
up every month.
And that is not any way to have an oil policy, an energy policy or a
fiscal policy, when we're having to rely on the rest of the world to
take care of us. The United States has to take care of itself. And that
is what we have to do. In fact, you know, we have to have a very
balanced all-of-the-above type of a policy in this country because we
have to have nuclear.
We have to use clean coal technology. The United States has over 24
percent of all the coal reserves in the world, 24 percent. It is
estimated that in the world there is about 164 a year supply of coal.
But the United States can get that going right now. But we're not doing
it. When you look at what has happened over in China, they're investing
in clean coal technology right now. India is the third largest consumer
of coal. But in this country, because of this Democratic Congress,
we're not using nuclear. We haven't sited a new plant since 1977. And
we're not looking at clean coal technology. We've got to be doing it.
But along with that, we need to have the alternatives, the
supplementals. And what those are, of course, are wind, solar, ethanol,
biodiesel and hydrogen. Those are the things we have to look at in the
future. And not too long ago, just this past weekend, Leader John
Boehner invited ten of the freshmen, I being one, to be able to go with
him to Colorado to see the renewable energy lab. And then from there we
went up to ANWR in Alaska. It was important that we were there, because
it really demonstrated something.
The United States is working on trying to get away from fossil fuels
and also other areas so that we can improve our balance in trade and
also make sure that we don't have to be relying on oil all the time. I
was fascinated because of all the things that we had out there. We were
talking about wind, and we were talking about ethanol, hydrogen and
solar. They are all occurring in my district, the Fifth Congressional
District of Ohio.
We already have a plant that is manufacturing solar panels. Most of
the solar panels right now are being exported to Germany. But we have
another plant that is going to be opening up. And they're going to be
manufacturing solar panels. And one of the things we noticed, if you go
back 20, 25 years ago, a lot of people didn't like the idea of solar
panels because the problem with them is you either had to put them on
the side of your house or on top of your house. And a lot of people
didn't think that looked good. But when you saw the technology that
they are coming up with right now in a private partnership with
government and also private firms out there working together, one of
the things you saw are the solar panels are now being integrated into
the roof itself. They are being integrated into the shingles. So you
have to look very, very hard to see that you actually have solar power
on your roof.
Also, when we were looking at some of the hydrogen and the plug-in
cars, it's very, very interesting because we hear a lot of talk about
what are we going to do about our fossil-fuel burning cars in this
country? And they had two different cars out there that day. They had a
plug-in, and they also had a hydrogen.
Well, we've got a lot of development. And that is what this is. This
is all research out there. Are we there yet to be able to mass produce
these? I don't think so. Because in one case, with the hydrogen car
that was sitting there, there was a small Mercedes. And I said, well,
how much would this vehicle cost as it sits here today? And they said
about $1 million. So we're a long way from getting that to where we
need to have it.
But the thing is, we've got to look at those alternatives for the
future. Because oil in this country is going to be king for the next 20
to 30 years. So we have to be prepared for the future. But we also have
to meet our needs so we don't fall behind the rest of the world.
Because there is no there is no time to fall behind.
They had a plug-in car that you plug in from your electrical outlets.
And you get that thing charged up. But the problem with that vehicle is
you can only go about 60 miles before you have to recharge. But there
was an interesting point. We talk about electric cars. And what people
don't want to talk about sometimes is this. Once you have that vehicle
and you have to plug

[[Page 16459]]

it in, don't forget, you have got to have the power some place to be
able to get that car generated again. So we have to make sure, in that
case, that you have the nuclear and you have to have the coal out there
to have what they call the base load capacity so we can make sure that
can occur. A lot of people are going to be investing in some of these
vehicles until you get more mileage. You not only have to get to work
and back but you have to plug your car back in.
So those were things that I was impressed with that they're working
on. But the really interesting thing is the hydrogen. The issue with
the hydrogen vehicle is where are you going to get the hydrogen to fuel
this vehicle? Well, they're thinking about taking a wind turbine and,
of course, usually with wind turbines you're putting it into the grid
with the electricity. But if you can divert that and put it into a
system where you can convert it to hydrogen. Then they are even
thinking about taking that idea, what do you do with the hydrogen? How
about having a hydrogen fueling station that you can fill up these
hydrogen cars with? That is a really, really unique thing out there
that they have. But I think it's very, very important that we remember
that we're going to have to be doing these things.
I have an ethanol plant in my district about 35 or 40 miles from my
home. They're producing about 60 million gallons of ethanol a year
there. But it's mainly corn based. What they're looking at out there is
what else can we use? They're thinking about using switchgrass. They
are looking at using not the product of the corn itself, but the stalks
for different types of cellulosic type of material that they can put in
there. So by doing that, they're looking at different ways that they
can produce ethanol. And they're looking at, well, how can we get these
across the country? Maybe if we can have 20 to 30 million gallons of
these types of facilities around, and you have to have about 400 to
help fuel a lot of the cars out there that are E-85. So things are
happening out there that I think are very, very exciting. But we have
to make sure that we're doing everything at the same time to make sure
we have the power to get to the next level.
The interesting part of this trip was going up into ANWR in Alaska.
And a lot of people say, ``well, what is ANWR?'' It's the Arctic Refuge
up there in the northeast part of the country in the far part of the
State. It is huge. You're talking about an area the size of South
Carolina, 19 million acres. Of that, 17.5 acres are always going to be
permanently set aside.

{time} 2115

So you are only talking about 1.5 million acres that Congress 28
years ago said that is the area that you will only be able to explore
and drill for oil in. But when we are talking about that 1.5 million
acres, that acreage, they are only talking about looking at 2,000
acres. What is 2,000 acres? It is a little over 3 square miles. Of an
area the size of South Carolina, 3 square miles. They believe there is
10.3 billion barrels of oil there that is capable of being taken out.
At this stage I would like to ask my colleague, the gentlewoman from
Minnesota (Mrs. Bachmann) to make some comments about ANWR and probably
about Colorado.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Thank you, Congressman Latta. I appreciate your
yielding to me for some comments.
We had a thrill to go on this trip this past weekend. It was the
American energy tour. Leader John Boehner led that tour. We were so
grateful that we were extended an invitation to join him.
Representative Latta was there, and I was there representing the people
from the Sixth District. So here we are, knowing we have very little
time left before Congress takes a break in August when we are back in
our districts, and we will be there for 5 weeks through Labor Day, we
are here right now with a chance to talk to the American people. But
more importantly, we have a chance to be here on the floor tonight and
solve this energy issue.
One thing that we learned on this energy tour is that the problem is
not a lack of natural resources that are available here in the United
States, it isn't a lack of energy in the United States. The lack of
energy is the inertia in the United States Congress, the Democrat-
controlled United States Congress. That's where we lack energy.
The one thing that we found on this tour is that the problem is
Congress. The problem isn't lack of resources. The problem isn't
degradation to our environment. The problem is the fact that Congress
has literally locked up and made illegal access to American energy.
Congressman Latta referenced the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge area
up in Alaska. I would like to speak about that, but before that, I
would like to talk about the areas that are off-limits. I mentioned
that Congress is the problem, and Congress can be the answer. Congress
has made it virtually illegal to access American energy. Where? Well,
the first place is up in Alaska where Congressman Latta and I were,
with fellow freshmen, and that is where there are over 10 billion
barrels of oil.
I spoke with somebody who just read the recently released geological
study which stated that there are over 90 billion barrels of oil in the
Arctic region, and over 10 billion of which are in ANWR. This is a big
story.
Let me go back now to the ANWR map. As Congressman Latta said, ANWR
is all of 19 million acres and is the size of South Carolina. The size
of the area that would be drilled upon is 2,000 acres of that 19
million acres. In other words, if you think of a football field, think
of putting a little postage stamp on a football field. That is the size
of the area that would be drilled upon.
Here is the Brooks Range up in northern Alaska. Here is the Arctic
Ocean. You can't get any farther north than this. The area that we were
in, the 1002 area where we are looking at drilling, and also President
Carter set aside this area specifically for the purpose of drilling,
this area is in direct proximity to the Trans-Alaskan Pipeline System.
This is one of the modern marvels of human engineering. It really
should be one of the seven wonders of the world. It is over 800 miles
of pipeline. This is America's energy lifeline.
Do you know that the largest energy field in the United States is the
Prudhoe Bay oil field that was discovered? We have had a living
laboratory over the last 31 years. We have had a demonstration project
for 31 years in Prudhoe Bay showing you in an environmentally safe and
clean way, you can not only drill for oil but also transport oil and
get it down to the lower 48.
One thing that Congressman Latta and I learned when we were there is
that 31 years ago when drilling began, the flow was 2.1 million barrels
a day that traveled through this pipeline. Today that oil flow is down
to 700,000 barrels a day. And the reason for that is because no more
oil fields have been opened for exploration.
Well, what happens when we get down to 300,000 barrels a day flowing
through this pipeline? The pipeline stops. It doesn't work any more,
and we are not able to get it back up online. It hurts that pipeline
and we can't use it.
This wonderful gift of a pipeline will be actually gone. You want to
talk about use it or lose it, that's the Trans-Alaska Pipeline. We have
to use it.
Here is the great story, and here is the great answer, Mr. Speaker.
The fact is in the 1002 area, the 2,000 acres in ANWR where we believe
there is over 10 billion barrels of oil, this is just 74 miles away
from the pipeline. It's the exact same terrain, completely frozen
ground. Nine months of the year it is under snow and ice, 3 months of
the year complete darkness. All we do is we build 74 miles of pipeline,
and we have access to over 10 billion barrels of oil. Overnight we
increase American reserves by over 50 percent. That's an answer,
Congressman Latta.
Mr. LATTA. I think it is important to point out what has happened
with wildlife in that area over the time that that pipeline was
constructed and the drilling began.
One of the caribou herds that we were told about actually has gone up

[[Page 16460]]

six to sevenfold in numbers. It was also interesting the day when we
got there, at Mile Marker Zero of the pipeline, that was the first
place we saw wildlife on the whole trip. We had three caribou about 45
yards away walking toward us toward the pipeline.
I think when we were up in the air surveying the area, not only of
Prudhoe Bay but going over to the NPR-A area and then over to ANWR, the
most wildlife we saw were in the area where the pipeline was, and the
one large caribou herd.
I think all of us want to make sure that we have environmentally
sound drilling and exploration. People have to know when we are up
there and those companies are out there looking for oil and getting
ready, they are only out there on that tundra during the time it is
frozen. There are no roads. There are no roads. There is one solitary
road heading north, but nothing else. Once you are up there and out
there exploring, they have to do it quickly. They have to find it, and
then come back the next year because they have to wait year after year
to get in and out.
But the oil is right there. The pipeline is less than 75 miles away
from that 10.3 billion barrels of oil. They have also been able, the
way they drill, as you mentioned being environmentally friendly, the
whole idea of having the smallest footprint that you would have to have
to drill, when you are looking at that footprint, we are talking about
how large of an area is it that you used to have until today, and
having to have your drill set up.
I happen to have some of the statistics here. In 1970, the drill site
had to be 20 acres to be able to cover 502 acres. From 1999 to the
present, they only need 6 acres to cover an area of 32,000 acres. That
is pretty exciting. One site that they are looking at, it is going to
cost $1.5 billion to get that going. And what that $1.5 billion is
going to be able to do is they are going to be able to laterally drill
down and go out 8 miles without having to set foot anywhere to get to
that oil.
Mrs. BACHMANN. That is what is absolutely amazing that we saw, is
that no roads are built to get into ANWR to do the drilling. The roads
that do go to put in the oil rig are ice roads. Those roads go in the
dark of winter when it is freezing. Bulldozers build ice roads out to
where the rig is going to be set. The oil rig is set, and as
Congressman Latta said, what formerly used to take 20 acres of a pad
site to put a drill down, now because of technological advances has
been reduced down to 6 acres of land. But if you look at underneath the
earth with the directional drilling that is able to be accomplished
now, literally we can go out 8 miles.
It is absolutely phenomenal what we are able to accomplish now, what
the oil industry is able to accomplish now, to be able to give us
American energy independence. Let's not forget what we are talking
about, American energy independence.
We are looking at $4 a gallon gasoline right now.
This is incredible. This Chamber should be filled with Members of
Congress. Unfortunately, and I don't know what the camera shows, but
the Chamber is completely empty. Except for you and I, Congressman
Latta, we are the only Members of Congress, as well as the Speaker. No
offense extended to the Speaker. There is no more important issue right
now for the American people.
When we are at $4 a gallon gas, and when we have the capability of
being at $2 a gallon gas, it is criminal to not allow the American
people to be there.
How do I know it is possible? We know from the seismic studies that
have been done that there are over 10.5 billion barrels in the ANWR
region in very close proximity to the Trans-Alaska Pipeline.
Also, I sit on the Committee on Financial Services. Last week Ben
Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman said to us regarding gas prices,
he said that a 1 percent increase in supply could lower prices by as
much as 10 percent.
Now what was the figure that we were told when drilling first started
out in Prudhoe Bay, it was 2.1 million barrels per day. We are down to
700,000 barrels a day. We are able to increase another 1.4 million
barrels a day. That's the capacity that we could increase, well over a
1 percent increase.
So instead of seeing prices fall by as much as 10 percent, we could
be looking at a price fall by as much as 20 percent. Perhaps,
Congressman Latta, what we should do is talk about the timeline. There
have been a lot of fallacies stated, false information stating that
there are 68 million acres of land that is being leased that is idle
that the oil companies are currently not using under use-it-or-lose-it
policies. That is a fact that we found out on this fact-finding
mission, the fact that that is a completely false statement. It is an
urban legend.
There is not one acre of land, Mr. Speaker, that has been leased that
is currently not in the production or exploration stage because
Congress again is at fault here. It is not companies, it is not
consumers that are consuming too much oil, it is Congress. Congress
created 10 years of an artificial delay period in the permitting, and
they created in that 10-year period 11 different points of entries when
nuisance lawsuits can be filed to stop the production of oil.
Do you remember the length of time that one lawsuit languished in the
9th Circuit Court of Appeals?
Mr. LATTA. I believe the pipeline they said was stopped for at least
2 years during the construction of the pipeline. So all of these things
take time. That is one of the big things, and there are some urban
legends out there about how long some of these things can take.
Some people say it takes 10 years. Well, if we all remember, it was
in 1995 that President Clinton vetoed the legislation on this drilling.
If we hadn't had that happen, we would have oil coming down that
pipeline from ANWR today. And then we would be able to say to the rest
of the world, look what is happening. And one of the things when we
talk about oil and prices around the world, President Bush just this
past week, I believe it was, said you know what, I am going to lift the
ban on the executive side, but Congress also has to act.

{time} 2130

Because the world says hey, wait, is the United States getting
serious about this, are they getting serious about really wanting to
produce their own oil, getting away from that 65, 70 percent that they
are importing right now and say, you know what, maybe the United States
is going to get serious, maybe they are going to start looking at that
Outer Continental Shelf. Maybe they are going to start looking at more
with drilling in Alaska. It's important to note that we met with the
Governor of Alaska.
Mrs. BACHMANN. That's right.
Mr. LATTA. It's important to know that she wants to keep her State
pristine and beautiful for the future generations of Alaskans. My
wife's one sister does live in Alaska, and you want to make sure you
keep that State gorgeous. But the Governor of Alaska said we have got
to drill, we must drill. Not only does she believe it, but 80 percent
of the Alaskans believe it.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Also the native Alaskans as well, the native Alaskans
that live up in the little villages. There is one little village up in
ANWR that has less than 300 people. The native Alaskans that live in
that village that are subsistence people. They live off of whale, they
eat the caribou that they hunt, they want the drilling to start as
well.
Why? Because they want to become greedy and wealthy? No, because they
have seen, to their neighbors just to the immediate west of them in the
Prudhoe Bay region, that this drilling that has occurred has been done
in an environmentally safe and sensitive way. In fact, so much so,
remember when we were going along up in Prudhoe Bay, we saw trucks, and
we asked, what is that little plastic, it looks like a little plastic
Barbie doll swimming pool that's underneath the trucks.
And we were told so strict are the environmental regulations in
Alaska, the strictest environmental regulations in

[[Page 16461]]

the entire country, they are so strict, that if a truck travels from
point A to point B, as soon as the truck stops, the driver has to get
out and take what's called a duck pond or a diaper. He slips this
underneath the truck so in case even 1 drop of oil comes out of a crank
case, they are so careful, that they don't want even one drop of oil to
touch the tundra. That's how careful they are.
You don't see industrial waste. You don't see pools of oil. You don't
see refuse lying about. You don't see excessive humans walking around
with the pipelines. You see a very tiny footprint, and that's in the
old area of oil drilling. With a new area of oil drilling, it is very
difficult to even spot from the air a new pipeline, because a rig comes
up out of the ground and a green house is literally, a little tiny
casing, is put over that pipeline. There is very, very little impact on
that region.
As Congressman Latta stated accurately, we did not see wildlife. We
were 2 hours in the air flying over the National Petroleum Reserve,
flying over Prudhoe Bay and then flying over the ANWR region. In that
2-hour time span, we did not see wildlife over in the ANWR area. We
were straining to find Dall sheep, straining to see musk ox, straining
to see caribou, looking for wildlife. Where did we see the wildlife?
Just as Congressman Latta said, we saw it at mile marker zero, where
the most activity was.
You know, it's interesting, caribou must be a lot like people. They
like to be where the action is. We like to be where the action is. The
caribou wanted to be where the action was. It was a great story.
Mr. LATTA. Remember we got off at Endicott at the drilling station
there. Do you remember what we were told immediately, what was the
warning?
Mrs. BACHMANN. The polar bear. We were told polar bears like to be
around the buildings. For one thing they like to eat people. They are
very aggressive creatures. We were told they had spotted a polar bear
that had gone underneath the buildings, because the buildings don't
have a regular foundation the way that houses do in the lower 48,
because, again, it's all permafrost. It is consistently frozen land up
there.
As a matter of fact, I am a hardy Minnesotan girl. Even as a hardy
Minnesotan, this is the warmest time of the year. I took my down parka
with me with Gore-Tex, and I was grateful that I had forgotten my
mittens that I stuffed in my parka last winter.
I put my mittens on, I had my woolly parka on. I had my socks on, and
I was happy to have it. This was the warmest time of the year.
You couldn't find a more perfect piece of territory to drill upon. To
think that we have this gift in a very compact area next to the
pipeline that's already built, and we can so quickly, if we would fast
track all the permitting process, we could literally, within 3 years,
have the oil pumping and in the pipeline down here in the lower 48, and
we would increase American energy reserves by 50 percent. That's a deal
that I don't know why we would turn it down.
Mr. LATTA. You are absolutely correct. We have got to act now. On the
environmental side, I have hunted my entire life. I have been outdoors
my entire life. One of the things, when I was in the Ohio legislature,
I carried a lot of the bills from the Division of Wildlife. I helped
create the bald eagle license plate. I believe in making sure that we
preserve our natural heritage. We want to make sure in Ohio that the
eagle is on a comeback, from only having four nests in 1979 to having
about 185 nests this year.
I am a firm believer of making sure. Not only did we hear about the
polar bear when we got there, but when we were leaving, they said oh,
we have got another report, we have got a brown bear out in the
compound.
Mrs. BACHMANN. I didn't hear about that. Somebody should have told me
about that.
Mr. LATTA. Yes, the bears were out. I think it's also important that
people keep remembering there is a lot of misinformation, there is a
lot of misinformation that comes with photographs.
You know, because just if you look at this, you talk about 1002 here
on the far end of the chart here of the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge. That's that 1.5 million acres. We are only talking about 3
square miles way to the west, and that's all it is.
The other thing is, you know, I see photographs sometimes showing the
refuge with trees, and the mountains having different types of trees on
it.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Thank you for clarifying that, Congressman.
Mr. LATTA. That might be on the south slope of the Brooks Range. But
I tell you when we flew along that Brooks Range, and I took
photographs, all I saw were granite mountains.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Oh, there were no trees up there. I worked for my
uncle up in Alaska when I was in college. I was in the Aleutian chain,
which is in the southern part of Alaska. There were no trees there.
We were here north of the Arctic circle. We touched other little toes
up here actually in the Arctic Ocean. There are no trees up there, the
mountain ranges that you see, as Congressman Latta said, the Brooks
Range, it is, it was all granite. There were no trees.
But the area we were in was the coastal plain, the perfect area for
drilling. So we have the National Petroleum Reserve, Prudhoe Bay, the
Arctic refuge, this has been a gift for our country.
Remember, we cannot forget that this is a key to making America
energy independent, not dependent upon OPEC for oil, not dependent on
Huge Chavez for oil. We don't want to continue to send all of our
American dollars and wealth overseas to make dictators happy and rich.
What do we need? What could we do? We could keep that money here.
Do you remember when we talked about jobs? I know your area in Ohio
has suffered terribly from job loss. There is job loss in the State of
Michigan. Many areas of the country right now are suffering with job
loss.
Do you know what we heard up here in Prudhoe Bay where the oil
drilling is occurring, that workers make over six figures, over
$100,000 a year. No one actually lives in Prudhoe Bay, they come in for
2 weeks at a time, and then they leave and they go home for 2 weeks at
a time. They have health care benefits. They make over $100,000 a year.
They work 2 weeks on, 2 weeks off.
We were told that if we would open up this ANWR region for drilling,
and if we would also be looking at Colorado to open that area up, we
would be looking at over 750,000 jobs, American jobs, where the
American economy would be stimulated, Americans could be making over
$100,000 a year.
Why in the world, why in the world would anyone possibly not want to
open up for the American people, not only energy reserves that could
bring the price of energy down to less than $2 of a gallon of gas, but
also to provide jobs. Wouldn't people in Ohio, in the great State of
Ohio, want jobs at over $100,000?
Mr. LATTA. You are absolutely correct. You know, it's mind boggling.
As the gentlelady from Minnesota said, you know, there is so much
that can occur up there. But you know the one thing that's being left
out of the debate sometimes is well we are hearing you have got the
National Petroleum Reserve over here, use it. Well, there is one thing
about it, you have to have larger footprints over there. You have to
have more exploring, because what we have gotten in ANWR, we know there
is that.
We know there is that 10.3 billion, probably more. Because as you
know when they first started in the Prudhoe Bay area they thought it
would be 9 billion. It could actually, by the time it is all over, be
13 to 15 barrels.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Be 15, they have now taken out 12 billion.
Mr. LATTA. So it could hit that. We can get that out.
Mrs. BACHMANN. That doesn't include the natural gas. Remember that
was the other part of the equation.
Mr. LATTA. What's the Governor of Alaska saying about that natural
gas?
Mrs. BACHMANN. Well the Governor of Alaska says let's tap into that
natural gas. We have the oil pipeline

[[Page 16462]]

that's currently under way. But you can't put natural gas into a crude
oil pipeline. They need to build a natural-gas pipeline that would run
fairly parallel.
Every day, I believe it's well over 1 billion cubic feet of natural
gas is extracted from the earth when the oil comes up. The great thing
that the companies have been able to do is to take that natural gas and
pump it back into the earth. The compression, I believe, from the
natural gas, has forced more oil up. That's part of the reason why we
have seen so much more yield from the Prudhoe Bay.
Without that advance in technology, we wouldn't have the tremendous
abundance that we have had. This is really sobering news. Again,
remember, when Prudhoe Bay was first opened up 31 years ago, it was the
largest oil field in the United States. Oil fields don't get larger,
they only deplete. After 31 years, it is still the largest oil field in
the United States.
Knowing that, we have adjacent to this field the Arctic refuge, or
the ANWR region 1002 which, again, president Jimmy Carter set aside
specifically for the purpose of drilling for this oil and getting it
back down for the American people, the American economy, and America's
national security. Because whoever controls fuel controls your freedom.
If Hugo Chavez and Middle East dictators and OPEC control America's
fuel, then Hugo Chavez and OPEC dictators control America's freedom. I
know that you don't want to have dictators controlling America's
freedom. I don't. I don't want that for the people of Minnesota.
Mr. LATTA. I also know in this country we are using over 20 million
barrels of oil a day. What would that do to have another million plus
be put in that pipeline per day to help the economy down in the lower
40? Look what it would do for the economy in Alaska. They get that
check up in Alaska, I know my sister-in-law's family gets that check
for every person living in Alaska, what they get for that royalty up
there.
But when you look at the map again, as the gentlelady from Minnesota
said, we are talking about an area, only about 75 miles, to be able to
tap in from area 1002 to that pipeline and get it in, you are going to
have to go much farther into that area of the NPRA to get over there
and find it. Again, they don't know if that's going to be in smaller
pockets, that means they will have to do exploration.
Mrs. BACHMANN. A much larger footprint over here, a much larger
environmental impact. The one thing we do know, the southern part of
the petroleum reserve, there is about 2 percent of oil down there.
About 2 percent of the area in the Southern part of the National
Petroleum Reserve holds oil.
So, again, the lie that we hear from other quarters state that, well,
we just have land that's idle, that the oil companies aren't exploring
on. Well, would you explore somewhere where there is no oil? I mean,
just think of that.
Where do young boys go to look for chicks? They go where the chicks
are. You know, you go where you can have your best yield. Oil companies
go where they can find their best yield.
Mr. LATTA. Again, we know where the 10.3 billion barrels are right
now. Again, we don't want to disturb that area any more than you have
to. They would have to be driving all over that area to do the
exploration.
Why do it right now? Why? Because we have got the ANWR area. As you
just said, back 28 years ago, Congress set that land aside, that top
part of that 1.5 million acres. You know it boggles my mind. We are
fighting over 3 square miles of land.
Mrs. BACHMANN. A postage stamp on a football field. That's what we
are talking about.
Mr. LATTA. Three square miles in the State of South Carolina, you
couldn't even find it if you had to, if you are looking at the size
difference. It's incredible that we have that problem going on there.
Mrs. BACHMANN. The other key point that we don't want to fail to
remember is that when we went on our American energy tour, the purpose
was to talk to the American people about our all-of-the-above strategy,
the fact that we believe in conservation. We need more conservation of
energy in this country, and Congressman Latta had talked about the
wonderful new designs at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory where
buildings can be designed to literally use zero energy.
I know it's hard to believe, but if you reorient the building, and if
you use solar panels, there are amazing things that can be done now
where buildings can actually get to the point of using zero energy.
These are all techniques and great new breakthrough technologies that
America can use to become energy independent.
Conservation is real. We can embrace conservation. We can also
embrace renewable energy. The breakthroughs right now that are
happening with wind energy are overwhelming.
We also saw all of testing that is being done with solar energy. I
was particularly intrigued by shingles that are on houses now, shingles
that are actually solar collectors.

{time} 2145

All of this work is being done at the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory. So renewables is one of the legs of our three-legged stool.
Conservation is one of the legs on our three-legged stool. But we do
not, a stool won't stand up without that third leg. Right now the third
leg that is the most key that we need to focus on, we have to focus on
all three at the same time, an abundance of increase in American energy
supply. And we have got it. We have oil in the Outer Continental Shelf,
over 88 billion barrels. We have over 10 billion barrels in the ANWR
region. We have about 2 trillion barrels worth of oil in the oil shale
region, and we have nuclear.
Mr. LATTA. And across the country where we can't get to right now we
have over 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
Mrs. BACHMANN. And that really is liquid gold.
Mr. LATTA. And when you look at what we need and when people this
winter are going to say, look at my energy bills. I have people telling
me in my district right now that they are already, that people are not
buying and filling up their tank this year already. They are ordering
only half a tank because the cost is going to be the same as have
gotten it at the full tank price last year. So people are going, how
are we going to pay for this?
Mrs. BACHMANN. And, Congressman Latta, we all know that school is
going on come up. Kids don't like to talk about the fact that school is
going to come because it is still July. But there was an article last
week in Minnesota, I believe it was in the St. Paul Pioneer Press
newspaper, and it said this. It said that parents are looking at
ratcheting back, not buying backpacks, not buying back to school
clothes, not buying new protractors, pencils, because they just feel
that they can't afford it, and, in fact, can't afford it.
Now there is something wrong, Mr. Speaker, when the American people
feel so squeezed that they don't feel they can buy their child a new
backpack. This isn't funny anymore. This is a very serious issue.
And I will tell you what, in the State of Minnesota, you don't have
an option not to turn your furnace on come October. You just don't have
that option.
Mr. LATTA. Well, I guarantee you in northwest Ohio Congresswoman that
you have got to turn that furnace on because there are some winters it
gets down real cold. It might not be quite as cold as in Minnesota, but
I will guarantee we have had some 10 to 20 below days, and it is cold.
Mrs. BACHMANN. When people open up their Excel energy bill--Excel
serves both Minnesota and Colorado--when people open up their Excel
bill and they see that the price of their electricity or natural gas
has doubled or maybe tripled, I cannot imagine the ramifications to the
economy.
Mr. LATTA. What happens for all those companies that have converted
their coal over to natural gas?
Mrs. BACHMANN. And that is the new wave. Company after company has
been forced to do that.

[[Page 16463]]

Mr. LATTA. And think about California. What are those people going to
be facing? Every time they are going to be turning on a switch at their
house they are going to be finding out they are going to be paying more
and more and more because that natural gas is going up and up and up.
But when you have, as you said, 420 trillion cubic feet in those areas
that we are not allowed to go into now, or as you mention, that 86
billion barrels of oil in areas we can't go in, or as you mention, that
oil shale, you know, all these things are out there, and as I mentioned
a little bit earlier, we have the world's largest coal supply that we
could gasify. You could use it into a liquid. You could run automobiles
off of it. But what are we doing? Absolutely nothing. And so I think
that you are absolutely right.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Why is it, Congressman Latta, we are the only country
in the world that has made it illegal to access the answer to our
problem, our own U.S. American energy supplies? Every day of the week
we hear buy American, buy American. We are here saying buy American,
buy American energy reserves. We have got them everywhere. Why aren't
we buying American energy reserves?
But you know what really makes me mad? Congressman Latta, when I hear
people say that Democrats don't have an energy plan. That makes me mad,
because they have an energy plan and it is loud and clear and they
stated it themselves just a week ago. Do you remember what it was?
Mr. LATTA. You are going show that out that direction because I can
remember it quite well.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Can you see it, Congressman Latta?
Mr. LATTA. I certainly can.
Mrs. BACHMANN. What does it say?
Mr. LATTA. It says Democrat energy plan, drive small cars and wait
for the wind.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Now, is that going to work in northwestern Ohio?
Mr. LATTA. Well, I will tell you what. When I have got people driving
50 miles one way to work. We don't have Metros. We don't have trains.
We don't have taxis. They can chauffeur you around most of my district
and we have got to have an automobile. So a person in my district now
is saying, you know what? If I have got to drive 500 miles back and
forth all week long, can I afford to go to work? And then the companies
then say, what happens if these people are going to say, well I can't
show up to work anymore, and then they don't have that good qualified
worker anymore. Then the company says we have got to go someplace else.
Mrs. BACHMANN. We have colleges in my State now that are revamping
their schedules to cut off one more day of class time for kids. And we
have local public schools, K through 12, that have decided they are
going to cut off a school day because they need to reduce the energy
consumption for school districts. Can you imagine that? The parents
that have enough of a burden with their own energy prices that are
going up, now they may have little children that will be sitting at
home all day. Mom has to go to work, Dad has to go to work.
These kids are going to be sitting home all day. Think of that. Think
of the implication when this is a problem that has been created by
Congress. And it is all inertia here. Again, lack of energy in the
United States Congress because unfortunately, the Democratic-controlled
Congress has decided we are all supposed to put wind sails on top of
our small cars and somehow that is going to get us to where we need to
go for American energy independence.
Not the people of the Sixth District of Minnesota, no way, no how.
Because they are smarter than that there. The people in the Sixth
District of Minnesota are pretty bright people, and they realize that
we are a ``can do'' country, and it is time we do some ``can doing''
around in place and increase American energy reserves.
Mr. LATTA. And I think it is absolutely correct, Congresswoman, that
we have got to remember that we have to have that balanced energy plan.
We have to have that base load. We have got to make sure that we have
that base load, that we have nuclear, that we have that clean coal that
we can run our factories. Because the big problem that people forget
sometimes is the wind is not always blowing all the time. And when the
wind is not always blowing all the time, those turbines aren't going to
be turning all the time.
In my hometown where we have the only four wind turbines in the State
of Ohio, the big problem could be, you know, when the wind stops, there
is no power being generated. But you know when people think they drive
about and I say, just out of curiosity, they will say oh, it is great
that you have the wind turbines. And I think it is great that we have
those wind turbines. But the thing that I ask them is how much power do
you think that supplies to the City of Bowling Green if that power is
going into the city's grid and not into just the general grid? And they
say, oh they come up with these really high numbers. I say no; only 3
percent from those four wind turbines. And they are big.
So you have to have a lot. You know, the estimates are out there that
you need 600 to 800 for a smaller coal generated plant. You need 1,250
to 1,700 turbines, and that means people are going to have to say, if
we are not going to go with the one direction and go with the turbines,
we are going to have to be able to site these.
Mrs. BACHMANN. And what are we supposed to do with the airline
industry? Put solar panels on the outside of airplanes and hope for the
best, hope that a cloud doesn't come, hope that the sun doesn't go
down? We have got to figure out some way to fly airplanes.
I had employees from Northwest Airlines in my office because
Northwest has to layoff--it is a great airline in Minnesota. And, Mr.
Speaker, these Northwest employees told me 2,500 employees will be laid
off, 2,500 employees. Think of what that is going to mean for the
economy in the State of Minnesota.
And then look at the airline announcement with United Airlines, with
American Airlines, with Delta Airlines. We are, the United States
Congress is personally responsible, I believe. Because of the negligent
policies that this Congress has made to make it illegal to access
American energy, they are responsible for spiking up the cost of energy
so much that Congress, the Democrat-controlled Congress is responsible
for seeing these airline companies go belly up.
2,500 employees losing their jobs in the State of Minnesota. Where is
this going to end?
If we don't increase American energy supply, if we won't build new
refineries, if we won't find new natural gas to liquid, where are we
going to go to fly our airplanes to keep our economy going?
Mr. LATTA. Well, and the other question is, it is just not tourists
that are on those airplanes. You have got a lot of people in business
travel. And so that is going to hurt the American business community
because people have got to get from Point A to Point B for business
reasons, and if they can't do it, then what happens?
Mrs. BACHMANN. Pretty soon, Mr. Latta, Members of Congress won't be
able to come to Washington, D.C. Maybe that is the only relief the
American people are going to get.
Mr. LATTA. Well, that might be true. They might be much happier to
keep us at home than send us down here.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Perhaps that has something to do with Congress' 9
percent approval rating.
Mr. LATTA. That might be that problem too. But we have got a
situation in this country. But my philosophy is this: You know,
sometimes you have got to spell out what the problems are before you
can solve them. And by saying, you know, these are the problems we
have, this is how we can solve them. I think the American people would
say let's do it. And when they get to that point, I think what we can
begin to say is we have got to start expanding. We have got to make
sure that we are doing everything we possibly can, across the board.
You know, we are all for conservation. We are all for renewables.
We are all for making sure that we have that base power that
companies

[[Page 16464]]

out there that use a lot of power, and when they turn those machines on
in those factories, that they are going to run, that there won't be
brownouts and blackouts. They have got to have that capacity to keep
those things running. And some machines, they have got to keep running
hours a day, all the time.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Can you imagine a hospital, for instance? People that
are in hospitals who require that 24-hour round the clock care,
hospitals routinely have generators as back ups. But you know,
generators have to run on something too. They need usually oil or they
need some sort of a product that they run on.
If we can't produce more energy and also, if the electric grid, this
is another very serious issue that we have seen brownouts and blackouts
that have occurred across the United States.
We are not increasing transmission lines. We have taken--it is almost
hard for me to believe how the United States Congress has taken a none
of the above strategy. And the one thing that I saw on our American
energy tour last weekend, Congressman Latta, is that the House
Republicans had embraced an all of the above. We want all energy from
wherever it comes from, we want to site new transmission lines, new
pipelines, open up American energy production. We want all of the
above. And all we have seen out of Congress is none of the above.
Mr. LATTA. And again, the American people all know it. And when we
have our tele-town halls, I think the other night when we did ours, we
probably had 95 percent of all the calls dealt with one issue, energy.
Energy, energy, because people are scared. They are worried about not
only about turning on the switches at home, but they have got to pay
for it.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Young people are scared. Old people are scared. Young
married people are scared. Everybody knows.
Mr. LATTA. I hate to admit it. I can remember when I started driving,
gas was around 32 or 35 cents a gallon.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Congressman Latta, what was gas when you and I took
office? For me it was $2 and change. What has happened? Seventy-six
percent increase just in the last year and a half. What happened?
The signal was sent to the American people that absolutely nothing
will be done. In fact, unfortunately, Speaker Pelosi said herself she
has no intention to allow a vote to drill, no intention. Their
intention is pretty clear. They are not going to drill.
That is not what I heard from the Republican conference. I heard the
Republican conference say all of the above. Not only do we want to
drill, we want wind, we want solar, we want bio fuels, we want
renewables, we want to have a conservation. We want it all because
America needs it all.
Mr. LATTA. I think that we have got a lot to do in this country. You
know, I was very glad when I was able to be on that mission to Colorado
and up to ANWR because I think that it really shows us what we can do.
We can go out and talk about it. We can talk about making sure that we
are using those renewables, that we can go out there and talk about
what would have the smallest footprint out there to preserve that
beautiful tundra up there. But again, I think the people, don't be a
lot of these photographs sometimes. You have got to see the actual
photos of what this area looks like. And not that the tundra isn't
attractive, but it is not some of the things that it is portrayed to
be.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Well, you can't live on it. That is one thing that was
clear to us. You can't have a lot of human habitation.
Mr. LATTA. You can't walk across it without sinking through. So my
view is that we want to do, as you said, and I said a little earlier,
it is all of the above. We want to make sure that we have got a great
energy policy, and energy that will get us past the oil. But it is
going to take time. And you probably remember, you were standing right
there when those discussions were being had, that we are not that close
yet to get to those new renewables that are out there. It is going to
take time.
But during that time, when 80 percent of all of the goods that are
delivered in the State of Ohio are delivered by truck, when you look at
everything that we rely on for oil, we have got to have it. But if we
put ourselves out of business before then, what good is it going do
down the road to get us to the renewables because we have already lost.
Mrs. BACHMANN. What good is it going to do, Congressman Latta, if
people don't have jobs? Because company after company, this is no joke.
Companies are facing very severe complications on their bottom line
because they can't afford the energy. They can't do it. And buying a
carbon credit isn't going to solve this. We have got to have more real
energy to power the real needs America needs to have. We never would
have had the American prosperity that we enjoy today without
affordable, accessible, reliable energy. Energy is a good thing. Oil,
gas, coal, these aren't evils. These have been building blocks that
have given us this greater country that the world has ever known. To
take away these energy building blocks is to take away freedom and to
take away prosperity, to take away the greatness of our Nation.

{time} 2200

We need this not just for our generation. We need this for the next
generation--for my five kids, for your kids. This is very important.
What kind of a country are we going to hand off to our kids? Sorry.
We're turning the lights off. You're on your own.
Mr. LATTA. Absolutely. That's what we're going to do, and that's why
we're going to keep working. We're going to make sure that the American
people hear what we believe has to be done. What I'm hearing from my
constituents in the Fifth Congressional District of Ohio is why aren't
we drilling, and why aren't we exploring. What happened to nuclear?
What happened to coal?
So these are the issues out there that folks in my district are
concerned about. They've figured it out.
Mrs. BACHMANN. You're right.
Mr. LATTA. They've figured it out.
Mrs. BACHMANN. You're right.
Mr. LATTA. But I just want to thank you very much this evening, the
gentlewoman from Minnesota, for being here tonight, because I know of
your passion on this whole subject.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Well, Congressman Latta, thank you for being the
leader here. Thank you for your leadership.
Mr. LATTA. I think it's important that the American people know that
we're out there, that there is a solution to this problem. So I just
want to thank you very much for all of your help.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Thank you for standing up for the little guy,
Congressman Latta. That is what your voice has been tonight, that of
the little guy who wonders: Does anybody hear me? Does anyone see I'm
suffering? Congressman Latta, you've done that tonight. Thank you for
your leadership.
Mr. LATTA. Well, thank you very much.

____________________

AMERICAN ENERGY

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King) is recognized for
60 minutes.
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the honor to be
recognized on the floor of the United States Congress. I also
appreciate the presentation that has been delivered by the gentleman
from Ohio and from the gentlelady of Minnesota, and I appreciate being
able to listen to the presentation, knowing that they have been to ANWR
just recently, within the past week or so, and have seen some of the
things that I had seen there several years ago. What they see today is
much of what I saw then.
It's interesting that they flew across that coastal plain for 2 hours
with everybody on the plane looking and looking for wildlife, and they
didn't see any. I remember I did see some. I saw four musk oxen. I
remember the pilots actually spotted them, and they announced back to
the plane that they

[[Page 16465]]

had seen four musk oxen, and they were quite excited that they had seen
wildlife in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. This was the airplane
crew who had flown that coastal plain over and over again. I was
surprised at that excitement.
I wouldn't have gotten that excited if I'd have looked down and had
seen a deer. I might have if I'd seen a buffalo but not a deer.
In any case, it's quite a thing to see that the people who had made
the trip to ANWR saw the things that I saw, confirmed the things that I
confirmed, gave speeches here on the floor of Congress tonight, and
then let the rest of the world know that the things that I've been
saying have been true all along, right down to ``there are no trees up
there, Mr. Speaker, not a single tree.''
I recall giving a speech at the Iowa State Fair where I made that
statement. The allegation was made in a very impolite way that that
wasn't true. So the newspaper that Iowa depends upon decided they would
go find a contrary view from mine when I said there were no trees in
ANWR. They found a botanist--I believe he was at Iowa State
University--who must have gone through and searched the Internet and
found out that there is, at least allegedly, a tiny, little weed up
there that grows about 10- to 12-feet high at the most, and it's
technically a tree. There's not enough wood in that to make a
toothpick, but it's technically a tree.
So, if they found a botanist who said there was a tree in ANWR--and
supposedly that's a rebuttal--I'd just say: Who has seen one? I don't
think anybody has seen one up there. We know that the Arctic Circle is
the line north of which trees cannot grow. This is the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge, a frozen tundra coastal plain. When it has had any
disturbance on the tundra, it has not been from the oil pipeline, and
it has not been from the drillers in a significant way, but it happens
sometimes when Native Americans get to moving around up there. They
tell me they just drag it smooth, and in 5 to 6 years, the tundra has
all grown back where it was. I've seen it. I know what it looks like.
What my eyes see confirms for my head and for my heart.
So I think this point has been made very clear. I don't know how a
thinking, living, breathing American could listen to the dialogue that
took place here in the last hour and conclude that we shouldn't drill
in ANWR. It is an ideal place for there to be oil. It's an ideal place
for us to extract oil, and we have the transmission system up there. I
think we'd have to add another 74-mile pipeline.
There is something on which I might have a little bit of a marginal--
not disagreement, but I'd just say here is the little way I see it
differently from Mrs. Bachmann's statement, which is that, in 3 years,
we'd have oil coming out of ANWR and coming down the pipeline. We did
the entire North Slope and the entire Alaska pipeline and 600 miles of
right-of-way. We drilled the wells, put it all together, built the
industry up there, and had oil coming out of the pipeline in 3 years,
from '72 till '75, marginally a little bit more than 36 months, but
still, within 3 calendar years, there was oil coming out of that
pipeline. There was an 800-mile pipeline. There were 600 miles of
right-of-way. Drill the wells. Pick up the collection. Get it to the
terminal at Mile Post Zero where the caribou congregate. That was in 3
years.
So I believe this, that if America makes up its mind, we can do it,
if we did a Manhattan Project and started to build an atom bomb after
the beginning of World War II and, to end the war, we'd had two ready
and two dropped. We did that. President Kennedy said--and I think the
year was 1963--we're going to go to the Moon. In 1969, we were on the
Moon.
How can a nation that has that technical ability, a nation of smart,
industrious people who have tamed everything we've decided to tame and
that we've always done in record time--has something happened to our
soul? Has something happened to our spirit that we would capitulate to
the Lilliputian ropes that tie down America's greatness--the ropes of
regulation? the ropes of environmental extremism? What's wrong with our
spirit that we would let people like this hold America back? They would
shut our economy down.
If somebody shuts down the valve at the Strait of Hormuz, that shuts
off 42.6 percent of the world's export oil supply. Ahmadinejad has
threatened to do just that, and he has also threatened to annihilate
Israel, and he is determined to move forward in building nuclear
weapons. He has said so even if the CIA in the NIE report some months
ago said, no, we concluded back in 2003 that they quit trying. Not
true. They're continually trying to enrich uranium. They are enriching
uranium. They showed it to us on our own television sets. They're
developing missiles to deliver a weapon. They showed us that on our
television sets.
Why would we argue with the Iranians? Do we think they're
perpetrating some kind of hoax?
It didn't work out so well for Saddam Hussein when he sought to
perpetrate some kind of a hoax. They thought we were bluffing, and now
we won't take them at their word, and we will watch in this Congress as
the San Francisco, Pelosi-led Congress shuts down every avenue of
energy development that we can create? Well, every one except maybe
they're okay with wind as long as it isn't out off of Nantucket. As
long as Teddy Kennedy can't see it from his yacht, we can have some
wind energy. They aren't so bad with geothermal because they don't see
it very much, and they don't understand it as much as they see it. Then
let's see. There must be some other things--solar, wind, geothermal. So
we can have a little solar, too, but not if it means we've got to put
solar panels out there across the desert, because that's unsightly.
So they worship the goddess, Mother Earth, and despise the idea of
free market capitalism. They shut down the economy. You know, I think
they're also aware that, as to the energy supplies that we have, as
soon as we drill a well and we get that well up to production, that's
the maximum that that well is going to produce for a day, and then its
production day by day tapers off. That's the case with the energy as we
develop it, so we constantly have to be out there exploring for new
energy. That's the point, I think, that maybe wasn't made in the last
hour that's essential for us in this hour.
I see that my good friend from California, Mr. Royce, has arrived on
the floor, and he knows that I have offered an open invitation by my
very presence here. I'd be so happy to yield so much time as he may
consume to the astute gentleman from California.
Mr. ROYCE. Well, perhaps I could engage the gentleman from Iowa in a
discussion here of the fact that I don't think many were really paying
attention in this country over the last few years, but today, 80
percent of oil reserves are owned by nationalized oil companies of
foreign governments. We don't think a lot about this, but if we
reflect, we will remember that, in many cases, the property has been
seized and that OPEC now controls these assets through cartels
overseas. As a matter of fact, it controls about 80 percent.
In my view, I think Congress sort of shrugged off the testimony of
our former CIA Director, who warned of the OPEC cartel spearheaded by
Saudi Arabia, deliberately lowering production levels in order to drive
the price of oil up. Now, as it turns out, the price of oil they
managed to drive up to $140 a barrel. In his view, this was a bid to
siphon $10 trillion over the next 10 years from our economy here into
the coffers of the OPEC members.
So I wanted to just touch briefly on the national security component
of this. I think Congress watched as the Chairman of the Federal
Reserve Board explained that our supplies in oil are so tight in the
United States today that a 1 percent increase in supply could lower
costs by 10 percent. Just 2 weeks ago, our Federal Reserve Chairman,
Ben Bernanke, testified to that point.
So what is the studied indifference as consumers and policymakers lay
out the case for more supply?
My concern is that the Democratic leadership has made a commitment to
maintain the moratoriums against new

[[Page 16466]]

drilling, new refineries, new nuclear power, the opportunity to extract
oil from shale. Like my colleague from Iowa, I believe that market
economics still have consequences and that the American Energy Act,
which we have cosponsored which would lift these prohibitions, would
increase supply by 33 percent. Now, if a 1 percent increase in supply
drives down the price in the estimate of the Federal Reserve Chairman
by 10 percent, what would a 33 percent increase in supply do for the
price?
You know, a majority of the House of Representatives, I now believe,
is feeling enough heat back home that they would vote for increased
supply, but the congressional leadership has blocked not only the
American Energy Act, but the Democratic leadership has also blocked all
other amendments that might lift any of the prohibitions from coming to
the House floor.
Well, under this American Energy Act that the gentleman from Iowa and
I are supporting, we would open our deep water ocean resources. That
would provide another 3 million barrels of oil per day to our domestic
supply. Currently, we use 20 million barrels a day. Now, Cuba and
Venezuela are already operating in these waters. It would open the
Arctic coastal plain. That would provide an additional 1 million
barrels of oil a day. Now the Russian oil exploration is already
operating in the Arctic today. It would develop our Nation's oil shale
resources, providing an additional 2.5 million barrels per day. Canada
is developing its oil shale resources.
It would cut the red tape that hinders the construction of new
refineries. None have been built in the last 31 years. It would extend
the tax credit for alternative energy production, including wind and
solar and hydrogen, and it would eliminate barriers to the expansion of
nuclear power production. As we know, France gets 80 percent of its
energy from nuclear power. My State of California gets 12\1/2\ percent.
So, today, the OPEC cartel controls more than three-quarters of the
world's global oil reserves, and it severely restricts both supply and
access to its oil fields. This is one of the factors that helps cause
this dramatic spike in the price of oil, which not only hits consumers
at the pump but which, frankly, harms nearly every aspect of our
economy, and the moratoriums here maintained by the Democratic
leadership, in my view, help drive up energy costs and risk further
sinking this economy.
This is the reason I've come to the floor, to make the case to have
our colleagues bring this bill before the floor of the House of
Representatives.

{time} 2215

I don't know of a case where we have gone so long without an
appropriations bill before this Congress. Article I, section 9, clause
7 of the Constitution says that, ``No money shall be drawn from the
Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.''
Normally, we have the 13 appropriations bills that come out of our
committees that fund every government agency, but this is being held
off. And one of the reasons why we are not having these votes on the
House floor is because of the concern that we might bring up these
amendments. We might attach this Act to one of the appropriations
bills.
And we've gone over 200 years on this House floor, and the House has
never gone into the August recess without passing a single
appropriations bill. In fact, the House has always passed at least one
appropriations bill prior to July 9.
And I am concerned that the Democrat leadership is so insistent on
blocking any votes to increase energy production that they are rolling
over until the end of the year all of the work that this Congress--and
we will have one omnibus bill in which we cannot bring up any of these
amendments to increase energy production in the United States.
I would ask if my colleague from the State of Iowa shares my concern.
Mr. KING of Iowa. I thank the gentleman from California, and I
appreciate you bringing this to the floor and laying it out with the
clarity that you have.
Supply and demand, as you're speaking, I'm thinking, let's see, if
there was 32 percent more corn on the market--being from Iowa, I think
in those terms--that might be, say, 4\1/2\ billion bushels more corn on
the market, maybe a little more than that. I'm pretty sure if we dump
4\1/2\ billion bushels of corn supposedly that we found somewhere on
the market, the price would go down.
I was also thinking about Adam Smith when he wrote in his famous book
``Wealth of Nations,'' published in 1776, how it was that the cost of
everything that we produce is the sum total of the capital and the
labor required to produce whatever the commodity is. And he wrote about
how the price of gold plummeted in Europe when the Spanish galleons
returned from the New World loaded with gold. But he didn't say because
of supply and demand strictly. He said it was because they had figured
out how to take the price of labor out of the production of gold. They
stole the gold, but the effect was the labor got cheap.
Supply and demand works for gold, it works for corn, and it works for
oil. It works for everything including labor. They're all commodities.
And some of the things that can affect that, of course, are the value
of our dollar. I'd like to see that dollar shored up.
When I look at these bushels--excuse me, I'm thinking like an Iowan--
when I look at these million barrels, 3 million a day off the gulf as
described by the gentleman from California, 1 million a day out of the
arctic region up there, 2\1/2\ million in oil shale, those are really
just for starters. We've always found more oil than we predicted was
there, and it will be the case this time.
On the subject matter of what it is that this Imperial Pelosi
Congress won't let us vote on, this is the production chart for the
United States of America for energy. And we need to, Mr. Speaker, talk
about energy from the concept of total Btus of energy. We have to put
it in one common measurement. So, rather than gallons or cords of wood,
whatever it might be, we put this into Btus and energy.
This is all of the energy sources that we have here that we produce
in the United States. And as we go around the edge here, I'll start
right in here. Hydroelectric power, nuclear. Coal, 32\1/2\ percent of
our overall production is coal. Natural gas, 27\1/2\ percent of our
overall production is natural gas. Then you've got heavy petroleum,
like asphalt and those kind of oils. Jet fuel, kerosene, diesel fuel's
in red, and gasoline in blue, biomass, and a lot of that's wood. People
are burning more wood today because of the cost of energy in pink. Then
you get down to these tiny little slivers, biodiesel, nine-one
hundredths of 1 percent. Ethanol fuel, .76 of 1 percent; solar, .11 of
1 percent; wind, .44; geothermal, .49. This is it.
Now, I would take you around this chart, and we're going to find that
the folks that, I will say, worship at the altar of Mother Earth object
to nearly every kind of energy that we produce in the United States.
They object to a lot of the biofuels because it is burning wood, and it
puts carbon dioxide in the air. The biomass, they've objected to.
Gasoline, we know the objection to that, and we have people in here
that would rather have you ride your bicycle and they think that if gas
prices go to $4 or $5 or more a gallon, more people will ride their
bikes.
Fewer will get in their car. That will save the environment, and they
can save Mother Earth. That's what they're thinking. So we can't
develop anymore gasoline here in the United States or diesel fuel or
jet fuel or heavy oils. That's all in the same kind of hydrocarbon,
comes out of the same well, the crude oil well. That's all verboten,
according to the Speaker's team from San Francisco.
And you get to natural gas. They have to drill wells to do that, and
they've got us blocked offshore. They've got us blocked on non-national
park public lands. Sometimes we can drill there, but we can't get
access, and we can't lay pipelines, and we know that we can't transport
natural gas unless we can conduct it through a pipeline or turn it into
liquefied natural gas.

[[Page 16467]]

By the way, we had a vote on the floor today on a motion to recommit
on a bill that would have opened up a bridge that's blocking tankers
that are coming into Massachusetts with liquefied natural gas. They
blocked that. They don't even want liquefied natural gas coming in up
their little river, even though the Federal taxpayers pay for the
bridge that's already replaced the one that's keeping the tankers from
going underneath it.
That tells you where they are with natural gas, and that's
Massachusetts mentality that teams up with some of that left coast
mentality, not all of it by any means.
And the coal, it's almost to the point now--I happen to know of one
expansion of a coal-fired generation plant. There may be more. But the
people that are putting these plants together say we can't meet the
regulations anymore. They're getting tighter and tighter. So coal-fired
generating plants are pretty much off the table.
You kind of see, and I'm going around here, off the table all the way
around. Nuclear, no, off the table. They're afraid of a Chernobyl, even
though our technology doesn't melt down that way. It actually cools,
instead of warms. So the greens are afraid of nuclear.
Hydroelectric, boy, now there is a superclean, wonderful, natural
resource that renews itself. It rains, water runs down the river, comes
through the turbine, spins it, generates electricity. What could be
better than that? But a strong contingent of environmental extremists
want to put all of our rivers back to where they were before because
they don't believe we should even think or attempt to improve upon
Mother Nature.
So I've gone all the way around here. Hydroelectric power, that was
the piece there. And what's left?
When you add this all up, all of these things are forbidden by one
entity or another. Even wind has resistance to it because people think
that birds are going to fly into those windmills. And I can tell you, I
can see 17 of them from my house. They have hundreds of them in my
district. There aren't piles of dead birds underneath there. It's more
dangerous to the birds when you drive your car down the road. They can
at least see that windmill coming and they tend to avoid it.
So I can only find three sources of energy that maybe, maybe we could
expand, and that would be--by the way, ethanol, biodiesel, that's food
versus fuel, so there's a resistance there. So we end up with wind,
unless Teddy Kennedy can see it; geothermal, as long as you can't see
it; and what do they have, solar.
Now, these tiny little pieces here, if you add up of our overall
production, that's .49, .44 and .11. Now I haven't done that. That's a
little bit over 1 percent of our overall energy production is what
they're going to let us expand to produce 100 percent of the energy
that we can consume.
And Mr. Speaker, we're producing only 72 percent of the energy that
we're consuming. So this energy pie isn't big enough. It's only 72
percent big enough to provide the energy necessary to fuel the United
States and keep our economy going.
By the way, just providing enough energy isn't good enough. We can
always buy enough energy until we go flat bloke. We have got to have
enough energy that's economical for our industry to run, that's
economical for people to engage in travel and enjoy life and be able to
exercise our freedoms.
Mr. ROYCE. If the gentleman would yield, what would the gentleman
think the consequence would be over the next 10 years presuming that
these moratoriums are kept in place? We can't do anything, presume for
a moment, to address the issue that the Federal Reserve Chairman
warned, that the supply of energy is so tight that a 1 percent increase
in supply would drop prices by 10 percent. Let's say that things remain
as they are, we don't get any additional sources for production because
of the moratoriums. What do you think the consequences would be of the
transfer of $10 trillion out of this economy over the next 10 years
into OPEC, into the members of the OPEC cartel?
Mr. KING of Iowa. Well, I think that we already see the heavy signs
of those consequences, that when dictators become rich, they also
become belligerent, and they begin to think that--well, actually,
they're measuring their power. It's their economic power, and a lot of
them run contrary to our values here in Western civilization. So we
have more conflicts to face, and we're going to have to do it with less
resources, and a Nation whose economy could no longer be thriving will
have transferred our wealth overseas.
Mr. ROYCE. If the gentleman will yield, I think it's pretty clear at
this point that high gas prices are hurting the pocketbook of families
across this country. Family budgets are strained. And the bottom line
is we are pushing for short- and long-term solutions to lower gas
prices and to address our future energy needs.
We're doing that with the American Energy Act, which is going to
provide tax incentives for businesses and families that purchase more
fuel-efficient carts. It provides tax incentives to those that improve
their energy efficiency. It permanently extends the tax credit for
alternative energy production, including wind and solar and hydrogen.
Barriers to the expansion of emission-free nuclear power production are
eliminated in this piece of legislation. It spurs the development of
alternative fuels.
It's a balanced piece of legislation, which gives us more energy, and
frankly, with gas prices increasing, it's vital that we utilize our
Nation's vast energy supplies, and at the same time, we should continue
to develop new, clean technology. And this would significantly reduce
our use of foreign oil.
That's what this bill is intended to do, and doing so is an economic
necessity. It is vital to our national security. So I encourage our
lawmakers, our colleagues to join us in this effort to bring this
important piece of legislation to the floor for a vote.
And I appreciate the gentleman from Iowa yielding to me, and I
appreciate also his explanation of energy production and energy
consumption here in the United States so that people can better
understand just how tight the supply is and how great the need is for
more energy production, to say nothing of the jobs, by the way, that
this would create here in this country if we allowed more production.
Mr. KING of Iowa. I thank the gentleman from California for coming to
the floor and bringing this issue forward, helping to frame it in the
fashion that he has.
And the segue gave me an opportunity to put up these two charts, and
the chart that I just took down was the energy production chart. That
was 72 quadrillion Btus of energy. The inside circle is the energy
production chart, 72 quadrillion total energy production in the United
States. The outside circle is the energy consumption in the United
States. That's 101.4 quadrillion Btus.
Now, those numbers don't mean a lot to anybody, I don't think, until
you just put it in perspective. We are producing 72 percent of the
energy that we're consuming, and if we're going to be energy
independent, if we're going to stop transferring American wealth
overseas, as the gentleman from California said, then we've got to
produce as much energy as we consume.
And I'm not stuck specifically on producing just as much gas as we
burn or just as much diesel or just as much electricity in whichever
fashion it is, but I'm insistent upon the idea that we go to full
energy production, that if we produce enough Btus and natural gas to
offset something we might use in coal, let the size of the proportion
of these pie charts change a little bit depending upon what's most
economical.
But I do think natural gas needs to remain, as John Peterson of
Pennsylvania said, the mother's milk of manufacturing and that it
should not be the kind of energy that we're using to expand our
electrical generation.

{time} 2230

And natural gas is also the feedstock for 90 percent of our nitrogen
fertilizer.
And so there's two essential uses. And we can't turn over the
nitrogen

[[Page 16468]]

fertilizer production to places like Venezuela and Russia, but that's
where it's going. We've almost lost the entire fertilizer industry in
the United States because we haven't acted to open up these energy
supplies. We know that we have 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas,
and that's known reserves. That's known reserves, and we still can't go
offshore in many places and explore.
So here's our answer: It is, expand all of these forms of energy,
every single one. And yes, we need to expand--even the energy that
Teddy Kennedy objects to, let's expand some wind and some geothermal
and some solar. That's the three that seem to be the least
objectionable. But let's do all the rest while we're at it.
And this green one right here, nuclear; when you think we haven't
built a nuclear plant since the mid-1970s, about 1975, there is a brand
new one that's under construction in South Carolina today--and boy
we're on a blitzkrieg to get that built--and it's going to be going
online in 2017. Can you imagine a nation that--we can put the erector
set together a lot faster than that, we just can't jump through all the
regulatory hoops any faster than that. So the master switch gets thrown
and the lights come on in South Carolina in 2017. And that is then the
master manual for how to go through all of the regulatory and
environmental red tape to build the next one after that.
And there was a vote in South Dakota, a public referendum to build a
new refinery in Union County, South Dakota, Elk Point area, $10 billion
investment. The referendum passed in favor of it, 59-41, so they said
most of us think it's okay to have a refinery in our back yard. That
refinery is one that I think it has a very good chance of going, but
even those who are driving this don't have the answer to every question
on how they jump through all of the regulatory hoops that have been
created.
So here's an example: In 1970, when the oil companies wanted to go up
to the North Slope of Alaska and open up Alaska for drilling, there was
a court injunction that was slapped on them. That was a new thing then.
I can remember being shocked that someone could come along and file a
court case and shut down an entire region from development for energy.
There used to be a thing called property rights in America,
constitutional property rights, and that would be a taking of the
property. They went in there and acquired those leases with all good
intent and above board, and they were shut down by an environmentalist
lawsuit that went to court in 1970. In 1972, the final litigation
hurdle had been leaped and they began the construction of the 600 miles
of right-a-way and the 800 miles of pipelines and all the wells and
collector tubes and the terminals on the Alaska Pipeline.
It took 2 years. And in 1972, I was astonished that anybody could
hold up an operation like that for 2 years. And yet today, that seems
like a blink of a litigative eye, 2 years. If we could resolve all the
litigation that's holding up energy in 2 years, in 4 years we could
have the energy problem solved. And that's because the trial lawyers,
the environmentalists, the people that want to make their money off of
litigation, the same kind of people that held up the Intelligence bill
and put our Nation at risk, those who see profit in squeezing it out of
somebody else, that's holding us up on energy, and the
environmentalists.
So now I add this up on production. All of these things are off the
table by environmentalists:
Can't do biomass, that burns wood, puts greenhouse gas in the air.
Can't do motor gasoline, same reason. Can't do diesel fuel. Can't do
jet fuel. None of the crude oil can we do because they're afraid it
contributes to global warming. And as we come on around the horn,
kerosene fits in that same category. Natural gas, I spoke to that.
Coal, can't build any more coal-fire plants, or if we do, we've got
some new hoops to jump through that no one has jumped through before.
You get to the nuclear, and the French are producing 78 percent of
their electricity by nuclear, and we're down here where our overall
energy consumption is 8.29 percent. The percentage of our overall
energy production is 11.66 percent. But nuclear is also off the table.
I spoke about hydroelectric, off the table.
So we get to add up geothermal and wind and solar. I add up those
three things. And I happen to know that in our overall consumption,
those three sources, geothermal, wind and solar, total .74 of 1 percent
of our overall energy consumption. And if we're going to be
independent, we're going to only expand those? What's your answer? Do
you have an answer? I don't think so. I think you worship at the alter
of mother nature.
And your default position is to always go back to pre Garden of Eden.
I don't think you can think beyond that. I'll say this, that I know who
created this Earth; God created this Earth. And he gave us dominion
over it, and the animals and the plants in it to be used respectfully.
And yes, we can improve upon mother nature, we've done it many times.
That's why we're given the gift of the intellect and free will that we
have. And we're to be tested in this fashion. And I'm more than happy
to rise to that occasion and be tested in this fashion. And this side
of the aisle over there, you all think the default position is, go back
to pre Garden of Eden, mother nature, whatever the random grab-bag
thing it was that came out of Darwin's ``survival of the fittest''
before man intervened as an intervening species, whatever that was,
that's the utopian version that you're after because you have no other
standard. We'll, I just described the standard, look it up in Genesis.
We can do this. We can produce all the energy that this country
consumes by expanding all of these sources of energy from the
production chart. Stretch it out to the outside limits of the
consumption chart. We can do this, we must do this. And if we fail, the
other people in the world--whom we are sending money to every day by
the billions--will own us. And when they own us, then they will tell us
what to do and they will be our boss and our freedoms will be gone and
diminished. And by the way, the people we're sending the money to for
the most part don't believe much in freedom.
And we're doing our best to encourage others to buy into the freedom
model that we have. If we besmirch the freedom responsibility to make
good decisions for the best long-term interests of the American people,
we trail in the dust of golden hopes of the Founding Fathers.
So much has been said about energy tonight, Mr. Speaker, and that
makes my point on energy. I may come back and reiterate it, but I'll
take up another subject matter that has me significantly concerned. And
that is, that as we watch the Presidential race unfold, and we're
watching as one of the Presidential candidates does his photo-op stops
around the Middle East and Europe, and as that Presidential candidate--
and specifically the junior Senator from Illinois--has said that he
expects to be in a leadership role for the next 10 years or so, he has
already anointed himself as President. And so I would submit--and I
don't hear anybody on the Democrat side say, wait a minute, calm down,
that Presidential seal was a little bit of an overreach and the
statement that you're going to be in command for the next 10 years
means that, even if you win the Presidency this year and get re-elected
4 years later, it's still not 10 years. So perhaps you can amend the
Constitution and make such a prediction. Maybe you're such a marvel of
nature you can do all of that, Mr. Obama.
But even if you're half of what you say, that makes you the leader of
the Democrat Party in the United States of America. That means that the
people over here on this side of the aisle are seeking to accommodate
the positions that you've taken, trying to make you look good as you
run for the Presidency, applauding and supporting the globe trotting
and the speech--that didn't take place at the Brandenburg gate today--
all of that adulation that goes on is surely affecting the agenda here
on the floor of Congress. It has to be and it has to have been.

[[Page 16469]]

For example, 40 different bills and resolutions brought to the floor
of this House in the 110th Congress, all designed to underfund, unfund,
deploy our troops out of Iraq and undermine the spirit and the will of
our own fighting men and women, while they encourage our enemy. Forty
bills and resolutions. All of those fit exactly with Obama's foreign
policy, ``get out and get out now.''
I'm a little amazed that he can argue that, when asked if the surge
worked, he couldn't agree that the surge worked. He said it was a
hypothetical question. What's hypothetical about sending 170,000 troops
over into a combat zone? What's hypothetical about some of them that
come back with a flag draped over their coffin? That's not
hypothetical, Senator Obama. That's real life, it's real death, it's
real families that gave their son or daughter, lost their husband or
their wife for our freedom. And you can't answer frivolously and
flippantly that it's a hypothetical question, did the surge work or
didn't it work? Obviously it worked.
And to argue that you have four points out there that the rest of--
the President and John McCain are coming around to, that they're
agreeing with you because you said we ought to get out of Iraq back in
2005--I think 2005 was the year that he said my position on Iraq is
identical with that of President Bush. So I'm not sure when the first
time was he said I think we should get out, but I know it was when we
were under combat stress and pressure and things weren't going that
well over there. And now I see him walking around the tarmac at Baghdad
International--where I've been five times and I'll be again before this
election cycle is over. And each time I've been there--hmm, I don't
know about that. I think maybe the first time I arrived there I didn't
wear a bullet-proof vest and I didn't wear a helmet. I think I went in
there in casual khakis because the threat wasn't deemed to be as high
as it turned out to be. The rest of the time I wore a bullet-proof vest
and I wore a helmet. And I look there now, Senator Obama gets off of
the plane or the helicopter, no bullet-proof vest, no helmet. Why is
that? Senator, it's because the surge worked. The surge worked, and
it's safe enough for you to walk around at Baghdad International in
your shirt sleeves.
A couple or 3 years ago, when I was walking around Baghdad
International and I had security personnel standing between me and the
line of fire, the other side of the concrete wall was the Mahdi
militia, Muqtada-al Sadr's militia. They were controlling the civilian
side of the airport. And the military side, by some truce--we didn't
shoot each other much, I guess, through that concrete--held the other
side. And today, the Mahdi militia is decimated and gone. Muqtada al-
Sadr, the bane of peace in Iraq, has gone from doing something he's not
very good at. Now he's studying. He's no longer a general. When he
loses his army, he goings off to be a scholar instead. And for him to
get ramped back up again and ever be commanding a Mahdi militia looks
pretty slim to the people I'm talking to.
The reason, Obama, you can walk around on the tarmac at Baghdad
International in shirt sleeves is because the surge worked. And the
reason that we can pull some troops out of Iraq incrementally, as
situations adjust on the ground, as they have been adjusting and
continue to adjust on the ground, the reason is because the surge
worked. And to take credit because some troops can come out of Iraq
when you said ``pull them all out now, right now,'' and when you said,
``I will, on my first day in office, order the immediate withdrawal of
the troops from Iraq,'' the only condition, the only caveat was, I'll
maintain a rear guard so they don't get shot in the back as they run
off and get on board the troop ship, that's what's going on. You can't
fool the American people in that.
And you say that you want to send a couple of brigades to
Afghanistan. Do it now, do it before the election. We can't wait until
January 20--presuming, of course, that John McCain won't make the right
decision. He's far more likely to make the right decision. And I
actually think he's actually more likely to be President today. But to
argue that we should send troops from Iraq to Afghanistan immediately
is an obscene contradiction to the sacrifice that's been made by our
military personnel that are there.
It works like this; here's how the logic in the rational world goes:
If President Bush has the insight and the courage to empower General
Petraeus, recognize his leadership, allow him the time to go back and
write the counter-insurgency manual, appoint him to command the troops
in Iraq for the purposes of initiating the surge, make sure General
Petraeus comes here before this Congress, explains it to us, we
appropriate the money--you didn't have the nerve to shut the funding
off because you didn't want to say, well, absolutely no to the troops
because the disgrace of shutting the funding off and watching 3 million
people die in Southeast Asia in 1975 comes back to haunt.
The President had the vision to appoint General Petraeus. He had the
vision to buy into that vision. He made the tough order. He put the
troops on the line. They went there. The surge worked. The political
solution flowed behind it and with it and in anticipation of it because
they knew that we were going to be there for a period of time and would
give the Iraqis time to get themselves established.
If the surge worked in Iraq, Obama, tell me why----
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is reminded that his remarks
should be referred to the Chair
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I acknowledge that statement as
correct. And Mr. Speaker, I will direct my remarks to the Chair. I
appreciate that.
So Mr. Speaker, when I speak to you and echo this message across to
the other Chamber, the idea that a surge didn't work in Iraq but it
allowed Presidential candidates to walk around on the tarmac without a
bullet-proof vest or a helmet, but it will work in Afghanistan?

{time} 2245

That's a rationale that doesn't fit for the people in the Midwest.
They know better. They've watched this. They stayed up to speed with
what's going on, and they will not be fooled. And I will not be fooled
either.
So what we have is we have a situation where the political climate in
this Chamber, Mr. Speaker, seeks to meld and shape itself to a
presidential campaign, to adopt those policies, to make it so it
increases the odds that their candidate will be elected President.
And part of this, Mr. Speaker, is unfolding tomorrow morning in the
House Judiciary Committee. I don't know that this is published in the
news media, but I know what I got in my Judiciary Committee hearing
notice here within the last hour. This is a notice that says that there
is going to be, for the first time in this millennia, impeachment
hearings in the United States House of Representatives in the Judiciary
Committee, impeachment hearings to consider impeachment of the
President of the United States and the Vice President of the United
States, starting at 10 a.m. tomorrow morning in room 2141 of the
Rayburn House Office Building.
I can only conclude, Mr. Speaker, that the initiative for this has to
be approved by the presidential candidate of the party that controls
the Judiciary Committee and this Chamber. There's no other conclusion
that can be drawn. It is all politics all the time. There are no
coincidences in politics. If a presidential candidate didn't want to
have impeachment hearings going on, he'd make sure that they weren't
going on. If a Speaker of the House or a chairman of the Judiciary
Committee was considering such an idea to hold impeachment hearings,
they would surely run it across the powers that be within their party
so there wasn't a conflict that rose up to bite them. I have to
believe, and I do believe, that this is with the full support and
endorsement of the presidential candidate chosen by the party on the
other side of the aisle.
This is what we're up against tomorrow, Mr. Speaker. It's going to be
an interesting day.
I was not in this Congress during the impeachment hearings of 1998,
although I was in this city. I came to

[[Page 16470]]

this city to do a couple of conferences, and I picked up the Washington
Post, and on about Page 4, there was a little clip in there that said
impeachment hearings in the House Judiciary Committee, room 2141, open
to the public, staring at 10 o'clock in the morning. I believe the
dates were the 7th, 8th, and 9th of December, 1998. I looked at that,
and I concluded that these were historical times and that in spite of
whatever the conferences were that I'd come out here to attend,
attending the impeachment hearings would be far more instructive, that
I would then be part of history.
Well, I observed those hearings for 3 days in a row. I was sitting
behind David Shippers when he delivered the summary of the prosecution.
I happen to have a copy that was handed to me that day by the Judiciary
Committee staff. I keep that in my file. It's an historic event. These
events tomorrow will be historic too, although they are far from as
serious as what was taking place in 1998 because in 1998 there was an
impeachment in this House. This House voted to impeach the President of
the United States, Mr. Speaker. They did so based on solid evidence,
and they went over to the Senate to bring forth the prosecution.
And I see things in this notice that goes this way: ``Full Committee
Hearing, Executive Power and Its Constitutional Limitations'' being the
subject, the subject being three resolutions introduced by Congressman
Dennis Kucinich and different resolutions to either impeach President
Bush or Vice President Cheney. It says that interest groups have
advocated for the impeachment of the President and the Vice President.
Nobody's talking about this where I live, but there are enough radicals
to bring this thing forward.
We are going to hear from several Members of Congress, one, two,
three, four Members of Congress tomorrow. We are going to hear from a
former Associate Deputy Attorney General from the Reagan
administration. We are going to hear from the Mayor of Salt Lake City,
Mr. Speaker, who has said publicly this: ``This President has engaged
in such incredible abuses of power and breaches of trust with both
Congress and the American people and misleading us into this tragic and
unbelievable war, the violation of treaties, other international law,
our Constitution, our own domestic laws, and then his role in heinous
human rights abuses, I think all of that together calls for
impeachment.''
Well, I would reject all of those allegations as having substance,
and I don't think that substance is going to come out tomorrow, Mr.
Speaker, because this is a dog and pony show. This is a political
exercise.
Actually, I tried to get the chairman to yield to me the other day,
and he declined to do so, because I was watching the progression of
these judicial public lynchings that have been taking place of Bush
administration officials in the Judiciary Committee over the last month
or better. We had David Addington, the Chief of Staff of the Vice
President of the United States, brought before the Judiciary Committee
under threat of subpoena. And he was told by one of the committee
members, ``I'm glad al Qaeda can see you now.'' Brought before the
public, a man who has been a private individual, and whipped up one
side and down the other with verbal assaults, trying to find to trip
him up so that he could go the same path as Scooter Libby, whom no one
can still tell me what it was that Scooter Libby said or did that was
wrong. All they know is that he's been beaten up on so much, there must
be something there. Well, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the politics in
this Chamber, I can tell you there doesn't have to be anything there to
be beaten up upon.
But here's what's going to make it a problem for some of the members
in the Judiciary Committee. They were on the committee in 1998, many of
them. They are on record as to what they thought was an objective
constitutional means, reason for which a President should be impeached.
They said such things as, and this is a quote, ``We are using the most
powerful institutional tool available to this body, impeachment, in a
highly partisan manner. Impeachment was designed to rid this Nation of
traitors and tyrants.'' That's the chairman of the committee.
Here's another quote from a committee member. This is Maxine Waters,
California, who believes we should nationalize our oil industry, by the
way, but, Mr. Speaker, here's the quote: ``How must our American
soldiers feel to have their Commander in Chief under attack''--this is
of President Clinton during the impeachment hearings. ``How must our
American soldiers feel to have their Commander in Chief under attack
while they are engaged in battle? They have the right to feel betrayed
and undermined. Today we are here in the People's House debating the
partisan impeachment of the President of the United States of America
while the Commander in Chief is managing a crisis and asking world
leaders for support. This is indeed a Republican coup d'etat.'' Mr.
Speaker, that's Maxine Waters, 1998, during the impeachment of Bill
Clinton. I wonder how she is going to conduct herself tomorrow, if she
is going to be consistent with her words then or if she's going to
contrive another argument manana.
Here's another quote from a current Judiciary Committee member
speaking of the Clinton impeachment in 1998: ``We have been warned
repeatedly that these allegations are nowhere near what is necessary to
overturn a national election and to impeachment a President. Despite
these cautionary flags, this committee has turned a deaf ear to
hundreds of years of precedent and to the Constitution that has kept
this country strong and unified.'' That's Congressman Robert C. Scott
of Virginia, a Judiciary Committee member.
Here's a statement made by the current Chair of the Immigration
Subcommittee back in 1998 of the Clinton impeachment: ``The people's
will must not be overridden by those who claim to know better, by those
who believe they know what is best for the American people,'' Zoe
Lofgren.
You get the idea, Mr. Speaker. Let me just do another one just to put
some of this on the record, Mr. Speaker. Here's another quote of the
1998 impeachment of President Bill Clinton, Judiciary Committee member
and Constitution Subcommittee Chair: ``It's an enormous responsibility
and an extraordinary power. It's not one that should be exercised
lightly. It certainly is not one which should be exercised in a manner
which is or would be perceived to be unfair or partisan.''
Well, get ready for tomorrow, Mr. Speaker. I don't expect it's going
to be fair, but I don't think there is a single pundit in America that
could analyze it as anything except partisan. Not a witch hunt anymore.
They've found their witch. They're bringing impeachment hearings before
the House Judiciary Committee, all of that on the heels of the
attempted public lynching of David Addington, the Chief of Staff of the
Vice President of the United States; Doug Feith, the Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy, also brought before the committee; and
then behind that last week, former Attorney General John Ashcroft,
another attempt made at him yesterday or the day before. I guess it was
the day before. We had Attorney General Mukasey. All of this before the
committee, all of this under at least the implication that a subpoena
can be issued, sometimes the actual vote and threat of a subpoena. I
don't know if a subpoena has been actually issued under any of these
cases. But these are honorable men. They'll come testify. They have got
nothing to hide. But it's a grueling thing to sit there and look at the
Judiciary Committee panel and know that it's exactly what, Mr. Speaker,
Jerry Nadler said it should not be. He said, ``It certainly is not one
which should be exercised in a manner which is or would be perceived to
be unfair or partisan.''
Well, I am very convinced that Jerry Nadler thought that it was
unfair and partisan in 1998. I don't know that a majority of the
American people think that, but today if you would walk down the
streets of America, at least inside the coasts in America, and say,
``What in the world would the Democrats want

[[Page 16471]]

to impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney for?'' I would be
hard pressed to find constituents in my part of the country that could
give me an informed answer. That means to me that it's unfair and it's
partisan, and this entire exercise is about discrediting the Bush
administration so that the landing zone is prepped for Election Day in
November. That's what I see.
I don't think there are coincidences in politics. I think it's all
real. And it is not a game. It is hardball. This is the hardest of
hardball that's unfolding here tomorrow. The unbelievable, the
unanticipated, the breathtaking, the illogical, the major reach, the
deja vu feeling with a different pair of figures in front of it.
Mr. Speaker, I will take us back also to another little event when I
had exposure to some of the things going on by the hard left in
America.
March 18, 2003, just a few days before the liberation of Iraq began,
there was an anti-war protest that took place out on the mall. Now, I
had not been to one of those before. We don't have them in my part of
the country. But I thought I should take a look at this one. And so I
put on my Redskins sweatshirt, an old one. I looked like a native, put
a cap on, walked down there amongst the people that were getting ready
for this march on the White House to protest the war that hadn't begun.
And as I was there and I watched a photographer wash the lens of his
camera with an American flag he kept in his pocket for a rag, and he
was pleased to do it, as I watched some of the countercultural signs be
put up, I took a lot of pictures down there, many of which couldn't be
published and many of which you wouldn't show your children. There was
a big stage. A big stage with big speakers up on it. And the orators
that came forward to stand between those large speakers were there to
gin up the crowd so they got all wound up and then they could march off
across the mall and march around the White House and go protest the war
that hadn't begun. And I did watch that entire march and that whole
protest, and that's a longer speech than I've got time for tonight, Mr.
Speaker. But I saw the chairman of the Judiciary Committee call for the
impeachment of President Bush before the operations began.
And now here we are, March 18, 2003, fast forward to July 24, and
tomorrow will be July 25, 2008. Just a little over 5 years later, we're
there. It's happening. It's coming before the Judiciary Committee
tomorrow in room 2141, 10 o'clock a.m. I think it will be a day that
lives in infamy, a shameful day, a day when the American people wake up
and realize there is a connection between a committee and the United
States Congress seeking to impeach a President without cause during a
time of war, during a time when our energy is tied up and trapped up
and we're looking at $4 gas, during a time when we have economic
difficulties and there needs to be confidence in the American system
and the American economy, during a time as we move up to a presidential
election. All of these things are affected. They are all wrapped up
together. They all have to have, Mr. Speaker, the imprimatur of
approval stamped on it by the man that wanted to give a speech at the
Brandenburg Gate today.

{time} 2300

It's his agenda. It's his motive. It's them working with him. It's
his impeachment hearings. This all ties together. And I believe the
American voters will hold the kind of people who pull these kind of
moves accountable. And I'm going to see to it that at least the
information is out. And I trust the wisdom of the American people.
Join me tomorrow, Mr. Speaker. I will hold a chair for you. All of us
will be looking in and see that at 10 o'clock tomorrow morning, room
2141, the House Judiciary Committee, impeachment hearings, President
Bush, Vice President Cheney, held tomorrow. They ensue at 10 in the
morning. I will be there. Mr. Speaker, you be there. And let's right
this ship that is going off tacking so hard to the left. It's going to
sink if we don't turn it around.

____________________

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to:
Mr. Bishop of Georgia (at the request of Mr. Hoyer) for July 22 and
23 on account of attending a funeral.
Ms. Hirono (at the request of Mr. Hoyer) for today from 12 p.m. to 1
p.m.

____________________

SPECIAL ORDERS GRANTED

By unanimous consent, permission to address the House, following the
legislative program and any special orders heretofore entered, was
granted to:
(The following Members (at the request of Ms. Woolsey) to revise and
extend their remarks and include extraneous material:)
Mr. Skelton, for 5 minutes, today.
Ms. Corrine Brown of Florida, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Sarbanes, for 5 minutes, today.
Ms. Woolsey, for 5 minutes, today.
Ms. Sutton, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Kagen, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Schiff, for 5 minutes, today.
(The following Members (at the request of Mr. Burton of Indiana) to
revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material:)
Mr. Poe, for 5 minutes, July 31.
Mr. Jones of North Carolina for 5 minutes, July 31.
Mr. Culberson, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Conaway, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Weller of Illinois, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Burton of Indiana, for 5 minutes, July 29, 30 and 31.
Mr. Daniel E. Lungren of California for 5 minutes, today.

____________________

ADJOURNMENT

Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 11 o'clock and 1 minute
p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until Monday, July
28, 2008, at 11 a.m.

____________________

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC.

Under clause 8 of rule XII, executive communications were taken from
the Speaker's table and referred as follows:

7764. A letter from the Secretary, Department of Health and
Human Services, transmitting the Department's report
entitled, ``Report to Congress on Head Start Monitoring for
Fiscal Year 2006,'' as required by Section 641(e) of the Head
Start Act; to the Committee on Education and Labor.
7765. A letter from the Chief, Division of Coverage,
Reporting and Disclosure, Office of Regulations and
Interpretations, Department of Labor, transmitting the
Department's corrections to the final regulation providing
relief from certain fiduciary responsibilities for
fiduciaries of participant-directed individual account plans;
to the Committee on Education and Labor.
7766. A letter from the Director, Human Resources,
Greenlee, transmitting a notice provided pursuant to the
Worker Adjustment and Retaining Notification Act; to the
Committee on Education and Labor.
7767. A letter from the Director, Human Resources,
Greenlee, transmitting a notice provided pursuant to the
Worker Adjustment and Retaining Notification Act; to the
Committee on Education and Labor.
7768. A letter from the Secretary, Department of Health and
Human Services, transmitting the FY 2007 Performance Report
to Congress for the Food and Drug Administration's Office of
Combination Products required by the Medical Device User Fee
and Modernization Act of 2002; to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
7769. A letter from the Secretary, Federal Trade
Commission, transmitting the Commission's annual report for
FY 2007 on the implementation of the National Do Not Call
Registry, pursuant to The Do Not Call Implementation Act; to
the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7770. A letter from the Chair, Election Assistance
Commission, transmitting the Commission's report regarding
State governments' expenditures of Help America Vote Act
(HAVA) funds from December 31, 2007 through September 30,
2007; to the Committee on House Administration.
7771. A letter from the Acting Director Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule
-- Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska;
Northern Rockfish, Pacific Ocean Perch, and Pelagic Shelf
Rockfish for Catcher Vessels Participating in the Limited
Access Rockfish Fishery in the Central Regulatory Area of the
Gulf of Alaska [Docket

[[Page 16472]]

No. 071106671-8010-02] (RIN: 0648-XI37) received July 8,
2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Natural Resources.
7772. A letter from the Administrator, FEMA, Department of
Homeland Security, transmitting notification that funding
under Title V, subsection 503(b)(3) of the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended, has
exceeded $5 million for the cost of response and recovery
efforts for FEMA-3283-EM in the State of Illinois, pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. 5193; to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
7773. A letter from the Assistant Secretary for Civil
Works, Department of the Army, Department of Defense,
transmitting the Department's report on projects, or
seperable elements of projects, which have been authorized,
but for which no funds have been obligated, pursuant to 33
U.S.C. 579a Public Law 99-662, section 1001(b)(1)(2); to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7774. A letter from the Assistant Secretary of the Army for
Civil Works, Department of Defense, transmitting the
Department's feasibility study undertaken to evaluate flood
damage reduction opportunities for the May Branch, Fort
Smith, Arkansas; to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
7775. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety Zones:
Annual Events requiring safety zones in the Captain of the
Port Detroit Zone [USCG-2008-0218] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received
July 14, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7776. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Temporary Safety
Zone; Wreckage of the M/V NEW CARISSA, Pacific Ocean 3
Nautical Miles North of the Entrance to Coos Bay, Oregon.
[Docket No. USCG-2008-0146] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received July
14, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7777. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety Zone; San
Diego Symphony Orchestra; San Diego, CA [Docket No. USCG-
2008-0399] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received July 14, 2008, pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure.
7778. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety Zone:
Central Massachusetts Swim Events [Docket No. USCG-2008-0421]
(RIN: 1625-AA00) received July 14, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
7779. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety Zone:
Fourth of July Fireworks Event, Pagan River, Smithfield, VA
[Docket No. USCG-2008-0472] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received July
14, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7780. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety Zones:
Fireworks displays in the Captain of the Port Puget Sound
Zone. [Docket No. USCG-2008-0475] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received
July 14, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7781. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety Zone;
World War II Beach Invasion Re-enactment, Lake Michigan, St.
Joseph, MI. [Docket No. USCG-2008-0483] (RIN: 1625-AA00)
received July 14, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7782. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Temporary Safety
Zone: Arlington Chamber of Commerce Fireworks Display,
Arlington, Oregon. [Docket No. USCG-2008-0487] (RIN: 1625-
AA00) received July 14, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
7783. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety Zone; Erie
Summer Festival of the Arts, Presque Isle Bay, Erie, PA
[Docket No. USCG-2008-0490] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received July
14, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7784. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety Zone;
Sigma Financial Fireworks, Lake Huron, Mackinac Island, MI.
[Docket No. USCG-2008-0491] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received July
14, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7785. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Shipping;
Technical, Organizational, and Conforming Amendments [USCG-
2008-0394] (RIN: 1625-ZA18) received July 10, 2008, pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure.
7786. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Safety Zone;
Patapsco River, Northwest and Inner Harbors, Baltimore, MD
[Docket No. USCG-2008-0180] (RIN: 1625-AA00) received July
14, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7787. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Security Zone;
Patapsco River, Middle Branch, Baltimore, MD [Docket No.
USCG-2008-0272] (RIN: 1625-AA87) received July 14, 2008,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
7788. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Security Zone;
Waters Adjacent 10th Avenue Marine Terminal, San Diego, CA
[Docket No. USCG-2008-0569] (RIN: 1625-AA87) received July
14, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7789. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Shipping,
Technical, Organizational, and Conforming Amendments [USCG-
2008-0394] (RIN: 1625-ZA18) received July 14, 2008, pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure.
7790. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Drawbridge
Operation Regulations; Mill Neck Creek, Oyster Bay, NY
[Docket No. USCG-2008-0010] (RIN: 1625-AA09) received July
10, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7791. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Regulated
Navigation Area, Safety Zones, Security Zones, and Deepwater
Port Facilities; Navigable Waters of the Boston Captain of
the Port Zone [Docket No. USCG-2007-0087] (RIN 1625 RIN 1625-
AA00, 1625-AA11, and 1625-AA87) received July 10, 2008,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
7792. A letter from the Chief, Regulations and
Administrative Law, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Implementation of
Vessel Security Officer Training and Certification
Requirements -- International Convention on Standards of
Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978,
as amended. [Docket No. USCG-2008-0028] (RIN: 1625-AB26)
received July 10, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7793. A letter from the Assistant Secretary, Office of
Legislative Affairs, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the report entitled, ``U.S. Department of
Homeland Security Other Transaction Authority Report to
Congress,'' pursuant to Public Law 107-296, section
831(a)(1); to the Committee on Homeland Security.
7794. A letter from the Program Manager, Department of
Health and Human Services, transmitting the Department's
final rule -- Medicare Program; Special Enrollment Period and
Medicare Premium Changes [CMS-4129-F] (RIN: 0938-AO77)
received June 27, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A);
jointly to the Committees on Ways and Means and Energy and
Commerce.
7795. A letter from the Program Manager, Department of
Health and Human Services, transmitting the Department's
final rule -- Medicare Program; Appeals of CMS or CMS
Contractor Determinations When a Provider or Supplier Fails
to Meet the Requirements for Medicare Billing Privileges
[CMS-6003-F] (RIN: 0938-AI49) received June 27, 2008,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); jointly to the Committees
on Ways and Means and Energy and Commerce.
7796. A letter from the Program Manager, Department of
Health and Human Services, transmitting the Department's
final rule -- Medicare and Medicaid Program; Hospital
Conditions of Participation: Laboratory Services [CMS-3014-F]
(RIN: 0938-AJ29) received June 27, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); jointly to the Committees on Ways and Means and
Energy and Commerce.
7797. A letter from the Program Manager, Department of
Health and Human Services, transmitting the Department's
final rule --

[[Page 16473]]

Medicare Program; Use of Repayment Plans [CMS-6032-F] (RIN:
0938-A027) received July 24, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); jointly to the Committees on Ways and Means and
Energy and Commerce.
7798. A letter from the Assistant Secretary, Office of
Legislative Affairs, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's views on S. 3061, the ``William
Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization
Act of 2008''; jointly to the Committees on Foreign Affairs,
the Judiciary, and Energy and Commerce.

____________________

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of committees were delivered to
the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as
follows:

Mr. WAXMAN: Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
H.R. 2780. A bill to amend section 8339 (p) of title 5,
United States Code, to clarify the method for computing
certain annuities under the Civil Service Retirement System
which are based on part-time service, and for other purposes;
with an amendment (Rept. 110-770). Referred to the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the Union.
Mr. WAXMAN: Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
H.R. 6388. A bill to provide additional authorities to the
Comptroller General of the United States, and for other
purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 110-771). Referred to the
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union.
Mr. FILNER: Committee on Veterans' Affairs. H.R. 674. A
bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to repeal the
provision of law requiring termination of the Advisory
Committee on Minority Veterans as of December 31, 2009 (Rept.
110-772). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union.
Mr. FILNER: Committee on Veterans' Affairs. H.R. 2192. A
bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to establish an
Ombudsman within the Department of Veterans Affairs; with an
amendment (Rept. 110-773). Referred to the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union.
Mr. FILNER: Committee on Veterans' Affairs. H.R. 4255. A
bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide assistance to the
Paralympic Program of the United States Olympic Committee,
and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 110-774).
Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of
the Union.
Mr. EDWARDS of Texas: Committee on Appropriations. H.R.
6599. A bill making appropriations for military construction,
the Department of Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other
purposes (Rept. 110-775). Referred to the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi: Committee on Homeland
Security. H.R. 4806. A bill to require the Secretary of
Homeland Security to develop a strategy to prevent the over-
classification of homeland security and other information and
to promote the sharing of unclassified homeland security and
other information, and for other purposes; with an amendment
(Rept. 110-776). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi: Committee on Homeland
Security. H.R. 5983. A bill to amend the Homeland Security
Act of 2002 to enhance the information security of the
Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes; with
an amendment (Rept. 110-777). Referred to the Committee of
the Whole House on the State of the Union.

____________________

PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of rule XII, public bills and resolutions were
introduced and severally referred, as follows:

By Mr. LAMPSON:
H.R. 6593. A bill to terminate prohibitions on leasing of
areas of the Outer Continental Shelf and the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge for exploration, development, and production
of oil and natural gas, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the
Committees on Science and Technology, and Energy and
Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mrs. MALONEY of New York (for herself, Mr. Nadler,
Mr. Fossella, Mr. King of New York, Mr. Rangel, Mr.
Engel, Mr. Towns, and Mr. Weiner):
H.R. 6594. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to
extend and improve protections and services to individuals
directly impacted by the terrorist attack in New York City on
September 11, 2001, and for other purposes; to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on
the Judiciary, and the Budget, for a period to be
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. WALZ of Minnesota (for himself, Mr. Ellison, Mr.
Emanuel, and Mr. Hill):
H.R. 6595. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to provide middle class tax relief while closing tax
loopholes, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Ways
and Means.
By Mr. McNERNEY (for himself and Mr. Space):
H.R. 6596. A bill to authorize the Secretary of
Transportation to carry out a school bus emergency fuel grant
program; to the Committee on Education and Labor.
By Mr. CONYERS (for himself, Mr. Gallegly, Mr. Nadler,
Mr. Van Hollen, and Mr. Moran of Virginia):
H.R. 6597. A bill to require the collection of data on
animal cruelty crimes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. CONYERS (for himself, Mr. Burton of Indiana, Mr.
Rahall, Mr. Jones of North Carolina, Mr. Moran of
Virginia, Mr. Chabot, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Scott of
Virginia, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Ms. Schakowsky,
Ms. Wasserman Schultz, Mr. Nadler, and Ms. Sutton):
H.R. 6598. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to
prohibit certain conduct relating to the use of horses for
human consumption; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. DOGGETT (for himself, Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas,
Mr. Hodes, Mr. Herger, Mr. Camp of Michigan, Mr.
English of Pennsylvania, Mr. Weller, Mr. Lewis of
Kentucky, Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania, Mr. Linder, Mr.
Stark, Mr. Levin, Mr. McDermott, Mr. Lewis of
Georgia, Mr. Neal of Massachusetts, Mr. Tanner, Mr.
Becerra, Mr. Pomeroy, Mrs. Jones of Ohio, Mr. Larson
of Connecticut, Mr. Thompson of California, Mr.
Emanuel, Mr. Blumenauer, Ms. Schwartz, Mr. Kind, Mr.
Pascrell, Ms. Berkley, Mr. Crowley, Mr. Meek of
Florida, Mr. Davis of Alabama, Mr. Waxman, Mr. Moran
of Virginia, Mr. Farr, Mr. Gene Green of Texas, Mr.
Al Green of Texas, Mr. Rodriguez, Ms. Eddie Bernice
Johnson of Texas, Mr. Edwards of Texas, Mr. Hinojosa,
Mr. Ortiz, and Mr. Reyes):
H.R. 6600. A bill to amend title II of the Social Security
Act to prohibit the inclusion of Social Security account
numbers on Medicare cards; to the Committee on Ways and
Means.
By Ms. VELAZQUEZ:
H.R. 6601. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to simplify the deduction for business use of the home
and to make other changes affecting small businesses; to the
Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. SCALISE:
H.R. 6602. A bill to provide for the use of amended income
tax returns to take into account receipt of certain
hurricane-related casualty loss grants by disallowing
previously taken casualty loss deductions; to the Committee
on Ways and Means.
By Mr. POMEROY (for himself, Mr. Tiberi, Ms. Herseth
Sandlin, and Mr. Walberg):
H.R. 6603. A bill to amend the Social Security Act and the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt certain employment as
a member of a local governing board, commission, or committee
from Social Security tax coverage; to the Committee on Ways
and Means.
By Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota (for himself and Mr.
Etheridge):
H.R. 6604. A bill to amend the Commodity Exchange Act to
bring greater transparency and accountability to commodity
markets, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Agriculture.
By Mr. ALLEN (for himself, Mrs. McCarthy of New York,
Mr. Michaud, Mr. Delahunt, Mr. Bishop of New York,
Mr. Carnahan, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Kildee, and Mr.
McGovern):
H.R. 6605. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code to
provide for a refundable tax credit for heating fuels and to
create a grant program for States to provide individuals with
loans to weatherize their homes; to the Committee on Ways and
Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. ANDREWS:
H.R. 6606. A bill to direct the Secretary of Homeland
Security to impose requirements for the improvement of
security camera and video surveillance systems at certain
airports, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Homeland Security.
By Mr. ANDREWS:
H.R. 6607. A bill to amend title II of the Social Security
Act to provide monthly benefits for certain uninsured
children living without parents; to the Committee on Ways and
Means.
By Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania (for himself and Mr.
Ehlers):

[[Page 16474]]

H.R. 6608. A bill to provide for the replacement of lost
income for employees of the House of Representatives who are
members of a reserve component of the armed forces who are on
active duty for a period of more than 30 days, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on House Administration, and in
addition to the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct,
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in
each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. BRADY of Texas (for himself and Mr. Sam Johnson
of Texas):
H.R. 6609. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to provide for recovery rebates for certain pension
recipients; to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas:
H.R. 6610. A bill to amend the Federal Rules of Evidence to
address the waiver of the attorney-client privilege and the
work product doctrine; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. CARNEY (for himself and Mr. Gerlach):
H.R. 6611. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to make the research credit permanent, increase
expensing for small businesses, reduce corporate tax rates,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. CAZAYOUX (for himself, Mr. Jefferson, and Mr.
Childers):
H.R. 6612. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to increase and make permanent the election to expense
certain refineries; to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. CONYERS (for himself, Ms. Kilpatrick, Mr.
Rangel, Ms. Lee, Mrs. Christensen, Ms. Jackson-Lee of
Texas, Mr. Meeks of New York, Mr. Cohen, Ms. Norton,
Mr. Grijalva, and Mr. Courtney):
H.R. 6613. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to
increase the number of dentists serving health professional
shortage areas, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. Price of
Georgia, Mr. Sullivan, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. King of
Iowa, Mr. Gingrey, Mr. Issa, Ms. Fallin, Mr. Campbell
of California, Mr. Kline of Minnesota, and Mr.
Westmoreland):
H.R. 6614. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to repeal the limitation on the amount of foreign earned
income excludible from gross income by citizens or residents
of the United States living abroad, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. GOHMERT:
H.R. 6615. A bill to provide for the transport of the enemy
combatants detained in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to Washington,
D.C., where the United States Supreme Court will be able to
more effectively micromanage the detainees by holding them on
the Supreme Court grounds, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee
on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined
by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such
provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee
concerned.
By Mr. HOBSON (for himself, Mrs. Jones of Ohio, Mr.
Turner, Mr. Tiberi, Ms. Sutton, and Ms. Pryce of
Ohio):
H.R. 6616. A bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior
to conduct a study of the Colonel Charles Young Home in
Xenia, Ohio, and other associated locations to determine if
those locations should be included as a unit of the National
Park System, to include those locations if the Secretary
concludes that they meet the criteria for inclusion, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Natural Resources.
By Mr. HONDA (for himself, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Mr.
Hinojosa, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Ellison, Mr. Cuellar, Mr.
Abercrombie, Ms. Bordallo, Ms. Hirono, Mr.
Faleomavaega, Ms. Matsui, and Mr. Becerra):
H.R. 6617. A bill to strengthen communities through English
literacy, civics, education, and immigrant integration
programs; to the Committee on Education and Labor, and in
addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to
be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas:
H.R. 6618. A bill to require complete displays of the
retail price of transportation fuel; to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. KUHL of New York:
H.R. 6619. A bill to provide for a drug discount program
for individuals without prescription drug coverage; to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the
Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently
determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of
such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned.
By Mr. LYNCH:
H.R. 6620. A bill to amend the Truth in Lending Act to
limit the amount of the interchange fee imposed on the sale
of motor vehicle fuel, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Financial Services.
By Ms. SOLIS:
H.R. 6621. A bill to amend titles XIX and XXI of the Social
Security Act to provide for the reinstatement of enrollment
for medical assistance and child health assistance of certain
youth who were enrolled for such assistance immediately
before becoming inmates of public institutions upon the
release of such youth from such institutions; to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. STUPAK:
H.R. 6622. A bill to amend chapter 44 of title 18, United
States Code, to increase the extent to which State law is
used in determining whether a criminal conviction under State
law is sufficient to deny a person the right to ship,
transport, possess, or receive a firearm; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
By Mr. WHITFIELD of Kentucky:
H.R. 6623. A bill to waive sovereign immunity and extend
the otherwise applicable statute of limitations for certain
actions under the USEC Privatization Act; to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the
Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. YOUNG of Alaska:
H.R. 6624. A bill to amend the Whaling Convention Act so
that it expressly applies to aboriginal subsistence whaling,
and in particular, authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to
set bowhead whale catch limits in the event that the IWC
fails to adopt such limits; to the Committee on Foreign
Affairs.
By Mr. CONYERS (for himself, Mr. Smith of Texas, Mr.
Scott of Virginia, and Mr. Gohmert):
H. Con. Res. 396. Concurrent resolution recognizing the FBI
on their 100th anniversary; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
By Mrs. MILLER of Michigan:
H. Res. 1373. A resolution expressing support for the
designation of National Marina Day to honor America's marinas
for their many contributions to their local communities and
create awarness amongst citizens, policymakers, elected
officials, and employees of the overall contributions of
marinas to their well-being; to the Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform.
By Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS (for herself, Mr. Hastings of
Washington, Mr. Smith of Washington, Mr. Inslee, Mr.
Larsen of Washington, Mr. Reichert, Mr. Dicks, Mr.
McDermott, and Mr. Baird):
H. Res. 1374. A resolution commemorating the 75th
anniversary of the Grand Coulee Dam and recognizing its
critical role in the national and economic security of the
United States and the contributions of hydroelectric power to
the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions; to the Committee
on Natural Resources.
By Mrs. BIGGERT (for herself and Mr. Israel):
H. Res. 1375. A resolution recognizing and supporting the
goals and ideals of National Runaway Prevention Month; to the
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
By Mr. HASTINGS of Florida (for himself, Mrs.
Christensen, Mr. Meek of Florida, Mr. Wexler, Ms.
Wasserman Schultz, Mr. Mahoney of Florida, Mr. Klein
of Florida, Mr. Putnam, and Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart of
Florida):
H. Res. 1376. A resolution commemorating the 80th
anniversary of the Okeechobee Hurricane of September 1928 and
its associated tragic loss of life; to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
By Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas:
H. Res. 1377. A resolution recognizing the commencement of
Ramadan, the Islamic holy month of fasting and spiritual
renewal, and commending Muslims in the United States and
throughout the world for their faith; to the Committee on
Foreign Affairs.
By Mr. JONES of North Carolina:
H. Res. 1378. A resolution amending the Rules of the House
of Representatives to authorize and direct the Speaker to
issue rules permitting the display outside of the offices of
Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner in the
House office buildings of tributes to members of the Armed
Forces killed in United States engagements in Iraq or
Afghanistan; to the Committee on Rules.
By Ms. LEE (for herself, Mr. Cohen, Mrs. Christensen,
and Mr. Rush):
H. Res. 1379. A resolution supporting the goals and ideals
of National Passport Month; to the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform.
By Mr. ROSKAM (for himself and Mr. Kirk):
H. Res. 1380. A resolution commending Federal and local law
enforcement for their efforts to crack down on illegal
immigration in the Chicagoland suburbs and calling on the
Governor of the State of Illinois to immediately implement
employee verification technology to curb rising trends in
illegal immigration in the State of Illinois; to the
Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee
on Education and Labor, for a period to be subsequently
determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of
such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned.

[[Page 16475]]

____________________

MEMORIALS

Under clause 3 of rule XII, memorials were presented and referred as
follows:

344. The SPEAKER presented a memorial of the General Court
of the State of New Hampshire, relative to Senate Concurrent
Resolution No. 6 urging the federal government to create a
simplified process for short-term admissions to nursing homes
for the purpose of respite care; to the Committee on Energy
and Commerce.
345. Also, a memorial of the General Assembly of the State
of Colorado, relative to House Joint Resolution No. 08-1009
supporting for the United Nations Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women; to
the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
346. Also, a memorial of the Senate of the State of
Michigan, relative to Senate Resolution No. 194 memorializing
the Congress of the United States to reauthorize
transportation funding with appropriate recognition of the
importance of the Great Lakes' infrastructure to the nation's
economy; to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
347. Also, a memorial of the General Assembly of the State
of Ohio, relative to House Resolution No. 100 memorializing
the Congress of the United States to enact the Community
Cancer Care Preservation Act of 2007, to reform the Medicare
reimbursement methodology for cancer drugs and their
administration; jointly to the Committees on Energy and
Commerce and Ways and Means.

____________________

ADDITIONAL SPONSORS

Under clause 7 of rule XII, sponsors were added to public bills and
resolutions as follows:

H.R. 154: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 211: Mr. Calvert.
H.R. 303: Mr. McGovern.
H.R. 579: Mr. Udall of Colorado and Mr. Lewis of Georgia.
H.R. 736: Mr. Marchant.
H.R. 847: Mr. Reichert.
H.R. 1060: Mr. Terry.
H.R. 1142: Mr. Levin.
H.R. 1157: Mr. Scalise, Mr. Wittman of Virginia, Mr. Berry,
Mr. Thompson of Mississippi, and Mr. Graves.
H.R. 1246: Mr. Dicks.
H.R. 1363: Mr. Ortiz, Mr. Ross, Mr. Hodes, Mr. Pallone, and
Mr. McIntyre.
H.R. 1399: Mr. Dreier.
H.R. 1552: Mrs. Musgrave.
H.R. 1589: Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida.
H.R. 1590: Ms. Speier.
H.R. 1610: Mr. Nunes.
H.R. 1655: Mr. Scott of Georgia, Mr. Peterson of Minnesota,
Mr. Hall of Texas, Mr. Engel, Ms. DeGette, Mr. Jackson of
Illinois, Mr. Lipinski, Mr. Miller of North Carolina, Mr.
Bishop of New York, Mr. Cummings, Mrs. Davis of California,
Mr. Gonzalez, Mr. Ross, Mr. Weiner, Mr. Rahall, Mr. Schiff,
Mr. McHugh, and Mr. McIntyre.
H.R. 1820: Mr. Hinchey, Mr. Holt, Mr. Honda, Mr. Engel,
Mrs. Napolitano, and Ms. Linda T. Sanchez of California.
H.R. 1843: Mr. Smith of New Jersey.
H.R. 2014: Mr. Altmire.
H.R. 2020: Mr. Wolf.
H.R. 2123: Mr. Peterson of Minnesota.
H.R. 2216: Mr. Filner, Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Gonzalez, Mrs.
Christensen, and Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 2217: Mr. Filner.
H.R. 2266: Mr. Sires and Mrs. Maloney of New York.
H.R. 2279: Mr. Platts.
H.R. 2501: Mr. Tancredo.
H.R. 2833: Mr. Frank of Massachusetts.
H.R. 2965: Ms. Herseth Sandlin.
H.R. 3212: Mr. Altmire.
H.R. 3267: Mr. Moore of Kansas and Mr. Tim Murphy of
Pennsylvania.
H.R. 3282: Mr. Gene Green of Texas.
H.R. 3294: Mr. Braley of Iowa.
H.R. 3334: Mrs. Napolitano.
H.R. 3622: Mr. Rogers of Michigan and Mr. Young of Florida.
H.R. 3737: Mr. Serrano.
H.R. 3961: Mr. Cohen.
H.R. 3979: Ms. Baldwin and Mr. Space.
H.R. 4007: Mr. Honda.
H.R. 4054: Mr. Larson of Connecticut.
H.R. 4088: Mr. Turner.
H.R. 4107: Mr. Michaud.
H.R. 4138: Mr. Patrick Murphy of Pennsylvania and Mr.
English of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 4202: Ms. Woolsey and Ms. McCollum of Minnesota.
H.R. 4450: Mr. McNulty.
H.R. 4460: Mr. Lamborn and Mr. Calvert.
H.R. 4544: Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas, Mr. Lincoln Davis of
Tennessee, Mrs. Schmidt, Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Emanuel, Mr.
Fossella, Mr. Towns, Mr. Arcuri, Mr. Smith of Texas, Mr.
DeFazio, and Mr. Graves.
H.R. 4851: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania and Ms. Woolsey.
H.R. 4930: Mrs. Lowey and Mr. Buyer.
H.R. 4987: Mr. McCaul of Texas.
H.R. 5032: Mr. Calvert, Mr. Bilirakis, Mr. Westmoreland,
and Mr. Shimkus.
H.R. 5176: Ms. DeLauro.
H.R. 5265: Ms. DeGette, Mr. Boucher, Ms. Slaughter, and Mr.
Hall of New York.
H.R. 5467: Mr. Barrow.
H.R. 5595: Mr. Hinchey, Mr. Butterfield, and Mr. Chandler.
H.R. 5605: Mr. Stupak.
H.R. 5632: Ms. Lee, Ms. McCollum of Minnesota, Mr. Wexler,
and Mr. Gene Green of Texas.
H.R. 5635: Ms. Berkley.
H.R. 5660: Mr. Grijalva.
H.R. 5727: Mr. McIntyre.
H.R. 5728: Mr. Jones of North Carolina.
H.R. 5756: Mr. McGovern.
H.R. 5761: Mr. Souder.
H.R. 5766: Mr. Sestak.
H.R. 5840: Mr. Sherman, Mr. Scott of Georgia, Mr. Shays,
and Mr. Murphy of Connecticut.
H.R. 5852: Mr. Schiff.
H.R. 5884: Mr. Van Hollen.
H.R. 5892: Mr. Lamborn and Mr. Space.
H.R. 5924: Mr. Baird.
H.R. 5951: Mr. Waxman.
H.R. 5954: Mr. Kagen.
H.R. 5979: Mr. Gene Green of Texas.
H.R. 6064: Mr. Bilirakis.
H.R. 6078: Mr. Carson and Mr. Towns.
H.R. 6107: Mr. Flake.
H.R. 6108: Mrs. McMorris Rodgers.
H.R. 6122: Mr. Smith of Washington.
H.R. 6133: Mr. Burton of Indiana and Mr. Stearns.
H.R. 6172: Mr. Salazar, Mr. Perlmutter, Mr. Udall of
Colorado, and Mr. Everett.
H.R. 6204: Mr. Ehlers.
H.R. 6205: Mr. Klein of Florida.
H.R. 6209: Mr. Stupak and Mr. Regula.
H.R. 6214: Mr. Upton and Mr. Westmoreland.
H.R. 6217: Mr. Sarbanes.
H.R. 6259: Mr. Bilbray.
H.R. 6297: Mrs. Napolitano and Ms. Berkley.
H.R. 6321: Mr. Upton.
H.R. 6326: Mr. Cummings and Ms. Loretta Sanchez of
California.
H.R. 6330: Ms. Lee and Mr. Tierney.
H.R. 6334: Mr. Kagen.
H.R. 6353: Mrs. Napolitano.
H.R. 6363: Ms. Loretta Sanchez of California and Mr.
Pastor.
H.R. 6371: Mr. Arcuri.
H.R. 6375: Mr. McNulty.
H.R. 6387: Mr. Thornberry.
H.R. 6435: Mr. McGovern.
H.R. 6439: Mr. Delahunt.
H.R. 6445: Mr. Buyer.
H.R. 6453: Mr. Wilson of South Carolina and Mr. Sam Johnson
of Texas.
H.R. 6458: Ms. Woolsey.
H.R. 6463: Mr. Gary G. Miller of California.
H.R. 6473: Mr. Arcuri.
H.R. 6474: Mr. Cohen.
H.R. 6478: Mr. Klein of Florida.
H.R. 6481: Mr. Delahunt.
H.R. 6486: Mr. Souder.
H.R. 6489: Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Wu, and Mr.
Walden of Oregon.
H.R. 6495: Mr. Moran of Virginia, Ms. Schakowsky, Ms.
Hirono, Mr. Markey, and Mr. Sarbanes.
H.R. 6496: Mr. Holt.
H.R. 6520: Mr. Jackson of Illinois and Ms. Lee.
H.R. 6525: Mr. Klein of Florida.
H.R. 6527: Mr. Doolittle, Mr. Nunes, Mr. Radanovich, and
Mr. Calvert.
H.R. 6529: Mr. Gary G. Miller of California.
H.R. 6538: Mr. Tierney.
H.R. 6539: Mr. Bilbray and Mr. Aderholt.
H.R. 6559: Mr. Kuhl of New York, Mr. Bartlett of Maryland,
and Mr. Manzullo.
H.R. 6566: Mr. Walberg, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Camp of Michigan,
Mr. Rehberg, Mr. Hensarling, Mr. Thornberry, Mr. Souder, Mr.
Deal of Georgia, Mrs. Emerson, Mr. Simpson, and Mr. McKeon.
H.R. 6570: Mr. McIntyre, Mr. Lipinski, and Mr. Gene Green
of Texas.
H.R. 6577: Ms. Slaughter, Mr. McCotter, Mr. Upton, Mr.
Knollenberg, Ms. Kilpatrick, Mr. Ackerman, and Mrs. Maloney
of New York.
H.R. 6578: Mr. Van Hollen, Mrs. Capps, Mr. Barrow, Mr.
Kagen, Mr. Wilson of Ohio, Mr. Shays, Mr. Hall of New York,
Mr. Emanuel, Mr. Wexler, Mr. Gene Green of Texas, and Mr.
Doyle.
H.R. 6582: Mr. Fattah and Mr. Sires.
H.J. Res. 79: Mr. Loebsack.
H. Con. Res. 253: Mr. Conaway and Mr. Fortenberry.
H. Con. Res. 338: Mr. Jackson of Illinois and Mr. Scott of
Georgia.
H. Con. Res. 341: Mr. Larson of Connecticut, Mr. Engel,
Mrs. Bono Mack, and Mr. Wexler.
H. Con. Res. 362: Mr. Murphy of Connecticut, Ms. Jackson-
Lee of Texas, Mr. McCarthy of California, Mr. Israel, Mr.
Ellsworth, and Mr. Daniel E. Lungren of California.
H. Con. Res. 374: Mr. Pence, Mr. Burton of Indiana, Mr.
Rohrabacher, Mr. Tancredo, Mr. Paul, Mr. Wilson of South
Carolina, Mr. Boozman, Mr. Gilchrest, Mr. Inglis of South
Carolina, Mr. Berman, Mr. Ackerman, Mr. Payne, Mr. Meeks of
New York, Ms. Watson, Ms. Woolsey, Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas,
Mr. Crowley, Mr. Wu, Mr. Miller of North Carolina, Ms. Linda
T. Sanchez of California, Mr. Scott of Georgia, Mr. Costa,
Ms. Lee, Mr. Carson, and Mr. McCaul of Texas.
H. Con. Res. 388: Mr. Dreier.

[[Page 16476]]

H. Con. Res. 390: Mr. Wittman of Virginia.
H. Con. Res. 393: Mrs. McCarthy of New York, Ms. McCollum
of Minnesota, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, and Mr. McIntyre.
H. Res. 610: Mr. Wamp.
H. Res. 620: Ms. Tsongas.
H. Res. 671: Mr. Wolf and Mr. Castle.
H. Res. 758: Mr. Tancredo.
H. Res. 1064: Mr. Hoekstra and Mr. Cohen.
H. Res. 1179: Mrs. Blackburn.
H. Res. 1200: Mr. Smith of Washington and Mr. Udall of
Colorado.
H. Res. 1228: Mr. Latta.
H. Res. 1266: Mr. Smith of Washington.
H. Res. 1288: Mr. Gingrey, Ms. Berkley, Mr. Peterson of
Pennsylvania, Mr. Berry, Mr. Langevin, and Ms. Baldwin.
H. Res. 1290: Ms. Baldwin.
H. Res. 1316: Mr. Manzullo.
H. Res. 1328: Mr. English of Pennsylvania and Ms. Baldwin.
H. Res. 1332: Mr. Stark, Mr. Gonzalez, Mr. Bishop of
Georgia, Mr. Lampson, Mr. Boyd of Florida, Mr. Boswell, Mr.
Patrick Murphy of Pennsylvania, Mr. Walz of Minnesota, Mr.
McNerney, Ms. Herseth Sandlin, Mr. Nunes, Mr. Costa, Mr.
Barrow, Mr. Meeks of New York, Ms. Loretta Sanchez of
California, Mr. Moore of Kansas, Mr. Melancon, and Mr.
Hinojosa.
H. Res. 1338: Mr. Jefferson, Mr. McNulty, Mr. Honda, Mr.
Cohen, Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas, Mr. Price of North
Carolina, and Mr. McGovern.
H. Res. 1351: Ms. Woolsey, Mr. Payne, Mr. McCotter, and Mr.
Cohen.
H. Res. 1352: Mr. Tancredo, Mr. LaHood, Mr. McHugh, Mr.
Wamp, Mr. Coble, Mr. Walsh of New York, Mr. Hunter, and Mr.
Murtha.
H. Res. 1357: Mr. Waxman, Mr. Welch of Vermont, Mr.
Sherman, Mr. McDermott, Ms. Lee, and Ms. Woolsey.
H. Res. 1358: Mr. Hobson, Mr. Duncan, Mr. Carney, Mr.
Peterson of Minnesota, Mr. Gallegly, Ms. Foxx, Mr. Baca, Mr.
Conaway, Mr. Boozman, Mr. Bartlett of Maryland, Mr. Moran of
Kansas, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Barrow, Mr. Nunes, Mr.
Souder, Mr. Butterfield, Mr. Etheridge, Mr. Lamborn, Mr.
Jordan, Mr. Coble, and Mr. Watt.
H. Res. 1361: Mr. Sherman, Ms. Berkley, Mr. Gene Green of
Texas, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Frank of Massachusetts, and Mr.
Gallegly.
H. Res. 1369: Mr. Smith of Washington, Ms. Watson, Mr.
Watt, Mr. Cleaver, Mr. Al Green of Texas, Mr. Davis of
Alabama, Mrs. Christensen, Ms. McCollum of Minnesota, Mr.
Delahunt, Mr. Clyburn, Mr. Lewis of Georgia, Mr. Conyers, Mr.
Meeks of New York, Mr. Rothman, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Kucinich, and
Mr. McGovern.

____________________

DELETIONS OF SPONSORS FROM PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 7 of rule XII, sponsors were deleted from public bills
and resolutions as follows:

H.R. 4789: Mr. Wamp.

____________________

PETITIONS, ETC.

Under clause 3 of rule XII,

298. The SPEAKER presented a petition of the General
Federation of Women's Clubs, relative to a Resolution
supporting a strong energy bill, including a renewable
electricity standard; to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.

____________________

DISCHARGE PETITIONS

Under clause 2 of rule XV, the following discharge petition was
filed:

Petition 14, July 24, 2008, by Mr. MARK R. SOUDER on House
Resolution 1331, was signed by the following Members: Mark R.
Souder, John R. ``Randy'' Kuhl, Jr., Lynn A. Westmoreland,
Pete Sessions, John Campbell, Ron Lewis, Kevin McCarthy, John
Sullivan, Tom Feeney, Robert E. Latta, Mike Rogers (AL),
Thaddeus G. McCotter, Donald A. Manzullo, Dan Burton, Terry
Everett, David Davis, Jim Jordan, Cathy McMorris Rodgers,
Thomas M. Reynolds, Stevan Pearce, Charles W. Boustany, Jr.,
Jim McCrery, Rodney Alexander, Henry E. Brown, Jr., Dennis R.
Rehberg, Bill Sali, John A. Boehner, Dean Heller, Joe Wilson,
Tim Walberg, Kenny Marchant, John T. Doolittle, Bob
Goodlatte, Charles W. Dent, John Linder, Candice S. Miller,
Thelma D. Drake, Robert J. Wittman, Jeff Miller, Jo Bonner,
Bob Inglis, Cliff Stearns, Ed Whitfield, Gus M. Bilirakis,
Tim Murphy, Paul C. Broun, Nathan Deal, J. Gresham Barrett,
Joe Knollenberg, Edward R. Royce, Jean Schmidt, Phil Gingrey,
Doug Lamborn, Phil English, Virgil H. Goode, Jr., Michael T.
McCaul, Bill Shuster, Ralph M. Hall, Jon C. Porter, Patrick
T. McHenry, Steve Scalise, Randy Neugebauer, Jerry Lewis,
Marsha Blackburn, John Kline, F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
Ken Calvert, Jeb Hensarling, Mary Bono Mack, Connie Mack, Tom
Latham, Kay Granger, Sam Graves, Gary G. Miller, John R.
Carter, Michael C. Burgess, W. Todd Akin, Adrian Smith, Jerry
Moran, Trent Franks, Adam H. Putnam, Louie Gohmert, Mac
Thornberry, John Abney Culberson, Harold Rogers, Steve
Chabot, Tom Cole, Mary Fallin, Tom Price, John E. Peterson,
John Shimkus, Sam Johnson, Dave Weldon, Spencer Bachus, John
M. McHugh, David Dreier, Todd Russell Platts, Lamar Smith,
Wally Herger, Zach Wamp, Steve King, Kevin Brady, John J.
Duncan, Jr., Judy Biggert, Ted Poe, Walter B. Jones, Robin
Hayes, Greg Walden, and Michele Bachmann.

____________________

DISCHARGE PETITIONS--ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS

The following Members added their names to the following discharge
petitions:

Petition 3 by Mr. PENCE on House Resolution 694: Ralph
Regula.
Petition 13 by Mrs. DRAKE on the bill H.R. 2493: Jerry
Lewis and Phil English.

[[Page 16477]]

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS
____________________

HONORING THE 175TH ANNIVERSARY OF PRATTSVILLE, NY

______

HON. KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND

of new york

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Town of
Prattsville, New York, which will be celebrating its 175th Anniversary
on August 17th of this year. Named for Zadock Pratt, a tanner and
former Member of Congress from Upstate New York, this community in the
Catskill Mountains was originally known to the Mohawk Nation as the
Onteora hunting grounds. In the early 18th Century, the area was
settled by German immigrants and named Schoharie Kill. Throughout the
19th Century, Prattsville thrived as a mill town and commercial hub for
the Catskill region.
Prattsville remains a ``gem of the Catskills'' to this day and is a
haven for hikers, artists and sportsmen alike. I congratulate the
people of Prattsville and offer the best wishes of this House as they
celebrate their community next month.

____________________

TRIBUTE TO CHANTLAND MATERIAL HANDLING COMPANY

______

HON. TOM LATHAM

of iowa

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Chantland
Material Handling Company (Chantland MHS) in Dakota City, Iowa for
earning Monsanto's 2007 Supplier Quality Recognition Award for being
one of Monsanto's top and trusted suppliers.
Monsanto has 31,000 suppliers, and Chantland MHS is now one of 75
elite companies that have received the award in the past 21 years. Each
company is rated based on their performance, and feedback from
Monsanto's manufacturing sites factored heavily into the final decision
of the award winners. Chantland MHS supplied 17,000 feet of conveyor
systems to Monsanto last year, which has helped Monsanto increase their
corn capacity. The Dakota City manufacturing facility employs 86 people
and is a leading supplier of bag fillers, conveyors, palletizers,
robots and systems.
Chantland MHS, dedication to providing outstanding service and
product quality has provided great benefit to the State of Iowa, and
for this I offer Chantland MHS my utmost congratulations and thanks. It
is an honor to represent Jamie Flot, President and COO, and all the
employees of the Chantland MHS, in the United States Congress, and I
wish them continued success.

____________________

IN RECOGNITION OF DELORIS ROACH

______

HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH

of ohio

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Deloris Roach
for 40 years of public service as she retires from the Louis Stokes
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Cleveland, and in
recognition of her advocacy and dedication to helping our nation's
veterans.
Deloris began her career in public service with the Internal Revenue
Service until moving to the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical
Center 32 years ago. Through her dedication to the minority veterans
program, she has helped to enroll over 1,000 veterans in the VA Health
Care System of Ohio. Deloris has served as the Program Coordinator for
the Minority Veterans Affairs Program for ten years, and also served as
the Cleveland VA Medical Center's Loaned Executive to the Combined
Federal Campaign. As Co-Chair for VA's Combined Federal Campaign, she
inspired and encouraged fellow employees to donate, raising a record
setting $267,000. Deloris also helped to raise over $8,000 in the
``Making Strides against Breast Cancer Walk'' for the American Cancer
Society. Her activism and community involvement reach beyond her work
on veteran's issues; she is a lifetime member of Blacks in Government,
Co-Chair of the EEO Diversity Action Committee, a member of the
American Red Cross Donor Committee, Minority Health Alliance, and the
NAACP Minority Health Committee.
Deloris has been the recipient of numerous awards, including the
National Minority Veterans Programs Coordinator of the Year in 2001,
the Cleveland Federal Executive Board ``Wings of Excellence Award'' in
2002, and certificates of Special Congressional Recognition for
Outstanding Contributions to Veterans and of Appreciation from the
State of Ohio. While serving as the Cleveland VA Medical Center's
Loaned Executive to the Combined Federal Campaign, she received the
Outstanding Leadership and Performance Award. She has also received
recognition from various veteran service organizations such as the
American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Blind Veterans Association,
and AMVETS. In 2005, the Department of Veterans Affairs Annual
Performance and Accountability Report to the President of the United
States, Deloris was recognized for her outstanding work on veteran's
affairs.
Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor of Deloris
Roach, and in recognition of her leadership and inspirational work on
veteran's issues and for her commitment to the Greater Cleveland
Community.

____________________

TRIBUTE TO MARY GLESE

______

HON. TOM LATHAM

of iowa

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize Mrs. Mary Glese,
principal at Hogan Elementary School in Marshalltown, Iowa, on the
occasion of her retirement. I also wish to express my appreciation for
Mary's dedication and commitment to the youth of Iowa.
For the past 39 years, Mrs. Glese has contributed her time and
talents to improving youths' lives through education and mentoring. She
grew up in Ames and graduated from Iowa State University before
obtaining her master's degree from the University of Colorado in
Boulder. During her career, Mrs. Glese also worked at schools in
Minnesota and Mason City as well as a consultant for the Area Education
Agency.
Mrs. Glese has truly made a lasting impact on students, family and
faculty throughout her illustrious career, and her leadership at Hogan
Elementary will certainly be missed by everyone. I consider it an honor
to represent Mrs. Mary Glese in the United States Congress, and I wish
her and her husband David a happy and healthy retirement.

____________________

MR. JAMES STRAYER

______

HON. PETER J. VISCLOSKY

of indiana

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure and honor
that I congratulate Mr. James A. Strayer on his retirement from his
position as the Business Manager for the Northwest Indiana Building and
Construction Trades Council. Jim, a member of Ironworkers #395 for many
years, has dedicated his life to the interests of his fellow tradesman
and the entire community in Northwest Indiana. For his lifetime of
service to the Ironworkers and the Building Trades Council, Jim will be
honored at a retirement dinner taking place at Avalon Manor in
Merrillville, Indiana, on August 1, 2008.
Jim Strayer has been a member of the Ironworkers #395 for the past
39 years. During that time, he has held numerous positions. After six
years as an Ironworker, Jim became an Apprentice Instructor, a position
that allowed him the opportunity to pass on his immense knowledge to
some of his younger counterparts. For five years, he fulfilled his
duties in this capacity with the determination and enthusiasm that
would foreshadow what was to come in Jim's career. As his commitment to
leading his union remained, Jim would later be named Business Agent for
Ironworkers #395.

[[Page 16478]]

From there, Jim went on to become the President of the Northwest
Indiana Building and Construction Trades Council in 1990. After six
successful years in this capacity, Jim was named Business Manager for
the Building Trades, the position he has excelled at for the past
twelve years.
Northwest Indiana has a rich history of excellence in its
craftsmanship and loyalty by its tradesmen. For many years, Jim Strayer
has displayed this unwavering dedication to the members of the Building
Trades, and his numerous positions have allowed him the opportunity to
touch the lives of countless individuals. Not only has Jim served his
local tradesman, but through his work with the Building Trades, he has
been a remarkable example of just how much good an organization can do
for a community. When it comes to serving those in need throughout the
community, the Building Trades has long been one of Northwest Indiana's
most generous organizations, as well as one of its greatest assets.
Although Jim has served the Building Trades and his community with
complete dedication, it is his commitment to his family that is most
impressive. Jim and his devoted wife, Pat, have two sons, Doug and
Andy, and one daughter, Rebecca.
Madam Speaker, James Strayer has given his time and efforts
selflessly to the tradesmen he has worked with and represented, as well
as to the people of Northwest Indiana through the many charitable
efforts of the Building Trades Council. He has been a true role model
to his peers and a true friend to Northwest Indiana. I respectfully ask
that you and my other distinguished colleagues join me in commending
Jim for his outstanding contributions and in wishing him well upon his
retirement.

____________________

CELEBRATING 50 YEARS OF ALVIN AILEY

______

HON. CHARLES B. RANGEL

of new york

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. RANGEL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Alvin Ailey, a
pioneer in the art of modern dance whose work is renowned throughout
the world and beloved in his hometown of Harlem. This year, the Dance
Theater celebrates 50 years of enriching the lives of audiences
throughout the world. The group has since won critical acclaim and has
been called an ambassador of American culture.
Today, the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater has performed in 48
states and 71 countries for an estimated 21 million people. By
integrating African-American tradition with classic modern dance,
Ailey's Dance Theater has created a unique experience that speaks to
audiences all over the world.
The innovation and freshness that Alvin Ailey brought to the world of
modern dance has forever elevated the standard for performance art and
has effectively engaged people of all backgrounds and world views with
the Theatre's legendary ``Revelations.'' After 50 years, it is true now
more than ever that to watch the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater is
to watch art come alive.

____________________

TRIBUTE TO PETER FAUST

______

HON. TOM LATHAM

of iowa

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate
Peter Faust for his longtime dedication to helping persons with
disabilities, being an inspiration in his community of Clear Lake, Iowa
and earning the American Network of Community Options and Resources'
(ANCOR's) Direct Support Professional (DSP) of Iowa Award.
Pete has been working at Opportunity Village for 31 years and is the
only employee to work with the agency for more than 20 years. In 1994,
Pete earned the Shirley Echelbarger Award, which is the highest honor
an employee at Opportunity Village can receive. Although Pete must work
extra hours just to pay his bills, he continues to work at Opportunity
Village because he understands that consistency and familiarity are
what his clients need.
Pete's sacrifices and dedication to his clients go above and beyond
what we are asked as citizens of this country. His willingness to give
a part of himself for the betterment of others illustrates the
compassion of Iowans, and for this I offer him my utmost
congratulations and thanks. I consider it an honor to represent Peter
Faust in the United States Congress, and I wish him the best in his
future work serving others.

____________________

DTV TRANSITION ASSISTANCE ACT

______

HON. PETER A. DeFAZIO

of oregon

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. DeFAZIO. Madam Speaker, I wish to express my strong support for
the passage of S. 2607, the DTV Transition Assistance Act, which will
aid rural communities by ensuring that low power translators get the
funding needed for digital equipment upgrades. This bipartisan
legislation is critical to rural Americans that rely on over the air
broadcast television as their main conduit to entertainment, news and
even lifesaving information in emergency situations. That is why I
joined with Representatives Walden and Boucher, the Co-Chairs of the
DTV Caucus, in introducing similar legislation.
Under current law, $65 million has been set aside for the upgrade of
low powered translators for the DTV transition. In Oregon alone there
are over 400 stations that broadcast over these low powered
translators. While this money has been set aside to assist in upgrading
these translators, the wording of the statute did not allow the money
to be spent until September of 2010, almost 2 years after the
transition. This bill would make these funds available on the day of
the transition in February of 2009. It would also give the NTIA the
authority to use leftover funds from section 3008 of the Digital
Television Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005 for grants,
contracts, and assistance programs to assist seniors, rural residents,
and minorities.
The Digital Television transition is the most sweeping and
fundamental change to the television landscape since the advent of
color. The advent of color television however, did not require millions
of Americans to buy a new television or converter box or risk losing
their picture. That fact alone makes the transition to digital
television in February of 2009 a tectonic shift in broadcast
television.
While this bill is an important fix, many problems still remain. The
auctioning off of the newly available spectrum being vacated due to the
digital transition has made the government over $19 billion. Despite
this massive collection of funds, the government has only allocated $5
million to educate the public about the transition, which is less than
0.03 percent of the $19 billion in revenue from the auction. The
results have been as obvious as they have been preventable. A December
2007 survey by Consumer Reports found that 36 percent of respondents
were completely unaware of the transition. How can we tell our
constituents that we did everything we could when we spent next to
nothing on educating them about the transition?
Instead the Bush Administration has privatized the outreach aspect
of the transition, relying on private industry to inform viewers. The
results have led to a jumble of different messages from different
industries, all looking to benefit from the transition. There are
examples of public service announcements supposedly made to inform
consumers about the transition instead being thinly veiled
advertisements for their own products.
The problems do not stop there. With only a 90 day window to buy
convertor boxes before their coupons expire, many rural customers are
finding that many stores either do not carry any convertor boxes or
they are not carrying a pass through capable converter box that the
customer will need in order to get all of their channels. These
customers should not be penalized because of where they live.
Madam Speaker, this bill is an important step but it is only a step.
We must do more to ensure that when Americans wake up on February 17th
2009, they are not left in the dark.

____________________

THE INTRODUCTION OF THE ``PREVENTION OF EQUINE CRUELTY ACT OF 2008''

______

HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.

of michigan

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the
``Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2008,'' along with
Representatives Burton, Rahall, Walter Jones, Moran, Chabot, Grijalva,
Bobby Scott, Christopher Smith, Schakowsky, Wasserman Schultz, Nadler
and Sutton. This bill criminalizes the possession, sale and transport
of horses in interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of
slaughter for human consumption. I thank the bipartisan coalition of
Representatives who have joined me in introducing this important
legislation.
Horses have played an important role in the development of our
country. They still fill the

[[Page 16479]]

role of workhorses, racehorses, rodeo horses and pets. Unlike cattle
and other livestock, horses in this country have never been raised as a
human food source.
The United States does not have a single plant where horses are
slaughtered for human consumption, but such slaughterhouses operate
across our borders in Mexico and Canada. Horses are bought at auctions
within the United States and then transported to these foreign
slaughterhouses for hours in packed and hot trailers without water,
food or rest. The slaughter process that awaits these horses in many of
the foreign plants is cruel and barbaric, and exists beyond the reach
of United States law.
The only way to prevent horses from suffering this fate is to stop
the sale and transport of horses to these foreign slaughterhouses
before they leave the United States. This bill will do that.
Again, I thank the bipartisan coalition of Representatives who have
joined me in introducing this important legislation.

____________________

IN RECOGNITION OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION'S 100TH
ANNIVERSARY

______

HON. JUDY BIGGERT

of illinois

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 100th
anniversary of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and to thank the men
and women of the Bureau for their dedicated service to the American
people. Over the last century, the FBI has been an unwavering and
powerful force in the ongoing struggle to protect the United States
from terrorism and enforce our laws against increasingly sophisticated
criminal forces.
Formed in 1908 when then-U.S. Attorney General Charles J. Bonaparte
asked Stanley W. Finch to lead the Department of Justice's primary
investigative division, the FBI began as a relatively small team of 34
Federal agents with no special name or designation. Over time, it grew
into a strong and effective leader among U.S. law enforcement
organizations.
Today, the FBI has 56 field offices here in the United States, as
well as close to 65 legal attache offices across the world. The Bureau
employs roughly 30,000 people, 12,000 of whom are sworn Special Agents.
All of these highly-trained men and women deserve our deep gratitude
and respect for putting their lives on the line each and every day to
protect this country from enemies foreign and domestic. I also would
like to express my thanks to FBI Director Robert Mueller for his
steadfast leadership of this dedicated group.
My home district, the 13th of Illinois, falls under the jurisdiction
of the FBI's Chicago Division. I would especially like to thank the men
and women of that office who have dedicated their careers to the
protection of individuals and families--including my own--that reside
in the Chicago region.
Under the capable leadership of Special Agent In-Charge Robert D.
Grant and Assistant Special Agents In-Charge Bob Holly, Mitch Marrone,
Bob Shields, Bill Monroe, and Arthur Everett, the highly-regarded
Chicago Division has been a powerful force against criminal elements
both in the city and throughout northern Illinois.
This Friday, July 25th, the Chicago Field Office will join the
Chicago chapter of the FBI Citizen's Academy Alumni Association at
Chicago's Navy Pier to celebrate the Bureau's 100-year anniversary. I
wish them and all of the other field offices and alumni chapters
celebrating this milestone the best as they toast to their past and
look forward to future success.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in congratulating the
FBI on the occasion of its 100-year anniversary, and thank the men and
women--both those serving today and those who sacrificed so much for us
in the past--for their tireless service. Truly, they have fulfilled
their duties in accordance with the Bureau's long-held motto of
``fidelity, bravery, and integrity.''

____________________

AMY U. HICKMAN, FINDING SAFE HOMES FOR OUR CHILDREN

______

HON. RON KLEIN

of florida

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor the
tireless efforts of a true local hero, Amy U. Hickman, Esquire.
A long-time Florida resident, Amy earned an Undergraduate and law
degree from the University of Florida, then went on to intern for Judge
Alcee Hastings, now my friend and colleague in Congress. Since then,
Amy has made a name for herself championing adoption legislation
improvements.
Amy is known by her peers for her skills as a keen litigator and as
THE go-to person for adoption cases.
She had been an associate civil trial litigator at a prestigious
South Florida law firm, but Amy chose to devote her career to serving
the neediest in our community- our children.
In 1996, Amy co-founded her own practice, with her partner Michelle
Hausmann, to specialize in adoption placement, litigation, parental
rights and surrogacy.
In 2002, Amy drafted substantial revisions to Florida's adoption law
and has successfully lobbied to help children in the Florida
legislature.
Amy continues to be a force for positive change. Her career is a
testament to her devotion to children that need a home. That is why I
nominated Amy as an ``angel in Adoption.'' Her commitment to finding
safe homes for our kids is unparalleled. Countless children enjoy a
caring childhood, thanks to Amy Hickman. I commend her for her service.

____________________

HONORING CHIEF RAY SAMUELS

______

HON. FORTNEY PETE STARK

of california

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. STARK. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Chief Ray
Samuels' retirement from the Newark, California Police Department and
to honor his thirty-four years of exemplary service in law enforcement.
Chief Samuels began his law enforcement career as a community service
officer in 1974 with the city of Vallejo, California. He was promoted
to police officer the following year. In 1981 he began an eighteen-year
career with the Police Department of Concord, California. During his
tenure, Chief Samuels held numerous positions within this organization,
including Traffic Bureau Commander and Professional Standards Unit
Commander.
In March 1999, Chief Samuels joined the Newark Police Department as a
Lieutenant. He was responsible for the Administrative Division,
Personnel and Training and the Investigation Division. He was promoted
to the rank of Captain three years later in April 2002 and appointed
Chief of Police in 2003. He became the seventh Police Chief since the
City's 1955 incorporation.
Chief Samuels received his Bachelor of Arts degree in Administration
of Justice from Golden Gate University. He is also a graduate of the
California Commission of Peace Officer Standards and Training Command
College, Boston's Senior Management Institute for Police, and the FBI
National Academy in Quantico, Virginia.
Chief Samuel has been instrumental in the implementation of Community
Policing strategies while serving the Newark community. He facilitated
the reorganization of the Community Services Division, which was
designed to improve coordination and enhance the efforts of the code
enforcement unit and the patrol division. Chief Samuels was also
actively involved in facilitating a unique partnership between the
Newark Police Department and the Newark Unified School District. Under
his leadership, a three-officer Community Safety Team was developed and
began its focus on gang education, intervention, and enforcement in
July 2006.
I join the City of Newark in applauding Chief Samuels' leadership
within the Newark Police Department and expressing appreciation for his
commitment to community service. He has not only guided the Newark
Police Department to excellence but has been active in civic and non-
profit organizations to make a difference in the lives of others.

____________________

HONORING MR. AND MRS. DICK AND BETTE GAMEGAN

______

HON. GEORGE RADANOVICH

of california

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. RADANOVICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Dick and
Bette Gamegan on the occasion of their 70th wedding anniversary. This
is truly a remarkable

[[Page 16480]]

milestone and I am proud to stand here to recognize this extraordinary
couple.
Mr. and Mrs. Gamegan met in high school and quickly became a young
couple.
On July 17, 1938, Dick and Bette exchanged wedding vows before
relatives and friends at Bette's mother's home in Fresno, California.
That hot summer day in Fresno was the start of a union that has spanned
seven decades. They spent their honeymoon in Pacific Grove, California
where Mr. Gamegan was a golf caddy for the nearby golf course, Pebble
Beach.
Mr. Gamegan's later position as a sales manager for the Sears
Department Store moved the couple to several different cities across
the Nation. Wherever his career would take them, they happily
acclimated to each new place and shared the journey that each new city
presented.
After working for the Sears Company, Mr. Gamegan purchased and
operated Gibbel Hardware Store in California's Central Valley. After
his retirement in 1972, the couple made their home in the mountains of
Coarsegold, California where they currently reside.
Mr. and Mrs. Gamegan's family includes a daughter, Karen, and one
granddaughter.
Over the years, Mr. and Mrs. Gamegan have traveled extensively
throughout the world and have shared countless memories together. Since
their honeymoon trip to Pacific Grove, the two have been enthusiastic
to visit as many places as possible.
In addition to their strong commitment to one another, Mr. and Mrs.
Gamegan have shared a tireless dedication for community involvement in
their area. They are outstanding community leaders and strong advocates
in many worthwhile causes.
Dick and Bette Gamegan have served actively on many neighborhood
organizations and projects. Mr. Gamegan is an active member of the
Lions and Kiwanis Club. In addition to other charitable work, Mrs.
Gamegan served on the Los Ninos Guild for many years, which raised
money to benefit the local children's hospital.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Mr. and Mrs. Dick Gamegan
on their 70th wedding anniversary. I invite my colleagues to join me in
recognizing this remarkable couple on their special milestone and to
wish them many more years of happiness.

____________________

TRIBUTE TO YOUTH AND SHELTER SERVICES OF MARSHALL COUNTY

______

HON. TOM LATHAM

of iowa

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Youth and
Shelter Services of Marshall County, Iowa, on celebrating their 25th
anniversary and to express my appreciation for their commitment to
providing services to Iowa's youth and their families.
Over 25 years, Youth and Shelter Services has grown from just a one
person staff to sixteen employees today. They began serving as a youth
and run-away service but now serve school-based and home programs,
which includes foster care and those on welfare as well. The agency has
turned part of their focus towards prevention services to help children
avoid making poor choices.
I commend Youth and Shelter Services for continuing to provide a
safety net for children and dedicated service to the Marshall County
community. It is an honor to represent Director David Hicks, and all
current and former members of the Youth and Shelter Services team, in
the United States Congress, and I wish them continued success in their
future service to Marshall County youth.

____________________

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

______

HON. SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR.

of georgia

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I regret that I was unavoidably
absent on Tuesday and Wednesday, July 22 and 23, 2008, on very urgent
business. Had I been present for the twelve votes which occurred on
Tuesday and Wednesday, I would have voted ``aye'' on H.R. 6493,
Rollcall vote No. 512; I would have voted ``aye'' on H. Res. 1311,
Rollcall vote No. 513; I would have voted ``aye'' on H. Res. 1202,
Rollcall vote No. 514; I would have voted ``no'' on the Motion to
Adjourn, Rollcall vote No. 515; I would have voted ``aye'' on H. Res.
1363, Rollcall vote No. 516; I would have voted ``aye'' on H. Res.
1363, Rollcall vote No. 517; I would have voted ``aye'' on H.R. 6532,
Rollcall vote No. 518; I would have voted ``aye'' on H.R. 3221,
Rollcall vote No. 519; I would have voted ``aye'' on H.R. 6545,
Rollcall vote No. 520; I would have voted ``aye'' on H.R. 6545,
Rollcall vote No. 521; I would have voted ``aye'' on H. Res. 1344,
Rollcall vote No. 522; I would have voted ``aye'' on H. Res. 1344,
Rollcall vote No. 523.

____________________

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

______

HON. GENE GREEN

of texas

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise to explain my reason
for missing votes on July 22 and July 23, 2008. My voting percentage is
over 96% for the 110th and I rarely miss votes, but there are certain
family events that cannot be missed, and for that reason, I was in
Houston for the birth of our newest grandson. I am proud to report the
newest grandson, as well as mother, father, and the rest of the family
are doing fine.
Had I been present for votes, I would have voted as follows:
On rollcall vote No. 523, H. Res. 1344, On Agreeing to the
Resolution, Rule providing for consideration of H.R. 3999--The National
Highway Bridge Reconstruction and Inspection Act, I would have voted
``aye;''
On rollcall vote No. 522, H. Res. 1344, On Ordering the Previous
Question on the Rule for H.R. 3999--The National Highway Bridge
Reconstruction and Inspection Act (H.Res.1344) I would have voted
``aye;''
On rollcall vote No. 521, H.R. 6535, Table Motion to Reconsider,
National Energy Security Intelligence Act of 2008, I would have voted
``aye;''
On rollcall vote No. 520, H.R. 6535, On Motion to Suspend the Rules
and Pass, National Energy Security Intelligence Act of 2008, I would
have voted ``aye;''
On rollcall vote No. 519, H.R. 3221, Concur in Senate Amendment with
House Amendment, Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008, I would have voted
``aye;''
On rollcall vote No. 518, H.R. 6532, to amend the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 to restore the Highway Trust Fund balance, I would have
voted ``aye;''
On rollcall vote No. 517, H. Res. 1363, On Agreeing to the
Resolution, Providing for consideration of the Senate amendment to the
House amendments to the Senate amendment to H.R. 3221, to provide
needed housing reform and for other purposes, I would have voted
``aye;''
On rollcall vote No. 516, H. Res. 1363, On Ordering the Previous
Question, Providing for consideration of the Senate amendment to the
House amendments to the Senate amendment to H.R. 3221, to provide
needed housing reform and for other purposes, I would have voted
``aye;''
On rollcall vote No. 515, On Motion to Adjourn, I would have voted
``nay;''
On rollcall vote No. 514, H. Res. 1202, On Motion to Suspend the
Rules and Agree, Supporting the goals and ideals of a National Guard
Youth Challenge Day, I would have voted ``aye;''
On rollcall vote No. 513, H. Res. 1311, On Motion to Suspend the
Rules and Agree, Expressing support for the designation of National
GEAR UP Day, I would have voted ``aye;''
On rollcall vote No. 512, H.R. 6493, On Motion to Suspend the Rules
and Pass, as Amended, Aviation Safety Enhancement Act of 2008, I would
have voted ``aye.''

____________________

CONGRATULATIONS TO RANDY SMITH

______

HON. RON PAUL

of texas

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today
to recognize Randy M. Smith, the CEO/President of Randolph-Brooks
Federal Credit Union, on his recent election to the Board of Directors
of the National Association of Federal Credit Unions (NAFCU).
For the past 21 years, Mr. Smith has dedicated his life to improving
financial institutions in America, serving on the Credit Union
Oversight Task Force of the Campaign for Consumer Choice, NAFCU's
Legislative, Regulatory and Accounting Standards Committees and various
committees of state and national credit union organizations. Currently,
he is a member of the Air Education and Training Command's Community
Council and the

[[Page 16481]]

Board of Trustees of the local United Way. I am also very proud to say
that he is a fellow retired officer of the United States Air Force.
As the President/CEO, Mr. Smith has focused on strengthening the way
Randolph-Brooks delivers services aimed at improving the economic well
being and quality of life of its members. Consistently ranked among the
top 25 of the nearly 8,300 financial cooperatives, Randolph-Brooks is
one of the strongest credit unions in the country with more than
265,000 members and total assets exceeding $3 billion. Randolph-Brooks
FCU was originally chartered in 1952 to serve personnel at Randolph Air
Force Base but has since expanded to include employees and associates
at more than 1,300 select groups and eight underserved communities in
the San Antonio and Austin areas. Randolph-Brooks FCU prides itself on
doing more than just conducting business in the communities they serve,
instead becoming members of the community and sharing in the credit
union philosophy of ``people helping people.'' With this in mind,
Randolph-Brooks provides assistance to hundreds of local charitable
organizations including the Children's Miracle Network, Society of St.
Vincent de Paul, USO, American Red Cross, and the Fisher House
Foundation.
It is because of the good work of Mr. Smith and others like him that
credit unions across the Nation have had such a tremendous impact of
the lives of millions of Americans. Such service is the hallmark of the
credit union movement and I know that he will bring this dedication to
his service on the NAFCU Board of Directors. I wish Mr. Smith the best
of luck in this new role and I look forward to working with him in this
new capacity.

____________________

INTRODUCTION OF THE JAMES ZADROGA 9/11 HEALTH AND COMPENSATION ACT

______

HON. CAROLYN B. MALONEY

of new york

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, today, along with my
colleagues, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Fossella, Mr. King of New York, Mr. Rangel,
Mr. Engel, Mr. Towns, and Mr. Weiner, I am introducing an updated
version of the 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, which we had
introduced previously in this Congress as H.R. 3543.
After conferring with Speaker Pelosi and the leadership of both
committees of jurisdiction, it became clear that some changes were
needed in the legislation in order to sharpen the scope of the
proposal, so that the House could consider taking up the bill by the
seventh anniversary of 9/11.
This bill is our best attempt, working with the City of New York, the
AFL-CIO, and the local community, to put forth a bill that the House
could approve, and that would also provide medical monitoring to all
who are at risk of illness because of exposure to Ground Zero toxins
and treatment to all who are sick, as well as compensating those who
sustained economic injuries due to their exposure to Ground Zero
toxins. We believe that the revised James Zadroga 9/11 Health and
Compensation Act does just that.

____________________

THE TURKISH MILITARY OCCUPATION OF NORTHERN CYPRUS MUST END

______

HON. ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN

of florida

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, the illegal Turkish occupation of
the northern region of the sovereign state of Cyprus began 34 years
ago, and continues to this day.
It must end, and Turkey must remove its forces from Cyprus'
territory.
Very commendable efforts are underway by the Cypriot government to
achieve a reunification of Cyprus. Meetings are being held with the
designated representative for the Turkish Cypriot community to discuss
ways to create a federal structure that will ensure the rights and
freedoms of all the people of Cyprus.
But, just as the continued illegal occupation of northern Cyprus has
to end, Turkey has to play a constructive role in supporting the talks
on reunification. In that regard, it is simply not helpful to have
Turkish military displays in northern Cyprus, marking the anniversary
of the occupation, as took place this past weekend.
It is time for the barricades to come down, for the people who had
been forced from their homes decades ago to return, for those who
remain missing from the time of the invasion to be accounted for, and
for freedom and economic prosperity to be allowed to spread across the
beautiful island-country of Cyprus.
I note the anniversary of the Turkish military invasion of Cyprus
with great disappointment that the Turkish military continues its
illegal occupation.
But I remain hopeful that the voices that are calling for peace and
reunification of Cyprus will be heard and will prevail.
Just as the ongoing talks have already led to the reopening of Ledra
Street, a key thoroughfare in Nicosia that had been closed for over 40
years, those talks can lead to reunification of all of Cyprus itself,
if Turkey takes steps that will support that.

____________________

TRIBUTE TO CONLEY NELSON

______

HON. TOM LATHAM

of iowa

in the house of representatives

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Conley Nelson of
Algona, Iowa, for his appointment to the National Pork Board.
Conley was one of five people appointed to the 15-member board at
the World Pork Expo at the Iowa State Fairgrounds and will serve a
three year term. The National Pork Board, which was created by Congress
as part of the Pork Promotion, Research and Consumer Information Act of
1985, is designed to develop budgets and award contracts to carry out
projects that bring pork into the marketplace.
Conley is the general manager of the Murphy-Brown LLC Midwest
operation. His large-scale operation includes 89,000 sows and markets
3.7 million hogs a year. In addition, he owns a 4,400 head wean-to-
finish operation. Conley is a member of the National Checkoff's Pork
Leadership Academy and serves on the Iowa Pork Producers board of
directors, its Audit Committee, the Membership and Leadership
Committees and the Swine Health and Animal Well-Being Committees. He is
also a member of both the Kossuth County Pork Producers and Humboldt
County Farm Bureau. Conley's broad range of experience and involvement
in the pork industry certainly has earned him a position on the
National Pork Board, and I am eager to see him excel in his role of
helping pork producers across the country.
I commend Conley Nelson for his dedication to his work and
congratulate him on his new nomination. I consider it an honor to
represent Conley in the United States Congress, and I wish him great
success while serving on the National Pork Board.