[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 11497-11498]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

  (Mr. BLUNT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. BLUNT. I yield to my friend from Maryland, the majority leader, 
to tell us what we plan to do next week.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the Republican whip for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, on Monday the House will meet at 12:30 p.m. for morning 
hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business, with votes postponed until 
6:30 p.m. On Tuesday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for morning hour 
and at 10 a.m. for legislative business. On Wednesday and Thursday, the 
House will meet at 10 a.m. for legislative business. On Friday, no 
votes are expected in the House.
  We will consider several bills under suspension. The final list of 
suspension bills will be announced by the close of business tomorrow.
  We will consider H.R. 6003, the Passenger Rail Investment and 
Improvement Act of 2008; H.R. 6063, the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration Authorization Act of 2008; and also hope to consider the 
Iraq-Afghanistan supplemental appropriations bill.
  Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman for that information.
  On the appropriation bill, supplemental appropriations bill, I think 
we are getting close to the time that the Pentagon may have to send out 
furlough notices to civilian employees, and probably beyond the time 
where they had to start shifting money from other accounts to the Army.
  Does my friend believe we will have that bill relatively early in the 
week, or is your confidence it will just be sometime next week?
  Mr. HOYER. I am reasonably confident it will be sometime next week. 
It is my hope it will be earlier in the week rather than later in the 
week. But I cannot say that at this point in time. There's still work 
being done on the bill. Chairman Obey is working very hard on a draft 
proposal that can be enacted in a short time frame.
  We are aware of the time constraints of which the gentleman spoke. I 
anticipate we will include a package of items that we believe are a 
cost of the war, the GI benefits that have been discussed, and also 
items that address a small number of pressing needs. We are strong 
believers in PAYGO, as you know, but we understand that we have to deal 
with the other body and the White House, who has not supported that 
effort. We are sometimes not in agreement with their position, and we 
will have to keep working on that issue. I know Mr. Obey is working 
hard on that.
  Mr. BLUNT. In that regard, has any conclusion been reached or not 
about whether tax increases similar to the ones that the House sent 
over to the Senate or other ways to pay for the ongoing expenses of the 
GI Bill that we all hope that we can arrive at a language on that we 
can be supportive of will be part of the package, or will the Senate 
view that there doesn't need to be a pay-for in this package be the 
prevailing view?
  I would yield.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Again, I would reiterate, as you know, we feel very strongly that the 
new entitlement program for the GIs, which is something we strongly 
support, but ought to be paid for as a new entitlement so that it does 
not add to the debt.
  The Senate did not agree with that proposition. As a result, that is 
not in the bill that has come back to us from the Senate. So we are 
currently trying to figure out what to do on this issue, but we feel 
very strongly that the GI Bill ought to be adopted one way or the 
other.
  Mr. BLUNT. I thank my friend for that.
  On other appropriations bills, you have announced in the press that 
the Appropriations Committee will begin its subcommittee markups next 
week. Do we anticipate that some of these appropriations bills would be 
on the floor this summer, and if so, which ones?
  I would yield.
  Mr. HOYER. I again thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I can't tell you exactly which ones, but I do anticipate there will 
be appropriations bills on the floor this summer. I don't, at this 
point in time, have the ability to tell you specifically which ones.
  Mr. BLUNT. On gas prices, as I am sure you have noticed, Republicans 
have been talking about gas prices a lot this week. We'd like to see 
some legislation scheduled that would allow more exploration, more 
American security in our energy sector. Is there anything like that 
scheduled?
  Mr. HOYER. Not next week. Although, as you know, we passed a major 
energy bill last year that was signed by the President that looks to 
real solutions to the problem of reliance on petroleum products and 
that is relying on alternative energy sources. We believe strongly on 
this side of the aisle that both from an environmental standpoint, a 
global warming standpoint, and an energy independence standpoint that 
looking to alternatives is absolutely essential.
  As you know, gas prices have risen very, very substantially during 
the course of the last 7\1/2\ years. As I have indicated before, during 
the 8 years of the Clinton Presidency, they rose approximately a nickel 
a year, from $1.06 to $1.46. Under this administration, they have gone 
from that $1.46 to now $3.86, $3.90, $4, and over $4.
  I know your contention is that it has just been in the last 12 months 
that this has happened. We disagree with that proposition. It's an 
interesting proposition to try to sell to the American public. But the 
bottom line is, frankly, for the last 35 years, since the late 
seventies when we had the long gas lines, we have not moved to 
alternative energy sources in the way we should have, in my view, so 
that we could not be held hostage by some, frankly, who have profit, 
understandably, in mind, but not necessarily the best interests of our 
consumers or our country. We support a diversified clean energy 
portfolio for our country.
  I want to make an observation because I have been listening today 
with interest. You may find this of interest. We have nearly a whole 
refineries' worth of capacity idle right now. Not for lack of supply, 
but for lack of use of existing refineries. As a matter of fact, we are 
at 87 percent, which is about 10 percent below what we usually are over 
the last 10 years. So for whatever reasons, refiners are now at 10 
percent below the capacity they usually are on average over the last 10 
years at this time.
  Secondly, since 2000, drilling on land has increased dramatically. 
Your side of the aisle has talked a lot about how we need more capacity 
to drill. I will tell you that since 2000, drilling on land has 
increased dramatically, climbing 66 percent. A two-thirds increase. 
Notwithstanding that increased drilling, gas prices have increased.

[[Page 11498]]

  In addition to that, I will tell my friend that oil and gas companies 
hold leases to nearly 68 million acres of Federal land and waters on 
which they are not producing oil and gas. It is our belief and experts' 
belief that these 68 million acres of leased but currently inactive 
Federal lands and waters could produce an additional 4.8 million 
barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day. 
That is existing leases on existing land that are not being used today.
  As a matter of fact, well less than half of the currently authorized 
leased land for oil drilling is not being used. It would nearly double 
if we did that total U.S. oil production and increased domestic natural 
gas production, by 75 percent. That is without a single new lease or 
single new drilling authorization being passed.
  It would also, of course, cut U.S. oil imports by more than a third 
and be more than six times the estimated peak production from the 
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge that is discussed so much on your side 
of the aisle.
  So while we are trying to focus on understanding what effect high 
prices have today and what manipulation may be going on in the 
marketplace today that is impacting on prices, we do continue to focus 
on the long-term solution, which is not, frankly, looking at petroleum 
products, which are a wasting resource and which will not in your 
lifetime and my lifetime but in our grandchildren's lifetime not be the 
source of energy to either power our cars or our economy but 
alternative sources of energy.
  We look forward to working with you on all of those. We believe that 
there is a lot of excess capacity in refining, excess capacity on 
leases for oil and for natural gas that currently exists that, for 
whatever reasons, are not being pursued now.
  Mr. BLUNT. I appreciate the gentleman's information on that. I will 
even be glad to accept some of it. Maybe gasoline was $1.46 in 2000. It 
had moved almost to $2.50 in the next 6 years. It has gone to $4 in the 
last 18 months. That is a record we are more than happy to talk about.
  In terms of refining capacity, actually we have been bringing refined 
gas product into the country in recent months. I don't know enough 
about refineries to know if a 10 percent downage in refineries is 
normal or not. I do know we haven't built a new refinery since 1976, 
and a number have closed.
  In terms of seeking oil, the Chinese now have an agreement with the 
Cubans that they can drill for oil 45 miles off our coast. Our 
companies can't do that. There's tremendous potential, I believe, and I 
think many of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle do, in the 
water, in the oil shale, and certainly the gentleman is right, and 
neither of us want to particularly give away our age in suggesting that 
that transition that we both anticipate will occur, will not totally 
occur in our lifetime. Even if we knew what it was right now, the last 
person will put the last gallon of gas in the last car that burns gas 
30 or 40 years after we move toward whatever that next thing is that 
powers the economy.
  We certainly need to encourage getting there, and I think there are 
many parts to that puzzle, from wind and solar and nuclear and better 
battery technology. But we firmly believe that you can have impact, and 
I don't mean we in the royal sense, I mean those of us who have been 
talking for years about supply, that you can have impact on the world 
price by just announcing that the United States was going to go after 
its reserves, known and unknown, and that unknown criteria is much more 
promising because of recent finds in this entire hemisphere than we 
would have thought it would have been.
  We are eager to enter into that and feel strongly that more supply is 
part of the important transition to a different energy future, and 
would like to see legislation on the floor that increases supply.
  In terms of legislation, one issue that we have talked a lot about, 
you and I have worked on, one of my colleagues has worked on a lot, the 
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, I am going to yield for a moment 
to my good friend from California.
  Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  I would just like to underscore the seriousness of the Foreign 
Intelligence Surveillance Act fix. We did it, as the gentleman knows, 
last August, for a 6-month period of time, the Protect America Act. It 
was enough bipartisan support that it passed, but it had a 6-month life 
on it. Since February 16 at 12:01 a.m. we have not had that or similar 
ability for our intelligence community to act.
  While they made some decisions within that 6-month period which carry 
over to the present time, as the gentleman from Maryland knows, we are 
up against it with respect to this summer.

                              {time}  1600

  I know that the distinguished majority leader announced his hope that 
we would have some sort of answer on this before Memorial Day. We 
missed that date. The gentleman knows our position, that a vast 
majority of Members on this side of the aisle, combined with the 
Members on your side of the aisle who have publicly said they would 
support the bipartisan Senate version, would give us that answer today. 
But I understand that the gentleman is attempting to mollify more 
Members on his side of the aisle.
  So my question would be, can the distinguished majority leader give 
us some idea of when we might see something on the floor that we might 
vote on that might in his judgment get enough bipartisan support to 
pass in the event that you continue not to bring us the Senate bill?
  Mr. BLUNT. Reclaiming my time, I yield to my friend.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding and I thank the 
gentleman for his observation and question. While I don't have a date, 
I do believe that we are making very significant progress. You have 
heard me quoted as saying that on the floor. I think that has been true 
for the last, frankly, 4 to 5 weeks, and I really think that everybody 
who has been addressing has been working in a very forthright, open and 
conscientious way to get us to a place where we can have legislation on 
the floor which will accomplish the objective the gentleman seeks.
  I think we are making good progress, and I am therefore hopeful that 
this will be sooner rather than later. I don't want to set a date. I 
wanted to do it by Memorial Day. We didn't get there. But we are 
working very hard, and I am hopeful in the near future we will get 
there.
  Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Will the gentleman further 
yield?
  Mr. BLUNT. I further yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. The distinguished majority 
leader has indicated we did not have the urgency of passing this 
because until August of next year it appeared that we had certain 
protections. We can't articulate what those are here on the floor. So I 
guess my question would be, does the gentleman expect that we will have 
it to vote before we leave for our recess in August?
  Mr. HOYER. Yes.
  Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman.
  After next week, we have 2 weeks remaining before our July 4 District 
Work Period, and I hope we can continue to work together to find a 
solution to that problem, to get the supplemental on and off the floor 
in a way that it properly funds the troops, and we get our work done. 
We will be working together to do that.

                          ____________________