[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 12597-12601]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




         SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF AMERICAN EAGLE DAY

  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to 
the resolution (H. Res. 1247) supporting the goals and ideals of 
``American Eagle Day'', and celebrating the recovery and restoration of 
the American bald eagle, the national symbol of the United States, as 
amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
  The text of the resolution is as follows:

                              H. Res. 1247

       Whereas the bald eagle was designated as the national 
     emblem of the United States on June 20, 1782, by our 
     country's Founding Fathers at the Second Continental 
     Congress;
       Whereas the bald eagle is the central image used in the 
     Great Seal of the United States and the seals of the 
     President and Vice President;
       Whereas the image of the bald eagle is displayed in the 
     official seal of many branches and departments of the Federal 
     Government, including--
       (1) Congress;
       (2) the Supreme Court;
       (3) the Department of Defense;
       (4) the Department of the Treasury;
       (5) the Department of Justice;
       (6) the Department of State;
       (7) the Department of Commerce;
       (8) the Department of Homeland Security;
       (9) the Department of Veterans Affairs;
       (10) the Department of Labor;
       (11) the Department of Health and Human Services;
       (12) the Department of Energy;
       (13) the Department of Housing and Urban Development;
       (14) the Central Intelligence Agency; and
       (15) the United States Postal Service;
       Whereas the bald eagle is an inspiring symbol of the 
     American spirit of freedom and democracy;
       Whereas the image, meaning, and symbolism of the bald eagle 
     have played a significant role in American art, music, 
     history, literature, architecture, and culture since the 
     founding of our Nation;
       Whereas the bald eagle is featured prominently on United 
     States stamps, currency, and coinage;
       Whereas the habitat of bald eagles exists only in North 
     America;
       Whereas by 1963, the number of nesting pairs of bald eagles 
     in the lower 48 States had dropped to about 417;
       Whereas the bald eagle was first listed as an endangered 
     species in 1967 under the Endangered Species Preservation 
     Act, the Federal law that preceded the Endangered Species Act 
     of 1973;
       Whereas caring and concerned citizens of the United States 
     in the private and public sectors banded together to save, 
     and help ensure the protection of, bald eagles;
       Whereas in 1995, as a result of the efforts of those caring 
     and concerned citizens, bald eagles were removed from the 
     endangered species list and upgraded to the less imperiled 
     threatened species status under the Endangered Species Act of 
     1973;
       Whereas by 2006, the number of bald eagles in the lower 48 
     States had increased to approximately 7,000 to 8,000 nesting 
     pairs;
       Whereas the Secretary of the Interior removed the bald 
     eagle from the Federal list of threatened species effective 
     August 8, 2007;
       Whereas the bald eagle remains subject to the Migratory 
     Bird Treaty Act and on May 28, 2008, the Secretary of the 
     Interior issued regulations providing continued protection 
     under the Act popularly known as the Bald and Golden Eagle 
     Protection Act;
       Whereas bald eagles would have been permanently extinct if 
     not for vigilant conservation efforts of concerned citizens 
     and strict protection laws;
       Whereas the dramatic recovery of the bald eagle population 
     is an endangered species success story and an inspirational 
     example for other wildlife and natural resource conservation 
     efforts around the world;
       Whereas the initial recovery of the bald eagle population 
     was accomplished by the concerted efforts of numerous 
     government agencies, corporations, organizations, and 
     individuals; and
       Whereas the sustained recovery of the bald eagle 
     populations will require the continuation of recovery, 
     management, education, and public awareness programs, to 
     ensure that the populations and habitat of bald eagles will 
     remain healthy and secure for future generations: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
       (1) supports the goals and ideals of ``American Eagle 
     Day''; and
       (2) encourages--
       (A) educational entities, organizations, businesses, 
     conservation groups, and government agencies with a shared 
     interest in conserving endangered species to collaborate on 
     education information for use in schools; and
       (B) the people of the United States to observe American 
     Eagle Day with appropriate ceremonies and other activities.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
Guam (Ms. Bordallo) and the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) each will 
control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Guam.


                             General Leave

  Ms. BORDALLO. 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 resolution under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Guam?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  House Resolution 1247, as amended, celebrates the recovery of the 
American bald eagle, the symbol of our country displayed on American 
currency and government agency seals, including the seal of the United 
States Congress. The bald eagle's recovery is a huge success story for 
the Endangered Species Act and the conservation laws which preceded it.
  In 1963, there were just 487 pairs of bald eagles in the lower 48 
States. Today, Mr. Speaker, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, there are an estimated 9,789 breeding pairs.
  Effective August 8, 2007, the bald eagle was removed from the list of 
threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, demonstrating that 
it had truly recovered. At the same time, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act 
and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act continue to provide 
important protections for this magnificent bird.
  I commend our colleague, Congressman David Davis from Tennessee, for 
introducing this resolution encouraging organizations and government 
agencies working on the conservation of endangered species to 
collaborate on educational information for use in our schools.
  The resolution further encourages the American people to observe 
American Eagle Day with appropriate ceremonies.
  This resolution merits our support.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I wish to yield, before I make my 
statement, to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. David Davis), the 
sponsor of this particular resolution, as much time as he may consume.
  Mr. DAVID DAVIS of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of 
H.R. 1247, a bill I introduced, to support the goals and ideals of June 
20 as American Eagle Day. The bill also highlights the successful 
recovery story of the American bald eagle, the official national emblem 
of the United States.
  The American bald eagle has been a part of American culture for 
hundreds of years. In 1782, the Second Continental Congress established 
that the bald eagle was the official emblem of the United States 
because of its uniqueness to North America. It can be seen on the 
United States seals in public buildings, schools, and even here in the 
House Chamber. Over the years, the bald eagle has become a living 
symbol of the United States spirit, freedoms, and continual pursuit of 
excellence.
  Mr. Speaker, just 45 years ago the United States had only about 400 
nesting pairs of the American bald eagle. Through conservation, 
education and careful planning, today we have seen a significant rise 
to about 7,000 nesting pairs of the American bald eagle.

[[Page 12598]]

  Because of the successful recovery exhibited by the American bald 
eagle, the Department of the Interior has taken the bald eagle off both 
the endangered and threatened species list. The bald eagle has been a 
national symbol, and its recovery has been a national success story.
  H.R. 1247 will not only honor the now thriving American bald eagle, 
it will also encourage support of the United States Mint bald eagle 
commemorative coin program which has been a success for the past few 
years. Currently, this coin program has raised over $5 million for the 
American Eagle Foundation, which is located in Pigeon Forge, Tennessee, 
which is located in my district.
  The American Eagle Foundation is a successful not-for-profit 
organization seeking to protect and fully restore the bald eagle 
population across North America. They also care for the injured and 
orphaned birds that have a strong environmental presence through 
educating thousands of families who visit Pigeon Forge, Tennessee each 
year.
  Furthermore, this bill encourages school systems, businesses, 
governmental agencies and conservation groups to share information on 
the American bald eagle that will benefit children and schools across 
our Nation.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in supporting H.R. 
1247, a bill I introduced to support the goals and ideals of June 20 as 
American Eagle Day, and celebrate the recovery and restoration of this 
great bird, the bald eagle, the national symbol of the United States.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  I rise also in support of House Resolution 1247 which endorses the 
goals and ideals of the American Bald Eagle Day, or American Eagle Day.
  226 years ago the Second Continental Congress decided to use the 
image of the American bald eagle on the great American, great seal of 
the United States. Since that time, the image of this majestic bird has 
graced our art, our culture, currency, stamps, headbands, and rubber 
things you put around your wrist. It's been the subject of more than 
2,500 published books, making the bald eagle the most extensively 
studied bird in North America.
  While we estimate there were nearly 500,000 bald eagles on this 
continent, this species was particularly devastated by a reproductive 
failure. In response, Congress did enact the Bald and Golden Eagle 
Protection Act, and the bird was listed on the Endangered Species Act.

                              {time}  1500

  From its all-time low of 417 nesting pairs in the continental United 
States during the Lyndon Johnson administration, extraordinary 
conservation efforts have saved the bald eagle since that time, and we 
have witnessed a significant population increase.
  Today, there are just under 10,000 breeding pairs in the lower 48, 
not to mention to 30,000 bald eagles living in Alaska. By any objective 
stand, the recovery of the bald eagle has been remarkable and sadly, 
one of the few success stories of the Endangered Species Act, an act 
that obviously needs significant reform.
  The Secretary of Interior has removed the bald eagle from the Federal 
list of threatened endangered species, and there is no question that 
the bald eagle will continue to inspire millions of America, but it 
symbolizes fundamental values of this country: courage, freedom, 
patriotic spirit, and of energy development.
  Under the terms of House Resolution 1247, the people of the United 
States are encouraged to observe American Eagle Day on June 20, to 
provide educational information about the bald eagle and our Nation's 
wildlife resources. And I also urge a ``yes'' vote.
  And I want to commend and compliment the author of this resolution, 
Congressman Davis of Tennessee, for his effective leadership in 
proposing this celebration of American Eagle Day.
  I will reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. BORDALLO. In that case, Mr. Speaker, I also reserve the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I wish to recognize the gentlelady 
from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx) for what time she may choose to consume.
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Utah for 
yielding me time, and I want to congratulate and commend my colleague 
from Tennessee (Mr. Davis) for his work on this resolution.
  I want to say that this Capitol Building in which we are working 
today and which people are visiting every day is one of the most 
wonderful symbols of our country. The American bald eagle is another 
symbol of our country,
  An intangible symbol of our country has always been our independence 
and our innovative nature and our freedom. The people all around the 
world know this country for what we stand for: freedom, and the rights 
of individuals, and the ability to solve problems, and to create ways 
to solve those problems.
  But right now our way of life is being threatened because of the 
price of gasoline in this country, and there are many who believe that 
there are liberals in this country who think that the United States 
should be taken down a peg or two, that we shouldn't be allowed to be 
the great Nation that we are; and that one way of doing that is by 
crippling the United States through the inability to be independent 
with gas and oil.
  But I want to say that that's not the direction that Republicans want 
to be going. Republicans want us to have the supply that we need for 
gasoline so that we can bring down the price of gasoline. We know that 
Democrats have blocked our ability for that. I spoke about that a few 
minutes ago, and I'm not going to repeat that; but I heard my colleague 
on the other side of the aisle talking about the argument that there 
are many, many leases out there that oil companies are not utilizing. 
That's another tactic of the Democrats: blame the oil companies, blame 
George Bush, blame everybody else for the problems that we have. Don't 
take the responsibility yourself. But again, unfortunately, we have the 
facts to back up what we know is true, which is Democrats have voted 
against our increasing supplies.
  They're also wrong on the issue of leases. They talk about ``use it 
or lose it.'' They want to introduce a bill that has no basis. They're 
inventing false arguments again.
  ``Use it or lose it'' is already the law. For Federal onshore 
competitive oil and gas leases, an oil company must have a producing 
well by 10 years. This comes from section 17(e) of the Mineral Leasing 
Act. Prior to 1992, the lease term was 5 years. The Energy Policy Act 
of 1992, under a Democratically controlled House, modified it to 10 
years. So it's the Democrats who changed the leasing terms.
  For Federal offshore oil and gas leases, an oil company must produce 
energy between 5 to 10 years. It's in the government's discretion. This 
is from the Outer Continental Shelf Land Act. So Democrats, House 
Democrats, do not even know what is the existing law now.
  What Democrats would have you believe is that a lease is a license to 
produce oil and gas. It is not. A lease is only the start of a process 
involving several steps the government requires an oil company to take 
before it may even receive permission to drill.
  Democrats are effectively arguing that we should pull leases away 
from oil companies before they receive permission to drill. This is 
like saying we should flunk a first grader on his first day of school 
because he has not yet taken his final exam.
  Most of the drilling on Federal leases has been for natural gas, and 
natural gas production was up, way up last year, and so was demand. In 
fact, the industry is producing more gas under these leases, but they 
cannot keep up with the demand because Democrats and their radical 
environmental allies will not allow the leasing of new areas and 97 
percent of Federal offshore areas are not leased; 94 percent of Federal 
onshore areas are not leased.
  We can solve our energy problems in this country, and we do have 
them, but they've been brought on by the Democrats who say, We can't 
drill our way

[[Page 12599]]

out of this. No, but we can do many things, including drilling. That 
will be a part of what we can do, and we can be energy independent. But 
again, many of them don't want us to be.
  They don't want us to have a Nation that soars into greatness like 
the bald eagle that we are honoring in this resolution or continue the 
great reputation that we have had over the years for being the greatest 
Nation on earth. They would like to take us down a peg or two. I know 
Republicans and most Americans don't agree with them.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I would say to the gentlelady that we are here to salute the American 
eagle. I would say that the American eagle would not be proud that 68 
million acres of Federal energy lands are being held hostage by big oil 
companies.
  To respond to the points just made, number one, current law allows 
leaseholders 10 years to develop oil or gas. The Responsible Federal 
Oil and Gas Lease Act cuts that down to 5 years. While existing leases 
can be canceled if leaseholders fail to comply with lease provisions, 
laws, or regulations, such as public safety and environmental 
requirements, there is no law or regulation that requires diligent 
development of Federal oil and gas leases.
  The next point. As long as leaseholders pay the required annual 
rental fee, the government cannot compel diligent development of the 
lease lands.
  Next. The Responsible Federal Oil and Gas Lease Act requires oil and 
gas operators to diligently develop Federal oil and gas leases as is 
currently required of coal leaseholders. This requirement was enacted 
in the 1970s to prevent coal operators from using Federal resources for 
speculation that would drive up prices.
  And finally, no such requirement is placed on oil and gas operators. 
And H.R. 6251 corrects that situation.
  And again, I would like to repeat, and I would say to the previous 
speaker, that we are here this afternoon to salute the American eagle. 
And I would say that the American eagle would not be proud that 68 
million acres of Federal energy lands are being held hostage by big 
oil.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may wish 
to consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa).
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, only on this floor would we debate how the 
American eagle would feel. I'm astonished that the Democrats have the 
hubris to talk in terms of how the American eagle would feel. As a 
matter of fact, the American eagle and countless thousands of birds and 
other wildlife have been used as an excuse for a generation for 68 
million acres--yes, they are leased, but a lease is in fact not a right 
to drill. Just because you have a lease doesn't waive any environmental 
consideration. So beyond the requirement to find out if in fact there 
is oil on a lease site, you have to go through a myriad of hoops before 
you can begin drilling.
  It's one of the reasons that, in fact, offshore drilling has become 
so popular. Not only are there vast resources out there, but in fact, 
the fish simply swim away; and in deep water, particularly over 400 
meters, it is unlikely to find an environmentalist at the bottom 
claiming that there is some new form of life that is not only new but 
highly in danger.
  So with all fairness to the Nation's bird, I would say that what we 
need to do is stop talking about 68 million acres that are ``available 
for production'' when in fact, the vast majority of that has little or 
no usable oil.
  And I just want to give you a fairly short statement, Mr. Speaker. It 
is not a question of whether or not you have acreage, it's a question 
of whether the acreage is valid acreage for oil. I will give you the 
easiest example. West Virginia. It's a wonderful State. Beautiful 
State. They take a tremendous amount of coal out of there. They also 
take a quite a bit of oil. As a matter of fact, with 3,400 oil wells, 
they take a total of 5,000 barrels a day out of there. To the contrary, 
or to the other example, Alaska, with only 1,700, half as many wells, 
take 700,000 barrels a day.
  So it's not, Mr. Speaker, whether or not you have millions of acres, 
it's do you have the acreage that you are able to drill in, do you have 
the acreage that is, in fact, yielding oil. And I can assure you at 
$134 a barrel, if anyone was holding acreage that yielded barrels that 
in fact could deliver that kind of revenue, it would be drilled today.
  The truth is the vast majority of the acreage is either off limits 
for environmental reasons or, in fact, would be like West Virginia: 
3,400 wells, 5,000 barrels a day.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch).
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady from Guam.
  It's probably appropriate that we're here saluting the American eagle 
because if there is anything that the American eagle represents, it's 
the spirit of American independence, American self-reliance, American 
strength.
  In the debate we're having today about the resolution honoring the 
American eagle, I don't want to say the energy debate has hijacked it 
because in many ways, it's quite relevant. The fundamental question 
that this country must decide is whether we will pursue a path of 
energy independence or continue to go hat-in-hand to the oil-exporting 
countries to try to solve our problems.
  Some of you may remember, which for me was the most vivid 
representation of the American energy policy, and that was a picture on 
the front page of the New York Times a couple of years ago, when the 
President of the United States went to Saudi Arabia, and hand-in-hand, 
as is the custom in many of the Middle East countries, President Bush 
and the Saudi prince walked in to have a private conversation about 
America's oil future. And what was going on there was not the spirit of 
American independence represented by the eagle. It was a spirit of 
capitulation where our President was imploring a foreign country to 
solve the problems that we face.
  A confident country, an energetic country solves its own problems. It 
doesn't look to others to help solve those problems. It takes on the 
challenge. Energy is a big challenge. It takes on the challenge of 
solving those problems on its own.
  And that's the question that this Congress faces: Will we have the 
self-confidence of a vigorous and strong Nation to chart a course of 
energy independence?

                              {time}  1515

  Now we're hearing arguments that the problem we face can be solved by 
drilling our way out of it, and of course, that's an argument that has 
been pursued vigorously since we discovered oil. But you know, there's 
enormous evidence that allows us to take a look at this proposition. 
Will more permits to drill, will more drilling reduce the cost of oil?
  And I have here, Mr. Speaker, a chart. The first chart shows the 
number of wells. The number in red here, we've got the number of 
leases, and in this blue, we have the number of wells. Starting in 
1994, there's been a steady increase of the number of leases and a 
steady increase in the wells drilled. And step by step by step, as 
leases and as drilling has increased, so has the price of a gallon of 
gas, from $1 up to about $4 a gallon today.
  So reasonable people would step back and ponder the question, whether 
more drilling and more leases results in lower prices. History shows 
us, in nearly the past 20 years, that is simply not the case.
  The other proposition is that the problem is the Federal Government 
is denying leases to the oil companies so that they can't do drilling, 
and the evidence is overwhelming that's simply not the case.
  This chart, the second chart, shows on a pie chart, the whole circle 
there is the land that is available for leasing. And the green is all 
that's available, and the red here, or orange, is all that is open for 
leasing. Pardon me, I have it the opposite way around.
  But of all of the land open and available for leasing, 79 percent is 
open and

[[Page 12600]]

subject to exploitation and exploration by our oil companies. Only 21 
percent is off limits. Yet, of this land where the oil companies have 
leases, 68 million acres where they can put metal to the ground is not 
under production, and there's no effort to put it under production.
  My friends on the other side have argued that the oil companies have 
to go through certain environmental permits. I'm not sure you're right 
about that because much of that work has been done. Assuming that is 
the case, that's no different than what has been the requirement for 
the production of oil on federally-owned lands.
  You know, there are many people who are asking the question as to 
whether the fix is in for the oil companies, and there's overwhelming 
evidence, in fact, that it is. Number one, the amount of speculation 
that now is core to the energy future trading markets is inflating the 
price at the pump, inflating the price of home heating fuel. How did 
that happen? Thanks to Congress.
  In 2002, under the Tom DeLay Congress, the Enron loophole was passed 
at the request of that great company, Enron, that did so much for 
America's energy situation. Enron passed a loophole that took away any 
kind of regulatory oversight of the energy future trading market, and 
it led directly and immediately to an explosion in speculation. Hedge 
funds, private investors, folks who saw that they could make a lot of 
money on the misery of a lot of people rushed into the speculation in 
the oil energy markets. Now, that's wrong. There should be no 
speculative premium that comes at the expense of American consumers, 
folks trying to heat their home, small businesses trying to run a 
business.
  This Congress has had an opportunity to get rid of that Enron 
loophole. House Democrats have passed legislation. It hasn't gotten 
through because of opposition on the other side, either in the Senate 
or the consistent opposition of the President of the United States.
  So what can we do if you want to be independent? One, we can get rid 
of the Enron loophole, wholly and completely. The second thing is that 
the energy companies, in fact, are hording leases, and that's a fact. 
There's an enormous push on this Congress to open up ANWR, and the 
argument is made and it has a surface appeal that if you open up ANWR, 
then it is going to mean a reduction in prices because the supply will 
go up and demand will go down.
  A couple of problems with it. First and foremost, the oil companies 
have leases on 68 million acres. They're not exploiting them. Why? We 
don't know exactly why because they won't say. They will come in, raise 
their hand, take an oath, acknowledge that they're paying their 
executives 10s of millions of dollars, acknowledging that when one 
executive was retiring he was given a $400 million payday to say good-
bye, but they won't tell us why they're not putting drill bits to earth 
to exploit the leases they have.
  But you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out what the 
motive may be. If they keep that lease and the oil or the natural gas 
sits in the ground and it goes from $28 to $48 to $68 to $134 a barrel, 
that's sound money for those companies, and it will fatten the already 
extraordinary profits, $125 billion in profits for the oil companies 
last year, the big five oil companies.
  Second, oil companies push hard to bring online as much Federal land 
for leases as possible because the Big Oil companies have been 
extremely successful in crowding out some of our small, independent 
producers, and in fact, my view is that's a detriment and a reason why 
this 68 million acres aren't exploited. If you had smaller, more 
independent, hungry, energetic companies that had an opportunity to 
make good money at $134 a barrel, and they owned those leases, they'd 
be drilling.
  So what you have is a situation where the oil companies are doing 
quite fine, they really are, and the status quo serves them very well. 
What may not serve them so well is the self-confident Congress, the 
self-confident President saying, you know what, we're not going to play 
that game anymore. There are other ways.
  We're going to take away the tax breaks, about $13 billion that 
American taxpayers are turning over to our oil companies, and that, 
with all due respect, is just an astonishing public policy. Our folks 
are paying over $4 a gallon for gas. In my home State of Vermont, we're 
paying over $4.25, $4.40 for a gallon of home heating fuel, and 
taxpayers are paying the oil companies about $13 billion in tax breaks. 
That's your money and mine. It's hard to see how that's justified, but 
the oil companies are quite happy to take that taxpayer subsidy.
  But what they won't like is what the House is pushing, and that's a 
policy of energy independence, where we take those tax breaks, we steer 
them, as America has frequently done when there's something important 
for the American people, and it's taken a push from our taxpayers to 
get us over that initial technological hump, and that's having those 
tax breaks go as incentives to alternative energy sources, wind and 
solar, biofuels.
  You know, if we could step back a minute and take a look at some of 
our friends in Europe and the leadership they're taking because of 
self-interest, a recognition in Portugal that investing in alternative 
fuel is a way to strengthen the economy, or Germany, investing in 
solar, Germany has less sun than Vermont. And let me tell you, I'm here 
to tell you that Vermont doesn't have as much sun as we need and I 
want. They have less sun than we do, but they are leading in solar 
technology.
  So, the bottom line question is really very simple. Do we want 
leadership, as best exemplified by President Bush when he was with the 
Saudi prince, imploring the Saudi prince to rescue us from ourselves, 
or do we want leadership where we say we will take care of our own 
future, that particularly in face of what I think are unfounded 
arguments, that we can drill our way out, that Congress or the American 
government is an impediment to drilling that is available immediately 
for our oil and natural gas companies, and that there isn't supply that 
we can achieve through efficiency and alternative energy.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. May I inquire how much time is left for the bald 
eagle to discover oil?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Utah has 7\1/2\ minutes. 
The gentlewoman from Guam has 4 minutes.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Let me yield myself as much time as I will go 
through here.
  We're now looking at a whole bunch of issues that deal from an 
Endangered Species Act that has few examples of success--this one 
happens to be one of those few--to an energy policy that we have 
developed over the last 40 years which can only be described as 
discombobulated.
  It seems there are a group of people who control this floor whose 
past policy towards energy development and energy independence was to 
blame Big Oil, and now that prices of gasoline are at $4 a gallon, 
$1.75 more than when this Congress started, it seems now we try to have 
an expanded policy which is to blame Big Oil and allow lawyers to sue 
OPEC to give us more oil.
  Simply, it does not come back to the reality of the situation that we 
have locked resources within this country, both onshore and in this 
country, that can produce our own energy independence.
  We have laws that already say if you have a lease, you have 5 to 10 
years. The Secretary of the Interior has power already under law that 
if he thinks that is not being used properly, they have power to 
abrogate those contractual leases. However, for each one of those, we 
have 7 to 10 years of regulation, litigation and study, including an 
Interior appropriations bill that will be coming to the floor either 
this week or next week, which expands those restrictions and expands 
the moratorium that we have.
  The bottom line is 30 years ago this country was producing about 11 
million barrels of oil a day, and our need was 17. We had to import. 
Today, we

[[Page 12601]]

produce about 8 million barrels of oil a day, and our need is 20, which 
means we have to import more.
  We have a 22 percent reduction in production in this United States, 
and we're the only country in this continent that does that. Mexico has 
increased. Canada has increased. We have decreased our energy 
production, even though our needs have come up.
  The chart you were looking at is somewhat skewed because it deals 
with only the offshore, and there's a difference to land that's 
documented and open and not opened to lease. The bottom line is, 
offshore, there's 1.7 billion acres of area that we could do to produce 
energy. We are doing 68 million acres. That leaves 1.6 billion acres 
still undiscoverable, locked away, not usable. That's 85 percent of 
everything we have.
  The gentleman from Vermont was correct in which he said speculation 
is indeed driving the cost of oil, but the speculation is driving the 
cost of oil because the speculators believe this country will not 
continue to produce, that we will decline in our production. And until 
we have a policy that says we are going to increase our production, 
speculation will continue to increase, and those costs will increase.
  What this Congress has to have is a comprehensive policy that says we 
will do more for conservation and we will do more for production of all 
sources of energy, alternative as well as carbon-based, and we will 
come up with new and innovative ways of delivering that energy. And 
until this Congress actually sits down and says we will have a 
comprehensive energy policy, all the data, all the instructions, 
everything else we're talking about is nothing more than useless 
rhetoric.
  Interesting facts, totally irrelevant to the needs of the time. The 
needs are people are suffering now, and we need to do something to help 
those people who are suffering. And we have to have a comprehensive 
policy which does include increases of production of all sources of 
energy.
  The gentlelady from Guam will be happy to know, I'm the last speaker 
on this bill.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I want to say, as Mr. Welch 
stated, ANWR, everybody keeps talking about ANWR. But if you opened 
ANWR today, you would not get any energy production tomorrow. You 
wouldn't get any for a decade or more. Whereas right now, the oil 
companies have 68 million acres of land available for development, and 
they are not exploiting them.

                              {time}  1530

  I don't care how much rhetoric goes on here today, there is still the 
68 billion acres of land available for development. They have access to 
enough acreage to produce six times the amount of energy that we might 
get from ANWR. So again, I'll repeat over and over, ``use it or lose 
it.''
  I urge support for House Resolution 1247.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo) that the House suspend the rules 
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1247, 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. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________