Jeff Bingaman

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent I be allowed to speak for 20 minutes.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague, Senator Domenici, for his comments, and I join him and Senator Alexander and many other colleagues who have cosponsored this legislation and congratulate our majority leader, Senator Frist, and our minority leader, Senator Reid, for their leadership in getting this issue introduced into the Senate. I hope very much this bipartisan effort can succeed and that before the end of the 109th Congress, we can see this legislation on the President's desk for signature. This bill is the result, as Senator Domenici said, of a close, cooperative effort by three of our Senate committees: the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which Senator Domenici chairs and of which I am the ranking member, and Senator Alexander is on that committee as well; the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee; and the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. I commend the staffs of those committees for their hard work in producing this legislation, as well as the personal staffs of all Senators involved. As Senator Domenici pointed out, this is a major piece of legislation which arises out of the good work that was done by the National Academies. This report which was done there made a series of recommendations which are clearly specific which will intend to put the country on a track to reverse some of the unfortunate trends we have seen in connection with our ability to compete with other countries in the world. Senator Domenici, Senator Alexander, Senator Mikulski, and I introduced three bills in January of this year in order to put into legislative form the recommendations of the National Academies report. Each of these bills went to a different committee. Since all three of us on the Senate floor today are members of the Energy Committee and since Senator Domenici chairs that committee, we were able to move more quickly in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee with the legislation that was assigned to that committee, S. 2197, which authorizes a number of programs to strengthen the Department of Energy's role in promoting stronger math and science education from kindergarten through graduate school. It creates a Director for Math and Science Education in the Department of Energy. The bill strengthens the role of our national laboratories in this K-12 math and science education. It authorizes a program whereby national laboratories adopt a nearby school to increase its math and science proficiency. The bill goes on and on with other initiatives which are taken directly from the recommendations of the Augustine commission that was referred to earlier. These provisions that are in S. 2197 have remained largely intact in the legislation that is being introduced today. In some cases, we had to reduce the authorization levels so that the increases to particular programs were ramped up over a period of time instead of suddenly doubling existing programs as had been recommended. In the education area, the National Academies report assigned highest priorities to this need to strengthen K-12 math and science education, and this legislation does so in a variety of ways. Senator Domenici elaborated on some of those. I will not go into great detail about them, but they are directly taken from the National Academies report. We are all aware here in the Senate that we operate on two different tracks: we operate on the track of authorizing legislation and the track of appropriating legislation. The legislation we are talking about today and introducing today is authorizing legislation, so it is only one of the steps needed in order to get action accomplished here in the Congress. But it is an important step, and it is particularly important when you are setting a long-term goal. That is what this legislation attempts to do: It tries to look long term. It tries to say that we need to ramp up our investment in these critical areas of concern so that 5 years from now, 10 years from now, we will see a change in these trend lines which have so concerned the National Academy of Sciences as well as many of us here in the Congress. This bill authorizes $73 billion to be spent over 5 years to maintain our Nation's competitive edge. Of that, about $20 billion is considered new funding; that is, it is funding above the 2006 level at which we are today. These are only authorizations. It is not an appropriation. It is going to be our job, and it is not an easy job, but it is going to be the job of the Congress not only to appropriate these new moneys we are here authorizing but also to make sure those moneys are not appropriated at the expense of other important programs in the Department of Education or in the National Science Foundation or in the Department of Energy. I think we are all aware that this has to be new money in a genuine sense of that term. Again, I thank my colleagues for joining in this bipartisan effort. I believe this is a very good piece of legislation. It is an important piece of legislation. Often we allow the urgent to crowd out adequate consideration for the important items that ought to be on our agenda. This is an exception to that. This is a case where we are giving attention to the important issues. Let me particularly single out for praise Senator Alexander. He has, at every step in this process, been pushing to get this initiative one step closer to the goal line. I compliment him for doing that. I compliment him for the introduction of this legislation today, and I compliment all my other colleagues who have been so cooperative in seeing that happen as well. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, CNMI, became a part of the United States 30 years ago with high expectations, but today they are an American community in deep distress. The CNMI economy is being bled by a rapid decline in its garment industry as the result of new international trade rules, by losses in its tourism industry, and by the loss of over $100 million each year in wages that are sent offshore by foreign guest workers. The community on Saipan, where 90 percent of the population resides is experiencing increasing problems with water quality and service, the electric system has returned to scheduled outages after years of reliable service, and overburdened wastewater systems cause regular contamination of the land, air, and water. The Government has recently made layoffs in an effort to balance the budget and has even cut back the number of workdays for those who continue to have jobs. Unemployment is conservatively estimated at 14 percent and rising, and a shocking 65 percent of children receive food assistance. Only 6 months ago, the Government asked Congress for an unprecedented $140 million in new appropriations to maintain government operations and meet critical needs. There are many reasons for this dire situation; some are temporary, others are systemic. One of the systemic causes of this situation which should be addressed promptly by Congress and the administration is the local government's labor and immigration policies, particularly their promotion of an extremely high population growth rate, 500 percent in 30 years, and their promotion of the use of alien guest workers instead of U.S. citizens for nearly all private sector occupations. In order to establish a stable and sustainable foundation for the CNMI's future, a new Federal immigration and labor policy framework and Federal institutions are needed to properly control the borders and to properly manage the guest worker program. When the CNMI became a U.S. territory in 1976, most U.S. laws were immediately extended. However, the granting of U.S. citizenship to the inhabitants and the extension of U.S. immigration law were not to occur until ``after termination of the Trusteeship Agreement''; that is, not until after the international community, acting through the United Nations, recognized the extension of U.S. sovereignty over the islands by terminating the U.N. Trusteeship Agreement. Unfortunately, during the 10-year period between U.S. approval of the covenant in 1976 and U.N. termination of the trusteeship in 1986, the CNMI began the importation of foreign workers to exploit a combination of immigration, wage, and trade privileges. In 1986, the Reagan administration wrote to the CNMI Governor stating that ``the tremendous growth in alien labor [is] . . . extremely disturbing'' and urged ``timely and effective action to reverse the . . . situation.'' The administration warned that ``the uncontrolled influx of alien workers . . . can only result in increased social and cultural problems.'' The CNMI policy was also inconsistent with the legislative history of the covenant which states that local immigration control was intended to restrict immigration in order to protect the indigenous community from being overwhelmed by immigrants. Notwithstanding these concerns expressed by the Reagan administration, and later the Bush and Clinton administrations, the CNMI continued to import alien guest workers and other, nonworker, aliens. The population of 16,000 in 1976 has exploded to an estimated 80,000 today. Mr. President, in 1999, the Northern Mariana Islands Covenant Act Implementation Act was reported favorably by the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and it passed the U.S. Senate by unanimous consent in 2000. It would have extended the Immigration and Nationality Act, INA, to the CNMI as anticipated under the covenant agreement which joined the United States and CNMI in political union in 1976. The measure was reintroduced in the 107th Congress and was again reported favorably by the Energy Committee. I was pleased that the measure continued to have bipartisan support at that time, including the ``strong support'' of the administration. On June 21,2006, I joined with my colleague and the chairman of the Energy Committee, Pete Domenici, in a letter to the Secretary of the Interior, copied to the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, asking whether there have been developments that would cause the administration to alter its support for this bill. We have not yet received a reply. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the recent letter to Secretary Kempthorne, a copy of the original, 2001 letter of support from the administration, and a copy of a section-by-section summary of the legislation all be printed in the Record at the end of my remarks.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I believe the reasons the Administration and Congress should continue to support legislative action are compelling, and I present them here for the consideration of my colleagues and the public. In short, there are five reasons that legislation is needed to more fully implement the covenant agreement that ties the CNMI and the United States in political union: the lack of local institutional capacity, national security, ineffective law enforcement against organized crime, an unsustainable economic model, and inadequate protection for alien workers. I believe that any one of these reasons is a basis for the administration to reaffirm its support. All five reasons make the case for continued support overwhelming. First, congressional action is needed because the CNMIs lack the institutional capacity to control its borders or to properly manage immigration and guest worker programs. In 1997, reports by both the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, INS, and by the bipartisan U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform found that the CNMI does not have, and never will have, the capacity to properly control its borders because border control requires sovereign authority to operate overseas consulates, issue visas, and have access to classified national and international ``watch'' lists. During the Energy Committee's hearings on this legislation in September of 1999, the General Counsel of the INS, Mr. Bo Cooper, was asked, ``Do you foresee any circumstances under which the government of the Commonwealth could operate an immigration system that is satisfactory to the Federal Government?'' Mr. Cooper responded, ``No, I do not.'' This fundamental fact has not changed with time, and it alone constitutes a basis for enacting legislation to extend Federal immigration control to the CNMI. Second, Federal legislative action is needed because the post-9/11 environment requires that the United States secure its borders. The CNMI is an American community that deserves that same level of protection from attack as other American communities. The United States also has important military assets and training facilities in the CNMI, and our Nation's Naval and Air Force bases in nearby Guam are increasingly important both regionally and globally. The threat from North Korea, tension between Taiwan and China, and terrorist activity in the nations of Southeast Asia, all underscore the strategic importance of the Marianas. Yet the lack of institutional capacity to secure the borders underscores the vulnerability of the Marianas, and the Nation. Border control is an inherently sovereign function, and given the increasing importance of the Marianas, the increased threats they face, and the obligation of the President to protect all U.S. communities, this function can no longer be delegated to local authorities. A third reason for congressional action is the CNMI's lack of capacity to screen for criminals entering the islands. This deficiency has contributed to the establishment of organized crime elements from Japan, China, and Russia in the community and to an increase in illegal drug, gambling, prostitution, and trafficking crimes associated with such elements. The 1997 INS report found that: ``[There are] serious deficiencies in all facets of the Marianas' current system of immigration enforcement and control'' and ``There appears to be universal recognition amongst the Mariana Government Authorities that various organized crime groups, such as the Japanese Yakuza, the Chinese Triads, and the Russian Mafia have made inroads into the Marianas . . . Few of these persons are ever detected at the port-of- entry or apprehended while in the Marianas.'' The report recommended that Congress enact legislation to extend the Immigration and Nationality Act. A fourth reason for congressional action is to change CNMI immigration and labor policies that are unsustainable and contribute to the distress the community now faces. The CNMI, promotes the use of guest workers to fill virtually all private sector jobs: unskilled, skilled, and even professional jobs. In addition, both the CNMI Government and the private sector earn income from the hiring of alien workers but not from hiring U.S. citizens. Consequently, those U.S. citizens who cannot find increasingly scarce Government work are left to go on welfare or emigrate. Unemployment is conservatively estimated at 14 percent and rising. An astounding 65 percent of children are on food assistance. Also contributing to this unsustainable economic model is the problem of wage remittances. For 2005, it was reported that guest worker remittances to their home countries was well in excess of $100 million. These remittances are bleeding the community of wealth that is no longer available to buy goods and services, create jobs, and otherwise stimulate economic activity for the benefit of the community. The CNMI's labor and immigration policies also contribute to an unsustainable economy because they result in huge population growth rates which have overwhelmed the community's infrastructure and services. Most of these new residents are very low-wage or no-wage migrants who are a net drain on the economy, consuming more in public services than they contribute in taxes. As a result, water and power are rationed; sewage fouls the land, air, and water; and healthcare and education facilities are seriously overcrowded. Each year the economy struggles to support growing numbers of unemployed U.S. citizens, as well as thousands of nonworking alien and illegal alien residents. Finally, local labor and immigration policies contribute to an unsustainable economy because the resulting high crime and deteriorating infrastructure create disincentives to investment. Gone are the clean and open beaches and the reliable utilities and services that attracted new hotel and tourist investment 20 years ago. Instead, the CNMI has asked the Congress for a $140 million bailout to sustain an economic model that is fundamentally flawed. The fifth reason Federal legislative action is needed is to protect guest workers from abuse. Abuse of workers was the driving force behind congressional establishment of the Federal-CNMI Initiative on Labor, Immigration, and Law Enforcement in 1994. Following establishment of this program, Interior Department investigations confirmed the allegations of outrageous abuses, from widespread and systematic cheating of workers out of ages, to improper confinement, to coerced abortions. The worst of these abuses have apparently ended, in part through the efforts of the U.S. Department of the Interior's labor ombudsman. This office was established under the initiative in 1999 as a stop-gap measure because the Energy Committee's efforts to enact reform legislation had run into insurmountable opposition in the U.S. House of Representatives. The Interior labor ombudsman's responsibility was, and remains, to advocate on behalf alien workers; to give them a voice in the face of the inadequately funded and often indifferent local bureaucracy. Unfortunately, the 2006 ombudsman's report states that while there have been improvements in the treatment of guest workers, ``There are still a number of serious problems that have yet to be effectively addressed by local government officials: ensuring the health and safety of alien workers; inadequate prevention efforts to curb labor abuses through periodic regulatory inspections; unacceptable delay in investigating and adjudicating worker complaints due to failure to allocate sufficient resources to the Department of Labor; difficulty rooting out corruption within the agencies tasked with regulating alien entry and work permitting, and an inability or unwillingness to prosecute repeat offenders.'' Mr. President, if, after 12 years of effort, the chief Federal labor official in the CNMI still finds such systemic problems in the local government's capabilities and commitment to stop the abuse of guest workers, then it is clearly time for Congress to enact reform legislation. Stop-gap measures have only resulted in stop-gap solutions. If foreign-national guest workers continue to be mistreated under the U.S. flag, then it is the duty of the Congress to extend the Federal laws and institutions necessary for their protection. I am disappointed with the lack of priority which the Department of the Interior has given the CNMI Initiative during recent years. Since 2000 the Department has failed to submit an annual report on the initiative. This year the report was finally submitted but only after the Department was twice directed to do so in congressional appropriations report language. As for content, the report is completely inadequate. It was composed only of a statement by the Interior labor ombudsman and it failed to include the input of Federal law enforcement officials or any of the socioeconomic data needed to properly assess socioeconomic and law enforcement trends in the islands. Without regular tracking of census and economic data, such as population, household income, and government revenues and expenditures, Congress must rely upon press reports to assess conditions in the islands. Nevertheless, the information contained in the Department's narrowly scoped report still leads to the conclusion that conditions have not fundamentally changed with respect to the protection of guest workers, and Federal legislative action is still needed. Any one of these five reasons--lack of institutional capacity, border control, law enforcement, unsustainable economics, and inadequate worker protection--is sufficient cause for Federal action. All five reasons make an overwhelming case. Certain fundamental facts that existed in 2001 when the administration first announced its support for legislation remain unchanged. For example, the CNMI still lacks the capacity to properly operate immigration and guest worker programs. Other facts are new and provide further justification for the administration to reaffirm its support. For example, after 9/11 the United States is at greater risk of attack and must secure its borders and protect the U.S. citizens of the Marianas as we protect all communities on American soil Border security and immigration control are inherent functions of national sovereignty that were intended to be extended to the CNMI following international recognition of the extension of U.S. sovereignty over the islands. That recognition occurred in 1986. As predicted by the Reagan administration 20 years ago, the failure of Congress to extend these laws has resulted in unacceptable social and cultural problems. Four U.S. administrations have expressed serious concern with these conditions, and two administrations have endorsed legislation to extend the INA with appropriate protections for the local economy. There have been no developments since 2001 that provide a basis for the administration to alter its strong support for this approach. In fact, the case for extending Federal policies and institutions to the CNMI to protect the community and to stabilize its economy is more compelling than ever. I look forward to receipt of the administration's reply to the committee's June 21 2006 letter, and to working with them, Chairman Domenici, and representatives of the CNMI on legislation to extend Federal immigration policies and institutions to the CNMI as anticipated by the covenant and as needed to protect the community and restore its economy to a sustainable future. Exhibit 1 U.S. Senate, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Washington, DC, June 21, 2006. Hon. Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC. Dear Secretary Kempthorne: The U.S. Senate is currently engaged in a debate regarding our Nation's immigration policies, including discussion of border security, labor demand, and the status of persons currently in the country without legal status. As members of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources which has jurisdiction with respect to the Territories of the United States, we have, over the course of several years, considered these issues with respect to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). On June 5, 2001, the Committee reported legislation, the Northern Mariana Islands Covenant Implementation Act (S. 507, S. Rpt. 107-28) that would have extended Federal immigration law to the CNMI with certain transition, exemption, and assistance provisions. This legislation was reported with a statement of support by the Administration as set forth in the letter of May 15, 2001 from Assistant Attorney General Daniel J. Bryant to then-Chairman Frank H. Murkowski. Given the passage of time, we are writing to ask whether there have been any developments in the CNMI that would cause the Administration to readdress their statement from 2001. We ask that you please provide a response within 30 days, as Chairman of the Interagency Group on Insular Affairs, and direct any questions that you may have to Josh Johnson or Allen Stayman of the Committee staff at 202- 224-4971. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Sincerely, Pete V. Domenici, Chairman. Jeff Bingaman, Ranking Member.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I want to add my congratulations to Senator Domenici on this great achievement, achieving this milestone of becoming one of eight Senators in the history of our country to have cast this many votes. I have had the good fortune in the 24 years I have been here in the Senate to serve with Senator Domenici, and also, of course more recently, to serve with him on the Energy Committee as the ranking member. I have seen the leadership he has provided to deal with our energy issues. He is the longest serving Senator to have served from the State of New Mexico. Of course, he has cast more votes on behalf of the people of the State of New Mexico than anyone in the history of this country. For that he deserves great recognition. The people of the State I represent recognize his great contribution and appreciate it greatly. I congratulate him today on reaching this milestone. I yield the floor.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its consideration.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, this amendment is the one that the floor manager, the chairman, indicated was to be considered now. It relates to wildfire management and is one that has strong support on both sides of the aisle. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. I know Senator Burns wishes to speak as well. I yield the floor.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, that is correct. This is in modified form from what was earlier filed as an amendment. I believe the concerns earlier raised have been resolved.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I am pleased to be an original coauthor of the Community Health Center Employee Health Coverage Act of 2006 with Senators Smith and Murkowski. I ask for unanimous consent that a fact sheet with respect to the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation with Senators Smith, Lincoln, Pryor, and Akaka entitled the ``Strengthening the Safety Net Act of 2006.'' This legislation is important to the continued survival of many of our Nation's safety net hospitals that provide critical health care access to our Nation's 46 million uninsured citizens through the Medicaid disproportionate share hospital, or DSH, program. In recognition of the burden certain hospitals bear in providing a large share of health services to the low-income patients, including Medicaid and the uninsured, the Congress established the Medicaid DSH program in the mid-1980s to give additional funding to support such ``disproportionate share'' hospitals. By providing financial relief to these hospitals, the Medicaid DSH program maintains hospital access for the poor. As the National Governors Association has said, ``Medicaid DSH's funds are an important part of statewide systems of health care access for the uninsured.'' Mr. President, I request unanimous consent for the text of the bill and the text of the fact sheet on the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to engage in a brief colloquy with the distinguished chairman of the Finance Committee, Senator Grassley, regarding the provision addressing tax-exempt credit counseling organizations. My understanding is that the provision is intended to strengthen the standards for credit counseling organizations claiming exempt status, helping to ensure that these organizations do not conduct substantial activities unrelated to their exempt purposes of providing charitable and educational counseling. I would ask Chairman Grassley to confirm that understanding and to briefly explain the intent of the provision.

Mr. BINGAMAN. I want to thank the distinguished chairman of the Finance Committee for his clarification and his leadership on these important issues. relief for airlines

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation with Senators Smith, Lincoln, Pryor, and Akaka entitled the ``Strengthening the Safety Net Act of 2006.'' This legislation is important to the continued survival of many of our Nation's safety net hospitals that provide critical health care access to our Nation's 46 million uninsured citizens through the Medicaid disproportionate share hospital, or DSH, program. In recognition of the burden certain hospitals bear in providing a large share of health services to the low-income patients, including Medicaid and the uninsured, the Congress established the Medicaid DSH program in the mid-1980s to give additional funding to support such ``disproportionate share'' hospitals. By providing financial relief to these hospitals, the Medicaid DSH program maintains hospital access for the poor. As the National Governors Association has said, ``Medicaid DSH's funds are an important part of statewide systems of health care access for the uninsured.'' Mr. President, I request unanimous consent for the text of the bill and the text of the fact sheet on the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to express my support for this Chamber's efforts to strengthen our CFIUS process--a system of screening foreign investment to make sure our national security is not compromised. In light of recent concerns about investments that did not receive adequate scrutiny, I think is imperative that we review this process and improve upon it where needed. It is important, however, that we do not modify the process in such a way that we create a system that unnecessarily discourages companies from investing in the United States. In order for our country to maintain our competitive advantage, we must make sure that we continue to be the worldwide choice of location for businesses. Although we have passed legislation out of the Senate intended to strengthen CFIUS, this legislation did not have the benefit of floor debate. I encourage the chairman of the Banking Committee, Senator Shelby, to continue to solicit the views of the Members of this Chamber and address concerns that may be raised about the impact on direct investment before we begin to conference with the House on the measure.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, in a few minutes we will be voting on S. 3711, which is the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006. I urge all Senators to oppose cloture on this bill which is the vote that will occur at 5:30. Last week, I outlined my reasons for my strong opposition to the bill. The bill is not good energy policy and, in my view, it is even worse fiscal policy. Turning first to Energy, S. 3711 actually expands areas that are under moratorium off the coast of Florida. It also sets a precedent for imposing a new long-term congressional moratorium. The chart behind me has been referred to by many on both sides of this debate. This chart depicts the area, which is in yellow, that will be locked up under S. 3711 until the year 2022. For the first time, as I can determine, Congress will be enacting a multiple-year moratorium--not a moratorium for just 1 year, which we have done many times in the past but, rather, a moratorium until 2022. In addition, Congress will be placing parts of this area under moratorium that have never been under a moratorium before. The bottom line is that in return for access to an additional 2.76 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, the bill puts almost 10 times as much natural gas--that is 21.83 trillion cubic feet--off limits until 2022. Again, that is all of the area colored in yellow. This is certainly not my idea of how we should be addressing our Nation's energy needs. In addition, the claims of the natural gas that will be produced under the bill are exaggerated. The sponsors of the bill claim that 5.83 trillion cubic feet of natural gas will be produced. However, over half of that natural gas will be leased next year and produced anyway under the Department of the Interior's proposed plan. The actual amount of additional natural gas made available because of this bill is 2.76 trillion cubic feet. Last year, the Congress enacted the far-reaching Energy Policy Act of 2005. The legislation addressed energy efficiency and energy production, nuclear energy, renewable energy, energy technologies, and energy taxes. We made progress, but there is much more work to be done. That is why I am deeply disappointed that the only energy legislation that the Senate is likely to consider this year is S. 3711, which I do not believe takes us in the right direction. I am also disappointed that the right of Senators to offer amendments addressing other important aspects of energy policy will be cut off if cloture is invoked. There were amendments to S. 3711 filed by my colleagues that address important unfinished business on the topic of energy policy. Prominent among these are amendments to improve efficiency in our use of oil and gas. But there are also other meritorious energy amendments which my colleagues will not be able to offer if cloture is invoked today. I turn now to the enormous adverse fiscal impacts of S. 3711. The bill would divert from the Federal Treasury 37.5 percent of revenues from the new sale areas to the four States--Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. Starting in 2017, this percentage is applied to new leases in existing areas of the Gulf of Mexico that are open to production. To put it simply, we are not talking about diverting revenues from the new lease sale area. Ultimately, S. 3711, by its language, would divert revenues from the entire Gulf of Mexico. This is chart No. 2. The area that is highlighted is the area in the western gulf and the middle gulf which are open to production, and the revenue from new production in those areas would begin to be diverted to the four States I mentioned beginning in 2017. As any Senator can see, this includes the entire western and central Gulf of Mexico and also, of course, the newly opened lease sale 181 and lease sale 181 south areas. Even with S. 3711's so-called cap on revenues paid to the States for the period from 2016 to 2055, the amount flowing to the four Gulf States that would otherwise go to the Federal Treasury would be somewhere between $28.5 billion and $30.5 billion. Estimated losses to the Treasury balloon beginning at that later date of 2056, with annual losses between $12.5 billion and $15 billion starting that year. There is no policy justification for diverting these Outer Continental Shelf revenues to the coastal States. The resources of the Outer Continental Shelf belong to the entire Nation. The Supreme Court ruled that offshore lands were and always have been owned by the United States as a feature of national sovereignty. In 1953, Congress passed the Submerged Lands Act which granted coastal States title to submerged lands to within 3 miles of their coast. This action by Congress several decades ago settled any issue of State equities. Finally, there has been much discussion as to whether passage of S. 3711 will lead us to a conference on the House-passed bill, which is H.R. 4761. I understand that the minority leader has made a commitment that we will not accept any version of this legislation other than that which is before the Senate today. In my view, he is right to take that stance because the House-passed bill would take us down a road to even greater fiscal irresponsibility. The administration has warned that the House-passed bill would cost hundreds of billions of dollars. In addition, the House bill contains many other far-reaching and extreme provisions that do not lead to the type of balanced energy policy that is in the best interest of our Nation. For these reasons, Mr. President, I again urge my colleagues to oppose the motion to invoke cloture. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, while the majority leader is still here, I understand the procedure he has followed, and that is to do what we refer to here as ``filling the tree'' with amendments so that other amendments cannot be offered. I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside so that I may be able to offer an amendment.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Hearing objection, I wish to take a few minutes and explain the amendment I was intending to offer so that Senators will understand what the alternatives are that we could be considering today. Madam President, just to pick up on the point the majority leader was making, I certainly want to build on the good work we did in this body last year with the passage of the Energy Act of 2005. I believe very strongly that the way to do that is to have an open process, allow Members to offer amendments, allow those amendments to be voted on, and see what the will of the Senate is. Unfortunately, that is not the process which is being used in connection with S. 3711. I stated extensively yesterday the substantive reasons I think S. 3711 is not good legislation, and I will repeat a few of those points. Let me talk about the amendment I wanted to offer this morning. The amendment I was going to offer consists of the text of S. 2253, which is the legislation we reported out of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on a bipartisan basis in March. My amendment would take that language and it would modify it to add the so-called 181 south area for leasing. Let me put up a chart so everybody knows what is involved here. The white area on this chart, the box there, is the area that we proposed in our Energy Committee bill that we reported to the floor to open for leasing. That thatched area to the right of that, to the east of that on the map, is an area which would be open with the consent of the Secretary of Defense or under appropriate circumstances and conditions which would be specified by the Secretary of Defense. That is what our bill called for. As I say, I would propose in this amendment, if I were able to offer it, to add the yellow area below that which is now being referred to as 181 south. The legislation we came out of committee with and I would desire to have us consider on the floor today would require that the lease sale be conducted within a year. It would provide that leasing in the 181 area south be done as soon as practicable after the date of enactment. Overall, the amendment I would like to have been able to offer would make available 7.37 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 1.58 billion barrels of oil. These are substantially more energy resources than the 5.83 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and the 1.26 billion barrels of oil made available under the pending legislation; that is, S. 3711. At the same time, the legislation we came out of committee with and that I wish we were able to consider on the floor would provide there would be no leasing closer than 100 miles from the Florida coast at any point and leasing east of the military mission line under the bill, as I indicated, could only occur with the prior consent and agreement of the Secretary of Defense. The 1-year timeframe for conducting the lease sale in this 181 area is intended to allow for full compliance with all environmental laws. The amendment does not impose any new leasing moratorium, such as the pending bill would. Also, it does not divert revenue from the Federal Treasury to four coastal States, as the pending bill proposes to do. Earlier this year, I was pleased to work with Senator Domenici to develop and introduce S. 2253. That is the basis of the amendment I am offering. We had a hearing on the bill in committee. We reported the bill with a very strong bipartisan vote. However, after the committee reported its legislation, several colleagues indicated they had problems with this bill, in particular my colleagues from Florida, who sought a new long-term moratorium off the Florida coast, which has been agreed to by those who are now advocating the pending legislation--this is a 16-year moratorium in a very large area--and my colleagues from other Gulf Coast States have insisted upon a provision that cedes to their States Federal revenues for oil and gas produced in the Federal Outer Continental Shelf off their coasts. Thus, S. 3711, which was written by Senators Domenici, Landrieu, and others, includes significant new provisions that I believe undermine the goals of our original bill. I am disappointed we did not have a chance to vote on the bill which was reported out of the committee. I believe the Senate would have acted favorably on that bill had it been given an opportunity to do so. S. 2253 is good energy policy; it is responsible fiscal policy. S. 2253 would have resulted in oil and gas being produced without locking up vast areas of the Outer Continental Shelf and without raiding the Federal Treasury at the same time. As I stated in the Senate yesterday, because S. 3711, which is the pending bill, locks up these vast areas of the Outer Continental Shelf off the coast of Florida, and because the bill provides for the sharing of billions of dollars in Federal revenues, I must strongly oppose it. The pending bill, S. 3711, expands areas under moratoria and sets precedence for imposing new long-term congressional moratoria. This next chart is the one many Senators have been using to make many different arguments on the Senate floor, but the point is very clear when one looks at this chart. There is a vast area, the yellow area on the chart, that is being put off limits to oil and gas development for a very substantial period, 16 years, longer than virtually any of us are likely to be in the Senate. The Department proposed, as I understand it, in return for gaining access to 2.76 trillion cubic feet of natural gas over what the Interior Department proposed--this bill currently pending in the Senate puts 21.83 trillion cubic feet of natural gas off limits until 2022. I think that is a mistake. I think it is a bad deal for America. Two of these areas within the original 181 lease sale area that are more than 100 miles off the Florida coast would be offered for lease under my amendment. And most importantly, my amendment would not impose any new moratoria on Outer Continental Shelf leasing. Likewise, the amendment I would offer would not include the ceding of Federal revenues to the four Gulf Coast States. Let me make it very clear: I recognize there are needs to protect the wetlands along the gulf coast, and I recognize that the Federal Government should provide assistance to these States to accomplish that wetland restoration and protection work. But I believe very strongly that should be money that comes out of the Federal Treasury. We should not be taking a stream of revenue that has historically always gone into the Federal Treasury--that is, royalty from production in the Outer Continental Shelf--we should not take that stream of revenue and divert a substantial portion of it directly to those States. We should, instead, bring those funds into the Federal Treasury, determine what the needs are for those States and for other communities in the country, and then appropriate the funds appropriately to meet those needs. That is my strong view. That is what the amendment I would have offered would contemplate, that is what current law contemplates, and that is what the Supreme Court has always said was the appropriate course. Of course, I cited former President Truman and his strong position, which is consistent with the position I am advocating today. In summary, the amendment I would like to have offered this morning, if the majority leader had not blocked our ability procedurally to offer amendments, would open this area called 181 south and also a larger portion of the 181 area originally than the pending legislation proposes to do. There would be an additional 1.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas made available. There would be an additional 300 million barrels of oil made available for our Nation over and above what is being made available under S. 3711. The amendment would accomplish this in a manner that protects Florida's coast without imposing new leasing moratoria. It would also do so in a manner that protects the fiscal interests of our Nation. I regret I am not able to offer the amendment today for consideration. Moreover, the amendment would achieve greater oil and gas production without setting dangerous precedents. I think one of the most disturbing things about what the Senate is preparing to do, if it goes forward and adopts S. 3711, is that we are setting precedents, both for putting areas off limits to production for long periods of time--a 16- year statutory moratorium--for areas that have not been subject to statutory moratorium, in some cases at all. I think that is a big mistake. I think the precedent we are setting with regard to so-called revenuesharing or ceding of revenues, Federal production revenues and royalties to coastal States is also a very major mistake, and it sets a very bad precedent which will come back to haunt us. I know very well that the other Senators who represent coastal States will in the future come to this Senate floor and insist, as the Senators from these four Gulf Coast States have insisted, that if production is going forward off their coasts, their States are entitled to Federal revenue as well. This is bad policy. This is bad energy policy. It is bad fiscal policy. It is a course of action that I believe the Nation will regret in future years if we go forward with it. I am disappointed that there is no place in this debate for us to offer amendments to correct the policy. I am also disappointed that there is no place in this debate for us to address other important energy-related issues. We should be proposing amendments to this legislation with regard to energy efficiency. We should be considering the legislation that Senators Obama and Lugar have proposed with regard to vehicle fuel efficiency. We should be considering a variety of bills--S. 2747, the Enhanced Energy Security Act, which tries to put in place a variety of provisions that would add to the efficiency with which we use energy in this country. All of those are legitimate issues we should be able to address by amendment to the Energy bill on the Senate floor. In fact, if we were building on the Energy Policy Act work this Congress did last year in the first session of this Congress, we would be, in fact, allowing those other very meritorious amendments to be considered as part of our debate as well. I regret that. I regret the decision of the majority leader to deny us the right to offer amendments. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent my amendment be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN. I yield the floor.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. I ask unanimous consent that Ana Romero Jurrison and Lesley Henderson, interns in my office, be permitted privileges of the floor during the consideration of S. 3711.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. How much time remains?

Mr. BINGAMAN. Is there time remaining for the proponents?

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, shortly I will be voting for cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 3711. I will be urging other colleagues to do as well. I am not casting my vote for cloture because I support the bill in its current form. On the contrary, I think the bill that has been brought before the Senate is seriously flawed on several grounds. I am voting for cloture on the motion to proceed because I want to have a chance to propose amendments to the bill, propose improvements to the bill. I want this bill to represent good, long-term energy policy and good, long-term fiscal policy for the country. I am aware of statements made by some that once the Senate is on the bill, there will be an attempt to frustrate the ability of Senators to offer legitimate energy amendments. I will certainly oppose any attempt to prematurely invoke cloture on the bill. Our energy problems in the country are serious business. They cry out for thoughtful responses. They also deserve a process in the Senate that is serious and is thoughtful. In this Congress, we made great progress on energy because we adopted an open, inclusive, and bipartisan approach on the issues. In my view, that record is at risk if we adopt a process on this bill that is a closed process. I hope the Senate consideration of this bill will be in the vein of the consideration we gave to the last Energy bill. Americans want positive, forward-looking solutions to our energy problems. They want us to use America's technological know-how to come up with innovative solutions and approaches to our problems. We are only going to be able to find those forward-looking solutions if everyone is given a legitimate opportunity to help the Senate work its will on this legislation. I yield the floor and retain the remainder of my time. I suggest the absence of a quorum.