Earl Blumenauer

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy of yielding me this time. I have been touched by the personal stories that we have heard here today. I think people are genuinely speaking from the heart. But the issue remains that we have embryonic stem cells that are either going to be thrown away for largely theological reasons, or they will be used for research to save lives. This research is going to take place in the United States and around the world. The question is, how rapidly? The question is whether the United States Government's official policy will remain frozen in place, or whether we will exert the same type of leadership that we have exerted in other areas of research, technology, and dealing with human health. For the sake of life, for the sake of health, for the sake of our families, I hope that this legislation passes, that we will be able to make sure that the Federal Government exerts its appropriate role in making sure that we have the resources, the direction, and the control to do this successfully.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, one reason there is so much opposition to the BRAC base closing process is that people do not know what they are going to get stuck with when their base closes. Seventeen bases from the 1988 round are still contaminated and have not been transferred back to the benefit of local communities. Over 140,000 acres on closed or realigned bases have not been cleaned up. I am offering an amendment to the defense authorization legislation tomorrow that would delay the implementation of the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure round until the Secretary of Defense submits a strategy including an estimate of the amount of funds necessary to complete unexploded ordinance clean up and environmental remediation of the bases closed during the 1988 round. Not trying to stop the BRAC, just getting plans in place that are 17 years overdue. At a time when we are asking communities to bear the trauma of the BRAC process, it is unacceptable that we have not finished cleaning up the first round.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing seven bills that will waive tariffs for specialty bike parts not produced domestically. The bicycle industry is an important part of our economy. There are over 6,000 bicycle shops and 2,000 companies that deal with bicycle manufacturing with tens of thousands of employees. These tariff waivers will reduce costs for the bicycle industry and will allow the savings to be passed onto the more than 57 million adult bicyclists across the country. Similar bike components that are not produced in the United States are already exempt from tariffs in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule. Without a domestic producer of compatible components, bike companies should not be required to pay duties. This legislation will level the playing field for the industry which provides one of the cleanest, healthiest, most efficient, and environmentally friendly modes of transportation that exists.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, today most recognize we are part of a global economy, probably no more so than in my home State of Oregon. Unfortunately, the Central American Free Trade Agreement, CAFTA, is not the step forward that new trade agreements should represent. For me it is clear that CAFTA does not include adequate environmental and labor standards. It is time to put the dispute resolution process for labor on the same solid footing as we do for commercial issues. Most acknowledge that CAFTA countries lack the financial resources and technical expertise to enforce good labor and environmental practices, but we are not providing funding that could help overcome these obstacles. Additionally, CAFTA would seriously harm these countries that rely heavily on their agricultural sectors. Our egregious farm bill has locked us into subsidies that do not promote free trade and have already caused much harm to other countries' farmers. We need to pay attention to the hard lessons NAFTA imposed on struggling Mexican farmers. Couple these issues with our reluctance to help American workers hammered by trade and technological change, and CAFTA is not an agreement that I can support in its current form.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on behalf of this bill. The congressional consideration of the Interior appropriations bill should be one of the highlights of this congressional session, as it touches on things that are near and dear to people's hearts: clean water, vast open spaces, environmental protection, even opportunities to invest in the arts. Sadly, what should be a positive expression of our values, our hopes, and our opportunities is instead in this bill a pattern of broken promises to our communities and to ourselves. Unfortunately, the bill represents lost opportunities and is a symbol of the inability of this Congress and this administration to match our priorities with those of our constituents and, most importantly, with the future of this country. I agree that the dramatic underfunding in terms of the budget allocation put the chairman and the ranking member and the staff in a hole to begin with, and my heart goes out to them; but there is no reason that we, as a Congress, cannot use the billions of dollars that are set aside in a trust fund for the Land and Water Conservation Fund that have not been tapped as these resources are set aside expressly for this purpose of land conservation. In the year 2000, as the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), my friend, mentioned, he was integral to fashioning an important compromise that gave flexibility to the Committee on Appropriations. We in Congress made a commitment to the public and an agreement amongst ourselves to fund this responsibility. It was something that then- Governor Bush sounded as one of his pledges when he was running for the White House. The promises of candidate Bush, President Bush and of Congress to our constituents and to ourselves is broken again by this budget. Now, there are specific proposals to try and make an inadequate bill better. I will support and speak out strongly in support of working to stop the diluting of our commitment to clean water with an amendment to stop the administration's efforts to weaken water quality protections, putting more sewage into our rivers and streams and drinking water. As a former commissioner of public works, I was responsible for the administration of sewage and water resource programs. I am not insensitive to the needs of many communities to occasionally blend water not completely treated. I recognize the need to do that in extreme weather events, an important tool for communities; but it is not something that we should be doing routinely. We should instead be reducing our use of this tool wherever possible rather than increasing it. The EPA rule weakening the current policy would actually penalize communities like mine and yours around the country that have worked to upgrade and improve their systems. In periods of extreme wet weather, blending will still often be necessary. It is legal under the current law, and it is not going to be changed with the amendment that will be offered. The anti-sewage dumping amendment would not change these existing blending standards, but they will prevent the EPA from lowering them to authorize routine sewage dumping. Now is not the time to move backwards. Water bodies around the country are impaired. We need to make sure that we are not making it harder to ultimately meet these water quality standards. I urge joining me in supporting the amendment and working with the members of this committee to try to craft this bill in a way that meets the needs of America's communities.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in favor of this bill, which includes critically important funding for Oregon and the rest of the country. I especially appreciate funding for prevention measures to reduce the damage done by floods and other natural disasters, and I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for fully funding the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2004. The Act, which this House passed overwhelmingly last year, extends the authorization of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and provides new resources to address severe repetitive loss properties. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) reports that repetitively flooded properties, which make up just 1 percent of the insured properties, account for 25 percent of NFIP claims dollars. Mitigating these properties will not only keep people out of harm's way, but will also save other flood insurance program policyholders thousands of dollars. Fully funding the program this year would allow us to move more than 1000 families out of harm's way. It will also save the Federal government millions of dollars in money that would otherwise be spent on flood damages and disaster relief. FEMA reports that mitigation and building standards already in place have resulted in over $1 billion annually in reduced flood losses. I appreciate the strong support of Financial Services Chairman Mike Oxley, Ranking Member Barney Frank, and their staff, who have worked tirelessly to ensure that the Flood Insurance Reform Act is implemented. The Homeland Security bill also includes crucial local preparedness grants, which are an important part of the Federal government's responsibility to be a good partner to local communities. I am pleased that these grants will be distributed, after a state minimum guarantee, on the basis of risk, as the 9/11 Commission recommended. However, I am disappointed that three and a half years after the terrorist attacks of September 11, our homeland security budget continues to under-fund some of our most pressing needs, from border security to infrastructure security to first responders. But this shortfall stems not from the appropriations bill, but from unfortunate budget choices and the resulting inadequate allocations.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I strongly believe that the United States should be doing more to reduce violent crimes, whether they are committed by gangs or individuals. I voted against the ``Gang Deterrence and Community Protection Act of 2005'' because it fails to address this problem and impairs our judicial system. H.R. 1279 increases penalties for non-violent crimes, while imposing mandatory minimum sentences and expanding the death penalty. These provisions do nothing to detour gang violence and limit judge's ability to impose sentences that fit the offense. Furthermore, the bill does not include early intervention programs or other preventative programs that could be successful in reducing gang violence. I am hopeful that Congress will work to pass legislation that addresses the core issues behind this serious problem.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I am sad that a bill that the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) worked so hard on, which contains $82 billion, would still be more an example of how not to do business. First of all, it is a testimony to the lack of planning on behalf of this administration for conducting the war in Iraq. They still could not give us, after 3 years of planning and activity, could not give a reasonable number in advance, to be able to budget properly, instead of putting together a supplemental effort. It continues to give, in my judgment, too much money to the wrong people to do the wrong things. And we have been slow to, despite the attention of this Congress, the lavish amount of money and expressions of concern by individual Members to protect our troops, we have still been slow to meet their needs on simple things like armoring their vehicles. But one of the worst things for me in this supplemental is that we have grafted onto it the Real ID Act. This element that we debated here contains what I think is the worst single example of legislative precedent in the 10 years that I have been here, where in order to deal with a 3\1/2\ mile gap in constructing a fence. For 10 years Congress and the administration has been willing to provide waivers for specific problems, where two administrations have been circling it, where rather than deal with the specifics and solve the problem, this legislation incorporates section 102 which waives all rules and regulations along not just this 3\1/2\ mile gap, but along the entire 7,514 border with Canada and with Mexico. It is not just an environmental problem. It waives all rules, all regulations, all Federal standards for an indeterminate width along 7,500 miles, and vests it in the hands of the Homeland Security Department, hardly a paragon of efficiency and sensitivity. Mr. Speaker, I would strongly urge my colleagues to take a hard look at this. You do not want to establish a precedent like this in Federal legislation.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing a resolution in support of National Bike Month. The League of American Bicyclists has celebrated every May since 1956 as National Bike Month. With this resolution, Congress will recognize the enormous role bicycling has in our lives. This month provides an opportunity to promote the benefits of cycling, appreciate those in the cycling community, and to encourage bicycle safety. Bicycling is one of the cleanest, healthiest, most efficient, and environmentally friendly modes of transportation that exists. It is the most efficient form of urban transportation in history. There are over 57 million adult cyclists in the United States, 5 million of whom choose to commute to work by bike. This transportation choice helps ease congestion on our roads and reduce environmental pollution while allowing cyclists to incorporate exercise into their everyday lives. In an age of high energy prices, overcrowded roads, and a growing obesity epidemic, biking is more important to the well being of our communities than ever before. Communities throughout the Nation have reaped the positive benefits of biking. According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, bicycles are second only to cars as a preferred mode of transportation. National Bike Month provides the opportunity to recognize the significant impact of this noble invention and to inform others of the healthy, environmental, efficient, and neighborhood-friendly form of transportation.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, this appropriations bill contains much crucial funding, most importantly money to provide additional armor for our troops and vehicles in Iraq and electronic jammers to protect them from roadside bombs. While I strongly support this funding, I am disappointed that I must vote ``no'' on this bill. We have a responsibility to the men and women who we send into harm's way as members of the United States Armed Forces. It is because of my desire to support our troops that I continue to insist that the administration develop a plan to win the peace in Iraq and, to the best of our capability, protect the troops as they go about their mission. I believe that Congress must hold the administration to the highest standards when the lives of our service personnel are at risk. A ``no'' vote is one of the few ways I have to protest the continued abdication of this responsibility by the highest levels of the Bush Administration. One positive part of this legislation is an amendment that I offered during House consideration with Mr. Markey to prohibit funds for torture and for sending detainees to countries that practice torture, which was carried into this conference report. The use of torture and rendition is morally reprehensible, puts Americans at risk, is a poor way to obtain reliable information in our fight against terrorism, and sets back the cause of democracy. This is the very least that we can do as Congress continues to abdicate its responsibility to investigate this horrific aspect of administration policy. Perhaps most disappointing, this legislation also continues to be burdened with all the flaws of H.R.418, the ``REAL ID Act,'' which, among other things, placed the entire 7,514 mile border completely outside all legal protections. This is perhaps the single most damaging precedent since I've been in Congress. Do we really want to be giving this responsibility to the Department of Homeland Security, which has not been a paragon of efficiency and sensitivity during its three years of existence? Some of the environmental laws waived by this provision include: the Noise Control Act, the Clean Water Act, the Farmland Protection Policy Act, and the Bald Eagle Act. This is not only bad public policy, it is unnecessary, as most of these laws have security exemptions already written into them. However, in addition to environmental laws, this provision would waive labor laws, safety standards, the National Historic Preservation Act, and the Native American Graves Protection Act. If this provision were to become law, the Department of Homeland Security could build a road that has no safety standards, using l2-year-old laborers, through the site of a Native American burial ground, killing hundreds of bald eagles during construction, and polluting the drinking water of a nearby community. The proponents of this provision have given us no compelling reasons for why this broad exemption is necessary.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, again this year the repeat State champions from my neighborhood high school, U.S. Grant, has had another outstanding national contest finishing second against the 1,500 students competing in the ``We the People'' Constitutional contest. The Grant High School performance has a simple formula for success: Hard work, dedicated teachers, outstanding students and parents all joined together in a creative program. They demonstrate year in and year out what works in education. I am sad to note that for some inexplicable reason the national program that inspired such interest in learning about our Constitution is absent from the President's budget, eliminating $29.4 million in civic education from the Department of Education. I hope we will be able to correct that deficiency. This is exactly the type of program and the positive reinforcement that the champions from Grant High School and students from across America deserve.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, the fiscal 2006 budget resolution is based on false economies and false promises. This budget provides tax cuts for the rich while adding to our national deficit, cutting billions from critical programs such as Medicare and shortchanging national priorities such as community development and housing, education, and environmental protection. Cutting vital programs does nothing to solve our problems. Congressional leadership and the administration are simply not owning up to their responsibilities to the American public. I will not support any budget framework that pretends that we have more funding than we do while at the same time cutting programs that help our families and communities. The administration's tax cuts give over $70 million in benefits to those who need them the least. Yet nothing is being done to address the long-term costs of fixing the Alternative Minimum Tax--a tax that continues to force middle-income families to pay higher taxes. This budget will put our country deeper into debt, mortgaging the future for our children and grandchildren. This is wrong. This budget resolution also sets the stage for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which would be a travesty. Not only is this policy incredibly shortsighted in terms of the real energy needs of this country, it is unconscionable that Congress is making a decision of this magnitude in a budget resolution.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, today, I am introducing the Water for the Poor Act of 2005, with Representatives Clay Shaw, Tom Lantos, Jim Leach, George Miller, and Tom Tancredo as original cosponsors. The Water for the Poor Act complements legislation introduced by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, S. 492, the ``Safe Water: Currency for Peace Act.'' This bill highlights a pressing issue: up to 5 million people die each year from lack of access to clean water and sanitation, including 1 child every 15 seconds. One in six people in the world--over 1.1 billion people--lack access to clean water and one in three people-- over 2.3 billion people--don't have access to adequate sanitation. As half of the people in the developing world are sick at any given time from a water-related disease, water and sanitation access is a major barrier to fighting poverty and increasing economic productivity. The Water for the Poor Act focuses American efforts to meet President Bush's commitment to cut in half the percentage of people without access to water and sanitation by 2015. This bill makes expanding access to clean water and sanitation a major objective for U.S. development efforts. It highlights innovative funding methods to increase the amount of public and private resources available and requires USAID to develop a strategy and measurable goals for increasing water access in an affordable and equitable way.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, 3 years ago I voted against a bill that is similar to what is being considered in the House today. My position on the bill has not changed. In fact, H.R. 748, the ``Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act'' is worse. Not only will this anti-choice bill make it illegal for friends and relatives to assist young women with one of life's most difficult decisions, it will require physicians to notify a young woman's parents in person, regardless of whether they live in a different State, before the abortion services can be provided. The physician will be responsible for following the abortion laws of both the State where he is performing services and the State from which the patient has traveled. In effect, doctors will have to know the abortion laws of 50 different States. I wish that every child was in a loving family that they could turn to first. The facts are, however, that many young women do not have that type of relationship with their parents and in too many cases we have seen the actual problem caused by abusive close family members. People who would deny women reproductive choice have altered their tactics to chip away at women's reproductive freedoms; this is one of the most insidious examples. This bill would limit the choices for the most desperate women and is part of an overall anti-choice strategy that I reject. Measures like H.R. 748 often have unintended consequences that can lead to desperate actions with dire consequences for the mental health and physical well-being of our nation's young women.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I am introducing the ``Friends of the Children National Demonstration Act'' that would authorize $7.5 million for Friends of the Children to support local program operations at existing sites and to disseminate findings to policymakers and other youth-serving programs, Friends of the Children is the only program in the nation that provides carefully screened full-time professional mentors to at-risk children for 12 years starting at five years of age, This innovative program began in Portland, Oregon, starting in 1993 with 3 ``Friends'', mentors serving 24 children. Today, Friends of the Children serves over 600 children in 11 communities across the nation. The young people who participate are truly the most defenseless--they are children of poverty; they have been in foster care, on welfare, and have parents who are incarcerated or are homeless. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this bill and make a commitment to improving the lives of at-risk children.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, in 1993 a gentleman in my community, Duncan Campbell, provided three full-time friends for 24 at-risk children, children who were at the bottom of the barrel, children who were guaranteed to fail, not just poor but without family support. With the efforts of these full-time mentors and this innovative program, we have produced stunning results over the course of the last 12 years. Ninety-eight percent of these children are still in school. Ninety-seven percent have passing grades. Ninety-eight percent have never been incarcerated. Ninety-seven percent do not use drugs or alcohol on a regular basis. Today, this program has spread across the country. It is in 11 different communities with over 600 children. First Lady Laura Bush is expected to visit the Friends of Children program in Portland tomorrow. I commend her for taking the time to visit with the kids and learning more about this program. Tomorrow, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), my colleague, and I are introducing legislation that would authorize $7.5 million for Friends of Children to support local programs at existing sites and disseminate this information to policy-makers around the country to make a commitment to improving the lives of at-risk children.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, last Friday evening I had the opportunity and the honor of attending a ceremony where the Lemelson Foundation awarded the annual Lemelson MIT Prize for Innovation, held for the first time in Portland, Oregon. The foundation was established by one of the most prolific American inventors, the late Jerome Lemelson, and his family. Although located in Portland, the foundation is truly international in scope. Jerome Lemelson endowed the foundation to promote innovation and to ensure that its application benefited humankind. In the United States, their unique foundation supports several grantees whose programs celebrate extraordinary inventors as role models, illustrate the value of invention in the evolution of a great society, and nurture young adults to solve pressing social problems by pursuing careers in invention. This year the foundation awarded a $500,000 Lemelson-MIT Prize, the largest cash award for innovation, to Elwood ``Woody'' Norris for revolutionizing acoustics. Internationally, the Lemelson Foundation nurtures individual creativity to transform fundamental challenges into opportunities for sustainable progress. Its Invention for Sustainable Development program recognizes inventors and innovators in developing countries, fostering the institutions that support them, and applies their inventions to meet basic human needs and advance sustainable development. Last week, foundation board member Eric Lemelson discussed foundation initiatives dealing with low-tech, high-impact innovation dealing with drip irrigation, an example of a cost-effective application of new technology to save scarce water resources, save money in a developing country while improving agricultural yields. This is the type of commonsense approach of applied technology to sustainability that can truly transform people's lives. I would hope that we in government can undertake the same spirit of innovation in our approach to USAID. I was pleased to see Senator Frist return from his trip to Africa convinced that the United States needs to do more with water innovation and has introduced legislation in the Senate. I applaud his bill, the Safe Water Currency for Peace Act, S. 492. By the same token, I am offering complementary legislation in the House, the Water for the Poor Act of 2005. This bill will make access to clean water and sanitation a major U.S. foreign policy objective and requires the USAID to develop a strategy to carry out this objective. It supports innovative financing mechanisms that can create additional resources for water and sanitation, while ensuring access and affordability to the very poor. This legislation is critically needed. The lack of clean water and sanitation is perhaps the world's greatest single health need. More than 1 billion people worldwide lack access to safe drinking water. More than twice as many, 2.3 billion people, one in every three people on the planet, lack access to adequate sanitation, and the consequences are devastating. Water-related diseases are a human tragedy, killing up to 5 million people every year. At any given time, half the population in the developing world is sick from water-related disease. Tragically, one child dies every 15 seconds for lack of water and sanitation. At a time when people in every corner of the globe understand the importance of water and the problems of its misuse, I was pleased that the United States and the Bush administration joined 185 other nations committed to cutting in half the percentage of people in the world without access to water and sanitation. I was there in Johannesburg in 2002, watching that consensus come together. I am hopeful that we will be able to follow through. As Eric Lemelson pointed out in his remarks, the Lemelson Foundation does not have to be responsive to shareholders or the voters so they can afford to be cutting-edge, innovative, and creative. I would like to think that they are pointing the way to more liveable communities around the globe where all our families can be safe, healthy, and more economically secure; and they are pointing the way for the Federal Government to follow their lead. My congratulations to the foundation; and I look forward to working on their innovations, integrating them with U.S. Government policy around the globe.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, it is commonly heard that the world changed after September 11, 2001; yet the energy bill did not. What Congress is considering this week is virtually identical to that which came forth from Dick Cheney's energy task force and the Congressional process four years ago. The ever growing concerns about energy reliability, the Enron scandal, skyrocketing gas prices, increasing demands on ever scarce supplies in unstable areas of the world all have not produced a change in the mindset of Congress. At a time when we should call forth our best, the energy bill is both a mediocre effort and more appropriate for the 1950s than this new century. With the American energy experience over the last third of a century, public opinion has grown clearer while Congress' vision has not. With 10 percent of our energy use tied directly to our vehicular traffic, it is selfevident to the majority of Americans that our fuel efficiency standards should be significantly increased. The Japanese and Europeans are already far ahead of us. Even the Chinese have now adopted more stringent fuel efficiency standards. Congress cannot keep up with the American public or the policymakers in China, Japan or Europe. The public knows that the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is the last place that America should look for oil, not the next place. The public supports investing in renewable energy sources, but this bill is heavily skewed towards more public subsidy of oil and gas interests, already awash in cash. These companies have ample money available to exploit energy resources in this country if they wish. Alternative energy sources are shortchanged in this bill. It has been estimated that they get one dollar for every $363 invested in other sources. Wind and solar energy are abundant, and non-polluting; with a fraction of the resources lavished on traditional energy sources, alternative energy could increase the production and reduce cost. The public is not interested in cutting deals with special-interests at the expense of the environment and public health. This bill poses significant risk to air pollution and makes an unnecessary and unwise compromise with MTBE manufacturers at the expense of state and local authorities and the quality of local drinking water. I am opposed to a provision in the bill that shortchanges public participation in the hydropower relicensing process. By denying rights to private landowners, farmers, local businesses, tribes, fishermen, conservationists and others who share a direct interest in dam operations, the bill would make it less likely that license applicants would agree to an outcome that allows for energy generation as well as protection of the river ecosystem. In Oregon, PacifiCorp is in the process of relicensing a number of dams on the Klamath River. The company has been involved in an open and cooperative process with stakeholders, and I am concerned that the language in the bill would both undermine that progress as well as reduce incentives for other companies to engage in this type of open process. I am disappointed that Congress defeated a number of Democratic amendments that would have boosted fuel efficiency, removed language allowing drilling the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, kept in place important consumer protections, and reduced our dependence on foreign oil. I am pleased that one small, but important, step was taken by the acceptance of my amendment to establish a Conserve by Bike program. This amendment authorizes pilot programs and a national study that will help us better understand the benefits of converting trips from cars to bikes and how to educate people about these benefits In short, this bill looks at our energy problem through a rearview mirror; it gives too much to the wrong people to do the wrong thing and is dramatically out of step with what the American public needs and wants. One can only hope that as it works its way through the Senate, and as the public discovers what's in this bill, that some of the more unfortunate provisions will be eliminated or modified. There will come a time in the foreseeable future when the needs of our country and the wishes of the public are heard and that will be reflected in an energy policy for this century that is cost effective and rational.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, three brief points. We are back here because of the obsession of the majority leader, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), to provide the relief to the oil companies. My friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), said that this was one of several oxygenated options. That is what the chairman of the committee raised. He did not pick one of them. The second point is that we have not voted on this. The procedural vote that we had yesterday was without the focus from the CBO that this is, in fact, an unfunded mandate. The people of this Chamber will be voting with the knowledge that if they do not approve the Capps amendment, they will be imposing unfunded costs. Last, but not least, it is obscene that we would be transferring these costs to local communities when we are giving billions to the oil companies under this bill, and they are already enjoying unprecedented profits. It is not fair. It is not right. I strongly urge the approval of the Capps amendment.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from Texas' (Mr. Hall) willingness to accept the amendment. What he said is true: there are over 100 million bicycles in this country. We have seen in community after community when there have been opportunities people bike. In my home town of Portland, Oregon, we have tripled the number of people who are commuting by bicycle. And when you take thousands of people off the road, it makes a difference in air quality. It makes a difference in congestion, and it makes a difference in terms of people's health. This is a small step in the right direction. I urge its adoption, and I look forward to greater application in the future. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in yielding me this time and permitting me to speak on this and for his bringing this forward. It is an example of where we can take steps forward to deal with how we put the pieces together in terms of transportation. Intelligent transportation has tremendous potential for energy savings, to put money back in the pockets of taxpayers and consumers around the country; and it is an example that we do not have to make this equation quite as hard as we tend to on the floor of the House. This, I hope, is going to lead to a broader sense of application about how we squeeze more value. I appreciate the gentleman's leadership in focusing on the notion of the $800 billion that is spent dealing with energy in this country. That is $800 billion; yet the amount of money that is spent in research for government and for the private sector is arguably less than 1 percent, less than for any other major sector of our economy. I appreciate my colleague's leadership in focusing on what impact research and technology can have in this critical area. By focusing on intelligent transportation, it will be one important area of research application that will make a difference for millions of Americans, it will save hundreds of millions of gallons of fuel, and it will improve the quality of life for our communities in the offing. This is the sort of approach that will truly make our communities more livable, make our families safer, healthier, and more economically secure. I appreciate the gentleman's leadership and strongly urge the adoption of this amendment.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Today I am introducing an amendment to the Energy Policy Act to create a new conservation and research program, Conserve by Bike. This is something that we discussed the last time we had an energy program before us. This was approved by a voice vote. This legislation represents a small but important step forward towards determining our energy future. There is much discussion on the floor about things that are mandatory. There are lots of things that make people cranky. This is one thing that will be able to help us move forward to actually take advantage of proven technology, and something that is a very positive development in each and every community across the country. Bicycling, as virtually every Member of this assembly knows, is one of the cleanest, healthiest, most efficient and environmentally friendly modes of transportation that exists. It is the most efficient form of urban transportation in history. As an alternative to automobile travel, bicycling can be an important element of a comprehensive energy conservation strategy. However, the relationship has not been adequately studied. The Conserve by Bike amendment recognizes that it is time to better understand the positive effects that bicycling can have on the conservation of our energy resources. The amendment seeks to ensure that the Federal Government educates the public and provides appropriate research into the benefits of bicycling as it relates to energy conservation. We are well aware of the health impacts. We are well aware of the opportunities that bicycling affords to young people, for example, to being able to have access to school. This assembly, just last month, has approved in our transportation legislation, almost $1 billion in Safe Routes to Schools. With ISTEA and TEA-21 we have increasingly supported bike facilities through State, Federal and local funding. This amendment will leverage these investments to help people take advantage of energy conservation choices they have in getting around their community. First, the amendment would establish a Conserve by Bicycling pilot program in the Department of Transportation, oversee up to 10 geographically dispersed pilot projects across the country designed to conserve energy resources, providing education and marketing tools to convert car trips to bike trips. In addition, the projects would encourage partnerships between stakeholders from transportation, law enforcement, education, public health, environment and energy fields. The project results in energy savings must be documented, and the Secretary of Transportation is instructed to report to Congress the results of the pilot program within 2 years of implementation. According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, bicycles are second only to cars as a preferred mode of transportation, demonstrating their potential for commuter use. In recent years there have been significant upgrades to bicycling environments in the communities across the country. At a time when these communities are seeking to reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, increase the safety of their neighborhoods, decrease petroleum dependence, bicycles offer a relatively simple, energy-saving alternative to driving. At a time when we talk seriously about transportation alternatives as an important component to comprehensive energy conservation strategy, this gives us the elements to make sure that we can document the impact. The Conserve by Bike program is a critical step in the right direction. I strongly urge its adoption. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy. We are fond of saying around here that the world changed after September 11, but the energy bill did not. This bill is virtually identical to Dick Cheney's energy task force and where the House has been these last 4 years with concerns, notwithstanding the Enron scandal, skyrocketing gasoline prices and demands on scarce oil supplies in unstable parts of the world. It is ironic that the American public's vision is much clearer than Congress. They want to increase the CAFE standards. The public has very clear views about the Arctic Wildlife Refuge, that it is the last place America should look for oil, not the next place. They oppose a waiver and relief to the MTBE manufacturers at the expense of State and local authorities and the quality of local drinking water. This bill is looking at our energy problem through a rearview mirror. It gives too much to the wrong people to do the wrong thing and is dramatically out of step with what the American public wants and needs. The politics of today and yesterday's policies do not provide an energy road map for the future. It is true that lots of people have been working very hard on this bill, but I would suggest that never have so many worked so hard and so long to do so little to change the direction of this country's energy future. For the sake of the country, one hopes that there will come a time when the needs and wishes of the public is heard and it will be reflected in an energy policy for this century, cost-effective and rational; preserving the quality of life, rather than operating on the cheap.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, we commemorate Earth Day at a time when American soldiers are in Iraq, in part as a consequence of our energy dependence. No matter what the press releases say, the way this Congress is commemorating Earth Day is by recycling the energy bill. It is replete with massive subsidies that will continue to tie us to the past. Rather than the development of true energy independence gained by working with renewables and a massive effort at energy conservation, this energy bill is a monument to Congress's inability to think comprehensively about the future. Our energy dependence and wasteful policies mean that we are desperately dependent on a volatile Middle East, especially Iraq and Saudi Arabia, as we spend a major portion of our defense budget protecting the stability in that oil-rich region. The Pentagon is also the largest single consumer of fuel in the United States, almost 2 percent of the country's total transportation fuel. And much of this fuel use is due to highly inefficient vehicles, from an Abrams tank, weighing 68 tons, that gets only about half a mile to a gallon, to an aircraft carrier that gets 17 feet to a gallon. The United States military now uses 1.7 million gallons of fuel a day in Iraq. The cost of this fuel can be up to $400 a gallon depending on how it is delivered. Our military itself is clearly held hostage by the philosophy that energy efficiency does not matter. As the lines of supply are dangerously stretched with more points of vulnerability, while the flexibility and nimbleness of our troops are compromised by having to have huge amounts of gasoline close at hand. Lighter, more energy efficient vehicles are harder targets for the enemy to strike, and they can move greater distances between refueling and do not need this long chain of supply with more points of vulnerability for the vehicles and for our soldiers. The situation the military faces in Iraq and other potential trouble spots demands action on an ambitious energy policy with a significant commitment to fuel conservation and renewable technologies, if only for the sake of the security of our Nation and the safety of our troops. The skyrocketing gas prices this spring further demonstrates that we are hostage to an inadequate energy infrastructure with constrained refining capacity. The energy bill contains almost no incentives for change, as all those currently in control profit by this restricted supply, vulnerability, and volatility. As gasoline prices have increased 50 cents a gallon in a matter of weeks, every tank of gasoline is a reminder that the Republican leadership in Congress for 10 years has refused to significantly increase fuel efficiency standards, which would have meant significant money in the pocket of every American family. The inability or unwillingness to establish a predictable window for wind energy development, by making the production tax credit permanent means that tens of thousands of jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars in new investment are delayed, with the advances in technology and additional elements of supply are denied to the public. This is ironic, when our military is touting the contribution that wind energy is making to the security and efficiency of operations at Guantanamo. The energy bill continues to spend too much for the wrong people to do the wrong things and shortchanging the technologies and strategies that ultimately will make a difference for the future. There is no question that America in this century will rely much more heavily on renewables and conservation. The sad note is that we are slipping behind the Chinese, who are increasing their cars' fuel efficiency standards, and further behind the European and Japanese, who are already racing ahead of us in energy efficiency. Even in a defense-dominated, security-obsessed environment that this Congress operates in, we cannot make energy investments that will at least enhance our military to make the military and America's families more secure. We can and should do better.