Earl Blumenauer

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you. Too often I have watched in the farm legislation that I have seen work through here that conservation ends up being the piggy bank for the farm bill. This is an area that is shortchanged to deal with more powerful political interests. Well, if the American public knew what was at stake, there would be no more powerful interest than protecting the environment. Two-thirds of the farmers who apply are turned down. This is not right. Increased conservation programs help balance out some of the inequities in the farm program and provide benefits to everybody. I urge you to support family farmers, the environment and sportsmen, and support a good farm bill by supporting Mr. Kind's motion to instruct.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy. I appreciate his continued leadership and advocacy in this bill. I would remind my good friend from Pennsylvania that earlier in this debate, Mr. Kind and I, Mr. Ryan and Mr. Flake, we advanced proposals that would have provided more than enough money to fully fund the conservation, would have provided more than enough money to deal for the areas of agriculture that are dramatically underserved. This does a terrific job for the large corporate enterprises, for the richest of farmers. Lowering the limits to $900,000 may in the minds of some be a draconian reform. But when we know that the average farmer makes twice what the average homeowner makes, the average citizen makes, and I was actually campaigning in Pennsylvania for a campaign in the presidential effort here a couple weeks back, and I was in some very rural parts of Pennsylvania engaged in the discussion there, and I found that Pennsylvania is much like Oregon. We are short-changed dramatically in the farm bill. Earlier we had my good friend from North Dakota, a State that produces less agricultural value than the State of Oregon and gets one- sixth the subsidy. Pennsylvania is a massive farming effort. Twenty- seven percent of the land area is devoted to farms. But Pennsylvania farmers get one-half of their share of the subsidy nationally, 62 percent of the applications for conservation are not paid for, and the average farmer in Pennsylvania, 83 percent make less than $100,000 a year. So these are small farmers. They are hard pressed. They want conservation, and they don't have the money for the application. It is just like in my State. I would suggest that we look hard, because I agree with my friend from Pennsylvania and my friend from Oklahoma. This is not necessarily partisan. There are areas that agriculture policy divides, not necessarily partisan, but sometimes it is urban and rural. Sometimes it is east, west, south, midwest. It is more likely the type of agriculture that is practiced, because the vast majority of farmers in this country would have been well served by the reforms that we advocated from here, limiting the payments to $250,000, for instance, like have been advocated by the Bush administration and by many people here. But we don't even have to get to that point. My friend Mr. Kind's motion to recommit should bring us together, because farmers all across the country, in States large and small, east and west, are for environmental protection. This is the most important environmental bill that the 110th Congress will address. We should not miss this golden opportunity. It is frustrating to me that the conferees are talking about cutting what we approved at $5.7 to as low as $4 billion. And who knows what it might end up? There are lots of missing pieces. We need to go on record here strongly supporting maintaining at least a $5 billion level. I will tell you, farmers in my State regularly identify conservation programs as their top need. They have to comply with all sorts of difficult environmental regulations, and we need to ensure that they get the payments they deserve for environmental protection that they provide. It is the farm community, the ranchers, that are the source of the cheapest, most cost-effective water quality and water quantity improvement. This money supports programs that protect our most sensitive and ecologically important lands. It keeps pollution out of the lakes, rivers, streams and wetlands. It represents the largest Federal investment in private land, and it should be an investment that our farmers and ranchers can count upon year after year. It is not just the clean water. It is maintaining abundant wildlife populations. It is storing carbon. Agriculture is one of the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions, the largest internationally. With the increased pressure on lands from biofuel mandates and high food prices, these programs matter more now than ever before.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Following up on my good friend, I'm glad he mentioned bicycles, because there are some people in America that are doing something to provide more choices to Americans, to burn calories instead of fossil fuels. I am pleased that my community, Portland, Oregon, was just designated a ``platinum level bicycle-friendly city,'' the highest rating granted by the League of American Bicyclists. Portland celebrates three decades of consistently applying policies that promote cycling, and the third consecutive year of double digit growth in bicycle ridership. This makes a big difference for real life people. It's why Portlanders are nine times more likely to ride a bicycle that the average American, and part of the rich choice menu for Portlanders with cars and transit and bicycles that ends up having them drive 20 percent less than the average American family. That translates into a savings of $2,500 a year per family that they can spend on education, on housing, on entertainment, on investing back into the community. I would suggest that it's time to celebrate choices, and I'm proud that Portland, Oregon, has decided to give cyclists the choices they deserve and is being honored for that effort.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. During this election season, we've seen some pretty painful moments. It has been embarrassing, for instance, to watch the flip-flopping of Senator McCain on tax cuts that he is now for before he was against them. But there is no idea that is as bad as his most recent suggestion that we just have a gas tax holiday, to suspend the 18.4 cent per gallon Federal gas tax from Memorial Day through Labor Day. This is a really unfortunate suggestion. It's unfortunate to me that Senator Clinton appears to be embracing it. I would hope that Senator Clinton's staff will help her remember her own words when this proposal was launched by one of her opponents in 2000 when she was running for the United States Senate, where Senator Clinton pointed out that it would be a ``bad deal for New York and a potential bonanza for the oil companies,'' which is why she opposed it back then. Her words were true in 2000 and they are true today. In fact, it's even more important. First of all, there is absolutely no evidence that States that have suspended the gas tax have ended up putting any more money in the pockets of consumers. The research suggests that it's more likely that they have simply increased the amount of money that goes to the oil companies who are not reducing their prices to compensate for the reduction. At a time when ExxonMobil's profits set a new record of $40.6 billion, we don't have to give them even more money at the expense of our infrastructure, because this proposal comes at a time when for the first time in history the highway trust fund is going into deficit. And this proposal would add more than $10 billion to that deficit, money that will not go to State and local governments to deal with badly needed transportation infrastructure. It comes at a time when we recognize that our infrastructure is falling apart. The Society of Civil Engineers has graded it D-minus, and they're grading on a curve. It would be far more logical and effective to help poor citizens and people in rural districts that have to drive a great deal directly as a part of the economic stimulus, or a rebate that actually gets into their hands, not to the oil companies. It would make more sense to invest in renewable futures and green jobs, like not allowing the production tax credit to expire at the end of the year, costing thousands of jobs in the wind energy business. It makes sense to rebuild and renew America with a vision for the future, attaching a budget priority, and be honest with the American public, not cheap political tricks that may sound good for a moment but will end up hurting us in the long run.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, John McCain has famously said that he doesn't know much about economic issues. But it's paradoxical that the Republican presidential candidate's idea for helping a troubled economy is to put people out of work and make traffic congestion worse and freight movement harder. His proposal to stop collecting the gas tax will cut critical funding that keeps commuters, freight and our economy running. And when the trust fund is moving into deficit for the first time in our history he will only make that problem worse. It will also lead to the loss of over 300,000 highway-related jobs, while there's no evidence that huge oil companies will cut their prices when they get this gas tax ``Holiday''. It is the worst kind of pandering to mortgage the future to serve current political needs. Instead, it's time for our presidential candidates to talk about their vision, their plan to support our economy and our infrastructure needs.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, it is an honor for me to recognize the National Florence Crittenton Foundation on its 125th year anniversary. As the first charitable organization created under a congressional charter, the Crittenton Foundation continues to perform good works for communities across the country. The city of Portland, Oregon, was just over 40 years old when the Portland Crittenton Refuge Home was founded there in 1893, resulting from a donation made by the organization's founder. Charles Crittenton. Today, the headquarters of the National Crittenton Foundation is still located in the heart of Portland. The work of the Crittenton foundation in reaching out to welcome and care for girls and young women seeking support during their unplanned pregnancy is well known. However many are less familiar with the extensive work of the national network of affiliated Crittenton agencies and how they have shaped the way social services are offered and the mentality of self-empowering the girls and young women they serve. The unique relationship between the National Crittenton Foundation and the family of affiliated agencies continues to be based on the beliefs of co-founders Charles Crittenton and Dr. Kate Waller Barrett. They believed that the best way to address compelling social issues in the United States was through a network of independent, local agencies supported by a national body. This belief grew into a national movement encompassing, at one point, 76 agencies in 5 countries, and continues to guide thc organization today. There are now over 23 Crittenton agencies across the country, which have provided valuable support and services to 5 million vulnerable girls, young women, and their families. Their success has come from over a century of providing forward-thinking and innovative services grounded in research, compassion, and a belief that change comes through empowerment. Crittenton programs address complex social issues, including teen pregnancy, mental health, substance abuse, and interpersonal violence, and they do so in ways that are gender and culturally specific. Most importantly, Crittenton services build upon the individuality, resiliency and strength of this country's young women. Please join me in wishing another successful 125 years to the National Crittenton Foundation and its family of agencies across the country.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy. I find no small amount of irony listening to our friends from the other side of the aisle talk about complexity on Tax Day because for the 12 years that they were in charge there was an explosion, hundreds of thousands of additional words added to the IRS code; loopholes and complexity, not simplification. It is absolute hogwash that there are areas that the IRS won't go after to collect and we have to use private collection agencies. They are the people who decided to underfund the IRS. Testimony before our committee was conclusive: The IRS-trained employees collect eight times as much per person as these bounty hunters that they contract out. With the minimum of a $70 million investment, we will raise over $1.4 billion. Equally specious is the argument here that we're hearing about HSAs. There are millions of Americans who have benefits, as my good friend from North Dakota pointed out, flexible savings accounts. We have them for our Federal employees. And all they have to do, however, is there is some minimal verification. What they're proposing is that we just ignore it and allow people to use it for car washes and country club memberships and rely on an occasional audit, which is much more difficult because they have cut back on the IRS. That's foolish. It works for millions of Americans with flexible benefit accounts, there's no problem doing it with HSAs. It is time for us to move forward with these simple, commonsense efforts, steps that make the IRS more effective. More money for the taxpayers prevents inappropriate use of tax exempt money.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. The economic disaster continues to unwind. Of course, there was reckless lending, bad investment, cheating and, yes, bad borrowing. But the major failure was of this administration and Congress over the last 7 years. I commend Chairman Frank for his understanding and resisting the rush to less regulation and oversight, while there was far more risk taken on in our economic system. There is a seriously flawed Senate package moving its way forward. We must remember the people who need help the most, by reforming bankruptcy laws so that we do not favor the speculator over the homeowner. Above all, we must not reward the people who got us into this mess and profited overwhelmingly along the way. American people deserve better; not just the almost 8,000 per day facing foreclosure, but the tens of millions whose neighborhoods will be harmed as a result.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to express my deep appreciation to Chairman Payne. I appreciate the ranking member yielding time to him. I was prepared to do so, but she was able to give him more time, and that is important. Congressman Payne, your laser-like focus on this with the subcommittee, your long-term advocacy, your work on the continent, is something that I find inspirational. I look forward to working with you and partnering on these issues as we move forward. To the Chair and ranking member, your willingness to include this is important, and our work together to be able to focus on the whole person and to be able to deal with waterborne disease, the number one preventible cause of death and disease around the world. Half the people who are sick today anywhere in the world are sick needlessly from water-borne disease. Adding this critical amendment to your important legislation is an important step forward. I hope it is just one step that we can work on together to bring people around the world to support this critical priority. As I say, I can think of no more fitting tribute to your previous predecessors as Chair of the committee, Congressman Hyde and Congressman Lantos, who worked so hard to advance this cause. I urge adoption of this amendment. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to rise dealing with the underlying legislation that contains an important section to address barriers that might limit the start of and adherence to treatment services. This section also encourages direct linkages between the efforts to treat HIV/AIDS, nutrition and income security programs. I applaud the chairman and ranking member for the work that they have done bringing this together, and the recognition that dealing with HIV- AIDS must be done in a holistic fashion that treats the entire person and their environment, not just the disease. I have a very personal connection to this legislation now that was not present when I first started working on issues of water for the poor now that I have a daughter working in Mozambique in the Peace Corps who is dealing with these problems on a day-to-day basis. This direct amendment would add safe drinking water to nutrition and income security on the list of programs for which direct linkages are encouraged. This is an important tribute to our late colleagues, Chairman Lantos and Chairman Hyde, who were so instrumental in the enactment of our Water for the Poor Act, and their insights that are bringing safe drinking is an important component of developmental sectors from health to the environment. To include safe drinking water in legislation through which we honor their memories is a small testament to their lasting legacies. Including safe drinking water is critical because we cannot treat HIV/AIDS without safe drinking water. USAID has recognized in its guidance for missions carrying out these programs that people with HIV/ AIDS are at increased risk for diarrheal diseases and far more likely to suffer severe and chronic complications if infected. There is terrible irony in providing patients with advanced antiretroviral agents, and then asking them to use the water in a glass that may infect them with a life-threatening illness to wash down the life-saving pills. To add irony, one of the complications of diarrheal illnesses is HIV- infected patients have a reduced ability to absorb antiretroviral and other medications from the gut. This poor absorption can contribute to the development of HIV strains that are resistant. In addition to the negative impact on life expectancy and quality of life, they also add significantly to the burdens on caregivers in clinics and at home and put them and other family members at risk for infection. We are all a part of this in the global community. This legislation is important to tie these challenges together, not deal with it piecemeal, and to help with advancing the overall objective of this legislation. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment made in order under the rule.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, over the past few months, we've had a lot of back and forth on this issue. For those who have been at the table, I want to express my appreciation for your hard work and the quality of your debate. I am proud of the fortitude displayed by the Speaker and the Intelligence Committee during this process: There will be no blanket immunity for telecom companies, there will be a two-year sunset, and there will be a commission to thoroughly investigate this administration's shameful wiretapping program. For the past seven years I have been highly critical of Republican wiretapping legislation. I have voted against past efforts to expand the ability of this administration to intrude in the lives and privacy of innocent citizens. Most recently, I supported the expiration of the Protect America Act because I am confident that the dedicated members of the intelligence community do not need to violate the rights of Americans in order to protect them. The bill before us will not solve every potential abuse of FISA, but it does provide stronger legal protections for Americans and introduces a measure of oversight. As this issue continues to play out into the future, it is my hope that our next steps will include even stronger protections for innocent Americans, clearer legal standards for FISA to judge surveillance procedures, and explicit requirements for the destruction of unnecessary data. Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, liberty and security are not mutually exclusive. Quite the opposite; they go hand in hand. The FISA Amendments Act recognizes this reality. This legislation is a balanced compromise that protects our country and ensures that our basic American freedoms remain intact. Our great country is founded on civil liberties, and secured by our intelligence community. Much of what keeps us safe is our commitment to upholding the values of freedom and liberty. All the security in the world is meaningless if we fail to protect the values that make our country worth defending in the first place. If we surrender the basic principles that make us who we are, we will forever change what it means to be American. Mr. Speaker, I know what can happen when we abandon our core American values. I was born in an internment camp, and my own family suffered the consequences when our country succumbed to the rhetoric of fear. That was a dark time in our Nation's history--one we cannot afford to repeat. That is why the legislation before us today is so important. It protects the liberties that we cherish, liberties that are the birthright of every American citizen. At the same time, it recognizes the need for the surveillance of our enemies. It gives our intelligence agencies the tools necessary to keep us safe, and provides strong legal clarity for the intelligence community. The compromise solution we have negotiated also allows telecommunications companies to defend themselves in a court of law. It takes Congress out of the equation and puts legal decisions back where they belong: in the court system. I am confident that this process will result in a fair solution to the civil cases that have been brought against these companies. That is why this balanced legislation deserves the support of every Member of this House. This bill will keep us safe, and it will keep us free. I urge passage of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008,

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I am proud of the Democratic majority's commitment to ethics reform. In the first 100 hours of this Congress, we adopted vital new rules ushering in a new era of openness and fiscal responsibility. We then reformed lobbying practices, and this year many of us voluntarily will reduce and disclose our earmark requests. To continue this commitment to transparency in government, I am pleased to support H. Res. 895 and the creation of an independent, bipartisan Office of Congressional Ethics. A smooth functioning and credible ethics process is critical for both the reputations of individual members of Congress and for the future of the institution itself. I have consistently supported reform of the existing process. At the beginning of 2007, my colleague Greg Walden and I reintroduced legislation, the ``Ethics Reform Act,'' which abolishes the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and establishes a fully independent ethics review process. This plan gives oversight authority to a panel of former Members, and empowers the independent office to oversee the actions and filings of lobbyists and offices. While the measure we consider today differs significantly from my bill, the spirit behind it is the same. If the intent of having members of Congress sit in judgment of their colleagues is to provide both a Constitutional check on impropiety and maintain public confidence in the institution, then I believe the present system has failed both the test of timely justice and of public opinion. Vesting the power of preliminary investigation with an independent board can lift the day- to-day work above partisanship and still keep any punishment of violators safely within the purview of the Congress. I believe a more independent process will provide greater fairness for both Members under review and for the public that demands greater accountability. The bill before us today initiates the changes that many of us seek and our constituents demand. Ultimately, I would like to see reform that fully removes sitting Members from the task of investigating their peers, and that instead gives that authority to independent individuals with a firsthand understanding of Congress. However I remain profoundly encouraged with the progress we have made on the issue of Congressional accountability. Instituting the independent ethics mechanism as outlined in this bill will benefit Congress, and ultimately, the American people.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you. I appreciate the gentlelady's courtesy. It is a little frustrating to listen to our friends repudiate the legacy of Ronald Reagan and Dick Darman who believed in the PAYGO philosophy. These people feel that they cannot balance revenue and spending, and they don't even want to try. We heard them in our committee propose adjustments that would have added over $1 trillion to the deficit. This budget demonstrates the Democratic commitment to the environment, public health and livable communities in a fiscally sustainable fashion. This budget addresses the 7 years of cutting environmental programs and failing to address our energy needs and challenges of this country. We reject the President's cuts to these programs and begin to reinvest in our public lands and domestic economy. This President's budget severely cuts important core environmental programs at a time when a third of our Nation's waters don't meet water quality standards and 150 million people live in areas that exceed EPA's air pollution standards. And the President's budget would provide some of the lowest levels of funding for clean water and drinking water revolving funds in their history, hurting communities' ability to meet their water infrastructure needs, which the EPA of the administration has estimated to be over a quarter of a billion dollars. Finally, the President's budget cuts the USDA farm bill conservation programs which provide farmers with critical technical and financial assistance to reduce erosion, protect wildlife habitat and limit adverse impacts from agriculture on land and water. Our budget rejects those cuts to natural resources environmental program. This provides 10 percent more to discretionary funding than the President's budget. On the environment, over 5 years the chairman's mark is more than $26 billion higher than the President's budget. This budget accommodates the legislation that the House has passed three times to increase tax incentives for renewable energy and conservation. It rejects the President's cuts to research as well as weatherization assistance for low-income families to cut down on energy bills. Instead, this bill increases funding for energy efficient and renewable energy programs and vehicle technologies that move our economies forward.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy, and I appreciate the leadership from my friend from Oregon on this legislation; likewise, my friend and colleague from Tennessee, with whom I'd served on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee so many years. They have adequately, I think, framed what we have here. This is not merely the commemoration of some obscure historical event. As was mentioned by the Speaker, this is the framework upon which America was built for over 200 years; the vision of President Jefferson and Albert Gallatin, the work of President Roosevelt, having a framework for taking a ragtag group of 13 colonies and making it into a transcontinental powerhouse. This farsighted leadership and Federal action helped make America what it is today. But right now, on Capitol Hill today, there are literally thousands of people who are here urging that we deal with the infrastructure crisis in this country, people dealing with mass transit, firefighters, engineers. There are thousands of people who are concerned, right now, that it is time for us to take this resolution as a clarion call for a wake up. The American Society of Civil Engineers has rated our infrastructure at D minus. We are being outcompeted internationally by the European Union and the Chinese. This is history that is worth reviewing; how we built the partnerships that created the infrastructure, how we were able to tie communities together, to be able to enhance new technologies. When it was time for the transcontinental railroad, the framework was in place. It is time for us to have a clear-eyed assessment of what the infrastructure needs are of today. My colleague, Mr. DeFazio, talked a little bit about this in his statement because, frankly, we've got the evidence at hand of what the condition is. We know that there is time for us to move forward with a new plan for this century. It is time to build the constituency and the public awareness going from the Sierra Club to the Garden Club, the AFL-CIO to the Chamber of Commerce, the bicyclists and the truckers. In 314 days, we start a new era here on Capitol Hill. There are people out and about who are starting work on this, the America 2050 program, a nonpartisan assessment under the leadership of the RPA, headquartered in New York, to other assemblage of professional and academic and business. I hope this resolution helps focus the attention of people on this Chamber for what we all need to do to help our colleagues on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to move forward with an assessment of our needs now, a plan for this century, so that all of our communities can be more livable and our families safer, healthier, and more economically secure.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Madam Speaker. In a couple of hours, the House of Representatives will be dealing on the suspension calendar with House Resolution 936, a commemoration of the 200th anniversary of the Gallatin plan. This historic effort was a plan commissioned by President Thomas Jefferson, led by his Secretary of the Treasury, Albert Gallatin, to design a system to knit together a ragtag group of 13 colonies into a transcontinental nation. It focused on transportation, on waterways, it planted the seeds for what would ultimately become the transcontinental railroad, and actually unleashed a pattern that carried through to the national park system, the hydro system and, indeed, the national interstate highway system signed into law by President Eisenhower. Today's commemoration comes at a critical time, for just as Albert Gallatin did something important for the founding of our Nation, today America's infrastructure is falling apart. The American Society of Civil Engineers rates our infrastructure at a D-minus. It's one of the reasons our economy is in decline. We're losing the competition to Europe, to Asia. China is investing nine times as much of their national output as we are in infrastructure. And at a time of $110 a barrel oil, will $4 a gallon gasoline be far behind? We live in a carbon-constrained, water-stressed environment with an imperative need to rebuild and renew America. It is time to celebrate this historic vision which helped build America for much of the first two centuries of our existence. It is critical that we remain true to that tradition, but today infrastructure means more than just roads, bridges, waterways and canals. We're talking about railroads, aviation, power transmission lines, pipelines, indeed the green infrastructure, the network of environmental, park and open space that means so much to the protection of the environment and clean air. It is time for us to craft a new plan, a vision for this century, one that takes into account global warming, rising energy prices, the change in demographics and the knowledge that we know today about how to put the pieces together. Renewing and rebuilding America ought to be something that people on both sides of the aisle can agree with, that we can unite behind a vast coalition that includes the Garden Club, the Sierra Club, organized labor and business, the professions, local government and environmental activists to make sure that we're putting the pieces together appropriately today, that we have the resources, the vision, the partnership that will make livable communities for all of our families, where they will all be safer, healthier and more economically secure. I look forward to the debate today on the Gallatin plan and the commitment of an infrastructure vision for this century.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Madam Speaker. This week, hundreds of cyclists from around America will descend on Capitol Hill to advocate on behalf of America's 100 million people who enjoy bicycling for recreation, for their livelihood, and some for basic transportation. With 176 members of the Congressional Bicycle Caucus, I know there will be great receptivity in many offices, but it is time for everybody to take these men and women very seriously when they bring their message to Capitol Hill. Yes, bicycling is fun. We know that from our youth. Everybody seems to have a bicycling story that they love to tell. However, there are many reasons why bicycling should be taken very seriously by policymakers. Consider the times. Remember last year when oil averaged $72 per barrel and gasoline averaged $2.81 per gallon and how people were deeply concerned about those increases over just the year before? Well, already oil is significantly over $100 a barrel and rising gasoline prices are expected to perhaps reach as much as $4 a gallon this summer. There is also an emerging consensus on global warming that it is not just an urgent problem, but that transportation is the largest source of carbon emissions that we can manage quickly to reduce. The carbon emissions from riding a bicycle to work or to the store or for exercise are zero. Consider the livability of our cities and neighborhoods as we are struggling with traffic congestion, air pollution, and the quality of life in every neighborhood and downtown and everywhere in between. Bicycles, obviously, make a huge difference there. Last but not least, impacts on our health. There is great unease about soaring health care costs. There is a childhood obesity epidemic. The bicycle is the simplest, most cost-effective way to be able to enhance our health as we enhance the quality of life for our young people. Think for a moment right now how many people somewhere in America are stuck in traffic on their way to ride a stationary bike at a health club. These are all initiatives that can be dealt with by taking over 100 million bicycles that are stored in our garages and basements and locked to a back porch and putting them to use. The role for the Federal Government is not to tilt in favor of cycling, although I could certainly make that argument, but just to level the playing field. Why do some Members of Congress think it's all right to give tax benefits to commuters that burn gasoline to help them cushion their costs, but are against providing modest tax benefits for those who burn calories instead? Three times the House of Representatives has passed a modest reform for bike commuter equity, but it has yet to be enacted into law. Mostly it's time to set the table for the massive transportation reauthorization that will be before us next Congress. I have introduced House Concurrent Resolution 305, which would be the first comprehensive bicycling policy statement as a guide for authorization and beyond. I urge my colleagues to look at it. It's the simplest, most cost- effective direction the Federal Government can give to make more transportation choices for Americans, to provide safer opportunities for our children to get to school, to deal with health and climate change, and to heal our communities while we strengthen our bodies and improve our spirits. Bicyclists are an indicator species of a livable community, a place where our families are safe, healthy and economically secure. It's time for the Federal Government to step up and do its part.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, President Kennedy, 47 years ago at the establishment of the Peace Corps, said that reactions to the Peace Corps are proof that we have in America ``an immense reservoir of such men and women, anxious to sacrifice their energies and time and toil to the cause of world peace and human progress.'' What was true in 1961 as it is true today. Peace Corps volunteers are an outstanding group of men and women serving the cause of humanity across the globe. This year, those words have even more meaning for me as my daughter Anne is serving in the Peace Corps in Mozambique. During this National Peace Corps Week, I want to commend the service and commitment of the Peace Corps volunteers from my community and express our pride in fellow Oregonians who have chosen to devote 2 years or more of their lives in service to others. In addition to Anne Blumenauer, I would like to recognize John Bento, serving in Georgia; Amanda Bickle-Eldridge, serving in Nicaragua; Stuart Chidester, serving in Paraguay; Melanie Edwards, serving in Azerbaijan; Ashley Hollenbeck, serving in Morocco; Andrea Lawrence, serving in Bolivia; James Lensen-Callas, serving in Peru; Erik Nelson, serving in Georgia; Sami Oeser, serving in Botswana; Sandra Stevens, serving in Jamaica; Paul Sylvester, serving in Samoa; Normand Tremblay, serving in Cameroon; and Natalie Wilson, serving in Botswana. They are the foundation for creating a safer and more prosperous world, establishing a better future for people everywhere.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, today I am introducing a resolution which recognizes that a national transportation system conducive to bicycling produces enriched health, reduced traffic congestion and air pollution, greenhouse gas emission reductions, economic vitality, and an overall improved quality of life which is valuable for the Nation. Communities across the Nation are seeking to reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, save energy and enhance neighborhood safety. The Federal Government can assist in those efforts by promoting increased bicycle safety, supporting policies that establish national target levels for bicycle use, increase intermodal travel, provide incentives to State and local government, provide flexibility in Federal transportation law, and encourage partnerships with employers and executive agencies. These changes will benefit all Americans whether they ride their own bikes or benefit from those neighbors who do. I have witnessed these positive impacts in my hometown of Portland, Oregon, as bike ridership has skyrocketed as modest investments in facilities have improved access and made biking safer. I have no doubt that communities nationwide can reap the benefits of bicycling if the Federal Government provides the right incentives and works with State and local officials on a balanced transportation system. Ever since I started the Congressional Bike Caucus over 10 years ago, I have seen broad and bipartisan support for bicycling grow with over 170 members from both sides of the aisle standing up for the role bicycles play in our transportation system. I now call on my colleagues to support this legislation that gives bicycling its proper role for our Nation's mobility and health.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Reclaiming my time, it is very clear that the gentleman does not know of any ``carveout'' for Hugo Chavez. He is just talking about the largest five oil companies that under this bill would get an unnecessary tax subsidy and instead would go to emerging technologies that do need the help.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Would the gentleman from California be kind enough to specify specifically what the carveout he thinks is in this bill for Hugo Chavez.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. So there is no carveout for Hugo Chavez.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, it's interesting our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are trying desperately to change the subject. There could be a FISA extension in a heartbeat. They turned that down. If they cared truly about national security, they would be embarrassed about the bankrupt energy policy that puts our Nation at risk. We wouldn't have a third of a million American soldiers and civilian contractors in Iraq today spending 1 trillion American tax dollars if Iraq didn't have the second largest oil reserves and that we have an energy policy that doesn't meet the needs of America today, much less for the future. The bill that we have before you that this rule enables us to consider will be passed. It will be passed through the House today. It will pass the Senate, it is only a question of when. It may take an election for the American people to be clear that they're tired of investing in energy policies from the past, for the past. This isn't a tax increase. Our bill has exactly the same amount of money coming in as going out. But instead of subsidizing the purchase of the largest gas guzzling SUVs, we are going to subsidize hybrid plug-ins. Instead of giving $14 billion of unneeded subsidies to the five largest oil companies who made over half a trillion dollars in profit, we are going to help avoid the starving of the wind energy business. Approve the rule. Vote for the bill.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, today I am proud to introduce a resolution expressing support for the designation of April 2008 as ``Public Radio Recognition Month.'' This legislation celebrates the contributions of public radio to America's communities and enduring civic spirit. Today, more than 33 million Americans listen to and appreciate public radio through more than 800 locally controlled stations, spanning every State and congressional district. Public radio is committed to community- based and fact-based journalism, as well as preserving and enhancing the archetypal musical genres of American music history, such as classical, Celtic, jazz, the blues, and bluegrass. This source for local, national, and international news, as well as informative, cultural, and musical programming, is a unique and valued service to our communities. I invite my colleagues to recognize these achievements and cosponsor this important resolution.