Earl Blumenauer

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, thank you for the work that you and Chairman Dingell have done in bringing forth to the House for a vote today an opportunity for a comprehensive energy policy. For too long, we've focused on energy for the past, on energy sources and products for the world as it was or as some wanted it to be. This is an opportunity for us to deal with the energy challenges of today and for the future. The bill that comes forward will be, for the first time since 1975, an opportunity to significantly increase vehicle fuel mileage standards. It will contain a renewable portfolio standard that emulates what has happened in over half our States across the country, to be able to jump-start renewable energy. It will be financed by redirecting tax breaks from the largest oil companies who don't need taxpayer support to produce oil profitably, and it will be directed to the energy sources of the future, renewables, which do need this help to bring their opportunities to scale. I hope my colleagues will arise to meet this challenge. Vote to pass this legislation. Our national security, economic stability, and environmental survival depends upon it.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I just wanted to express my appreciation for what you're doing. I have the Rules Committee meeting now for the Energy package. I need to go represent Ways and Means. I depart, hanging on your every word.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy and his continued focus on the opportunities we face with the energy legislation that is coming before us this week, and the bigger picture, the new Apollo project. I wanted, if I could just elaborate on one point, because I think as you were talking about the compelling opportunities for new technology that are harnessed in the car of the future, I was thinking back to the situation that we faced as some of us were growing up when the United States Department of Defense was paying $100 for a transistor when they could have spent 79 cents for a vacuum tube. But that investment in technology for the future made possible the first Apollo project, sending a person to the moon, miniaturization, the electronics that harness that power. But it also spoke, I think, to the power of having strategic Federal investment and incentives. I heard my friend from California a moment ago talking about the power of the market. Well, we are all interested, I think, in harnessing market forces wherever possible. And your response about the issue of nuclear energy, that despite massive subsidies, there hasn't been a new plant in the last 30 years because the private sector didn't think it penciled out. I am interested in opportunities that we can have harnessing this new technology and perhaps using it in sectors like national defense where we can jump-start new technology and we can make a difference for our national security. That, as you know, has been one of the cornerstones of the Speaker's initiative. The first hearings we had on the Global Warming Committee that we both serve on were from national security experts that talked about how our dependence on expensive foreign oil, on traditional energy sources, put us at a strategic disadvantage in terms of oil supply, and it is also having an operational disadvantage for our national defense. The current war in Iraq is the most intense, most energy-intense military operation in the history of the world. It is four times more energy intense than the first Iraq war. We are delivering gasoline to the front that we are heavily dependent on in great big tankers that might as well have bull's eyes on them at a cost of over $100 a gallon. What you're outlining here in terms of fuel-efficient vehicles, in terms of new techniques for generating electricity, has the potential of revitalizing American defense posture to make our troops safer and more efficient as well as making battles in areas to secure oil supply less likely. I just wanted to commend you for dealing with us today in terms of the big picture and what a difference that can make for the lives of everyday Americans in terms of where they shop, how they move, where they work and live, as well as the international arena as well where we are going to be spending $1 trillion in Iraq. This type of technology could be harnessed to make a big difference in terms of national security and technology.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Congressman Inslee. I appreciate your being here, I appreciate your explanations, and I appreciate your continued work on our various committees that we serve on. One final point that I would say in conclusion that we haven't talked about is that this is not just an issue of greening the Capitol in terms of providing examples. This is also fundamentally that the same principles that we are talking about here make a huge difference for American security. The first hearing that we had on our Global Warming and Energy Independence Committee was a panel of retired military and intelligence experts. The United States Department of Defense is the largest consumer of energy in the world. An aircraft carrier gets 17 feet to the gallon. The war in Iraq is the most energy-intensive military operation in the history of the world. It is four times more energy-intensive than the first Iraq war. We are delivering gasoline to the front at a price of over $100 a gallon, and it's being delivered in tanker trucks that might as well have great big bull's eyes on them. Our military understands that part of the reason they are engaged in Iraq now is because it is the second largest source of proven oil reserves. They understand that their budgets are being tortured out of all proportion because of the rapidly escalating energy costs. They understand that our dependence on petroleum in areas that are extraordinarily volatile in the Middle East, in other parts of the world and Africa, Venezuela, and being linked to a decline in petroleum whenever that peak hits, if it hasn't already, and handcuffs them, puts them at risk, costs them money. So while we are talking about greening the Capitol, empowering people in the neighborhoods to live more environmentally-sensitive lives and to be able to have policies that will reduce the threat of global warming and greenhouse gases, there is a very real and very tangible element here that is the very security of the United States and the protection of our soldiers. The things that you have been talking about here, Mr. Inslee, and others, that we have talked about on Capitol Hill, if we are able to implement them for the Department of Defense, it's going to make a huge difference for the taxpayer and the safety and the military effectiveness of our soldiers.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Sam. Thank you for your efforts and your kind words. I want to just elaborate for a moment on a point that Congressman Inslee said in terms of providing choices. What we are talking about here today is to provide Americans with better choices that meet their needs, giving them options, because too many people are trapped in a car, too many people don't have environmentally-sensitive opportunities available to them. Every day, Americans make billions of decisions about where to shop, what to buy, how to move, where to go. The extent to which we get it right, to give them a range of choices about where they live, how they can move that are available to them that meet their needs, we find that people inevitably gravitate toward things that are better for them and better for the community. We are seeing it now coast to coast in terms of opportunities of livable communities where, if they can walk safely, they will; if they can bike safely, they will. They will take transit if it's available to them. I think, Congressman Inslee, your point a moment ago about choice, about choice and leveling the playing field, is really what this battle is about. If we are able to squeeze out the incentives for things that really aren't environmentally sensitive, because we tend to subsidize a lot of things that are actually environmentally destructive. If we even out the economics, if we give people those choices, it's going to make a difference. We are seeing it here on Capitol Hill, greening the Capitol in a way that will save us money while we give people better choices. I know you have a lot of thoughts about ways to give people more choices in areas of energy conservation and production. I wonder as we are wrapping up if you have some thoughts that you would like to share in that direction.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Do they play them to scare them?

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Do you want to borrow one?

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you for joining us and for your work.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. You are almost caught up to Portland.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I must confess, and you and I have endured some fascinating hearings on our global warming committee having these new technologies explained that are not, as you say, some far distant point in the future. They are available today for people to implement. I must, however, as the Chair of the congressional bicycle caucus, make a mention of proven technology that we have available now, where people can burn calories instead of electricity or fossil fuel. One of the things that I really appreciate Dan Beard working with us on is to make the cycling choice more readily available to employees on Capitol Hill. As I mentioned a moment ago, we have about 14,000 car trips a day to Capitol Hill. The majority of the trips to the Capitol by our employees are made by car, higher, at a higher percentage than the rest of D.C., where fewer than half of the residents drive to work. Mr. Beard has been working with us to be able to deal with making this Capitol more cycle friendly, working with the Washington Area Bicycling Association, the League of Bikers, to have more bike racks here on Capitol Hill, more secure facilities, lockers perhaps inside the garages. When I first came here, there are showers that are available for the staff, but people didn't want to let it on, I guess, because they wanted to be able to sort of use it on their own. But we have made some real progress. We have got maps now where the showers are available. We have added employee locker and gym facilities in Rayburn. But we have more work to do in terms of improving the choices for cyclists. Part of it, and I would defer to any of my esteemed colleagues here who are more senior, if there is something we do with the Capitol police so they don't have different standards for cyclists than people in cars or pedestrians, allowing the bikers to have the ramps, barriers that are lower for people who are cycling. So like I am cycling to Capitol Hill to vote, I don't have to choose to go on the sidewalk and harass pedestrians. In all seriousness, cycling is the most efficient form of urban transportation ever invented. It is something that helps promote health. It does not have any impact in terms of the environment, wear and tear on the roads, congestion, and in 13 years on Capitol Hill, almost 12 years now on Capitol Hill, I have never had to look for a parking place or be stuck in traffic. And I hope there is more we can continue to do with Mr. Beard working on this program for cycling promotion.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Congressman Miller. Thank you for your decades of leadership. And I appreciate what you said a moment ago about our responsibility as a neighbor. I have been privileged to be a Member of Congress for 12 years. And 3 of those 12 years on Earth Day, we went down and had press conferences using that coal smoke belching out of the Capitol power plant as an example of what we would like to change. And it's interesting, I remember, Congressman Farr, when I first came here, we were concerned about the whole House of Representatives, with gazillions of tons of paper. Sam, help me. I think it was something like $21.17 for a year.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate, Congressman Farr, both your being here and the work that you have done for years, dating back to your tenure as a local official and as a legislator in the State of California, continuing a fine family tradition of sensitivity to the environment. The point you just made about the difference between having an energy policy that our friends on the other side of the aisle that would be perfect for the 1950s, maybe, but not where business is going, not where local government is going, not where any of our three State governments are going, is unfortunate. And people are turning to change these practices not just because they are fuzzy-headed tree huggers, but because it makes good, solid business sense. The initiatives that have been undertaken in the House to this point are anticipated to reduce our energy bill by more than $5 million a year at the end of the 10-year period. We invest a little money at the outset, like businesses are doing across the country, like some families are doing, with energy-efficient appliances or more energy-efficient vehicles, but it pays for itself. I was particularly put off when they were taking to task the environmentally sensitive adhesives and materials that we're putting on Capitol Hill. One of the problems right now in our households is that people use building products, use materials that are not environmentally sensitive, that actually put people at risk, put people at risk in terms of the health of their family, that we have in business. When they use environmentally sensitive adhesives, for instance, it not only enables a little shoe company in my State, Nike, to meet U.S. EPA air quality standards in Thailand by using these water-based solvents, it's a better product, it's a safer product, and it's safer for the producer and for the user. It seems to me that this is the type of thinking that I commend Chief Administrative Officer Beard for bringing into play here in the House. I would turn to my colleague to maybe elaborate based on his experience.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Just in referencing the work that's already under way, now we are implementing in our cafeteria products that will add less than a nickel to the overall price of a meal that are fully biodegradable, items here that will turn to dirt within 90 days, unlike the typical foam clam shell and plastic cup that will be here thousands of years. These are being implemented on Capitol Hill, something that will be responding to the desires of the outstanding young men and women who work here who've been agitating about this. Having biodegradable products that are completely compostable will reduce the problems of land fill and pollution for centuries to come.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Would the gentleman just yield on this point?

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I must note, Mr. Speaker, that that first year when we were trying to get the House under the Republican leadership to change their policies, the entire House of Representatives, with all this paper, with the staff, they recovered what I think was less than a Boy Scout troop would do in my neighborhood in Portland, Oregon. It was embarrassing. We've turned the corner. It is a significant change. And I deeply appreciate, Sam, the work that you've done personally to sort of pound that drum and make it happen.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity. As we are concluding our activities wrapping up on the floor, preparing for the Thanksgiving recess, as people go back to work in their districts, and hopefully spend a little time with their families, it is appropriate for us to reflect on the important work that has been done here in Congress under the leadership of Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Hoyer, working with our House Chief Administrative Officer Dan Beard, to develop a Green the Capitol initiative. We have made it clear under the new Democratic leadership in the House that it is not appropriate to ask the American people to address the challenges of global warming and climate change without first carefully examining the ways that we reduce our own work energy consumption and sustainable practices here in the workspace. Mr. Speaker, I have spent most of my career working with environmental issues at the State, the local, and now the Federal level, working in partnership with people in the private sector to be able to make our communities more liveable, to make families safer, healthier, and more economically secure by virtue of our environmental initiatives, how we put the pieces together. Over the years, I have had lots of ideas myself. I have heard them from others. We have looked at policies and practices, rules and regulations. I will tell you that the one thing, if I were empowered for a day to be able to set the rules and regulations, it wouldn't be any new regulation, any new tax, any new environmental law. It would simply be to make sure that the Federal Government practiced what we ask the rest of America to do in terms of our behavior regarding the environment. The Federal Government is the largest manager of infrastructure in the world. It is the largest consumer of energy. We have facilities from coast to coast. We are the largest employer in the United States. And the extent to which we are able to put in practice the best practices, it will have a transformational effect, not only in terms of the Federal operations themselves, but in terms of what difference it will make as we are setting trends and move forward. I am extraordinarily impressed with what has happened already. I can't say enough about this initiative. The goals that were adopted were to operate the House in a carbon neutral manner by the end of the 110th Congress; to reduce the carbon footprint of the House by cutting energy consumption 50 percent in 10 years; and, to make House operations a model of sustainability. There are a number of steps that the Chief Administrative Officer has already done to implement these goals. They purchased renewable energy power for electricity, funding that was approved in the Legislative Branch appropriations bill. We have switched the Capitol power plant, which provides heating and cooling to the House, to natural gas. It will improve the air quality on Capitol Hill for the residents. This was also already approved. I personally have been appalled at looking at the belching gas coal-fired plant that powers many of the energy needs for Capitol Hill. That is being changed. To improve energy efficiency, the House will use metering, commissioning, and tracking to improve operations, install energy- efficient lighting, adopt new technologies and operation practices, other office equipment, update heating and ventilation. We are looking for sustainability in all House operations. Purchased carbon offsets from the Chicago Climate Exchange. These are initiatives, Mr. Speaker, that are extraordinarily exciting as they are spreading out across Capitol Hill. Before turning to some of my colleagues this evening, I however must note that our friends in the minority office have decided to somehow try and politicize this effort issuing a broadside, and I am willing to talk about this further if we have time with my colleagues, but issuing a broadside against this initiative, claiming that it is somehow, the term the House Minority Leader Boehner used, green pork. It is sort of disappointing, I guess, to see that the minority leader doesn't see the value in leading by example and reducing the House energy costs and modeling the behavior we expect from citizens. I am disappointed he would prefer to have the Capitol continue to waste energy, limit transportation options for House employees, and continue to force Capitol Hill residents to experience the pollution of the Capitol Power Plant. The green pork update has taken issue with a number of initiatives that the CAO has undertaken, taking to task the notion of working with the Chicago Climate Exchange. I wish that the House could offset all our emissions on premise, but it is not possible at this point. But the Chicago Climate Exchange is a credible mechanism, the world's first and North America's only voluntary, legally binding greenhouse gas emissions reduction registry and training program. The minority leader attacks initiative here on Capitol Hill for car- sharing. It is kind of ironic, we actually have higher per capita use of auto commuting on Capitol Hill with our 7,000 employees than in Washington, D.C. as a whole. One of the initiatives to help solve the problem of forcing people to drive their cars is to use car-sharing, something my colleague from the Seattle area can speak to. We've had Flex Car and Zip Cars. The average car is only used 2 hours, less than 2 hours a day. Car-sharing is something that's moving across the country. It's been pioneered in a number of European cities. The minority leader dismisses this as a ``hybrid loaner car for staffers wishing to run errands or catch a movie during work hours.'' I find that offensive in the extreme. The 7,000 men and women who work for us on Capitol Hill are amazing. Now I don't know what happens in the minority leader's office, maybe he has employees that go off in the middle of the day to catch movies. I don't know of anybody, Republican or Democrat, who experiences that. And it's a slander against the outstanding primarily young men and women who work with us. It's illegal in the first instance to do this. But I think it really is demeaning for the people that we work with. Car-sharing, if that's what they're trying to get at, is a very successful business around the country. It's recently on the GSA schedule. I'm pleased to have a small part in encouraging that to happen here on Capitol Hill. We now have over 100 employees that have signed up for it. There are cars that are parked here that people can use before or after hours for business or after hours on their own time and avoid having to drive a vehicle. I will return to this in a moment. I am obviously quite disappointed in the minority leader slandering our employees and demeaning this effort, even picking out, claiming that he's concerned about the notion of using Segways. The Segway personal transporter is not in the initiative. It's nothing that we have done in bringing forward this program. They were part of a green products fair that was conducted here 2 weeks ago on Capitol Hill, fabulously successful. But it's an example of the fuzzy thinking and sloppy research that I think typifies the Republican approach to trying to green the Capitol and their dismissive nature of it now. I would, however, if I could, recognize my colleague from the State of Washington, Jay Inslee, a gentleman who is deeply involved with the environmental issue, who's just published a book, I think it's entitled ``Apollo's Fire,'' where he has spent, with a co-author, over a year researching these issues, has tremendous insights and is using the work that he has done to help implement a sense of vision here on the House floor. It informs his work on the Commerce Committee, and I am privileged to serve with him on the Speaker's Special Committee on Global Warming and Energy Independence where he has made invaluable contributions, and would recognize him at this point.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Congressman Inslee. I think it's safe to say that we are running to catch up with the American people, and that is one of the reasons why I think we are ultimately going to be successful in this, because the American public gets it. Whether it is college campuses, churches, Girl Scout troops or Optimist Clubs, people are moving in this direction. I appreciate working with you and your joining us this evening. Mr. Speaker, I know this will disappoint you because there are potentially another 15 minutes that we could have you and the dedicated desk staff held hostage, but I think we might sort of celebrate breaking for the holiday, and I am happy to yield back my time.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, as a chamber, we have come a long way since August when the disgraceful ``Protect America Act'' was strong- armed into law. The RESTORE Act, a comprehensive and thoughtful overhaul of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, could not cut a more striking contrast. Over the past 7 years I have been highly critical of Republican wiretapping legislation. I have voted against every effort to expand the ability of this administration to intrude in the lives and privacy of innocent citizens. But this is a Democratic Congress and a Democratic bill. The RESTORE Act strikes an unprecedented balance between civil defense and civil liberties. I deeply appreciate the hard-won progress we've made on this issue and I am heartened by our leadership's determination to end a Republican legacy that so blatantly disregards the rights of ordinary Americans. The bill before us will not solve every potential abuse of FISA, but it does greatly strengthen legal protections for Americans and introduces robust congressional 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.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy, as I appreciate watching the legislative process work here. Too seldom in the last 12 years have we watched this unfold in the way that it has, and I congratulate Mr. Frank, Mr. Watt, Mr. Miller, the Ranking Member Bachus, this is how the legislative process should work. I will tell you, this is not a Sarbanes-Oxley moment, where Congress stalled and stalled and stalled until the problems got so great they exploded. Then Congress rushed to act; actually didn't know in many instances what people were voting on. This bill has been a deliberate process. It has not been rushed. It has been bipartisan. And I must say that I feel better than at any point in the last 4 or 5 years, as I have been alarmed as Congress has been missing in action on this issue where the regulatory structures have looked the other way. The big question for me, though, is where we go from here. I am pleased in the Ways and Means Committee we have been able to make some tax adjustments so that people will not be taxed on phantom ``profits'' if they end up having a loan foreclosed upon. I am eager to find out if the gentleman, Mr. Miller from North Carolina, can move forward dealing with fundamental bankruptcy reform so that people who are homeowners get the same protection that would be given to a speculator in an identical home in a subdivision or identical units in a condominium tower. This is extremely critical. We are talking now not just about the hundreds of thousands of people that will be affected by this legislation. Ultimately, there will be ripple effects throughout the economy, a shaken industry, and millions of innocent homeowners who are going to have their property values drop because regulators were asleep at the switch, because Congress was missing in action, and because abusive practices took place. H.R. 3915 is a good start. I commend the committee and look forward to working with you as it works its way through for the refinement of this legislation and the next step.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I have consistently voted against funding for this ill-conceived and miserably run war, but I reluctantly support this additional funding because it will require the beginning of a withdrawal from Iraq. It also contains important provisions to prevent torture and ensure that our troops are fully equipped and trained. Because President Bush has done nothing to earn the trust of Congress or the American people, this funding is only for a few months, giving Congress the chance to exercise oversight and hold the President accountable to ensure that the withdrawal is actually occurring at a responsible pace. With a veto likely, we must tell the President that Congress will not provide this $50 billion, and certainly not the entire $200 billion he's asked for, as a blank check. But I am pleased that, in this legislation, Congress is saying that we will only fund an end to this war, not its continuation. Bringing this nightmare to a quick and responsible close is my highest priority.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Concurrent Resolution 259, 110th Congress, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy, as I deeply appreciate the work that the subcommittee has done. This is not just about spending money; it's about spending money right. It is important that resources are being focused to being able to ``fix it first,'' to be able to deal with the fraying of our Nation's infrastructure. As the gentleman pointed out, there are 100 million trips on tens of thousands of substandard bridges across the country. There is an important step in this legislation to have more robust funding for Amtrak. We have avoided the problems of past sessions where we have come through here to have an ideological battle fought about how somehow the United States should be the only country in the world without government-supported rail passenger service. Given skyrocketing oil prices and congestion in our highways, people understand that that is a prescription for disaster. I appreciate the hard work of the committee coming forward with a proposal to help put a floor underneath the rail passenger infrastructure, not making a difference just for Arizona but throughout the country. I appreciate looking at the big picture. The committee's willingness to look at how land use, housing, and transportation fit together to coax maximum advantage out of those investments is very, very important. I hope that we can continue to work with the subcommittee, with the whole Appropriations Committee, with the authorizing committees to be able to get more out of these investments. Last but not least, it should be pointed out that this will be the last budget that we'll be able to have with the transportation funding at this level. The refusal of the administration to work with us to increase transportation investment in the last Congress resulted in a reauthorization level that is higher than the trust fund can support. We're going to be running out of money here in a couple of months. That means that the task of the subcommittee will be extraordinarily difficult, given the slow payout rate of transportation funding. It means you're going to have to cut probably four times the amount of the deficit this next year, and it's going to be even greater in subsequent years. So I'm hopeful that, working with the subcommittee dealing with appropriations and with Ways and Means, with the authorizers, we can come forward to make sure that we don't lose the opportunity to make the right investments in transportation and housing, because these are going to help us with greenhouse gases. These are going to help us with economic development, with energy efficiency. It's a tall order ahead of us, but I appreciate the foundation that the subcommittee has laid, and look forward to working with them.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. This morning, the Washington Times has a story about the Governor of Georgia, Sonny Perdue, praying for rain. The Governor said, and I quote, ``It's time to appeal to Him who can and will make a difference.'' I find that ironic, coming from the Governor of the State of Georgia, a State that has no realistic plan about how it's going to use its water resources, has no understanding of what the demands are for the work that they have in place right now. The good Lord might say, Sonny, why did you have a huge artificial snow mountain so people can ski in Georgia in the middle of the summer in the middle of a drought? ``I believe in miracles,'' one minister said. Perhaps that would be one solution. But maybe it's time for people to respect and carefully use what God has given them. The good Lord does help those who help themselves.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, my Republican friends are shocked, shocked that a tax that they have ignored for 7 years is suddenly going to come into effect. Mr. Neal, Mr. Rangel, and others on our side of the aisle have been claiming this for years. Instead of specious tax cuts for a few, let's deal with the real meaningful problem: they ignored it. The red line that my friend Mr. Ryan had on his chart is the red line that is assumed by the Republican administration to justify their budget. This proposal is not a tax increase. Over the next 10 years there will be exactly the same amount of money collected by the Federal Government. What is different is that there are three provisions that most Americans would say are modest technical provisions, including adjustments to carried interest rates. In exchange for that we will protect 23 million middle-class families from paying the AMT; provide 30 million homeowners with property tax relief; help 12 million children, by expanding the child tax credit; benefit 11 million families through the State and local tax deduction. That is the difference and that is why you should vote for it.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy, and I couldn't agree with him more. For 12 years, our Republican friends in Congress looked the other way at this looming tax tsunami that was going to engulf every middle-income family in America with two incomes and raising their kids. They watched as the alternative minimum tax enacted in 1969 to deal with less than 200 people who didn't pay any Federal tax at all morphed into a tax which, next year, if we don't pass legislation like this, is going to subject every middle-income family with two earners with children to the alternative minimum tax, penalizing them, not for tax dodges, but for paying their taxes, for investing in retirement and charitable contributions. We are dealing with this responsibly. Instead of borrowing the money, we are paying for this tax relief. We are doing it, in part, with a tax reform so that people who drive hedge fund managers to work or answer their phones will no longer be paying tax rates twice what the people who are making, not millions, not tens of millions but, in some cases, hundreds of millions of dollars a year. This is a choice about priorities. My Republican friends for years have chosen to avoid the alternative minimum tax with a wide array of tax breaks. There are a few that they are talking about that we are perfectly willing to work with and extend that deal with the tax needs of working American families. We will extend them without debate, but the more elaborate, the more expensive, the ones that are concentrated for a few are going to be looked at, like carried interest for hedge fund managers. We are not going to be held hostage to President Bush who used the alternative minimum tax revenues as a way to disguise the true cost of his tax-cut schemes that have helped increase the deficit and are going to be exploding in the years in the future. They had a chance to adjust it, and they didn't. This is a deliberate decision on the part of the Republicans in Congress for the last 12 years to avoid dealing with the consequences of their tax cut proposals. In fact, they are the ones who scheduled them so they would be expiring at different times over the next few years, in part because the bond markets would have gone crazy if those would have been made permanent at the time and all the revenue lost, so they disguised it. Now they are paying the consequences for their sleight of hand having them go out into the future. We are going to be looking at each and every one of them: do we have to have tax breaks for Paris Hilton or Warren Buffett that even Warren Buffett doesn't want because he has made billions, in some cases, on money that wasn't taxed in the first place. This is an opportunity for Congress to start acting responsibly, making some needed tax reform, and to be able to show the American public that we are going to deal with the problems for tens of millions of Americans, and we are not going to continue to do it on the backs of interest that will be paid by our children for decades to come and special preventions for people who frankly should be paying the same tax rates as the rest of us.