Vernon Ehlers

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the life and service of William Spoelhof, president emeritus of Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He was born in 1909 in Paterson, New Jersey, and passed away on December 3, 2008, at the age of 98. William Spoelhof graduated from Calvin College in 1931, and began teaching history and civics at the secondary level. He received his masters of arts degree from the University of Michigan in 1937, and began his doctoral studies there. During World War II, Mr. Spoelhof enlisted in the U.S. Navy, and served our country in the Office of Strategic Services. Following the war, he completed his doctoral work, and went to Calvin College to teach history and political science in 1946. After becoming president of Calvin College, Dr. Spoelhof oversaw the process of moving Calvin College from its original Franklin Street campus, located in urban Grand Rapids, to its current Knollcrest campus in southeast Grand Rapids. Dr. Spoelhof carefully balanced the college's vision for excellent academics with its relationship with the Christian Reformed Church, as he effectively steered the college through occasional church conflicts and the tumultuous, nation-wide student protests of the 1960s. In 1976, Dr. Spoelhof announced his retirement after 25 years, the longest serving president in Calvin College's history. After his formal retirement, he was named president emeritus and maintained an office and steady presence at the College, offering continued support and goodwill whenever needed. Dr. Spoelhof was a Christian role model and mentor to many faculty members, staff and students, as he provided wisdom and counsel to thousands during his more than 8 decades of service to Calvin College. On a personal note, Dr. Spoelhof recruited me from the University of California at Berkeley to teach physics at Calvin College. I am deeply grateful for his guidance and for leading me to teach at a wonderful, Christian liberal arts college. Dr. Spoelhof is fondly remembered for his contributions to daily discussions with retired faculty and students at the ``Emeritorium'', and for his kind words to passers-by around the campus. In 1935, William Spoelhof married Miss Angeline Nydam, and they had three children, Robert Spoelhof, Elsa Scherphorn, and Peter Spoelhof. Ange, as Dr. Spoelhof lovingly called his wife, passed away in 1994. Dr. Spoelhof lived a life of gratitude, and desired to bring God glory in all he did. On December 3, 2008, the Calvin College community lost a visionary leader and wise friend. He is to be honored and recognized for his outstanding devotion and service as a member of the military, a Calvin College professor, and president and friend.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank you for the accommodation. As soon as I discovered this issue was before us, I rushed to the floor so that I could participate in this discussion. I worked closely with Ms. Millender-McDonald for several years. When I was Chair, she was ranking member, and when she was Chair, I was ranking member. The word that comes to mind the second I think about her is ``elegance.'' She was a very elegant person. I mean that in a very positive sense. I'm not talking just about elegance in dress, elegance in bearing, but to the core of her being she was an elegant, wonderful human being. I enjoyed working with her. We accomplished a lot together on the committee. We obviously had our differences now and then, but we always worked through them. And what always struck me as something really wonderful about her and about our Nation, and to show how far we've come, that a sharecropper's daughter could become the Chair of a major committee in the Congress of the United States. That's amazing, but it speaks very well of her in the way she comported herself, the way she had taught herself, the accomplishments that she had made during her life. Just a very remarkable person in every way. The only regret I had was that she never shared with me anything about her illness or the seriousness of her illness. I believe she felt she had to carry that burden alone. And I would have been delighted and honored had she shared with me more of the details so that I could help her on this journey towards death, and that I could have been at her side praying with her and comforting her. But it's just a great delight to see this honor bestowed upon her. I certainly hope this is an elegant highway that we're dedicating to her, because it would be befitting of her and her accomplishments, and above all, her presence as a human being, that this highway reflect her greatness, her elegance, her ability, and her dedication to her people and to this Nation. I thank you.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I appreciate his comments. I especially appreciate his support of this bill. I also commend the gentleman from Minnesota for his thorough discussion of the history of the Great Lakes pollution problems and the solutions that we have developed. I certainly appreciate his support for this bill. I rise today in strong support of the reauthorization of one of, if not the most, effective Federal environmental cleanup programs ever developed. Those are not my words, those are the words I have heard from many individuals about the Great Lakes Legacy Act which we put in effect a few years ago. This bill today will continue that act. In 2002, I authored the original Great Lakes Legacy Act, which was passed into law with broad bipartisan support. The Great Lakes Legacy Act provides Federal funding to clean up contaminated sediments in the tributaries of our Great Lakes. These contaminated sediments are a legacy of our industrial past, and the longer we wait to clean them up, the greater the likelihood that they will be transported into the open waters of the Great Lakes, where cleanup is virtually impossible. Just to give one example, the city of Kalamazoo, Michigan, has been renowned for years for the paper plants which developed high quality paper using the forests of Michigan. When PCBs were discovered, that seemed like an ideal thing to include in the composition of the coatings on the paper. No one realized their poisonous, toxic nature, and today the Kalamazoo River bottom is littered with remnants of that time with considerable amounts of PCBs. Earlier this year, Congressman Oberstar and I introduced H.R. 6460 to reauthorize and expand the Great Lakes Legacy Act. In addition to making a number of improvements to the original law, our bill also dramatically increased the authorization for Great Lakes cleanup from $50 million per year to $150 million per year. If fully appropriated, this funding level has the potential to clean up all of the known toxic hot spots within 10 years, which will save a considerable amount of money over the cost which will be incurred if we do not clean it up and those toxic materials get into the Great Lakes. On September 18, the House passed the Great Lakes Legacy Act by an overwhelming majority of 371-20. Unfortunately, the Senate was unable to overcome the objections of a few Senators who did not appreciate the necessity to authorize enough money to clean up all of the contaminated sediments within the next decade. Because the Legacy Act expires on September 30th, which is rapidly approaching, supporters in the Senate, most notably Senator Levin and Senator Voinovich, worked hard to draft a compromise amendment that ensures this vital cleanup program continues. The Senate approved the amended Legacy Act by unanimous consent on September 25. That is the bill which is before us. It is not what I had hoped to have. It is not what I think we should have. But the Senate amendment, although it decreases the $150 million per year authorization, does continue the current $50 million per year authorization, plus $4 million per year for ancillary activities. The amendment also decreases the authorization from 5 years to 2 years. This is not because we want to shorten the period of time this bill is in effect, but because the Senators wanted to reintroduce the bill with us next year and put in place a longer bill with greater authorization. Although I am disappointed that this funding authority has been decreased, I am pleased with for the broad support this program has garnered. Congressman Oberstar has mentioned some of that broad support. I especially appreciate the commitment of Chairman Oberstar to revisit this authorization in the 111th Congress. I once again want to thank Chairman Oberstar, Chairwoman Johnson, and especially Ranking Members Mica and Boozman for their hard work and for moving this bill so expeditiously. It is not always easy for individuals from other parts of the country to appreciate the importance of the Great Lakes and the importance of cleaning up the toxic materials. I personally want to thank Chairman Boozman for his very diligent work in examining this issue, fully understanding it, and getting the bill through the process. I also want to thank all the members of the Great Lakes Task Force, and there are many, who have joined in cosponsoring this particular bill. I ask my colleagues to once again join me in supporting H.R. 6460. Let's immediately get this bill on the President's desk for his signature, so that this important work can continue unabated.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information for publication in the Congressional Record regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 2638, the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act of 2009. Requesting Member: Congressman Vernon J. Ehlers. Bill Number: H.R. 2638. Account: Rdte,A Research, Development, Test And Evaluation, Army. Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Grand Valley State University. Address of Requesting Entity: 301 Michigan Street, NE, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 49503 Description of Request: I am requesting funding for the Midwest Traumatic Injury Rehabilitation Center at Grand Valley State University (GVSU) in fiscal year 2009. The funding for this project will help Grand Valley State University partner with Mary Free Bed Rehabilitation Hospital to develop a specialized educational curriculum, and an integrated model of total patient care in order to help those servicemembers and veterans who suffer from a traumatic brain injury and/or limb loss. This bill provides $1,460,000 for this project. Out of this amount, GVSU plans to spend $400,000 on the educational design, $985,000 for twenty veterans in treatment, and $75,000 for evaluation and continuous improvement. I certify that neither I nor my spouse has any financial interest in this project. Requesting Member: Congressman Vernon J. Ehlers. Bill Number: H.R. 2638. Account: Rdte,N Research, Development, Test And Evaluation, Navy. Legal Name of Requesting Entity: GE Aviation. Address of Requesting Entity: 3290 Patterson Avenue, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49512 Description of Request: I am requesting funding for GE Aviation in fiscal year 2009 for the Micro-munitions Interface for Tactical Unmanned Systems (MITUS). The funding would be used to develop an interface between Unmanned Air Systems (UAS) and micro-munitions, which are defined as weapons weighing less than 100 pounds. Integration of micro-munitions onto UAS's requires a stores/weapons management interface that provides a safe and effective integration between the weapon and the unmanned system. This bill provides $1,600,000 for this project. Out of this amount, GE Aviation plans to spend $250,000 to complete the development of key technologies for the MITUS project to include: high-speed communication network, airborne weapon emulator, interface for micro-munitions, unmanned safety architecture, universal stores management system; $200,000 to conduct lab demonstrations of these enabling technologies and validation of the SAE industry interface standard; $400,000 for the integration of these capabilities into various unmanned systems leading up to a flight demonstration; and $750,000 for flight demonstration in FY09/FY10 to test the interoperability of tactical unmanned systems integrating the MITUS technologies with various micro-munitions, which includes items necessary to support flight test including: Safety board reviews, range time, UAS operation, munitions and targets. I certify that neither I nor my spouse has any financial interest in this project.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Robert A. Gleich, Jr., on the occasion of his retirement from his position of Deputy Superintendent, House Office Buildings. Bob Gleich began his career with the Architect of the Capitol in November 1976 in the AOC's Construction Management division, where he worked on many sizeable projects, including final construction of the Madison Building. His experience in overseeing large-scale construction projects proved helpful as he then transitioned to the A/C Engineering Division, where he was assigned to oversee the construction of the Hart Senate Office Building. Bob's engineering expertise and construction management skills were instrumental in the successful completion of this high profile project, which was finished on time and on budget. Following a promotion in August 1987 to Assistant Superintendent, House Office Buildings, Bob was named Deputy Superintendent, House Office Buildings, in December 1992, a position which he holds today on the eve of his retirement from public service. In his role as Deputy Superintendent, Bob has been involved in many initiatives which have transformed the AOC into an organization that is dedicated to completing its mission with a commitment to exceptional performance, and a focus on quality customer service. He played a critical role in developing the first automated work order system in the AOC. He also chaired a group charged with developing a computer aided facility management (CAFM) system for the AOC designed to improve the Architect's facility management data collection. This system which was implemented in 1999, was enhanced in 2004, and remains a key component in the AOC's successful management of the facilities that comprise the Capitol Hill complex. Bob continued to build on his accomplishments by streamlining the Congressional office-moves process for the House of Representatives. Through his efforts, the room selection process has been transformed from a labor-intensive process where information and data required manual display, forcing Members and staff to spend an extensive amount of time monitoring the process, to a fully automated process that can be monitored via the Web, reducing Member and staff time by approximately 90 percent. This transformation has made the Congressional office-moves process easier to execute, and has increased the customer satisfaction scores to greater than 95 percent during the last three Congressional move cycles. Upon his retirement, Bob will be embarking on a new career in the private sector. We wish Bob our best as he begins this exciting new chapter of his life, and extend our good wishes to him, his wife Petra, and his six children, Aaron, Robbie, Ryan, Dana, Dustin, and Derrick.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Madam Speaker, due to illness, I unfortunately was unable to be present and to vote on the legislation considered by the House on September 15, 16, and 17, 2008. On rollcall numbers 589, 590, 591, 600, and 601, had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.'' On rollcall numbers 592, 593, 594, 595, 596, and 597, had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall number 599, had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' Though the Comprehensive American Energy Security and Consumer Protection Act (H.R. 6899) included some good provisions, many of which I had supported in the past, the bill also included many provisions that concerned me. I was very troubled by the legislative process. The drafting and introduction of this legislation included no Republican Members, and the bill was offered under a closed rule, prohibiting any Republican amendments for consideration. On rollcall number 598, had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.'' A bipartisan compromise was presented in the form of the Republican Motion to Recommit. I regret that I did not have the opportunity to vote on these important measures.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S.J. Res. 45, the Great Lakes--St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact. This resolution represents the culmination of efforts, which started nearly a decade ago, to create a framework to govern water withdrawals from the Great Lakes Basin. The Great Lakes comprise the largest source of freshwater in the world--20 percent of the Earth's total and 95 percent of the surface freshwater in the United States--and they provide drinking water, transportation and recreation to tens of millions of people in the United States and Canada. Although the Great Lakes contain copious amounts of fresh water, less than one percent of the water in the Great Lakes is renewed every year through rain, snow melt, and groundwater recharge, with the remaining ninety-nine percent remaining in the lakes each year. In other words, the Great Lakes are a non-renewable resource that is currently at jeopardy from large-scale water diversions outside the Great Lakes Basin. The catalyst for the creation of a Great Lakes Compact came in 1998 when the government of Ontario granted a permit to a private Canadian company to ship up to 160 million gallons of water per year to Asia. Thankfully, the public outcry was so strongly opposed that the deal died. In the wake of this incident, Congress included language in the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2000 which prohibited the export of Great Lakes water from the basin unless the request for withdrawal received unanimous approval of all eight Great Lakes governors. WRDA 2000 also encouraged the Great Lakes states, in consultation with Canada, to develop and implement a compact that would govern withdrawals of water from the Great Lakes Basin. In 2005, the 8 Great Lakes governors, in collaboration with the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec, local governments, and other stakeholders, endorsed the Great Lakes Compact and referred it to the state legislatures for consideration. On July 9, 2008, my home state of Michigan became the last Great Lake state to approve the Compact--sending it to Congress for final ratification. The Senate passed S.J. Res. 45 by unanimous consent on August 1 and the House Judiciary Committee approved a similar House version (H.R. 6577) by voice vote on July 30. I am an original cosponsor of H.R. 6577. The Great Lakes Compact prohibits new or increased out-of-basin, large-scale water diversions except under special circumstances, and it requires all of the Great Lakes states to develop water conservation and efficiency programs. With respect to small-scale water diversions (containers less than 5.7 gallons), such as for bottled water, beer, and canned foods, the Compact allows states to choose how to regulate these small transfers. For instance, Michigan regulates bottled water under the Compact by requiring producers to obtain a state permit for new or increased water withdrawals of more than 200,000 gallons per day. Under Michigan law, a permit may be granted if, among other requirements, there are no individual or cumulative adverse impacts, the water withdrawal is reasonable under common law principles, and the producer has certified that it is in compliance with water conservation measures. Although some have voiced concern over this ``bottled water exemption,'' I believe these small-scale withdrawals are better left to the states to regulate. In addition, much of the bottled water will likely remain the Great Lakes watershed, and changing the agreement now would mean the entire process must start over. With water predicted to become the oil of the future, it is imperative that we pass this agreement now so that we ensure the water in the Great Lakes Basin stays within the basin. I hope my colleagues will join me, the Great Lakes governors, state legislatures, the U.S. Senate, and President Bush in supporting the Great Lakes Compact. Vote for S.J. Res. 45.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, (Mr. Chairman), on rollcall No. 600 and 601, I missed these votes due to illness (influenza). Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on both.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I also want to thank my colleague from Michigan for his kind words. He and I have worked on a number of Great Lakes issues together, and it has been a pleasure to work across the aisle on something that really benefits the people of this country. I am very pleased today that we are taking up this bill. It is another great day for the Great Lakes. Today we renew and expand upon one of the most effective Federal environmental cleanup programs ever, the Great Lakes Legacy Act. All of us have heard about Superfund and all of the tremendous cost overruns of that program. When we wrote this original Legacy Act some years ago, we made sure to keep the issues out of the courts, and make it a very efficient program, and that is exactly what has happened. The Great Lakes, we all know, comprise the largest source of fresh water in the world--20 percent of the earth's total and 95 percent of the surface fresh water in the United States. The Great Lakes also provide drinking water, transportation, and recreation to millions of people. Approximately 30 million people drink the water of the Great Lakes in the United States and Canada. However, the Great Lakes are endangered by contaminants from years of industrial pollution that have settled into the sediments of the tributaries, the rivers and streams, that flow into the lakes. These pollutants degrade the health of both humans and wildlife, and they disrupt the beneficial uses of the lakes. The longer we take to clean up these areas, the greater the likelihood that the sediment will be transported into the open waters of the Great Lakes, where cleanup is virtually impossible. To address this problem, I introduced the original Great Lakes Legacy Act in the 107th Congress. With bipartisan support, the Congress passed and the President signed this bill in 2002. The Great Lakes Legacy Act authorizes the EPA to clean up contaminated sediments in designated areas of concern in the Great Lakes. These areas of concern are designated by the EPA and are defined as any ecologically degraded geographic area that requires remediation. Currently, there are 43 areas of concern throughout the Great Lakes and 31 of those are either wholly or partially located within U.S. waters. The Great Lakes Legacy Act has made tremendous progress in cleaning up contaminated areas. Of the 31 areas of concern in U.S. waters, four remediation projects have been completed, one project is underway, and six more are currently being monitored and evaluated. Since 2004, the EPA estimates that almost 1 million cubic yards of contaminated sediments have been removed from our Great Lakes tributaries. These sediments are saturated with toxic substances such as mercury, arsenic, chromium, cadmium, polychlorinates, better known as PCBs, and lead. However, more cleanup work remains. The U.S. Policy Committee for the Great Lakes has identified 75 remaining contaminated sites. The Great Lakes Legacy Act expires in just a few days. In order to ensure this vital cleanup continues, Congressman Jim Oberstar and I introduced this bill. The bill has 45 bipartisan cosponsors and passed the Transportation Infrastructure Committee by voice vote. In order to speed up efforts, this bill triples the authorized funding level from $50 million to $150 million per year. If fully appropriated, this has the potential to delist all of the U.S. areas of concern within the next decade. These funds will continue to be leveraged with a 35 percent non-Federal cost share with locals, businesses, environmental groups, and so forth. The bill also makes a limited number of changes to the original Legacy Act that were jointly recommended by involved parties, and will vastly improve the bill.

Mr. EHLERS. The toxic pollutants from our industrial past have plagued the Great Lakes region for far too long. By voting for the Great Lakes Legacy Reauthorization Act, we can ensure that critical cleanup efforts in the Great Lakes continue. In closing, I want to thank Chairman Oberstar, Chairwoman Johnson, Ranking Member Mica and Ranking Member Boozman for all of their great work on this bill and their dedication to preserving our greatest fresh water resource. I also want to thank staff members Ryan Seiger, Ben Webster, John Anderson and Jon Pawlow, and also Ben Gielow on my staff. It has taken a lot of hard work, but it is a great bill and I am proud to present it. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in supporting the bill.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6475, which would establish the Daniel Webster Congressional Clerkship Program within the House of Representatives. Instituting this program will create a talented pool of young attorneys within the House at a fraction of the cost of obtaining similar talent through the hiring process. Many of these exceptional individuals will become leaders of their chosen profession. By offering them a judicial clerkship, we may even inspire some to embark upon a congressional career in lieu of life in a law firm or corporation. For these young men and women, the ability to obtain a judicial clerkship in the very body where laws are created will be an invaluable experience. For the House, it will be a chance to tap into the best and brightest legal minds just as they begin their careers. While we cannot offer the same compensation package that many top law firms offer, we can offer an opportunity to experience the legislative process in a way that is only possible within the Halls of Congress. Whether they continue their careers in the private or public sector, a greater knowledge and appreciation of the legislative process would be enormously useful to the participants in this program as they become part of the fabric of our Nation's judicial system. I thank my colleagues on the House Administration Committee, and especially thank Congressman Lungren and Congresswoman Lofgren for introducing this bill. At this time, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. EHLERS. I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren).

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I wish to commend the gentlewoman from California and the gentleman from California on this bill. I think it's an excellent idea. And I have good grounds for saying that because, as I mentioned earlier, I'm a scientist, and the scientific societies of America, for a number of years, have been supporting fellowship programs in which scientists will come and spend one year in the House of Representatives, and thereby learn something about how laws are made. And it has had a profound effect on the scientific community in this country and it has also had a profound effect on the Congress. Some of my best employees have come from that program. If they have worked in the Congress for a year, either in my office or another office, and I have an opening, they fit in beautifully because so many of the issues I deal with are scientific. So I'm sure this clerkship proposal will be an outstanding program. And I, frankly, think six clerkships is too little, especially for both Chambers. And I hope that some day we're talking in terms of perhaps 20 or 30 for the two Chambers together because I'm sure it is going to be successful. With that, I yield what time he may consume to the gentleman from California.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First of all, let me say a few more words about energy, and perhaps your speaker will be here by that time. But I first want to say, I think your clerkship program is an excellent idea. And I think it would have been wonderful if your clerks could have heard this discussion that you just had with the gentleman from California. It's just exactly the sort of experience that they should have, and it will certainly benefit them. But I have always been impressed with the court clerks that I have encountered over the years, some of whom are good friends of mine whose entire career changed and was shaped by their experience in clerking for someone, whether it was at the State court of appeals level or the Federal judgeship level. So this without a doubt is going to be a very important bill. I also would like to make a few concluding remarks about the energy issues, as I outlined a little while ago. This time I want to mention two sources that are wonderful energy resources, and that we should use more often and more wisely. They are energy resources, that have been in this Earth for many, many years, ever since its creation. First is nuclear; second is geothermal. Both are ample sources of energy if used properly. Both are essentially free in the sense you're not paying anyone for the energy; you're just paying for the equipment and process to extract the energy. And when nuclear energy fell on bad times in the United States almost 30 years ago and basically no one was going to build another reactor in the United States, I said this is going to last one generation because it's a decision based on emotion, not on reality or on the facts. And that's precisely what is happening now. After one generation, we are recognizing that we made a mistake at that point, whereas France has put 80 percent of their electrical power in the hands of the nuclear reactor business and India has done 90 percent. They have been using nuclear power successfully at reasonable cost with no dangers, no accidents, and this indicates that we can do the same. I think that would be immensely useful. I am particularly perturbed with the current trend to use more and more natural gas to generate electricity. You can imagine what this is going to do to the price of energy for homeowners who heat their homes with natural gas, who are going to have to pay more as natural gas becomes in shorter supply because the power plants are using such copious amounts of it. In addition to that, I note that natural gas, frankly, is too valuable to burn. It's an invaluable feedstock for the petrochemical industry, and the more we use it for other purposes, the more we increase the price of natural gas for manufacturing purposes, we reach a point now where almost all the new fertilizer factories in the world are being built in other countries, not in America, because the price of natural gas here is getting so high that it's too expensive to make fertilizer out of natural gas in our Nation, so it is manufactured in other countries. We have made a number of mistakes in our energy policy. I would hope this Congress, before the end of this session, would resolve this, set us on a new track, so that we would once again return to an era of cheaper energy, and that our Nation may prosper and our people may be able to keep warm. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1207, which would enable House staff to receive their pay stubs electronically and encourages the CAO to make further technological improvements that would enable employees to make changes in withholding, deductions or deposits electronically. Increasingly, individuals are using technology to keep track of their financial information, and putting key data such as compensation information online will assist many in their efforts to keep track of their finances. With the impact of junk mail, paper bills and other items delivered via postal mail, reducing the amount of wasted paper, even by a single item each month, would be good for the environment and likely will be a welcome change for many employees. In this spirit of developing online tools for House staff, I also introduced an amendment to this bill that would direct the CAO to allow employees to make changes in withholdings, deductions, or deposits electronically. Not only would this service be of great use to employees, but it would also lessen the burden on payroll counselors who currently make these types of routine adjustments manually, which would in turn free them up to handle more complex questions that are not suited to a self-service model. I am pleased that the committee voted unanimously to accept the amendment. I thank the chairman for his leadership in bringing this bill to the floor. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H. Res. 1207. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlelady from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further comments on the bill, but I do have further comments to make. In particular, all of us have spent 5 weeks or thereabouts home with our constituents and were impressed at how seriously our constituents and the Nation is taking the energy crisis that we face. There is a huge concern about this, particularly with the cost of gasoline. In one example, a young woman in my district lives on a farm. It's hard today to make a living on a farm, and so she has a job off the farm as well. Their only vehicle is a pickup with, of course, very poor gas mileage. And she's faced with a position where the cost of driving to work is almost greater than the pay that she receives. This is one small example, and I believe that it is absolutely urgent for the House of Representatives to address this issue. There are several bills out there regarding the energy crisis. There's been a lot of discussion about it. I think the only way I can summarize it after looking at the various bills is to say, what we really need is all of the above. Some members are focused totally on drilling, some are totally focused on alternative forms of energy, some on conservation. But what we really need is a comprehensive bill which addresses all of the above, because we are in a situation where we cannot depend on oil for very many more years. Back in 1954 scientists predicted that by 1970, American oil production would peak, and they were right on the mark. In 1970, American oil production peaked. It's been going down ever since. That same research projected that in about 2005, or 2010, world oil production would peak, and it looks like we've entered that period, and that's one reason why prices are going up. We clearly have to develop the resources we have in this country. We clearly have to develop alternative forms of energy, particularly related to solar. An incredible amount of solar energy hits the Earth every day from the sun, to the point that in one year we get more energy from the sunlight hitting our planet than is contained in all of the resources of energy and the fossil fuels that are in the Earth. So clearly there are ways to address this. We must address this. I just want to speak out and say it's absolutely essential for us to develop new approaches to energy. We certainly ought to put the money into developing alternative forms of energy. We have to put the money into developing drilling techniques that are safe, environmentally safe, and are not going to pollute the waters if they are offshore. We really have to take this seriously. And I think it's reached the point where we can't just throw spitballs or snowballs at each other, but must simply say that we have to do all of the above approaches to energy production, and develop legislation that does that. I am concerned that the legislation being proposed by the leadership of the House will not do all of the above. It will only do part of it. So I urge all of the Members to work together to really solve this problem and show the people of this country that we can deal with an important problem like this. And it's my pleasure to raise this issue, and we will continue discussions on that in the House. As we know, the minority party discussed it every day in the House during the recent recess, out of a sense of disappointment that we had taken the August recess without first dealing with the energy bills that were available for us to consider. We should carry that on and make sure that we do address this issue, especially before we adjourn for the next recess. I thank the group here for listening, and I hope this will result in some action on the part of the House of Representatives. I don't believe I have any further speakers, and if the gentleman from Pennsylvania doesn't, I will, at this point, yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H.R. 6608, the House Reservists Pay Adjustment Act. I thank Chairman Brady for his leadership on this issue, and I'm proud to join with him as a cosponsor on this important bill. The men and women of the United States Armed Forces make many sacrifices to protect our freedom. They are asked to spend time away from their families, to put themselves in harm's way, and, in the case of some House staff, to accept a salary that is less than what they would normally earn in civilian life during the period that they are on active duty. The gap in pay experienced by these servicemen and women often causes undue hardship on themselves and their families and increases the already heavy burden placed upon them as they leave for battle. I am pleased to be able to find any reasonable method of assisting House staff, who are also members of the military, with the personal sacrifices they are asked to make to defend their country. This bill would compensate active servicemen and women for the difference in their combat pay and their official House salaries. These individuals have found not one but two careers that serve the public, and they should not experience a financial penalty for doing so. I congratulate Chairman Brady for introducing this bill, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 6608. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. EHLERS. I have another speaker. Myself.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Continuing with the discussion of energy, Mr. Speaker, let me just say I have a deep interest in the topic and have had for many years. Most of my colleagues here remember and recognize that I am a physicist, and physicists deal with energy all the time. One of the biggest problems that we address is that energy is intangible. The public simply doesn't recognize what it is, how its obtained, what the limitations are, and so forth; and I think we should do a better job of educating them about these problems. Another aspect is that energy is critical to every aspect of life. As an example, we talk about the agricultural revolution. But very few people recognize that the agricultural revolution, even though attempted a number of times many, many years ago, did not actually succeed until people learned to domesticate their animals so they could do the plowing and thresh the wheat and so forth. The second major revolution in history is the industrial revolution, once again directly tied to the use of energy. It's the first use of nonhuman and nonanimal energy with hydropower to drive the mills, later coal to drive the steam engines and so forth. And so the major revolutions in history took place in connection with the use of energy and the development of new forms of energy. We are now at a critical point in our life as a Nation and as a planet. If we do not recognize the changes required in our energy use, we are going to retrogress. Instead of advancing, we will lose the advantages we have from our copious amounts of energy and end up in a state where we have less energy than we had before. This will have disastrous economic effects, unless we change our direction. If you look back over history, virtually every recession has been tied to a dramatic increase in the cost of energy, which is something that we also have occurring now. So this is a serious problem, something that should be addressed immediately, and should not wait for next year. There are a number of excellent proposals out there from both parties. I would hope that we would winnow these out and come up with proposals that truly accomplish what we have to do, and that is to preserve our standard of living by developing new sources of energy, certainly developing those that we already have and know about which we are not really using properly. It's essential that we do this, but this isn't going to happen by itself. We need help from the Congress to lay down the guidelines for the people in the energy industry, to researchers in the national labs and other labs to really tackle this problem and come up with new ideas. I don't care if it's wind energy, which happens to be a part of solar energy; whether it's wave energy, which is also derived from solar energy; or whether it's photovoltaic cells. Naturally it helps that very soon photovoltaic cell research will be so good that we will have photovoltaic shingles on every house because we can make them at a cost that eventually will be less than that of the asphalt shingles. If we do that, every house becomes a power-generating system, and much of the electrical needs of each homeowner can be met just by the use of solar shingles on the roof of their home. This would be a tremendous boon to our country. Relatively free energy; you just buy the shingles which you have to buy anyway, and you get essentially free energy out of it. So there are many options that we should be pursuing, and we should be encouraging and helping as a Congress, so that we can help the public that is becoming desperate about what to do about the cost of energy and the price of energy. So I sincerely hope our Congress will tackle this issue and deal with it, and meet the needs of the public and of the planet at the same time. With that, if you have no further speakers, I'm pleased to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).

Mr. EHLERS. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Madam Speaker, it is my distinct pleasure to rise today in commemoration of the 100th anniversary of Our Lady of Sorrows Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan. On Saturday, September 13, 2008, a centennial dinner will celebrate this extraordinary milestone, and it is a privilege to recognize and honor Rev. Theodore J. Kozlowski and the congregation of this remarkable church for the model of Christian service and the beacon of hope they have offered to the Grand Rapids community over the past century. From the first mass celebrated on September 20, 1908, by their young energetic priest, Father Salvatore Cianci, Our Lady of Sorrows was founded primarily to provide for the growing Italian community in Grand Rapids. Meeting in the basement chapel of St. Andrew's Cathedral, this fledgling church offered the opportunity for Italians to worship and continue their faithful prayer life in the language of their childhood. Through the devoted efforts of Fr. Cianci and the small but very dedicated congregation, a dream became reality on Easter Sunday 1921, when a new structure intended as a temporary church, and also a second building intended to house a future school, were blessed and dedicated. Even though the Great Depression prevented the parish from fulfilling its dream of a permanent house of worship for almost 40 years, Our Lady of Sorrows School did open its doors for the first time on September 25, 1922, with 56 students in attendance. Certainly this was an exceptional accomplishment for a church which originated from the hard work and perseverance of just a handful of Italian immigrant families. A long, faith-filled journey has led the congregation of Our Lady of Sorrows to now carry out the same legacy of their Italian forefathers for the growing Hispanic population in our community. Today, as this parish reaches out to each member and to a larger, more diverse community with loving acts of kindness, they continue to enrich and inspire those who are touched by their works. Our Lady of Sorrows is well known and widely respected for bringing a greater understanding of all cultures within the Catholic Church to others throughout the greater Grand Rapids area. This extraordinary anniversary reminds all of us that wonderful things do happen when we seek to serve and glorify God. Reflecting on the many struggles and joys Our Lady of Sorrows has faced during its first century of service to the Lord, it is the perfect time to reaffirm and strengthen our own faith, recognize the call to reach out to others, and share the power of God's love. I am proud to represent the many parishioners of various races and ethnic groups who call Our Lady of Sorrows their church home, and am grateful to this congregation for their illuminating example of God's kindness. I am honored to extend my best wishes for a memorable, grace-filled celebration of a century of caring concern and service to the Grand Rapids community.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the conference report on the Higher Education Opportunity Act. As a conferee on this bill, I am very pleased that we have a final bill before us. I want to thank Chairman Miller and Ranking Member McKeon for all their hard work on this bill, and I especially thank them for including provisions that are very important to people in Michigan. Higher education is vitally important for students entering the workforce and for the global competitiveness of this country. This bill will ensure students have better access to higher education, and that they have received a high quality educational experience when they receive their degree. Now that a college degree is the bare minimum requirement for so many jobs, the need for better access is stronger than ever. Let me comment on some specific provisions in the bill. In 2007, Representative Blumenauer and I joined together to introduce the Higher Education Sustainability Act (H.R. 3637). I commend Representative Blumenauer for his leadership in ``greening'' colleges and universities, and I am grateful that he allowed me to partner with him on an issue that is so dear to my heart. I am very pleased that provisions of our bill have been included in the conference report, especially now when energy prices and shortages are on everyone's mind. Simply put, sustainability is meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. As population growth, urban development and growing energy use place stress on our ecosystem, it is imperative that we develop innovative and successful sustainable operations and programs. Colleges and universities are in a unique position to foster new knowledge, evaluate policies and discover new technologies to address sustainability. Sustainable operations and programs on university campuses include water and energy conservation, recycling, and academic programs such as engineering courses that encourage innovative product designs, e.g., alternative fuels for cars, other new energy sources, and new types of packaging that use fewer natural materials. The conference report contains two key sustainability provisions. First, it convenes a Summit on Sustainability with higher education experts working in the area of sustainable operations and programs. The Federal Government and university and business leaders are encouraged to identify best practices in sustainability by promoting current efforts, enhancing research and identifying opportunities for partnerships to expand sustainable operations and academic programs. Also, it authorizes the Sustainability Grant Program. The Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, is authorized to award grants to colleges and universities to establish sustainability research programs, such as developing new alternative energy sources. It also allows schools to implement sustainability practices on campus. The conference report also contains an important study of distance education. It requires the Secretary of Education to contract with the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a scientifically valid study of the quality of distance education, as compared to traditional, campus-based education. With so many students using distance education and a huge Federal investment in helping students attend college, it is critical that we effectively evaluate new modes of instruction to ensure that our students are receiving a topnotch education. Finally, the conference report contains an array of provisions related to science, technology, engineering and math, collectively ``STEM'', education. Notably, it includes the National STEM Database to allow students with an interest in the STEM fields to more easily find financial aid. Also, it authorizes important loan forgiveness for college graduates pursuing careers in the STEM fields, and it authorizes the Mathematics and Science Scholars Program to award scholarships to students pursuing STEM majors. Now, more than ever, we must increase the size of our STEM workforce to maintain our competitiveness and national security. In closing, I support this conference report since it helps students and makes many overdue improvements to the Higher Education Act. I urge all Members to vote in support of it.