Rodney Frelinghuysen

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)(3) of House Resolution 5, 113th Congress, which states: It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general appropriation bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments proposing an equal or a greater decrease in such budget authority pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI. The amendment proposes a net increase in the budget authority in the bill in violation of such section. I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I move to strike the last word, and oppose the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. The gentleman from Georgia's amendment would further cut funding for renewable energy and energy reliability and efficiency program by an additional 1 percent from the levels contained in our bill. The Energy and Water Development bill cuts levels by $2.9 billion below last year's level, including $971 million from renewable energy and energy-efficient activities. In just those accounts alone, that's 50 percent below fiscal year 2013, and 67 percent below the President's request. To that end, the funding the bill preserves is just as important as the funding it cuts. Our bill focuses the vast majority of remaining funds within this account on programs that can address high gas prices and help American manufacturers compete in the global marketplace. These programs can reduce American manufacturing costs, help companies compete in that market, creating jobs here at home. Reducing Federal spending is critical. That's why the bill reduces funding for this account to half its current levels. But we also must make strategic investments to address high gas prices and help America compete. The amendment would eliminate these important programs. I urge Members to oppose it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word and speak in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. The gentleman's amendment, as he said, would increase funding for this EERE account and by cutting weapons activities in the NNSA administration and using that as an offset. Our bill not only cuts the renewable energy and energy efficiency accounts, it also cuts fossil energy by $84 million, 16 percent, nuclear energy by 14 percent. As I said earlier, Mr. Chairman, our allocation made for some tough choices. We've placed highest priority on activities in which the Federal Government must take the lead. One of those, of course, the most critical mass is assuring funding for national security. It's our highest priority. While I support the programs that he outlines, we should not divert to programs from national security. Therefore, I oppose his amendment and ask Members to do so as well. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I rise to oppose the gentleman's amendment. Our bill already cuts the National Renewable Energy Lab, or NREL, within the Department of Energy. We cut it by $15 million below the President's request. That's a 33 percent reduction. Quite honestly, I don't think the facility could take any further reductions that undermine this budget consolidation, which is something we've sought, something which the Department of Energy has gone ahead with. Therefore, I oppose the amendment, and urge others to do the same. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word. The Acting Chair. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Chair, I rise to oppose the gentleman's amendment. This amendment offers, as he said, a $1 million gesture of support for renewable energy, energy reliability and efficiency activities in the Department of Energy. It would increase funding by $1 million using the departmental administration as its offset. While I support my colleague's good intention, what he calls his signal gesture of support, we simply cannot afford to increase energy efficiency and renewable energy by diverting funding from other essential activities. Therefore, I oppose the amendment and urge others to do so as well. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment. The amendment would eliminate all renewable energy and energy efficiency activities, fossil energy activities, and severely reduce funding for nuclear energy in favor of deficit savings. And, of course, the committee has done a lot; we have done a lot of cutting. We are way below the 2008 level. I think we have made a commitment in our committee to reduce spending and contribute to reducing the deficit. Nuclear energy research does keep American innovation at the forefront of the technology that we invented. I think we need to continue that leadership. Fossil energy, whether people like it or not, provides 82 percent of our Nation's energy needs, and we need to find ways to refine and make it even more productive. Lastly, renewable energy addresses high gas prices and helps America's manufacturers compete in the global marketplace. Maybe not all of those activities are imperative, but renewable energy is part of that equation, and our bill supports diversity of energy supply. Therefore, I oppose the amendment and urge Members to do likewise. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Chair, I rise to oppose the gentleman's amendment. The amendment would increase Renewable Energy, Energy Reliability and Efficiency by $10 million using, once again, as others have before him, the Departmental Administration account as an offset. As I said earlier, our allocation did make for some tough choices. One thing we know is that you can't operate a Department of Energy unless you have staff doing oversight and doing the tough work of reviewing contracts to make sure the money we give them is well spent. So with all due respect, I have to oppose the gentleman's amendment. We cannot divert more money from the essential department activities. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I rise to oppose the gentleman's amendment. This amendment would increase funding for Renewable Energy, Energy Reliability and Efficiency activities of the Department of Energy by $15 million using Weapons Activities within the Nuclear National Nuclear Security Administration as an offset. While I and I think all the committee members support the programs championed by my colleague, we simply cannot afford to increase efficiency and renewable energy activities by diverting funding from inherently Federal responsibilities. The focus and primary responsibility of the Department of Energy is indeed to make sure that we have a modern nuclear weapons stockpile, even if we don't need to use it. It has to be verified by the Secretary to the President. So this would divert funds from that essential mission. I oppose the amendment, urge Members to do likewise, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Let me say it may be the relative lateness of the hour, but I welcome the comity with which you put forward your amendment. May I just say for the record that having handled the Hurricane Sandy supplemental, I can make you aware that our power was off in our very modern part of northern New Jersey for the vast number of my constituents for over 2\1/2\ weeks. Even despite the best minds in the Nation, some of which still circle around the remains of Bell Laboratories, we still didn't get it right. But having said that, I appreciate your intent and your good humor. Our primary focus has been national defense and nuclear security. I don't think this is the time when we should be taking away from that modernization project, which is important and something which has to be certified in terms of being reliable to the President by the Secretary of Energy. So I oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Chair, I insist on my point of order.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Chair, the amendment proposes to amend portions of the bill not yet read. The amendment may not be considered en bloc under clause 2(f) of rule XXI because the amendment proposes to increase the level of outlays in the bill. The object being increased has first year outlays of $72,500,000. The objects being decreased have decreased first year outlays of $71,250,000, leading to a net outlay increase of $1,250,000. I ask for a ruling of the Chair.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Chair, I would ask that the reading continue.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. As I said on other occasions, ensuring adequate funding for the modernization of our nuclear weapons stockpile is our highest priority in our Energy and Water Development bill. This amendment unacceptably strikes funding for these very critical national security investments, and therefore I oppose the amendment and ask others to do as well. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.