Bart Gordon

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I certainly thank the gentleman for his generosity. There is a lot of interest in this bill. I would like to yield now 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Carnahan), another active member of our committee.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski), the vice chairman of the Science and Technology Committee.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Giffords), the former State senator.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, thanks to the generosity of our ranking member, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to one of his fellow Texans (Mr. Hinojosa), chairman of the Subcommittee on Higher Education.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 2006-2007 Riverda1e High School Lady Warriors and their championship basketball season. The Lady Warriors are from my home town of Murfreesboro, Tennessee, and I am proud of them for this tremendous accomplishment. I know these ladies put forth intense determination and perseverance as they captured the first girls basketball championship for a Murfreesboro team in 83 years and the first ever for Riverdale High School. The Lady Warriors were dominant throughout their season. Their final win over Memphis Northside was the team's 17th straight victory. I commend Riverdale High School principal Tom Nolan, Lady Warriors head coach Michael Burt and assistant coaches Brianne Dodgen, Tisha Hayes, Jamey Arnold and Cuyler Lanier. I extend my congratulations to the 2006-2007 AAA State Champion Lady Warriors: Anne Marie Lanning, Alex Bivens, Jessica Whitens, Nikki Talley, Shellina Burgess, Morgann Swoape, Clarke Davis, Hillary Grider, Payton Dickinson, Candace Spurlock, Rachel Orman, Natalie Lanning and Manager Jackie Donovan.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. I thank my friend for yielding. Mr. Speaker, as I have watched this healthy debate over the last 2 days, I keep thinking about an e-mail that I received from a lady in Springfield, Tennessee. You would never accuse this woman of not supporting the troops because her husband was a soldier serving in Iraq. He was a month from returning home to his wife and his two daughters, but he was ordered to stay in Iraq for another 6 months because our troops are spread so thin. He hasn't been home since October of 2005. These are the words that she wrote to me: ``Mr. Gordon, we need to help other countries, but there are already 3,000 families in America whose lives will never be the same. I want, need, and would love to see my husband again.'' Mr. Speaker, this lady supports the troops. I support the troops in Iraq, and I believe everyone in this Chamber supports our troops. They perform their missions with bravery and honor, and I commend them for the job they are doing. But I am unconvinced that deploying more troops and spending more money is the right strategy. And I am not the only one. General Colin Powell said in December: ``I am not persuaded that another surge of troops into Baghdad for purposes of suppressing this civil war will work.'' General George Casey, the former commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, said last month: ``It's always been my view that a heavy and sustained American military presence was not going to solve the problem in Iraq . . . '' In December it was reported that the Joint Chiefs of Staff unanimously disagreed with the concept of troop escalation. General Colin Powell, General George Casey, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, these are men who support the troops. Yet these American generals, the Iraqi Study Group, and the Iraqi Prime Minister have all opposed this troop surge. We have had four other surges since we first went to Iraq. None produced a lasting change on the ground. In October more combat troops were sent into Baghdad to fight the growing violence there. Unfortunately, the sectarian violence has only grown worse. Many have endured great sacrifices in the 4 years this war has been waged. More than 3,000 Americans have lost their lives; 23,000 more have been wounded. We have spent more than $350 billion with many billions more to go. We have been in Iraq longer than we were involved in World War II. And there is no end in sight. For 1,300 years Sunnis have been fighting Shias. Now is the time for the Iraqis to take more responsibility for securing the peace in their own nation. No one has offered any evidence that 20,000 more American troops would change the direction of a 4-year-old war or 1,300 years of history.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. The gentleman from Georgia has been talking about examples. Well, let me give you an example, we just heard about whining, whining about chocolate and whining about tobacco. Here we are trying to give you an example about leading, about doing something about this country's very, very, very major problem with global warming and with alternative energy and energy dependency. Let me tell you what, I have just been through 3 hours of a hearing, 3 hours, where representatives of the IPCC, which represents 113 nations including the United States, came before us and said after 5 years of study, 30,000 comments, 600 scientists; they made a recommendation, and that recommendation was that with 100 percent certainty, there is global warming, and with 90 percent certainty, human action is making it worse. Today, our example is trying to do something about that. Today, we have the first bill on this floor to deal with alternative energy, to deal with making our Nation energy independent. So this is an example of us trying to move forward. It is a bipartisan bill, and I might remind the gentleman that when, after 9/11, when Speaker Hastert was the first to be given transportation for security reasons, I don't think anybody over there complained. I don't think anybody over here complained. When the President of the United States, George Bush, said that it is a matter of security, we didn't hear anybody complain; when the Department of Defense has also given a ruling on this, that again what is available will be available for the person who is the second-ranking person to be President of the United States. Now, if Speaker Pelosi is going to be attacked here on this floor for eating chocolate or anything else, you can imagine what more serious people might be doing. So, yes, this is an example today. We have an example of, if we want to, on a bipartisan basis do something about global warming. Let me tell you, we talk about 10 years from now, maybe. Or is it 20 years? Sometimes you can say, well, to have a serious problem with global warming, it might be 30 years or 50 years. Well, that is not hypothetical. I have a 5-year-old daughter. Some of you probably have young children or young grandchildren. If any of them were born in this century, in all likelihood, they are going to live till the end of this century. They are going to inherit a much different world. So this is real. So I think now the time is to lead by example. Let us do something about this. We have a good bill on the floor. This is our example. You can have whatever example you want.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I want to concur with my friend from Texas in terms of his concern about coal being a part of the overall package of dealing with energy independence. He is absolutely right, and I think everyone in this body recognizes that clean coal will be a part of our energy independence. Unfortunately, though, this amendment does not really deal with clean coal. This amendment is a continuing effort to try to undermine this good bill today dealing with alternative energy. This is a very narrow bill. This is a bill that was cosponsored by myself as chairman of the Science Committee, the ranking member of the Science Committee, and many others, and passed out of the committee unanimously because we are trying to deal with the problem today. We want to deal today with the infrastructure problems that stop our alternative fuels from being able to be used in existing infrastructure. Clean coal will be a part of a solution later, but clean coal is not available right now. And so why are we stopping dealing with something we can do today for something that there is no solution for today? Clean coal will be a part of what we do over in the Science and Technology Committee. We have been in discussions about this. I think everybody should know that. So that is off the table. The question today on this motion to recommit is, do you want to move forward and do something today about alternative energy? If you do, vote down this amendment. If you do not want to do anything about this today, if you want to talk and talk and talk and come back another day, then vote ``aye.''

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from Massachusetts for yielding. Once again from the White House: ``This is a silly story. I think it's been unfair to the Speaker.'' And let me tell you what else is silly. It is silly for the party that inherited the biggest surplus in our Nation's or world's history and then turned it into a deficit, the biggest deficit in history, to come in here and try to be fiscally conservative. And let me tell you what is even more silly about that. What is even more silly about that is they have a silly amendment that has been accepted; yet they want to continue to talk about the silly amendment, pretending to be fiscally conservative, although it is costing the American taxpayer to keep this Record going even though this amendment, silly amendment, has been accepted. And that is what is silly about this.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Thank you for that commentary, and I think the White House has given you the answer. If you would like for me to read it to you again. As I heard Barney Frank say here one time, I can read it to you, but I can't understand it for you. But I would be happy to read it to you again: ``This is a silly story, and I think it's been unfair to the Speaker. What happened in the wake of September 11 is that the Department of Defense, in order to protect the Speaker, began offering aircraft to the Speaker of the House of Representatives; did it with Representative Hastert, doing so with Speaker Pelosi. We think it's important that the Speaker of the House enjoy the same kind of security that we arranged for Speaker Hastert in the wake of September 11. And, like I said, there has been a lot of overhype in reporting this story.''

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. What is silly is pretending to be a fiscal conservative while you are continuing to waste the taxpayers' dollars talking about an amendment that has been accepted. That is what is silly.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. My friend, the gentleman from Texas, that is not a contradiction of terms. As usual, you do a good job of putting oil on the water and we thank you for that. I thank you also for cosponsoring this bill, this bipartisan bill, that went through the hearings, this bill that will be the first real effort to deal with alternative energy. This is part of the process, unfortunately, and we will go through it. But at the end of the day we are going to have a good bill. I thank you for being a part of that.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I would like to thank the gentlewoman for her constructive amendment to this good bipartisan bill, and we will accept that amendment.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, although this amendment is a bit oddly written, it appears to be repetitious to the previous Burgess amendment, which is repetitious to the previous Eshoo amendment. With that said, in the spirit of civility, we accept this amendment. Amendment Offered by Mr. Ferguson as a Substitute for the Amendment Offered by Mr. Burgess

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 547.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Interesting, Mr. Chairman, the report of this amendment has reached the White House. I would like to report to you the official statement from the White House just given by Tony Snow. Quoting Mr. Snow, ``This is a silly story. I think it's been unfair to the Speaker. What happened in the wake of September 11 is the Department of Defense in order to protect the Speaker began offering aircraft to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, did it with Representative Hastert, doing so with Speaker Pelosi. ``We think it's important that the Speaker of the House enjoy the same kind of security that we arranged for Speaker Hastert in the wake of September 11. And like I said, I think that there's been a lot of overhyped reporting on this.'' I certainly concur with Mr. Snow. This is a silly story. We have a chance to get on to serious business. To put this to rest, as the author of this bill, and as the chairman of the Science Committee from which it came, we want to accept this amendment and allow this country then to get on to the serious business of trying to do something about alternative fuels.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 365) to provide for a research program for remediation of closed methamphetamine production laboratories, and for other purposes.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 365, the bill now under consideration.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 365, the Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act. This is the same legislation which passed the House a year ago, but was not enacted into law. Unfortunately, the need for this legislation is just as strong today as it was then. We have a terrible problem with methamphetamine in Tennessee and the Nation as a whole. One side effect of the methamphetamine epidemic is the chemical waste dump left behind by meth cooks. H.R. 365 focuses on cleanup needs for former meth labs, a tremendous problem facing communities across the country. The Drug Enforcement Agency reported more than 12,500 domestic meth lab seizures in 2005 alone. These meth labs, most often found in residential settings, are contaminated, not only with methamphetamine but also with other toxic residue associated with the production of meth. These chemical residues pollute the inside of a residence and also threaten septic and water systems. The meth epidemic has not only devastated families, it has also left thousands of potentially toxic waste dumps spread across the country. Right now, there are unsuspecting families living in homes that were once illegal meth labs. Dangerous and hidden toxic substances on these sites threaten the health of these families, with children being the most vulnerable to the devastating long-term effects of exposure. H.R. 365 addresses the specific problem of determining the level of cleanup required to ensure that a former meth lab is safe for occupation. I want to stress that H.R. 365 is not a Federal mandate. Rather, it requires the EPA to develop model, voluntary, health-based cleanup guidelines for use by States and localities if they desire. In addition, H.R. 365 authorizes this to initiate a research program to develop meth detection equipment for field use. This will help law enforcement agents detect active meth labs faster and assist in measuring the levels of contamination in former meth labs. Finally, H.R. 365 requires a study by the National Academy of Sciences on the long-term health impact of exposure to meth labs on children and first responders. It authorizes a total of $5 million for EPA and NIST to carry out these activities over 2 years, a bargain by any standard. The bill is endorsed by the National Association of Counties, the National Sheriffs' Association, the Fraternal Order of Police, the National Narcotics Officers' Associations' Coalition, the National Association of Realtors, the National Multi-Housing Council and the National Apartment Association. H.R. 365 is not the complete solution to the methamphetamine epidemic. Unfortunately, there will always be people who decide to harm themselves by using methamphetamines, dangerous drugs such as meth or manufacturing dangerous drugs such as meth. H.R. 365 aims to protect innocent people whose lives are endangered by these illegal activities. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Ranking Member Hall, Representative Wu, and Representative Calvert for working with me on this legislation in the past Congress, and for sponsoring this legislation for reintroduction in the 110th Congress, as well as I want to thank Mike Quear for the good staff work that has helped bring this bill before us. This bill is an important component in helping our local communities combat the meth problem. I would urge everyone to vote ``yes'' on this bill. Mr. Speaker, I would like to place two letters in the Record. Committee on Science and Technology, Washington, DC, February 7, 2007. Hon. John D. Dingell, Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Dingell: Thank you for your willingness to allow floor consideration of H.R. 365, the Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of 2007, to proceed unimpeded. As you may know, this bill addresses very important environmental research issues and is a priority for our caucus; approximately half of the House Democratic Caucus has cosponsored the legislation. I have been cognizant of the jurisdictional limits of the Committee on Science and Technology since I began writing this legislation. Therefore, I instructed my staff to work with the Office of the Parliamentarian to assure a sole referral to the Committee on Science in the 109th Congress and to the Committee on Science and Technology in the 110th Congress. I am pleased that they were successful in both Congresses in keeping the bill within the Science and Technology Committee's black letter jurisdiction over environmental research and development and standardization of weights and measures. I acknowledge that your committee, if it had so chosen, would have had the right to request a sequential referral of this legislation, both in the 109th Congress and in the 110th Congress. Since this did not occur, I am unable to predict whether the Speaker would have given the Committee on Energy and Commerce a formal referral. I would like to make it clear that I recognize that sequential referrals sometimes do occur at this point in the process and I further recognize that our proceeding to the Floor of the House with this legislation should not be construed as deciding this issue one way or the other. As you requested, I will insert our two letters in the Congressional Record as part of the consideration of the bill on the House floor. I value your advice and expertise and welcome it any time you wish to share it on legislation that has been referred to the Committee on Science and Technology. Sincerely, Bart Gordon, Chairman.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, let me first compliment Mr. Diaz-Balart for a good explanation of the bill and the threats that go with this. I now would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Carnahan), a member of our Science Committee.

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Calvert for cosponsoring this legislation last session as well as this session, and for his work as cochair of the important Methamphetamine Caucus. I now yield 2 minutes to my friend from Texas (Mr. Al Green), an alumnus of the Science Committee.