Gene Green

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleagues, my good friend from Indiana and chair of the subcommittee, Mr. Visclosky, and Chairman Obey, for bringing up this important piece of legislation. I rise in support of the supplemental report on H.R. 2641. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the subcommittee leadership for their inclusion of $18.3 million for the Houston Ship Channel Navigation project, which is $2 million more than the President's budget, and for including $15.442 million in operations and maintenance for the Houston Ship Channel, which is $1 million over the President's request. While I understand the tight fiscal constraints this Congress is under, I hope we increase funding for these projects in the future. The continued O&M funding would be used to keep the channel at its authorized depth, which is critical to keeping the channel navigable for the tankers that bring in crude oil to our refineries. The navigation funding goes towards important environmental restoration work in the deepening and widening project. We are at the end of that project now. Our area relies heavily on Corps of Engineers' funding, since we're not only an energy-producing area but also a low-lying area in the middle of a flood plain. I requested funding through the Army Corps of Engineers for Greens Bayou, Hunting Bayou and Halls Bayou, which were flooded during Tropical Storm Allison in 2001. These authorized projects are located in blue-collar residential areas in my district, where the threat of future flooding is all too real. I am grateful the subcommittee included $588,000 for Greens Bayou, which will help conclude the study portion of the project and now the project is fast approaching its construction phase. The Greens Bayou project has a high 3.7 benefit to cost ratio, and in 2001, over 15,000 homes in this watershed flooded in Tropical Storm Allison. I appreciate the committee's continued understanding of the pressing flood control needs in our area, but am disappointed only Greens Bayou received funding in this appropriations cycle. Hunting Bayou has already started construction and a cut-off of Federal funding threatens to put this project into danger of falling further behind schedule. Fortunately, this is a 211 (f) project which provides the local sponsor--the Harris County Flood Control District-- flexibility to continue work on the project. The Hunting Bayou project will reduce the number of homes and businesses in the 100-year flood plain by 85 percent, from 7,400 structures to 1,000. Eight thousand homes flooded in this area during Tropical Storm Allison as well. I also hope Halls Bayou will receive funding in the future; this project is authorized in WRDA 1990 and is included in the pending WRDA legislation to become a Sec. 211(t) project. Greens Bayou, Hunting Bayou, and Halls Bayou are not projects to protect vacation homes or homes in obvious flood hazard areas. Most of these areas were outside the flood plain until upstream development expanded the flood plains. In closing, I want to commend the Chairman, and especially my good friend from Texas, Congressman Chet Edwards, for their hard work on this legislation, and hope they will continue their progress on funding critical needs across the Nation. I urge my colleagues to support the supplemental report.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 375, Honoring United Parcel Service and its 100 years of commitment and leadership in the United States. I have a UPS facility in my district on Sweetwater Lane in Houston and I have visited the facility many times to speak with management and the employees who are represented by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. I even delivered packages with the UPS employees a few years ago on the Beltway 8 and Intercontinental Airport Route. Many of my constituents work at this UPS location and I am pleased that UPS continues to be a responsible employer and corporate citizen. Many businesses have difficulties surviving over time, but UPS has stayed strong for 100 years. We appreciate their strong relationship with the local communities and the services they provide worldwide. I am pleased to honor UPS for their 100 years of service and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee for allowing me to speak. Before I get into my prepared remarks, part of the resolution, if my colleagues would go to page 5 of the resolution, says as part of the justification required, the President shall, at a minimum, address whether it is necessary for the Armed Forces to carry out the following missions: protecting U.S. diplomatic facilities and U.S. citizens, including Armed Forces who are engaged in carrying out other missions; serving in roles consistent with customary diplomatic positions; but also, engaging in actions to disrupt and eliminate al Qaeda and its affiliated organizations in Iraq. So while I sat here on the floor listened and heard, ``we are bailing out of attacking al Qaeda,'' we are not doing that. This resolution says we will still be there. The President has to certify, though, that is what we are doing. We are not shoring up the Iraqi Government; we are fighting al Qaeda, who brought us September 11. So anybody who says we are leaving is just wrong. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution and this legislation, and thank Chairman Skelton for his work on the bill. Like Chairman Skelton, I want to thank our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines and their families who are serving our country. I have stated before, we must let the Iraqi Government know our commitment is not open-ended. I have not supported efforts for immediate withdrawal, but this bill, just like our first supplemental sent to the President, which he vetoed, lets the Iraqi Government know that they need to make some tough choices to stabilize their country within the next several months. It also gives our administration time to have a comprehensive strategy in Iraq, and allows the troops to remain to protect our diplomatic facilities and fight al Qaeda, and training and equipping the Iraqi security forces. As this legislation states, we give the President the authority to use the Armed Forces to defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by the Iraqi government at that time. But we won that battle. The government was removed. The power and its leader indicted, tried and convicted, and executed by the newly elected, now-democratic government of Iraq. This bill will bring our troops home by April 1 of next year--that will be more than 5 years since the war began. U.S. taxpayers have spent billions of dollars, and thousands of troops have given their lives to bring security and stability to Iraq. While the current Iraqi government has been organizing and security forces have been training, our forces have been responsible for every facet of security in Iraq. Our troops defeated Saddam's Army, worked to control the country, policed Iraq's streets, protected the transitional and elected governments, and trained Iraq security forces. Our military has given the Iraqi government, the Iraqi security forces, and the Iraqi people every opportunity to have a stable, democratic country. It is time to let the Iraqi people know that 5 years is long enough--they must take responsibility for the future of their country. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill to bring our troops home in a safe, responsible timeframe.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the College Reduction Act of 2007, and I thank the chairman and the committee for bringing this bill to the floor. I think it is a great step forward for our college students. This important piece of legislation will strengthen the middle class by making college more affordable in several ways at no additional cost to taxpayers. First, it will increase the maximum Pell grant scholarship by at least $500 over the next 5 years, and expand student eligibility for other grants like the National SMART grant. Both of these things will increase the purchasing power for students who otherwise would not be able to afford going to college. In Texas alone, over 475,000 students will benefit from a $500 increase in the Pell grant. In addition, this bill will cut interest rates on need-based Federal student loans from 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent over the next 5 years. All of this will be done at no additional cost to the taxpayers by cutting excess subsidies paid by the Federal Government to lenders in the student loan industry. Four of the six offsets were already approved by the House this year, when it overwhelmingly voted to pass the College Student Relief Act of 2007 this past January. During the past few years, student lenders have been able to increase their efficiencies through market-driven mechanisms, but the Government's subsidization has continued unchecked. The Congress has a chance to help the American people at no additional cost for the taxpayer. How can we resist doing this? In our district, financial barriers often inhibit the ability of high school graduates to go to college. By reducing student loan interest rates and increasing Federal grants, we are encouraging families and students to get a college education. When we pass this legislation, we are investing in the future of our economy, because we will have more college graduates with a lower debt burden. This will enable graduates to do things like buy homes, invest, and fuel our economy. This is such a critical bill, and it's important that this body approach this bill in a manner that shows bipartisan support for educating our children. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Texas for yielding to me. And I want to thank this House, Madam Speaker, because earlier this year we passed a bill and it has been signed by the President naming the Department of Education building for Lyndon Baines Johnson. A lot of our goal was to make sure that Lady Bird was alive when that was done. And it was. When President Bush signed the bill, she actually heard; because of her illness she couldn't be in Washington, but she heard the bill signing and the great things said about the legacy of President Johnson and the Johnson family. And all of us share the loss of the Johnson family and the loss of Lady Bird. She literally defined the term ``lady'' for those of us who knew her.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2900, legislation to reauthorize important user fee programs at the Food and Drug Administration and enact critical drug safety reforms at the agency. This legislation is the result of years of hard work by the Energy and Commerce Committee and particularly the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee and the Health Subcommittee. I am proud to serve on both of these subcommittees. The Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee has worked on a bi-partisan basis to investigate the drug safety concerns brought to light by scandals associated with drugs such as Vioxx, Ketek and Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, or SSRIs, which are typically used to treat depression. These investigations uncovered significant safety lapses at the FDA and shed a bright light on the FDA's bias toward drug approval with too little attention paid to post-market safety concerns. The FDA Amendments Act of 2007 makes important changes at the FDA to place a greater emphasis on post-market surveillance within the agency. Specifically, this legislation would establish a Risk, Evaluation, and Mitigation Strategy whereby drugs approved by the agency are monitored throughout their life-cycle for adverse events or other signs of safety concerns. A critical aspect of this strategy is the additional authority this bill gives the Secretary of HHS to mandate that drug manufacturers conduct post-market studies. Under this bill, the additional post-market activities extend to the user fee programs that help fund the drug approval process. Specifically, this bill directs drug manufacturers utilizing the FDA's drug approval process to dedicate an additional $225 million over five years for post-market surveillance activities at the FDA. This additional funding represents an important investment by the pharmaceutical industry in the FDA's postmarket safety activities, while also ensuring that pre-market user fees are adequate to bring potentially life-saving medicines to market in a reasonable time. This legislation also reauthorizes the Medical Device User Fee Act, as well as the Best Pharmaceuticals For Children Act and the Pediatric Research Equity Act. The unanimous support of the committee for this bill is a testament to the open process and bi-partisan nature in which the committee members and staff on both sides of the aisle conducted these negotiations. I would like to thank our Chairman, Mr. Dingell, and our Health Subcommittee Chairman, Mr. Pallone, for their work on this important legislation, and encourage my colleagues to support this important bill. These necessary changes at the FDA will go a long way toward restoring the American public's confidence in the agency and its ability to ensure the safety of the nation's drug supply.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation that provides a 3-month extension to the transitional medical assistance program under Medicaid. TMA provides vital support for low-income American families moving off welfare and into work. Under the TMA program, families whose earnings would otherwise make them ineligible for Medicaid can receive up to 12 months of Medicaid coverage. Without TMA, many families transitioning from welfare to work would go without health insurance and could end up back on welfare. Families leaving welfare often encounter difficulties such as securing health insurance because they have taken low-wage jobs that do not offer employer-sponsored health coverage. In some cases this choice could serve as a deterrent to returning to work, and we want to provide folks with as many incentives as possible to return to work. According to the Congressional Research Service, 79 percent of people with incomes of at least 200 percent of the Federal poverty level benefit from employer-sponsored health insurance, yet only 19 percent of working-age individuals with incomes below the poverty line receive health care coverage through employment. These are folks who earn $10,210 or less a year. If they can't get coverage through their employer, it is essentially cost-prohibitive for them to purchase health insurance. No one should be made to choose between a job and health insurance. Thanks to TMA, many Americans are spared this tough choice and allowed to move off welfare and into a job while maintaining their health coverage. Without TMA, many of our most vulnerable Americans would be unable to access the health coverage they need. In my State of Texas, TMA helps provide more than 111,000 people each month continued treatment for ongoing health care needs. A gap in care would be particularly problematic for the one out of four mothers in the program who are in poor or fair health yet transitioning from welfare to work. The extensions of the program is critical to their continued access to necessary health care. Again in Texas, TMA also reimburses medical providers for more than $300 million in annual expenses for acute medical care, prescription drugs, and other approved Medicaid services. Without TMA, these costs for medically necessary services would be shifted to local governments or charitable organizations, or worse, the client may not receive needed care at all. Mr. Speaker, TMA enjoys wide-ranging bipartisan support. The National Governors Association strongly supports TMA and its extension. According to the National Governors Association, ``without access to regular health care, health problems of a new worker or the worker's family members are likely to lead to greater absenteeism and possibly job loss.'' TMA is also supported by the National Conference of State Legislatures, the American Public Health Association, and the National Association of State Medicaid Directors. The administration also supports this vital program as evidenced by the fact that the President included a 1-year extension of TMA in his fiscal year 2008 budget proposal. Mr. Speaker, in the past Congress has always acted in bipartisan fashion to extend TMA in combination with an equal extension of Federal abstinence education programs. While there is no shortage of debate or opinion on the merits of abstinence education programs, I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this approach, at least for the short term, so we can ensure that hardworking American families don't lose their health care under the transitional medical assistance program. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 1701) to provide for the extension of transitional medical assistance (TMA) and the abstinence education program through the end of fiscal year 2007, and for other purposes.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, the report accompanying H.R. 2643 urges the Environmental Protection Agency to study the health and environmental effects of using trona in air pollution control systems. Trona is a naturally occurring, non-toxic mineral widely used in food additives, in glass manufacturing, paper, laundry products and medicine. It is odorless, non-combustible and stable in the air. Trona is a key ingredient of baking soda. In the United States, the Green River Basin of Wyoming is home to the world's largest deposit of this incredibly useful mineral, and the Wyoming trona industry alone produces close to 20 million tons of trona and employs more than 2,000 people every year. For almost 20 years, trona has also played a critical and growing role in air pollution control at coal-fired power plants, cement plants, municipal incinerators and similar facilities around the country, including Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Virginia and Washington. Texas-based Solvay Chemicals, Inc. pioneered the use of trona in air pollution control systems, and it is the only company in the United States that produces trona products for that purpose. Trona works in air pollution control systems, and it works well. The EPA, which has repeatedly approved the use of trona in air pollution control systems since 1989, reports that those systems have actually reduced sulfur dioxide emissions by more than 85 percent and hydrochloric acid emissions by 95 percent at several power plants around the country, without increasing particulate matter emissions.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. I rise today in strong support of the Conaway Amendment. Supply and demand for energy is out of whack and our Nation needs more energy. Demand for natural gas is already building up across the economy, and proposals pushing cleaner energy will only accelerate this demand. This amendment is a major opportunity for us to respond to today's energy crisis with a national solution. I feel justified in supporting this amendment because I am from a coastal district. My constituents feel the same way as I do on this issue. Chemical production and oil and gas exploration, processing, and refining are Texas's top coastal industries. My colleagues from Florida and California think only they have beaches, but coastal tourism is Texas's second largest coastal industry. That fact alone shows the argument that oil and gas production and coastal tourism are mutually exclusive is just plain wrong. They are acting like Chicken Little, and cannot point to one beach in Texas that has been ruined by oil or natural gas production. There will be less need for LNG facilities and LNG tankers when we tap our own offshore resources so we can use the safest mode of transportation in the world--pipelines. My point is not that we can drill our way to cheap oil or drill our way to energy independence. If we allow domestic production to die out, conservation and research will not save us, and we will have to pay a terrible economic price. I urge my colleagues to support oil and gas production and support the Conaway Amendment.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Speaker, before I get into my remarks, let me talk about some of the remarks and the comments that have been made. I know we've heard a study quoted about $3.50 natural gas. Right now if you can find $3.50 natural gas anywhere, we ought to buy it because now it's $6 to $7 per million cubic feet for natural gas right now. And so whatever studies talk about $3, $3.30, whatever, is really not relevant. I represent a district that we actually have zero emitting natural gas wells in the Gulf of Mexico. Zero emitting for air pollution, zero emitting for water pollution. And I've offered many times to take colleagues who've never been to a natural gas offshore well to just come to the Gulf of Mexico, either off of Texas or Louisiana or maybe Mississippi or Alabama where folks also drill off the coast. Natural gas is one of the cleanest producing fuels we can use. I'm a strong supporter of this Peterson amendment to allow the Department of the Interior to issue new leases for offshore natural gas in areas 25 miles off the coast. We're not talking about 3 miles off the coast. We're not talking about 10 miles. We're talking about 25 miles. This amendment has less to do with fossil fuels and everything to do with helping Congress address our climate change and transition America to a clean energy future. If you are for renewables, if you're for cleaner power, if you're for low-emitting vehicles, if you're for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, then you should be increasing the access to the domestic natural gas supplies. Demand for natural gas is already building across our economy, and proposals pushing cleaner energy will only accelerate the demand. That's because it takes a lot of natural gas to make the materials for our economy that make it more energy efficient. Insulation, weatherization materials, thermal windows, appliances, lightweight vehicle parts, low-resistance tires, compact fluorescent light bulbs, heat reflecting coatings, house wrap, the list goes on and on. All are made from materials that are directly made from natural gas. It also takes natural gas to make materials that make wind turbine blades and solar panels to run biomass facilities and to run cleaner burn power plants. One example is right here in the Capitol where our Speaker and majority leader directed the Chief Administrative Officer, our CAO of the House, to develop a green Capitol initiative. The CAO officer announced last week that his strategy to reduce CO2 emissions from the Capitol power plant was to use natural gas instead of coal, which will lower CO2 emissions by 30 percent from 2006 level. This is equivalent to taking 1,900 cars off the road each year. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to back up their support for addressing both climate change and by supporting domestically produced natural gas in the environmentally responsible Peterson amendment.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my Pennsylvania colleague for yielding to me. This is similar to the earlier amendment, although I rise in strong support of this because it is for new leases, offshore natural gas and oil, at least 100 miles of the U.S. coast. Supply and demand for our energy is out of control and our Nation needs more energy from all sources. Demand for natural gas is already building across the economy and proposals pushing cleaner energy will only accelerate this demand. Natural gas, again, is the most abundant clean-burning fuel to heat and cool our homes and businesses. We also need a lot of natural gas to make the materials that we make wind turbine blades out of and solar blades. Opening the OCS would save $300 billion in natural gas costs over 20 years for customers and manufacturers. High natural gas costs are sending manufacturing jobs overseas following the cheap gas. When I had the Shell CEO of Western Hemisphere two years ago sit in my office and say they transferred jobs from their chemical facilities in our country to the Netherlands because of the high cost of our natural gas, because the North Sea gas was so much cheaper, that is why we need the Peterson amendments. Environmentally conscious nations like Norway, Denmark, Canada, Japan and the United Kingdom are safely producing natural gas in their coastal waters. Why can't we do it? No other country in the world can it do as responsibly as we can. I have been on oil and gas rigs and have seen so few discharges into the ocean. A medium-sized fishing boat will leak more in a year than we will see off some of our rigs. This amendment is a major opportunity for us to respond to today's energy crisis and the climate change with a national solution. I urge my colleagues to support the oil and gas production on the Outer Continental Shelf and support the Peterson amendment.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor a native Houstonian, who has spent the last 25 years of his life serving our country in the United States Navy. After graduating from Lubbock Christian University where he was actively involved in the Army ROTC Program, Chief Day entered the Navy on October 16, 1983, and for the next 5 years was involved in 3 different SEAL teams. While accomplishing numerous tasks with the SEALS, Chief Day committed much of his time to his community. He served as President of the Gateway Housing Council, Director of the Neighborhood Watch Program, and was a member of the San Diego School Board. After being transferred to Europe in 1989, Chief Day continued achieving duties with the Personnel Support Detachment and many community organizations. Some of those organizations include: Leader of the Scottish Boy Scouts, member of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and was recipient of the 1995 Outstanding United Services Organization (USO) Award of Europe. In June 1996, Chief Day was reassigned to Ingleside, Texas, and continued participating in community involvement. During the completion of his assignment with the Afloat Training Group (ATG) and Mine Warfare Training Center, Chief Day became Commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars chapter in Ingleside. During his time as commander he received the highest award in the Department of Texas. The J.T. Rutherford honor is awarded to the number one ranked volunteer member in Texas. In June 1998, Chief Day was relocated to the Middle East and honorably carried out various missions with the Navy and Marine Corps TAFT unit, under the Joint Military Order of the Royal Saudi Navy and Marine Corps forces. After being selected as the number one sailor in Europe and promoted to his current rank of Chief Petty Officer, Chief Day volunteered and deployed to Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Throughout his military career Chief Day earned 42 awards, was selected 5 times as sailor of the quarter, and 3 times as Sailor of the Year. Chief Day is a loving father, husband, and a prime example of a leader who promotes citizenship by participation. As Chief Day's military career comes to a close, I am proud to stand before you and honor a man who has represented his community, state, and country with dignity.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Bishop/Courtney/DeLauro Amendment. The amendment would unfairly target a single liquefied natural gas project, ``Broadwater,'' that is mid-way through a very extensive Federal and State regulatory process. Interfering with this regulatory review would undermine the very process that is designed to provide a thorough assessment of environmental, safety, security and energy supply impacts of the project. I understand the desire of the proponents of this amendment to ensure the ultimate security of their constituents, but I hope this amendment is not simply a red herring to utimately stop further efforts to site LNG terminals across the U.S. LNG has a record of relative safety for the last 40 years, and no LNG tanker or land-based facility has been attacked by terrorists. Since September 11, 2001, the U.S. LNG industry and federal agencies have put new mesures in place to respond to the possibility of terrorism. Federal initiatives to secure LNG are still evolving, but a variety of industry and agency representatives suggest they are reducing the vulnerability of LNG to terrorism. Here in America we only have two options to increase our supply of natural gas to meet our energy needs--we can build more LNG import plants and we can produce more gas offshore. There is no alternative to natural gas in many cases. Unfortunately, the opponents of both options are often the same people--they oppose LNG and they oppose drilling for gas. Without increased exploration or LNG facilities, where will we receive the energy America needs in the immediate future? Natural gas is the cleanest energy source we have besides solar or wind, and it is a critical fuel for industrial facilities and is a feedstock for the petrochemical industry that makes plastic. If we cannot produce natural gas here, we are going to have to import gas to heat our homes and import more plastic in bulk or in consumer products. That hurts our balance of trade. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose the Bishop- Courtney-DeLauro Amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Hinchey-Wolf amendment. Today, more than ever, America needs a transmission grid that will deliver reliable and affordable electricity to consumers across the Nation. The Energy Information Agency projects that electricity consumption will increase 43 percent by 2030. Other studies project growth and demand to grow by 19 percent over the next 10 years, while power capacity will grow by only 6 percent over that same time. It stands to reason we're going to have to move power where we have excess to where we need it. Recognizing the fact the Energy Policy Act of 2005, EPACT, allowed for the designation of national interest corridors where congestion in the electricity grid is jeopardizing reliable service and raising the cost to electricity consumers, this designation is not a mandate that a transmission line be built but, instead, an incentive for stakeholders to address the grid capacity issues. FERC is authorized to get involved only if the State is unwilling to or cannot act, then only after exhaustive Federal considerations. The Hinchey-Wolf amendment, unfortunately, seeks to block funding for the National Electricity Transmission Corridors as contained in the authorizing legislation. Failing to address congestion and transmission infrastructure will do absolutely nothing for electricity consumers who will see their energy bills continue to climb in the future. And more blackouts. Our constituents deserve a robust energy transmission infrastructure, and EPACT encourages congested States to resolve the problems in a timely manner. And we know the issue of blackouts, particularly in mid- America to the Northeast. I urge my colleagues to oppose the Hinchey-Wolf amendment because all it will do is raise electric prices because we can't move power where we really need it.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I wish to engage Subcommittee Chairman Mr. Visclosky in a colloquy for purposes of underscoring the strategic role of petroleum coke gasification to reduce dependence on the foreign supply of energy, and illustrating the technological feasibility of petroleum coke gasification projects to sequester carbon. Mr. Chairman, the Energy and Policy Act of 2005, Public Law 109-58, has a specific provision, section 415, 42 U.S.C. 15975, authorizing the Secretary of Energy to provide loan guarantees for at least five petroleum coke gasification projects. Petroleum coke gasification projects are also qualified under title 17, the Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program under 1703 (c) 2 and (c) 3 as an industrial gasification project and pet coke gasification project, respectively. This provision of the law recognizes the critical importance of these projects in promoting efficient management of energy sources within the United States. Domestic gasification of ``petcoke,'' as it is also called in the U.S. refining industry, will reduce foreign exports of this product. Reducing exports of petcoke will result in reduced emissions of hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide and other gases resulting from production, transportation and burning of fossil fuels associated with energy sources currently being used instead of petcoke. Globally, it would also result in lower emissions from petcoke since this product often is not being burned in clean processes when it is exported. Technology exists today to sequester carbon dioxide byproduct from the petcoke gasification process, pressurize the gas, and inject it underground as a petroleum recovery enhancement technique. Carbon sequestration can be a viable and compatible technology with petcoke gasification where the geology, ongoing field production, and relative distance to the location of a reliable source of carbon dioxide gas co-exist. Petcoke gasification and carbon sequestration technologies would be in use more widely in key regions in our country if market-entry costs were not so high. Mr. Chairman, reducing the cost of capital to place petcoke gasification technology into service is the very objective Congress recognized and set out to implement in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The Department of Energy has not allocated sufficient funds for loan guarantees to demonstrate commercial readiness of the petcoke gasification technology, which will reduce dependence on foreign sources of energy. Adding carbon sequestration will require further allocation of Federal funds to implement this important technology. Mr. Chairman, I urge your consideration to expand the types of projects that receive funding under title XVII of the Energy and Water appropriations bill to include already authorized petcoke projects that will enhance U.S. energy independence. I also urge your support for appropriating sufficient resources for one to two petcoke gasification projects in the fiscal year 2008 funding bill for the Department of Energy and hope you can take this into consideration when negotiating in conference committee with the Senate.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague, my good friend from Indiana and Chair of the subcommittee, for bringing up this important piece of legislation. I rise in strong support of H.R. 2641. I am particularly pleased the committee has provided the Army Corps of Engineers with $5.6 billion, which is $713 million more than the President's request and $246 million more than last year's appropriations. These funds will help strengthen our Nation's flood control programs and navigation infrastructure, which is particularly important to my district. Along the Houston Ship Channel, we have requested $35 million for operations and maintenance on the deepening and widening project. This continued O&M funding would be used to keep the channel at its authorized depth, which is critical to keeping the channel navigable for the tankers that bring in crude oil to our refineries. We also have submitted a request for the environmental mitigation required as a result of the deepening and widening project and would hope that the committee will give that request its full consideration in conference. Our area relies heavily on Corps of Engineers' funding, since we're not only an energy-producing area but also a low-lying area in the middle of a flood plain. I am hopeful that a portion of the increased funding for the Army Corps of Engineers can be directed to Greens Bayou, Hunting Bayou and Halls Bayou, which were flooded during Tropical Storm Allison in 2001. These authorized projects are located in blue-collar residential areas in my district, where the threat of future flooding is all too real. We dodged Hurricane Rita in 2005, but we need to step up our flood control efforts on these projects to give our residents adequate protection when the next storm hits. I appreciate the committee's continued understanding of the pressing flood control needs in our area. I am also hopeful funding can be provided for other meritorious projects in our district, including the University of Houston's Center for Clean Fuels and Power Generation, the Very High Differential Pressure Sub-sea Multiphase Pumping System, and the Texas Hydrogen Highway. This bill also makes a significant investment in researching and developing alternative energy sources which will lead us away from our dependence on fossil fuels. The bill provides $1.6 billion for research into solar energy, biomass and bio-refinery systems, technologies to reduce vehicle emissions, and technologies to make buildings more energy efficient. It also provides much needed resources for weatherization assistance grants which will weather-proof the homes of low-income disabled and elderly individuals. An investment in new sources of energy is critical to meeting our future energy needs, but in the interim we must continue to improve on the conventional sources of energy we use today. That is why I am pleased this bill funds the demonstration of technology that captures carbon exhaust, and researches how to make fossil fuels more efficient and sustainable. These investments in both conventional and renewable energy research will help meet America's future energy needs and diversify our energy portfolio. The University of Houston's Center for Clean Fuels and Power Generation is contributing to this effort, and I have requested funding for the center's expansion. The center's work to conduct cross- disciplinary research and develop technology to spur the discovery and commercialization of new fuels to provide the Nation's transportation and construction sectors with low-cost, reliable and sustainable power sources. I hope the committee will work with us to include funding for this important project in conference. I commend the Chairman, and also my good friend from Texas, Congressman Chet Edwards, for their hard work on this legislation, and urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this appropriations bill and thank Chairman Obey, Chairman Edwards, and our ranking members for their work in setting a new standard for funding our veterans program. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this appropriations bill, and to congratulate Chairman Edwards and Ranking Member and Chairman Obey for their work in crafting this bill that sets a new standard for funding veterans' programs. For the first time since the veterans' service organizations began producing their independent budget, Congress has met and even exceeded their request in this bill. The bill appropriates a total of $87.7 billion for veterans' programs, which marks a $6.7 billion increase in funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs--the largest increase in veterans' health care funding in the 77-year history of the VA. This level of funding lets veterans, our troops, and their families know this Congress is going to make sure the promises we made to the men and women who fight for our country will be fulfilled, even after they are done with their service. The wait times at VA medical facilities have increased in recent years; the number of veterans has increased and will continue to grow in the coming years as service members return from Iraq and Afghanistan; and unspeakable conditions at Walter Reed uncovered earlier this year all require attention, and this bill ensures there is funding to address these problems. During a time of war, we need to demonstrate a strong commitment not only to our troops currently serving, but to those who have returned from service and those who fought to defend our country in previous conflicts. I would also like to offer my support for a project request to provide funding for a fire station at Ellington Field, and I hope the chairman will give it strong consideration as projects are funded. The existing fire station at Ellington field is in a rapidly deteriorating condition and does not meet OSHA or Air Force standards. Roof leaks and lack of insulation result in equipment being destroyed and extremely high operating costs. New firefighting apparatus must be parked outside the station because they will not fit into the truck bays. This fire station supports all flying operations at Ellington Field including Air National Guard, Army National Guard, U.S. Coast Guard, NASA, and civilian aircraft. Construction of a new fire station at Ellington is critical for the Texas Air National Guard and all units stationed at Ellington Field. Mr. Chairman, I again applaud the leadership from the chairmen who drafted this bill, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, it is amazing because a lot of us sat here last night until 2 in the morning and watched the Republican minority file motion after motion for us to rise so we wouldn't take up a Homeland Security bill that has no earmarks. What they did was slow us down on trying to have a bill passed by October 1, which they have had trouble when they were 12 years in the majority. That is why we had to live under continuing resolutions, and continue to live under one because of their governance last year. The Homeland Security bill has 300 new Border Patrol agents. It would be nice on October 1 if this bill was signed into law so we would have those Border Patrol agents on the border, in our airports and in our ports. They are delaying the planning for the first responders, whether in the city of Houston where I come from, or the State of Texas where my three colleagues who spoke earlier on how bad earmarks were, or the bill provides protection from explosive systems for our airports, including Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston. This is delaying $400 million for port security, including the Port of Houston, the number one foreign-tonnage port. We are doing some great things in the Port of Houston. It is because we put the community together, the business community and all government agencies, Republican and Democrats. I wish we could see that in Washington. But we didn't see that last night. We saw delay after delay in not taking up this bill. So we are putting it off so they can make a point of how bad earmarks are. But the House Republicans don't want to talk about those issues. They want to talk about how they want to bring the light of day into earmarks. Well, for 12 years they didn't want the light of day in earmarks. They were the king. They were the emperor of earmarks. I have watched for many years what happened over those 12 years with the earmarks and the ones that were shut out in the minority. I think what they are concerned about is that we may do to them what they did to the Democrats for 12 years, but that is not our intent. All we want is to be able to see them, the public. I have requested earmarks, and I am proud to say I have received them for our district. I don't mind publicizing them. In fact, I will do it in any manner required, instead of airdropping them in like they previously did in the appropriations bills. I think that conversion we saw, maybe it started with the November election, but we are seeing it now, that conversion is almost as amazing as Saul's conversion on the road to Damascus, from Saul being a persecutor of Christians to becoming Paul, the Lord works in mysterious ways; but I don't think it is so mysterious. I think what we are seeing is after 12 years of being dictators in this House, now they are afraid the same rules are going to be used against them. For 3 years, I have requested $250,000 in an earmark for a prenatal machine to treat mothers, poor mothers, to be able to get a new piece of equipment so we can do prenatal planning. $250,000. Health and Human Services has stripped out Democratic earmarks for a number of years. I don't intend to do that. I am not an appropriator, but I hope our Appropriations Committee doesn't do that. I am not ashamed to say that I asked for that earmark again this year for that prenatal machine. Or for $250,000 for a diabetes program in Harris County to help what our local community is doing. I have asked for $250,000 for immunizations. The reason we have earmarks is that I don't want to appropriate all that money and send to Health and Human Services, and say, by the way, I sure would like you to help diabetes and immunizations in Harris County in Houston, Texas. Or maybe help pay for part of a machine for prenatal care. Mr. Chairman, do I still control the time on the floor of the House?

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. It is my understanding that Members cannot rise while other Members have the floor of the House.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, we all have to obey the rules, whether Republican or Democrat; and that is what we are trying to say. We want to pass the appropriations bills before October 1. In the majority for 12 years, they couldn't do it. They put in earmarks all over the appropriations process, and yet stripped out Democrats. I don't want us to do that, but I do want us to have some legislative ability to say we have projects in our district that are important. If I am willing to say, yes, I want them and I will publicize them, then why shouldn't we be able to have an elected official make that decision instead of the bureaucracy that may still be under the President. But the now Republican minority put earmarks in even when they were in the majority, so that is what this debate is about. They don't want us to pass these bills but we need to do it for the American people, particularly Homeland Security.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this legislation, and want to thank its sponsor, Mr. Engel, as well as Chairmen Dingell and Markey for working with me on an amendment that was added to the bill during the full committee mark-up. Caller ID is a great benefit to millions of Americans by giving them more control over their telephones and who and when they talk on the phone. Like many technological advances, caller ID is a benefit, but bad actors can take advantage of it and turn the technology against the people it is supposed to help. The amendment accepted during full committee clarifies that the standard in this bill--``intent to cause defraud or harm''--covers dirty political tricks that use caller ID spoofing. Using fake caller ID info to commit identity theft or stalk or harass someone is wrong and should be prohibited. Using fake caller ID to falsely pretend to be calling from the Democratic Party or the Republican Party or any candidate for office is also wrong and should be prohibited. We are not limiting anyone's speech, but we are saying that if you choose to contact thousands of people by phone through robocalls, Americans deserve accurate information on where you are calling from. We are focusing on pre-recorded robocalls because there is no other way besides caller ID to know where they came from since there is no real person on the other end. Current law requires commercial telemarketers to transmit accurate caller ID, but there is a loophole for non-commercial calls. We are closing this loophole for non-commercial robocalls which includes political robocalls. If you are going to send out thousands of robocalls, there is no justification for using false caller ID, regardless of whether you meet the underlying standard in this bill. Again, I thank the bill's sponsor for working with me to solidify this through my amendment in committee, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise to raise awareness of an issue in our Texas offices and I think around the country: The significant application backlog in the Houston passport office. Last Friday morning, a number of Members of Congress from Texas and I went to that office. I call on the adminstration and the State Department to take the necessary steps to alleviate the backlog. I know in the Houston office, Jacqueline Harley-Bell, the regional director of the Houston Passport Agency, and the staff have been working long days and weekends, and I commend them for their efforts to serve the public because they are understaffed and overwhelmed by the number of applications they are getting. The Houston office has already issued nearly 11 million passports in the first 5\1/2\ months of 2007. That is 3 million more than the 7.9 million that were issued in all of 2006. The administration needs to provide the resources necessary now for additional workers or funding, to clear the backlog due to the new requirement that folks traveling in North America by plane need to have a passport. On Thursday the administration changed the requirement, or delayed it, that individuals flying into Canada, Mexico, the Caribbean and Bermuda must only present a State Department receipt they have applied for a passport through the end of September. But this is much later than it should be. People are standing in line from 2 in the morning. People wait in line to get rock concert tickets, not a passport. I hope the State Department and administration will immediately address this problem.