Gil Gutknecht

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I request unanimous consent that I be allowed to claim the time of the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones).

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise on the House floor tonight to talk about something that I think is one of the big solutions that we need to pursue here in the United States. And I would like to, first of all, talk about this first chart; and hopefully, Members can see it back in their offices. But this is a chart of the imports of petroleum as we have seen it from 1984 until 2005. Back in 1984, we were importing less than 5.5 million barrels of oil a day; today, that number is over 13.5. In fact, I should say in 2005 it was about 13.5 million barrels a day. This is a scary chart because the direction is heading in the wrong direction. Let's put some numbers on this. I am told that by this summer with $70-a-barrel oil, we will be spending about a billion dollars a day to buy oil from countries, in many cases who are not particularly friendly to the United States. This is a serious problem. It is a challenge to our economic security and it is a challenge to our national security. Now, renewable fuels are only part of the solution. I voted to increase the CAFE standards. I think conservation is an important part of solving our energy problems here in the United States. I believe in developing other kinds of energy. I voted consistently to develop the oil and the natural gas which we know is up in Alaska. I voted to expand the many uses of other energies. But, Mr. Speaker, one of the things that we have not talked enough about, in my opinion, is our ability to grow more of our own energy. And so tonight I want to talk about renewable energy in general and ethanol in particular because I think there is huge misunderstanding, and it is not just among Members of Congress and the general public, it is among many of the policy-makers even in the Department of Energy. Mr. Speaker, there is still a misunderstanding about how much it costs to produce ethanol. In fact, we had a hearing of the Science Committee about 6 months ago. We had three top energy experts who testified before the committee. I asked all of them, I said, How much does it cost to produce a gallon of ethanol? Well, they started to look at their watches and their shoes and it was clear they did not want to answer the question. Well, I said, make a guess. And the low guess, and these are energy experts, the low guess among those three experts was $2 a gallon. The high estimate was $3 a gallon. And I said, Would it surprise you to know that we are actually producing ethanol in Minnesota for less than $1.20 a gallon? In fact, some of the plants at that time with lower natural gas prices were actually producing ethanol for about $1 a gallon. Today, with corn at about $2 is a bushel and with oil at about $70 a barrel, the cost right now to produce a gallon of ethanol at an efficient plant in the upper Midwest is about $1.20 a gallon. Gasoline, on the other hand, right now costs about $2.10 a gallon for unleaded gas. Now, I have to be clear, though, and we want to be fair in this discussion. You do not get as many Btus, British Thermal Units, out of a gallon of ethanol as you do a gallon of unleaded gasoline. In fact, it is about 20 to 25 percent less. So you get less energy out of a gallon, partly because ethanol is 35 percent oxygen. That is good, though, because it means it burns much cleaner than gasoline. Ethanol is better for our environment. It is better for our economy because that billion dollars a day that we may be spending this summer we are sending to countries that in some respects do not like us, and in worst cases they may be using part of that oil revenue to actually fund the terrorists. The beauty of producing energy here in the United States, clean- burning ethanol in the United States, is that all of that money stays here in America where it recycles through our own economy. A new plant, for example, recently opened just west of Mankato, Minnesota, in the little town of Lake Crystal, Minnesota, and they told us they will be employing, on average, 42 workers in that plant, and the average starting wage will be somewhere over $16 an hour plus benefits. These are good jobs that help our own economy right here in the United States. But the point really needs to be made, not only is it better for our economy, it is better for our environment, but it is actually cheaper. So some people say, well, if it is better for the economy, if it is better for the environment and it is cheaper, why is more of it not available? Well, the answer is simply this. The oil companies do not make any money on ethanol. I am not here to say that the oil companies are evil, but right now they have a 98 percent market share, maybe a little less than 98 percent market share. They are not interested in giving away market share to ethanol, which is why I have introduced a bill called 10 By 10. And what it says, and I believe that success leaves clues, and what it says is that by 2010, 10 percent of our gasoline supply should be renewable energy. It is an idea whose time has come.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes. Mr. Chairman, I will try to make this as simple as I can. We have one of the largest deployments right now of National Guardsmen from the State of Minnesota since World War II. It has created a disparity. Back in January, members of the 1st Platoon Bravo Company asked my office to help with a pay problem. It just so happens that most of them were called up to serve in the Balkans back in 2003. Part of them were called up under a Presidential Reserve Call Up, and others were called up under a Partial Mobilization. What this has led to is a discrepancy in how much they may be eligible for in terms of what we used to describe as combat pay. The bottom line is that about 400 members of the Minnesota National Guard, who will be doing the same duty as the other members of the National Guard in Iraq, will not be eligible for roughly $7,000 in incentive pay. This is an inequity. It is unfair, and it is something that we in Congress can and should do something about. I want to thank the chairman of the committee and the ranking member and the staff as well. We have been working with them for several weeks and they have been extremely helpful on this matter. Hopefully tonight we can adopt this amendment and send a clear message to the Pentagon that this inequity needs to be resolved and it needs to be resolved soon. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Simmons).

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kennedy).

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief. I want to thank my colleagues from Minnesota for helping to resolve this inequity. I want to thank the gentleman from Connecticut and my colleagues from Arkansas. In the big picture, when we were talking about spending hundreds of billions of dollars, $7,000 for these families does not seem like a lot of money in the big picture. But to those families, $7,000 is extremely important. So I appreciate your support tonight to make certain that we have equity and create a solution for this problem that is fair to all of the folks who are proudly serving us in uniform wherever in the world, but particularly in Iraq.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5037, the Respect for America's Fallen Heroes Act. I am a proud cosponsor of this act which will ban protests at military funerals at national cemeteries, including Arlington National Cemetery. Burying a child, father, husband or wife is hard enough without having to see signs that say things like ``God Hates You'' or hearing hateful language shouted at your family during a funeral procession or graveside ceremony. On February 23, 2006, the funeral of Army Corporal Andrew Kemple from Anoka, Minnesota, was disrupted by protestors who claimed that U.S. military deaths are divine retribution for the Nation's tolerance for homosexuality. The protestors even went so far as to taunt Andrew's mother as she entered the church for her son's funeral service. It is hard to think of a more shameful act than taunting a woman who just gave her son in service to our Nation. All Americans are proud of the sacrifices made by our Nation's brave Americans in uniform. We have seen their skill and their courage in the armored charges and midnight raids and in their lonely hours of faithful watch. We have seen the joy when they return home and felt the pain when one is lost. No matter what one's position may be on U.S. policy matters, we should all agree that demonstrating at the funeral of one of our fallen heroes is disgraceful and unacceptable. We must stand behind our Nation's military families, especially on the day when caskets draped with the American flag are carried that last mile. The Minnesota State legislature passed a bill on Monday, May 1, to ban all protests at military funerals, burials, and memorial services. I encourage other States to follow Minnesota's lead, and I urge the House of Representatives to pass the Respect For America's Fallen Heroes Act today. Our Nation's heroes deserve no less.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate CMSgt Jeffery D. Gustafson of Rochester, Minnesota, on his dedicated service in the United States Air Force. In November of 1975, Chief Master Sergeant Gustafson enlisted in the United States Air Force at the 934th Airlift Wing, Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport Air Force Reserve Station in Minnesota. He retired from the same station on April 1, 2006, having achieved the highest attainable enlisted rank in the United States Military. Chief Master Sergeant Gustafson has served the United States from across the world, including Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Honduras. He was given the distinct honor of being the first troop commander of a fully manned Aerospace Expeditionary Force for the United States Air Force. He was also the first recipient of the General Rawlings Air Force Sergeant Association and Air Force Association Chapter's Chief Master Sergeant of the Year. In addition, Chief Master Sergeant Gustafson has been thanked in person for his military service by President George W. Bush and First Lady Laura Bush. Mr. Speaker, I offer my sincere gratitude to CMSgt Jeffery D. Gustafson for his service in the United States Air Force and his commitment to our nation. His distinguished accomplishments reflect to the highest degree upon himself and the United States Air Force.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend Ms. Nettie Paulson of New Ulm, Minnesota, for her service to the Gillette Children's Hospital and her dedication to making the patients more comfortable as a member of the Friends of Gillette group. The Friends of Gillette are volunteers devoted to the children being treated at the Gillette Children's Hospital and their families. The Friends of Gillette have raised more than $2 million in medical assistance for families and they also donate items, such as knitted quilts and hats, to patients in an effort to bring comfort and warmth to the patient's hospital stay. Ms. Nettie Paulson's dedication to the children and families of Gillette Children's Hospital has been felt for over 50 years. Through the Friends of Gillette program, Ms. Paulson has now donated 1,000 of her hand-made quilts to Gillette patients over the years. She has touched the lives and hearts of thousands of children and their families with her constant kindness. Mr. Speaker, Ms. Paulson is a great example of one who is willing to share her talents to help those in need. I commend Ms. Nettie Paulson for her decades of service to the children and families of Gillette Children's Hospital.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Mr. Steven Benson of Owatonna, Minnesota on receiving the 2005 Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching. This award was established in 1983 by an Act of Congress and is administered for the White House by the National Science Foundation. The award recognizes teachers who are both role models for colleagues and encourage talented individuals to become and remain teachers. Outstanding math and science educators are nominated each year from the United States and four other jurisdictions. Teachers may be nominated by faculty, students, parents or members of the community. After advancing through an intense selection process at both state and national levels, the final winners are announced by the President of the United States. Mr. Steven Benson has proven himself as a dedicated and outstanding educator. Mr. Benson believes in making his math classes more relevant to everyday life to generate greater interest in his students and encourage their success. By creating a personal connection to the content, Mr. Benson shows students how math significantly affects and influences their hobbies, activities, and future plans. For this commitment to his profession and to his students, Mr. Benson will receive The Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching--the highest honor a teacher of mathematics or science can receive. I extend my sincere congratulations to Mr. Steven Benson for receiving the 2005 Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching. Quality math teachers, like Mr. Benson, inspire our students' inquisitive nature to explore new challenges, innovative career paths, and the future of ideas. His steadfast professionalism and abilities in the classroom are a standard for which all educators should aim.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Ms. Debra Las of Rochester, Minnesota on receiving the 2005 Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching. This award was established in 1983 by an Act of Congress and is administered for the White House by the National Science Foundation. The award recognizes teachers who are both role models for colleagues and encourage talented individuals to become and remain teachers. Outstanding math and science educators are nominated each year from the United States and four other jurisdictions. Teachers may be nominated by faculty, students, parents or members of the community. After advancing through an intense selection process at both state and national levels, the final winners are announced by the President of the United States. Ms. Debra Las teaches eighth grade science at John Adams Middle School in Rochester, Minnesota where she utilizes the school's diversity to connect to her students. Viewing diversity as a strength rather than a weakness, Ms. Las believes that both staff and students alike need to spend the time and the energy to learn about each other. For this commitment to her profession and to her students, Ms. Las will receive The Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching--the highest honor a teacher of mathematics or science can receive. I extend my sincere congratulations to Ms. Debra Las for receiving the 2005 Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching. Quality science teachers, like Ms. Las, inspire our students' inquisitive nature to explore new challenges, innovative career paths, and the future of ideas. Her steadfast professionalism and abilities in the classroom are a standard for which all educators should aim.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Mr. Norm Sieling of Lake Crystal, Minnesota, on his induction into the Minnesota Future Farmers of America Hall of Fame. The Minnesota Future Farmers of America strives to make a positive difference in the lives of students by developing their potential for premier leadership, personal growth and career success through agricultural education. By maintaining the ideals of the past and incorporating the ideas of the future, the Minnesota Future Farmers of America continually seeks new, innovative ways to join agriculture and education with today's world of technology. The Hall of Fame is an honor reserved for those alumni who are a living example of this mission. For his commitment to these ideals, Mr. Norm Sieling was inducted into Minnesota FFA Hall of Fame. As an agriculture teacher for 39 years in Lake Crystal, Minnesota, and a mentor for new agriculture teachers at the University of Minnesota, Mr. Sieling has demonstrated his dedication to the future of agriculture. He has helped students to achieve their goals, while encouraging the expansion of the agricultural industry. I extend my sincere congratulations to Mr. Sieling on receiving this achievement. His dedicated service to the young farmers of Minnesota and the agricultural community is greatly appreciated.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Dr. Ann Vogel of New Ulm, Minnesota, on receiving the Sertoma Club's Service to Mankind Award. The Sertoma Club is an organization that strives to better people's lives through philanthropic activities. Since 1960, the Sertoma Foundation has positively influenced the lives of its members and hundreds of communities internationally. Sertoma primarily focuses on service projects assisting the more than 50 million people with speech, hearing and language disorders. Sertoma also sponsors community projects to promote freedom and democracy, to assist youth, and to benefit a variety of other local community needs. Every year Sertoma clubs raise more than $20 million for these local community service projects. The Sertoma Club also recognizes the efforts of citizens who volunteer their time and service to the local community. The Service to Mankind Award, the highest honor a non-Sertoma member can receive, is awarded to an individual who has gone above and beyond the call of duty. This year, The Service to Mankind Award was given to Dr. Ann Vogel by the New Ulm Sertoma Club. Dr. Vogel devotes her time to working at the Open Door Health Center in Mankato, a non-profit organization that seeks to provide care to uninsured and underinsured people in southern Minnesota. Additionally, Dr. Vogel led the funding drive for the Friends of German Park, a group dedicated to the redevelopment of the community area; while also dedicating her time as a storyteller with Bavarian Blast. Her community involvement also includes volunteering at Heritagefest and the Oak Hills Assisted Living Center. I extend my sincere congratulations to Dr. Ann Vogel for receiving this commendable award. Her commitment to public service is greatly appreciated and an inspiration to all.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Mrs. Julie Stevenson of Worthington, Minnesota, on receiving the 2006 Athena Award from the Worthington Travelodge. The Athena Award is presented each year to a woman who has demonstrated excellence, initiative and creativity in her profession. This award recognizes one woman's time and energy put in to improving the lives of her peers. This woman also acts as a mentor for other women in the community. Mrs. Julie Stevenson received this award for her many contributions to the community of Worthington. She has served as the executive director of the Southwest Minnesota Chapter of the American Red Cross and she has volunteered with Big Brothers/Big Sisters, United Way, YMCA, Youth Area Baseball Association, Junior Achievement, Nobles County Integration Collaborative and the Worthington Area Chamber of Commerce. Currently, at the Minnesota West Campus, Mrs. Stevenson has helped bring the college and the community together through a variety of programs. These include the Winter Wonderland and Golf the Links at Minnesota West and Kids College. She has been a co-host for a United Way telethon as well as a trainer in a teen asset building workshop at Thrivent Financial for Lutherans. I extend my sincere congratulations to Mrs. Stevenson for receiving this commendable award. Her commitment to service has helped to grow many individuals and to strengthen the community.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of issues we talk about here on the House floor where Members don't know much about the issue they are talking about. This may be one for me. But I did serve on the Pension Commission of the State of Minnesota and I know something about defined benefit plans. I know something about defined contribution plans, and I understand how pension plans in general work, and so I rise in support of the Miller motion. The reason this issue is here, and my colleague from Ohio just described it very well, the reason we are here is that we are now in the process where many employers are converting their pension plans from old defined benefit plans to this new hybrid plan called a cash balance plan. And I am not opposed to that basic notion. But what happens, Members, and you need to understand, is many older workers show up for work one day and their pension plan has changed. Now, the employers say, well, that is our pension plan and it is our money. Well, that is not exactly true. That money is being held in trust, and this has been a very craftily done procedure to allow many employers or some employers to take money from the pension plans and convert it to their bottom line, and that is wrong. This is not their money. That is the first point everybody needs to understand. The second thing people need to understand is the Senate did a better job of writing their bill. This is all here because of a few bad actors, and the Senate said we are not going to protect those bad actors, and so the Senate did a better job. We wouldn't even be talking about this if we had all agreed on some language that would have protected those older workers. Members, this is the right thing to do, and I want to say to my Republican colleagues, what we are talking about here is language that was inserted by the Senator from Iowa, who is a Republican. Okay? This is not a Republican issue. It is not a Democrat issue. It is not right versus left. It is right versus wrong. It is wrong to allow a certain number of employers to get their hands into the pension funds and to change these pension plans without talking to their workers. It happened at IBM and they were taken to court and Federal court ruled that this is age discrimination. And do you know what? I agree with that Federal court. So Members, please support the Miller motion to instruct. All we are saying is we want the Grassley language in the final product when it comes back from conference. If we do that, we will have served the best interest of working Americans, and I think we will have served those employers who are doing the right thing, and we will send a clear message to those employers who either have done the wrong thing or want to do the wrong thing, that we are not going to put up with that. This is a good motion. It is not a Republican motion. It is not a Democrat motion. We are simply saying, let's keep the Grassley language in the final product. I rise in support of this motion to instruct conferees. The motion instructs the conferees to adopt the Senate provisions on cash balance plans in S. 1783 written by Senator Grassley and his Committee and passed by the Senate by a vote of 97-2. These are common sense reforms supported by the vast majority of the Senate and AARP. I supported H.R. 2830, the Pension Protection Act of 2005, when it passed the House. At the time, I noted it contained a weakness that I wanted to see addressed in conference committee. The weakness of the House bill is that it does not have strong rules regulating the conversion of defined benefit pension plans into cash balance plans. On the other hand, under the Senate bill, employees would be given added protections so that older employees are not put at a disadvantage when conversions take place. Millions of Americans are currently vested in defined benefit pension plans. Even though they may be working for a very profitable company, they could show up for work one day and learn that their promised benefits have been dramatically reduced with the sweep of a pen. This is what happened to thousands of employees in my district. Millions of Americans will be affected by this legislation. It is important we get it right. I ask my colleagues to support the Miller motion to instruct.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I am very pleased to be here and join my colleagues from Minnesota. I want to thank my colleague from North Carolina for his kind remarks as well. Like the mighty Mississippi River, the tradition and pride of the Minnesota National Guard is long and deep. For 150 years Minnesotans have proudly taken their places in that long line of citizen soldiers, that long line that has never failed us. Much has been said already today and I will try not to be redundant, but I do want to share some of the history of this very historical Guard. As has been mentioned, they were organized before Minnesota even became a State. Now, 150 years is a long time and many things have changed in our State, in our Nation, in our world. But there has been one constant, and that is the professionalism and the sense of service that we take for granted from our own National Guard. As was mentioned, in April of 1861, it just so happened that the Governor of the State of Minnesota, Governor Ramsey, was here in Washington, D.C. on other business when we heard of the firing on Fort Sumter. And President Lincoln put out a call for troops, and Governor Ramsey became the first Governor in the Union to rush over to the White House and volunteer troops to serve to defend the Union. And it then fell upon the Minnesota 1st Infantry to be the first regiments volunteered to serve in that battle for the Union. And the story has been told that when they marched off to war, they were 1,066 strong, but by the end of the day of fighting of July 2, 1863, only 47 could answer the call. They suffered on the late afternoon of July 2, 1863, the highest percentage of casualties of any unit that fought in that tragic war. But they held the line that day. And to this day many people believe that they deserve to be called the saviours of our country because of their sacrifices. Many years later the colonel who led that regiment, Colonel William Colville, was asked what he thought about as they charged down that hill that day, and he said, ``Gad, I thought of Washington.'' They knew what the stakes were, and they knew that they had to hold that line. Earlier in the day that pivotal battle was fought, General Hancock rolled by and he asked Colonel Colville, ``How long can you hold your position?'' And he responded with a sentence which made military and political history and survives to this day as the motto of the 1st Infantry. He said, ``General, to the last man.'' And as we know, it became no idle boast. Since the Civil War, the Minnesota National Guard has honorably served in the Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, Operation Desert Shield, Desert Storm. These soldiers helped defend the border against Pancho Villa and maintain the peace in Bosnia, Croatia, and Kosovo. Today more than 600 National Guardsmen from Minnesota have been deployed to Afghanistan in Operation Enduring Freedom. More than 2,600 Minnesota citizen soldiers are serving in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. In January I saw firsthand the courage and dedication of the Minnesota National Guard at Camp Shelby. Awaiting their deployment to Iraq, these volunteer men and women maintain the historic spirit and tradition of the Minnesota National Guard. Mr. Speaker, I proudly rise in support of this resolution, and I congratulate and recognize the Minnesota National Guard's 150 years of dedicated service. Because of their sacrifices, our Nation and our State are more secure and millions around the world can look forward to a future of peace and freedom.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time of the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton).

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to honor the Winona State University Warriors. They won the NCAA Division II Men's Basketball National Championship last weekend. Winona State is famous for many things, but this historic win is the first major championship for Winona State and a milestone for WSU athletics. On behalf of basketball fans across southern Minnesota, I congratulate the players, coaches, fans and everyone who helped make this season so special. Permit me to congratulate Coach Mike Leaf and his staff on an outstanding season. His squad finished with a record of 34-2, winning 22 consecutive games to close out the year. Coach Leaf was named the Northern Sun Intercollegiate Conference's Coach of the Year for his efforts. The warriors, like all champions, won as a team, but they were led by a couple of outstanding players. David Zellman, a senior from Lewiston, Minnesota, ended his college career in style. He led the team in scoring with 26 points in the championship game, including seven three- point baskets. Sophomore John Smith of Johnsburg, Illinois, led the Warriors defensively and was named the NCAA Division II Elite Eight Tournament's Most Outstanding Player. I congratulate family, friends, and fans of the team. Two busloads of Warrior supporters made the 22-hour trip to the championship game and cheered the team on to victory. They were joined by hundreds of other Warrior fans, alumni and family members of the Warrior athletes who made their own way to the game. And thousands, like myself and my wife, were watching on TV. Some succeed, Mr. Speaker, because they are destined to. Most succeed because they are determined to. This team worked hard, played defense, shared the ball, and stuck together. They were rewarded with a well- deserved championship that all of us can be proud of.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, this has been a very interesting debate; and if you want to get into hot water, just start debating dairy policy. It not only gets very complicated very fast, but it gets very heated. This is not a new issue. This has been percolating around this Capitol now for at least 2\1/2\ years. I was first made aware of it by the gentleman from California (Mr. Nunes) and others on a trip to California. I have learned more about this issue than I think I really ever wanted to know; and, frankly, I think most Members of the House do not really want to know too much about this. Our colleague from Ohio, I think, said it well. This is really an example of where the laws were originally designed to protect small producer-handlers, and here we have a large producer-handler who has found this, and I do not want to get into a fight here over the term ``loophole,'' but he has found this opportunity and he is exploiting this opportunity. Now, we have said repeatedly to our colleagues in California, this essentially is a California issue, why do you not work it out. I think there was a good-faith effort on both sides of this argument to try and do that; but, unfortunately, they failed. This is a very complicated issue, but I think all of the speakers who have preceded me have said it well, that we have a responsibility to have a Federal milk system that is fair to everybody. What we have right now is one particular producer who is trying to use the best of both worlds, who is situated right on the border; and, frankly, I think we have a responsibility to close that loophole. Let me point out that this is not an issue, while generally milk issues divide geographically, they divide between the people who produce the milk, the dairy farmers and the processors, this is one where virtually everyone in the dairy industry, from all corners of the United States, whether they are dairy farmers large or small, whether they are processors large or small, or whether they are in the marketing side or the manufacturing side, almost universally they support this legislation. So with all due respect to our distinguished colleague and chairman of the Appropriations Committee, I think this is an idea that has percolated for a very long time. It is time for the House to take action. I strongly support the bill, and I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting it as well and pass it here today on the House floor. Mr. Speaker, as Chairman of the Subcommittee with jurisdiction over dairy programs and policies, I want to express my support for this legislation and reiterate the comments made by the Chairman of the Agriculture Committee. As he said, the federal milk marketing order system has served the dairy industry well. But we have this situation where a processor from outside California can undermine the market there by under pricing the regulated competition. Mr. Nunes and a number of others have worked to address this, and the legislation before us today would direct USDA to apply the minimum pricing regulations of the federal order system to milk processed in a federal order area and distributed into states that have a statewide system. While we're aware that some Members have concerns with this legislation, it's important to point out that it has the strong support from nearly the entire dairy industry, both producers and processors. Again, as Chairman of the Dairy Subcommittee, I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to clarify the scope of preemption under H.R. 4167, because some confusing and misleading things have been said on this subject. While I have great respect for the Association of Food and Drug Officials, especially for the work its members do at the state level, I would specifically like to clarify some mistaken points the group made in a letter dated January 16th of this year. This letter stated that H.R. 4167 would preempt state laws on food sanitation, including milk sanitation statutes on the books in Minnesota and most other states. This is not the case. The bill we're considering today would not preempt state food sanitation standards. H.R. 4167 only provides for federal preemption of certain requirements of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FFDCA, and these are specified in the legislation. If a requirement of the FFDCA is not specified in H.R. 4167, then it will not be preempted by H.R. 4167, and states can establish or maintain requirements that are different from federal ones. This is the case when it comes to sanitation. Again, Mr. Chairman, states would still be free to enact state sanitation standards that are not identical to federal sanitation standards. Even if H.R. 4167 did preempt state laws on food sanitation, which it again does not, it would still not preempt state milk sanitation laws. Through this bill, for preemption to be found in general, there must be a conflict between a state law and a federal requirement of the FFDCA or certain other federal laws and regulations. But in the case of milk sanitation, there is no federal law or regulation for a state law to conflict with. There are only the FDA definitions of ``pasteurized'' and ``ultra-pasteurized'' milk, which are agreed upon by agencies at all levels of government and the entire dairy industry, and the general manufacturing practice regulations applicable to all foods. Along these lines, Mr. Chairman, I ask that the dairy industry's letter of support for H.R. 4167 be included in the Record following my remarks. These were conscious decisions made by the authors of H.R. 4167, decisions that, I think it is safe to say, are certainly agreed upon by the over 225 cosponsors of this bill, including myself. We recognize that states have often been at the forefront of regulating food sanitation, and for this reason, one of our legislative intents through this bill was that food sanitation standards should not and would not be preempted. February 28, 2006. Members of the House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. Dear Representatives: America's dairy producers and processors urge you to vote for H.R. 4167, the ``National Uniformity for Food Act of 2005.'' The International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) and the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) support H.R. 4167, a bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act in the areas of food safety tolerance setting and warning labeling because it takes a measured, science based approach, to achieve labeling uniformity. The bill contains a method for the orderly review and harmonization of existing state food safety adulteration laws and warnings as they relate to Federal law. No existing state labeling law would be preempted without this review and state requirements under petition would stay in effect during that review. H.R. 4167 recognizes that it makes no sense to have a ``patchwork quilt'' of different states adopting different regulatory requirements on identical food product labeling. National uniformity in food laws is actually the norm, not the exception. All meat and poultry regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) have national uniformity under the Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act. The Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) of 1990 established uniform nutrition labeling requirements on manufactured foods. In addition, the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996 included a uniformity provision for pesticide tolerance standards in food products. H.R. 4167 completes the job by establishing national uniformity for food additives and warning labels. H.R. 4167 enjoys the support of 227 bipartisan co-sponsors and was reported by a bipartisan vote from the Energy and Commerce Committee on December 15,2005. America's dairy industry believes consumers deserve a single standard when it comes to food safety, and this bill will allow states and the Food and Drug Administration to work collaboratively in establishing sound food safety labeling policies that benefit, not confuse consumers. We urge your vote for H.R. 4167. Sincerely, Connie Tipton, President and CEO, International Dairy Foods Association. Jerry Kozak, President and CEO, National Milk Producers Federation.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, baseball fans everywhere, and in Minnesota in particular, mourn the passing of Kirby Puckett. Kirby Puckett was born to play baseball. He lived for the game. In an era of oversized egos and greed gone mad, he was a throwback to an earlier time. Kirby was the ultimate underdog. Born to humble beginnings, he related to kids that could not afford to buy an autograph. Like a bumblebee, he did not know that his stubby body could not fly. Propelled only by an infectious enthusiasm, he amazed us with leaping catches that mere mortals would have conceded to the bleachers. We always knew that with Kirby in the game the underdog Twins always had a chance. With his bat, his glove or with his smile, he made everyone around him play better. He embodied the essence of all that baseball is supposed to be. The game will go on, new heroes will emerge, but there will never be another Kirby Puckett.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on behalf of 7,000 current and former IBM employees who live in my district. While most of this bill is necessary and the legislation is appropriate, the weakness of the bill is that it fails to clarify the rules concerning the conversion of defined benefit pension plans into cash balance pension plans. I understand the bill will not affect the IBM employees and their court case. It could, however, affect millions of Americans that are currently vested in defined benefit pension plans. Even though they may be working for a very profitable company, they could, under the terms of this bill, show up for work one day and learn that their promised benefits have been dramatically reduced with the sweep of a pen. Under cash balance plans, older, long-serving employees do not have the same opportunities to build up retirement benefits that younger workers do. The bill before us today would allow conversions to take place but gives no protections to workers during these transitions. I offered an amendment last night at the Rules Committee to provide protections to vested workers. Unfortunately, the Committee did not rule my amendment in order. The Senate version of the bill contains more protections for workers. For those and other reasons AARP supports the Senate passed bill and opposes the House bill. I would hope protections like the amendment I tried to offer will be incorporated in the final version. While I am voting today to move the bill forward into conference with the Senate in the hopes more worker protections can be added, I reserve the right to oppose a report that fails to correct this glaring omission.

Mr. GUTKNECHT

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks.)