Doc Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, once again I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question because that means we will have a vote on both their bill and our bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the Republican whip, Mr. Blunt of Missouri.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Would the gentleman yield on that point?

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Will the gentleman yield on that point?

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend from Vermont (Mr. Welch) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I again ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question so that Congress, as they return from the 5-week recess--vacation, in some people's terms--and begin the work here in the fall before the election, so that we can finally vote, Mr. Speaker, on real solutions to the real and painful problem of high gas and energy prices. American workers and families are hurting. Congress can help, can help today by voting on and passing this legislation, the American Energy Act. Mr. Speaker, I think it's time to show whether you're really for lowering gas prices or whether you will continue to vote in lockstep with those against lifting the ban on offshore drilling and promoting alternative energy. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question. With that, I yield back my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, my colleague has spoken at length about the reasons--though not as long as I thought he would, let's put it that way--why he believes these stretches of the river in Vermont to be studied for the designation as Wild and Scenic, and it's very clear that he strongly believes in this bill to enact this study. He obviously has a great deal of love for his State when he challenges all of the other 49 States as not being as beautiful, at least indirectly, as Vermont. And I would just point out to him that in my State we have so much geographic diversity as far as beauty is concerned, from one area of the State where we have more rainfall than anyplace in a country--I'm not talking about Seattle; I'm talking about the Olympic Peninsula--to the area where I live, which is a desert area that has in some areas where I live less than 7 inches of rain. So I invite my friend any time he wants to come out to see what real beauty is in a short period of time, and he may want to ask me up there and I might respond to that. But having said all of that, Mr. Speaker, I believe it's fair to say that the American people, frankly, are far less concerned about the rivers in Vermont and are far more concerned about the high price of gasoline and the fact that Congress is not acting right now on real solutions to lower energy costs. The House of Representatives will spend over 2\1/2\ hours today discussing rivers in Vermont but not 1 minute, Mr. Speaker, not 1 minute, on actual legislation to lower the price of gasoline. I really believe that the priorities of this Congress since we have come back from the 5-week August vacation are wrong. High gas and energy prices are hurting American workers and it's hurting our Nation's economy. With jobs at stake, Mr. Speaker, this Congress twiddles its thumbs and busies itself once again, as we did earlier in the year, naming post offices and, today, studying the value of rivers in Vermont, in all deference to my friend from Vermont. Mr. Speaker, this House should be permitted to have a ``yes'' or ``no'' vote on legislation to expand alternative energy sources and to lift the ban on drilling offshore, both coasts, Mr. Speaker, and in ANWR and other Alaskan lands in Alaska. But, unfortunately, the liberal leaders in this Congress have blocked, up to this point have blocked, a fair ``yes'' or ``no'' vote for months because I believe, Mr. Speaker, and I believe the majority of Members of this body knows that if we were to put the all-of-the-above energy plan up for a vote, that a majority of this House would vote for it. But we have been denied that opportunity time after time after time. Instead, they voted to go on a 5-week vacation in August to avoid working to lower gas prices, to protect American jobs, to make our Nation more energy independent. But, Mr. Speaker, I want to say that during that time since the adjournment for the 5-week vacation, a number of my Republican colleagues, 136 of my Republican colleagues, were here every day for several hours a day, trying to attempt to call the ask the Speaker to call Congress back in session. Unfortunately, that didn't happen. So now we are back here again on a regularly scheduled basis, and we will certainly have an opportunity to have a vote on the all-of-the-above, and I will talk about that more later. But, Mr. Speaker, in the past, in the past, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Joe Biden, Senator Harry Reid, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi, they are the leaders of the Democrat Party here in the U.S. Congress. Yet the one thing, other than being Democrat leaders, the one thing they all have in common, Mr. Speaker, is that they have in the past always opposed offshore drilling and drilling in Alaska. I think the majority of the Americans feel contrary to that view. And they fight and block any action on that at every turn. They refuse to act and to allow a vote on a drilling and alternative energy plan that would ultimately lower gas prices. To me, Mr. Speaker, I just simply have to say in this election year that it's clear that liberalism has been put ahead of the need to help American workers and families struggling with high gas prices. We need to end the stranglehold that they have on America's ability to produce more of its own energy and on American jobs and the economy. And we can do that, Mr. Speaker, very simply by opening the resources that we have in this country. We need to change their no, no, no stance on producing more American energy. This Congress, Mr. Speaker, and we all know this, needs to vote on the all-of-the-above energy plan. In that plan it includes promoting alternative energy sources, like wind and solar power. I might add parenthetically, Mr. Speaker, that we have a nuclear plant in my district, we have hydro plants in my district, and we have wind machines in my district. I am all in favor of all of the above, and our all-of-the-above energy plan includes precisely that. This plan recognizes the need for more nuclear power. As I mentioned, I have a nuclear power plant in my district. Of course, it protects the value of hydropower, and that is the most abundant energy source for us in the Northwest. But it also allows, while we transition to a new energy source in the future, it allows drilling offshore and in Alaska and on other Federal lands. Mr. Speaker, it really is time for the liberal leaders of this Congress to stop blocking a vote on producing more American-made energy. It's time for Members of Congress to stop hiding and to start voting. Mr. Speaker, we all know that we are not elected to avoid taking positions on tough issues. We are elected to stand up and resolve those tough issues for the American people. So it's time for Congress to set aside naming post offices; in deference, again, to my friend from Vermont, studying rivers. It's time to get serious about addressing the high cost of gasoline and voting yes or no on real solutions, including drilling offshore and in Alaska. With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is the last speaker, and he is prepared to close. I know I have several Members that have asked for time. So, Mr. Speaker, I will yield myself such time as I may consume until other Members come to the floor. Mr. Speaker, I mentioned just briefly in my remarks that after the adjournment prior to the 5-week vacation and, by the way, that adjournment resolution was passed on a straight partisan vote. Every Republican voted against it because we felt we needed to stay here to help resolve the energy problem rather than go on a 5-week vacation. But there were a number of Members, I can mention 136 Members, that came down here and talked about the need for energy. During that time, Mr. Speaker, the lights were off here, the microphones were off, and the cameras were off. Yet there were a number of tourists, as we always have coming through the U.S. Capitol, their Capitol, and they were invited to sit on the floor and talk with us, interact with Members that came down and spoke. The 2 days that I was here, and I admit I was only here 2 of those days, the last 2 days, and I had private conversations with a number of tourists that came through here. I have to say they were not from the Northwest, although there were some from the Northwest, but there were some from the South, and they were all kind of perplexed as to why the people's House, the House of Representatives, probably the genius part of our Founding Fathers in making a representative body, of which all Members that have served there, and there are slightly over 11,000 Members that have served in this body and, Mr. Speaker, every one, every one of those Members have been elected to this House. There has never been a Member that was appointed to the U.S. House of Representatives. Now why do I say this in the context of energy prices? The genius of our Founding Fathers was that the House of Representatives and the fact that every one was elected is probably more in tune to what the people's wishes are across the country. And so they were, frankly, the people I talked to, perplexed. Well, if this is the people's House, why haven't you had the opportunity to have a vote, just a vote up or down, recognizing, listen, we know that a majority rules, and I am prepared to take the consequences of that if my position on any issue fails to get a majority vote. I recognize that. I think every Member of Congress understands that. But to not have the opportunity, not have the opportunity to even vote, even vote on a proposal, really perplexes the tourists that came through here the 2 days I was on the floor. In talking to my other colleagues, some of whom were down here as many as 13 days, and more, they had what I would say were similar experiences with their conversations with people that came through here. Mr. Speaker, I mentioned that my district is the district that in central Washington that is a center of virtually--I won't say all, but a great deal--of electricity that is produced in the Pacific Northwest. Within my district, for example, probably the hydroelectric facility that most Americans can associate with is Grand Coulee Dam. Half of that dam is in my district and the other half is in my colleague's from the Fifth District, Cathy McMorris Rodgers' district. But, in addition to that, I have up to 10 dams that are wholly within my district or I share with other Members of Congress, including my friend and colleague from across the river in Oregon, Greg Walden. There are three dams there where we share half of those dams. That produces about 70 percent of the electricity in the northwest. It is renewable, Mr. Speaker. It is absolutely renewable, and we need to expand that, and a portion of expanding hydropower is in the all-of- the-above energy plan I talked about earlier that we have been denied a vote on. We have been denied a vote on. Furthermore, I mentioned that I have wind plants in my district. Because generally in areas that I mentioned earlier on, that there was not a whole lot of rainfall in certain parts of my district, but the wind does blow. Now the wind, of course, is only good if the wind blows. But if the wind blows, it adds to the other facilities, like hydro, like hydro, or like nuclear. And I have a nuclear plant in my district. What I am saying, Mr. Speaker, is that my constituents are well aware that we need to have a diverse energy portfolio. Without having an opportunity in the people's House to at least address the issue of all of the above, seems to me to be contrary, seems to me to be contrary to what this Congress is all about, and indeed what the House of Representatives is all about as it was envisioned by the Founders. With that, Mr. Speaker, I have talked about what we did in August, and I have talked about the fact that up until August, and now we have a new session coming in after the break, that the Democrats have blocked and blocked any vote on lifting the ban. But I have heard during the break that there are a number of brave Democrats who I think went home, talked to their constituents, and find out that their constituents were saying we need to become more energy independent. As a result, they proclaim that they support now offshore drilling to increase the supply of gasoline and oil and to make America more energy independent. Well, listen. To all of my colleagues that maybe during the August break and having listened to their colleagues or to their constituents at home, I have a very positive message for you, and I have an opportunity for you, because by voting against the previous question, Mr. Speaker, all of my colleagues can prove that you are supporters of drilling and producing American-made energy. Of course, if you do not, that means that you side, of course, with Speaker Pelosi and you oppose drilling. By defeating the previous question, Mr. Speaker, I will move to amend the rule to make in order H.R. 6566, the American Energy Act, and I have talked at length about what it is. This bill will reduce the price at the pump by enacting an all-of-the-above energy strategy. Once again, what it does, it increases the supply of American-made energy by using environmentally sound technology and innovations. It does so by improving conservation and efficiency and, Mr. Speaker, it promotes a diversity by renewing alternative energy sources, like wind that I had talked about, and solar. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the amendment and extraneous material inserted into the Record prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Well, of course I am going to do that. And, listen: Mt. Rainier I can see from my district on a clear day, because it is 14,410 feet high. But it is quite a view when you view it from a desert setting. So I invite you the next time you come back to come over to my district for all the great wines, where the wine grapes are grown, by the way. And I understand my friend likes to have a cold beer once in a while. The taste of that beer comes from the hops that are grown in my district. So, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friend yielding on that basis, and I look forward to his visit. I appreciate it and yield back to him.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman 30 additional seconds.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank her for that information, and am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I want to remind my colleagues this will not slow down the process of working on the MILCON bill. This is just an addition to it, an addition that I think is very, very important, since Congress is contemplating and probably will go on a 5-week break without taking up any energy legislation. I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so that we can consider this vitally important issue for America. Broken Promises: The Death of Deliberative Democracy A Congressional Report on the Unprecedented Erosion of the Democratic Process in the 108th Congress (Compiled by the House Rules Committee Minority Office--Hon. Louise M. Slaughter, Ranking Member) 4. Rules with Pre-Printing Requirements are not ``Open Rules'' During the 108th Congress, the Rules Committee reported out four rules with a so-called ``pre-printing'' requirement. This provision requires Members to submit their amendments for publication in the Congressional Record, in accordance with clause 8 of Rule XVIII, on the day preceding floor debate of the legislation. While the majority optimistically calls such rules ``modified open rules,'' we consider them ``restrictive'' rules and have scored them as such in the appendices attached to this report. While we concede that considering a bill with a pre- printing requirement is less restrictive than the more common tactic of limiting amendments to those printed in the Rules Committee report, there is a significant difference between an open rule and a rule with a pre-printing requirement. A pre-printing requirement forces Members to reveal their amendments in advance of floor consideration, something that may assist the floor managers, but can disadvantage the Member offering it. In addition, a pre-printing requirement blocks any amendment proposal that might emerge during the course of the debate. When Chairman Dreier was in the minority, he made the following statement about the preprinting requirement during debate on a rule on national service legislation: ``This rule also requires amendments to be printed in the Congressional Record. That might not sound like much, but it is another bad policy that belittles the traditions of House debate. If amendments must be preprinted, then it is impossible to listen to the debate on the floor, come up with a new idea to improve the bill, and then offer an amendment to incorporate that idea. Why do we need this burdensome pre- printing process? Shouldn't the committees that report these bills have a grasp of the issues affecting the legislation under their jurisdiction? Again, Mr. Speaker, I think we can do better.'' We agree with Chairman Dreier's statement that the purpose of the amendment process on the floor is to give duly elected Members of Congress the opportunity to shape legislation in a manner that they believe is in the best interest of their constituents and the Nation as a whole. It is not to help the floor manager with his or her job. A majority interested in allowing ``the full and free airing of conflicting opinions'' would allow at least some House business to occur in an open format--in a procedural framework that allows Members to bring their amendments directly to the floor for discussion and debate under the five-minute rule. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I listened very closely to what the distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee said, and if I infer by what he said, this may be the end of open rules in this House. There have been many people that have said on the floor today that this rule is in fact an open rule. Mr. Speaker, this is not an open rule. It does not permit an open process that allows Members to come to the floor and offer amendments to this veterans funding bill. Instead, it restricts and closes down the ability, by limiting amendments to only those who preprinted their amendments in the Congressional Record. I didn't, Mr. Speaker, so I am prohibited later on today from offering an amendment if I chose to do so. This clearly violates the open process by which appropriations bills have long been considered in this House. Mr. Speaker, don't take my word for it. I would like to quote several statements from my Democrat colleagues in the past Congress and in this Congress. On September 15, 2005, this is in the last Congress, Mr. Hastings of Florida made the following statement on the House floor about a preprinting requirement for a Coast Guard authorization bill. Mr. Hastings from Florida said, and I am quoting: ``I am nevertheless disappointed that the preprinting of amendments was even required. Despite the majority's claims, this legislative process which they call 'open' is actually restricted. It is not an open rule because every Member is not permitted to offer any germane amendment.'' Mr. Hastings of Florida said that in the last Congress. In a report prepared by Ms. Slaughter before becoming chairman of the Rules Committee, in this report, which is entitled ``Broken Promises: The Death of Deliberative Democracy,'' Ms. Slaughter and her Democrat colleagues stated, and I quote from page 26 of this report, ``Rules with preprinting requirements are not open rules.'' Quoting further from the same page: ``Further, there is a significant difference between an open rule and a rule with a preprinting requirement. A preprinting requirement forces Members to reveal their amendments in advance of floor consideration, something that may assist the floor managers, but can disadvantage the Member offering it. In addition, a preprinting requirement blocks any amendment proposal that might emerge during the course of debate.'' That comes from a Democrat publication. The rule before the House today is not an open rule, by their own definition. The long-standing tradition has been deliberately violated. But don't take my word about the past. Quoting again from the Congressional Record, this is Ms. Matsui from last year, and she is a member of the Rules Committee, last year in the 110th Congress she states regarding the Energy and Water appropriations bill: ``As I mentioned at the outset of this debate, this bill is made in order under an open rule, which is our tradition. I hope that all Members will give that tradition the respect it deserves.'' Where is the respect, Mr. Speaker? Where is the respect? Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert in the Record excerpts from ``Broken Promises: The Death of Deliberative Democracy,'' printed by the then-minority party of the Rules Committee. Finally, Mr. Speaker, this House has been blocked repeatedly for many months from being allowed to vote on lifting the ban on drilling. Congress needs to act now to produce more American-made energy. Congress needs to vote now on lifting the offshore drilling ban. By defeating the previous question on this rule, the House can vote on drilling offshore. When the previous question is defeated, I will move to amend the rule to make in order H.R. 6108, the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2008. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the amendment and extraneous material inserted in the Record prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.