Jay Inslee

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Cascadia Marine Trail Study Act. The Cascadia Marine Trail is a unique, 150-mile long water trail stretching from the Canadian border south through the San Juan Islands and Puget Sound to Olympia. It was started in the late 1980s by local kayaking enthusiasts wanting to highlight the 5,000-year old small- boating tradition along the water trail. The trail's popularity with both tourists and local boating enthusiasts is a testament to its grassroots beginnings and extensive local support, making it a valuable economic and natural State resource. The Cascadia Marine Trail has been recognized as a significant environmental and tourist resource, including its 1994 designation as a National Recreation Trail and in 1999 as a National Millennium Trail. In 2005, the American Canoe Association (ACA) designated the trail an ACA-Recommended Water Trail. The trail's 55 safe pull-out zones and campsites are managed by a multitude of State and local agencies, despite its extensive length. First introduced in 2009, the Cascadia Marine Trail Study Act directs the Department of Interior to study the feasibility of adding the trail to the National Trail system. During the 110th Congress, the bill passed the House with unanimous support but unfortunately, did not make it out of the Senate. Today, with bipartisan support, I am reintroducing the Cascadia Marine Trail Study Act. The trail's designation as a National Scenic or Historic Trail, if recommended by the Department of Interior study mandated by the bill, would raise its national profile, provide for educational and interpretive resources along the trail, and coordinate management and restoration of the trail and surrounding campsites. The bill has wide support, including endorsements from several national and statewide recreation and conservation agencies and is the first step toward enhancing the visibility and preservation of this historic water trail. Designation will help encourage tourism across the Puget Sound, which will bolster local economies in the Puget Sound region. According to the Prosperity Partnership, the Tourism and Visitor industry cluster is the region's largest economic cluster with more than 108,000 jobs across the region. Scenic travel to places like the Cascadia Marine Trail can have a significant impact on the economy of surrounding communities. The Cascadia Marine Trail is a State gem that deserves its chance to become a national treasure.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Madam Chair, I am concerned about the underlying legislation's attempt to zero out funding for the USDA Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP), in the Agriculture Appropriations bill for FY2012. BCAP is an important economic development program uniquely focused on advanced, next generation biofuels that can be grown, produced, and refined in Washington state. This biomass can be used for heat, power, bio-based products, and biofuels. In fact, it is the only program that helps farmers transition from growing traditional crops to growing energy crops. BCAP is vitally important for the development of the clean domestic biomass energy industry. Authorized in Title IX of the 2008 Farm Bill, BCAP received $552 million in FY 2010, but the final Continuing Resolution that passed into law for FY 2011 reduced BCAP funding to $112 million. Today, the House Agriculture Appropriations bill goes further, proposing to eliminate funding for this program in its entirety. I believe that eliminating this program is the wrong direction, and will hinder job creation in the emerging biomass and biofuels industries. It is widely agreed that developing a robust sustainable biomass and biofuels industry will produce significant jobs and generate revenues in rural areas. One national study has found that producing 475 million gallons of biofuel in 2009 resulted in 23,000 jobs across the economy, $4.1 billion in added GDP growth, $445 million in Federal tax revenues, and $383 million for State and local governments. Feedstock production would likely represent half the direct jobs, boosting employment in rural areas and small communities. For example, in the Pacific Northwest, a coalition of aviation and airline industries, universities, ports and international airports, recently released a report outlining how to commercialize aviation biofuels. Many of the coalition partners are working to bring these aviation biofuels to market and will rely on BCAP, as do countless other biofuel and biomass organizations around the Nation. Because of the prospects for widespread job creation and superb opportunities for positive rural development, I believe that rather than zero out this program, Congress should preserve funding at the Administration's proposed budget of $201 million.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Kathy Fletcher for her lifelong dedication to bettering the environment within Washington State and across the Nation. Kathy Fletcher is retiring after 20 years serving as the Executive Director of People for Puget Sound, a citizen's organization she founded in 1991 to preserve the Puget Sound and Northwest Straits. The organization has inspired countless individuals through its education and volunteer programs. It also has successfully lobbied to strengthen environmental safeguards throughout the Puget Sound. Kathy has had a distinguished career spanning over 30 years of environmental activism, beginning with a position on President Carter's White House Domestic Policy Staff handling environmental and natural resource issues. A fifth-generation Washingtonian, she moved to Seattle to become the first chair of the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority and has since sat on the board of many local and national environmental organizations. Through her efforts, Kathy has helped protect Washington State's coastlines from disintegration and degradation and has made environmental activism more accessible to all. Kathy, thank you for your environmental leadership and for your tireless efforts to improve Washington State for the benefit of all.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chair, I rise today to express my concern over a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 that would limit the access of certain military retirees to the TRICARE Uniformed Services Family Health Plan (USFHP). As you know, USFHP has been an extremely popular program within the Military Health System since its introduction in 1981, serving more than 115,000 active duty service members, veterans, and their families 16 states, including more than 11,000 in Washington state. USFHP consistently earns a 90 percent satisfaction rating among its enrollees--by far the highest among military beneficiary programs. In addition to its success and popularity, this program plays an integral component in the Department of Defense (DoD) meeting its commitment to provide health care to those who have served our country in uniform. The provision included in this year's Defense Authorization bill would terminate health care services under the plan when beneficiaries reach the age of 65 and become eligible to transfer to Medicare. Over one third of all USFHP beneficiaries are currently over 65 and are taking advantage of the USFHP managed care structure. Removing them from the program could undermine the highly effective disease management and prevention aspects of the USFHP, not to mention potentially ending longstanding patient-doctor relationships due to the change in coverage. USFHP is a fully capitated program, providing quality and efficient care to beneficiaries. Even recently, Congress highlighted the effectiveness of USFHP in the 111th DoD authorization bill, while directing DoD to examine opportunities to improve the broader TRICARE Program. Additionally last year the Director of TRICARE Management engaged USFHP to assist in educating the rest of the DoD system about their highly successful prevention and disease management programs. As we look to improve the quality of care while addressing high costs, we can learn from effective programs like USFHP, which provides managed care and includes a focus on preventative care and managing chronic illnesses to improve the lives of our service members and potentially creating savings in the long run. Transferring beneficiaries to Medicare will only shift costs, rather than improve the quality of care for those who have served our country. In light of this, and the success this program has had in providing for those who have served in uniform, I wish to reiterate my support for USFHP. I hope we can avoid major alterations to the US Family Health Plan and continue to offer this service to all eligible beneficiaries, including those over the age of 65, who I believe have earned a right to this high quality program through service to our country.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the graduating Class of 2011 from Bridgeport High School in Bridgeport, Washington. These students were finalists in President Obama's Commencement Challenge, and because of their inspiring story, deserve to be recognized. Bridgeport is a public school in eastern Washington State where students are forging a way to bring energy and talent to a small, rural orchard community. Most of the students I recognize today have overcome incredible challenges in order to graduate this June. Many of them will be among the first in their families to do so and all of them are on free or reduced lunch plans, an indicator of the difficult economic circumstances overcome by these students and their families. Only two students in the class have parents that graduated from high school. Yet, 90 percent of the students will receive their diplomas and 82 percent of the students are college-bound. This is a remarkable accomplishment and something for which all schools should strive. The principal, teachers, students, and families of Bridgeport High School should be commended for their success. They have demonstrated that by working together, we can close the academic achievement gap, improve graduation rates, and most of all, help students realize their dreams. Congratulations to the exemplary graduating class at Bridgeport: Adriana Gomez Saucedo--Valedictorian; Ana Berta Soto Mendez-- Salutatorian; Javier Aguilar; Elivis Alcaraz; Michael Baca; Norma Camacho; Brooke Desjardins; Fredy Eduardo Flores; Elizabeth Gameros Garcia; Maria Elizabeth Garcia Gomez; Miranda Garza Trevino; Alejandro Jr. Gomez Camacho; Irma Gomez Garcia; Nadia Gonzalez Garcia; Lizbet Lopez Casillas; Maria Alexis Macedo Ruiz; Baltazar Munoz Perez; Mauro Efrain Mosqueda; Marisol Vanessa Valdovinos Aleman; Carina Ochoa Valdovinos; Christian Perales Barboza; Ricardo Perez Rojas; Miguel Angel Ramos Parbol; Paige Leone Rodriguez; Rosendo Rodriguez Hernandez Jr.; Erika Berenice Saucedo Rubio; Samuel Soto Rojas; Alfredo Ubaldo Rosas; Joaquin Valdovinos Infante; Xenia Valdovinos Perez; Daniel Velasco Velasco; Jasmine Mogollan Roa; Olivia Silva Dominguez; Veronica Nicole Saucedo; Elodia Isabel Jimenez Valdovinos; Carina Velasquez.

Mr. INSLEE

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

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chair, we're offering a simple amendment that will make it much easier for our wounded warriors to obtain access to adaptive recreational equipment. We have these proud men and women coming back from the field of battle with obviously very, very severe wounds; and what we have found is some of the best things they could do to get back with their lives and professional development is to have access to adaptive recreation, both services and equipment. And I know some of these folks do incredible things with paralysis skiing, with severe injuries riding adaptive bicycles, people who have lost their vision, wounded warriors getting back up on the slopes, and it has been a tremendous thing for these men and women to help restore their confidence, rebuild their strength, and get back into the swing of things. Research has shown this works not only from a psychological but also from a physical standpoint. But we have a little glitch that, whereas our veterans through the Veterans Administration can have access to this adaptive equipment, such as monoskis and adaptive hand-cranked bikes, our wounded warriors haven't necessarily had the authorization to be provided that equipment who are on active duty. So my amendment would simply authorize the Department of Defense to make that available. And I have been inspired by Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Dudek, who until today has been the commanding officer of the Warrior Transition Battalion at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Tacoma. He is moving on to continue this work here at the Pentagon. He lost some function in his limbs and has done a tremendous job helping wounded warriors get back going. We'd like to extend this systemwide now, and this would authorize the DOD to do that. So we would commend this as one step forward to helping our proud men and women regain their confidence, enjoy life and professional abilities. We commend this. For the young men and women who return from overseas with a severe injury or disability, recreational activities--spending time outdoors skiing or on the basketball court shooting hoops with friends--offer them a chance to forget their disability and focus on doing the things they love. Research has shown that engaging in physical activity regularly benefits wounded warriors' confidence and overall quality of life. Thanks to the incredible equipment available to these wounded warriors--such as ``mono-skis'' or sport wheelchairs that have been adapted to fit their disability-- participating in outdoor recreation is a real possibility. At this time, service-disabled veterans may receive such adaptive recreation equipment through the Department of Veterans Affairs. For the wounded warriors who remain on active duty, however, access to the rehabilitative equipment that can get them outdoors and active may be more difficult. Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Dudek, who until today served as the commanding officer of the Warrior Transition Battalion at Joint Base Lewis McChord, in Tacoma, WA, is one of these brave wounded warriors. My amendment would authorize the Secretary of Defense to provide wounded warriors who remain on active duty the same recreational equipment that their retired comrades receive through the Department of Veterans Affairs. This amendment will open the door to daily exercise and friendly athletic competition with friends, and will give them independence to pursue the recreational activities that give them the most joy. Brief Background After a scathing Washington Post investigation of their wounded warrior programs at Walter Reed, the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs overhauled their wounded warrior transition care programs. While I applaud the steps they have taken, I am introducing this amendment to fill a remaining benefit gap. Previously, when a member of the Armed Services was found ``unfit to serve'' because of a disability--a process that included an appearance before a MedBoard--they were automatically retired and began receiving care through the VA. Now, you can apply to remain on active duty. Active duty members, who have been declared unfit for duty and cannot transition back into, stay on in service of their country in other capacities. Many of these men, such as Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Dudek (who I mentioned earlier), are serving as inspirational mentors to other wounded warriors who are undergoing a difficult transition. Though they are not serving on the battlefield, they are providing our country a valuable service by assisting with this transition. To account for the benefit gap that prevents active duty wounded warriors from receiving recreational equipment through TRICARE, the DoD has worked with VA to see that some active-duty members received assistance through the VA. However, this was inefficient and many active duty wounded warriors were still without the equipment they wanted. Further, the VA's authority to help active duty members is set to expire on December 31, 2012. Beginning in 2008, the DoD developed a pilot program to provide rehabilitative equipment to active duty service members. However, the definition of rehabilitative equipment was restricted to simply provide ``hand bicycles.'' My amendment would give the DoD flexibility, and allow wounded warriors independence to choose the type of recreational rehab they want to pursue. My amendment in no way abridges the rights or services currently enjoyed by wounded warriors. It simply gives them expanded access to rehabilitative, recreational equipment. Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Dudek (Commanding Officer of Joint Base Lewis McChord's Warrior Transition Battalion)--paralyzed from the feet down after an IED attack. Stayed in the service working with other wounded warriors as they transitioned back to active duty or retired. LTC Dudek wanted a ``mono-ski,'' but was unable to receive one through the DoD. Had he retired, he could have been provided a ``sit-ski'' by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Under my amendment, the Secretary of Defense will be authorized to provide this equipment. I have spoken with another Army Colonel who is 100 percent disabled but was approved to stay on active duty. However, when he tried to get adaptive sporting equipment--in this case a mono-ski--through the caregivers at the DoD health facility Walter Reed, he was unable to get it as it wasn't covered through TRICARE. Again, the VA could have purchased it if he was a veteran, but since he had not yet retired he did not have access to the same equipment that he otherwise would have. Testimonials from Wounded Warriors ``All the training and dedication pays off when you have crossed the finish line, you're standing completely exhausted next to your fellow service member, and for that moment, completely forgetting about your disabilities.''--Jose Ramos, Hospital Corpsman 3rd Class, U.S. Navy, Above Elbow Amputation, Iraq War Veteran ``Six months after my injury I was skiing again. You can't imagine the confidence that gives you and so you start seeing yourself doing things in life again . . . knowing that you're going to get a job, knowing that you're going to go to school because you're out there tearing up the slopes. It's just a super family here. It's a great experience, it's a family experience, and the whole community just gives its all to give you a group hug and I love coming here.''--Dennis Walburn, U.S. National Guard LTC, Wounded Warrior, Above Knee Amputee, Iraq War Veteran ``It was amazing, I was out there on the water, hearing everyone cheer me on. I was waterskiing! It's something I never thought I would be able to do again.''--Joey Bozik, U.S. Army SGT, Triple amputee, Iraq War Veteran I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the bipartisan Domestic Fuel for Enhancing National Security (D-FENS) Act of 2011, which will allow Civilian Agencies and Military Agencies to extend multiyear contracts from the current limit of 5 years to up to 15 years for the purchase of advanced biofuels. I thank my colleague Mr. Jones of North Carolina for working with me on this issue, which will increase our national security and help build an American industry. Accounting for about 2 percent of U.S. energy consumption, the Department of Defense is the largest single consumer of energy in the country. According to Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, ``[the Department of Defense] is using 300,000 barrels of oil every day. The energy use per soldier creeps up every year. And our number-one import into Afghanistan is fossil fuel.'' U.S. Navy Secretary Ray Maybus has outlined several goals to lead the Navy toward a more energy-secure fleet. By 2015, the Navy will reduce petroleum use in the commercial fleet by 50 percent. By 2020, the Navy will produce at least 50 percent of shore-based energy requirements from alternative sources and 50 percent of total energy consumption will come from alternative sources. No one knows better than the Department of Defense that energy supplies are critical to combat troops and our national security. To ultimately realize these goals, we must dramatically scale-up advanced biofuel production in the United States. With added Congressional authority to purchase longer-term contracts, our defense sector could adopt domestically produced sustainable fuels for the security of our troops. Companies already have developed technologies to produce ``drop-in'' ready fuels, meaning our military could use these fuels in existing infrastructure, aircraft and ships. The longer-term contracts provided by this bill will not only increase our energy security, but can ultimately help unlock private investment for construction and development of large advanced biofuel refineries in the United States. In states like Washington, North Carolina, California, Montana and others, interests from the private sector, universities, ports and major airports are already working to bring the first generation of biofuels to the market, and their efforts can be greatly enhanced by this legislation. Washington state and the Pacific Northwest are well-positioned to commercialize aviation biofuels--all elements of the supply chain are feasible, and the region has come together to map out a strategic and sustainable path to bring advanced bio-based jet fuels to market. Already in the Northwest, 40 public and private stakeholders from academic research institutions, environmental advocacy, and government, and the aerospace and aviation, biofuels, and agriculture and forestry industries have formed the Sustainable Aviation Fuels Northwest (SAFN) initiative. This effort was convened by regional aviation leaders Boeing, Alaska Airlines, the region's largest airports--Port of Seattle, Port of Portland and Spokane International Airport--as well as Washington State University, a center of advanced biofuels research. Stakeholders include fuel producers, farm and forest managers, non- governmental organizations and key government leaders, including representatives from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Defense Logistics Agency. This diverse group representing all points along the supply chain is working to create a ``flight path'' that will overcome challenges to deploying advanced aviation biofuels. This legislation will support Washington's effort to make the Northwest region a market leader in the advanced biofuel industry. With our nation's security and energy independence in mind, I urge my colleagues to support the Domestic Fuel for Enhancing National Security (D-FENS) Act of 2011.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise to protect the beaches and shoreline and economy of the State of Washington. This amendment is quite simple. It would simply say that we will not allow the Federal Government to run over the State of Washington on issues of drilling off of our coastline, that we won't be shackled to this antiquated policy of drilling without first providing reasonable protection, without first addressing the issue of rampant speculation that is what is exposing my consumers to $4 a gallon gas in the State of Washington, and without freeing us to do what we should be doing, which is developing new, clean energy sources. I want to address each one of those. Basically our position is we don't think in the State of Washington, or any State, and particularly the State of Washington, which is the Evergreen State, we ought to have this policy foisted upon us that is not an evergreen energy policy for this century for three reasons. Reason number one: Despite the fact that we have had this enormous passage of time since this horrendous spill in the gulf, this Chamber has not passed into law one single safety provision to bring additional safety to anywhere on our coastline. My amendment would simply say that the people of the State of Washington and their elected officials ought to be able to make a decision that we have got adequate, reasonable safeguards for drilling before it happens off of the State of Washington. That has not happened, and it is inexcusable. Second, before this happens, the people of the State of Washington ought to have reasonable protection against the rampant speculation that is going on that is driving up these prices. Even Goldman Sachs has recognized we have had four times the speculative positions taken and probably a $20 amount that has driven up these prices associated with this unchecked speculation. Yet this Chamber and my friends across the aisle have not done a single thing to address this speculation. Until we do that, we shouldn't have my neighbors and my constituents have foisted down their throats this policy of mandatory drilling without them first making a decision. Third, the people of the State of Washington want to help in our energy crisis and they are capable of helping in this energy crisis if this Chamber will just free them to do it. Here is how they want to help. They want to produce lithium ion batteries that can run electric cars so we don't have to start being shackled and just addicted to oil. But this Chamber hasn't done a single thing, a single thing this year, to help clean energy sources that Washington State business people want to produce. I look at the EnerG2 company that is making ultracapacitors. This Chamber isn't helping them make electric batteries for electric cars. I look at the REC company in Moses Lake, Washington, that is making the polysilicate cells for photovoltaic cells to produce the electricity for electric cars. This Chamber hasn't done a single thing to help that company advance. I look at the Targeted Growth company and the Boeing company that are developing biofuels so that we can have a competitor to gasoline so we can drive those prices down. This Chamber hasn't done a single thing to help those companies develop Washington State jobs for a new energy future. Now, we have got a lot of energy off of our coastline. It might be in assorted ways. But I know it is in offshore wind. But we aren't doing a single thing to help the offshore wind energy. All we are doing is trying to shackle an antiquated energy policy on the people of the State of Washington. I would have liked this amendment to have helped all of my colleagues on the Pacific Coast, but because of some of the financial rules that we have, we have only been able to bring this involving the Evergreen State. But I would hope that all of my colleagues would join me in saying that before this gets forced on the citizens of Washington State, we adopt some reasonable measures. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. INSLEE. Thank you. First, I wish my friend Doc Hastings from Washington was with us today. He's not feeling well. But Mr. Young is doing an admirable job with a weak argument, and I'll report that they're getting represented. I just want to point out we haven't seen horrendous damage to any ecosystem from a wind spill yet. If you spill a little wind, you don't end up covering large gulf areas with hydrocarbons or destroying oyster and shrimping grounds like have been in the gulf. There are differences from multiple sources. We are simply saying that before we move forward with additional offshore drilling, we ought to have reasonable safety protocols, we ought to address speculation, and we ought to have an energy policy that looks at all of the above. My friends across the aisle told us you were going to give us an all- of-the-above energy policy. All you have given us is an all-of-the- below energy policy. We need a little better than this.

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, today, I am introducing the bipartisan Domestic Fuel for Enhancing National Security (D-FENS) Act 2011, which will allow Civilian Agencies and Military Agencies to extend multiyear contracts from the current limit of 5 years to up to 15 years for the purchase of advanced biofuels. I thank my colleague Mr. Jones of North Carolina for working with me on this issue, which will increase our national security and help build an American industry. Accounting for about 2 percent of U.S. energy consumption, the Department of Defense is the largest single consumer of energy in the country. According to Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, ``[the Department of Defense] is using 300,000 barrels of oil every day. The energy use per soldier creeps up every year. And our number-one import into Afghanistan is fossil fuel.'' U.S. Navy Secretary Ray Maybus has outlined several goals to lead the Navy toward a more energy-secure fleet. By 2015, the Navy will reduce petroleum use in the commercial fleet by 50 percent. By 2020, the Navy will produce at least 50 percent of shore-based energy requirements from alternative sources and 50 percent of total energy consumption will come from alternative sources. No one knows better than the Department of Defense that energy supplies are critical to combat troops and our national security. To ultimately realize these goals, we must dramatically scale-up advanced biofuel production in the United States. With added Congressional authority to purchase longer-term contracts, our defense sector could adopt domestically produced sustainable fuels for the security of our troops. Companies already have developed technologies to produce ``drop-in'' ready fuels, meaning our military could use these fuels in existing infrastructure, aircraft and ships. The longer-term contracts provided by this bill will not only increase our energy security, but can ultimately help unlock private investment for construction and development of large advanced biofuel refineries in the United States. In states like Washington, North Carolina, California, Montana and others, interests from the private sector, universities, ports and major airports are already working to bring the first generation of biofuels to the market, and their efforts can be greatly enhanced by this legislation. Washington state and the Pacific Northwest are well-positioned to commercialize aviation biofuels--all elements of the supply chain are feasible, and the region has come together to map out a strategic and sustainable path to bring advanced bio-based jet fuels to market. Already in the Northwest, 40 public and private stakeholders from academic research institutions, environmental advocacy, and government, and the aerospace and aviation, biofuels, and agriculture and forestry industries have formed the Sustainable Aviation Fuels Northwest (SAFN) initiative. This effort was convened by regional aviation leaders Boeing, Alaska Airlines, the region's largest airports--Port of Seattle, Port of Portland and Spokane International Airport--as well as Washington State University, a center of advanced biofuels research. Stakeholders include fuel producers, farm and forest managers, non- governmental organizations and key government leaders, including representatives from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Defense Logistics Agency. This diverse group representing all points along the supply chain is working to create a ``flight path'' that will overcome challenges to deploying advanced aviation biofuels. This legislation will support Washington's effort to make the Northwest region a market leader in the advanced biofuel industry. With our nation's security and energy independence in mind, I urge my colleagues to support the Domestic Fuel for Enhancing National Security (D-FENS) Act 2011.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chair, we should oppose this bill not because it is too strong, but because it is too weak. Americans do need relief from $4 a gallon gasoline, and they are not going to get it from this bill either in the short term or the long term. The reason they won't get relief in the short term is we're not drilling in the right places. We need to drill speculators, not just wells. Even Goldman Sachs recognizes that a significant portion of the huge spike in prices is due to rampant speculation in the market, but this bill doesn't do a single thing about that short-term reason for this short-term price. We need to drill speculators, not just wells. But, secondly, in the long term, this bill does not give us what we need. My friends across the aisle told us they were going to give us an all-of-the-above energy strategy. They haven't given us an all-of-the- above strategy. They are just giving an all-of-the-below strategy, because the only thing they are thinking about are these archaic technologies of drilling holes in the ground. We use 25 percent of the world's oil. We only have 3 percent of the world's oil supply, even if we drill in Yellowstone National Park. The dinosaurs just didn't die underneath our feet. We need new supplies of energy, of electricity, camalena-based biofuels from Targeted Growth in Seattle, advanced forms of algae-based biofuels from Sapphire Energy and General Atomic and other companies. We need new sources of energy, not just below our feet but above our feet, and in our minds where we get the intellect to invent these technologies. That's an all-of-the-above strategy. Let's do what we can do to give real short-term relief. Defeat this bill, and we will get a comprehensive energy policy for this country.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, we have an obligation to our generations who built America. That's why we will not allow the Republicans to terminate Medicare with extreme prejudice. We will not allow them to turn a guarantee for seniors into a voucher program for the insurance industry. We will not allow them to turn Medicare into ``Medi-gone.'' We will not allow them to give us 6,000 reasons to vote against their hair-brained scheme because they want to put $6,000 worth of more costs on our senior citizens. This is a noble obligation. It should not be shredded. We should reduce medical inflation, not put this burden on senior citizens. Preserve Medicare and reject the Republican scheme.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker. I rise today to once again to introduce the Offshore Drilling Safety Improvement Act. As we rapidly approach the one-year anniversary of the catastrophic Deepwater Horizon oil spill, which killed 11 workers and dumped hundreds of millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, we must confront the fact that Congress still has yet to pass comprehensive safety reform for offshore oil drilling. A year after toxic sludge drenched the Gulf beaches, communities are still suffering from economic ramifications of the loss of tourism and fishing. Last year, after numerous congressional hearings and months of hard work, the House passed the Consolidated Land, Energy, and Aquatic, CLEAR, Act, a comprehensive approach to make sure American jobs and coastlines are protected. Among other beneficial improvements, the CLEAR Act included important provisions requiring better technology on blowout preventers and other commonsense safety reforms. Unfortunately, the bill did not make it through the Senate, and over the last few months the House has yet to pass similar legislation. That is why I am once again, with bipartisan support, introducing the Offshore Drilling Safety Improvement Act. This act strengthens the standards for safety equipment on offshore oil rigs by requiring the use of the best available technology for blowout preventers and emergency shutoff equipment. It will also require the Administration to consider independent and reputable science and expertise when determining appropriate equipment. It is one vital piece of the larger, comprehensive effort to create a regulatory system that protects American jobs, coasts, and communities. We may never know for sure what exactly caused the disastrous leak but we do know that we must work together to protect our shores and local economies from future spills. Other countries around the world require more comprehensive emergency safety equipment. It is time that, in the places we decide to drill, we are using the best safety equipment available.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Max Cleland, my friend, former U.S. Senator and an American war hero. Today marks the 43rd Anniversary of the Battle of Khe Sanh. It was there that at the age of 25, he earned the Silver Star and the Bronze Star for valorous action in combat serving America as a U.S. Army Captain in Vietnam. On April 8, with a month left in his tour, Captain Cleland was ordered to set up a radio relay station on a nearby hill. A helicopter flew him and two soldiers to the treeless top of Hill 471, east of Khe Sanh. When the helicopter landed, Cleland jumped out and was accidentally struck by a grenade blast. The explosion slammed him backward, shredding both his legs and one arm. Due to the severity of his injuries, doctors amputated both of Cleland's legs above the knee and his right forearm. Max Cleland only became stronger after this devastating experience, and dedicated himself to a life of public service as a United States Senator where he worked to significantly improve the lives of Veterans returning from war. In these ways, he lived in the essence of one of his favorite quotes from Ernest Hemingway ``The world breaks everyone, and afterward, many are strong at the broken places.'' Max, we are inspired by your patriotism, spirit, and your great achievements to our nation. We only hope that our nation can follow your example and grow stronger at all the broken places.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, it is deeply disappointing that instead of being here seeking a bipartisan consensus to avoid a government shutdown, we again are brought to this floor in an effort to engage in this ideological effort to, in fact, shut down government. Yesterday, my Republican friends wanted to shut down the ability of Uncle Sam to protect the freedom of Americans to breathe clean air. Today, they are attempting to shut down the ability of Uncle Sam to protect the freedom of Americans to get access to the Internet. Tomorrow, they are attempting to shut down the government so they won't be allowed to protect the freedom of women to get health. We should not be shutting down Americans' access to an open Internet. We should be opening up Americans' access and Uncle Sam's ability to guarantee Americans access to the Internet. Now here's what is at stake. Our access to freeways--and freeways are great, just like the Internet is great, but it is not so great if powerful economic forces can shut down the on-ramps to the freeway. And it's not so great if they can shut down or create a two-tiered system so that if you go to your Internet service provider's favorite warehouse store you get a deal to get access to the freeway; but if you want to go to their competitors, you have got to pay extra and you get slower service to get there. This is what is at stake. And what the Republicans want to do with this resolution is shut down government's ability to prevent these powerful economic forces from making a second tier, a substitute, a secondary access if you don't go to their favorite situation. Now, Mr. Speaker, America has been great because it invented free speech and it has been great because it has invented an open Internet. But both of those freedoms are in jeopardy today because powerful economic interests that are becoming larger and larger in consolidating these Internet entities have the ability now to start choking off consumers' access to the Internet. And for those who want to say, oh, it's not a problem, we cannot wait until this horse is out of the barn, it will be too late. And, by the way, this is not just a consumers' issue; it is a business development issue. It is small businesses who today want to create these small businesses that want to have people get access to their businesses. And they don't have the powerful clout to sign these big, mega-million dollar deals with Internet service providers to give them a leg up. Mr. Speaker, reject this issue to shut down government's ability to provide freedom of the Internet. Preserve open Internet and reject this bill. announcement by the speaker pro tempore

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, we should oppose this dirty air act because it would suggest that we are a nation in a deep and dangerous sleep, dozing in the face of disastrous pollution, slumbering while our children are riddled with asthma. It's time for America to wake up, get up out of our comfortable beds of denial, and get to work building a new, clean economy. It's time to wake up, America. The Chinese are not sleeping while they build five times more wind turbines than us. The Germans are not sleeping building more solar panels. The Indians are not sleeping who are restricting carbon pollution. It is time to wake up. Nobody in human history has ever won a race while asleep. And that's why it's time for a national awakening by rejecting this bill. It's a time to put engineers to work on clean energy. It's a time to help businesspeople to grow businesses. It's a time to help students learn new technology. It is an irony, but it's true: You can only dream while you're asleep, but you can only realize a dream when you're awake. We should believe in American exceptionalism. We are exceptional in innovation, exceptional in entrepreneurship, exceptional in pioneering technology. And if we do these things, the sun we see on the horizon will be a sunrise, not a sunset. It will be a sign of an awakening nation. We'll do this because we will know and America can know the profound satisfaction of building a clean energy economy and producing children free of asthma rather than increasing it like this dirty air act. Vote ``no'' against this small-minded exercise in pessimism. Vote ``no'' and embrace the optimism that is inherent in our national character.

Mr. INSLEE. I appreciate my Republican colleague's statement, but the clear fact of this bill is, if it passes, what does it do? It basically says that Sir Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, and Thomas Edison didn't know what they were talking about because this bill, in rather clear form, caters to a narrow sector of a narrow political interest to ignore clear science. And there is no way you can get around this or sweet-talk your way around this clear rejection of science. Now, this isn't just us. Who has cleared and said this statement that we seek to put in this bill is correct? Only the National Academy of Sciences, NOAA, the Department of Defense, the Centers for Disease Control, the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union, the Geological Society of America, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Institute of Physics, and the American Chemical Society. But one side of the aisle thinks that the tea party has greater scientific credibility, and that's who you are catering to when you refuse to adopt this amendment. Let's have a bipartisan statement of the problem so that we can have a bipartisan statement of the solution.

Mr. INSLEE. It is deeply disappointing that our Republican colleagues are so willing, able--and apparently eager--to shut down the government. This bill fundamentally shuts down the government. It shuts down the ability of the Environmental Protection Agency to help lead us into a clean energy future. Why shut down an agency that can help develop these biofuels that we were just talking about? Why do they want to shut down the engine of innovation? Why do they want to shut down our effort to find a solution for energy-intensive industries? The steel industry, the aluminum industry, the cement industry, the paper pulp industry need solutions to this. We offered one. Yet the Republicans have no solutions. Shutting down the government is not a solution. Shutting down the EPA is not a solution. Shutting down American innovation is not a solution. This is an amendment that makes a statement that we ought to study science and economics and come up with a solution in a bipartisan way.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, we will all breathe easier if we are able to reach a bipartisan consensus about this budget impasse that we now have. But we will not all breathe easier if the Republicans succeed in essentially eliminating the ability of Uncle Sam to enforce the Clean Air Act. Now, I know it seems pretty shocking, but the fact of the matter is, tonight, as these discussions are going on, the Republicans want to put a rider--one of these noxious viruses on a bill--a rider that would make it illegal for the Environmental Protection Agency to protect our children's health against asthma in enforcing the Clean Air Act. Now, this is pretty amazing. It cannot stand. We are encouraged that the majority leader has said they will not allow these riders. Let's get a compromise to deal with this deficit, not make it harder for our kids to breathe, not make it easier for asthma to ravage our kids, and let's preserve a bipartisan success in the Clean Air Act.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, middle class Americans around the country are very concerned about what's going on in Wisconsin for two reasons. The first reason is that they fundamentally understand that while we all have to tighten our belts--and they've seen workers do that in Wisconsin, to give up various rights under bargaining agreements--they understand fundamentally that we can't solve this problem by attacking the middle class. And second, they understand that the shenanigans that went on last night in Wisconsin are an assault on some democratic principles that we have long enjoyed. We have long enjoyed the right to petition our government for redress of grievances. It's right there in the grand old document that we took an oath to. And fundamentally, this is a reduction in the ability of Americans to work together, to speak with one voice to and with their government. This will not abide. We've got to respect the middle class. We've got to respect democracy and move forward together as a country.