Mary Landrieu

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, may I inquire of the Senator, another 5 or 10 minutes?

Ms. LANDRIEU. I thank the Senator.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I understand we have up to 10 minutes.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, before I begin speaking about the disaster occurring in Louisiana and in parts of Texas, and refer briefly to some of the other disasters that have struck, I wish to respond briefly to some of the remarks the Senator from Iowa made. We don't have time for a debate, and I respect my friend on the other side a great deal, but had the Democrats followed the Republican leadership in trying to privatize Social Security, many seniors would be in a very difficult situation right now, as you know. The Republican Party has for years tried to privatize Social Security. What a terrible situation we would be in had we allowed that to happen. But we and some others, a few on their side, stopped it from happening. I can hardly tell you what the situation would be for our seniors, whether they are on the poor end of our economic scale, the middle end, or the higher end, with Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers and others that are now collapsing. So I know we will have a great deal of debate about which economic policy is the best, and I know the Senator rattled off quite a few numbers regarding Social Security, but I couldn't help myself as I was standing here thinking: Thank goodness we didn't privatize Social Security. Because whatever situation he has outlined, it would be a thousand percent worse for our seniors today. So I thank the junior Senator from Illinois from stopping that from happening, along with myself and many others. I came to the floor today, however, to speak about the disasters unfolding in Louisiana and Texas and other parts of our country. I know as this Congress gets ready to adjourn, we have done some significant work over the last couple of months, and we have more work to do, we do need to get on an energy debate for this Nation, and I am hoping something can be worked out there. We also, of course, have a continuing resolution to discuss. But this is only one of several pictures I am going to show of the results of a terrible storm that crashed into the southern part of the United States last week. Hurricane Ike hit the gulf coast with a ferocious force of winds and tidal surges on September 13. Hurricane Gustav hit us on September 1, and Tropical Storm Fay, while it entered in Florida, or hit our country in Florida, actually did a tremendous amount of damage to other parts of the United States, not only the States along the gulf coast. There was some terrible interior flooding in Arkansas and even up here in this region. As a result, we have homeowners like this. These photos were sent to us by American Press, from the Lake Charles American Press, and I thank them. This is the parish of Calcasieu, which is right outside the Texas border. So you have the counties, of course, of Houston and Galveston and Beaumont, but right on the other side of that border are Calcasieu Parish and Cameron Parish. Let's see some of the extension of the damage in these other pictures. This is in a city. This is not in a low-lying area. This is not on a beach. There is not a beach anywhere around here. We have had tidal surges from Ike much higher than I think many people realize. This is a picture of the eastern part of Louisiana. You all have seen this picture before, and I know you are going to accuse me of actually bringing out an old picture from an old storm. I feel as though I am in Groundhog Day here. But this is actually taken from last week. This is America's energy port. This is Port Fourchon, where 30 percent of the offshore oil and gas from the gulf comes. Port Fourchon. You can't see Port Fourchon, because it is completely underwater. I feel I am going through the repeat of a movie. We had Katrina, we had Rita, and now we have Fay, we have Gustav, and we have Ike. And while Ike did hit directly into Galveston--and please let me begin by saying that my heart goes out to the people of Galveston and Beaumont and the millions of people right now who still in Texas do not have electricity. We in Louisiana most certainly understand the difficulties from a storm of that nature. But I would be remiss if I didn't come to the floor this afternoon and say that this storm hit more than the Texas coast. It walloped us as well. This is another part, from southeast Louisiana, I believe. This is Port Fourchon. This is right on the coast. We can understand this happens when storms occur. This is not in the middle of a city. This is not inland. This is right on the coast. But as I have come down to say so many times, when is America going to wake up and realize that these are where our pipelines are? These are where our refineries are. By the nature of pipelines and refineries and ports, they have to be near a coast. They cannot be inland. We need to do a much better job of protecting these communities. This is in the Houma-Terrebonne area, which is much farther inland. We had some of the worst flooding in Terrebonne Parish, which is really in the southeastern part of the State. Remember, the hurricane really hit Texas, but the hurricane was so big; it was over 600 miles wide. While it was not a category 4 or 5, it was a massive storm that really flooded parts of Mississippi, almost all of south Louisiana, and Texas. I see my colleague, the chairman of the committee, coming to the floor. I will at this point yield for just a few moments, as I think they have come to some agreement.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. I see several other colleagues are here on the floor to speak, maybe on this subject or another, so I will say I will reserve for myself another 5 minutes and be finished with my remarks. I was speaking about the hurricane damage throughout really the southern part of the United States. I do not have the figures from Florida or from Mississippi or Alabama, but we are turning in our figures from Louisiana. Again, I remind my colleagues and the Nation, Fay hit the gulf coast; it hit Florida but devastated parts of the gulf coast and many interior parts of the southeastern part of the United States, with heavy rains and flooding on August 18. Then we had Hurricane Gustav on September 1, which slammed into Louisiana and did a tremendous amount of wind damage to parishes such as Point Coupee and Rapides and Avoyelles Parish--parishes about which you don't hear very much because they are not coastal parishes, but the wind damage was very substantial, all the way up to the northern parts of Louisiana. Much like Katrina, it affected the northern parts of Mississippi, although it was a great flooding event down South. These storms are getting very big and very powerful. Then, of course, Hurricane Ike hitting again the Texas coast, right into Galveston, right up the Houston Ship Channel, doing terrible devastation to our friends in Texas. But again the flooding was substantial along the coastal States. Let me just put up this chart you have seen before. These are the pipelines that support America's energy coast. This is Louisiana's coast. This is Mississippi's coast. This is the Mobile Bay and, of course, the panhandle of Florida. This is the Texas coast. These two storms, Gustav and Ike, hit right here in this region, in the center part of America's energy coast, and wreaked havoc in terms of flooding and wind damage. Again, that has gone up through Louisiana and to other parts of the coastal States. This is just another example from Lake Charles of the water damage in communities tucked well in from the coast. This is wind damage in that same area that can show you some of the wind damage our people are experiencing. Because my time is short, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter from the Governor of Louisiana outlining some of our priorities.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I have a number of the press accounts, and I will just read for the Record the headlines that are pouring into my office each day from newspapers around the State. This one: Ike badly damages Rita-ruined region. Hurricane Ike's receding storm waters on Monday revealed a footprint of damage across coastal southwest Louisiana too similar and too soon after Hurricane Rita of 2005. Storm report: Vermilion Parish sees tough road ahead. Again, a Parish hard hit just 3 years ago. Cameron Parish: ``Still too much water.'' These headlines are streaming into my office. St. Mary Parish: Cypremort Point residents digging out of mud. Barataria to pick up pieces. St. John, St. Charles dig out, clean up. 16,000 people at Blackham Coliseum-- waiting for help and assistance. Gustav, Ike set record for power outages in Louisiana. Finally, as my time draws near: Storm update: Gustav's damage to Louisiana crops estimated at hundreds of millions of dollars. I wish to say on behalf of my friend from Texas, we have some headlines we received in Louisiana about Galveston and about the billions in storm damage to our neighbors in Texas, because we have a situation that I hope our Congress will respond to before we leave here, some agricultural damage and storm damage for the Gulf Coast States, and also to reach back and pick up some of that damage we did not address in the Midwest floods. I thank my colleagues for their understanding. I yield the floor.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I would like to take a few minutes to reflect upon the memory of Tom J. Morris, a true hero to the men and women of Louisiana. Tom died while traveling on vacation with his wife Denise in Boston last Friday morning. As an individual who shares his commitment to civil service and the State of Louisiana, I wanted to honor his truly inspiring career. For the last 19 years, Tom was the CEO for the United Way of Southwest Louisiana, Inc., in Lake Charles. In sum, he had a combined 30 years of service with the United Way and was considered a leader in the community of Lake Charles, particularly in the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. As you know, United Way is a nonprofit organization dedicated to nurturing the future generations and youth of the United States. Tom Morris was a man who represented the convictions of this Nation's youth, by bringing together communities and organizations in order to solve today's dilemmas. Louisiana is still in the wake of the hurricanes, and his dedicated assistance to victims, as well as the general community, will be sorely missed. His efforts to inspire young volunteers and assist in hurricane recovery are still considered vital to the reconstruction of local communities in Louisiana. To his family and his wife Denise, I extend my condolences and my prayers. Tom Morris's efforts are truly inspirational and will always be remembered, not only by the men and women of southwest Louisiana but by also by the Nation as a whole.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I introduce this bill today to prevent misuse of the Antiquities. Act of 1906 to create very large marine monuments. The Antiquities Act was intended to protect landmarks, not create the largest protected areas in the United States unilaterally without congressional assent. The Bush administration acted covertly to convey protected status to 139,000 square miles of the northwestern Hawaiian Islands. In so doing, the administration short-circuited the extensive Marine Sanctuaries process that was already underway and notified the delegation only after the press conference. Now they have turned their attention to the Gulf of Mexico. We learned that the President, with mixed support from his top advisors, is considering using his authorities under the Antiquities Act to unilaterally and permanently declare ``marine monuments'' in various locations of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. Some of these areas are in my backyard--in the Gulf of Mexico--but other areas of the Atlantic and Pacific are also under consideration. I certainly understand the need to conserve and appropriately manage our most sensitive and vulnerable marine areas, which can serve as nurseries for fish stocks and provide critical habitat for other important species. That is why I support the processes Congress established in the National Marine Sanctuaries Act. But any declarations of new or additional protected status to marine areas should continue to follow the scientific and public processes outlined in the Sanctuaries Act. This is a good process that allows all affected parties--from the environmental community to recreational fishermen to the oil and gas industries--to have a say.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I introduce this bill today to restore historic Jackson Barracks in New Orleans to its pre-Hurricane Katrina status as a national historic treasure. Jackson Barracks represents the rich military history of New Orleans, and indeed our great State. However, the rebuilding of the structures on this significant garrison has been hindered by bureaucratic roadblocks and gaps in funding. This bill directly addresses those challenges. As you know, Hurricane Katrina brought torrential floods and driving winds to New Orleans and the surrounding region. The devastation from the storm touched every structure at Jackson Barracks. The original Jackson Barracks consists of 14 Antebellum Garrison Structures built between 1834 and 1835. These historic buildings were not spared and suffered tremendous damage. There is a pressing need to complete the restoration and renovation of the barracks. Jackson Barracks requires additional renovations and restorations that are not within the scope of the Federal Emergency Management Agency hurricane restoration funding. With the agreement of the Chief, National Guard Bureau and the Secretary of the Interior, this bill would reprogram the savings from several military construction projects elsewhere on Jackson Barracks to assist in the completion of historic preservation at the post. I ask the support of my colleagues in enabling the National Park Service to aid in the restoration of Jackson Barracks through the Historic Preservation Fund. I am not asking for additional dollars, but rather that the money that was saved on previous projects be recommitted and used for this vital need.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to reauthorize the Cane River National Heritage Area Commission and modify the boundaries of the heritage area. In 1994, Congress recognized this area as one of the nation's cultural and historic treasures. In the 1700s, Creole culture flowered across the stunning landscapes of the Cane River, and the Creole culture continues to enliven the region to this day. In terms of beauty, it is not only the landscape but the Creole architecture from that time period that charms visitors. Today, the 35 mile region includes the Cane River Creole National Historical Park, seven national historic landmarks, three state historic sites, and 24 properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Anchored by the city of Natchitoches, which traces its history to a French colonial settlement established in 1714 near the Natchitoches Indian village on the Red River, the region's colonial forts, Creole plantations, churches, cemeteries, archeological sites, historic transportation routes, and commercial centers provide a unique view into Louisiana's past. I am proud to represent the people of Louisiana by asking the 110th Congress to reauthorize this National Heritage Area and reaffirm the importance of the Cane River Creole culture as a nationally significant element of American heritage. This should not be a difficult task. Congress has once before agreed to establish a Cane River Creole National Historical Park to serve as the focus of interpretive and educational programs on the history of the Cane River area and to assist in the preservation of certain historic sites along the river. Now, I ask this Congress to do it again by reauthorizing the Cane River National Heritage Area. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation entitled the Lower Mississippi River National Historic Site Study Act. This bill will direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of designating sites in Plaquemines Parish along the Lower Mississippi River Area as a unit of the National Park System. To be eligible for favorable consideration as a unit of the National Park System, an area must possess nationally significant natural, cultural or recreational resources. The Lower Mississippi River area in Plaquemines Parish meets and exceeds these criteria. I am proud to come to the floor today to introduce this bill. Anyone who has visited Plaquemines Parish knows that it is one of the Nation's unique treasures. The natural beauty there at the mouth of the Mississippi is impossible to describe, but impossible not to love. The area is rich in history, and it is a preserve for one of the nation's most unique cultural melanges. That mix began after the Native Americans in the region began to intermingle with the Spanish explorers who traveled along the banks of the river in the 1500s. In 1682, Rene-Robert Cavelier de LaSalle claimed all the land drained by the Mississippi for France area. In 1699, the area became the site of the first fortification on the Lower Mississippi River, known as Fort Mississippi. Since then, it has been the home to 10 different fortifications, including Fort St. Philip and Fort Jackson. Fort St. Philip, originally built in 1749, proved to be instrumental during the Battle of New Orleans by blocking the British Navy from going up river. Fort Jackson was built at the request of General Andrew Jackson and partially constructed by famous local Civil War General P.G.T. Beauregard. This fort was the site of the famous Civil War battle know as the ``Battle of Forts'' which is also referred to as the ``night the war was lost.'' As this glimpse of the region's military history shows, the Lower Plaquemines region is of national cultural and historical significance. There are also many other important and unique attributes to this area. This area is home to the longest continuous river road and levee system in the U.S. It is also home to the ancient Head of Passes site, Plaquemines Bend, geological features and two national wildlife refuges. Finally, the area has a rich cultural heritage. Over the years, many different cultures have made this area home including Creoles, Europeans, Indians, Yugoslavs, African-Americans and Vietnamese. These cultures have worked together to create the infrastructure for transportation of our Nation's energy which is being produced by these same people out in the Gulf of Mexico off our shores. They have also created a fishing industry that contributes to Louisiana's economy. I think it is easy to see why this area would make an excellent addition to the National Park Service. I hope that my colleagues will join me in supporting this bill which simply allows the National Park Service to study the suitability and feasibility of bringing this area into the system. I look forward to working with my colleagues to quickly enact this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I introduce this bill today to restore historic Jackson Barracks in New Orleans to its pre-Hurricane Katrina status as a national historic treasure. Jackson Barracks represents the rich military history of New Orleans, and indeed our great State. However, the rebuilding of the structures on this significant garrison has been hindered by bureaucratic roadblocks and gaps in funding. This bill directly addresses those challenges. As you know, Hurricane Katrina brought torrential floods and driving winds to New Orleans and the surrounding region. The devastation from the storm touched every structure at Jackson Barracks. The original Jackson Barracks consists of 14 Antebellum Garrison Structures built between 1834 and 1835. These historic buildings were not spared and suffered tremendous damage. There is a pressing need to complete the restoration and renovation of the barracks. Jackson Barracks requires additional renovations and restorations that are not within the scope of the Federal Emergency Management Agency hurricane restoration funding. With the agreement of the Chief, National Guard Bureau and the Secretary of the Interior, this bill would reprogram the savings from several military construction projects elsewhere on Jackson Barracks to assist in the completion of historic preservation at the post. I ask the support of my colleagues in enabling the National Park Service to aid in the restoration of Jackson Barracks through the Historic Preservation Fund. I am not asking for additional dollars, but rather that the money that was saved on previous projects be recommitted and used for this vital need.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I introduce this bill today to prevent misuse of the Antiquities. Act of 1906 to create very large marine monuments. The Antiquities Act was intended to protect landmarks, not create the largest protected areas in the United States unilaterally without congressional assent. The Bush administration acted covertly to convey protected status to 139,000 square miles of the northwestern Hawaiian Islands. In so doing, the administration short-circuited the extensive Marine Sanctuaries process that was already underway and notified the delegation only after the press conference. Now they have turned their attention to the Gulf of Mexico. We learned that the President, with mixed support from his top advisors, is considering using his authorities under the Antiquities Act to unilaterally and permanently declare ``marine monuments'' in various locations of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. Some of these areas are in my backyard--in the Gulf of Mexico--but other areas of the Atlantic and Pacific are also under consideration. I certainly understand the need to conserve and appropriately manage our most sensitive and vulnerable marine areas, which can serve as nurseries for fish stocks and provide critical habitat for other important species. That is why I support the processes Congress established in the National Marine Sanctuaries Act. But any declarations of new or additional protected status to marine areas should continue to follow the scientific and public processes outlined in the Sanctuaries Act. This is a good process that allows all affected parties--from the environmental community to recreational fishermen to the oil and gas industries--to have a say.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation entitled the Lower Mississippi River National Historic Site Study Act. This bill will direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of designating sites in Plaquemines Parish along the Lower Mississippi River Area as a unit of the National Park System. To be eligible for favorable consideration as a unit of the National Park System, an area must possess nationally significant natural, cultural or recreational resources. The Lower Mississippi River area in Plaquemines Parish meets and exceeds these criteria. I am proud to come to the floor today to introduce this bill. Anyone who has visited Plaquemines Parish knows that it is one of the Nation's unique treasures. The natural beauty there at the mouth of the Mississippi is impossible to describe, but impossible not to love. The area is rich in history, and it is a preserve for one of the nation's most unique cultural melanges. That mix began after the Native Americans in the region began to intermingle with the Spanish explorers who traveled along the banks of the river in the 1500s. In 1682, Rene-Robert Cavelier de LaSalle claimed all the land drained by the Mississippi for France area. In 1699, the area became the site of the first fortification on the Lower Mississippi River, known as Fort Mississippi. Since then, it has been the home to 10 different fortifications, including Fort St. Philip and Fort Jackson. Fort St. Philip, originally built in 1749, proved to be instrumental during the Battle of New Orleans by blocking the British Navy from going up river. Fort Jackson was built at the request of General Andrew Jackson and partially constructed by famous local Civil War General P.G.T. Beauregard. This fort was the site of the famous Civil War battle know as the ``Battle of Forts'' which is also referred to as the ``night the war was lost.'' As this glimpse of the region's military history shows, the Lower Plaquemines region is of national cultural and historical significance. There are also many other important and unique attributes to this area. This area is home to the longest continuous river road and levee system in the U.S. It is also home to the ancient Head of Passes site, Plaquemines Bend, geological features and two national wildlife refuges. Finally, the area has a rich cultural heritage. Over the years, many different cultures have made this area home including Creoles, Europeans, Indians, Yugoslavs, African-Americans and Vietnamese. These cultures have worked together to create the infrastructure for transportation of our Nation's energy which is being produced by these same people out in the Gulf of Mexico off our shores. They have also created a fishing industry that contributes to Louisiana's economy. I think it is easy to see why this area would make an excellent addition to the National Park Service. I hope that my colleagues will join me in supporting this bill which simply allows the National Park Service to study the suitability and feasibility of bringing this area into the system. I look forward to working with my colleagues to quickly enact this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to reauthorize the Cane River National Heritage Area Commission and modify the boundaries of the heritage area. In 1994, Congress recognized this area as one of the nation's cultural and historic treasures. In the 1700s, Creole culture flowered across the stunning landscapes of the Cane River, and the Creole culture continues to enliven the region to this day. In terms of beauty, it is not only the landscape but the Creole architecture from that time period that charms visitors. Today, the 35 mile region includes the Cane River Creole National Historical Park, seven national historic landmarks, three state historic sites, and 24 properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Anchored by the city of Natchitoches, which traces its history to a French colonial settlement established in 1714 near the Natchitoches Indian village on the Red River, the region's colonial forts, Creole plantations, churches, cemeteries, archeological sites, historic transportation routes, and commercial centers provide a unique view into Louisiana's past. I am proud to represent the people of Louisiana by asking the 110th Congress to reauthorize this National Heritage Area and reaffirm the importance of the Cane River Creole culture as a nationally significant element of American heritage. This should not be a difficult task. Congress has once before agreed to establish a Cane River Creole National Historical Park to serve as the focus of interpretive and educational programs on the history of the Cane River area and to assist in the preservation of certain historic sites along the river. Now, I ask this Congress to do it again by reauthorizing the Cane River National Heritage Area. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to speak on behalf of small businesses in the rural areas of my State, as well as rural small businesses nationwide. This is because small businesses are crucial to rural communities as they account for 90 percent of all rural establishments. In 1998, small firms employed 60 percent of rural workers and over 1.2 million small firms were located in rural areas. While Louisiana has major metropolitan areas such as New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Shreveport, and Lafayette, my State has countless rural communities which are vital to our State's economy. In fact, Louisiana has 13.8 million acres of hardwood and softwood forests, in addition to the fact that the State is one of the 10 largest producers of agricultural products. These include cotton, sugar cane, rice, pecans, soybeans, strawberries, and cattle. We are proud of our natural and agricultural resources, just as Louisianans are proud of our culture and cuisine. As I mentioned, rural small businesses are key to the economy in my State, just as they are in other States. While the Department of Agriculture has various programs to help rural communities, the Small Business Administration, SBA, remains the primary Federal agency focused on promoting small businesses. From my positions on the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship as well as the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, I have focused on improving SBA's ability to serve small businesses in Louisiana. One area that I believe this Congress can truly make a difference in addressing the main challenges facing rural small businesses. In talking to various stakeholders, I have repeatedly heard that two of the traditional obstacles to small business expansion in rural areas are lack of access to technology and capital. For my part, I would like to offer some commonsense solutions to help address these and other challenges facing our rural small businesses. These businesses are the backbone of our economy so we should give them every opportunity to succeed. In particular, I am proud to introduce today the, ``Rural Small Business Enhancement Act of 2008.'' This bill provides necessary improvements to SBA programs to help the agency better assist rural small businesses. First, as you may know, in 1982 Congress established a 5-year government-wide Small Business Innovation Research, SBIR, program. This program has been extended three times, most recently by Public Law 106- 554, which continues the SBIR program through September 30, 2008. The SBIR program was created to help meet the Federal Government's research and development needs. Among other things, the SBIR program was established to stimulate technological innovation related to each participating agency's goals and missions, to encourage agencies to use small businesses to meet Federal research and development needs, and to increase private sector commercialization of innovation derived from Federal research and development. The SBIR program had awarded over $17 billion to more than 82,000 projects from its inception to 2004. In addition to the SBIR program, Congress also created the Small Business Technology Transfer, STTR, program. STTR is another important small business program that expands funding opportunities for small business in the area of Federal research and development. This program expands the public/private sector partnership to include joint venture opportunities for small businesses and nonprofit research institutions. For example, our university labs are important to the country in that they provide the engine for high-technology innovation. However, if innovation cannot be translated from the classroom or the lab to the marketplace, it cannot benefit the lives of everyday people. STTR combines the strengths of small businesses and universities to transfer technology/products from the lab to the marketplace. The small businesses in particular benefit from commercialization, which supports jobs and the U.S. economy. As part of the 2000 Reauthorization of the SBIR program, Congress also created the Federal and State Technology Partnership Program, or FAST. FAST was created to strengthen the technological competitiveness of small business concerns by providing competitive grants to States to help support the SBIR program. These grants are traditionally used to assist technology transfers by universities to small businesses, provide technical assistance to firms participating in the SBIR program, and encourage commercialization of technology developed through SBIR funding. The FAST program has proven vital to States like Louisiana, which have traditionally been in the lower tier of States in terms of SBIR/STTR awards and total dollars. For example, in fiscal year 2003, Louisiana ranked 44 in terms of total SBIR award dollars out of the other 50 States, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. That year Louisiana had 14 Phase I and II awards for a total of $2,373,062. Compare that to the 3 ranked State of Maryland which had 325 awards for $96,533,591. For this reason, technical assistance provided under FAST grants is extremely important to businesses in my State. In general, the more SBIR applications that are submitted by small businesses in a State, the more SBIR awards are made in that State. The FAST program has allowed the Louisiana Business and Technology Center, LBTC, located at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, to establish the Louisiana SBIR/STTR Phase Zero Program. This program allows LBTC to grant up to $3,000 to companies needed help in writing SBIR Phase One grant applications and up to $5,000 for Phase Two proposals. One of the companies that benefitted from FAST and the Phase Zero Program was Mezzo Systems. Mezzo Systems is a provider of design analysis and prototyping services for micro fluidic, optic, magneto, and electronic devices. The company was an incubator tenant of the LBTC at LSU and I was able to visit with them at the center in 2003. With the support of my office and the LBTC, Mezzo won five SBIR awards totalling $1.3 million. One of these awards was an SBIR grant from the Department of Defense Missile Defense Agency totalling $750,000. Through the FAST program, several spinoff companies at Louisiana Technical University in Ruston, Louisiana have also received SBIR funding to support research and development related to commercial application of their innovations. This is because Louisiana Tech recognizes the value of expanding the local service network for technology-based, small and rural businesses through programs like FAST. While my State has utilized the FAST program successfully in the past, I believe that rural areas, such as Louisiana, need additional technical assistance to help our small businesses compete in the SBIR program. In particular, I am concerned about the non-Federal match that is required for this program. Currently, each participating State that receives FAST awards is required to match each Federal dollar that is provided with their own funds. I do not oppose this approach as each recipient should put up funds as the Federal Government is putting up the majority of funds for these activities. However, as currently structured, each State in the bottom 18 States receiving the fewest SBIR Phase I awards is required to put up 50 cents for each Federal dollar. This makes sense as the lower tier of States need additional technical assistance so they should have an incentive to apply for these grants. Next, each State in 1 of the 16 States receiving the greatest number of Phase I awards are required to match dollar for dollar each Federal dollar awarded. States not included in either of these two categories, those in the middle tier, are required to match 75 cents for each Federal dollar. There was also included a special match requirement for low-income areas, which is 50 cents for each Federal dollar. In reviewing this current structure, it is clear that rural areas and rural small businesses could benefit from a reduced match requirement for the FAST program. Just as low-income areas and States which are the bottom 18 States for SBIR awards are provided a 50-cent match requirement, FAST award recipients in rural areas should be provided a reduced match requirement. My bill would make this important revision and would also further reduce the match requirement, to 35 cents, for FAST grants from rural areas which are also in the bottom 18 States. This increased technical assistance would go a long way and really provide assistance where it is most needed--our rural small businesses and universities. Furthermore, this change does not affect the allocation of SBIR program awards but does provide rural areas with a level playing field when competing for these awards. As I mentioned, the SBIR program is set to expire on September 30, 2008. It is important that we reauthorize this program given its importance to our country, universities and small businesses. Almost as important as reauthorizing this program is ensuring that the necessary technical assistance programs are also extended. Small business owners often lack the resources and expertise necessary to improve the quality of their proposals. That is where programs such as FAST come in to help. For SBIR/STTR, Congress also created a program which was particularly helpful to rural small businesses. In particular, the Rural Outreach Program was created by Senator Kit Bond in 1997 to help the lower tier SBIR/STTR States increase their participation and success in both programs. Funds under this program helped these 25 underrepresented States establish or expand programs to assist small high technology businesses through training, counselling, and outreach. Activities included workshops, one-on-one counselling for small businesses, and the expansion of the base of high-technology/economic development service providers. While this program was extremely helpful to rural States like Louisiana, President Bush each year tried to cut the program in his budget. Along with Senator John Kerry and six other Senators, in 2004 I sent a letter to then SBA Administrator Hector Barreto urging him to restore Rural Outreach Program funds in his fiscal year 2005 budget. Unfortunately, it is my understanding that no additional funding was provided and the program was not reauthorized. In my bill I include a reauthorization of the Rural Outreach Program. It is my hope to work closely with Senators Bond and Kerry to reauthorize this important program when we reauthorize the overall SBIR program. I would also note that I believe the Rural Outreach program, which I understand may have been intended to phase out as the FAST program ramped up, can coexist with the FAST program. With the change included in this bill for the FAST program, along with reauthorizing the Rural Outreach Program, the States at the lower tier of SBIR awards would receive the help needed most--technical assistance. Rural States and those at the bottom of the rankings in SBIR awards deserve more, not less, technical assistance dollars. That is so that they can provide the help necessary to foster innovation and commercialization in their States. Next, both the SBIR and STTR programs are administered by the SBA Office of Technology. Eleven agencies participate in the SBIR program and five agencies participate in the $2 billion STTR program, yet I have repeatedly heard concerns from stakeholders that the Office of Technology is understaffed and overwhelmed. The employees in this office deserve tremendous credit for their service in running these vital programs but they also deserve additional help. Groups in my State have told me about calling the office for assistance with understanding SBIR/STTR rules. They indicated that the office was helpful, but slow. For example, when an award is granted, the agency administering the award provides the names of numerous staff members that may be contacted for SBIR reporting, funds management, technical assistance, and other needs. There does not appear to be the same capacity for assistance or outreach in the Office of Technology. If one considers that both SBIR/STTR provide hundreds of awards worth hundreds of millions of dollars each year, additional funds for staff to oversee these programs is a wise investment of taxpayer funds. The bill I am introducing today would require SBA to hire five additional employees and provide the agency with the funds to hire them. While the Rural Small Business Enhancement Act includes these provisions which focus on existing SBA programs, there also is a need for new programs to help our rural small businesses. The Federal Government disposes of or sells thousands of unused computers each year. Some of this technology could be better utilized in the hands of entrepreneurs in rural communities. Recently, the SBA Office of Advocacy worked with U.S. Department of Agriculture to donate a warehouse of used Department of Health and Human Services computers to rural communities. Given that the SBA is charged with promoting entrepreneurship in low-income and rural communities, it is a natural agency to spearhead an initiative to donate/discount used Federal computers to rural/low-income areas. According to information provided to my office by SBA, the agency currently has about 7,000 desktop personal computers and 2,700 laptops. Some estimates say that perhaps as many as 10 percent of these computers are targeted for disposal every month or so. When SBA disposes of these computers, they follow General Services Administration guidelines to either dispose of them through excess property auctions or through contractors. I would like to see SBA help address the technology challenges of rural small businesses by donating these used computers to these businesses or offering them at discounted prices. As such, my bill creates a 3 year pilot program at SBA where the agency would provide not less than 1,000 excess government computers each year to small businesses in rural areas. Lastly, rural small businesses, just as with businesses in metropolitan areas, need capital to expand or survive. Unfortunately, many smaller lenders which have served rural areas have merged with larger banks in recent years. These local banks are traditionally the only source of capital in the community. To address this issue, my bill directs the Administrator to establish a rural lending outreach program. This program would provide not more than an 85 percent guaranty for loans of $250,000 or less. Since the program is targeted for rural areas, there is a requirement that the program be carried out only through lenders in rural areas. I would note that this particular provision is also included in a bill which I have cosponsored, S. 2920, the ``SBA Reauthorization and Improvement Act'' which was introduced by Senators Kerry, Snowe, and Levin. In the coming 2 months, both the House and Senate will be working to reauthorize the SBIR program. As we reauthorize the SBIR program, Congress should not forget the role that rural small businesses and universities play in fostering innovation and development. For example, in Louisiana, we have multiple universities participating in these programs and collaborating with local small businesses. I have already mentioned LSU and Louisiana Tech. Louisiana Tech in particular has steadily increased its activity in the SBIR program at a key time for the region. This is because the Barksdale Air Force base located in Shreveport, which is 70 miles from Ruston, is looking to secure the permanent Cyber Command. This command would protect the United States from cyber warfare. All of the universities, colleges, and parishes in this area are collaborating on securing this command, which could mean thousands of jobs for the region. As they look to attract additional technology-based businesses, the SBIR/STTR program has proven to be an important economic development tool for local businesses and communities. For my part, I want to ensure that universities like Louisiana Tech in rural areas have every opportunity to compete on a level playing field for SBIR dollars. I also would like to provide our rural small businesses with the tools necessary to partner with these institutions to commercialize the products of their research. The bill I introduce today would accomplish both of these goals and, in the process, it would improve the ability of SBA to assist rural small businesses. I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense legislation as we must foster development in our rural small businesses. Without these businesses, our country cannot truly compete on the international stage. This is because our Fortune 500 companies and large urban areas are instrumental in the success of the United States but rural small businesses and rural areas form the backbone of this country. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to speak on behalf of small businesses in the rural areas of my State, as well as rural small businesses nationwide. This is because small businesses are crucial to rural communities as they account for 90 percent of all rural establishments. In 1998, small firms employed 60 percent of rural workers and over 1.2 million small firms were located in rural areas. While Louisiana has major metropolitan areas such as New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Shreveport, and Lafayette, my State has countless rural communities which are vital to our State's economy. In fact, Louisiana has 13.8 million acres of hardwood and softwood forests, in addition to the fact that the State is one of the 10 largest producers of agricultural products. These include cotton, sugar cane, rice, pecans, soybeans, strawberries, and cattle. We are proud of our natural and agricultural resources, just as Louisianans are proud of our culture and cuisine. As I mentioned, rural small businesses are key to the economy in my State, just as they are in other States. While the Department of Agriculture has various programs to help rural communities, the Small Business Administration, SBA, remains the primary Federal agency focused on promoting small businesses. From my positions on the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship as well as the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, I have focused on improving SBA's ability to serve small businesses in Louisiana. One area that I believe this Congress can truly make a difference in addressing the main challenges facing rural small businesses. In talking to various stakeholders, I have repeatedly heard that two of the traditional obstacles to small business expansion in rural areas are lack of access to technology and capital. For my part, I would like to offer some commonsense solutions to help address these and other challenges facing our rural small businesses. These businesses are the backbone of our economy so we should give them every opportunity to succeed. In particular, I am proud to introduce today the, ``Rural Small Business Enhancement Act of 2008.'' This bill provides necessary improvements to SBA programs to help the agency better assist rural small businesses. First, as you may know, in 1982 Congress established a 5-year government-wide Small Business Innovation Research, SBIR, program. This program has been extended three times, most recently by Public Law 106- 554, which continues the SBIR program through September 30, 2008. The SBIR program was created to help meet the Federal Government's research and development needs. Among other things, the SBIR program was established to stimulate technological innovation related to each participating agency's goals and missions, to encourage agencies to use small businesses to meet Federal research and development needs, and to increase private sector commercialization of innovation derived from Federal research and development. The SBIR program had awarded over $17 billion to more than 82,000 projects from its inception to 2004. In addition to the SBIR program, Congress also created the Small Business Technology Transfer, STTR, program. STTR is another important small business program that expands funding opportunities for small business in the area of Federal research and development. This program expands the public/private sector partnership to include joint venture opportunities for small businesses and nonprofit research institutions. For example, our university labs are important to the country in that they provide the engine for high-technology innovation. However, if innovation cannot be translated from the classroom or the lab to the marketplace, it cannot benefit the lives of everyday people. STTR combines the strengths of small businesses and universities to transfer technology/products from the lab to the marketplace. The small businesses in particular benefit from commercialization, which supports jobs and the U.S. economy. As part of the 2000 Reauthorization of the SBIR program, Congress also created the Federal and State Technology Partnership Program, or FAST. FAST was created to strengthen the technological competitiveness of small business concerns by providing competitive grants to States to help support the SBIR program. These grants are traditionally used to assist technology transfers by universities to small businesses, provide technical assistance to firms participating in the SBIR program, and encourage commercialization of technology developed through SBIR funding. The FAST program has proven vital to States like Louisiana, which have traditionally been in the lower tier of States in terms of SBIR/STTR awards and total dollars. For example, in fiscal year 2003, Louisiana ranked 44 in terms of total SBIR award dollars out of the other 50 States, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. That year Louisiana had 14 Phase I and II awards for a total of $2,373,062. Compare that to the 3 ranked State of Maryland which had 325 awards for $96,533,591. For this reason, technical assistance provided under FAST grants is extremely important to businesses in my State. In general, the more SBIR applications that are submitted by small businesses in a State, the more SBIR awards are made in that State. The FAST program has allowed the Louisiana Business and Technology Center, LBTC, located at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, to establish the Louisiana SBIR/STTR Phase Zero Program. This program allows LBTC to grant up to $3,000 to companies needed help in writing SBIR Phase One grant applications and up to $5,000 for Phase Two proposals. One of the companies that benefitted from FAST and the Phase Zero Program was Mezzo Systems. Mezzo Systems is a provider of design analysis and prototyping services for micro fluidic, optic, magneto, and electronic devices. The company was an incubator tenant of the LBTC at LSU and I was able to visit with them at the center in 2003. With the support of my office and the LBTC, Mezzo won five SBIR awards totalling $1.3 million. One of these awards was an SBIR grant from the Department of Defense Missile Defense Agency totalling $750,000. Through the FAST program, several spinoff companies at Louisiana Technical University in Ruston, Louisiana have also received SBIR funding to support research and development related to commercial application of their innovations. This is because Louisiana Tech recognizes the value of expanding the local service network for technology-based, small and rural businesses through programs like FAST. While my State has utilized the FAST program successfully in the past, I believe that rural areas, such as Louisiana, need additional technical assistance to help our small businesses compete in the SBIR program. In particular, I am concerned about the non-Federal match that is required for this program. Currently, each participating State that receives FAST awards is required to match each Federal dollar that is provided with their own funds. I do not oppose this approach as each recipient should put up funds as the Federal Government is putting up the majority of funds for these activities. However, as currently structured, each State in the bottom 18 States receiving the fewest SBIR Phase I awards is required to put up 50 cents for each Federal dollar. This makes sense as the lower tier of States need additional technical assistance so they should have an incentive to apply for these grants. Next, each State in 1 of the 16 States receiving the greatest number of Phase I awards are required to match dollar for dollar each Federal dollar awarded. States not included in either of these two categories, those in the middle tier, are required to match 75 cents for each Federal dollar. There was also included a special match requirement for low-income areas, which is 50 cents for each Federal dollar. In reviewing this current structure, it is clear that rural areas and rural small businesses could benefit from a reduced match requirement for the FAST program. Just as low-income areas and States which are the bottom 18 States for SBIR awards are provided a 50-cent match requirement, FAST award recipients in rural areas should be provided a reduced match requirement. My bill would make this important revision and would also further reduce the match requirement, to 35 cents, for FAST grants from rural areas which are also in the bottom 18 States. This increased technical assistance would go a long way and really provide assistance where it is most needed--our rural small businesses and universities. Furthermore, this change does not affect the allocation of SBIR program awards but does provide rural areas with a level playing field when competing for these awards. As I mentioned, the SBIR program is set to expire on September 30, 2008. It is important that we reauthorize this program given its importance to our country, universities and small businesses. Almost as important as reauthorizing this program is ensuring that the necessary technical assistance programs are also extended. Small business owners often lack the resources and expertise necessary to improve the quality of their proposals. That is where programs such as FAST come in to help. For SBIR/STTR, Congress also created a program which was particularly helpful to rural small businesses. In particular, the Rural Outreach Program was created by Senator Kit Bond in 1997 to help the lower tier SBIR/STTR States increase their participation and success in both programs. Funds under this program helped these 25 underrepresented States establish or expand programs to assist small high technology businesses through training, counselling, and outreach. Activities included workshops, one-on-one counselling for small businesses, and the expansion of the base of high-technology/economic development service providers. While this program was extremely helpful to rural States like Louisiana, President Bush each year tried to cut the program in his budget. Along with Senator John Kerry and six other Senators, in 2004 I sent a letter to then SBA Administrator Hector Barreto urging him to restore Rural Outreach Program funds in his fiscal year 2005 budget. Unfortunately, it is my understanding that no additional funding was provided and the program was not reauthorized. In my bill I include a reauthorization of the Rural Outreach Program. It is my hope to work closely with Senators Bond and Kerry to reauthorize this important program when we reauthorize the overall SBIR program. I would also note that I believe the Rural Outreach program, which I understand may have been intended to phase out as the FAST program ramped up, can coexist with the FAST program. With the change included in this bill for the FAST program, along with reauthorizing the Rural Outreach Program, the States at the lower tier of SBIR awards would receive the help needed most--technical assistance. Rural States and those at the bottom of the rankings in SBIR awards deserve more, not less, technical assistance dollars. That is so that they can provide the help necessary to foster innovation and commercialization in their States. Next, both the SBIR and STTR programs are administered by the SBA Office of Technology. Eleven agencies participate in the SBIR program and five agencies participate in the $2 billion STTR program, yet I have repeatedly heard concerns from stakeholders that the Office of Technology is understaffed and overwhelmed. The employees in this office deserve tremendous credit for their service in running these vital programs but they also deserve additional help. Groups in my State have told me about calling the office for assistance with understanding SBIR/STTR rules. They indicated that the office was helpful, but slow. For example, when an award is granted, the agency administering the award provides the names of numerous staff members that may be contacted for SBIR reporting, funds management, technical assistance, and other needs. There does not appear to be the same capacity for assistance or outreach in the Office of Technology. If one considers that both SBIR/STTR provide hundreds of awards worth hundreds of millions of dollars each year, additional funds for staff to oversee these programs is a wise investment of taxpayer funds. The bill I am introducing today would require SBA to hire five additional employees and provide the agency with the funds to hire them. While the Rural Small Business Enhancement Act includes these provisions which focus on existing SBA programs, there also is a need for new programs to help our rural small businesses. The Federal Government disposes of or sells thousands of unused computers each year. Some of this technology could be better utilized in the hands of entrepreneurs in rural communities. Recently, the SBA Office of Advocacy worked with U.S. Department of Agriculture to donate a warehouse of used Department of Health and Human Services computers to rural communities. Given that the SBA is charged with promoting entrepreneurship in low-income and rural communities, it is a natural agency to spearhead an initiative to donate/discount used Federal computers to rural/low-income areas. According to information provided to my office by SBA, the agency currently has about 7,000 desktop personal computers and 2,700 laptops. Some estimates say that perhaps as many as 10 percent of these computers are targeted for disposal every month or so. When SBA disposes of these computers, they follow General Services Administration guidelines to either dispose of them through excess property auctions or through contractors. I would like to see SBA help address the technology challenges of rural small businesses by donating these used computers to these businesses or offering them at discounted prices. As such, my bill creates a 3 year pilot program at SBA where the agency would provide not less than 1,000 excess government computers each year to small businesses in rural areas. Lastly, rural small businesses, just as with businesses in metropolitan areas, need capital to expand or survive. Unfortunately, many smaller lenders which have served rural areas have merged with larger banks in recent years. These local banks are traditionally the only source of capital in the community. To address this issue, my bill directs the Administrator to establish a rural lending outreach program. This program would provide not more than an 85 percent guaranty for loans of $250,000 or less. Since the program is targeted for rural areas, there is a requirement that the program be carried out only through lenders in rural areas. I would note that this particular provision is also included in a bill which I have cosponsored, S. 2920, the ``SBA Reauthorization and Improvement Act'' which was introduced by Senators Kerry, Snowe, and Levin. In the coming 2 months, both the House and Senate will be working to reauthorize the SBIR program. As we reauthorize the SBIR program, Congress should not forget the role that rural small businesses and universities play in fostering innovation and development. For example, in Louisiana, we have multiple universities participating in these programs and collaborating with local small businesses. I have already mentioned LSU and Louisiana Tech. Louisiana Tech in particular has steadily increased its activity in the SBIR program at a key time for the region. This is because the Barksdale Air Force base located in Shreveport, which is 70 miles from Ruston, is looking to secure the permanent Cyber Command. This command would protect the United States from cyber warfare. All of the universities, colleges, and parishes in this area are collaborating on securing this command, which could mean thousands of jobs for the region. As they look to attract additional technology-based businesses, the SBIR/STTR program has proven to be an important economic development tool for local businesses and communities. For my part, I want to ensure that universities like Louisiana Tech in rural areas have every opportunity to compete on a level playing field for SBIR dollars. I also would like to provide our rural small businesses with the tools necessary to partner with these institutions to commercialize the products of their research. The bill I introduce today would accomplish both of these goals and, in the process, it would improve the ability of SBA to assist rural small businesses. I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense legislation as we must foster development in our rural small businesses. Without these businesses, our country cannot truly compete on the international stage. This is because our Fortune 500 companies and large urban areas are instrumental in the success of the United States but rural small businesses and rural areas form the backbone of this country. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I come to speak basically about the need for more energy production as well as more conservation. Before I do, I would like to follow up on the comments of my colleague from Pennsylvania. This housing bill we have all worked on for quite some time now is hopefully going to be passed by the House. The President has withdrawn his threatened veto. It looks like this major piece of reform will finally come to pass. I thank Chairman Baucus, Chairman Grassley, and Chairman Dodd for including in that bill, before it left the Senate, an extremely important provision for the State of Louisiana and Mississippi, the whole gulf coast, that will provide some significant tax relief to people who had received Road Home benefits based on the extent of their damage, whether they received a $20,000 grant or a $50,000 grant or a cap at 150, to try to make them somewhat whole. This is not making people whole along the gulf coast. But if their insurance failed them or they were in a place that was not a flood plain and didn't have insurance because they weren't in a flood plain but lost everything anyway because of the magnitude of the storms, we allow them an opportunity for a grant to rebuild. It is working. It has been very slow. It has been painful. The programs were not established correctly initially, but both Mississippi and Louisiana are making great progress. The problem was, these grants would have been taxable, putting people in a tax bracket where they would have to write a check to the Federal Government for $5,000 or $15,000 or $20,000. It would be impossible for them to do that under these circumstances. So this bill has corrected that. They will still have to pay regular taxes but not on these Road Home grants. It is basically a billion-dollar direct relief to homeowners in the gulf coast. We could not be more grateful to the Members, to the Presiding Officer and others who voted to include that and particularly to the chairman. If any homeowners in America need help, not just the ones who were foreclosed on through no fault of their own but most certainly the 300,000 homeowners who lost their homes because these storms took everything they had, we are very grateful for that help in housing. I wish to speak about energy. There have been a lot of charts and graphs put up because this is a dynamic and tense debate. There are legitimate issues on both sides. I wished to bring a new chart that can explain the situation at least much more clearly. The facts are that in the United States, along the Outer Continental Shelf which is off our shore, there is currently now a moratorium along the west coast, along the east coast from Maine to the top of Florida, and on the eastern side of the gulf. This goes out 200 miles from State waters, and it is now off-limits to exploration. Meanwhile, Canada, our friendly neighbor, is drilling right here off their entire coast. I do not know how much they are producing off this coast, but it is substantial resources. Right here in the gulf, off the coast of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, as you all know, we have a long tradition of believing that natural resources actually belong to the public, and we should be exploring these resources for the benefit not just of our region but for the Nation. Most of the oil and gas--basically a third of the oil and gas--of the Nation is coming off the shores of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and, to some degree, Alabama, despite the no-drill zone or no-exploration zone off Florida. Now, interestingly enough--which is what is partly driving a change in this debate--is this area right here, as shown on the map, which is off the coast of Cuba but very close to Florida. It is currently being leased for drilling by the Chinese, by European powers. So the fact is, while we sit and lock up our resources off our coasts, China and Europe are coming in and drilling closer to the land of the United States than we are allowing ourselves to drill, which does not make sense. What we need to do to get prices down is to increase the supply of oil and gas domestically and--and--significantly reduce our usage of it by moving away from gasoline-only vehicles. It does not mean we all have to move from big cars to tiny cars. It does not mean our farmers have to give up their pickup trucks. It does not mean our truck drivers have to park their big vehicles and sit on the side of the road. What it does mean is we can, through legislation, build new trucks, new cars, and new pickup trucks that get 50 miles a gallon or 60 miles a gallon and not just gallons of gasoline but gallons of ethanol produced from corn or from sugarcane or cellulosic matters or fiber or waste, municipal waste. So we need to look and see where we can drill safely in these places. There is drilling allowed right now in Alaska but very limited. Although it is allowed, it is limited. We need to look at how we can accelerate this drilling. The great news is--even though I support drilling in ANWR; we do not have enough votes to do that--ANWR represents this tiny dot, a dot. We should not stop fighting about ANWR, but we should also think about other places in Alaska where we could drill safely and open exploration in limited places, providing a buffer zone for States and providing very strategic care. One myth I wish to correct today--because it is a rampant myth--is that there is hardly any oil and gas off our coast. People will come to the floor and say: The Senator is correct. This is off-limits to exploration, but the reason it is is because there is no oil and gas there. That is not true. I know people are not purposely misleading because they are citing statistics from old material. But I wish to give you some statistics that will prove my point. The estimates come from Minerals Management through the Energy Department. In 1995, the Government was making estimates of what was in the Gulf of Mexico. They said, in 1995, there were only 5 billion barrels of oil in the gulf. But when they started drilling more and exploring more and using new technologies, we have now determined there are 20 billion barrels of oil. So in 1995, the same group that is doing these estimates here, said in the gulf there was only 5 billion barrels. But after we did the right kind of exploration and testing, we actually found more than 20 billion. That was in 2000. So the idea is that today, if we would allow the inventory to take place right now, the estimates might be that there are only a few billion barrels. But based on the experience we have in the Gulf of Mexico, we know it is going to jump considerably. We are the only country, to my knowledge, in the developed world that has not even explored or taken an inventory of what the resources are. In those days, we did not have the kind of technology we have today. So we can use modern 3D seismic technology. I am going to suggest we do not have to wait until 2030. We do not have to wait until 2040. There is infrastructure in place now in this part of the Gulf of Mexico, and it could be established in some other places as well, to go after the oil and gas that is there that this country needs to increase our domestic supply. Mr. President, I know I only have 1 more minute to close. As you know, people from this Chamber send letters overseas. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 1 more minute.

Ms. LANDRIEU. We keep sending letters overseas asking everybody else to increase production so they can send us oil and gas. Yet off our own shore, we have great resources of oil and gas for which we must make a breakthrough and open for exploration. So I know my time is wrapping up now. I wish to come back to the floor and talk about the safety and the new technology. I am going to show one picture in the Chamber. This is what an offshore oil rig looks like. There is a platform on top of the water, which a lot of people have not seen. But you can see these off the coast of Texas and Louisiana. We like the way they look. It talks about money and independence. That is what it means to us. It can be done quite safely. This is as blue as the water looks, with lots of fish around those rigs. The pipelines are down on the ocean floor. So I will come back and talk more about the new technologies that allow us to drill safely. But I hope the facts I have shared help us to come to terms with opening more resources in the United States. I yield the floor.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I have also come to the floor to speak about the direction I believe our country needs to move to lower gas prices and decrease our dangerous dependency on oil from places in this world that do not share our values and are not friendly, safe places to operate. I wish to associate myself with the remarks of my colleague, the good Senator from South Dakota. I have been very pleased to work with him in a group of five Democrats and five Republicans. We hope to expand our group as there is more interest in trying to find a centrist approach, a commonsense center core that can move us away from saying no to saying yes in a smart way, yes to more production--not everywhere but in certain places where we believe there are reserves of oil and gas that our country most certainly needs, in a safe environmental way that can protect our coasts. I know that issue is very sensitive to you, Mr. President. You have spoken eloquently about that on the floor, and you have made some excellent points, as other Senators. I know the Senator from New Jersey was here earlier today, and there have been Senators from different coastal communities. I am not insensitive to the needs of coastal communities. I represent one myself. We might not have the beaches that Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, and New Jersey have, but we do have very special coastal areas that we also want to keep clean and pristine because of our fishing, because of our boating, and because of our other recreational sports that involve more than just sitting or playing on a beach. We do a lot of water activity, and we need that water to be clean and pristine. So we are not unaware of those challenges. My colleague who just spoke is absolutely correct. Not only he but others have talked about the importance of saying yes, and this morning in a bipartisan energy summit conducted by the Democratic chairman, Chairman Bingaman, and the ranking member, Ranking Member Domenici, Daniel Yergin, who is the chairman of the Cambridge Energy Research Association, had a great deal of wisdom to share with us. I think, Mr. President, you were at that hearing. There were many good, insightful comments made. Statements were made this morning that could help guide us to a more secure approach. One that stuck with me--I am going to paraphrase it because I don't have his quote. He said something along the lines of it has taken us 20 years to get into this tight oil market, and it is going to take us some time to get out, but there is a way out. He said it is imperative that we increase our supply of oil in the world, and particularly for the United States since we are consuming so much of it, and there are many places that production can be found and improved. He went on to say: We have made some real progress in conservation, but, of course, we have to do more. Again, we have been saying no for 20 years--no to this refinery, no to producing here, lawsuit after lawsuit, actions that shut down production. We must begin to say yes. Twenty years of saying no, and I am not leaving this, of course, at the doorstep of only Democrats, which is what some of our friends on the other side want, to blame just the Democrats. The Republicans have been in charge of this Congress for the majority of those years. Now they are claiming they were the ones saying yes all along. No, it was their Congresses that were saying no. But this is not about blaming Democrats or Republicans. This is about starting all of us to say, yes, we can; yes, we can get prices down; yes, we can make America more energy independent. I would like to correct something I said the other day that is not true, and I am very sorry because I was not clear, but I am clear now. I came to the Senate floor with this chart and said that all of these light blue places represented moratoria areas. While it is true for the lower 48, all of this entire west coast is off production, the eastern Gulf of Mexico under Alabama and next to Florida is off production, for the most part, with very few exceptions, with wells here. All of this area on the east coast is off limits to production. I also said Alaska was off limits to production, and that is not true. This was changed very recently, and Alaska has now opened up, not ANWR, which is this little tiny point which is so hard to see on this map, but the rest of Alaska has opened up. I am going to show another chart that describes it a bit better. This is a more accurate chart, and it is up to date. Again, I apologize, but that was an old chart. This is all off limits. Everything on the west coast is off limits and has been for decades. All of this area on the east coast, except for this blue diamond, is off limits by executive and congressional moratoria. The President has lifted his moratoria. He has lifted the executive moratoria, but the congressional moratoria still remain. The place that has been the most open--and we are very proud of this in Louisiana and Texas--is the gulf. This is the western gulf, this is the central gulf, and this is the eastern gulf. The reason the eastern gulf is a different color than the rest of the chart is because this moratoria was extended actually under an agreement that was made on the Senate floor--and I was part of that action--to extend this moratoria longer than the moratoria on the east and west coasts. The west and east coast moratoria are year-to-year moratoria. They are done in the Interior bill, and they have been routinely passed year to year. The eastern gulf moratoria is in law, and it extends until 2022. Alaska is now basically opened, these blue sections. It is going to be very hard for people to realize this because it is really shocking to me, and I look at this all the time, but this dot approximately right here, this little dot right here is ANWR. This dot is what we fight over really, let me say--we fight over this little dot. Here is a whole State with lots of opportunities, and yet every discussion for the last 20 years has been about this little dot. I know that little dot has a lot of oil and gas in it, and I voted to open it. But I am to the point now where we have to stop talking about ANWR and start thinking about other places in and around ANWR--with the help of our Senators from Alaska, who are very knowledgeable and very good on this issue, Senator Ted Stevens and Senator Lisa Murkowski--where we can get oil and gas in places that are not so remote where the infrastructure exists to move this gas from Alaska, which sits up north, to the lower 48, either by pipeline or by tanker to get oil safely to us. There are benefits to drilling in Alaska. There are not many people there to aggravate. There are only 500,000, and people in Alaska, like people in Louisiana, want to have oil and gas drilling. They believe in using their natural resources, whether it is oil and gas or trees. We believe in actually cutting a lot of our trees because they grow back. We don't believe in cutting old, primitive forests and special places, but we actually believe that cutting trees and growing them back helps provide the good products we need, and we know how to manage our forests. Alaska is a lot like Louisiana. We could find oil and gas here. And there is a lot of it. The problem is the transportation and the infrastructure, and there are some risks associated with moving oil through tankers. There is always a risk associated with long pipelines. We have that same infrastructure in the gulf where we have pipelines coming up from Louisiana. I would like to show what some of this infrastructure actually looks like so people get an understanding when we talk about opening areas to drill. This is the kind of infrastructure that it takes to actually get it done. This is a picture of the Gulf of Mexico. This is the tip of Louisiana and the coast of Texas and Mississippi. This is Mobile Bay, and this is the Florida panhandle, and it goes down. This pipeline, as the Presiding Officer knows, is a pipeline that is laid under the gulf to move gas to Florida from Mobile Bay because the eastern gulf is closed right now to production. But yet Florida has great need for gas, and the good people of Alabama send it to the people of Florida. There was a lot of controversy about this pipeline. There were people in Alabama, even Members of Congress, who said: Why send the gas to Florida? Let them drill their own gas. That is not part of this debate today, but it is a good question. There are answers to it. It is an interesting discussion. These are pipelines, every one end is a rig or at least a well. These platforms are large. They are very deep. They are almost like skyscrapers out in the gulf. You cannot see them from the shore. This is invisible to the naked eye. You don't really see this. If you are in a boat, plane, or swimming, it is all subsea. This is a picture of the network of pipelines required to move millions of barrels of oil from the ocean to people. If you took a snapshot onshore of where there is production in Wyoming or Utah or Colorado or New Mexico, you would see much the same thing--a maze of pipelines and wells--because it takes more than waving a magic wand for the oil to jump out of the ground and into people's tanks. There are a lot of steps that have to go into it. So part of opening the OCS and opening more onshore is you want to open it in places that it is likely for the industry to reach and to have people--because even though robots are doing a lot of this work, we need people to show up on the rigs to build the platforms. That is why I fought so hard for money to come from these activities. When people tell me and some of my colleagues say, But, Senator, this resource belongs to the United States of America; why should Louisiana share any of these resources, I say, because Louisiana is the platform for oil and gas production, just like Texas. And with all due respect to the United States of America, the United States could not access these resources if we did not allow these resources to be accessed and then brought through our shores for distribution. There is the distribution pipeline. It doesn't just affect Louisiana, it affects the entire country. I am going to show you the gas distribution system. This is not an oil distribution system, this is gas. All of the manufacturers in the Midwest and on the east coast need natural gas. There are very few places they can get it. They get it basically from the Gulf of Mexico. This is the trunk, in real terms, of how much gas there is. It says 6.4 billion cubic feet from the Gulf of Mexico production. The other big trunk comes from Alaska, and there is potential gas in Canada. This comes from Alaska. Basically, that is it. This is where the gas comes from. So when prices of natural gas are high, it is because there is only a limited source in America, and we are not opening gas reserves where there might be more here, there might be some more here, and obviously there are more in Alaska. So that is just an example. But as you can see, the production in the Gulf of Mexico doesn't just benefit the people in Louisiana and Mississippi. Without it, you couldn't keep lights on in this Chamber or in New York or Chicago and other places that are very important. I wanted to clarify that most of the OCS is off limits. Most of the OCS is off limits, and while you see lots of posters and pictures, and everybody is trying to move the numbers to justify their position, the fact is that in the lower 48--not counting Alaska, Alaska is not on here--less than 19 percent of the OCS is open to development, less than 19 percent. All of this is off limits, this is off limits, and this is off limits. The only area we can drill is here. I would like to read this number here: It is 33 billion barrels of oil here on this side of the gulf. When people say there is no more oil in America, it is because we are not looking for it. There is plenty of oil onshore and offshore, not counting the oil we could actually get from coal--coal-to-liquids technology, clean--and not counting the oil we could potentially get from shale, which is boiling the rock into a liquid and producing the oil, which could be billions of barrels. I agree with Senator Salazar that the technology is not quite there yet, and maybe it is going to be too much of a drain on the water supply in the West. Perhaps it might be a very serious environmental problem. But we don't know. I think we should find out. That is my point. We don't know, but we need to find out because one day we may need to boil that rock, and if we need to, we need to figure out how to do it. There is plenty of oil here. But when people say ``the science,'' trust me, if there is a scientist in America who wants to come anywhere around Washington to say there is no oil because they have explored it, I will debate them until my last breath, because we have not looked. There has been some seismic--not a lot of seismic--and the technology is so improved now that we can be much more certain of where oil and gas is. Just to say there are 33 billion barrels of oil here and then to jump to the conclusion that there is no oil here, that there has to be no oil here and no oil here, is really defying common sense. I will end with this, Mr. President. Do we need to do more than produce? Yes, we do. Just increasing production is not the answer, but it is a step that must be taken. We are too great a nation to, every time prices hit $5, send a little piddling letter over to countries such as Saudi Arabia begging and pleading, as if we are some second- rate power, asking them to increase their oil production when we won't increase it at home. It is not right. We must increase our production, and we can do it safely. I know there are others who wish to speak, so I will wrap up in just a moment. We need to also--and this is where my friends on the other side of the aisle have not been very good in their own right. They have not been for mandates pushing conservation, and we must start driving a different kind of automobile, and not just expanding mileage from 20 miles per gallon to 27 miles, but CAFE standards reflecting efficiencies from 25 miles per gallon to 27 or 35. We need to move to a different kind of automobile because it is the fuel demand, it is the gap between the 20 million barrels we use every day and the 8 million we produce. There is a 12 million-barrel-a-day gap. If we could close 6 million of that by more production domestically and close the other 6 million by conservation, America would have no more problem, the price would come down, and we would be free and happy--a powerful, free people again. And we have to get that way. We once dominated in this industry. That is how we won World War II. We would not have won without our domination in the energy industry. We have to dominate again, and we can do it through conservation and production. I hope our leaders, both the Democratic leader and the Republican leader, understand that there is a group of us who don't want to go home until this is done and that we are going to do everything we can because I don't believe we should be drifting out of this Capitol anytime soon until we have given a clear and unmistakable signal to the American public that we hear them and that we understand the economic strain. Our economic model was not built for $5 gasoline, and we cannot sustain it. That is what we were told, and not by the Republican policy people or the Democratic policy people but by two of the brightest minds on this subject. They said the U.S. model cannot sustain this high price for long. It will cause and has caused serious economic disruption. It must be corrected. So I hope, Mr. President, that we most certainly do this. I am open to things that perhaps I wouldn't have considered in the past, and I hope my colleagues will have that same open mind. If so, we can perhaps get some extraordinary things done. Either tomorrow or next week, I am going to come back and talk about the myth of oil spills because the signs I see on this floor about oil spilling in the gulf--I want to continue to remind people that less than 1 percent of the oil in the ocean is caused from drilling in the ocean. The majority of it is natural seepage, and I am going to have some information that will show that. The people of Louisiana, Texas, and Mississippi are very proud of this industry that we have helped to birth not just for our country but for the world, and we are determined to help people understand that it can be done in a clean and environmentally sensitive manner. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to speak on behalf of some of our most in need gulf coast residents. Everyone around the country is familiar with the impact of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita on the New Orleans area and the southwest part of our State. Images from the devastation following these storms, and the subsequent Federal levee breaks, were transmitted around the country and around the world. This is because Katrina was the deadliest natural disaster in United States history, with 1,800 people killed-- 1,500 alone in Louisiana. Katrina was also the costliest natural disaster in United States history with over $81.2 billion in damage. Everyone is familiar with the images and the cost, but they may not be too familiar with the impact on individual businesses. In particular, I am speaking about the affects of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita on minority firms in the gulf coast. As a result of these storms, many minority firms in the gulf coast were disrupted and thus lost valuable time for participating in the 8(a) program. The 8(a) business development initiative, created under the Small Business Administration, helps minority entrepreneurs access Federal contracts and allows companies to be certified for increments of 3 years. These contracts are vital to the revival of these impacted areas. However, as currently structured the program allows businesses to participate for a limited length of time, 9 years, after which they can never reapply nor get back into the program. It is imperative that we provide contracting assistance to our local minority businesses. Today I am proud to sponsor legislation that will help these businesses recover from the effects of these storms. This bill, the Disadvantaged Business Disaster Eligibility Act would tackle this problem in three important ways. First, the bill extends 8(a) eligibility for program participants in Katrina/Rita-impacted areas in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama by 24 months. Next, the bill would apply to any areas in the state of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama that have been designated by the Administrator of the Small Business Administration as a disaster area as a result of Hurricanes Katrina or Rita. Lastly, the bill would require the Administrator of the Small Business Administration to ensure that every small business participating in the 8(a) program before the date of enactment of the act is reviewed and brought into compliance with this Act. This requirement would ensure that any eligible previous 8(a) participants will be allowed back into the program. As such, these key provisions would ensure that these businesses continue to play a vital role in rebuilding their communities. I note that a similar bill has already passed the House of Representatives, with the strong support of the Louisiana House delegation. I would note though that my legislation differs from the House-passed bill in that my bill also covers businesses impacted by Hurricane Rita. While I support the House-passed bill, I feel that we must also cover businesses impacted by Hurricane Rita--particularly those in southwest Louisiana. For this and other reasons, I look forward to championing this bill here in the Senate. Although recovery has been slow, it is my belief that great progress brings great change. The Small Business Administration has come a long way in correcting its failed practices. Congress recently stepped up and enacted wide-ranging SBA disaster reforms as part of the Farm Bill. I note that many of these reforms, such as the increases in loan limits and collateral requirements, were immediately helpful to disaster victims in the Midwest. It is my sincere hope that we can keep up this momentum by also passing the Disadvantaged Business Disaster Eligibility Act. To these ends, I will work with my colleagues on the Senate Small Business Committee, including Senators Kerry and Snowe, respectively chair and ranking member of the committee. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, this year we are celebrating Alpha Kappa Alpha, Inc. sorority's 100th birthday. This week, more than 20,000 members from all over the country have come to Washington, DC, to participate in a week-long program of forums and seminars with a focus on leadership, sisterhood and service, known as the Centennial Boule. The theme of this week's celebration is the ``Centennial Commitment to Leadership.'' The week's events will culminate in today's Unity March where members from the nine African-American Greek fraternities and sororities marched to the Capitol. AKA's International President, Barbara McKinzie, who has lived in Shreveport, LA, says the qualities that have sustained AKA for a century are ``sisterhood and service.'' Her administration is committed to ESP: Economics, Service and Partnership. AKA is the first Greek-letter sorority established by African- American women for African-American, college-educated women. It was founded by nine enterprising Howard University women, led by Ethel Hedgeman Lyle, on January 15, 1908. Now the membership has grown to 975 chapters worldwide and is 200,000-strong. Among the famous AKAs are Maya Angelou, Gladys Knight and Alicia Keys; and Members of the House of Representatives include Eddie Bernice Johnson and Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas, and Diane Watson of California. Powerful women across America both in the private sector and government represent the AKA sisterhood. Three members of my staff are proud to be a part of this sisterhood: my office manager Alicia Williams, acting State director Tari Bradford, and my New Orleans constituent services representative Sherae Hunter. The AKA sorority, founded before women had the right to vote by women one generation away from slavery, has been an instrumental group in raising the profile of African-American women and has worked tirelessly to knock down barriers to advancement in our society. The sisterhood has consistently encouraged academic achievement, leadership and service. Members remain active for their whole lives and are encouraged to contribute to their communities. Each chapter has its own community service focus. The Gamma Eta Omega Alumnae Chapter in Baton Rouge, for instance, raises money through an annual fashion show for scholarships for high school seniors and sorority undergraduates and also sponsors the Leadership Fellows Institute each year to promote leadership among high school students. The Delta Lamda Omega Chapter in Shreveport gathers for ``A Day On and Not a Day Off,'' where sisters take off work to volunteer in the community. Chapters all over Louisiana are similarly committed to their communities. In the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005, AKAs from all over the country came to the aid of hurricane survivors along the gulf coast and helped with our recovery effort. It is with great pride that we welcome all AKAs to the birthplace of the sisterhood, Washington, DC, as they embark on another groundbreaking century.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mr. President. I am so happy to be able to speak for the next 10 or 15 minutes. It is important for me to do that. I said I would come to the floor every day we are in session until we leave--whether it is in the morning that I get that opportunity or in the afternoon or before going home at night--every day until we leave in August to speak about this issue, because I agree 100 percent with my colleague from Idaho and I want to associate myself with all of his remarks, from the first paragraph, through the middle, until the end, because he is absolutely correct in his assessment of a couple issues: one, the anger, frustration, and pain our constituents are feeling at this moment; the truth he spoke about the fact that this is Congress's fault; the fact that he said the American people get it and understand it. They don't just get it in Idaho, I say to the Senator, they get it in Louisiana. What a shame it will be for us to leave in August or September or October or ever until we get this done. There is a moment of opportunity. There is a window. That window has been created, unfortunately, by extraordinarily high and historic prices that are forcing the attention on this issue. When we force attention, the pressure comes to bear to really make some headway. When prices are too low, there will occasionally be--or when they are low; they can never, maybe, be too low. But when they are lower, there is interest. But it is fleeting. Or maybe the prices are low, and we have a little bit of a rush for some environmental legislation. We deal with it, and we move on to other things. But there is no moving on to anything else right now in America because this energy price--this energy price--is unsettling to this economy in ways that I don't have to explain tonight, and my time is limited. I will leave that up to others. But I agree with my colleague from Idaho and associate myself with his remarks. Health Care Mr. President, also, briefly, before I get back to energy, I wish to thank my colleague from Oregon who spoke so kindly about the two of us and our efforts on health care because it is another issue that has to be addressed but without the urgency, in my view, that the energy issue has to be addressed. I am very proud to be working with him and 15 other of our colleagues in a bipartisan effort to bring down the cost of health care in a new and innovative approach. I am looking forward to working on that once we solve the energy dilemma here. Cosponsorship of S. 911 Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be added as a cosponsor of the Caroline Pryce Walker Conquer Childhood Cancer Act, S. 911, sponsored by my good friend, the Senator from Rhode Island, Mr. Reed. I would like to be added as a cosponsor and want to thank Senator Coburn for lifting the hold on that bill so we can actually get it passed.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mr. President.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, let me add a few thoughts in the next 10 or so minutes tonight about this energy debate. The Senator from Idaho just said we must increase production domestically, and he is absolutely right. It is so hard for me to understand how this Congress can continue to ask OPEC to increase production, ask our enemies to increase production, and we continue to refuse to increase production in our own country year after year, time after time, whether onshore or offshore. Now, I would know a little bit about this issue because I helped to lead, with the actual Presiding Officer tonight, and many colleagues, one of the most successful efforts to open at least a portion of our area that was under moratoria. We opened, just 2 years ago, 8.3 million acres, which was a tremendous victory. I am very proud of the Senators for doing that, and the House Members. It was a 10-year effort. We passed that bill here by a substantial margin, but it passed by one--one--vote in the House of Representatives. It took 10 years, and we just barely won. All we opened in that bill was a sliver--if you all can see this map of North America--was literally a sliver of land. I am going to have this map blown up so we can see it better. I hope the camera can see this right here. I wish to repeat this, because I know it is hard for people looking to believe it, but for 10 years, by 1 vote in the House of Representatives, we opened 8.3 million acres right out underneath Alabama and Mississippi, about 70 miles southeast of Venice, LA. That 8.3 million acres is being prepared now to drill. It literally took an act of Congress that took us 10 years. At that rate, the price of oil could go up, perhaps double or triple or quadruple. I don't know. This is a big country. We can see how big it is here. There is oil in many different places in this country, and it is time that we strategically open some other places to drill. We should be careful. We should be deliberate. We do not have to open everything. So let me say to my Republican colleagues--not the Senator from Idaho, my friend, who did a beautiful job just now--but others on the Republican side who want to open everything right now: That is a foolish and unnecessary step, and it will do nothing but confuse the situation. It is like saying we are going to launch a space program right now. We have not created the rocket, and we don't have all the details, and we are going to go to every planet right now. It is that foolish. I wish to say directly to the President of the United States if that is your starting point, it is not a starting place for me, and I am as pro-drilling as you can get on the floor of the Senate, because it confuses the issue and it throws up red herrings and it leads the country into a false frenzy. We don't have to lift the moratoria everywhere, and I am not going to vote for lifting the moratoria everywhere, but we can strategically lift congressional moratoria, or provide some kind of local option for States. I am kind of open on this. I have come at it many different ways, including considering some local options for some limited numbers of States where we actually think there might be oil and gas to drill. Now, we do know there is a lot of oil and gas, because this purple spot right here represents the drilling that the States of Texas and Louisiana and parts of Mississippi and Alabama have been doing for generations, billions and billions of barrels of oil and gas that we were able to get out safely, securely, having less spills. And this is something that I want too, less spills than what is in the natural seepage of oil. I know this is going to be impossible for some people listening to this to actually believe it is true, so I am going to give the reference. It is the National Academy of Sciences. This is not Mary Landrieu's propaganda poster or Republican propaganda poster or Democrat. This is from the National Academy of Sciences. Now, they have National Academies of Science in England. I think they have them in Germany. Maybe you could go ask them, but you can also ask our American National Academy of Sciences. This is what they say: Natural seeps of oil--just natural, coming out of the formations--represent 63 percent. Cars and boats and other sources--which we are trying to clean up, but we are not doing a real great job of it but we have made some progress--are 32 percent of all the spills in the oceans. Petroleum transportation, which means the big tankers, the Exxon Valdez, the tankers that sometimes run into the bridges in San Francisco Bay because they won't put in a pipeline, so they have tankers that come in. I keep explaining it would be better not to have the tankers, but they want the tankers there in that San Francisco Bay. They keep running into bridges. They keep spilling. So we have 4 percent of the spillage from the tankers. Now, look here: drilling and extraction. Drilling and extraction, this little green sliver, is 1 percent. Why is this? This is because we have gotten so good and clean and strong, the technology has improved so substantially since the 1940s and 1950s, that it is not true that this jeopardizes the oceans or the beaches. I will say to be completely honest that when there is a spill, it can look pretty bad and it does and it happens, but this is life, and there are risks associated with everything we do, but the risk is so minimal to the benefit of this Nation. I will tell you what the great benefit for me is: that we can stop funding both sides of the war on terror against ourselves, because that is what we are doing right now today. We are taking the people's hard- earned money and supporting a war at the tune of $348 million a day, and then we are paying our enemies to buy missiles and weapons to kill our own soldiers that we are sending over there. That is actually happening today because we are afraid. We are afraid that 1 little percent might seep into some water that we couldn't quickly go gather up and push to the side. This is why America is angry, because America does not like to be wimpy. That is one thing about our country. We don't like it, because we are not a wimpy country. We are a smart country. We are a strong country. We are a bold country. This Congress has the American people feeling as if we are wimps. We don't again have to lift the moratoria everywhere. I am going to tell the Republican leadership they are barking up the wrong tree here, because you don't have to go to every planet, but we have to pick one or two. We just have to pick one or two planets we are going to go to. We should let our scientists pick them. We should figure out what is the fastest, best way to get some additional oil. China has already figured this out, because they are going to be drilling closer to our coast than we are. Let me repeat. There are leases right here off the coast of Cuba and they are leasing this land to China as I speak. So China will be drilling closer to the coast than we allow our own companies to drill, and that is why the American people are angry. How we open a little bit more of Florida to protect what we need, I am going to leave that to my colleagues. I have some ideas, but there are others who probably have better ideas, but there is a possibility here. I think there is a lot of possibility in Alaska, and thank goodness that both Ted Stevens, the senior Senator from Alaska, and the junior Senator from Alaska, Lisa Murkowski, understand this and they know it. If we listen to them, they can help lead us to a way where we can get a great deal more oil out of Alaska. Now, it is going to take, because it is far away--Alaska is not part of the 48, as you can see here. There are distances that have to be crossed, pipelines that have to be laid, transportation infrastructure that can get this oil to where we need it. Let me tell you where we need the oil. We need the oil in the Northeast. If we don't get them some before this winter, there are going to be people in the Northeast who cannot afford to heat their homes this winter. These prices have never been this high. It is a long way from here to here. The industry can do that, but it takes them a while. It would be a lot easier to get the oil right here, but politically, that seems to be a problem. So we could move it from the gulf to there; we could move it from Alaska to there, but it is going to take some time. We can also get more oil here. The other part I should not forget to mention is you have different kinds of oil. There is sweet and it is light, and then there is heavy oil and harder to refine, and the refineries are having a hard time because Congress gives them no direction virtually whatsoever. They don't sometimes know what refineries to build, and I don't blame them, because we are so schizophrenic about it. So we now have refineries that only can refine a certain type of oil, and they take these big gambles, because Congress any day could wake up and say: Oh, we just decided we don't want that kind of oil. I have to learn a little bit more to talk more about it, but the general gist of it is that not only do you have to go get more oil from some places, we have to make sure the refineries are there to be able to produce, but we can. Now, that is enough on oil and gas, because for the next 5 minutes I wish to talk about not just producing more oil, which we obviously can, but we also have to conserve. I have to say that I have not been the best person on this issue, so I am going to apologize now, and then we are going to move--I am going to move on to say I will be happy to vote for even things that I wouldn't have considered in the past because I feel as though it is very important. We have to move our automobiles off of gasoline. We have to move them to fuels that we can produce, we can grow such as sugarcane, such as biofuels, cellulosic ethanol, and it can't just come from corn. We know we can do this because there are automobiles on the street today, there are just not enough of them because the mandate is not strong enough, and when you talk about demand, that is where the demand is. It is in fuels for our automobiles. There are electricity problems. There are power generation problems. However, the real stranglehold that our enemies have over us now, and OPEC has over us, is in the fuel sector. So we have to do two things: We have to produce more fuel and we have to consume less. I hope our bipartisan energy bill will include some stronger mandates for our automobiles in some way that allows people to drive a big automobile if they want, but it can't consume a lot of gasoline. It can consume a lot of sugarcane, fuel made from sugarcane, or a lot of fuel made from something other than the corn itself, because that will drive up the price, but the technology is here and we can do it. The bottom line is we don't have to be wimps anymore. We can be what America always has been in every generation: bold, strong, decisive. We can protect our people from losing their homes, their jobs, and their businesses, and their ranches, which the Presiding Officer would know something about since he comes from a family of ranchers, because that is what is happening right now. People are losing the American dream while we sit and twiddle our thumbs talking about everything else that doesn't have anything to do with the price of gasoline. Let me back up. That is an overstatement. Speculation does have something to do with it, but not the fundamentals. So let's get on with speculation; try to get speculation out of the market and then talk about some other things. I am not going to put up any more posters tonight. I think that is enough for the night, but again, this is going to be a combination of expanding production, perhaps--I know there is an issue in the Presiding Officer's home State of oil shale. I am looking at him smiling because we will have this debate. I am learning a lot about that. There is a lot I don't know about the oil shale, which he does know about. I think there is some potential there. How we go about it, we will have to see. But I do know that there is a lot of oil and a lot of gas from traditional sources, but we have to let them find it, expedite the leases we already have, and make sure the infrastructure is there in this country to produce, and then move as rapidly as we can to new freedom fuels of the future, particularly in the areas of our automobiles. I know the people of Louisiana are anxious for this debate. We are proud of the production we do. We are very happy that Congress gave us now a percentage of the oil and gas off of our shore, 37.5 percent that we are going to use wisely to secure our coasts and to build some additional infrastructure in our State. I know not every State has the same attitude that Texas and Louisiana and Mississippi have, and I don't expect that. I don't expect that. That is too much to expect. We just have a tradition of it. We are happy to do it. But on the other hand, it is not fair for some States and some places to say they don't want to produce anything, and then expect the States of Wyoming and New Mexico on shore, and Louisiana and Texas to do all the production in this country. There are other places that can produce, and we most certainly need to do it. We owe it not just to our constituents today, but we owe it to future generations of this country to break the back of OPEC, put us on a path of independence, get these prices lower, and clean up our environment at the same time. You can get to the place sometimes--well, the Presiding Officer has played baseball--when the bases are lined up and the lights in the stadium are on, it is a perfect time to hit it out of the ballpark. If we can get the right batter up, with the right pitch, we can hit this out of the ballpark. We can do for the American people what they expect, which is to move beyond our comfort zone, from what we are used to, and do something that may actually make a difference in their lives. Thank you so much. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.