Ed Markey

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. At this time, I yield myself 2 minutes. Madam Chair, a philosopher once asked: If a tree falls in the middle of a forest and if there is no one around, does that tree make a sound? It is a very deep, profound, philosophical question. Mr. Burgess' amendment raises a similar question. If there is a great energy efficiency program and if people don't know about it, will it help to actually increase energy efficiency? The answer to that question, I think, is no. We actually need to have a plan to spread the word about Home Star to achieve the best results. Now, I do agree that Lowe's and Home Depot will have a stake in getting the word out, but the truth is that those large chains aren't the only companies that are going to be part of this program. The local hardware stores will be as well. So we need to create a balance here of ensuring that people in rural America, who might have hardware stores right down the street from them, understand that they can go there as well. We need to make this program as accessible as possible and as successful as possible in this telescoped time frame that the program will be in existence. In a modern American, capitalistic culture, we know that advertising is the central means by which consumers learn about good products. The gentleman from Texas, I am sure, is an educated consumer, especially about this program. He knows a lot about it. Yet there will be millions and millions of Americans who will not unless we augment what Lowe's and Home Depot might spend as part of their advertising programs.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. I yield myself an additional 30 seconds. We should augment what Lowe's, Home Depot, and other large chain stores do with programs to ensure that the other tens of thousands of small stores across the country, which will also be able to participate, will have consumers who understand that that is where they can go. I think it will dramatically enhance the attractiveness and the success of the program. As a result, I would urge a ``no'' vote on the Burgess amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Madam Chair, I yield myself those 30 seconds in order to again make the point that this program is central to our ability to ensure that the Home Star program will work and that there will be a democratization of access to the capital which will be needed in order to implement this program. We believe that it will have the impact of ensuring that more and more and more Americans will become aware of it, will use this funding mechanism, and will create this technological revolution which we need in energy efficiency in our country.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Madam Chair, I yield myself as much time as I may consume, and that is only to make the point that the way in which the amendment is drafted is that it is just a classic motion to strike. And in striking, it eliminates everything within the subsection that exists without substituting any additional instructions. So the metaphor of a black hole just refers to what is the legislative result of having just a strike section without also additional language in order to substitute for what the intent would be to ensure that the money is then used in a way that did not lead to the law of unintended consequences being invoked. We are very concerned here about this amendment. As it is constructed inside the legislation, we know what the program is. We know, historically, it has been a very successful and a very popular model that has been used in other laws. In the Clean Water Act, it was used as a revolving loan fund to finance wastewater cleanup for decades. The Safe Drinking Water Act has successfully used this model for the last 15 years. So, again, my hope would be that Members would reject the Barton amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. I thank the Chair. The Barton amendment would eliminate the revolving part of the loan section which requires the money to be dedicated, again, to energy efficiency after it is repaid. Unfortunately, this would limit the ability of the middle class to take advantage of the Home Star program and invest in energy efficiency in the future. If adopted, the amendment would create a black hole. It leaves unanswered the question of what to do with hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars that will be repaid in the coming years. I am concerned that this amendment is not only counter to the goals of the program, but it would leave it vulnerable because of the lack of precision which the actual impact of this amendment would have on the operation of the program in the future. So I continue to urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Would the Chair inform us as to how much time remains on both sides?

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. May I inquire as to how much time I have remaining?

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the 62nd anniversary of the founding of the State of Israel, our great ally and friend. Over 60 years ago, Israel's pioneers began to revitalize an ancient land. Today, Israelis remain pioneers at heart--pioneers for prosperity, democracy and progress. They are once again facing challenges in their homeland with determination and a vision for a better future for their children and for their country. But even as we celebrate the founding of the State of Israel, we know that while sovereign independence is necessary, it is not sufficient-- security of the State's people is also of paramount importance. The Jewish homeland must be kept safe, surrounded by neighbors who respect its right to exist in peace. Through sacrifice, ingenuity and innovation, Israel has managed to thrive for 62 years in a dangerous and unstable region of the world. Let us hope that the conflicts that have marked the difficult decades since Israel's founding will subside in the years to come. Indeed, Prime Minister Golda Meir believed that one day there would be peace in Israel, because there are mothers and grandmothers--and let me add fathers and grandfathers--in Egypt, in Jordan, in Syria and the Palestinian territories who also want their children and grandchildren to live in peace. Today is an opportunity to both acknowledge history and look to the future. I am hopeful that someday soon Israel and its neighbors will finally find the keys to a peaceful future side-by-side in mutual security, and the conflict in the Middle East becomes relegated to the history books. I congratulate the State of Israel on its 62nd anniversary, and offer my sincere wish for its peaceful and productive future.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, on April 22, 2010, I missed rollcall Vote No. 219. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, recently, President Obama announced a 5-year offshore drilling plan that would allow oil and gas exploration in new areas off the East Coast and in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico. However, before oil companies drill off thousands of miles of pristine coastline, they should first use the thousands of drilling leases they already own. Right now, oil companies hold the offshore drilling rights to an area the size of Pennsylvania on which they are not actually drilling. In fact, of 7,316 total offshore leases held by oil companies right now, only 1,844 are producing, according to the Interior Department. Production is occurring on only 8,894,428 acres on the Outer Continental Shelf out of 39,331,641 total acres leased to oil companies. That means that oil companies are producing on only about one-quarter of the leases and roughly 22 percent of the acreage that they hold offshore. As a result, today I am introducing legislation that would provide an incentive to oil companies to move quickly to get oil to the market or relinquish the leases so that they could be developed by other companies. My legislation, the United States Exploration on Idle Tracts Act or the USE IT Act, would establish an escalating fee over time on nonproducing leases to encourage companies to expedite production. Similar legislation repeatedly passed the House in the last Congress with large, bipartisan majorities. President Obama has also included this concept in his budget request for fiscal year 2011. The Department of Interior estimates that the proposed fee would raise $760 million over the next ten years--allowing us to drill for oil while also drilling for deficit dollars on behalf of U.S. taxpayers. As gas prices once again move towards $3 per gallon, it is time to finally get oil companies to ``use it or lose it'' on their nonproducing leases.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. I thank the gentleman very much, and I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Boucher) for his leadership on this critical issue, along with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns) in partnership with Mr. Waxman and with Mr. Barton. Mr. Boucher and I have been working on these issues for many, many, many years, and this bill that has been produced by his subcommittee is something that, in my opinion, is going to go a long way towards helping our country to create a new boom economically in this wireless sector. We saw a great boom in the 1990s when we moved over 200 megahertz of spectrum, creating the third, fourth, fifth and sixth cell phone license, combined with the Telecom Act of 1996. We saw, actually, a transformation in the way in which we communicate in our country. Who would think that we could move from black rotary dial phones to BlackBerrys in just 10 years, almost on a ubiquitous basis. Who would think that Mr. Stearns could be checking his BlackBerry even as I'm speaking out here on the floor? That's something we're very proud of. We're very proud of that revolution in the 1990s. And I think we have the potential here in this legislation to accomplish the very same kind of addition to the spectrum capacity. And Ms. Blackburn is showing not only can we use these devices now for voice but also for video and for data. It's become a technology with the great deal of flexibility; yet because of this technology, we are going to be able--and I thank the chairman for this--to inventory each radio spectrum band of frequencies from 225 megahertz to 10 gigahertz, and that includes the radio services authorized to operate within each band of frequencies, the identity of each Federal or non-Federal user within which such radio service is authorized to operate in each band of the frequencies, the total amount of spectrum by band of frequencies allocated to each Federal or non-Federal user and an approximation of the extent to which each Federal or non-Federal user is using each band of frequencies. This basic goal that the legislation advances to create this inventory will make it possible for us to build on this revolution that occurred from the mid-1990s to 2005 where companies whose names did not exist-- Google, eBay, Amazon, Hulu, YouTube--are now replaced or added to with a whole new generation of companies, of technologies, of gadgets and applications that will give incredible economic stimulus to our country. So what we have here is a debate over the American economy, and it's central to our wellbeing; yet in a lot of ways, it just doesn't get talked about as being the biggest part of what happened in the 1990s. And as it moves into the 21st century, we're seeing these technologies now be included in new energy technologies, new health care technologies, new education technologies. It now has infiltrated technology after technology in our country. And what the gentleman from Virginia is doing in a bipartisan partnership with the gentleman from Florida is, in my opinion, central to ensuring that we have the leadership in this mobile innovation, that we have a smart spectrum policy that is put on the books, and then we can just get out of the way and watch these entrepreneurs and watch these whole tech communities make it possible for us, with a little bit of luck from Mr. Stearns and others, that the applications become so great that perhaps he and millions of other Americans will never again have to look up from their BlackBerry. There will just be so much interesting stuff that is on it, it will be so versatile. So thank you so much and congratulations. I urge an ``aye'' vote on this important legislation.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. On health care, the Democratic party is the ``party of hope'' and the Republicans are the ``party of nope.'' The Democratic health care bill lowers prescription drug costs for seniors, expands coverage to 32 million more Americans, reduces the deficit by $143 billion over the next 10 years, and gives middle class families tax credits to help pay for health coverage. What do the Republicans say to this plan? They say ``nope.'' Nope to lowering prescription drug prices, nope to expanding coverage, nope to health insurance tax breaks. GOP used to stand for Grand Old Party. Now, it stands for grandstand, oppose, and postpone. They grandstand with phony claims about nonexistent government takeovers, they oppose any real reform, and then they want to postpone fixing a broken health care system. GOP: Grandstand, oppose, and postpone. Today we have a choice between change and more of the same, between ``hope'' and ``nope.'' Ted Kennedy is looking down and smiling today. Vote ``aye'' for John Dingell, for Ted Kennedy, and for all of those Americans that need health care in our country. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, information is the ultimate tool for empowering consumers. The more people know about the things they buy, the better able they are to match their needs and budget to the appropriate product and quantity of that product. This principle has been applied to help consumers make more fully-informed decisions on everything from corn flakes to cars, but never to electricity. Today I am introducing the Electricity Consumers' Right to Know Act (e-KNOW) to establish the consumers' right to access their electricity information. Encouraging energy efficiency and conservation in our homes and businesses is one of the easiest and most cost- effective ways to strengthen our energy security and reduce global warming pollution. e-KNOW is a simple way to ensure that electric utility consumers have access to free, timely, and secure data regarding their electricity prices and usage patterns so they can take charge of their energy use and save money on utility bills. The Pacific Northwest National Lab has found convincing evidence that consumers will change their energy consumption behavior in response to feedback they get regarding prices and patterns of use. When people see just how expensive electricity is when demand peaks on a hot summer day, they find ways to conserve energy or defer usage to a later time. This saves consumers money directly and also reduces the need for utilities to build more power plants, thereby indirectly saving consumers money through avoided rate increases in the future. Rapid developments in Smart Grid technologies are providing a golden opportunity to bridge the consumer information gap, but without regulatory reforms to ensure customers and their third party designees can access their electricity information, the potential of these technology advances will not be fully realized. The Recovery Act provided $4.5 billion to accelerate standardization and deployment of the Smart Grid, including assistance in deploying millions of ``smart meters'' that can provide customers real-time usage and pricing information through two-way communications with the utility. The Electric Power Research Institute estimates that the U.S. will spend $165 billion over the next 20 years building the Smart Grid, and FERC estimates that smart meters deployments will rise ten-fold over the next decade, from 8 million today to 80 million in 2019. With full roll-out of smart grid technologies, the Pacific Northwest National Lab estimates that conservation efforts resulting from consumers' access to information will reduce residential and commercial electricity demand by 6 percent. This would save businesses and consumers more than $15 billion annually and reduce carbon dioxide emissions significantly: 92 million metric tons annually in 2030, equal to the emissions of 16 large coal power plants. Providing customers with access to the data will not happen by itself. One recent study of a number of large utilities found that of the almost 17 million new meters being planned or deployed by respondents, only 35 percent had clear plans to provide customer access to the data. Less than 1 percent of these utilities' customers have real-time access to electricity data today. States and utilities need not wait for full smart meter deployments to see benefits from adopting more transparent consumer data policies. Even without price incentives, simply providing consumers better information about their energy use has been shown to reduce total consumption by 5 to 15 percent, providing annual savings of $60 to $180 for the average American household. Even without smart meters, customers with access to historical electricity usage and price data can analyze their energy usage over time, evaluate prospective energy- efficiency investments, and compare electricity consumption against similarly sized houses. Improved access to this very basic data will also let new buyers of homes or buildings factor energy efficiency information into their purchase decisions. Making energy data readily accessible to end-users will also open a whole new market and unleash massive innovation in the area of home and building energy management. Google and Microsoft are among the many innovators that have already released Internet-based visualization tools that are helping consumers better manage their energy use. This legislation implements critical recommendations regarding increased consumer access to energy data that were included in the Federal Communications Commission's National Broadband Plan that was also released today. e-KNOW is critical to empowering energy consumers in the near-term, but it is also one part of an evolving national Smart Grid policy that will encourage entrepreneurs to use new technologies and business models to create a variety of energy management and information services over the longer-term. Making energy data available to electricity customers and their authorized third parties is fundamental to unleashing this vast potential for innovation. The e-KNOW Act amends Title II of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 by adding Section 215, Electric Consumer Right to Access Electric Energy Information. Under this legislation, U.S. electricity consumers, and any third parties they designate, would have the right to access their electricity usage and pricing information from their retail electricity provider in a free, timely, and convenient manner that ensures privacy and data security. To help implement this consumer right of access, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), in consultation with State regulatory authorities, the Secretary of Energy, and other appropriate Federal agencies, would--within six months of the date of enactment-- establish guidelines identifying minimum national standards that States and utilities could adopt to ensure customers this right. These standards would incorporate and build upon the pioneering work done in this area by innovative States, including California, Pennsylvania, and Texas, which have already adopted standards to ensure consumer access to electricity data. If, one year after the promulgation of the FERC guidelines, a retail electric utility fails to uphold the minimum national standards for ensuring consumer access to electricity data, the State may bring a civil action against the utility on behalf of its electric consumers to ensure compliance with the Act. If no civil action is brought by a state authority, any electric consumer may bring a civil action against their retail electric provider to require compliance with the Act. Enforcement authorities would not apply against utilities that FERC has, within the most recent two years, determined have adopted and implemented a policy that complies with the minimum standards set forth by FERC.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 83, I did not vote, but intended to vote ``yes.''

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the National Alzheimer's Project Act. I would like to thank my colleague and fellow cochair of the bipartisan Alzheimer's Task Force, Mr. Chris Smith of New Jersey, for continuing to partner with me on this important legislation. An estimated 5.3 million Americans have Alzheimer's disease, and one in ten individuals has a family member with the disease. Unless science finds a way to prevent or cure it, nearly 16 million Americans will have Alzheimer's disease by the year 2050. Additionally, in 2005, Medicare spent $91 billion for the care of individuals with Alzheimer's disease, and this amount is projected to increase to $160 billion in 2010. While we have made great progress in the battle against Alzheimer's, much more needs to be done. This bill will establish a National Alzheimer's Project Office and interagency Advisory Council to help coordinate a national plan for Alzheimer's research, care, and related support services. The National Alzheimer's Project Office will be established within and overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services. Alzheimer's efforts throughout the federal government will be coordinated and continually evaluated by this entity, including research, clinical care, and various support programs. The Alzheimer's Association has endorsed this bill which will modify care delivery and help prevention of this awful disease. Madam Speaker, in order to help fight this disease and reduce the number of patients who suffer from Alzheimer's, it is imperative to better coordinate federal activities relating to this disease. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this important legislation, and I look forward to continuing to work with them throughout the legislative process.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the E-Rate 2.0 Act, an important advancement in the effort to update the successful E-Rate program for the 21st century. I am pleased to introduce this bill with my colleagues Representative Lois Capps (D-CA) and Representative Doris Matsui (D-CA). While the U.S. lags behind other countries in several key broadband categories such as adoption rates, there is one area where our country leads: Internet connections to classrooms. Our leadership position in this important area can be traced back to the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which created the education rate--or ``E-Rate''--program. I was proud to be the lead author in the House of the legislation creating the E-Rate program. At the time the 1996 bill was enacted, only 14 percent of K-12 classrooms had Internet access, compared with more than 95 percent today. Over the past 14 years, the E-Rate program has helped schools around the country connect to the Internet and other telecommunications services, enabling students to access a vast universe of educational information, communicate with other students around the world, and capitalize on opportunities that otherwise would be out of reach. With the E-Rate's mission of connecting classrooms to the Internet largely fulfilled, now is the time for an updated E-Rate program--an ``E-Rate 2.0''--to move the program into the 21st century. I have introduced the E-Rate 2.0 Act, which directs the FCC to implement three vital pilot programs: The first pilot program narrows the digital divide through the distribution of vouchers to enable low-income students to purchase residential broadband service. The second utilizes a competitive grant program to extend funding for broadband equipment and services to selected community colleges and head start facilities that best demonstrate need and incorporation of broadband use in their educational mission. The third enables certain E-Rate applicants serving particularly low- income students to apply for significantly discounted services and technologies for the use of e-books The bill also would provide for an inflation adjustment to the current $2.25 billion cap on the E-Rate program, so funding would increase with inflation. The bill also calls for the streamlining of the application process to improve the ease and accessibility of the application process. As the scope of technology has expanded, the E-Rate program needs to keep pace. I am pleased to introduce the E-Rate 2.0 program today and look forward to its consideration in the future. I urge my colleagues to join in cosponsoring this legislation.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, or LIHEAP, is a vital safety net for millions of Americans. This winter, a perfect storm of economic hardship, rising heating oil prices, and increased demand for home energy assistance is leading to a serious home energy crisis for millions of Americans. The Energy Assistance for American Families Act that I am introducing today would increase the level of funding for LIHEAP and expand its availability in order to protect millions of American families who are facing difficult choices this winter between paying for food or paying for fuel. The Energy Assistance for American Families Act would increase the authorized funding level for LIHEAP to $7.6 billion per year for fiscal years 2011 to 2014, an increase of $2.5 billion over the last authorized level, enacted in 2005. The Energy Assistance for American Families Act would also extend the expanded eligibility levels that were included in the omnibus appropriations bills for fiscal years 2009 and 2010--giving states the option of helping families with incomes up to 75 percent of the State Median Income level. According to the National Energy Assistance Directors Association (NEADA), states assisted 8.3 million households last year--more than a 33 percent increase in the number of households served from the previous year. In my home state of Massachusetts, LIHEAP funding helped 186,160 Massachusetts families in 2009, according to the Campaign for Home Energy Assistance. However, overall demand for LIHEAP aid is rising this year, in large part due to the economic downturn. NEADA estimates that 10 million households may apply for assistance this year. Increasing the LIHEAP funding level will allow states to meet this increased demand and to continue to provide meaningful aid. Energy prices are also on the rise--average household expenditures on heating oil this winter are expected to increase to $1,911 from $1,864 last winter, according to the Department of Energy. The Energy Assistance for American Families Act will allow grants to continue to cover a significant portion of home heating bills. Our economy may finally be heating up, but the effects of a recession, periods of cold weather, and rising energy prices are still having a chilling effect on millions of American families. Expanding LIHEAP's funding and availability is absolutely essential to help families who are struggling this winter.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, yesterday the administration announced that President Obama will propose a three-year freeze on non-security discretionary spending in his State of the Union address tomorrow as a way of addressing the federal deficit. However, as President Obama works to reduce the budget deficit and put our nation on a path of fiscal responsibility, oil companies are pushing us further into the red by continuing to drill for free on public land. The ``Royalty Relief for American Consumers Act of 2010'' that I am introducing today with the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Van Hollen, would recover the more than $50 billion that taxpayers currently stand to lose in foregone oil royalty payments as a result of defective leases issued by the Department of Interior between 1996 and 2000. The minerals below our public lands belong to the American people and no company should be allowed to exploit them for free. This legislation would protect American taxpayers and reduce our budget deficit by up to $54 billion. The legislation that we are introducing today would offer oil companies a simple choice: they can continue to drill for free on public lands but they will not be permitted to purchase new leases from the federal government. The language in the Royalty Relief for American Consumers Act has repeatedly passed the House of Representatives in 2006, 2007 and 2008. It is time that we start drilling for deficit dollars by reclaiming these lost royalty payments and ending the free ride that oil companies are currently enjoying on public land. As President Obama steps up efforts to reduce the federal budget deficit, ensuring that oil companies are paying their fair share is a common sense way to help restore fiscal responsibility. We can no longer afford to allow oil companies to drill for free while taxpayers are left holding the bill. Enacting this legislation will put an end to this taxpayer rip off once and for all.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, one of the most critical elements of the legislation now before us is the establishment of tough new regulation of the over-the-counter derivatives market. This reform is long overdue and I strongly support the legislation now before us. I am pleased to say that I can wholeheartedly support this bill because--thanks to language agreed upon by Chairman Peterson, Chairman Waxman and myself--it ensures that the expansion of Commodity Futures Trading Commission's authority over derivatives will not in any way limit the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's authority to regulate energy markets. FERC plays a critical role in ensuring that those markets deliver energy reliably and at just and reasonable rates. The bill preserves FERC's role in three ways: First, the bill amends the Commodity Exchange Act to fully preserve FERC's authority over agreements, contracts, and transactions entered into pursuant to a FERC-approved tariff or rate schedule. An exception is made for instruments that are executed, traded, or cleared on a CFTC-registered entity. However, it is the drafters' understanding and intention that CFTC cannot construe this exception to limit FERC's underlying authority. For example, FERC-regulated entities, such as Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators, would not be required to register with CFTC based on their utilization of Financial Transmission Rights or other instruments to facilitate the physical operation of the electric grid. Nor will CFTC require instruments of that nature to be executed, traded, or cleared on some other CFTC-registered entity. Second, in any area where FERC and CFTC have overlapping authority, the bill requires the two agencies to conclude a memorandum of understanding delineating their respective areas so as to avoid conflicting or duplicative regulation. Where FERC has regulatory authority, CFTC is permitted to step back and let FERC do its job. It is the drafters' understanding and expectation that CFTC will recognize FERC's primacy with regard to energy markets that it comprehensively regulates. Finally, the bill states that it does not in any way limit or affect FERC's existing authority, under Section 222 of the Federal Power Act and Section 4A of the Natural Gas Act, to protect against manipulation of the electricity and natural gas markets. As one of the principal authors of these anti-manipulation provisions, which were included in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, I see the preservation of this authority as critical to ensuring fair and transparent energy markets. These provisions were drafted broadly to allow FERC to protect against the use of any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance ``in connection with'' FERC-regulated electricity and natural gas markets, regardless of where such manipulation occurs. With these elements now included in the legislation, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this legislation.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. I would be glad to yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Well, the facts are very clear. The facts are that 9 of the 10 warmest years on record have occurred in the last 10 years and it has reached a temporary plateau. We are in a recession, and in China and in the United States and in other countries there has been a slower pace of increase in emissions. And by the way, this year it's going back up again, it's going to be the fifth warmest year in history this year.

Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Yes, they are public. This is the data provided by NASA, which I will provide to you. NASA has been compiling temperatures from the last 130 years, and I will be more than willing to give it to you. I guess the fundamental question is, as China and India industrialize, as other parts of the world industrialize and start to send up more fossil fuels into the atmosphere, do we believe this trend is likely to stop and abate, or is it likely to exacerbate and continue to skyrocket? I think the evidence, since the beginning of the industrialized period as we have moved from 280 parts per million to 380 parts per million of CO2 in our atmosphere, is that the more we add the warmer it gets. And as the 3 or 4 billion people in this developing world begin to want to drive automobiles and have electricity in their homes, it's pretty clear that the trend line is heading upwards. Yes, over the last 10 years it stayed very warm. As I said earlier, it's like a child having the same temperature, 100.6 not 98.6, for about 10 days.