Jim Matheson

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. We certainly want to offer our condolences to Bill's wife, Jacquelyn; his sons, Will and Wes. And with that, I ask the House recognize this with a moment of silence.

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, it is with regret that I bring before the House the news that a former colleague, Bill Orton from the Third District of Utah, passed away in a tragic accident just last Saturday. He was out with his kids recreating on some sand dunes in central Utah. Bill was a smart Member of Congress. He was a substantive Member of Congress. He was someone who spoke his mind, and I know that his commitment to public service continued after he left this institution. He was first elected in 1990. He served for 6 years. He was one of the founding members of the Blue Dog Coalition here in the House of Representatives while he was here. I would like to yield to my colleague from Utah (Mr. Bishop) for some comments, and then I will ask for a moment of silence.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor our colleague who just passed away this past Saturday, Bill Orton, who represented the Third Congressional District in Utah. Bill was a Congressman who spoke his mind, who was an independent voice. And let me tell you, in today's politics, I think we can all learn something from Bill Orton because I think most people in America don't like the polarization they see in Washington, D.C. Bill was all about trying to find solutions, trying to make progress. We can honor his legacy by behaving more like Bill. I offer my condolences to his wife, Jacquelyn, and to his sons, Will and Wes. Their father was a great public servant. I hope they can find some solace in the great record of public service their father has.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, today In introduced the ``Residential Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Prevention Act'' in the House of Representatives. Carbon monoxide is the leading cause of accidental poisoning deaths in America. Nearly all carbon monoxide poisonings can be prevented by simply placing a carbon monoxide detector in one's home. Carbon monoxide poisoning kills 500 people each year in the U.S. and hospitalizes an additional 20,000 people, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Poisonings occur from several sources, including leaky furnaces that aren't properly serviced, water heaters, stoves, and portable generators that are used inside or in an area with poor ventilation. Carbon monoxide poisonings occur everywhere across the U.S., from cold weather states in which furnaces frequently run to hurricane-prone areas in which residents lose electricity and use portable generators inside. This is a commonsense bill that incentivizes states to encourage citizens to place carbon monoxide detectors in their homes by establishing grant programs for detectors for which states can apply. This commonsense legislation is supported by both consumer protection groups and national retailers.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today in support of my legislation. H.R. 479, the Wakefield Act, which seeks to reauthorize the Emergency Medical Services for Children (EMSC) program. Unfortunately, today the hospital emergency department has become the fundamental source of our health care delivery system for both primary and emergency care. Due to this trend, it's easy to forget that emergency medicine is actually a relatively new specialty. Emergency rooms were first established in the 1970s as medical personnel returning from the Vietnam War sought to put to use the battlefield medicine they had learned. Skills initially developed to save wounded soldiers were translated to saving victims of car crashes and trauma. That genesis in battlefield medicine, however, failed to account for the very different physical, developmental, and physiological traits of children. By the early 1980s, doctors were seeing marked disparities in survival rates among adults and children with similar injuries. Created in 1984, the EMSC program sought to address those disparities in children's emergency care. The program has driven fundamental changes in America's emergency medical system and brought vital resources and attention to a neglected population. Since it was established, child injury death rates have dropped 40 percent. With the aid of research and attention from the EMSC program and others, pediatric emergency medicine was developed, and was ultimately established as a separate medical subspecialty in 1992. This year we are proud to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the EMSC program. The EMSC program provides seed money to every state and territory to carry out activities designed to improve children's emergency care. States may use those funds to ensure that hospitals and ambulances are stocked with appropriate equipment and supplies; to provide pediatric training to paramedics; to improve systems, such as transfer agreements among facilities; and much more. The program also supports the National EMSC Resource Center, an information clearinghouse that provides materials and technical support to states and institutions. The Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network links pediatric emergency providers across the nation to perform research on injury and illness among children. The National EMSC Data Analysis Resource Center--based in my district at the University of Utah--assists states to collect, analyze, and utilize EMSC data. The EMSC program's authorization expired in September 2005. In summer 2006, the Institutes of Medicine released a report entitled, ``Emergency Care for Children: Growing Pains,'' which documented both the value of the EMSC program and the gaps that remain in providing quality emergency care for all children. The report found that, although children represent 27 percent of all emergency department visits, only about 6 percent of emergency departments have all of the supplies deemed essential for managing pediatric emergencies, and only half of hospitals have at least 85 percent of those supplies. The report described the EMSC program as ``well positioned to assume [a] leadership role'' in addressing deficiencies in emergency care for children and recommended funding the program at $37.5 million per year. H.R. 479, the Wakefield Act, has bipartisan, bicameral support. The bill is also endorsed by over 50 organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Emergency Physicians, the American Medical Association, the Emergency Nurses Association, and many more. I would like to thank Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Waxman and his staff for working with me and my staff to move this legislation forward. Last year, the House passed this bill on a vote of 390-1. I urge every Member to support this important legislation once again-- together, we can work to ensure that our nation's children have the best possible medical care during emergencies.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I rise today along with my colleague Rep. Fred Upton to introduce the ``Labeling Education and Nutrition Act of 2009''. I am introducing this legislation so we can move toward providing consumers with key nutritional information they seek while hopefully providing restaurants with a workable framework to deliver this information to their customers. This legislation is a bipartisan effort to address nutritional labeling in this Congress. Senators Carper and Murkowski will introduce the companion bill in the coming days. With the introduction of the LEAN Act in both chambers, I believe we have an opportunity to have a constructive national conversation about uniform nutrition labeling requirements and standards. Since 1994, the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) has required food manufacturers to provide nutrition information on nearly all packaged foods. However, the NLEA exempts restaurants. Due to this exemption, states, cities and counties have acted to provide nutritional information to consumers. This has led to at least 20 states introducing varying degrees of labeling requirement legislation in 2009. From New York City to the state of California, more and more cities, counties, and states are passing differing laws mandating that chain restaurants put calories and other nutritional information on menus and menu boards. The result of this increasing state activity is a patchwork of regulation that can be confusing to the consumer and is burdensome to restaurant chains. The LEAN Act requires restaurants and grocery stores that serve prepared foods and have 20 or more locations to disclose calories for each menu item so that consumers can access this information before making a meal choice. Under this bill, calories will be posted directly on the menu, menu board or in one of the approved alternative ways, such as a menu insert or a sign directly next to the menu board. As we see in our own lives and daily eating habits, consumers increasingly choose to eat in restaurants. According to a 2009 Forecast report by the National Restaurant Association, Americans are looking for healthier options when they dine out. In my home state of Utah, restaurant jobs represent about 8% of the employment. American adults buy a meal or a snack from a restaurant 5 times per week on average and spend 48% of their food budget on food away from home, almost $1078 per person annually. Unfortunately, we have also seen the toll diseases such as obesity and diabetes have taken on society. By providing nutritional information, individuals with special dietary needs will be able to make the right nutritional decisions for them regarding caloric intake or sodium levels. I appreciate the interest and leadership my colleagues have demonstrated on this issue in the past. I believe this legislation represents a compromise effort that will allow consumers to make informed decisions while also providing for greater individual responsibility in dietary choices. Finally, I hope my colleagues will work with me on this piece of legislation and I look forward to working in a bipartisan way to build upon this legislative proposal.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I have always worked to protect children. The recent press reports of abuse, neglect, and tragically death, in some residential therapy programs for youth is very concerning to me. Over the years, many treatment centers have been established across the Nation, including Utah. As a result, Utah has worked hard to license and regulate residential treatment programs over the past several years and our state meets many of the standards set forth in the legislation passed by the House of Representatives. It is my understanding that some states have not developed as stringent requirements as Utah and that leads to a patchwork of regulations where kids can fall through the cracks. I believe a uniform set of standards makes sense, especially when it comes to meeting the needs of the most troubled children and their families. I am supportive of provisions in this bill which seek to support good actors and encourage those who are not to become so. I also feel that steps taken by Utah could be an example for other states implementing new requirements. I was able to include language in the legislation which requested HHS study the outcomes of individuals in these types of programs through a longitudinal study. I feel this data is extremely useful to better understand the outcomes of individuals in these programs and the progress made towards the goals of the treatment programs to fully rehabilitate troubled youth and teens.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank Chairman Waxman for addressing problems with the transition to digital television which was due to happen next month. The simple fact is that millions of Americans are not prepared for the digital switch. In Salt Lake City, Nielsen Media Research reports that nearly 9 percent of households are completely unprepared. Salt Lake ranks as the sixth least-ready out of 56 surveyed. The coupons authorized by Congress 4 years ago--to help families acquire the hardware they need to view programs once the digital change is made--aren't getting to the customers. Millions of Americans are currently waiting to receive the coupons. The agency charged with distributing them has fallen behind. My office has been attempting to assist constituents with the program for several months. I know of cases where coupons have expired before they even reach consumer mail boxes. That's ridiculous. I'd like to thank Chairman Waxman for working with the Senate to address concerns I raised about the coupon program. This is a Senate bill, but it is important to acknowledge the work of the Energy and Commerce Committee in trying to fix DTV problems. The last thing families need right now is the prospect of additional monthly bills in order to watch television. Finally, I am pleased to see that this bill allows for emergency services to begin using some analog space. It also provides flexibility by allowing broadcasters who are ready-to-go to switch to digital service earlier than June, which is a good idea.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Wakefield Act, which reauthorizes the Emergency Medical Services for Children Program. It is the only Federal program that focuses on saving the lives and health of children needing emergency medical treatment. This year is the program's 25th anniversary and I am proud to be the lead sponsor along with Representative Peter King. Unfortunately, millions of kids find themselves in our Nation's emergency rooms every year. Thanks to the Wakefield Act, doctors, nurses, and first-responders now have much greater knowledge about what works and what doesn't work, when these small patients come through the emergency room door. Since the program began, child injury death rates have dropped 40 percent. The research that resulted from this legislation helped establish pediatric emergency medicine as its own specialty. Data collection and training seminars--including from the Emergency Medical Services for Children Data Analysis Center based in my district at the University of Utah--have been provided to thousands of medical personnel. The program's authorization expired in September 2005. In the summer of 2006, the Institutes of Medicine released a report which documented the value of the program. It also noted the gaps that remain in providing quality emergency care for children. There is a serious gap between the percentage of kids who end up in the ER and the percentage of emergency rooms that are staffed, trained, and equipped to respond appropriately. The report's bottom line--this program is ``well positioned to assume a leadership role'' in closing the gap. It's endorsed by over 50 organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Emergency Physicians. Madam Speaker, this legislation enhances the program by authorizing the funding needed to ensure that progress continues in this specialty. I look forward to working with my colleagues toward its adoption.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation that would correct a drafting error that involves a 25-acre parcel of Bureau of Land Management, BLM, land, and land that is part of the Turn-About Ranch, which rehabilitates troubled youth. An erroneous survey in January 1999 was the cause of this trespass conflict when Congress approved a major land exchange, P.L. 105-335, between the State of Utah and the border of the Grand Staircase Escalante, GSE, Monument. This legislation makes a minor boundary change to resolve the trespass conflict. It would grant the owners of the ranch to purchase the erroneously surveyed land at a fair market value, enabling this important and effective program for troublesome youth to continue unimpeded. The Turn-About Ranch has graduated approximately 500 troubled and at risk teenagers through an intense program of training and rehabilitation. The ranch also employs about 35 Garfield County residents. The Turnabout Ranch has strong support from the local community, and the Garfield County Commission, as well as approval from the parents of the troubled youth. The Government-owned land administered by the BLM surrounds the congressional action by passing this legislation in Congress. The land was historically used for agriculture and grazing purposes. The Townsend family purchased the ranch and then leased the land to the Turn-About Ranch, Inc., for the sole purpose of rehabilitating the troubled youth, and restoring the values and self-esteem to these wayward teens. Madam Speaker, this legislation is a fair resolution to a technical problem. I hope Congress can implement this legislation and resolve this problem to continue helping our troubled adolescent teens.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the ``Labeling Education and Nutrition Act of 2008'' which I believe is a first step towards providing consumers with the nutritional information they seek while hopefully providing restaurants with a workable framework for delivering that information. This legislation is a starting point for a bipartisan effort to address nutritional labeling. Senator Carper introduced the same legislation earlier this week in the Senate. With the introduction of the LEAN Act, I believe we have an opportunity to have a constructive national conversation about this important issue. As we see in our own lives and daily eating habits, consumers increasingly choose to eat in restaurants. In my home State of Utah, restaurant jobs represent about 7.9 percent of the employment in my State. American adults buy a meal or a snack from a restaurant 5.8 times per week on average, and spend 48 percent of their food budget on food away from home, almost $1,078 per person annually. Unfortunately, we have also seen the toll diseases such as obesity and diabetes have taken on society. By providing nutritional information, individuals with special dietary needs will be able to make the right nutritional decisions for them regarding caloric intake or sodium levels. I appreciate the interest and leadership some of my colleagues have demonstrated on this issue in the past. I believe my legislation represents a compromise effort that will allow consumers to make informed decisions while also providing for greater individual responsibility in dietary choices, Finally, I hope my colleagues will work with me on this piece of legislation and I look forward to building upon this legislation next year.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2583, the ``Physician Workforce and Graduate Medical Education Enhancement Act.'' I am proud to join Representative Burgess as a lead sponsor of this legislation and want to thank him along with Chairman Dingell and the Energy and Commerce staff for moving this legislation forward. Data shows that physicians typically will practice within 100 miles of where they train. While current residency training programs continue to excel at producing high quality physicians, they do not adequately distribute physicians to communities across the Nation. H.R. 2583 aims to create new residency programs in geographic regions that face physician shortages, especially those in the South, Southwest, Rocky Mountain, and West regions. A major obstacle often preventing the establishment of new residency training programs are the costs associated with the creation of such programs. Under current law, a hospital starting a new residency program is not eligible immediately for direct graduate medical education or indirect medical education funding. This financing arrangement presents challenges for hospitals that operate on narrow margins, especially community hospitals that lack adequate reserve funds to offset the financial commitments associated with staffing a new residency program. I believe this legislation provides the appropriate incentives that would lead to the creation of new residency training programs in geographic areas that lack an adequate supply of physicians, thus enhancing the Nation's ability to meet future physician workforce needs. If carried out over 10 years, the loan program established by the ``Physician Workforce and Graduate Medical Education Enhancement Act'' has the potential of assisting in the establishment of up to 50 new residency programs. Thank you and I urge my colleagues to support this piece of legislation.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 988, a resolution honoring MRSA awareness. I introduced this resolution with my colleague, Congresswoman Barbara Cubin. First, I would like to thank Representative Cubin for working with me on this resolution, as well as the staff of the Energy and Commerce Committee, several stakeholder organizations who advocated in support of this resolution, and most importantly over 80 of my colleagues who joined me on this resolution. Since the 1940s, the widespread availability of antibiotics, such as penicillin, and the subsequent discovery of additional antibiotics have led to a dramatic reduction in illness and death from infectious diseases. Today, antibiotics continue to save lives and also have led to many other advances. However, bacteria and other infectious disease- causing organisms through mutation and other mechanisms are able to develop resistance to antimicrobial drugs. The more antimicrobials are used, whether appropriately or inappropriately, the quicker resistance develops. Worrisome recent examples of drug resistance which have been highlighted in the news include community-associated MRSA. An October 2007 article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) concluded that more than 94,000 invasive methicillin-resistant Staph aureus, MRSA, infections occurred in the United States in 2005. More than 18,500 of these infections ended in death. The CDC estimates that Americans visit doctors more than 12 million times per year for skin infections typical of those caused by staph bacteria. In some areas of the country, more than half of the skin infections are MRSA. In my home State of Utah, reported cases of MRSA are steadily rising. According to the Bureau of Epidemiology for the Utah Department of Health, there were 4,904 cases in 2006. MRSA and other drug-resistant microbes that were once confined to ill hospital patients are now striking down otherwise healthy individuals, including schoolchildren, athletes and members of the Armed Forces. The resulting ``super infections'' are painful, difficult to treat, and cost billions of dollars to the U.S. health care system annually. Patient stories about this silent, yet sinister, pandemic are tragic and heart-wrenching. They should not go unnoticed and unanswered by Congress. By bringing much needed attention to MRSA, this resolution will highlight the need for Congress and Federal health agencies to identify and coordinate efforts to address this growing problem. Thank you and I urge my colleagues to support adoption of the resolution.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman, both for yielding the time, but more importantly I thank the chairman for his leadership on putting together a bill that really, I think, speaks to a number of issues that we all care about. It's no surprise we're less than 50 days before an election that the rhetoric out here on the House floor may get a little hotter than usual, and on an issue as important as this, I think that's unfortunate. I think if we can, for just a few moments, maybe set that aside and really take a look at what this bill is and talk about what's in the bill, I think that would be productive, because, you know, this bill actually takes ideas and clauses and sections from a lot of different bills that have been introduced by a lot of Members of Congress. There have been all kinds of energy bills introduced by Republicans, by Democrats. This particular bill we're talking about tonight incorporates a lot of those ideas, and that's a good thing, and it reflects a cross-section of the House of Representatives in terms of point of view. If we take a look at this bill, you will see that there are Democrats and Republicans who could actually come together and agree on a lot of these things. I suspect with the election coming up we may have more of a partisan nature on this vote than we would like. At the end of the day, I think we all spent a lot of time in August meeting with our constituents. We all have had the experience of going to the pump and paying a lot more than we are used to and a lot more than we like, and we've all felt the pain of that process. We've talked to a lot of our constituents who have also felt the unease of that circumstance, and they are anxious about looking for opportunities to move beyond that. That's what we're looking to do. I don't think my constituents think the government can wave a magic wand and solve all this. When I talk to my constituents, they know that this is a complicated issue, that it is going to take a comprehensive approach, and a lot of the solutions are going to come not necessarily from government but from the private sector, the innovators in our country. That's why this country has always done so well in global competitions through innovation. I've met with various businesses in my own congressional district just in the last few weeks who are making remarkable progress on technological advances, and it's exciting. It's invigorating. We should be optimistic about the future when you see what's going on out there in the private sector right now to help new technology move forward. We shouldn't be on the blame game of who's responsible for this. Our caucus leader, Mr. Emanuel, said that the oil crisis first started 35 years ago with the 1973 oil embargo. Different parties have been in power in the White House and in the Congress, and we can look back in hindsight and say there may have been a lot of decisions that should have been made but weren't, or other actions that should have happened but didn't. The blame game is not particularly productive. What we ought to talk about doing is how do we move forward as a country? How do we set public privacy that allows the private sector to innovate? How do we make progress with new technology? How do we take ourselves to a new position where we are no longer dependent on foreign energy? That's the type of discussions I think most people around the country want us to have. That's the type of discussion we ought to be having here on the floor tonight. And I'm not hearing enough of that, quite frankly, from both sides of the aisle. This bill does increase production. It opens up substantial amounts of the offshore resource for exploration. The bill also includes oil shale production. A lot of people on the other side of the aisle said it does not, but it does. It eliminates the moratorium. It gives the States the ability to opt in to do that. It is a huge potential resource. It includes the important tax credit extensions that so many people in this body on both sides of the aisle support. Oh, I know there are things in this bill that probably every Member of Congress could come up with something they don't like. I'm sure every Member of Congress could come up with things they would like to see in this bill that are not in it tonight. When you try to put together a consensus bill, that's the nature of the process. But this is an important step. It's a step that allows us to say we are moving ahead with domestic production, we're moving ahead on accruing new technology, we're moving ahead on trying to reduce our dependence on foreign supply. Again, I commend the chairman for his leadership. I ask everyone to support this bill.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize Chairman Oberstar of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for working with the Science and Technology Committee in such a cooperative and constructive manner on this bill, and I will insert an exchange of letters between the committees into the Record. House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Washington, DC, July 22, 2008. Hon. Bart Gordon, Chairman, Committee on Science and Technology, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Gordon: I write to you regarding H.R. 3957, the ``Water Use Efficiency and Conservation Research Act.'' This legislation authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency to establish a research and development program to promote water use efficiency and conservation technologies and practices. H.R. 3957 contains provisions that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. I recognize and appreciate your desire to bring this legislation before the House in an expeditious manner and, accordingly, I will not seek a sequential referral of the bill. However, I agree to waive consideration of this bill with the mutual understanding that my decision to forego a sequential referral of the bill does not waive, reduce, or otherwise affect the jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure over H.R. 3957. Further, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reserves the right to seek the appointment of conferees during any House-Senate conference convened on this legislation on provisions of the bill that are within the Committee's jurisdiction. I ask for your commitment to support any request by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for the appointment of conferees on H.R. 3957 or similar legislation. Please place a copy of this letter and your response acknowledging the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure's jurisdictional interest in the Committee Report on H.R. 3957 and in the Congressional Record during consideration of the measure on the House Floor. I look forward to working with you as we prepare to pass this important legislation. Sincerely, James L. Oberstar, M.C., Chairman.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3957) to increase research, development, education, and technology transfer activities related to water use efficiency and conservation technologies and practices at the Environmental Protection Agency, as amended.

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 3957, the bill now under consideration.

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, dwindling water supplies are creating concern across this country. Thirty-six States are currently or expect to experience significant water shortages within the next 5 years. That's why I introduced H.R. 3957, the Water Use Efficiency and Conservation Act. This bill would establish a research and development program within the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Research and Development to promote water efficiency and conservation. Madam Speaker, tough decisions lie ahead for water managers who must balance the needs of agriculture, consumption by cities, industrial and energy production, transportation, tourism, wastewater treatment, energy response, and ecosystems. We are not going to solve this problem overnight, but H.R. 3957 will provide us with several important tools to address the coming issues we face with technology and innovative thinking. By encouraging research and development into water-use efficiency, we can create a path to increase our Nation's water supply. H.R. 3957 would expand EPA's scope and involvement solving the Nation's water crisis through the development of technologies and processes to expand water supplies through storage, treatment, and reuse of rainwater, storm water and grey water. The program will also conduct research on water storage and distribution systems, research on behavioral, social, and economic barriers to achieving greater water efficiency, and research on the use of watershed planning. As part of the program, EPA will develop a strategic plan to outline the best path forward to avoid duplication and work towards the most relevant problems facing our water supply. My bill directs the EPA to facilitate the adoption of technology and processes to increase water efficiency and conservation. The new program will collect information on new technologies that achieve more efficient use of water and provide this information through a public clearinghouse. I want to thank Chairman Gordon for his interest in this legislation and for his leadership in ensuring adequate water supply for the 21st century in this country. I also want to thank all of the members of the House Science and Technology Committee for their bipartisan support and for their collaboration--their thoughtful collaboration I would say--on this bill. In the full committee, amendments were adopted that were authored by Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson, Congressman Phil Gingrey, and Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Their amendments made this a better bill, and I certainly appreciate their input. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I just would encourage everyone to support this. The Science Committee reported this bill in a unanimous bipartisan vote. That's the tradition of the Science Committee to work in a bipartisan way. I encourage all my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I am pleased that the House will consider the bill, H.R. 2339, the Produced Water Utilization Act. I particularly want to acknowledge and thank the ranking member, Mr. Hall from Texas, for introducing this bill. And I look forward to working with him on other water-related issues in the future. Domestic production of oil, natural gas, and coal bed methane are essential to our Nation's economy. The term ``produced water'' refers to the water brought to the surface during the extraction of these fossil fuels. For every barrel of oil generated in the U.S., 10 barrels of produced water are created. Since produced water comprises 98 percent of all waste generated by petroleum production activity, handling and disposal of this water can be a major impediment to efficiently increasing domestic oil production. This bill before us, H.R. 2339, the Produced Water Utilization Act, creates a research, development, and demonstration program for beneficial water produced in connection with oil and gas extraction. The program will focus on improving safety and minimizing environmental impacts during produced water recovery. The utilization of treated produced water will increase water supply, reduce injections into underground formations, and increase domestic energy production through cost reductions. At a time when water supplies are dwindling and oil prices are high, a research program to turn waste water into a clean reusable resource is just good common sense. I urge all Members to support H.R. 2339. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MATHESON. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2339) to encourage research, development, and demonstration of technologies to facilitate the utilization of water produced in connection with the development of domestic energy resources, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 2339, the bill now under consideration.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Well, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for his thoughtful comments tonight. And it is no surprise. He's always been someone who tries to understand issues well. His comments really reflect a couple of the basic principles. You know, as I mentioned earlier in my remarks, the Blue Dog Coalition published a set of energy principles at the start of this Congress, and I think my colleague, Mr. Scott, really touched on two of the important components of those principles. The first is that the Blue Dogs believe in the value of technology development, and energy policy should build on American strengths. One of the great things about this country is its ability to innovate. Research and development capability of this country surpasses any place in the world. Whenever this country has applied itself to solve a problem, it succeeds so well. And that type of innovation is what is going to allow technology to take us to a different place than we are today. And I think Mr. Scott discussed some of those potential technologies in which he's familiar, and there is no question in the long run, if we are going to get to a position where this country is not as dependent on foreign oil, we need technology to take us to a new place in terms of particularly how our transportation and infrastructure are going to operate. And the second Blue Dog energy principle I think Mr. Scott touched on very well is this notion of efficiency. You know, if you can do more with less, we all win. We use less energy, we save money, it's good for the environment. Energy-efficient technologies and energy conservation are other pieces to this puzzle. I think an overriding thing we've said throughout this discussion tonight is that there is no single option here. There is no silver bullet. We, as Blue Dogs, support the furtherance of energy-efficient technologies. We think that we can continue to make progress and push the envelope and that, again, as a country that leads the world in innovation, we can also lead in terms of continuing to be more efficient in how we use energy. Again, I thank Mr. Scott for his comments. As usual, very consistent with Blue Dog principles, and again, it helps further this debate about how we ought to move ahead in our national energy policy. With that, I would like to recognize another of my fellow Blue Dogs, someone who has invested a lot of time and effort to develop an understanding of the energy issues and is a real substantive contributor to the policy debate, and that is my colleague from South Dakota, Representative Herseth Sandlin. I will yield her as much time as she may consume.