Nick Rahall

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table House Resolution 1382 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize two of my fellow colleagues from the great state of Alabama, Congressman Bud Cramer and Congressman Terry Everett, who are set to retire at the end of the 110th Congress. Both of these Members have a passion for and deep respect for serving the American people that led them to serve the constituents of the 5th and the 2nd Congressional Districts, respectively. Bud Cramer has served the people of the 5th District of Alabama in the U.S. House of Representatives since 1991, where he faithfully served on the House Appropriations Committee and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Terry Everett came to the House of Representatives 16 years ago and ever since he has spent his time helping the people of the 2nd Congressional District and serving on the Agriculture Committee, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and as Ranking Member on the House Armed Services Committee. As military veterans, they have both answered the call to serve their country time and again, and I know that as they start this new chapter in their lives, they will continue to find new ways to serve their community. Although it seems that we as a Congress can't find ourselves in agreement on many things, one thing that is beyond dispute is that both Congressmen Cramer and Everett have embodied the ideal of civil servants who tirelessly have served the interests of the American People.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize a dear friend and colleague, Congressman Ray LaHood. Ray has been a faithful servant to the people of the 18th District of Illinois since first being elected in 1994 to the 104th Congress. Before that he was a schoolteacher, a longtime community leader, member of the Illinois General Assembly and Chief of Staff for former U.S. House Minority Leader Robert Michel. Each of these opportunities furthered his dedication to serving the American people and eventually led him to serve as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Ray and I have worked closely together over the years on a number of issues, but one that has always been near to our hearts because of its importance to the United States, has been our work with the nation of Lebanon, the land of our ancestors. As Members of Congress who are deeply interested in Lebanon, the people of Lebanon, and the ability of Lebanon to rise above the turmoil and conflicts which have overtaken the country, we are able to view the recent election of the new Lebanese President as a strong signal to the world that progress and forward movement continues to be made in the Middle East. Ray has always had a deep respect for the institution of Congress, a trait which can be attested to by any and all who have served with him over the years. While Ray has left many lasting legacies during his time here in the House of Representatives, for me his friendship will be one I continue to treasure the most as he, his wife Kathy and their family move on to this new chapter in their lives. Although it seems that we as a Congress can't find ourselves in agreement on many things, one thing that is beyond dispute is that Ray has embodied the ideal of the civil servant who tirelessly has served the interests of the American people.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Onshore, yes. We are talking about the Outer Continental Shelf here. You said OCS.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. The gentleman from Louisiana has just described the revenue program as ``typical'' and that we are doing away with the ``typical revenue sharing.'' I would remind my colleagues, that is not an accurate statement. The OCS Lands Lease Act passed in 1954 had zero revenue sharing in it. Zero revenue sharing. It was only in 2006 when this Congress passed revenue sharing to allow four States to share in that money, due to hurricane relief, those four States being Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. Revenue sharing was a one-shot deal. So for the gentleman from Louisiana to describe it as typical, and many on that side have attacked this bill because there is no revenue sharing, a bribe to the States, if you will, to opt in, is just not an accurate description of this legislation. Revenue sharing has never been typical of leasing and the Outer Continental Shelf.

Mr. RAHALL. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, it should be noted that the recommittal motion, in taking the Abercrombie and Peterson language as it has word for word, does repeal the military mission law protection that we worked so hard to keep in for the Florida delegation. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) raised that issue on the floor. He had the map, and I would say to him that because of the importance of this to our military training, our aviation training, our national security defenses, we protect this area in our bill. The Abercrombie-Peterson measure, as read by the Clerk of the House just now, repeals the section 104 that provides for the protection of this Florida area. So I would urge my colleagues from the State of Florida to particularly take this into recognition, as well as all of my colleagues, because this is a national security area. The Air Force uses the eastern gulf for training maneuvers. It has become crucial for maintaining our military readiness, especially after the closure of Vieques, and our compromise bill does protect this area for important defense training and exercises. So I would hope Members would note that, and I do, of course, rise in opposition to the motion to recommit. Well, I do know where it came from, and as I said, I respect the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Peterson) for working with Mr. Abercrombie, and he has stated his reasons for opposing this language as well. So I would urge my colleagues to oppose this motion to recommit. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Klein).

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, may we have a time check. I am prepared to close on this side.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, I claim my 5 minutes in opposition to the motion to recommit, and I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania's partner in this effort, the gentleman from Hawaii.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon, a valued member of our Committee on Natural Resources, Mr. DeFazio.

Mr. RAHALL. Regular order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. RAHALL. Reclaiming my time, it was a one-shot correction due to hurricane relief, Katrina.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlelady from Pennsylvania, a member of the Ways and Means Committee, Ms. Schwartz.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlelady from Nevada, Ms. Shelley Berkley.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlelady from California, Ms. Anna Eshoo.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. I'm glad the gentleman from Alaska has returned to the floor and reclaimed managing on his part. I hope he's been back in the cloakroom speaking to his Governor, Sarah Palin, and urging her to speak with his Presidential nominee, John McCain, in regard to opening up ANWR, since the gentleman is so anxious to open up ANWR. I would note that his Presidential nominee is opposed opening ANWR as well. This legislation, however, increases domestic oil production in Alaska by mandating annual lease sales in the National Petroleum Reserve which has more than 10 billion barrels of oil, more oil than the Arctic Wildlife Refuge. Mr. Speaker, it's my honor to yield 4 minutes to a very distinguished member of our Committee on Natural Resources, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Boren).

Mr. RAHALL. I yield the gentlelady an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished chairman of our Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources, an individual who's helped us a great deal in the drafting of this legislation, the gentleman from California (Mr. Costa).

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I am very honored to yield 1 minute to the distinguished dean of the House and cosponsor of the pending legislation and chairman of our Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Dingell of Michigan.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. I would note to the gentleman that just spoke, the minority, when they were in power, tried very hard writing bills late at night, so nothing should surprise them as far as the timing of this bill. I yield, Mr. Speaker, 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green), a very important champion of this bill and cosponsor of the legislation.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 6899.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. It's interesting to note that the gentleman from Texas has just spoken about that we should have a straight up-or-down--or, I'm sorry, that we should have amendments, that he's complaining about the closed rule as other Members on that side have. Yet their mantra over the last several months has been, Let's have a straight up-or-down vote; let's have a straight up-or-down vote. I would say that's what we're getting to before this evening is over with. I would note also the lack of hearings to which we've been charged. This energy debate has gone on ad infinitum on numerous pieces of legislation, often bills having nothing to do with energy, during 1- minutes, during Special Orders. Even when the House was not in session, the other side had their energy debate. So I would say there are various parts of this bill that have passed the House before, have been debated on ad infinitum in committees and/ or on this floor. So there is really nothing new in this piece of legislation, and it's a piece of legislation that has been debated over and over. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished chairman of our Education and Labor Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), and also a cosponsor of this legislation.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the pending legislation, H.R. 6899, has as its additional cosponsors the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green), the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), and the gentleman from Michigan, the dean of the House, Mr. John Dingell. My colleagues, today we stand at a crossroads, and the two paths before us are crystal clear. Those of us supporting the pending legislation bring with us the new-age conviction that in order for this Nation to be truly secure, we must bridge the gap between our addiction to oil, to a future empowered by more secure, safe, and reliable sources of power, that we must shatter the shackles of the past and remove the bonds that have placed such a burden on the American people and on our security as a Nation. The other path is less enlightened. It carries with it the belief that a subservience to the policies of the past can sustain the country in the years and decades ahead. It would sacrifice America's energy security on the altar of Big Oil's profits and its profiteering. The choice is quite clear. Before us today is landmark legislation that would, for the first time since 1982, sweep away moratoria precluding oil and gas leasing in much of the Federal waters off America's coastlines. As a result of the pending measure, roughly 85 percent of all oil on the Outer Continental Shelf will be available for production. We are opening up to 400 million acres off the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts to drilling. We are expanding the availability of oil by at least 2 billion barrels of oil, enough to power 1 million cars for 60 years. But in doing so, we have built in safeguards. I repeat that: we have built in safeguards. We do not undermine the defense posture of this country and the Defense Department's need to engage in military operations in America's waters. We protect national marine monuments and sanctuaries, and we provide for the consideration of the interests of the coastal marine and human environment. And importantly, we are cracking down on the incredible failure of the Interior Department to ensure that Americans are getting paid a fair rate of return for the production of their, and I emphasize their, Federal oil and gas reserves and resources. These reserves are not owned by Chevron or Shell or by Exxon; they are owned by all Americans. They are owned by all Americans by birthright. Yesterday, another former Interior Department official who was in charge of collecting Federal oil and gas royalties pleaded guilty to rigging bids. Last week reports were released by the Interior Department's Inspector General which found ``a culture of ethical failure'' in a division of the Minerals Management Service as part of what I believe to be a burgeoning scandal. This is an agency that is supposed to safeguard one of the largest non-IRS streams of revenue to the Treasury. It is almost like Teapot Dome all over again. At the same time, Government Accountability Office reports were released that found that the United States receives one of the smallest shares of oil and gas revenue in the world. Think about that. We receive one of the smallest shares of oil and gas revenues of any country in the world. The reports also found that Federal oil and gas leases are not being diligently developed. We on this side of the aisle have been saying that for months. Production is only occurring on 12 percent of offshore leases and 5 percent of onshore leases. And as I have been bringing to light through a number of hearings held by the Natural Resources Committee, the Interior Department is unable to provide certainty that companies are paying the royalties owed to the American people, a culture of ethical failure, indeed. The legislation before us contains bold initiatives to crack down on this legacy of abuse. It would require the diligent development of Federal oil and gas leases, require that prompt, transparent and accurate royalty payments are made, and would tackle the ethical failures occurring at the Interior Department. Leading the vanguard in our march to a more energy self-reliant and secure future is this legislation's establishment of a strategic energy efficiency and renewable reserve. This initiative would finance the development of renewable and alternative energy technologies, provide increased assistance for low- income home energy and weatherization programs, and advance carbon capture and storage, among other items. And we are dedicating over $6 billion to this fund over the next 10 years. All of the above. All of the above. How often have we heard that in this debate? All of the above. It is here my friends: oil, natural gas, oil shale, wind, solar, coal energy efficiencies and energy conservation. As I noted earlier, today we are at a crossroads. The difference is clear between those of us supporting this measure and some of those on the other side of the aisle who have been trumpeting their bumper sticker ``drill here, drill now'' approach to our serious energy situation. They would open up everything to Big Oil. Perhaps some of them would even open up the National Mall if they could to drilling rigs. They would give away the store, no accountability, no safeguards, no expectation of a return in terms of energy or revenue. We, on this side, instead, seek to protect America's interests in American resources. Make more Federal oil and gas available to drilling? Yes. That's what we're doing in this bill. But we're doing so in a manner that safeguards our environment, ensures the diligent development of those energy resources, and demands that the American taxpayer gets a fair return. Royalties due, royalties paid. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.