Fred Upton

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas, Dr. Burgess, vice chair of both the Health and the O and I Subcommittees.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Dr. Murphy, the chairman of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2218, the Coal Residuals Reuse and Management Act, an important and bipartisan jobs bill. Mr. Chairman, today's vote is the culmination of over a 2-year pursuit of a thoughtful, sensible and transparent solution to a serious regulatory challenge; and while the coal ash bill has continued to improve since we first debated and passed the legislation back in 2011, we have stayed true to our original principles. First, the bill sets out strict standards for coal ash management, but it leaves the permitting program to the States. This approach is important because it ensures consistent environmental protection but gives the day-to-day implementation to the States, which have the combination of expertise and dedication to get the job done right for their States. Second, it takes EPA's 3-year-old proposal to regulate coal ash as a hazardous waste off the table. When EPA first published this proposal, it knew that it had overreached, but EPA faced a very tough dilemma. It wanted a permit program for coal ash, but, in fact, the Solid Waste Disposal Act did not give EPA the authority over coal ash unless it were labeled ``hazardous.'' This legislation offers a solution. The administration has stopped asking for the ``hazardous'' designation--and good thing. Beginning this year, EPA stopped seeking that the Agency, instead of the States, do the permitting. The administration has come a long way, and we certainly commend it for that, but, meanwhile, we've been listening to and working with EPA. On April 11 of this year, EPA testified before our committee. By moving past the notion that EPA should write regulations for each State, the administration finally acknowledged that the States are in the best position to implement coal ash permit programs. After our hearing, we had additional meetings with EPA to discuss the bill, and we ultimately made changes that EPA recommended, including adding tough deadlines for State action.

Mr. UPTON. This is how the legislative process is supposed to work. The bill reflects crucial input over the last 2 years from House and Senate Republicans, Democrats and the administration. The time has come to put our pencils down and enact this law so that we can close the regulatory gap. States, utilities, and hundreds of thousands of workers in the recycling industry have been waiting in limbo for a resolution. This bill meets those needs, and I urge a ``yes'' vote.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Madam Speaker, 2 weeks ago, as Americans were gathering with loved ones to celebrate our Nation's independence, a Treasury bureaucrat quietly posted a blog detailing a major policy shift in the administration's signature health care law--the delay of the employer mandate. While it appeared to be a sudden turnabout, today we learned the administration had made the decision in June and that ``it was considered in a very careful way for a while.'' This is a direct contradiction to previous testimony before Congress. Every single time that we asked the administration witness if implementation was on track, they looked us in the eye and said, ``Absolutely, yes.'' Why did the ``most transparent administration in history'' mislead Congress and try to dupe the public? Because it knew that the law is bad for business and bad for jobs. Today, we give the administration authority in full view of the American public to delay the employer mandate for a year. The House will stand up for the millions of young adults, working families, and older Americans who cannot afford the health care law's looming rate shock. Fair is fair. If businesses aren't subject to the same burdens and penalties under the health care law next year, average Americans shouldn't face them either. Many middle class families are going to pay dramatically higher premiums as a result of the Affordable Care Act. The Energy and Commerce Committee surveyed 17 of the Nation's leading insurers and found many consumers in the individual market could see their premiums nearly double, with potential highs eclipsing 400 percent. The broken promises are many. Missed deadlines and delays have become routine. This law is so off the rails that the administration is now disregarding entire sections of the statute. This debate is about jobs and it is about fairness. We continue to believe a permanent delay of these damaging policies is the best course of action. For today, let's join together and protect Americans for at least another year. I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 2667 and H.R. 2668 so that we can delay and dismantle these policies that will hurt American jobs.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. I just want to say again, I want to compliment you and your staff. This has been a major issue for us for a good number of years, something that needs to get done. I look forward to continuing that strong relationship as we look to the future. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. UPTON. Well, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey. This approach really does build on last year's momentum to get the job done. Consumers and taxpayers have paid over $15 billion--that's ``b'' as in ``big''--to find out whether Yucca Mountain would be a safe repository for civilian spent nuclear fuel and defense nuclear waste. They deserve an answer, yes, they do; and under this bill, they're going to get one. I commend all the members of the Appropriations Committee for this. And I would urge all Members to vote ``yes'' on this appropriation bill for FY 2014 so that we can make additional resources available to perform the critical work. I yield again to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen).

Mr. UPTON. Madam Chair, I rise to commend the Committee on Appropriations for its leadership in resolving the nuclear waste issue. This is certainly a very crucial issue for all Americans. Last year, I would remind us that the House voted 326-81 in favor of the Shimkus amendment to increase the bill's funding for Yucca Mountain license review. This year, the committee has once again reflected the will of the House not just by funding the license review, but also providing the Department of Energy the authority to transfer funds to the NRC, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. It's my understanding that this provision gives both DOE and the NRC the flexibility to make sure that the Yucca Mountain licensing case gets optimum resources, where needed, to make real progress in meeting our Nation's need for a safe repository to isolate our spent nuclear fuel and high-level defense waste. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen).

Mr. UPTON. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. I rise today in strong support of S. 622, the Animal Drug and Animal Generic Drug User Fee Reauthorization Act of 2013. This bipartisan bill is nearly identical to H.R. 1407, which we favorably reported out of the Energy and Commerce Committee last month. This bill, as well as the Animal Generic Drug User Fee Act, has proven to be very successful; and they are so important for the Nation's public health. Congress first created ADUFA back in 2003 and AGDUFA in 2008. Collectively, these programs have yielded many benefits for the American public. These two bills have ensured that veterinarians, livestock, poultry producers, and pet owners have access to new and affordable animal drugs to keep their animals healthy. They have assisted animal drug producers by fostering a stable and predictable FDA review process, a rigorous process that helps expedite access to new therapies and fosters new drug development. The programs have also helped American consumers by keeping the food supply safe. Having medications that keep our animals healthy is essential to keeping our Nation's food supply safe. For companies like Zoetis, which employs some 700 people in southwest Michigan, these programs are vital in allowing them to keep producing innovative drugs for pets and livestock. I was the lead sponsor of the original ADUFA legislation back in 2003, and it is terrific to see how successful it has been and how many Americans it has helped over the last decade. I want to thank my colleagues, particularly Mr. Shimkus and Mr. Gardner, for their real leadership on this important issue. They deserve tremendous credit as we work to get this bill to the President's desk, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Certainly, this afternoon I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1919, the Safeguarding America's Pharmaceutical Act of 2013. I want to thank the bill's authors, including Mr. Latta, for their bipartisan leadership on this very important issue. This bill strengthens the prescription drug supply chain in order to protect American families against counterfeit drugs. The bill also would help prevent increases in drug prices, avoid additional drug shortages, and literally eliminate hundreds of millions of dollars worth of duplicative government red tape on American businesses that is harming job growth. As Mr. Latta said, supporters of the Federal track and trace legislation include the U.S. Deputy Sheriffs' Association and also those in the supply chain, including the National Community Pharmacists Association. According to the CBO, the bill would reduce the deficit by $24 million. Last Congress, we spent a significant amount of time working on this very important issue as we successfully moved the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act through the legislative process, and our efforts continued beyond enactment and into the 113th Congress. During that entire process, we also sought input from stakeholders like Pfizer and Perrigo, in my district in Michigan, as well as our smaller pharmacies, too. This hard work allowed us to better understand the issue, and this bill reflects that understanding. At the Energy and Commerce Committee, we held a legislative hearing on the bill last April. We approved the bill in both subcommittee and full committee by voice vote. We certainly did have a spirited debate at the committee, but we stand here united in our belief that the prescription drug supply chain has to be strengthened. We look forward to working with our Senate colleagues on H.R. 1919 on a bipartisan basis to improve the bill, including how it addresses issues related to wholesale distributors during phase one. Because of the hard work that has already been put in on this issue and the importance of protecting our Nation's families from counterfeit drugs, I am hopeful we can get a product to the President's desk by the August recess.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, a review over how to treat crude oil derived from oil sands for the purposes of the oil spill liability trust fund is one in fact that we look forward to having, but it needs to be at the appropriate place and time. I've got to say that we are fully supportive of the goals, purpose, and funding mechanisms of the trust fund, and we believe that the allocation of fees should be done equitably among crude oil received at a U.S. refinery and petroleum products entering the U.S. for use. However, a bill or an amendment to approve a single pipeline project is not the appropriate vehicle for this debate. Frankly, it needs to be part of the tax reform bill that I'm sure that Mr. Camp and others are going to move later on this year. I wish we could have debated this as an amendment to this bill, but we don't have that opportunity. It's simply a motion to recommit. So let's push it to the right date, and that is part of tax reform later this year. Mr. Speaker, we have waited over 1,700 days for this project. Many of us have folks that commute 80, 90, even 100 miles a day. They need a source of gasoline. Canada provides 1.5 million barrels literally every day to the United States. They want to send as much as 6 million barrels by 2030. This is the best way to do it. Why send it by truck? Why send it by rail? Let's send it by pipeline. It's safer, more economical, and in fact it's going to help the consumer. I remind my colleagues that 62 Members of the U.S. Senate earlier this year voted for this project. We need to do it here. Reject the motion to recommit and vote for final passage. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Johnson).

Mr. UPTON. I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Lance).

Mr. UPTON. We have two speakers--unless you'd like to yield some of your time to us. We still have two speakers. Do you just have one speaker left? Why don't you do one speaker, then we'll do one--one-one- one, and finish up.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time we have left on our side.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Gardner), a member of the Energy and Power Subcommittee.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, at this point I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry), the sponsor of the bill.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield), the chairman of the Energy and Power Subcommittee.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Keystone pipeline and in strong support of the Northern Route Approval Act, which will finally make this project a reality for the American people. There may be a few of my colleagues who are tired of Keystone bills, but the American people are also tired. And they're tired of $3.70 a gallon of gasoline. They're tired of unemployment above 7 percent. They're tired of 4 years of delays that continue to block this critical jobs and energy project. Remember that the President said only last year that he would do ``whatever it takes'' to create U.S. jobs. Every stated reason for previous delays has now been addressed--most recently, a reroute of a portion of the pipeline through Nebraska. In fact, you can count Nebraska's Governor among the many Americans who want to see the Keystone pipeline built. And while some may try to make this a partisan issue here in the Congress, it is not a partisan issue across the country, with a majority of Americans--Democrats, Republicans, Independents--supporting the pipeline, including a vote last March on the Senate budget. I give credit to President Obama for saying some of the right things as of late. Just last week during a visit to Baltimore manufacturer Ellicott Dredges, at that factory the President declared: One of the problems we've had in the past is that sometimes it takes too long to get projects off the ground. There are these permits and red tape and planning and this and that, and some it's important to do, but we could do it faster. Those are his words. Well, guess what, the very day before, the president of that same company was here on Capitol Hill testifying in support of the Keystone pipeline and how it would help his business. The President has it exactly right, and Exhibit A is the Keystone pipeline. Some are trying to claim this bill is an unprecedented attempt to rush the process. Give me a break. In truth, the only thing that is unprecedented is the lengthy delays we have already encountered for a project that has been the subject of over 15,000 pages of Federal environmental review and, yes, found to be safe. Congress faced much of the same dilemma 40 years ago when the Federal red tape was holding up a project called the Alaska pipeline. At the time, Congress realized that the bureaucratic process had gotten out of hand and that a pipeline that was clearly in the national interest was being subjected to never-ending delays. But thanks to the bipartisan 1973 Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act, the red tape was cut, the ground was broken, and the project was built. It became an incredible success story, a game-changer for American energy policy, providing thousands of jobs, billions of barrels of oil while safeguarding Alaska's environment. Guess what, H.R. 3, this bill, takes much of the same approach for the Keystone pipeline. Unfortunately, while the delays over the Keystone grow longer, so do the excuses. Some argue that Keystone won't create very many jobs and most of them would be temporary. Tell that to the labor unions and the American workers who are begging for this pipeline to be built. Even the administration's own State Department found that Keystone would support over 40,000 jobs during the pipeline's construction. That's a lot of jobs to me. And the paychecks created by the Keystone pipeline would be paid for by the private sector, not taxpayer dollars. Some also claim that Keystone won't impact gas prices. Well, the law of supply and demand still stands. Keystone is going to deliver up to a million barrels a day of Canadian oil to American refineries. And remember, already today, we're getting 1.5 million barrels from Canada from the oil sands. So if the pipeline isn't built, guess what, the oil is going to come by truck or by rail, certainly a riskier form of transport, not nearly as cost efficient as the Keystone pipeline would be. This will be the most technically advanced and safest pipeline ever constructed. It will cost probably $4 million to $5 million a mile, adhering to the new pipeline safety standards that we worked together on on a bipartisan basis, signed by the President last year, adding 57 additional safety standards specific to the project. So for that reason, Mr. Chairman, we need to support the bill. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chair, may I ask how much time we have remaining?

Mr. UPTON. I yield 1 minute to the chairman emeritus of the Energy and Commerce Committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton). (Mr. BARTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia, Dr. Gingrey.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the vice chair of the Energy and Power Subcommittee, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).