Mark Udall

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Oregon for his kind words. I also wish to echo his remarks about the leadership of the chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee and her focus on keeping our country safe and our citizens protected. I also wish to make the point that, as my colleague from Oregon, I also oppose reauthorization of the expiring provisions in the PATRIOT Act without significant reforms. I believe it is critical that the administration make public its interpretation of the PATRIOT Act so Members of Congress and the public are not kept in the dark.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise to speak about a bill that is born from the forward-thinking ideas of my constituents, a bill that will help spur our Nation's new energy economy and create jobs: the Solar Uniting Neighborhoods Act, or SUN Act. Over the last three years, I have been travelling across Colorado as part of a work force tour to talk directly to Coloradans and hear their innovative policy ideas to create jobs. The SUN Act comes directly from visiting with Coloradans. This bill will help bring commonsense to our tax code, get government out of the way of developing solar energy, and spur job growth in every community across the United States. I installed solar panels on my own home several years ago to take advantage of the strong Colorado sun. However, I understand this option is not available for all American families who want to receive their home's energy needs from solar power. There can be difficulties attaching solar panels to your home, which is why more and more neighborhoods and towns are creating so called ``community solar'' projects. Instead of affixing solar panels to every roof on the block, an increasing number of Americans have decided to place those same solar panels all together in one open and unobstructed sunny area near their homes. By grouping solar panels together, it reduces the cost by up to 30 percent compared to installing each panel on every roof separately. Whether used by neighbors living at the end of a cul-de-sac or developed by our rural energy cooperatives, creating these group solar projects to share energy is a great way to lower the cost of developing solar energy. But there is a problem: our tax code is getting in the way. It discourages neighborhood solar projects by requiring that solar panels must actually be on your property instead of allowing neighbors and others to partner on community solar projects. This discourages innovation and slows the growth of solar power as an alternate energy source. The SUN Act would make a small change to the tax code that would no longer constrain this innovative solar energy development. By eliminating the requirement that solar panels be on one individual's property, it allows Americans to work together on community projects where each individual can claim a tax credit. This simple solution makes it easier to adopt and use clean, renewable energy. What excites me about this bill is that it will create jobs for Americans in every neighborhood where these community solar projects are developed. This bill reduces barriers that currently prevent Americans from adopting solar energy, opens up new markets, and creates a simple structure to allow people to utilize clean energy for their home. Mr. Presdient, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the role safe nuclear energy can play in moving our country toward a more secure energy future. Given the economic, national security, and environmental threats that we face, we need a comprehensive energy policy. In this regard, safe nuclear energy clearly has emerged as an important player in our search for stable and domestic energy sources with fewer greenhouse gas emissions. A cleaner energy economy will spur innovation in, and accelerate the shift to, clean and domestic energy sources. It will create a new industrial sector employing millions of Americans in the research, development, and commercialization of new energy technologies. And it will help reduce our dependence on foreign oil from unstable regions of the world and cleaner energy technologies will help us get there. Finally, as we try to emerge from perhaps our greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, we need an ``all of the above'' solution to jump-start our economy and create new jobs. Beyond renewables and natural gas, this also means next generation nuclear energy. That is why I am introducing the bipartisan Nuclear Energy Research Initiative Improvement Act today. This bill would authorize the Department of Energy to carry out a research, development, and demonstration program to reduce manufacturing and construction costs of safe nuclear reactors. It would support research in areas critical for us to achieve these goals, while also protecting national security. For example, it would support research into: modular and small-scale reactors, balance-of-plant issues, cost-efficient manufacturing, licensing issues, and enhanced proliferation controls. In light of the disaster at the Daiichi nuclear facility in Japan, it is evident a new era of safe nuclear energy development is needed: one with enhanced safeguards and more agile manufacturing and operating capabilities. My bill seeks to achieve those objectives. Nuclear power's energy security and environmental benefits have earned this industry an important place at the table. It is my hope that we can build new, safe nuclear plants over the next decade to create jobs and build a cleaner, more secure tomorrow. My bill would help us accomplish these goals. I would like to thank Senator Bingaman and Senator Murkowski for joining me in introducing this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the role safe nuclear energy can play in moving our country toward a more secure energy future. Given the economic, national security, and environmental threats that we face, we need a comprehensive energy policy. In this regard, safe nuclear energy clearly has emerged as an important player in our search for stable and domestic energy sources with fewer greenhouse gas emissions. A cleaner energy economy will spur innovation in, and accelerate the shift to, clean and domestic energy sources. It will create a new industrial sector employing millions of Americans in the research, development, and commercialization of new energy technologies. And it will help reduce our dependence on foreign oil from unstable regions of the world and cleaner energy technologies will help us get there. Finally, as we try to emerge from perhaps our greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, we need an ``all of the above'' solution to jump-start our economy and create new jobs. Beyond renewables and natural gas, this also means next generation nuclear energy. That is why I am introducing the bipartisan Nuclear Energy Research Initiative Improvement Act today. This bill would authorize the Department of Energy to carry out a research, development, and demonstration program to reduce manufacturing and construction costs of safe nuclear reactors. It would support research in areas critical for us to achieve these goals, while also protecting national security. For example, it would support research into: modular and small-scale reactors, balance-of-plant issues, cost-efficient manufacturing, licensing issues, and enhanced proliferation controls. In light of the disaster at the Daiichi nuclear facility in Japan, it is evident a new era of safe nuclear energy development is needed: one with enhanced safeguards and more agile manufacturing and operating capabilities. My bill seeks to achieve those objectives. Nuclear power's energy security and environmental benefits have earned this industry an important place at the table. It is my hope that we can build new, safe nuclear plants over the next decade to create jobs and build a cleaner, more secure tomorrow. My bill would help us accomplish these goals. I would like to thank Senator Bingaman and Senator Murkowski for joining me in introducing this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. The Senator from Oregon has put his finger on why it is so important to have a debate on the floor and not rush these provisions to the House because of a deadline that I think we can push back. We can, as you know, extend the PATRIOT Act in its present form a number of other days or a number of weeks in order to get this right. But the Senator from Oregon makes the powerful point that the law should not be classified--as far as its interpretation goes. Of course, we can protect sources and methods and operations, as we well should. Both of us serve on the Intelligence Committee. We are privy to some information that should be classified. But we have come to the floor to make this case because of what we have learned on the Intelligence Committee.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in opposition to the proposed reauthorization of the expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act incorporated in S. 1038. I have to tell you, I find reauthorization especially troubling since we have waited until the last minute and are now being told we must rush this bill through the Senate of the United States. There are a number of PATRIOT Act provisions that are permanent, and they remain in place to give our intelligence community important tools to fight terrorism. But there are three controversial provisions we are debating, commonly known as roving wiretap, lone wolf, and business records. I have to tell you, at least from my point of view--and I think there are other Senators here who agree with me--they are ripe for abuse, and they threaten Americans' constitutional freedoms. As I start my remarks at the onset, I want to state that I firmly believe, as we all do, that terrorism is a serious threat to our great country, the United States, and we have to be focused like no other time in our history in seeking to protect our people, the American people. I sit on the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate Intelligence Committee. On those two committees, much of my attention is centered on keeping Americans safe, both here and abroad. I recognize that despite bin Laden's death--which we all celebrate because justice was delivered--we still live in a world where terrorism is a serious threat to our country, our economy, and to American lives. Our government does need the appropriate surveillance and antiterrorism tools to achieve these important goals--indeed, many of the PATRIOT Act's provisions which I support and have made our Nation safer since those devastating attacks on that day we will always remember, on 9/11, we know that for a fact. But the problem we confront today is there are three provisions we are debating that fail to strike the right balance between keeping us safe, while protecting the privacy rights of Coloradans and all Americans. Instead, these three provisions are far too susceptible to abuse by the Federal Government, even in the name of keeping us safe from terrorism. I do not say this lightly, but my concerns about some of these provisions have only grown since I have been briefed on their interpretation and their implementation as a member of the Intelligence Committee. Let me share some examples. Currently, the intelligence community can place wide-ranging wiretaps on Americans without even identifying the target or the location of such surveillance. That is one concern. Second concern. The intelligence community can target individuals who have no connection to terrorist organizations. A third concern I have is they can collect business records on law-abiding Americans who have no connection to terrorism. We ought to be able to at least agree that the source of an investigation under the PATRIOT Act should have a terrorist-related focus. If we cannot limit investigations to terrorism, my concern is, where do they end? Is there no amount of information our government can collect that should be off-limits? I know Coloradans are demanding that we at least place commonsense limits on government investigations and link data collection to terrorist- related activities. If we pass this bill to extend the PATRIOT Act until 2015, it would mean that for 4 more years the Federal Government will continue to have unrestrained access to private information about Americans who have no connection to terrorism, with little to no accountability as to how these powers are used. Again, I wish to go back because we all agree the intelligence community needs effective tools to combat terrorism. But we must provide those tools in a way that protects the constitutional freedoms of our people and lives up to the standard of transparency democracy demands. The three controversial provisions I have mentioned can be much better balanced to protect our people. Yet it seems to me that many of my colleagues, many of our colleagues, oppose any changes. By making the PATRIOT Act provisions I have outlined permanent, we would be, in effect, preventing debate on them ever again. To travel that path would be to threaten constitutional and civil liberties we hold dear in this country. That is not the right path. Let me be clear. I do not oppose the reauthorization of these three provisions of the PATRIOT Act, but I do aim to bring forward some commonsense reforms that will allow us to strike an important balance between keeping our Nation safe, on the one hand, while also protecting privacy and civil liberties. Toward that goal, I have worked side by side with my colleagues in coming up with commonsense fixes that could receive bipartisan support. Senator Wyden from Oregon has filed an amendment, which I have cosponsored, that would require the Department of Justice disclose to Congress the official legal interpretation of the provisions of the PATRIOT Act. While I believe our intelligence practices should be kept secret, I do not believe the government's official interpretation of these laws should be kept secret. I have also filed my own amendments to address some of the problems I see with the three expiring provisions. The first amendment I have filed is bipartisan with Senator Paul of Kentucky, who is on the floor, and Senator Wyden, who has joined as well. Our amendment would modify the roving wiretap authority under section 206 of the PATRIOT Act. Specifically, our bipartisan amendment would require intelligence agencies to identify either the target or the place to be wiretapped. They currently do not have to do so. I believe that when seeking to collect intelligence, law enforcement should at least have to identify who is being targeted. I have also filed an amendment to address the so-called ``lone wolf'' provision which currently allows the government to conduct wiretap surveillance on individuals, even when that person has no connection to a government or a terrorist organization. This amendment would simply require that should the intelligence community use the ``lone wolf'' provision, that Congress simply be notified--again, a safeguard that is not in place as we stand here today. Without safeguards like that, how do we in this body conduct our constitutional duties of oversight? Finally, I was joined by Senator Wyden in filing an amendment designed to narrow the scope of business record materials that can be collected under section 215 of the PATRIOT Act. This amendment would still allow law enforcement to use the PATRIOT Act to obtain such records but would require these entities to demonstrate that the records are in some way connected to terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities. Right now, law enforcement can currently obtain any kind of records. In fact, the PATRIOT Act's only limitation states that such information has to be related to any tangible thing. That is right. As long as these business records are related to any tangible thing, the U.S. Government can require businesses to turn over information on all their customers, whether or not there is any link to terrorism.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Yes.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. I thank the Senator for his question. I look forward to his comments in a few minutes. The Senator from Oregon, in effect, points out that these are just a few of the reform ideas we could debate. But without further debate on any of these issues, this or any other administration can abuse the PATRIOT Act and could actually deny us, as Members of Congress, whether in this Congress or future Congresses, the opportunity to fulfill our oversight responsibilities on behalf of the American people. I voted against the original passage of the PATRIOT Act in 2001, and I plan to vote against the reauthorization of the expiring provisions this week, unless we implement some reforms that will sensibly restrain these overly broad provisions. Simply put--again, to make the point that the Senator from Oregon made so importantly--I believe Congress is granting powers to the executive branch that lead to abuse and, frankly, shield the executive branch from accountability. It has been 10 years since we first passed this law, and there has been very little opportunity to improve the law. I resist this rush to again rubberstamp policies that threaten the very liberty we hold dear. I recently supported a short-term extensions of the expiring provisions before us as a bridge to take time and debate and amend the PATRIOT Act and its controversial provisions. But we were notified--unfortunately, a few days ago--that we would be voting on a 4-year extension of these expiring provisions. That is not the way to assure Americans that we are diligently considering these important public decisions. In Federalist 51, James Madison, whom we venerate, who was the author of many of the documents that structure the way in which we organize and operate our democracy, wrote: ``In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.'' The bill before us does not live up to that standard. I believe it seriously risks the constitutional freedoms of our people. We need to strike a better balance between giving our national security and law enforcement officials the tools necessary to keep us safe, while not damaging the very Constitution we have sworn to support and defend. By passing an unamended reauthorization, we are assuring that Americans will live with the status quo for 4 more long years. I believe this bill may well be a lost opportunity to improve the balance between our security and our civil liberties. That is not the result that our Founding Fathers envisioned, and it is not a result that our constituents want. For these reasons, if the PATRIOT Act provisions are not amended, I plan to vote no on the motion to invoke cloture and on passage of S. 1038. Before I yield the floor, I wish to make one last historical reference. Ben Franklin, one of our Founding Fathers, said, compellingly and presciently: ``A society that would sacrifice essential liberties for short-term security deserves neither.'' I think that is the question before us. There is a way forward. There is a way to keep the PATRIOT Act in place to protect our national security but also to protect our essential liberties. But in order to do that, we have to have a chance to debate and pass these important amendments. I yield the floor.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Act of 2011 to address concerns of federal jurisdiction and public safety regarding a mine drainage tunnel in Leadville, CO. In 2008, a blockage formed in the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel that backed up a large volume of contaminated water, creating a serious safety hazard for the surrounding community if a catastrophic tunnel failure were to occur. The Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, took actions to address the immediate threat, including installing a dewatering relief well to relieve water pressure behind the tunnel blockage. However, in the process, questions arose as to whether the Bureau of Reclamation, which owns the tunnel, has the authority to help implement a number of remedies by treating contaminated water from the tunnel. My bill clarifies that the Bureau of Reclamation has the authority to treat this water and is responsible for maintaining the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel to protect public safety and reduce future threats to the community. The Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel was originally constructed by the federal Bureau of Mines in the 1940s and 1950s to facilitate the extraction of lead and zinc ore for World War II and Korean War efforts. The Bureau of Reclamation acquired the tunnel in 1959, hoping to use it as a source of water for the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, a water diversion project in the Fryingpan and Arkansas River Basins. Although the tunnel was never used for the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, water that flows out of the tunnel is considered part of the natural flow of the Arkansas River. With the passage and subsequent signing into law of H.R. 429 during the 102nd Congress, the Bureau of Reclamation constructed and continues to operate a water treatment plant at the mouth of the tunnel. Water levels in the tunnel have fluctuated in recent years. The 2008 collapse in the tunnel increased the tunnel's mine pool significantly, leading to new seeps and springs in the area. Estimates suggest that up to 1 billion gallons of water may have built up behind the blockage within the mine pool. In November 2007, EPA sent a letter to the Bureau of Reclamation expressing concerns over a catastrophic blowout as a result of the built-up water, and, in February 2008, the Lake County Commissioners declared a state of emergency. The Bureau of Reclamation developed a risk assessment in the area, and the EPA and the Bureau of Reclamation performed some emergency measures to relieve water pressure in the tunnel. While this emergency work was important and successful, the Bureau of Reclamation's authority to participate in a long-term solution remains an open question. It is unclear whether the Bureau of Reclamation has the authority to treat the water from the dewatering relief well or surface water diverted into the tunnel from a nearby National Priorities List site. In short, we found there is not only a physical blockage in the tunnel, but also a legal blockage that has prevented the Bureau of Reclamation, the EPA and the State of Colorado from reaching an agreement on a long-term solution. This legislation will clear out the legal blockage by allowing the Bureau of Reclamation and the EPA to work collaboratively on solutions and address the unsafe mine pool in the tunnel. Specifically, the bill does three things: First, the bill clarifies that the Bureau of Reclamation is required to maintain the structural integrity of the tunnel to minimize the chance of a catastrophic failure of the tunnel leading to the uncontrolled release of contaminated water. Second, the bill clarifies that the Bureau of Reclamation has the authority to participate in the long-term solution by treating water pooling up behind the blockage and surface water diverted into the tunnel from operable unit 6 of the California Gulch National Priorities List, Superfund, site. Current law restricts the Bureau of Reclamation to treating only ``historically discharged'' effluent, and it is uncertain whether that includes treating water as part of the remedy. Third, the bill requires the Bureau of Reclamation and EPA to cooperate on any Record of Decision for the California Gulch Superfund site that impacts the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel or the associated water treatment plant. As part of that cooperation, the agencies must enter into an agreement describing how they will pay for any necessary changes to the tunnel or treatment plant. The bill also authorizes any funding that might be necessary for the Bureau of Reclamation to perform its clarified responsibilities under this bill. By clearing up the legal blockage, the bill will help create a collaborative working relationship between the Bureau of Reclamation, the EPA and the State of Colorado to solve this problem for the long- term benefit of Lake County and all of Southeastern Colorado. Concerns about the safety of the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel have persisted for over 30 years, as have questions about federal agencies' responsibility to address those concerns. My bill will finally clarify federal jurisdiction and give the residents of Leadville, Colorado, as well as the entire Arkansas River Basin, an additional measure of certainty that the federal government will maintain safe conditions at the tunnel. I look forward to working with the rest of the Colorado Congressional delegation on this legislation and to its speedy passage. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Act of 2011 to address concerns of federal jurisdiction and public safety regarding a mine drainage tunnel in Leadville, CO. In 2008, a blockage formed in the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel that backed up a large volume of contaminated water, creating a serious safety hazard for the surrounding community if a catastrophic tunnel failure were to occur. The Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, took actions to address the immediate threat, including installing a dewatering relief well to relieve water pressure behind the tunnel blockage. However, in the process, questions arose as to whether the Bureau of Reclamation, which owns the tunnel, has the authority to help implement a number of remedies by treating contaminated water from the tunnel. My bill clarifies that the Bureau of Reclamation has the authority to treat this water and is responsible for maintaining the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel to protect public safety and reduce future threats to the community. The Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel was originally constructed by the federal Bureau of Mines in the 1940s and 1950s to facilitate the extraction of lead and zinc ore for World War II and Korean War efforts. The Bureau of Reclamation acquired the tunnel in 1959, hoping to use it as a source of water for the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, a water diversion project in the Fryingpan and Arkansas River Basins. Although the tunnel was never used for the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, water that flows out of the tunnel is considered part of the natural flow of the Arkansas River. With the passage and subsequent signing into law of H.R. 429 during the 102nd Congress, the Bureau of Reclamation constructed and continues to operate a water treatment plant at the mouth of the tunnel. Water levels in the tunnel have fluctuated in recent years. The 2008 collapse in the tunnel increased the tunnel's mine pool significantly, leading to new seeps and springs in the area. Estimates suggest that up to 1 billion gallons of water may have built up behind the blockage within the mine pool. In November 2007, EPA sent a letter to the Bureau of Reclamation expressing concerns over a catastrophic blowout as a result of the built-up water, and, in February 2008, the Lake County Commissioners declared a state of emergency. The Bureau of Reclamation developed a risk assessment in the area, and the EPA and the Bureau of Reclamation performed some emergency measures to relieve water pressure in the tunnel. While this emergency work was important and successful, the Bureau of Reclamation's authority to participate in a long-term solution remains an open question. It is unclear whether the Bureau of Reclamation has the authority to treat the water from the dewatering relief well or surface water diverted into the tunnel from a nearby National Priorities List site. In short, we found there is not only a physical blockage in the tunnel, but also a legal blockage that has prevented the Bureau of Reclamation, the EPA and the State of Colorado from reaching an agreement on a long-term solution. This legislation will clear out the legal blockage by allowing the Bureau of Reclamation and the EPA to work collaboratively on solutions and address the unsafe mine pool in the tunnel. Specifically, the bill does three things: First, the bill clarifies that the Bureau of Reclamation is required to maintain the structural integrity of the tunnel to minimize the chance of a catastrophic failure of the tunnel leading to the uncontrolled release of contaminated water. Second, the bill clarifies that the Bureau of Reclamation has the authority to participate in the long-term solution by treating water pooling up behind the blockage and surface water diverted into the tunnel from operable unit 6 of the California Gulch National Priorities List, Superfund, site. Current law restricts the Bureau of Reclamation to treating only ``historically discharged'' effluent, and it is uncertain whether that includes treating water as part of the remedy. Third, the bill requires the Bureau of Reclamation and EPA to cooperate on any Record of Decision for the California Gulch Superfund site that impacts the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel or the associated water treatment plant. As part of that cooperation, the agencies must enter into an agreement describing how they will pay for any necessary changes to the tunnel or treatment plant. The bill also authorizes any funding that might be necessary for the Bureau of Reclamation to perform its clarified responsibilities under this bill. By clearing up the legal blockage, the bill will help create a collaborative working relationship between the Bureau of Reclamation, the EPA and the State of Colorado to solve this problem for the long- term benefit of Lake County and all of Southeastern Colorado. Concerns about the safety of the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel have persisted for over 30 years, as have questions about federal agencies' responsibility to address those concerns. My bill will finally clarify federal jurisdiction and give the residents of Leadville, Colorado, as well as the entire Arkansas River Basin, an additional measure of certainty that the federal government will maintain safe conditions at the tunnel. I look forward to working with the rest of the Colorado Congressional delegation on this legislation and to its speedy passage. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise to talk about an issue that is close to my heart: introducing our children to National Parks across the country. Enjoying the outdoors has been a lifelong passion for me and it began in my youth. Growing up in the American Southwest, my parents would take our family on frequent trips to the nearby parks. This helped inspire my brother, Randy, and I to take a 10-day backpacking trip to Glacier National Park in Montana when we were in college. I know now these important visits to the parks were the building blocks of a life filled with enthusiasm for mountains and the outdoors. I have always enjoyed being outdoors with others, first as an instructor with Outward Bound and then with my wife and kids. In Congress, I have similarly tried to ensure that open spaces in both urban and rural areas are preserved so that families in Colorado and across America have ample opportunity to get out and take advantage of our greatest natural resources, our parks and open spaces. I believe today more than ever it is important that we are encouraging our Nation's youth to get outdoors. In America today, one in three children are overweight or obese. Kids between the ages of 8 and 18 spend an average of 7\1/2\ hours a day using some sort of entertainment media such as TVs, computers, video games, cell phones and movies. I believe this is a major reason why only one-third of all children get the recommended level of physical activity every day, contributing to childhood obesity. In this spirit, on Saturday families all across the Nation will get outside and visit a city, State or national park in honor of the first annual National Kids to Parks Day. National Kids to Parks Day celebrates America's commitment to getting kids outdoors and highlights the importance of preserving open spaces for American's to recreate. That is why today I will be submitting a bipartisan resolution that recognizes Saturday, May 21, 2011, as the first annual National Kids to Parks Day. National Kids to Parks Day encourages more of our Nation's youth to get outdoors and enjoy the great system of city, State and national parks we have in this country. I thank Senator Burr, Senator Murkowski, and Senator Bingaman for their cosponsorship and support. Getting kids outdoors won't completely solve our childhood obesity problem, but it may help them get excited about being active and healthy outdoors, and it may help inspire the next generation of American stewards to enjoy and protect our Nation's special places. I plan to celebrate National Kids to Parks Day by attending the 100- year anniversary of Colorado National Monument near Grand Junction, CO. I encourage my colleagues to do something similar--highlight the national, State, and local parks in your State and encourage American families to get outdoors. I ask my colleagues to support my National Kids to Parks Day resolution.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss an important issue, energy consumption. Do each of us know how much energy we actually consume? How much does our energy use affect our pocketbooks? Consumers should be able to answer these questions. That is why I am introducing the Electric Consumer Right to Know Act today. This legislation takes a common-sense step toward broadening consumers' access to data about their electricity usage. I first began working on this issue while serving in the Colorado General Assembly back in 1997, when I introduced a bill that would have given consumers information about the price, water consumption, pollutants, and emissions used to generate the electricity they were sold. However, I am proud to say that this refined transparency bill--which gives consumers access to their energy use and price--was developed directly from the input of Coloradans who participated in my energy jobs summit in Denver in February 2010. In today's marketplace, consumers have a clear understanding of what their car mileage means for their wallet. They also have ready access to the number of minutes remaining on their cell phone. However, consumers lack clear, timely data about their electricity use and its price. Providing increased transparency will help consumers with their decisions about electricity usage in their homes or businesses. The Electric Consumer Right to Know Act, or E-Know Act, would provide this transparency by establishing consumers' clear right to access data on their own electricity usage. This right is an important step toward a more effective, reliable and efficient electric grid, and a step toward helping consumers use electricity more efficiently and save money on their electric bills. For the past two years, I have been traveling across Colorado as part of a work force tour to talk directly to Coloradans and hear their innovative policy ideas to create jobs. I also hosted an Energy Jobs Summit in Denver in February 2010. As part of this summit, we asked experts in energy policy and business to join us for a conversation about how we can better position Colorado and the United States to lead in the 21st century clean energy economy and win the global economic race. We heard from U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu, then-Governor Bill Ritter, Senator Michael Bennet, and Congressman Ed Perlmutter. But, more importantly, we heard from Coloradans who came to share their views on what the federal government can do, or in some instances not do, to support job creation and transition to cleaner and more efficient energy use. One consumer participant at the summit noted that even though he had a smart meter at his home, his power company would not let him access his electrical meter readings to learn how he was using electricity. If he could access those readings, he could better understand his energy use, learn how to be more energy efficient and save money. That is why I am reintroducing E-Know Act today, to improve communication between the consumers and their utility and spur innovation in developing creative technologies that will save energy. The bill directs the Federal Regulatory Energy Commission to convene an open, extensive and inclusive stakeholder process to work through the details of this measure to ensure that implementing the consumers' right to access their information also retains consumer privacy, and ensures the integrity and reliability of the grid. The outcome of this process will create national guidelines establishing the right of consumers to access their electricity data, including minimum national standards that utilities must meet to ensure that right of access. In developing those minimum standards, the FERC will take into consideration the ongoing and important work at the National Institute of Standards and Technology in developing a smart grid roadmap, as well as the innovative state and local programs already being developed across the country to integrate smart meters into the electrical grid, including Colorado, California, Texas, Pennsylvania, and others. In my home state of Colorado, Xcel Energy has been working with the city of Boulder on a pilot program called SmartGridCity to develop a community-scale smart grid with over 20,000 residents participating. In Fort Collins, Colorado, the business community and utilities have teamed up to form the FortZED project with the goal of turning the downtown into a net zero energy district using smart technology. I am proud to see Coloradans and others around the country taking important steps together in learning how to make the grid more reliable, efficient, and help save everyone money. Finally, part of ensuring the right to access your data includes the right to retain the privacy of your data. When consumers gain access to their data, they will also need to clearly understand how it will be used, especially when consumers grant third-party access to it. This is why this bill states that the FERC will establish, among other important measures, guidelines for consumer consent requirements. Retaining privacy is critical to building consumer trust in the smart grid and facilitating the transition of the smart grid to an integral part of everyday life for every American family. I look forward to working with my colleagues from both parties and all interested stakeholders in establishing this right, defining it in a way that eliminates unintended consequences, and enforcing this right in a way that promotes the efficient use of electrical energy. This bill is an important first step in implementing smart meters across the country, moving us toward an electrical grid that is more reliable and more efficient, a ``smart grid,'' if you will. There are several pieces of the puzzle that will be required to realize that future, and one critical part of that puzzle is the right of consumers to access their electricity data. I urge my colleagues of both parties to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss an important issue, energy consumption. Do each of us know how much energy we actually consume? How much does our energy use affect our pocketbooks? Consumers should be able to answer these questions. That is why I am introducing the Electric Consumer Right to Know Act today. This legislation takes a common-sense step toward broadening consumers' access to data about their electricity usage. I first began working on this issue while serving in the Colorado General Assembly back in 1997, when I introduced a bill that would have given consumers information about the price, water consumption, pollutants, and emissions used to generate the electricity they were sold. However, I am proud to say that this refined transparency bill--which gives consumers access to their energy use and price--was developed directly from the input of Coloradans who participated in my energy jobs summit in Denver in February 2010. In today's marketplace, consumers have a clear understanding of what their car mileage means for their wallet. They also have ready access to the number of minutes remaining on their cell phone. However, consumers lack clear, timely data about their electricity use and its price. Providing increased transparency will help consumers with their decisions about electricity usage in their homes or businesses. The Electric Consumer Right to Know Act, or E-Know Act, would provide this transparency by establishing consumers' clear right to access data on their own electricity usage. This right is an important step toward a more effective, reliable and efficient electric grid, and a step toward helping consumers use electricity more efficiently and save money on their electric bills. For the past two years, I have been traveling across Colorado as part of a work force tour to talk directly to Coloradans and hear their innovative policy ideas to create jobs. I also hosted an Energy Jobs Summit in Denver in February 2010. As part of this summit, we asked experts in energy policy and business to join us for a conversation about how we can better position Colorado and the United States to lead in the 21st century clean energy economy and win the global economic race. We heard from U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu, then-Governor Bill Ritter, Senator Michael Bennet, and Congressman Ed Perlmutter. But, more importantly, we heard from Coloradans who came to share their views on what the federal government can do, or in some instances not do, to support job creation and transition to cleaner and more efficient energy use. One consumer participant at the summit noted that even though he had a smart meter at his home, his power company would not let him access his electrical meter readings to learn how he was using electricity. If he could access those readings, he could better understand his energy use, learn how to be more energy efficient and save money. That is why I am reintroducing E-Know Act today, to improve communication between the consumers and their utility and spur innovation in developing creative technologies that will save energy. The bill directs the Federal Regulatory Energy Commission to convene an open, extensive and inclusive stakeholder process to work through the details of this measure to ensure that implementing the consumers' right to access their information also retains consumer privacy, and ensures the integrity and reliability of the grid. The outcome of this process will create national guidelines establishing the right of consumers to access their electricity data, including minimum national standards that utilities must meet to ensure that right of access. In developing those minimum standards, the FERC will take into consideration the ongoing and important work at the National Institute of Standards and Technology in developing a smart grid roadmap, as well as the innovative state and local programs already being developed across the country to integrate smart meters into the electrical grid, including Colorado, California, Texas, Pennsylvania, and others. In my home state of Colorado, Xcel Energy has been working with the city of Boulder on a pilot program called SmartGridCity to develop a community-scale smart grid with over 20,000 residents participating. In Fort Collins, Colorado, the business community and utilities have teamed up to form the FortZED project with the goal of turning the downtown into a net zero energy district using smart technology. I am proud to see Coloradans and others around the country taking important steps together in learning how to make the grid more reliable, efficient, and help save everyone money. Finally, part of ensuring the right to access your data includes the right to retain the privacy of your data. When consumers gain access to their data, they will also need to clearly understand how it will be used, especially when consumers grant third-party access to it. This is why this bill states that the FERC will establish, among other important measures, guidelines for consumer consent requirements. Retaining privacy is critical to building consumer trust in the smart grid and facilitating the transition of the smart grid to an integral part of everyday life for every American family. I look forward to working with my colleagues from both parties and all interested stakeholders in establishing this right, defining it in a way that eliminates unintended consequences, and enforcing this right in a way that promotes the efficient use of electrical energy. This bill is an important first step in implementing smart meters across the country, moving us toward an electrical grid that is more reliable and more efficient, a ``smart grid,'' if you will. There are several pieces of the puzzle that will be required to realize that future, and one critical part of that puzzle is the right of consumers to access their electricity data. I urge my colleagues of both parties to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the energy-related votes we face this week in the Senate. Coloradans--and all Americans--are feeling the sting of skyrocketing gas prices. And ``pain at the pump'' puts a crimp in the budgets of hardworking families and small businesses everywhere. I hear this every time I am back in my home State, talking to folks. They think it is unfair--and I agree. Runaway gas prices are not acceptable and we must work across the partisan divide to bring a stop to it. In fact, I recently called on the State Department and the U.S. Trade Representative to do everything they can to crack down on global oil market manipulation. And I joined my colleagues in urging the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to ratchet up their efforts at preventing overspeculation in oil trading domestically. Taking these steps would help reduce the chance that market manipulation is hurting American consumers. But from a larger perspective, the challenge is that we simply do not have any quick fixes. And substantial relief today would have required us to take steps years ago to reform our energy system. Unfortunately, we let those opportunities pass us by. That is the unvarnished truth the American people need to hear, not false promises or bumper sticker solutions. The real solutions involve tough choices and strategic investments in clean energy that will help wean our Nation off foreign sources of oil. It really is the only way we will be able to dig ourselves out of this hole and lower gas prices. And, importantly, it is one of the ways that we will get the United States back on the path to winning the global economic race. Unfortunately, neither of the votes we will take this week will reduce gas prices for consumers. As are most Americans, I am frustrated that once again politics is getting in the way of progress I would much rather be debating a comprehensive energy policy this week that includes a renewable electricity standard, promotes energy efficiency, and encourages responsible development of domestic resources such as safe nuclear power and natural gas. We need to move beyond partisan fights and blame games. Instead, we need to work toward what we all can agree are key priorities: developing energy that brings affordable prices to American families and businesses; building a sustainable, long-term energy future; and doing it in a way that protects our clean air and water for future generations. Put simply, establishing energy security--perhaps above any other issue--will assure our Nation's future success. We each often say that our States are the best laboratories to create innovation. But in Colorado, we have a great example of this in action. Back in 2004, Colorado cast aside partisan politics and bumper sticker solutions by taking a big, brave step forward and embraced the emerging clean energy economy. That year I led a bipartisan ballot initiative with the former Republican Speaker of the Colorado House, Lola Spradley, in a campaign to convince the voters of Colorado to approve a State-based RES that would harness renewable resources like the sun, the wind, and geothermal energy. We barnstormed the State, speaking over and over to anyone who would listen. There was a lot of industry opposition to an RES, and dire predictions that it would cost consumers money and damage Colorado's economy. But, those arguments were proven wrong. And Colorado industries, consumers, and people across the political spectrum have embraced clean energy as part of Colorado's effort to win the global economic race. In fact, last year, the Colorado Legislature approved, and former Governor Bill Ritter signed, a bill to increase the RES standard even further: from 20 percent to 30 percent renewable energy by 2020. This makes the Colorado RES the second most aggressive standard in the Nation, only after California. Even more refreshing is that in the years since Colorado established one of the earliest and strongest renewable electricity standards, our energy producers have embraced the move. One of our State's largest utilities, Xcel Energy, has become a national leader in clean energy. In proving that clean energy can be profitable and competitive, Xcel is making the case for how an RES can create jobs, stimulate the economy, and help us achieve energy independence. The clean energy economy is one of the greatest economic opportunities of the 21st century, and the global demand for clean energy is growing by $1 trillion every year. The lesson to be learned from Colorado is that clean energy can unleash the American entrepreneurial spirit. We must pursue forward-thinking policies that will help America seize and lead this growing market. Make no mistake. We are in a race against foreign competitors and are quickly being left behind. Last year, I returned from China where I discussed clean energy issues with American businesses located there. I saw it firsthand. They are ready to eat our lunch when it comes to clean energy. China is pursuing renewable energy and clean energy technology so ambitiously, not because they want to save the planet but because it makes good business and economic sense. In fact, China has announced that it is investing over $738 billion over the next 10 years in clean energy development--nearly the size of our entire American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Just imagine, their economy uses a comparable amount of energy, but they take clean energy so seriously that they plan to invest a stimulus-sized amount of money solely in renewables. But we can't just rely on renewable energy. Rather, America must have an all-of-the-above energy policy. For example, conservation and energy efficiency efforts offer the quickest way to reduce energy demand today. And safe nuclear energy and natural gas can and should fill a larger share of our energy portfolio as they both are cleaner fuels. In addition, we all know America will be dependent on fossil fuels for years to come, so it is not realistic to exclude them in our strategy. All of these elements should be in America's energy mix and we must acknowledge that to really embrace 21st century solutions. But when we look at the future demands for clean energy and the economic opportunities ahead of us, renewable resources hold the greatest promise. And the more home-grown renewable energy we can produce, the less money we need to spend buying oil from foreign nations that wish to do us harm, which means less money spent at the gas pump. I don't think anyone in this Chamber can argue with the proposition that we should be moving aggressively toward energy independence with dividends like that. It is time we made a concerted national effort to reclaim our position at the front of the pack. We should be harnessing the wind and sun and other renewable resources here in America, and putting Americans to work in good-paying jobs developing, building, and leading the clean energy revolution. It is an example of what we call back home ``Colorado common sense.'' But instead of pursuing some commonsense goals that are sure to move our economy forward, we are here today exchanging political punches on issues largely unrelated to our energy independence and the prices Americans pay at the pump. While I support reducing tax breaks for the five largest oil companies, I honestly wish this issue was a smaller part of a larger discussion on a comprehensive energy strategy that allows the U.S. to lead the global economic race. That said, I will vote to repeal these needless tax breaks for Big Oil. Traditional energy production has received billions in subsidies over the last 70 years. And the top five oil companies in particular make billions in profits that far exceed the need for government support. I happen to agree with the thousands of Coloradans who have told me: these companies--among the biggest in the world--don't need and shouldn't receive taxpayer money, especially as we look for ways to consolidate our Tax Code and reduce the deficit. It is important to me that this bill is limited to the top five companies and does not include small, independent producers that provide many jobs in Colorado. I should note that there are some tax credits--such as the production tax credit for wind, the investment tax credit for solar, and the intangible drilling costs tax credit for small oil and gas producers--that are important to jobs in Colorado and across the country. While my ideal energy market would be free from any tax credits, I also want to make sure we continue to invest in domestic energy industries that still need help getting off the ground. Just as with most policy, it is a delicate balance. In my home State of Colorado and in the Presiding Officer's home State of Pennsylvania and all over our country, Americans are feeling the sting of rising gas prices. The pain at the pump puts a real crimp in the budgets of hard-working families and businesses everywhere. I hear this every time I am back in my home State listening and visiting with the folks there. They think it is unfair, and I have to say I agree. Runaway gas prices are not acceptable. I think it is our job, working across the partisan divide, to bring a stop to it. I have to tell my colleagues, instead of pursuing some commonsense goals that would move our economy forward and would mold a comprehensive energy proposal, we are punching away at each other on issues largely unrelated to our energy independence and the prices Americans pay at the pump. I am going to support the vote today. We ought to reduce tax breaks for the five largest oil companies. But I have to say I wish this had been part of a larger discussion on a comprehensive energy strategy to allow us to lead the global economic race. That said, I am going to vote to repeal what I think are needless tax breaks for Big Oil. Traditional energy production has received billions of subsidies over the last 70 years--70 years--and the top 50 companies in particular make billions in profits that far exceed the need for more government support. I happen to agree with thousands of Coloradans who have been in touch with me to say that these companies, which are among the biggest in the world, don't need and shouldn't receive taxpayer money, especially as we look for ways to consolidate our Tax Code and reduce the deficit. It is important to me that the bill is limited to the top five companies and doesn't include small, independent producers that provide a lot of jobs in Colorado. I should note that there are some tax credits, such as the production tax credit for wind, the investment tax credit for solar, and the intangible drilling costs tax credit for small oil and gas producers that are important for jobs in Colorado and across our country. I think we would agree that the ideal energy market would be free from any tax credits, but I also wish to make sure we invest in our domestic energy industries that still need help getting off the ground. As with most policy matters, this is a delicate balance. Let me wind down my remarks with this request to my colleagues, that we would take responsibility for our economic future and get serious about energy independence. That means we would have to shed, each and every one of us, some of our doctrinaire positions and what is too often on the floor a ``my way or the highway'' approach. There are ways to responsibly drill for oil while also increasing our renewable electricity production. There are ways to safely expand nuclear power while also boosting energy efficiency. There are ways to harness natural gas as a bridge fuel while also spurring a generation of electric cars. These are not either/or propositions. I think we especially have to seize the clean energy opportunity that is in front of us, so 2, 4, and 10 years from now we are not still sidetracked by political infighting because we, once again, failed to make the tough decisions. A comprehensive energy policy is critically important to our Nation's economic recovery and our long-term energy future. Believe me, Americans are ready for it. In fact, they are demanding it. Thank you. I yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam President, I was unable to return to Washington, DC, and was therefore unable to cast a vote for rollcall vote No. 62, the nomination of Kevin Hunter Sharp, of Tennessee, to be U.S. District Judge for the Middle District of Tennessee. Had I been present, I would have voted yea to confirm the nominee.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bipartisan bill along with my colleague Senator Collins to help improve the health and efficiency of our schools by making them more energy efficient, while creating much-needed jobs in the process. Though it is often over-looked, energy efficiency is a huge job creator. Not only does it create jobs through the purchase and installation of efficient materials, it frees up scarce school finances to retain teachers and important programs. There are numerous Federal programs and funds already available to schools to help them become more energy efficient. However, as I learned in my travels across Colorado, schools face a morass of programs and agency offices across the government, and it is challenging for schools to take full advantage of them. The bipartisan Streamlining Energy Efficiency for Schools Act of 2011 will force the government to coordinate their efforts so that schools are less confused and they can better navigate the existing Federal programs and financing options available to them. Put simply, it will streamline the Federal Government while still leaving decisions to the States, school boards and local officials to determine what is best for their schools. I have seen the benefits of energy efficient buildings first hand when traveling in Colorado. The Cherry Creek School District in Greenwood Village, Colorado has incorporated day lighting techniques and ice storage to cool the buildings during the day. Because of these innovative improvements, the school district has enjoyed significant cost savings. In another example, the Poudre School District in Fort Collins, Colorado, actively promotes sustainable design guidelines, calling it their ``Ethic of Sustainability.'' This program includes an elementary school in Fort Collins that actually uses recycled blue jeans as insulation for the school buildings. I hope that in passing this bill we will see more examples of these successful and creative projects across the country--projects that will increase the efficiency of our schools and teach our students about the importance of saving energy. I urge my colleagues--of both parties--to join me in supporting this bipartisan legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the Renewable Energy Market Access Program Act, or REMAP Act, which I am re-introducing in the 112th Congress with my colleagues, Senators Stabenow and Merkley. This bill is designed to help grow American renewable energy and energy efficiency exports abroad by helping small and medium sized renewable energy businesses promote, export and ultimately penetrate foreign markets. In turn this bill will help grow the American economy and create American jobs. This effort is a smaller piece of what needs to be a comprehensive and cohesive approach to reduce our trade deficit in clean energy goods and bolster our economy. Despite efforts to do just that, we still struggle to build a manufacturing base that can provide the goods necessary to meet the global demand for renewable energy products. It is astonishing that increasingly, we import more renewable energy goods than we export. A recent Senate report showed that over a 5 year period from 2004-2008, our trade deficit in renewable energy goods increased 350 percent, which is attributed to increased U.S. demand that is met largely by imports from Asia and Europe. Not only are we failing to meet our own domestic demand, but we are slow to take advantage of market opportunities abroad. It is estimated that 90 percent of worldwide investments in renewable energy goods occur in G-20 countries, and the developing world is projected to comprise 80 percent of the world's future energy demand, yet the United States is not well positioned to capture these growing and burgeoning markets for renewable energy goods. If we are truly dedicated to strengthening our capability to grow renewable energy manufacturing and to becoming energy independent, we need to do more. We need to invest strategically at home, and we must also look beyond our shores to build markets for domestic manufacturers markets that can translate into sustainable, well-paying jobs here at home. My legislation would create the Renewable Energy Market Access Program to focus on equipping small and medium sized enterprises with the tools they need to access foreign markets, thereby strengthening our domestic economy and creating jobs. Through REMAP, trade associations and state-regional trade groups would apply to the U.S. Department of Commerce to enter into cooperative agreements to provide marketing and trade assistance to small- and medium-sized companies in the renewable energy and energy efficiency sectors. The assistance would help facilitate the export of their goods to existing and new foreign markets. The agreements would also offer eligible participants an opportunity to share the costs related to innovative marketing and promotion activities. The public funding for any one application would never exceed 50 percent of the total cost of the proposal, ensuring buy-in from the applicant and an ongoing working relationship with the Department of Commerce. In sum, this bill will help streamline access to the global marketplace for small businesses and help promote American renewable energy and energy efficiency products overseas. I believe that this legislation takes an important step in the right direction to support the growing renewable energy industry. I have been encouraged by the efforts of my colleagues here in the U.S. Congress and in the Administration to place a strong emphasis on supporting and growing all of America's exports but our future will be in solving our shared energy challenges. While we look at ways to enhance market access to foreign markets, Congress must also develop sensible policy mechanisms to address unfair trade barriers and other anti-competitive tactics that are used to keep our goods from markets in countries with which we have stable relations. Such tactics should be addressed, but should not keep us from pursuing other opportunities to build foreign markets for American businesses. This is why I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation to support our small business community in growing our nation's economy. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bipartisan bill along with my colleague Senator Collins to help improve the health and efficiency of our schools by making them more energy efficient, while creating much-needed jobs in the process. Though it is often over-looked, energy efficiency is a huge job creator. Not only does it create jobs through the purchase and installation of efficient materials, it frees up scarce school finances to retain teachers and important programs. There are numerous Federal programs and funds already available to schools to help them become more energy efficient. However, as I learned in my travels across Colorado, schools face a morass of programs and agency offices across the government, and it is challenging for schools to take full advantage of them. The bipartisan Streamlining Energy Efficiency for Schools Act of 2011 will force the government to coordinate their efforts so that schools are less confused and they can better navigate the existing Federal programs and financing options available to them. Put simply, it will streamline the Federal Government while still leaving decisions to the States, school boards and local officials to determine what is best for their schools. I have seen the benefits of energy efficient buildings first hand when traveling in Colorado. The Cherry Creek School District in Greenwood Village, Colorado has incorporated day lighting techniques and ice storage to cool the buildings during the day. Because of these innovative improvements, the school district has enjoyed significant cost savings. In another example, the Poudre School District in Fort Collins, Colorado, actively promotes sustainable design guidelines, calling it their ``Ethic of Sustainability.'' This program includes an elementary school in Fort Collins that actually uses recycled blue jeans as insulation for the school buildings. I hope that in passing this bill we will see more examples of these successful and creative projects across the country--projects that will increase the efficiency of our schools and teach our students about the importance of saving energy. I urge my colleagues--of both parties--to join me in supporting this bipartisan legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the Renewable Energy Market Access Program Act, or REMAP Act, which I am re-introducing in the 112th Congress with my colleagues, Senators Stabenow and Merkley. This bill is designed to help grow American renewable energy and energy efficiency exports abroad by helping small and medium sized renewable energy businesses promote, export and ultimately penetrate foreign markets. In turn this bill will help grow the American economy and create American jobs. This effort is a smaller piece of what needs to be a comprehensive and cohesive approach to reduce our trade deficit in clean energy goods and bolster our economy. Despite efforts to do just that, we still struggle to build a manufacturing base that can provide the goods necessary to meet the global demand for renewable energy products. It is astonishing that increasingly, we import more renewable energy goods than we export. A recent Senate report showed that over a 5 year period from 2004-2008, our trade deficit in renewable energy goods increased 350 percent, which is attributed to increased U.S. demand that is met largely by imports from Asia and Europe. Not only are we failing to meet our own domestic demand, but we are slow to take advantage of market opportunities abroad. It is estimated that 90 percent of worldwide investments in renewable energy goods occur in G-20 countries, and the developing world is projected to comprise 80 percent of the world's future energy demand, yet the United States is not well positioned to capture these growing and burgeoning markets for renewable energy goods. If we are truly dedicated to strengthening our capability to grow renewable energy manufacturing and to becoming energy independent, we need to do more. We need to invest strategically at home, and we must also look beyond our shores to build markets for domestic manufacturers markets that can translate into sustainable, well-paying jobs here at home. My legislation would create the Renewable Energy Market Access Program to focus on equipping small and medium sized enterprises with the tools they need to access foreign markets, thereby strengthening our domestic economy and creating jobs. Through REMAP, trade associations and state-regional trade groups would apply to the U.S. Department of Commerce to enter into cooperative agreements to provide marketing and trade assistance to small- and medium-sized companies in the renewable energy and energy efficiency sectors. The assistance would help facilitate the export of their goods to existing and new foreign markets. The agreements would also offer eligible participants an opportunity to share the costs related to innovative marketing and promotion activities. The public funding for any one application would never exceed 50 percent of the total cost of the proposal, ensuring buy-in from the applicant and an ongoing working relationship with the Department of Commerce. In sum, this bill will help streamline access to the global marketplace for small businesses and help promote American renewable energy and energy efficiency products overseas. I believe that this legislation takes an important step in the right direction to support the growing renewable energy industry. I have been encouraged by the efforts of my colleagues here in the U.S. Congress and in the Administration to place a strong emphasis on supporting and growing all of America's exports but our future will be in solving our shared energy challenges. While we look at ways to enhance market access to foreign markets, Congress must also develop sensible policy mechanisms to address unfair trade barriers and other anti-competitive tactics that are used to keep our goods from markets in countries with which we have stable relations. Such tactics should be addressed, but should not keep us from pursuing other opportunities to build foreign markets for American businesses. This is why I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation to support our small business community in growing our nation's economy. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, today we recognize the life of Ruth Humphreys Brown, a remarkable Coloradan who dedicated herself to a life of service and good will and a woman who was deeply tied to the American West. Ruth passed away on December 30, 2010, at the age of 90. Ruth led a life full of courage and giving, and our country is indebted to her for her service. In 1943, at the age of 22, she answered our nation's call and was among the first women accepted to fly American military aircraft in the Women Airforce Service Pilots. As a young pilot stationed in Texas, her efforts prepared our bombardiers and ground artillery units to fight and win in World War II, and Congress rightfully acknowledged her heroic contributions by awarding her a Congressional Gold Medal in 2010. I knew Ruth to often work behind the scenes, but she never lacked in ambition. Ruth's service extended to countless projects that continue to improve the health and activity of Colorado's communities. She took part in starting the first Outward Bound Program in the country. I am personally grateful to Ruth for her efforts to start this program, having made it my career for 20 years. Coloradans and adventurers across the continent benefit from Outward Bound's strength in training leaders and building community--two ideals to which Ruth contributed tremendously. Her love for the outdoors, from whitewater rafting and picnicking to swimming and skiing, carries on through the mission of Outward Bound. Ruth gave to improve her community and never asked for the credit. But many agree she deserved it. One of her well-known and early contributions was committing the money to clear a new run on Aspen Mountain in 1949. Skiers have since come to love Ruthie's Run, aptly named after its originator, in much the same way that so many of us admire Ruth. She grew up in Denver, worked and played on her family's Wagon Wheel Ranch in Southern Colorado, and was fundamental in making Aspen a thriving mountain town and wonderful place to live. Ruth's touch spanned the State and never failed to reach a person or community in need. A veteran, entrepreneur, philanthropist, and mother, Ruth was a truly accomplished and inspirational Coloradan. Today we pause to honor her legacy and her welcomed contribution to Colorado's rich heritage.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, last year we lost a great man and leader whom I knew well, Dave Genova. On March 28, 2010, Dave passed away at the age of 67. From my days as an educator and guide in the Outward Bound Program, I knew Dave to be a remarkably talented and committed individual with a gift for leadership. Dave spent 32 years with Outward Bound, a program that uses the outdoors as a classroom to inspire service to others and to coach leadership skills, oftentimes to underprivileged youth. Having taught some 2,000 students, he had an incredible enthusiasm for bringing people together to overcome challenges in ways they never thought possible. Throughout his tenure in the North Carolina Outward Bound, Dave played an invaluable role as an educator, but he was also an innovator. In 1999, he started the Unity Project, which is designed to break down barriers of social and economic inequality. His efforts have enabled nearly 1,000 young leaders to become agents of social change in their local schools and communities, and the program continues to educate and train future leaders today. Dave once said of the Outward Bound School, ``Compassion is the well- spring from which we derive our relevance.'' These words should serve as a guiding compass for us all. Dave taught from a place of understanding, and he sought to ensure every one of his students came away with a greater appreciation for others and the knowledge that, in his words, ``We're all in this together.'' He used the great outdoors to build a sense of community among adventurers, but more important, he taught them how to carry on his work to build bridges between people. Neighborhoods, cities, and States have been touched by Dave's work, and we can all be grateful for his contribution. A longtime outdoorsman myself, I appreciate and admire Dave's passion for our wild lands and the lessons they can teach us. Always a bold leader, scaling the toughest of life's mountains, Dave's extraordinary character exemplifies an ideal to which we all should strive. He is missed by many, but his memory continues to guide me and all his students.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise tonight, as so many of my colleagues have through this long day, to urge all of us to join to prevent a government shutdown. We have all expressed a growing amount of frustration here with what I would characterize as politics as usual under the dome of this great Capitol, in which we are so fortunate to serve. But it sure seems like these are the kind of politics where the goal posts get continually moved, and no amount of civility can seemingly overcome the impasse that is unfolding down the corridors in the House of Representatives. I know the Presiding Officer operates in this way, and the American public operates in this way, and they expect us to work together. They expect us to pass an appropriations bill that funds our government. But it appears as though some unrelated policy riders that are not about appropriating money but are about setting policy are leading to an impasse that could lead to an unnecessary and costly shutdown of government operations and services. Last night--I do not know where the Presiding Officer was--my colleague Senator Bennet was down here. He highlighted how petty the situation has become. He pointed out if you and I went to Applebee's for dinner tonight, and we had a $20 dinner for two, and then we had a fight over the bill, we would be fighting over 4 cents. Well, I have some news. It looks like today we got an agreement that we reached on the actual numbers, but now the House wants to add some controversial policy riders into the mix. It is as if that same check arrived when we were at Applebee's and after finally agreed on who is going to pay the 4 cents, but we are now arguing over whether the waitress, who is a hard-working American, should receive health care. I have to say, I think people watching this are scratching their heads. I sure am. We all are facing an impending government shutdown. As I have said, some Members seem to want to inject very controversial policy issues into the debate. These issues have divided us for too many years. We ought to have that debate elsewhere. It is forcing this shutdown on the American people. Some people who are standing their ground think they are doing something about the deficit. I am often the one highlighting how disturbing our long-range fiscal picture has become. But what is equally frustrating is the disservice being done to the American public by the current debate. Not only are we taken off the beat from addressing our real fiscal imbalances, which would be the debate we need to have on the 2012 budget or on the longer term challenges the Simpson-Bowles commission pointed out, but we are now focusing on women's health issues. I don't understand. We have a tentative agreement to cut billions from current spending levels, but the Speaker of the House seems to continue to demand that we ought to focus on nonbudget issues. These are hot-button issues. Why we would insert them into an unrelated budget debate when there is so much at stake is beyond me. I understand we want to show the American people we are serious about deficit reduction. I am, I know the Presiding Officer is, and I know the American people are. But in Colorado, people see straight through this latest ploy to inject nonbudgetary issues into the debate. It is politics as usual. I know we have felt a little better recently. We have had 13 straight months of private sector growth. We have added 1.8 million jobs during that time. But our economy is still very fragile. Way too many Americans, way too many West Virginians, and way too many Coloradans are struggling. I have no doubt that a government shutdown at this time would have a counterproductive effect on our recovery. Don't take my word for it. Listen to what top business leaders of all political persuasions are saying. The Business Roundtable president, John Engler, former Governor of Michigan, a Republican Governor, said businesses would face the dangerous ``unintended consequences,'' where interest rates could rise because of a shutdown and we would have turmoil in our financial markets. Forecasters at Goldman Sachs have warned that a shutdown could shave off growth in our GDP every single week. CEOs of all stripes all over the country have warned about a shutdown's impact on confidence in the U.S. economic recovery. The Presiding Officer and I know that confidence is what we need. That is what is really lacking in many respects. A shutdown would actually prevent what we need to address our long- term growth and fiscal balance. In other words, if we get the economy growing again, we would have more tax revenue, and we would see that gap between what we are spending and bringing in narrow. I can't help but think in the context of this debate about my uncle Stewart Udall. I have talked to the Presiding Officer about the effect men like his father had on his upbringing and his values, his public service commitment. But Stewart Udall, my uncle, father of my cousin, Senator Tom Udall, wrote a book called ``The Forgotten Founders'' that focused on the settling of the West. I bet it would apply as well to West Virginia. The theme of the book was on how the West was settled, how it was built. He made a strong case in his book that the people who came out West were not looking to get into gunfights or range wars, regardless of what the Hollywood movies suggest. They wanted to start a new life and in a new country, pursuing what we now call the American dream. My uncle Stewart pointed out that when we watched those Hollywood movies, it was the people standing on the sidewalks watching the mythical gunfight who were really the people who built the West. They were looking to work together. They weren't looking to get into fights. They were looking out for each other. It didn't matter what one's political party was. To me, the American people today are standing on those board sidewalks watching the same senseless gunfights and range wars. These are the people who matter. These are the people who will ultimately be hurt and affected by a shutdown. I know I was hired by the people of Colorado and sent to the Senate to come here and work together and solve some very difficult challenges facing this country. That is why today I introduced the Preventing a Government Shutdown Act of 2011. This bill was originally a Republican idea. It is meant to ensure that the American people are not unfairly subjected to the effects of a government shutdown simply because some Members of Congress want to make a political point and pursue persistent squabbling over the budget. The bill would ensure that Federal appropriations continue at last year's funding levels as a bridge to keep the government running until a compromise could be reached for the remainder of the fiscal year. Once Congress is able to reach a bipartisan agreement to fund the government for that fiscal year, then the automatic funding under my proposal would stop and it would be replaced by the enacted bill. I know there are some who say: Wait a minute, the Congress is charged with passing appropriations bills that reflect strategic planning, current functional needs, and create stability. What I am suggesting is that the Preventing a Government Shutdown Act would create a safety valve that would ensure that partisan shutdown politics don't punish the American people and destabilize the economy going forward. It seems as though a vocal minority wants to be combative, almost for the sake of being combative--let's fight for the sake of fighting. But in this case, in these delicate and fragile economic times, that is not a helpful thing to do, to put it mildly. I think the mature thing to do would be to have a piece of legislation in place that would eliminate that kind of irresponsible behavior moving forward. As I come to a close, I have to think the American people are amazed at this, if they have time because they are busy providing for their families. We have to settle down here. We have to act as adults. We need to work collaboratively toward a budget solution. We have to reduce the debt and the deficit. The Presiding Officer has been on point on that as well as on this. But you won't find anyone more committed than I to that cause. Let's reach it in a way that protects our senior citizens, veterans, students, and border security--I could go on with a long list of important functions the Federal Government provides--and let's do it in a way that slashes spending but doesn't harm our fragile economic recovery or divert our attention on divisive social issues. We can't afford a government shutdown. We just flatout can't afford a government shutdown. I will be disappointed, to say the least, if the bipartisan deal that is before us--it is in our hands--is undercut by contentious, unrelated issues that only serve to divide us rather than to bring us together. One thing we can agree on is that our military personnel deserve better than this. We have young people fighting in two wars as I speak. We have young men and women serving all over the globe in over 50 countries. The last thing our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines need is to worry about whether they will be able to pay their bills. Military families have already done more than their share. Now we are asking them to do even more. That is simply unacceptable. I know we can find a solution to this particular situation. We worked together in the Senate with Senator Hutchison and a bipartisan group of Senators to introduce the bipartisan Ensuring Pay for Our Military Act. This bill, S. 724, would ensure that our military servicemembers would not have interrupted pay in the event of a shutdown. We need to pass that bill if we don't get the job done tonight. Three days ago, I wrote a letter, joined by close to 18 of my colleagues, including the Presiding Officer, to Mr. Boehner. I know Speaker Boehner well. He and I served in the House together. I urged him to work with all of us to avoid a shutdown. I will stay here the rest of this day, all night, whatever it takes. I am here to urge all of us, both Chambers, let's sit down together. Let's reason together. Let's use common sense together. Let's find a compromise. That is the American way. I know that is why I was elected to the Senate. People in Colorado know I work across party lines. The Senate could set that example right here tonight. We have numerous examples of us working together across party lines. I had to come to the floor tonight. I know the night is growing on. I had to come down here and urge Senators in this great body, the world's greatest deliberative body, to find a commonsense compromise to keep our government funded, keep our economy focused upon, and move our country forward. That is job 1. I thank the Chair for his attention and his willingness to work with me and the spirit with which he serves West Virginia. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record. There being no objeciton, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record. There being no objeciton, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows: