Zach Wamp

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, Jim Lee Green--or Jimmy Lee as he's known in my hometown of Chattanooga--is an ordinary man with an extraordinary amount of commitment. He began working for Southern Champion Tray in Chattanooga when he was 18 years old. And now, 50 years later, Jimmy Lee is the first person in Southern Tray's 78-year history to attain this landmark anniversary! Having no plans for retirement, Jimmy Lee Green has an extraordinary amount of energy, commitment and devotion. Southern Tray will honor Jimmy Lee for his 50 years of servant leadership and dedication this Saturday, July 2, 2005. Words that his co-workers use to describe him are ``honest, faithful, loyal, determined, fair and trustworthy.'' Jim L. Green was born in Welch, West Virginia, on February 16, 1937. He's more than a faithful employee, he's a family man, a loyal friend and veteran of our Naval Services. Congratulations to Jimmy Lee Green for reaching this unprecedented milestone! And, congratulations to Southern Champion Tray for its great work environment and continued investment in those who work there.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, over the next several minutes, we here in the majority are going to talk about two issues that are incredibly important to the future of our country: our energy policy and then preventive health care and personal responsibility in trying to get our arms around the rising costs of health care. But before I begin our discussion on energy, and especially in light of the commentary that we just heard on the House floor and the very patriotic tribute by the gentleman from Maryland to the Greatest Generation, I thought I would pause and pay a tribute to a person who I may have met, I am not sure, but I heard this week about his life, and he died a week ago in Iraq, a young patriot named Noah Harris, Second Lieutenant, United States Army, a platoon leader from Ellijay, Georgia. Mr. Speaker, three summers ago he was interning here in Washington in the office of the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal), and he felt a passion to volunteer to serve our country at this time of war in response to the terrorist threat, and he signed up, and he went. I happened to be taking a tour group through the Senate this week, just yesterday, and I sat in the Senate gallery and I heard the distinguished Senator from Georgia, Senator Isakson, pay tribute to Noah Harris's life, because in May of this year, Lieutenant Harris sent Senator Isakson this note from Iraq to Senator Isakson. He said, ``Now I am serving my country as an infantry officer in Iraq. I am proud to say that the situation is improving here. The media often misses the big picture. Our presence here is not just about Iraq, it is sending a message to the oppressed peoples of the world that freedom can be a reality. Freedom is the greatest gift that we, the United States, has been granted and, as such, it is our responsibility to spread it. For it to become a permanent fixture in our future and our children's future, we must give it to all those that desire it.'' Mr. Speaker, he said that last month; and then, last week, he gave that full, that last full measure of devotion to our country. I pay tribute to this great American hero. Tomorrow, they will gather in the mountains of north Georgia, down below my district in Tennessee, to pay their last respects to him. But he represents so many of our brave and proud citizens who are willing to volunteer to lay their life on the line and stand between a threat to our civilian population and advance the cause of freedom around the world. I think we have to hold them up as the greatest of our citizens and, frankly, stand behind the mission that they believe in. He sent the word back that he believed in what he was doing and it was making a huge difference in the world. That is why it is important for us to come to the floor; and I pulled these words out of my pocket as I heard the testimony on the floor, because I think we need to honor the life of Noah Harris and every other one like him. Now, our national security does hang in the balance as it relates to our energy security. The case is very clear, I believe, that we need a national energy policy, the first one in a generation. And for three consecutive Congresses, we have gotten close to having an agreement between the House and the Senate for a national energy policy, but we have not yet sent a bill to the President of the United States. We stand on the threshold of doing that today, because the House has passed a bill and the Senate is very, very close. I think they have had a cloture vote and they expect to pass the bill this coming Tuesday in the United States Senate so that we can go to conference and work out the differences and, ultimately, send a national energy policy to the President of the United States, hopefully in July, so that we can then send word to our private sector and anyone in the energy industry what the national policy is so those investments will follow. Now, here in the House, we have had some reorganization around this issue of energy. I serve on the House Policy Committee under the very able leadership of the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Shadegg), and he recently reorganized the policy committee in the House to name a new Subcommittee on Energy and Technology and asked me to chair that subcommittee. I come to the floor tonight in that regard, and I want to discuss this issue of advancing tax policies and incentives to encourage energy independence, to make sure we have the energy resources for us to maintain our productivity as a Nation. I believe it is a win-win-win opportunity for the United States of America, and I will tell my colleagues why. I believe the 3 years that we balanced the budget here in the late 1990s were a direct result of increased revenues to the Federal Treasury. Now, we did show some spending restraint for the first time in a generation by holding the growth of government spending below inflation and allowing revenues to exceed expenses, but it really was a revenue-generated effort to balance the budget. The revenues were generated largely because, for a sustained number of years, we led the world in the information explosion. You think of Microsoft and you think of software and you think of the whole advancement of information technology this country led, in a major way, this breakthrough in the economy, and, as a result, record revenues with a sound robust economy were generated and we balanced the budget. I would also tell you that given the challenges we face in the wake of September 11, the likelihood that we balance the budget again is very low unless we have another sector of our economy that explodes with export-driven manufacturing technology that will cause revenues to dramatically climb. And I say that as a member of the Appropriations Committee, because if you eliminate all of the nondefense, nonhomeland security discretionary spending of the government, you would still be at a break-even. If you eliminated all of the nondefense, nonhomeland security, discretionary spending you would still either be at a budget deficit or very close. So it is very difficult to balance the budget unless you have increasing revenues. This whole sector called entech, energy technologies, presents that kind of an opportunity for this country to grow the U.S. economy, export energy solutions to the world, solve many of our own energy and homeland security problems, and serve the world right. It would actually cause such global leadership from the United States, that we would solve a whole lot of our problems all at once. A very prominent person in the energy sector that I know personally named Riley Bechtel, the chairman and CEO of one of the largest family- held companies in this country, I think a fourth- or fifth-generation energy company called Bechtel National, he told me right after September 11 that we needed to understand that energy security is homeland security. Energy security is national security. And I think that is the approach that the Congress has taken today. And I will also tell you that a very prominent editorialist with the New York Times, Thomas Friedman, who sometimes I agree with and sometimes I do not, but he is a very bright man and he understands the world as well as anyone, he basically has said over and over again in the wake of September 11 that if our country will demonstrate global leadership on energy and the environment, we will help ourselves with the nations of the world that have had either envy or distaste for our country in the past, and in terms of foreign policy we will improve our position in the world. Before I go into the details of the comprehensive solution of this, I want to yield to one of the most prominent Members of the House, a person I came in with 11 years ago, a senior member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, from the State of New Hampshire, a person who has been a real leader on renewable energy. I assume he could be a conferee, I do not think they have been named yet, but he should be a conferee yet. That is up to the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Barton) the distinguished gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass).

Mr. WAMP. I thank the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass) for his leadership at home and here in Washington and I wish him Godspeed as he travels back to New Hampshire this weekend. As the cochairman here in the House of the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Caucus, which is about half of the House, not quite equally divided but close to equally divided between Democrats and Republicans, I particularly appreciate his leadership in the area of renewable energy. You know, that caucus has been around here for a number of years. And I have had the privilege for the last 5 years to chair it with the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall). And the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus here in the Congress held an expo this week here in Washington with Energy Secretary, Samuel Bodman, participating. And we had a big gathering here mid-week. As we kicked off this focus this week here in Washington on energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies, and the solutions to our energy problems in this country, I said that we coordinated the activities of the conference; but one thing we did not coordinate is that very morning it was announced that we had a record high price for crude oil at $60 a barrel on Wednesday of this week, and it was also announced that we had a record high for natural gas prices, two of the major energy sources that we consume in this very productive country of ours, oil and natural gas, and we began our conference this year on the alternatives and the energy efficiency program on that very day. So we did not coordinate it, it is unfortunate, but we need to do something about it. That is what brings us to the floor and brings us to this agenda and this important issue. Last year I had the privilege of traveling to Colorado with the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall) and touring NREL, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory right outside of Denver. Unbelievable research done there, particularly in the areas of renewables, things like hydrogen fuel cell technologies as well. They have energy efficient programs, and they are really our country's lab, though, on renewable energy sources, from solar to hydro, wind, different sources that we have available to us that are alternatives to those major areas of energy consumption like coal and petroleum and natural gas. Now, I also represent the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, which is probably the premier laboratory in our country for energy efficiency and building programs, ways to make our construction industry and our residential home building industry more efficient. And we have just recently brought a bill up that will be introduced in the coming days, authored principally by me, but by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall) and the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall) have joined. We have a bipartisan bill that will raise the standards for energy efficiency in building materials across the country, which is certainly one way that we can save energy. And part of our goal here is not just to increase supplies, but to reduce the demand by energy efficiency, energy conservation and savings. We must do both in order to maintain our level of productivity. But we need to recognize when we are talking about oil, that 42 percent of all oil in this country is used by personal vehicles in the transportation sector; cars. Forty-two percent of the oil. We have a very, very small percentage, like 2 percent or less of the world's oil reserves in this country, yet we use approximately one- third of all of the oil in the world, and 42 percent of it goes to our own automobiles. That is why it is so important that we begin to transition as quickly as possible into the alternative transportation systems of the future. I am encouraged by the interest in hybrid electric vehicles. Many of us see that as a bridge to the future, not totally the future because the technology is developing. But hybrids are now very much in demand, and most of your auto producers both now domestic and foreign that make hybrid vehicles have a huge backlog, and more and more of these companies are moving to that. As a matter of fact, I spoke this week to a major Toyota and Lexus dealer from my district named Bob McKamey who has been a national leader with both of those organizations. And he told me that in 5 years the trend in this industry is that many of the cars, maybe even most of the cars produced in the world 5 years from now, will have some technology of a hybrid electric option because the technology is getting so much better: the battery acceleration is so much better, the technology is advancing. And most of the new production facilities are going to have a place there. They will adapt the current manufacturing to make room for the hybrid production so that every consumer will have the option of going hybrid and doubling their gas mileage. As technology develops, then we will actually have a very good product in the marketplace. And the private sector is driving this, but the government needs to not only know what is going on but be partners with the private sector because, ultimately, I believe through the hybrid bridge and transition we will get to a hydrogen fuel cell, advancing the President's Freedom Car Initiative to where 15 years from now you can drive the hydrogen fuel cell vehicles in this country that are available in Washington, D.C. today or in New York City where Shell Oil and GM have these partnerships with the permanent hydrogen filling station in Washington, one in New York City, and some 40 automobiles and vans on the road that are completely hydrogen fuel cell driven. I have driven one, and you cannot tell the difference between driving it and driving a normal car. The problem is they cost about $400,000 each today because the technology is not developed, the mass production is not developed to make them affordable for average citizens, but that is going to happen. And everyone in the industry says that is going to happen, that 400,000 will come down to 50,000. And then you will actually have something that a lot of families will drive that will be oil free and we would be petroleum free for those vehicles, securing our own energy future. I think we are going to have both for a good long time, but I think this is an important goal of energy independence so we are not as reliant on oil in this country as we are today. Now, back where I live in the Tennessee Valley, between our assets in Huntsville and Oak Ridge and the technology drivers in our valley, we have clearly positioned ourselves to make these next-generation vehicles. Because of the leadership of our former Governor, now a United States Senator, Lamar Alexander, the State of Tennessee is third in the Nation in automobile manufacturing. We were not even in this game when I was born a few years ago, but today we are third. We now have assets. Like in the heart of the Tennessee Valley where I live in the Enterprise South Industrial Park, one of the top megasites for industrial investment in the southeast, right on a major interstate, Interstate 75, which virtually everyone uses that is west of 95 going north and south, right there is this major economic part ready for, with all the assets and infrastructure necessary, a major auto plant investment in next-generation vehicles. And I am excited about this. We also have research institutions like the Advanced Transportation Technology Initiative, ATTI, in our city advancing through test tracks, these next-generation vehicles and exactly how the technology should go to make that the most efficient. I believe, too, we need an intermodal transportation system. In the wake of September 11 when we had an attack on our aviation industry, many people asked where are we in this country on high-speed rail. Because in terms of mass transit, aviation is the primary way to move people rapidly from one place to another in this country. And a true intermodal system would say that we have a mass transit system by rail as well, with at least three major corridors in this country. We believe one of those should come through our region, as well, because of the incredible growth of the Atlanta airport 100 miles south of where I live. In this transportation bill that is now pending before the House and the Senate, it has already been through both bodies, the conference report is pending, there is a beginning for high-speed rail. The first connection, I believe, that is under study and some engineering in this bill is between Las Vegas and Los Angeles. The distinguished transportation chairman in the House, the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), should be commended for advancing high-speed rail as a clean alternative to the traditional energy source utilization to rapidly move people around. Go to Europe, you will see high-speed rail. Here the automotive industry drove a lot of investments for a hundred years; and as a result, we do not have the kind of rail links that we need, I believe. At least three major arteries are needed to make our mass transit system and quick mobilization of people more intermodal, where you need to have multiple systems, particularly in this day of terrorist threats, because if they attack one mode and you have another, people will shift to that. As a matter of fact, for days people could not get out of New York City after September 11. Many people ended up hiring taxi drivers to drive them from places like New York City to Atlanta, Georgia. I know one particularly. So we have another sector that really needs attention and that is the whole electricity sector. We have had brownouts, blackouts, energy shortages, problems in California, problems in the Northeast. We are using a whole lot of natural gas now for electricity. And that is going to be very difficult in the future because we have the highest natural gas prices in our country. My home is heated with natural gas, many of my neighbors' homes are, and the price is now very hard to afford. And I think we must advance a national prototype-design nuclear reactor program to advance nuclear in this country for electricity. It is a clean, safe alternative. We now have Yucca Mountain fully developing, fully supported by our country, by the Congress, by the President. At least we have passed the legislation, and the President supports in his budget request and leadership from our Subcommittee on Energy and Water which I serve on, extraordinary leadership from the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Hobson), to advance the Yucca Mountain proposals so that we take care of the waste stream at the end of the nuclear production cycle so that when a reactor produces electricity, really, the only liability associated with that is the waste stream. But if Yucca Mountain is ready for that waste to be shipped to and stored safely, then we can continue to develop nuclear reactors in this country. This program was almost at a standstill for many years; but within the TVA system where I live, we actually will have a new nuclear reactor come online next year, the first in a number of years. And I believe with DOE's partnership with TVA, you will see even another nuclear reactor come online in the next 5 years. And as we have an advanced prototype national design, we can efficiently, effectively, safely bring on this alternative because nuclear power in terms of air quality is as clean as you get, and we need to advance that. But I do believe because coal is such an abundant resource in this country, we must advance all the clean coal technologies that we can as well. In closing, I just want to say a clean energy policy which focuses on securing our independence from foreign sources of energy will create a robust economy as we advance technologies, use American know-how and ingenuity to try to create these solutions for the whole world and make them and ship them to the world. I think it is such a win-win-win that when you think of green you do not just think of the environment; you think of money and the resources that can be generated by advancing the energy solutions for tomorrow. I cannot think of an issue that is more important to permanently securing our independence and liberty than the energy utilization. It is an area that, frankly, some of our enemies almost hold us hostage to, and that is over energy sources; and we need to move as rapidly as we possibly can without making big mistakes to secure our energy independence. With that, Mr. Speaker, I want to transition quickly over to another major issue that I do not think we talk enough about. We have the most wonderful health care system in the world, and we have had such for a long, long time. And the professionals, the providers, the people in our health care industry should be commended. But just in the last 10 years since I got to Congress, it is outrageous what kind of stress our health care system is under. The providers are underpaid. Many of them are so overlitigated that they just give up the ghost. They leave the profession. And I am very, very concerned about our health care industry. The problem really is two-fold. One is that our private fee-for- service health care system is at risk of collapse. And I know that sounds really, really bold to say that; but I really believe if we are going to be honest about our health care system, we need to talk about the stress points in our health care system and the problems it faces. I do not think enough is yet done around here on this particular issue. I think there are even some people that would like to see the government take it over. So maybe some of them are not doing enough to help us in this cause. But the fact is we need to save our fee-for- service private health care delivery system in this country. Then the second part of this problem is that the government is so into health care with Medicaid and Medicare that we are not going to be able to afford these two major government programs given the current health care trends of Americans today. We will not be able to afford Medicaid and Medicare if Americans continue to live the way they live today. The biggest problems are with obesity, which now rivals tobacco as the largest health care challenge in this country; and type II diabetes, which is connected to obesity, is a huge problem, and I am the most concerned about it among young people because once a young child is sentenced to type II diabetes or chronic obesity in their adolescence, they may never get well. It is effectively a death sentence. And many of them do not know by the time they are in the fourth grade exactly what they need to be doing. So a lot of this is education. Personal responsibility is at the heart of some of the solutions. Some of it is genetic. I am not a health care expert, but my view is about half of what we are we are born with and the other half we acquire. Sometimes we acquire habits that lead to poor health. Sometimes people are born with it. I recognize that. So we have to balance this out and be fair and reasonable, but I want to give you some facts from the Centers for Disease Control and the American Heart and Stroke Society. Fact: obesity and physical inactivity are risk factors for heart disease and stroke. About 28 percent of Americans age 18 or older reported no leisure time physical activity in the last 30 days. Less active, less fit persons have a 30 to 50 percent greater risk of developing high blood pressure, which is a risk factor for heart disease and stroke. Physical inactivity is more prevalent among women than men, among African American and Hispanics than whites, among older than younger adults, and among the less affluent than the more affluent; 107 million American adults are overweight. In addition, an estimated 5 million children, ages 6 to 17, are considered overweight. The Centers for Disease Control estimates that more than 300,000 people die each year due to diseases associated with physical inactivity. They give a lot of recommendations on what to do about this. One thing I want to tell you is that here in the Congress we have decided to step up and lead by example, and we have formed an organization to do just that. We believe that fitness, nutrition, and preventative health care measures are all components to this personal responsibility and this corporate responsibility to try to solve our health care crisis and lower the cost of health care, and in doing so expand the availability of quality health care to everyone in this country. The Surgeon General has made his recommendations. They are in writing here, and I will be adding those to go with my testimony today, recommendations that the Surgeon General has made for children and adults. But 2\1/2\ years ago, because I believe that we will not be able to sustain these government programs of Medicare and Medicaid unless we become more fit and more active, I founded the Congressional Fitness Caucus. I co-chair it also with the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall). And our goal here with about 100 Members of Congress over the last 2\1/2\ years is to educate, to advocates, and to legislate. In the area of education, we encourage our Members, and they do regularly go out into the schools and give speeches and maybe put on some gym clothes and do events with children, geared at the elementary age so that by the fourth grade young people either at home or at school, and we cannot get into their homes so we can go to their schools, we can say to them that the human body is made to move. The human body is made, I believe by God, to be active and to burn calories. And you sleep better, you are more productive, you have a much higher quality of life if you get a certain amount of physical activity. Now when I grew up, when kids had extra time, you might catch them on the playground or out running around or playing a pick-up football game or climbing a tree or building a tree house. Today, you might find them more often inside on a computer. This is great in a way, as long as it is just part of their life and not all of their life, but a lot of kids spend so much time in front of a television screen or a computer screen, and then they go to the closet and they get food that might not be as balanced as it needs to be, and they do not get that physical activity. The human body is made such that you can eat a whole lot as long as you burn it up and you are fine, but there is a balance here. It is called calories intake versus calories burned, and the balance has got to stay close to the same, and many, many young people do not understand this. There is not the physical activity necessary for them to be healthy. There are big bodies, small bodies. Everybody's made different. Our DNA is different. Our makeup is different. Our genetics are different. Our moms and dads are different. I am not talking about that. I am talking about a balance of activity in your life to where you are burning the calories that you are taking in your body so that young people, when they get to the fourth grade, understand some of the ill effects of sedentary living, couch potatoes. We cannot afford the trends that are happening in our society. So part of it is an education process. I tell young people when I go into these schools, do not ever use the F word, fat. Do not ever use that word and do not ever criticize somebody else for how they look but encourage them to go outside and play games with you. If there is a kid on the sidelines that needs to be in, kicking the ball and running the bases, put them in, encourage them, take them out to walk. If you are a mom or dad, set up some activity for your children to be active in the evening. So there are a lot of things we can do. We educate. We advocate. We hosted events on the Mall. We brought professional sports figures in. We used the media to get the word out about the effects of inactivity and sedentary living because this is a major health care problem in our country, this Type II diabetes and obesity, and we can do something about it. These are called preventable illnesses. Preventable illnesses, meaning we can do something about it, and I believe leadership is called to this issue, and then we need to legislate from time to time. It is hard to regulate people into better behavior, but you can pass bills that may incentivize them to better behavior, use our tax code to create incentives, and I will get on to those in a minute. We do have a national program that the Bush administration embraced early on called America On the Move. In Tennessee, we have a part of that program called Tennessee On the Move, and most of our States now have On the Move programs, grassroots statewide organizations designed throughout the year to promote activities and events and communication and education, newsletters across the State encouraging restaurants to have printed on their menu ways to take 100 calories off of your diet. Let me tell you that the rule of holes is when you are in a hole the first thing you should do is quit digging. So, in the obesity hole, we have got to figure out what can we do to not become more obese and then what we can do to turn around and go the other way. It is this simple. If an average American burned 100 calories more per day and consumed 100 calories less, this country would not become any more obese. As a matter of fact, we would start going the other way. A hundred calories more burned may be taking the steps through the Capitol each day instead of the elevator. It may be parking the furtherest distance at the supermarket instead of the closest distance. It is little things that can burn an extra 100 calories. Intaking 100 calories fewer may be as simple as going from a Coke to a Diet Coke and taking 100 calories more out of your diet, because we will, as a Nation, not become any more obese if we will consume 100 fewer calories a day on the average and burn 100 more. Those are simple approaches, first steps. Walk at night after dinner as a family. Husband and wife, encourage each other 3 or 4 days a week to get just a basic amount of physical activity. You do not have to be a marathon runner. You do not have to be a superduper athlete. You have just got to develop one way to do it. If you have got a problem with your leg, go slow, but be walking. The human body was made to move. America On the Move is a great program Tennessee On the Move is a great program. I want to also talk about other programs that are very, very helpful. Recently, two pretty important athletes, Peyton and Archie Manning, came around the Hill lobbying for Physical Education for Progress, the PEP funding, and I am on the Committee on Appropriations. We all weighed in, and the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Regula) responded, and this bill that just passed the House today included $73,408,000 for this national program to promote physical education through our schools because physical education in our schools, frankly, has not been focused on enough. I remember when I was young, we wanted one of those T-shirts. We wanted to go out and do the President's physical fitness contest. We wanted to do push-ups and sit-ups, and today, I do not think there is enough physical education in our schools. I have asked the President to consider amendments. I have asked the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Boehner) here in the House, our chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, to consider amendments to No Child Left Behind that would encourage physical fitness in our schools. Today, because of the testing of the other subject matter, there are schools that report to me that they are actually having to squeeze out physical education because they have limited resources and they have to put those where they know they are going to be tested so that their school system or their school is not out of compliance under the standards of No Child Left Behind. I support those standards. I think it is a good approach, but let us not leave out physical education. Let me tell you, Thomas Jefferson said 200 years ago that a child who is not physically well cannot learn and I agree. That is so true today. A child who is not physically sound cannot learn. If they do not get enough sleep, they cannot learn. If they are not physically well, their attention span is not there, and today, we would have a better bottom line if children in every educational setting were required to do a certain amount of physical activity. I offered a bill earlier this year called the Workforce Health Improvement Program. We have now got 32 cosponsors signed up here at the desk. This gives tax incentives to companies and institutions for providing fitness facilities to their employees. Again, use our tax code to incentivize better behavior. How many people in this country would invest in something like that if they knew they had a tax break to stay more physically active and to have some regimen of physical activity in their life? I want to advocate for community health centers. Preventative health care is not just fitness and exercise. It is mammograms. It is making sure that you have your blood pressure taken. It is making sure a health professional sees you on a regular basis. That is preventative health care so you do not wait till you are sick to walk in the door of the emergency room and run up the cost of health care. Preventative health care says you take better care of yourself physically, even mentally. It is all connected. The holistic approach says physical, mental and spiritual health will lead to a productive life with a high quality of life, and we all know, I believe, the benefits, but the community health center approach in the community, to get your preventative health care and your maintenance of your health care, is also very important, and in this bill, we just funded $1.8 billion for community health centers in this Labor-Ed bill that passed today. I also want to advocate another program called the Healthy Communities Access Program, HCAP. HCAP was funded last year at $83 million across the country, and this year, unfortunately, in this bill, we were not able to find any money for it, but I am hopeful when we go to the Senate that we will find that money because this is a real market- driven solution. These are the networks at the local level designed to fit the needs of that community. We have got one in Chattanooga, Tennessee, that is very successful where all of the providers banded together, and they say how can we refer people that do not have health insurance, there are 43 million of them in this country today, to good preventative health care, treatment, checkups and even access points because a lot of our providers are willing to give away their care if they know it solves this problem and maintains our fee-for-services health care system. Back in the day, doctors used to give away a lot of their time. Today, because the government's so involved in health care, many of them cannot even give away their time. You cannot give away your time for Medicare delivery, by the way. I think it is against the law. So doctors are disincentivized to actually help people who need health care the most, and many times this is just good, common, routine, preventative health care. The Healthy Communities Access Program has got this high cost benefit ratio. For every dollar the government invests, it saves $6 in the health care delivery system of that community. Again, Medicaid and Medicare cannot sustain these kind of costs. Guess what happens if one of the 43 million uninsured people gets really sick? Oftentimes, they will walk into one of the safety net hospitals that have to cover them by Federal law. They walk into Erlanger Medical Center in my hometown of Chattanooga, and when they walk in, it is too late in terms of preventing the calamity and their costs. Maybe it is too late to even save their life. It is certainly too late to save money because their chronic health care needs got out of hand. This network keeps that from happening, and that is why it is one of the solutions. It is preventative health care. That is where we need to invest our dollars. Let me just say in closing, because my hour is almost up, we need to learn sometimes from other countries. I was in Japan a few years ago, and I was very impressed that early in the morning, sun had just come up, these people are outside. You just kind of look and watch, and the senior citizens are out exercising. They are in a group, grandmas, granddads, and then the children are watching, and they are out doing their morning exercise. Now, these people are healthy, and in many cases they are healthier than we are. We actually may have more technological superiority to them. We have got the great pharmaceutical industry that has found all these new inventions, but they have got it right in terms of the physical benefits of exercise, and they know that the human body is made to move, to move, not to sit still. We have too many people gaining unnecessary weight in this country. It is a fact, and there is something we can do about it. They call them preventable health care challenges, and preventative health care is the solution. We cannot buy our way out of this problem. We cannot even invent our way out of this problem. This problem can be addressed with simple solutions, develop these small first steps towards better health care, and I think the element here is personal responsibility. Something that I believe the Republican party stands for in this country still is personal responsibility. We are responsible for ourselves and then our family and then our community. The government should be last, not first. So let us take better care of ourselves, and let us make sure that the children of America know that if they want to live a productive life, one of the basic things they need to do is personal hygiene, good sleep habits, good nutrition habits and make sure that when it is time to play, they do not do it on a video screen as much as they go outside and sweat a little. That would be good for this next generation. I think they could work a little more, sweat a little more, and we would all be the better for it. With that, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the Chair's indulgence, and the material I referred to previously, I will insert into the Record at this point. The Surgeon General's Call To Action to Prevent and Decrease Overweight and Obesity

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. In order to avoid offering an amendment, I rise today to engage the chairman in a colloquy to discuss funding for the Healthy Communities Access Program, HCAP. HCAP funds the development of community-wide health care networks which organize and coordinate care for low-income and uninsured individuals. Through shared resources, HCAP networks help improve health care access, reduce emergency room use, and save a lot of money. HCAP is a flexible, bottoms-up approach that can be tailored to meet a community's unique needs. Without a coordinated community- based approach, the uninsured simply end up in the emergency room or go without care. Both results add to our growing health care crisis. Since 2000, HCAP has leveraged $6 in the community for every $1 in Federal grant funds, and has saved $1.9 billion annually through increased efficiency in health care systems. It has provided access to health care for 6.2 million more uninsured and vulnerable people. Five communities in my State of Tennessee have won HCAP grants since 2000, and I have worked closely with one of our current grantees, the Medical Foundation of Chattanooga. The HCAP coalition partners in Chattanooga have used this small investment to serve the uninsured. While I understand well this year's budgetary constraints, I strongly believe programs like HCAP are providing essential support for improving access to care, reducing cost to the Federal Government, and making communities more self-sustaining. The HCAP program embodies exactly the kind of innovative approach to health care access and cost we must address across the Nation. I ask the chairman to continue to work with me throughout the process to ensure this program can continue.

Mr. WAMP. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, a husband, father, businessman, accountant, and community leader. Dan Johnson is a man of values and integrity. He is a steady thoughtful leader who has been giving back to the community for more than three decades. Born and raised in Tennessee, Dan Johnson graduated from the University of Tennessee at Knoxville with a degree in accounting. After faithful service to his country in the U.S. Army, Dan came to Chattanooga, established himself through civic and political involvement and founded Johnson, Hickey and Murchison, PC in 1977. Dan's role as the CEO of the firm that bears his name has provided the platform for him to promote and encourage entrepreneurs and private investment. His contributions to job growth and economic development are significant. In his new capacity as Chief of Staff to Chattanooga's Mayor Ron Littlefield, Dan offers seasoned political and legislative expertise, which will serve our citizens very well. Dan exemplifies the words in the Jaycee Creed, ``Service to humanity is the best work of life.'' Dan's selfless contributions have been recognized by our community and state: He received the Public Service Award from the Tennessee Society (Of Certified Public Accounts in 1997, the 2004 Benefactor Award by The Tennesee Council for Resource Development and the 2005 Tennessee Board of Regents Chancellor's Award for Excellence in Philanthropy--just to name a few. Dan's affiliations and leadership positions include being president of the Chattanooga Jaycees and the Tennessee Jaycees, founding member of Jaycee Future Corporation and Jaycee Progress, Inc., which built housing for the elderly in Chattanooga. He is also a board member and past chairman of Chattanooga's public television station, WTCI Channel 45, member and past secretary of the Chattanooga Kiwanis Club, treasurer and co-founder of Blood Assurance, vice president and board member of the Chattanooga Chamber of Commerce, a member of the board of trustees at Erlanger Medical Center, vice president and board member of Orange Grove Center, past Chairman of the Hamilton County Republican Party, 1998 Chairman of the Year for the TN Society of Certified Public Accountants and my trusted campaign treasurer for more than a decade. Dan and his wife of 43 years, Linda, live in Hixson. Their four children have blessed them with twelve grandchildren. The Johnsons have been active members of the First Baptist Church of Chattanooga for almost forty years. A great man! A great mind! And a big heart! Thank you, Dan Johnson, for the example you set, your devotion to others and selfless service to mankind. We are all the better because of your dedication to our region, state and nation.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 284, I was unavoidably delayed. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 283 I was unavoidably delayed. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' Amendment Offered By Mr. Hunter

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, after 27 years of serving people with intellectual disabilities, Michael L. Cook is retiring as the Executive Director of Orange Grove Center in Chattanooga, TN. After receiving his Master's degree in Behavioral Disabilities, Mike Cook began his career as a direct support professional with Central Wisconsin Center and Training School. He then served as a field representative with the Accreditation Council for Individuals with Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities before coming to Orange Grove in 1978. During his tenure at Orange Grove Center, Mr. Cook transformed this community organization into one of the most respected agencies in the field of mental retardation in the Nation. Today, Orange Grove has a comprehensive, person-centered program serving in excess of 650 adults and children in a variety of settings. Mike Cook's quiet dedication to improving the lives of individuals with intellectual disabilities has been the foundation of all that Orange Grove has accomplished over the years. Having served as Executive Director for more than half of the center's 52 years, Mr. Cook has left an indelible mark on every aspect of life for the people who are in their care. Mr. Cook's devotion can be best summed up in the words of Orange Grove's vision statement: ``To recognize, support, and celebrate the qualities of the individual.'' That has been Mike Cook's vision for the past 27 years. Mr. Speaker, today I pay tribute and honor Orange Grove Center's Mike Cook.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this time to recognize Mr. James Edward Westcott of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, for his continued dedication and service to the community. Ed Westcott's career has been a long and illustrious one. He served a unique role in capturing the history of Oak Ridge. In 1941, Ed went to work for the United States Army Corps of Engineers as their chief photographer for the famed Manhattan Project. He served the City with two distinct roles, officially documenting the historic creation and operation of the ``Secret City'' and unofficially documenting the daily life and events of the community of Oak Ridge as a photojournalist for the Oak Ridge Journal. Throughout Mr. Westcott's career, he has captured numerous historic events and many notable personalities on film, including seven presidents. His most important work, however, was capturing the unique history and heritage of Oak Ridge. The early people of this town who dedicated their services to the greater cause of our country will never be forgotten thanks to the talents and contributions of Ed Westcott. He has truly distinguished himself through his commitment and service to the community.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of a devoted and well-respected Tennessean, Mr. Richard ``Dick'' Smyser. Dick passed away on March 14th of this year at the age of 81. His deep devotion to his community and to the well-being of everyone leaves a legacy carried on by the lives he touched. Mr. Smyser was born and raised in York, Pennsylvania, before graduating in 1944 from Pennsylvania State College with a degree in journalism. His dream to pursue writing, however, was put aside to answer a greater call. In 1943, he enlisted in the United States Army and served with distinction overseas in Algeria and Italy rising to the rank of corporal. Upon returning to Pennsylvania, Mr. Smyser continued on the path he had left and began reporting news for The Chester Times, now The Delaware County Times. In 1948, Dick was named managing editor of The Oak Ridger, the first and only newspaper in the small East Tennessee town of Oak Ridge. Oak Ridge, Tennessee, was created for the important work on the World War II bomb, commonly referred to as the Manhattan project. He was a pioneer and helped shape Oak Ridge into the town it is today. With a large number of scientists living and working in the area, Mr. Smyser became active in science writing circles, with a focus on nuclear science. For eighteen years he served on the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing's board of directors. He was a member of numerous media and science boards and a highly sought after speaker and panelist. Under Mr. Smyser's leadership, The Oak Ridger grew substantially and won numerous awards and accolades for its coverage of the transformation of Oak Ridge. His contribution not only to the development of journalism in East Tennessee but to the entire community is significant. Before his retirement he insured that generations of young writers could make an impact in the field of journalism, as he did, by passing on his vast knowledge as a visiting professor at universities across the country. Dick Smyser was not a personal friend of mine. After all, I am a politician, and he is a journalist. So, we could not be ``friends.'' However, I had many occasions to converse with him and enjoy his warmth and depth of perspective on Oak Ridge and our mutual commitments to this very special place. Dick Smyser was simply a classic human being who was good to his family and friends. His departure from this earth left a large void, and we will always miss him but never forget him. May his legacy endure in the many lives that he touched and inspired.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I want to make some brief comments and then engage in some colloquy with the chairman. Not to repeat anything that has been already said, but just to highlight why I can believe this is such an excellent work product, really three reasons: one, this chairman over the last 2\1/2\ years has gone out into the country, both on the water side and on the energy side, gone into the depths of very complex places like our nuclear weapons complex, gone into our scientific research institutions, energy research, gone and seen demonstrations and the advancement of technology, and tried hard to understand what needs to be proposed. This chairman deserves tremendous credit. At no time in my 9 years on the Committee on Appropriations have I seen this kind of diligence that the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Hobson) has shown. Secondly, it has been very fair and very bipartisan all along the way. Third, this is one of the greatest assimilations of professional staff on both sides of the aisle, people with expertise and experience coming to the same subcommittee at the same time at a very important time. My hat is off to all of these individuals for their diligence. Mr. Chairman, if I may engage in a colloquy, I would like to say a few words on the importance of fielding a leadership-class computer for open science. For the past 2 years under your leadership, this subcommittee has provided additional funds to achieve this goal, and I thank you for this commitment. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory and its partners were competitively selected to carry out this effort. With the additional funds provided by this bill, they will continue down that path. The $25 million for hardware will enable the Center For Computational Science at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory to upgrade the existing system to 50 teraflops. This will get us halfway to the goal of a leadership-class computer which is a 100 teraflop system. The remaining funds will help support the operations and software.

Mr. WAMP. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman. In the subcommittee bill in the area of fusion energy sciences, the subcommittee offered a very reasonable approach to funding fusion science, given the uncertainty surrounding the thermonuclear experimental reactor equipment. As the subcommittee report notes: ``If the United States expects to be a serious contributor to international fusion research in general, and ITER in particular, the Nation needs to maintain strong domestic research programs and user facilities to train the next generation of fusion scientists and engineers.'' I think that is exactly right, and I want to commend the gentleman and subcommittee staff for putting that strong statement in our report. Mr. Chairman, I want to highlight one area in particular that we fund and ask for the gentleman from Ohio's comments. Our bill provides $5.1 million for ``compact stellarators and small-scale experiments.'' I understand that to be a reference to experiments such as the quasi- polloidal stellarator, or QPS, that is being developed by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Mr. Chairman, I ask the gentleman from Ohio, is my understanding correct?

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman I would like to thank the gentleman from California (Chairman Dreier) and the Committee on Rules for making my amendment in order and the gentleman from California (Chairman Cox) and the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thomas), ranking member, as well as their staffs, for their good work on this bill and for working with me on this important issue. My amendment would permit the Department of Energy laboratories to team with a university or consortium of universities when competing for Department of Homeland Security's Centers of Excellence. Currently, the DHS Science and Technology Directorate prohibits DOE laboratories from contributing to university proposals for Centers of Excellence solicitations. My amendment would allow DOE labs to participate as partners with universities in preparation of Centers of Excellence proposals. This is only if the university or universities want the DOE lab to participate. It is not my intention to take anything away from universities or have Centers of Excellence located anywhere but at the universities. Under my amendment, universities will remain the lead on the Centers of Excellence proposals. As a member of the Subcommittee on Homeland Securities of the Committee on Appropriations, I want to state that I fully support the Centers of Excellence program and have advocated for increased funding every year. My concern arises from a faulty policy decision by the Science and Technology Directorate to prohibit DOE labs from partnering with universities to bring their expertise to complement university proposals. I have heard that the Department of Homeland Security opposes my amendment. That is unfortunate, but I know that we are on the right track for six reasons. First, DOE labs, even the ones that are intramural, are not and have not been involved in strategic planning and program development of Centers of Excellence and university programs. Second, these labs are only intramural to those DOE legacy programs under the Office of Research and Development mostly dealing with chemical, radiological, biological, and nuclear threats within the funding that comes to Office of Research and Development for those missions. This funding is all done at national laboratories where the classified nature of the research needs to happen at a secure Federal research facility. Third, to say that an intramural DOE lab has insider information on the Centers of Excellence program is simply not accurate. Fourth, why do DOE labs have the ability to be eligible to partner with universities post award if requested by the university? What is the difference between pre award versus post award? How do universities write a proposal? The Department accepts it, makes the award to the university, and then after it is awarded, the university changes the proposal to add a DOE national lab that was barred from contributing in the first place. That makes no sense. Fifth, it is my understanding that these Centers of Excellence are eligible for renewal, so there is a question that is still not clear. If a university that wins the Center of Excellence picks the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, for instance, to partner post award, would that preclude Science and Technology from considering that university from competing again or getting a renewal contract? Finally, what happens when a university has a contractor at a DOE national laboratory such as the University of Tennessee and Battelle, which manage the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, or the University of California that manages Lawrence Livermore, does that not preclude these universities from ever being considered for Centers of Excellence proposals? When we created the Department of Homeland Security Science and Tech Directorate, this was not the intended result. The Federal Government should encourage our excellence in academia to partner with our excellence at our national labs. The Science and Tech Directorate's use of the national labs is still unclear. Congress needs to work together on this and challenge these decisions by making DHS more accountable so their decisions are made with good, common sense. We need these changes in this authorization bill, and I urge the adoption of this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WAMP. Well, then, I appreciate that. Maybe we have worked these things out. That is great news, and I will just go ahead and yield back the balance of my time and move the adoption of the amendment.

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) for yielding to me. Let me say how encouraged I am that five senior Republicans would come together tonight to share different perspectives on the need to secure our energy sources in this country and to help bring the American people along to some of the reforms that are necessary, I think, to secure our future in the world and to create more opportunity. I believe that we have done a lot of good things on this side of the aisle, but I think that we have a whole lot left to be done. And before this energy bill gets back from conference, I think we all need to advocate for quite a few changes. Let me say that energy and economic development are hand in hand. The gentleman from South Carolina invoked the name of Bill Gates. I would submit that the reason that we balanced the budget a few years ago for a few years in a row was not because we cut spending. We did hold the line on spending for like 3 consecutive years and kept the growth of spending below inflation. But it was because we actually led the world in a particular area of our export economy and information technology and we created such a robust U.S. economy that revenues surpassed expenses, and we balanced the budget. And I would challenge the country that the one great area that we can do that again, as we look over the next 10 to 15 years, is in what I call ``entech,'' energy technologies. Because there are so many energy needs around the world as the population explodes, as third-world countries become industrialized, as people are more mobile, and this global economy that we all live and operate in is increasing the demand for energy, the whole world is looking to us for leadership. And it is an export potential in manufacturing that could lead to the most robust U.S. economy that could actually increase revenues so greatly, because we are so productive, and we are solving the world problems. We could balance the budget again. I do not believe, given today's needs, we can cut spending enough to balance the budget because of homeland security, because of entitlement spending. As a matter of fact, if we eliminate all of the nondefense discretionary funding, we still would have a deficit in this current fiscal year. So we have got to grow this economy, and energy technologies are the way to do it. Energy, as we have heard already, is a source of many of our problems. But I have get got to tell my colleagues, energy is also the source of the solutions to a lot of our problems, and I am looking forward to the development of technologies. And when we look at this continuum, I love the combination of history and knowledge on energy, but think about the next 100 years and think back on the last 100 years. Man has only been flying a little more than 100 years. That ought to blow people's minds that, in less than 100 years, we can go from Kitty Hawk to people routinely being catapulted into space with a hydrogen system, catapult them into space. They stay out there for a period of time. They reenter the earth's atmosphere in a big ball of fire, and then they safely land and walk away. And except for two great tragedies with Challenger and Columbia, this became routine in less than 100 years. Where are we going to be with technology in the next 100 years? Children ought to look forward to their future. The Jetsons, which was a cartoon we watched, could very well be a reality within the next few decades. Transportation, though, has to be at the forefront of the energy revolution in this country because two-thirds of the petroleum is used in the transportation sector, and as the gentleman from South Carolina so well articulated, we have got to look for solutions. I am encouraged by the development of hybrid vehicles. It is the bridge to the hydrogen economy as it develops, and right now, there are more and more automotive systems, cars and light trucks, that are moving to hybrid technologies, both foreign and domestic. And next year, the American consumer will have a host of options. One of the things that I regretted about the energy bill, and I think several of our colleagues here on our side did not vote for the House version, and I believe we will be able to vote for the conference report when it comes back soon, because the House version did not include the tax incentives to stimulate renewables, alternative fuels, did not extend the tax credit for these hybrid vehicles. And, frankly, we have got people waiting in line, and we need to incentivize more of that so that the manufacturers will be encouraged to make them and consumers will be encouraged to buy them, and we did not do enough in that bill. As a matter of fact, here is what folks need to know, because I have met with President Bush recently and listened to him on this issue: When he sent his proposal over here, 72 percent of the tax incentives in his energy plan were for renewables and energy alternatives, and he really wanted to rachet this up. But, by the time the House got through with it, they had lowered that 72 percent to 6 percent and replaced a lot of the renewables and alternative energy sources with oil and gas. And when they asked the President what he thought about that he said, You do not need to incentivize oil and gas; $2.35 a gallon will incentivize oil and gas. They have got incentives. It is called the marketplace. We need to incentivize the alternatives to oil and gas. And that is really what we are excited about here, and I believe, when the Senate finishes its work, brings this back, the Republicans in Congress and quite a few good Democrats will come together and pass an energy bill that really moves us towards these alternatives. Let me tell my colleagues that I look to the private sector to see what they are doing because there is some division at DOE as to whether or not hydrogen is safe and if hydrogen is the solution, and there are still some question marks behind it. But GM and Shell, they do not just throw their money away. They are interested in the bottom line. And they now have 40 hydrogen fuel cell vehicles on the road, a permanent hydrogen station in New York City, a permanent hydrogen station here in Washington, D.C., to demonstrate what can be done. The challenge, we have heard some of the challenges; another challenge is cost. These units cost $400,000 each. We have got to find ways to bring that cost down to a $40,000 or $50,000 each so that it is cost-effective for the American consumers to jump across this bridge to the hydrogen economy. I have said that I believe our tax code is the best way to encourage and incentivize manufacturers and consumers to move towards these new sources of energy. Our energy independence, though, is a homeland security issue. I co-chair the Renewable Energy Caucus here in the House, and in the last Congress, we got over half the Members. It is very bipartisan; about 60 percent Democrats, 40 percent Republicans. Many of my colleagues here, I think all of them are members of it. It is so important that we do these things, but I also serve on the Homeland Security Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations. Our energy security is a top homeland security issue. As a matter of fact, former national security advisers all came together last month and signed a letter to the President of the United States saying that energy security is a crisis and that it is a national security issue and that we need to address it with the highest level of priority. And there are several crises floating around. We are spending a lot of time talking about them. In my view, this energy issue is right at the end of our nose in terms of a crisis. We have got to mobilize quickly so that we can secure our independence. I do not want to be reliant on the Middle East for petroleum for two-thirds of our transportation needs. And the sooner we act, the sooner we are going to be stable and secure. It is a very important national security and homeland security issue. We talk about natural gas. The prices have spiked so quickly that now we look at photovoltaics. We look at solar panels for home construction, and because of the rise in natural gas prices, they become cost-effective to put them on their house early. They make solar energy panels in Memphis, Tennessee. Sharp Solar does. And in a lot of places that are cold in the winter, now where natural gas has gone to $7, I think, we can actually put in our building materials these energy-efficient technologies. Go to the National Renewable Energy Lab in Colorado and see the breakthroughs. One will be stunned as to how quickly, as the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) has said, these things are advancing. A host of things. Wind power, we are building more and more windmills in the Tennessee Valley. TVA has the green power switch option. More and more consumers are signing up for that. Pay a little more but know that they have got totally renewable energy coming into their home. It is a popular thing. And, frankly, Republicans leading with a national energy policy for the first time since the late 1970s are doing the right thing for the environment. But that brings me to a problem we have, and that is in the electricity sector, the cleanest, most efficient electricity in this country is nuclear. In France, these people are very environmentally sensitive. They actually get it, and over 70 percent of the electricity in France is provided by nuclear, but they do prototype their design. They eliminate the margin of error, and they do the same thing over and over again. We need to do that here, and we need to go back into the nuclear business. We have the waste stream problems worked out with Yucca Mountain. We need to be bold enough to say, if we are going to secure our energy sources, and the main thing is there is absolutely no emissions with nuclear. We have clean air. We could actually participate in Kyoto if we would replace fossil with nuclear, and we are smart enough to do it. Dadgum, if the French are smart enough to do it, then we are smart enough to do it. The House Republicans have a strong energy plan. By the time we finish, we are going to do extremely well. We have got several deliverables from renewable energy and energy efficiency, moving to the hydrogen economy, making sure that our electricity grid is reliable, expanding nuclear power and cleaning up the coal technologies in this country. I am proud to serve with these men and advocate for energy security. I believe we are going to actually send that bill to the President and do the right thing, grow the economy and hopefully ultimately have revenues pass expenses again.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, once again today, the Speaker of the Whole House, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), has proven that he is a decent, fair, humble, and, today, magnanimous person, putting the institution first. The truth is neither party has an exclusive on integrity or ideas. There are good and decent people in both parties. But we are not your enemy. Al Qaeda is our enemy. We are competitors. We need to stick together and pursue unity and reconciliation. Sometimes that means setting your own beliefs aside, which the Speaker did today for the purpose of the institution, holding it up above our own view of how things should be done. I have spoken out when I thought we were going in the wrong direction, but in this case I, frankly, think the rules proposals were reasonable. And if one Member's foot was not in a snare today, I think a lot of Members over here would have agreed to them. But that is not a discussion point anymore. I appeal to both sides. Let us make sure that this ethics conflict does not turn into a circular firing squad. It is not in our country's best interest and it is not in this institution's best interest. Let us pursue, as much as we can in the competitive battles we fight on ideas and our agendas, let us pursue reconciliation and unity, especially when it comes to the ethics of this great institution, putting it above either party's political agendas. It will serve our country well, and the Speaker should be commended.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I rise to make remarks on the subrogation provision in the Price Anderson section of H.R. 6. Mr. Chairman, I would like to discuss a provision in this bill that I have some concerns with. I have the pleasure of representing the Department of Energy sites in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. This site is a natural asset that not only has a vitally important defense mission, a growing and prominent science mission, but an ongoing active environmental cleanup activity. I am proud of the caliber of contractors we have in Oak Ridge and the work they do for our country. I have some concerns with Section 612 in the nuclear title of this bill. This provision, dealing with Price Anderson Act indemnity, is reportedly designed to make DOE contractors more ``financially accountable'' for their actions in support of the DOE nuclear mission. The fact is that there are already a wide variety of mechanisms in place to ensure DOE contractor accountability: from civil penalties of up to $110,000 a day; to stop work orders; to contract terminations; to criminal fines and imprisonment. There is no evidence that additional sanctions are needed. In the 48-year history of Price Anderson, no government contractors have been found to have engaged in ``willful misconduct.'' Are we willing to ask the government's best contractors at all levels, the ones we want involved in this business, to face significantly increased financial risks that have and will likely remain uninsurable? I believe that we presently have sufficient mechanisms in place to hold the contracting community accountable. The inclusion of this provision in the final Energy bill will have the opposite effect as intended. Rather than adding to financial accountability it will drive the most prudent and best performing contractors out of the DOE nuclear market. I do not want to imagine a time when the activities at Oak Ridge are not being conducted by the most qualified DOE contractors. If Section 612 was enacted, I fear that it will have a detrimental impact on not only the defense mission of DOE, but on most of the government's nuclear science activities. I look forward to working with Chairman Barton and the Energy and Commerce Committee to perfect this provision as we head to Conference with the Senate.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. I am torn, I will have to tell you. I support the President, and I support the President's request for a national energy policy. But he sent a request for $6.7 billion of tax incentives, 72 percent of which was for renewables and energy efficiency; and this base bill has 6 percent of the total for those two very important functions given the crisis that we face today. I am the cochairman of the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus. Over half of the House are members. We asked for four amendments last night to ratchet this back up some, just a little; and all four were denied. That is not right. Yet there are so many important things in this bill. So I am torn. I do not want to vote against the new residential personal 15 percent tax credit for photovoltaics that does not exist today, or the 20 percent tax credit for homeowners to install energy-efficiency improvements to their home, or Charlie Bass's billion dollar rebate program for investment in renewable energy. But I am telling you, all of it together is 6 percent instead of 72 percent that our President asked us for. I am for the President. I am for his plan. And I hope that the conference report after we work with the Senate has it all in there, because no one in this House wants an energy policy more than me. I have worked for a decade as an appropriator on those important investments, yet I asked for amendments to improve this bill, and every one of them was denied.