Zach Wamp

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to a great patriot, the gentleman from the State of Arizona (Mr. Franks).

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume for the purpose to close briefly by saying that Chairman Obey said something at the full committee that I want to paraphrase and restate in the context that we all know that those who do not learn from history, are destined to repeat it. One of the lessons of Vietnam is that regardless of how you feel, especially as a policymaker, but even as a citizen, about the war in Iraq or the war in Afghanistan, or any war, it's so important to appreciate fully the men and women who are engaged in that war on our behalf. Regardless of how you feel about the mission, it is so important for our Nation to appreciate and support and fund and resource the needs of our men and women in uniform and our veterans. I want to say tonight I grew up a Democrat. I am a Republican today. But we should, and are, meeting at the water's edge on this issue of resourcing the men and women in harm's way and supporting the veterans when they come home for the balance of their life. This is a lesson of history, of modern history. We saw it and we are making that right. So even though many of them do not support what we are doing in Iraq, or maybe even Afghanistan, this bill supports those who are fighting, and their families. And that is important. In closing, I do want to recognize by name again the extraordinary staff. They call these people the front office staff. Rob Nabors and Jeff Shockey at the highest level. This committee staff is bipartisan. There happens to be a majority staff, Carol Murphy, Donna Shahbaz, Walter Hearne; the minority staff, Martin Delgado, Liz Dawson, and Kelly Shea. Mr. Edwards has John Conger, I have Amanda Schoch. They have done a remarkable job day in day in day out to bring us to this today because this is a great work product. Not all bills that come to this floor are, but this is. And it's right. I urge its passage. I thank you for the time on the general debate. We have got 37 amendments. The hour is getting late. Let's get on with it. I yield back the balance of our time.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. If the gentleman will yield, I thank the gentleman from California for raising this issue before the House tonight. As the gentleman has seen firsthand, dealing with this multiyear, multibillion-dollar BRAC process, some of the business plans that were initially adopted have changed. He is doing everything he can to make sure that the Department of Defense sticks as close as possible to those plans. I join Chairman Edwards and commit to working to ensure that we conduct proper oversight of the BRAC process. I want to thank the chairman for this commitment to fully fund the BRAC process, which was a major point of discussion throughout our 100 hours and 19 hearings this year, to make sure BRAC is fully funded on time. I am grateful the gentleman from California has taken this initiative tonight.

Mr. WAMP. I just want to say, in all fairness, Mr. Chairman, the Chair allowed the reader to read past this point with people on their feet for the colloquy, with an understanding on both sides that the colloquy would go first and then we would start this point in the bill. The reading was an accidental reading, not that someone wasn't here ready to offer the amendments. Mr. Burgess was sitting right here. And points of order are going to be raised against both. So, with all due respect, Mr. Chairman, if we can get on with it, we will dispose of it quickly.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. I do want to point out, in follow-up support to the gentleman's amendment, about how important it is for us to advance alternative sources just across the board throughout the military. The Military Construction bill is kind of a small piece, frankly, of the energy utilization across the entire Department of Defense, but it is something that we clearly should come together on. The military is a tremendous user of energy, we all know that. There is no question that we can do better there. And this was an excellent amendment offered by a gentleman who's got just tremendous history here with the Veterans Committee and a great patriot. So I think we want to encourage all of those type uses as we move forward. We're coming together here on the bill tonight, I think we're making great progress. Over the next 2 to 3 hours I think we can get through the rest of the sections of this bill. Certain Members are working out agreements as I speak right now, and so we're trying to draft this language. And I'm kind of keeping the ball rolling now, as you can tell, so that we can get this language drafted. I think we're making the progress that we need tonight. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WAMP. Well, I was prepared to perfect your amendment, if it's ruled in order, with the words ``at VA medical facilities'' to make sure that it complied with the letter of the law. But I think it's an outstanding amendment. And I would like to see it see the light of day, but I understand there may be a point of order reserved.

Mr. WAMP. Will the chairman yield?

Mr. WAMP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to compliment you on your statement. And, again, we are bipartisan partners here. But I would point out that had we not had the preprinting requirement that was talked about earlier that we're living under, the fluidity of modifying amendments or amounts on the floor is part of the way that the appropriations process works. We do have a great bill. But the neat thing about appropriations is when you bring a great bill to the floor, the Members of the House, all of them, do have the ability to make changes or make improvements or make suggestions, and, frankly, that is what the gentleman is trying to do. So I want to make that point, and to say that it's not late. We can start talking about how late it is, but this bill has been ready for the floor for 35 days. So as far as I'm concerned, we are not late tonight. We have got plenty of time to debate these things. So I don't want to--especially these gentlemen, the chairman and ranking member from the Veterans Affairs Committee who want to bring these ideas to the floor on an appropriation bill, that's kind of the nature of an appropriations process. It is an open process. We do have a great bill. I don't think it's a perfect bill not subject to amendment by the Members of the House.

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, point of parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. WAMP. Will you restate how far you've read?

Mr. WAMP. No objection.

Mr. WAMP. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WAMP. I, too, want to commend Mr. Stupak and Mr. Barrow, two of the finest Members in this House, outstanding, a perfect example of how Members that aren't on our committee can bring improvements to the floor for the bill. Certainly we'll work with you the whole way. We'll support your amendment subject to the chairman and his call tonight. But we will work together with you either way.

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief. My amendment is very simple. It says that the VA can not modify current standards that are used to make special monthly benefit payments and therefore protects that benefit payment for U.S. veterans who are eligible for it. Earlier tonight the chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee offered and withdrew two amendments that would have decimated the information technology budget at the VA to fund a new entitlement program for Filipino veterans. Had those amendments passed, it would have stopped key VA initiatives dead in their tracks. We're trying to get the VA to streamline operations, reduce the time it takes to process claims, and increase interoperability between VA and DOD medical records, not to mention that the VA is going to need all of the $2.4 billion that the President requested to help it roll out or new GI Bill. Earlier in the year the chairman of the authorizing committee tried to pay for this bill by proposing to cut special monthly pension benefits to U.S. veterans currently receiving these benefits. Now, let's be clear here. We support those Filipino veterans who fell alongside U.S. forces in World War II. But to provide them with a new benefit to be paid for out of an account that our veterans will immediately feel the impact of is wrong. An ``aye'' vote on my amendment will tell our veterans that their benefits will not be cut and let them know we are trying to do everything we can to get their claims processed as quickly as possible. I yield back.

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. WAMP. I, too, rise in opposition to this amendment. And Mr. Chairman, now it is late. It's 12:30, we've got two more amendments. I will speak, and then I assume Mr. Hensarling will speak. But let me say briefly why three senior members of the Appropriations Committee from our side--Mr. Wolf, Mr. Kingston and myself, people I believe have very high integrity--offered a proposal to have a 6-month moratorium, no earmarks from either side, while we establish a select committee to reform the way that earmarks are carried out because the earmark system is broken, and there have been abuses on both sides. And I do think that job one is to define what is an earmark. Because under article I, section 9 of the United States Constitution, the Congress does have the authority and the responsibility to direct the funding on behalf of the taxpayers, not the unelected bureaucrats in the executive branch. And this is now way out of kilter, but there have been abuses and it needs to be cleaned up. So we said we should have a time out, let's redo this. I'm hopeful that this still happens because both major Presidential candidates have indicated they would like to see sweeping reforms in this process. But you've got to define what is it and then go from there, and then change the rules for everybody--authorization committee, tax, trade, earmarks from the executive branch, anywhere would all come under the same rules, both bodies, bicameral, sweeping reforms. Let's start over and define what is a congressional direction that's acceptable. But I think these gentlemen tonight have picked the wrong bill to come and attack on earmarks. Let me tell you why. One of the problems with earmarks out there is there's a cottage industry of lobbyists bringing requests to the Congress on behalf of clients. Are there lobbyists on MilCon earmarks? There is no lobbyist for a National Guard or a Reserve or a military base asking for money from the Congress. Are there campaign contributions flowing based on earmark requests from the National Guard, the Reserve, or military bases? No. Now, I don't know where you get your numbers, but let me tell you that there's not a request in this bill in my district, but there's one in my State, and it's in a Democratic Member's district, Mr. Davis. He may be on that vulnerable list, but he ain't vulnerable. I would say at 9 percent approval we are all vulnerable. What kind of a rating is that, vulnerable? Now, my name was also on that request because it was my State and protocol is we put our names on it. But it's not in my district. So facts are whatever you present them to be, but the military construction bill is a perfect example of where the Congress has the right and the responsibility to say this needs to be done. We are the ones who had the 19 hearings about quality of life in child care centers, not the executive branch. They don't have any hearings. Why do we even exist to have hearings if we're not going to say these need to be funded? Let me tell you I was born at Fort Benning. My dad was on active duty. They needed a new hospital. Mr. Bishop is going to get nailed for getting an earmark because he represents Fort Benning, and he probably went to this subcommittee of Appropriations because he represented Fort Benning, Mr. Flake. Duh. That's how the numbers work that way. Good gracious. Defeat this, but then reform the process. Clean up the mess. But coming through here with a chainsaw on everything, treating them all like they're the same thing is no way to run a train. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Madam Speaker, as a leader on earmark reform among House Republicans, I am committed to honoring House Republican rules that provide for greater transparency. The Fiscal Year 2009 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies Appropriation Act contains the following funding that I requested: Requesting Member: Rep. Zach Wamp. Bill Number: H.R. 5658. Account: Military Construction, Army National Guard. Legal Name Requesting Entity: Tennessee National Guard. Address: 3041 Sidco Drive, Nashville, TN. Description of Request: $10,372,000 for the construction of a new Army National Guard Readiness Center to replace the inadequate Readiness Center that was constructed in 1954. The existing facility has numerous health and safety issues as well as significant electrical code issues, and ADA violations. The new facility will house the 20th Troop Command, and the Company Headquarters of the 1175th Transportation Company. This project is in the Army National Guard's Fiscal Year 2012 Future Year Defense Plan.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove my name as a cosponsor of H.R. 4789.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, tonight I come to the floor to honor a great American hero, Corporal Jason Dane Hovater, who gave his life 10 days ago in defense of the United States of America in Afghanistan. Corporal Hovater was killed when 200 militants with machine guns, rocket- propelled grenades and mortars attacked his outpost. Thankfully, they were beaten back after a fierce firefight that lasted hours. But nine American soldiers lost their lives. Besides Corporal Hovater, First Lieutenant Jonathan Brostrom of Hawaii; Sergeant Israel Garcia of California; Corporal Jonathan Ayers of Snellville, Georgia; Corporal Jason Bogar of Seattle, Washington; Corporal Matthew Phillips of Jasper, Georgia; Corporal Pruitt Rainey of Haw River, North Carolina; Corporal Gunnar Zwilling of Florissant, Missouri; and Private Sergio Abad of Kentucky, with the C Company, 2nd Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment, 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team, these nine patriots gave it all they had. And they laid down their life for our Nation. Yesterday morning, I had the privilege of being with Corporal Hovater's family at the Holly Gamble funeral home in Lake City, Tennessee. I was with Jeanna, his wife of only 19 months. They only had 6 weeks together before he went to train, before he spent 16 months on the ground in Afghanistan. He was set to come home 1 week after his death. I met his mother, Kathy; his father, Gerald; his sister, Jessica; his brothers, Joe and Jesse Darrin; Sean and David. They're very active at the Lake City Christian Fellowship where the memorial service was held Monday night. It was a praise service. You see, he was a worship leader. His family is very involved in this ministry. When I met his family, it was like no other time that I have spent with a family of a wounded or slain soldier. Unfortunately, he was the ninth soldier from Tennessee's Third Congressional District, and every time we've lost one in the last 4 years, I have had the privilege of being with the family and presenting them a Bible engraved in their memory. But this was unusual. In this family's eyes, all of them, all of them, was the love of their Lord. The humility, the genuine appreciation of our Nation, they honored their son. They believed deep in their soul that God was with him when he was conceived, throughout his life, God was with him when he died on this Earth, and he is with God today. They believe deeply that this is what God ordained for him, to lay his life down voluntarily for our country. I had the privilege to say to them, thank you from a grateful Nation, from every one in the Congress and the executive branch, to thank this family for this extraordinary sacrifice and to share with them that every time freedom has been handed from one generation to the next, it has been by the blood of these American patriots who are willing to stand between a threat and our civilian population and pay the ultimate sacrifice on our behalf. Corporal Jason Dane Hovater is an American hero in every sense, and we thank him so much for his sacrifice. And we thank this extraordinary family for their witness and their testimony and their faith and their goodness and their trust in God Almighty that Jason is in his arms and they will see him again. I felt it. We love him, and we are so grateful in east Tennessee that they gave their husband, their son, their brother, for all of us. And with his eight comrades, we honor you on the floor of the House tonight and we thank you for standing up for us and giving us, as Abraham Lincoln once said, ``your last full measure.'' We honor you, Corporal Hovater, as a great American patriot and hero. We will always remember, and we will never forget.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Well, I thank Dr. Gingrey, and I thank Mr. Hall for his unique insight. It is a privilege to come tonight. I think Mr. Hall is right. There are a lot of people of good will in this body that really want to do something about this. As a matter of fact, the heat is on. I had a Democratic colleague tell me recently that he was on an airplane and a guy came up to him and said bring down gas prices. And the guy was pretty upset, as we see often now at home. And the Democratic Member said, don't you think if we could do something quickly we would? And that really is the response that a lot of Members give. And politics sometimes gets in the way of progress. But I have got to tell you that it is important the votes you cast, and it is important when you try to push a legislative initiative, and when things are vetoed and do not go forward, there are consequences. And we find ourselves in that mess today. I don't come to the floor to blame anybody. Frankly, I come to the floor to offer solutions. And I think the blame game has got a lot of people really dissatisfied with the Congress to begin with. But these solutions really need to be debated and voted on. That is what we are really trying to press is for more legislative activity around new energy sources for Americans. Now, for the last 8 years, I have had the privilege of co-chairing a large bipartisan group in the Congress called the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus. It is well over half the House. I know both these men, I think, are on the caucus. But it is about 60 percent Democratic Members, 40 percent Republican Members. And I have to tell you, from our perspective, conservation is kind of job one. I say conservation is not for wimps; it is for warriors. Not everybody is going to put the uniform of our Armed Forces on, but everybody can help our country in a mighty way by increasing efficiency and conserving as they can. They can weatherize their home and save electricity. They can cut back, and they can go to a more efficient vehicle, and they can be smart about how they consume energy. And as we reduce demand prices will come down, and every American has a patriotic obligation to push for efficiencies and conservation, and that really ought to be job one. And we all need to say more about that because it is real. The number one energy source over the last generation in this country, is conservation, if you just calculate all of the energy and how much we have saved since the 1970s when we conserve and create efficiencies. That is important. Now, there is an irony here, and that is the Energy Policy Act that was signed into law almost 3 years ago this week, EPAct, the Energy Policy Act of 2005, was a Republican bill with a Republican Congress signed by a Republican president. And everybody trashes the President and the Vice President for knowing a lot about the oil and gas industry. But the truth is, and I was there and wrote what was called the Energy Efficiency Cornerstone Act with some industry groups for the renewable and energy efficiency organizations. That was rolled in. And if you were in the wind, solar, biomass, geothermal or renewable energy sector, you loved that bill, and you said, this is the best bill that has been signed into law for us in a long, long time. But as Dr. Gingrey said, those tax credits to incentivize the investments in those new technologies have expired. Some of them may still be going on, but most of them have already expired. They were 2 years. Now, if you are in the majority in the Congress today, you have a majority in the House and the Senate, and you believe in those things, why in the world have you not not only extended them for another 2 years, but extended them for 5 years or 10 years? There is an article today that the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee is frustrated that he can't get the votes in the Senate to bring this up. You talked about Congressman Bartlett from Maryland. I am the original cosponsor with him of the extenders for these tax incentives for renewables and efficiencies without any tax increases. Just extend them. If you believe in them, extend them. Don't worry about the budget consequences because it will stimulate. And right now the cost of energy is so heavy we can't afford not to. As a matter of fact, we can't afford to do a lot of things now because of the cost of energy. We really can't afford any more time delays, any more recesses, as Dr. Gingrey says. And these investment tax credits are important. The industry groups will tell you give us a 5-year investment tax credit and you will see major investments. If you really believe in those things, to the new majority, and I am not blaming, I am just saying, let's get on with it. Bring it up now. Time is of the essence. The gentleman talked about nuclear. And yes, Yucca Mountain is out there, and yes, you can take the spent fuel from nuclear and you can bury it, but that is a long now protracted process that is involved in a legal dispute. What does France do? Because they get 81 percent of their electricity from nuclear they reprocess the spent fuel. They are not as afraid of it as we are. Now, listen, the French have not been accused of being overly courageous here of late. Yet, here, they have more courage than we do. Actually they are smarter than we are on energy utilization. They go 81 percent nuclear, and they reprocess the spent fuel and turn most of it back into energy. And they have half as many nuclear reactors as we do. We are at about 105 reactors. They are at about 53 reactors. They have one reprocessing facility, therefore, we would need two. We have the technology to do it. I represent the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. We can demonstrate for the country right now, and TVA is prepared to show we can reprocess the spent fuel and stand up nuclear. And the gentleman is right. It is 8-12 percent right now, reactors on-line of our total electricity capacity. It needs to be at least \1/ 4\ nuclear. Now they're going to come up, the Democrats, in a few minutes and talk about Boone Pickens. Okay. He's an oilman who now says 25 percent wind. Great. He shows us where they can be put. Great. What they're not going to tell you, as he also says, is go after all of the oil and gas capacity in this country that you can because we have to have new energy, okay? We can go in all of these renewable and efficiency areas, but it's still not enough given the demand. The demand is way up. We've had a robust economy for 15 years in this country. I know it has sputtered of late, but because of that dynamic economy and because of the demand in India and in China and in other parts of the world, the demand exceeds the supply globally, and the price points are now unacceptable and unsustainable. We have got to have some new capacity as well. The Outer Continental Shelf, way out in the ocean where you cannot see it, should be a no-brainer for people if the State says ``okay.'' So that's what Senator McCain has proposed is let the States decide. That's a good idea. If South Carolina wants to do it, let them do it. If Florida doesn't want to do it, don't let them do it, but get out of the way with the global moratorium. The President released the executive moratorium on Outer Continental Shelf exploration. Now the Congress should do it. That's another thing that the Speaker ought to bring to the floor. Let's lift the moratorium. Things have changed. When President Clinton vetoed ANWR in 1996, 70 percent of the American people thought that we should preserve all of that Alaska wilderness and not drill. Today, it's the other way around. Seventy percent of Americans say let's get on with it because we can't afford gas. We need help. Senator Obama says it's going to be 7 years before you can pull any of it out. How much worse off are we going to be in 7 years if we don't get started now? We need all of the above. Let me tell you that I know a lot of Democrats want to go ahead and start drilling. They want the votes, but they won't let us have the votes. Today, here at the Capitol, in Washington, there were dozens of protesters who were holding up signs, saying, ``Do not drill. Protect our coastlines. Protect our wildlife area regions.'' I've got to tell you that they are now in the minority in this country. The American people don't want them up here protesting our going after American energy for American citizens. We have to do all of the above. I just want to close on a couple of new technologies that have great potential out of the Silicon Valley, which has, frankly, led the world now for a long time on things like information technology and which has really helped the U.S. economy and our exports. There is a company called Bloom Energy, and they've developed a solid-oxide stationary fuel cell. It looks like the HVAC system in your home, and without a transmission system at all, it creates electricity. Now, it obviously has to have some feedstock going in, but it can run off a host of feedstocks. It can run off natural gas. It can run off of ethanol. It can run off of solar in some applications. This is a unique, new technology. We're trying to demonstrate that solid-oxide stationary fuel cell here at the Capitol because all of these lights are on today as a result of a fossil-fired, dirty powerhouse here in Washington where we actually pollute in Washington about as bad as anywhere in the country. There's not much efficiency here. The lights stay on all the time. It's really ridiculous. The Democrats have a greening initiative for the Capitol, but it mostly involves light bulbs. We really need to get serious about it and take some of these buildings off that fossil powerhouse and move into solid-oxide stationary fuel cell-type technology. Plug-in hybrids, we need them. Get them to the marketplace. Biodiesel, ethanol, new fuel mixes, get on with it. Wind technologies have tremendous potential in the Northern and Central United States. As the gentleman from Georgia says, the right approach is everything. Don't pick winners and losers. Don't leave anything off the table. They did that in California with electricity, and the lights went out. You can't regulate yourself into a solution here. You can't tax your way into a solution here. We have to have a robust agenda, and it is time for Democrats and Republicans to come together and get this done. I thank the gentleman for coming again tonight, for giving us the opportunity to talk about what the solutions are, and then let's get on with it. The American people are tired of waiting. I yield back.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, if I may, let me tell the Members that for 37 years we've had this tradition in a bipartisan way of Members and former Members getting together, but this is the first year that we brought in this extraordinary charity, the Disabled Sports Foundation. And these wounded warriors, mostly amputees, that got joy out of playing golf with us on Monday, we raised a lot of money for them. This was so important. We took the venue to Army-Navy Golf Club, where they are under construction with renovations. The PGA of America cosponsored it with us. The co-chairmen from the former Members were Ken Kramer and Dennis Hertel. We had 33 Republican Members and only eight Democratic Members--that's one reason the trophy is back over here this year--but y'all had a conflict, so you do have an excuse this year. But next year we should really bring people together to help these wounded warriors. I want to say Steve Buyer was the low gross on the Republican side for the whole House, and Gene Green from the Democratic side was the low net. Republicans reclaimed the trophy. The big winners are these disabled athletes who are great American patriots. We honor them. We had fellowship. We came together. And the full House joins us in our salute to all these men and women in uniform that are disabled.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I especially thank the author of the resolution, Mr. Farr of California, for his leadership and insight here in the Congress. It's a privilege to serve alongside him. A very thoughtful man. I want to join the chorus in praising these firefighters and encouraging others to answer this extraordinarily difficult call to public service every time that one of these fires encroaches on areas where people live and work. But I do find it ironic, having been here for 14 years, from time to time these issues cross over with each other because, frankly, the nexus between the environment, which is a part of these fires; energy, which is also a piece of this; and national security is the most important challenge of our generation, this nexus. And they are connected. Over the last 14 years I have had the privilege, even with Mr. Farr, to travel to places like Yellowstone and Yosemite Valley and the Olympics in Washington State and actually see with the stewards of our public lands, which represent over one-third of the land mass of the continental United States, is government-owned land, and actually be there with the Forest Service, the Park Service, the Bureau of Land Management personnel, many of whom are registered foresters, who will say that one of the biggest problems with the creation of these fires is the dead and dying timber which we have refused to clean out in terms of our stewardship of the forest. You can't just leave this forest alone and let all of this timber become just a matchbox on the ground without huge problems with the fires. So the mindset that says leave all forests alone and do not touch them, even to the point of not cleaning up the dead and dying timber, which creates with any kind of a spark these out-of-control fires that come into California into the areas where people live, the mindset that says, for whatever reason, do not touch these forests, is a flawed mindset that causes these fires. The best thing we can do for the firefighters is to try to mitigate the fires with good forestry practices, good stewardship, and logical environmental response. I consider myself a very logical and rational lawmaker on issues of the environment. But that is the same mindset that says under no circumstance do you take a piece of land in the middle of the Arctic tundra and not explore for oil and gas there. That is the same mindset. It's a flawed mindset. That is why we have the energy pinch. It's a mindset that says States cannot even go into the Outer Continental Shelf, if they want to, and explore oil and gas resources, when in fact we should leave that up to the States. So here we are, kind of feeling the pinch and the adverse consequences of extremist environmental policy, whether it's fires, whether it's energy sources. We have to come back to a rational, logical modern approach. Now I am very much part Cherokee Indian. The Cherokee National Forest is in my district. The Cherokee used to intentionally burn the forest. Why? Because it helped the nutrients in the ground. It became more robust. It's a natural cycle. They intentionally did it. Speaking of good forestry practices, they were not only not afraid of fire, they used fire for the right purposes so that the forest wouldn't get out of control and just burn wildly. It's that kind of thinking, long-term stewardship, that we need to get back to so that the political winds of the day do not stymie us on good management practices with our forests or good energy policy as a Nation so that everything is not off-limits to the point that the lights go out in California or we are paying $4.50 for a gallon of gas. These are unacceptable outcomes when all we have to do is take a reasonable, responsible approach from the center of America, representing average people, and saying, We are all for stewardship, we are all for participating in global warming, but we don't want to do it at the expense of our future. Our economic future, our quality of life, all these issues come together. So I would implore the leadership--I understand the Speaker of the House yesterday said in fact the SPR, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, does need to be released so that we can increase some supply of oil. I am glad to see these steps are taken finally to recognize that supply and demand are at stake here, they are at work here, and that we need to increase the supply of oil and gas in this country. Not that that is the cure- all, end-all, but it's one of many things that we need to do in an all- of-the-above approach to energy, which is connected to the environment and good long-term stewardship for our country. I thank the gentleman for the time.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support H. Con. Res. 195, a resolution designating June 2008 as National Dysphagia Awareness Month. First, I would like to thank my colleague, Congressman Gene Green, for being the lead cosponsor of this resolution and for his efforts in helping move this resolution forward. Congressman Green is a strong advocate on healthcare issues in Congress and I am pleased to have the opportunity to work with him on the vital issue of raising awareness about dysphagia. In addition, I would like to thank the Dysphagia Awareness Society, the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, and the American Occupational Therapy Association for their grassroots efforts in building support for the resolution. It truly has been a collaborative effort for an important cause. Dysphagia is a medical condition incorporating any difficulty with swallowing and affects as many as 15 million Americans. Dysphagia can be caused by any condition weakening or damaging the muscles and nerves used for swallowing, including strokes, nervous system complications, and head injuries. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has estimated that 1 million people in the United States annually are diagnosed with dysphagia. According to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, an estimated 60,000 Americans die annually from complications associated with dysphagia. Dysphagia awareness is particularly important to my home state of Tennessee, where stroke incident rates are relatively high. Dysphagia affects a significant percentage of stroke survivors due to weakness in the muscles of the throat and mouth traditionally caused by strokes. Dysphagia can cause additional life-threatening complications for these stroke survivors, such as pneumonia, malnutrition, dehydration, and airway obstruction. In addition, complications due to dysphagia increase health care costs by resultant hospital readmissions, emergency room visits, extended hospital stays, the necessity for long-term institutional care, and the need for expensive respiratory and nutritional support. Including money spent in hospitals, the total cost of dysphagia to the health care system is well over $1 billion annually. Unfortunately, the condition of dysphagia is vastly underreported and not widely understood by the general public. Observing June 2008 as National Dysphagia Awareness Month would raise public awareness about dysphagia and the need for early detection and treatment. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support the passage of this important resolution.