Greg Walden

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. So you think something got by Joe?

Mr. WALDEN. So what's the point?

Mr. WALDEN. Nobody messes with Joe.

Mr. WALDEN. Now, you know, the University of Massachusetts got a grant--you're aware of this one--for $95,000 to study pollen samples from the Viking era in Iceland. Now, I'm not making this up. It's there. You can find it. $95,000, the University of Massachusetts studied pollen samples from the Viking era. You want to study pollen from the Viking era, an old sample of the Viking era? Just have Brett Favre sneeze. You know, that's an old Viking. We can do that. Save the $95,000. Maybe this will make good, like 1:30 in the morning, Discovery or Science Channel reporting, you know. We investigated old Viking pollen from Iceland. And we created jobs--95,000 of your tax dollars. We've been joined, Mr. LaTourette, if I could, by Mr. Scalise here from Louisiana. We're glad to have you join us today and share your comments to our colleagues, and we may even go back and forth here with our colleague from Ohio.

Mr. WALDEN. So it's not like a permanent sustainable job that'll get us into a recovery that goes forward. I mean it replaced a roof, and roofs have to be replaced.

Mr. WALDEN. And even if it's six jobs, how long did those last?

Mr. WALDEN. What?

Mr. WALDEN. No, they can go to recovery.gov. By then they'll know the district. And it's going to be well-jobbed.

Mr. WALDEN. We have one of those in Oregon. Actually ours was double 00.

Mr. WALDEN. So we could have written a check and made nearly a hundred millionaires.

Mr. WALDEN. You could write a million-dollar check and get 100. I mean we could make 100 millionaires out of that. So maybe 1,000?

Mr. WALDEN. Apple pie or cherry?

Mr. WALDEN. Supporting pie?

Mr. WALDEN. That sounds like real monkey business.

Mr. WALDEN. Say that again.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, Republicans come to you today to talk about some of the same things that my colleague who just finished was talking about, but we are going to try and liven it up a little bit. Because, you see, the Democrats have controlled the Congress for the last 3 years, not the last 10 months or 11 months, but the last 3 years. But in the last 11 months, Americans have lost 2.9 million jobs. You see, they passed this so-called stimulus, and they rammed it through in record time. It is one of those thousand-page bills that probably nobody had a chance to read before it got voted on, and then they passed it. The theory was that if they passed it into law, that unemployment wouldn't top out over 8 percent. That was their promise. That's what the Democrats promised, was pass the stimulus and it will solve unemployment. It will be no more than 8 percent. In fact, that's what their Department of Labor, the Obama Department of Labor, said right here, you can see it, Obama forecast with stimulus, right here is where unemployment would be. This is without the stimulus where unemployment would be at this point. These were their numbers. This is what they promised the American people. This is what they said. Now, let's look at what really happened, however. Unemployment started out here in January of this year, 2009, whoa, up it goes. How high, nobody knows, but it goes on up and up and up over 10 percent, over 10 percent. Now who is benefiting from that? Well, let's, first of all, look at The Washington Post today. And right here on The Washington Post newspaper here in the Nation's Capital the top story is: ``Stimulus is Boon for D.C. Area Contractors.'' Federal Departments are paying firms to help spend the money. And let me read Alec MacGillis' story here. It says: ``As struggling communities throughout the country wait for more help from the $787 billion stimulus package, one region is already basking in its largess: the government-contractor nexus that is metropolitan Washington, D.C.'' That's right. Come on down. You are the winner, Washington, D.C. Once again, the Federal Government is the winner. ``Reports from stimulus recipients show that a sizable sum has gone to Federal contractors in the Washington area who are helping implement the initiative--in effect, they are being paid a hefty slice of the money to help spend the rest of it.'' Now, if you want jobs for Washington, D.C.-based government contractors, I don't see how that is sustainable, helpful or even what was promised. And for heaven's sakes, we can see the red line here is not getting lower; it's getting higher. In fact, as I look at this, we would have been better off under the President's proposal, the Democrats' plan on the stimulus to have had no stimulus at all if you look at what they predicted versus what reality is. But here is the best part. If you want to talk about helping rural areas, one of these people that has been involved in the government here tells The Post the reason all this money is being spent back here in the Washington, D.C. area is, she says, I'm not sure I ever heard of a government support contractor in Michigan. Well, maybe that is part of the problem. Maybe if we had some of this actually flowing out to people who need the help and not into more government, things would be better. So where is the money going? And where are the jobs? Now, we know that on February 25 in an interview with ABC's ``Good Morning America'' 's Robin Roberts, our Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden, said: ``We've got to make sure this is done by the numbers, man. We've got to make sure people know where the money is going. This cannot be squandered. We have an opportunity to get the Nation back to work and back on its feet, and the first piece of that is generating some economic growth here, and we have to do it right.'' Now that was February 25. Now, again, here is where they said we would be without the stimulus. Here is where they said we would be with the stimulus. Here's where we are. Here's where we are. And my colleague who spoke earlier about the horrible problem of unemployment--and it is--my home State of Oregon has suffered mightily. But this stimulus hasn't produced jobs out there. It may have produced them to contractors back here, but not out there. So where are the jobs? And where is the money going? We were promised, the American taxpayers, when we borrowed all this money from China, we were promised that we would know, by golly, this is going to be accounted for. Everybody is going to know. Everybody is going to know. In fact, in a speech on the stimulus at the Brookings Institution on September 3 of this year, the Vice President, Joe Biden, said: ``Everybody has to account for the money they got beginning October 1. It's going to go up on a big old Web site. We've got a new modern Web site that is going to blow you away in terms of how detailed it is. `` So, here is the Vice President. He says, first of all, we've got to make sure this is done by the numbers, man. We've got to make sure people know where the money is going. It can't be squandered. We have an opportunity to get the Nation back to work and on its feet, and the first piece of that is generating some economic growth here, and we have to do it right. And then he said, we're going to track it all. We have a new modern Web site that is going to blow you away. Everybody has to account for the money. They have got to get that, beginning October 1, going to go up on a big old Web site. We've got a new modern Web site that's going to blow you away in terms of how detailed it is. Well, now, here is a guy who knows what happens with Federal money. You all know Lesko. You've seen him on TV. He says, free government money. Buy my CD. Buy my book. Get the free government money. You would think that even Lesko could track where the money goes. So, let's look at what happened to some of the money, because I think Americans are asking, where's all this money going, $787 billion? Where did the money go? Let's see, in Louisiana, the New Orleans Times Picayune newspaper says Louisiana has seven congressional districts. So Louisianans visiting recovery.gov, that's the Web site that the Vice President said will blow you away with its detail, might find themselves not just a little skeptical, but truly puzzled to see that nearly $5 billion was listed as headed to Louisiana's Eighth Congressional District, $2.8 million to the 22nd District, $1.8 million to the 12th Congressional District, and lesser amounts to the 26th, the 45th, the 14th, the 32nd and even the double 0 district. Now let me go back. The 26th district? The 45th district, the 14th, the 32nd, the double aught. There are only seven, count them, seven congressional districts in Louisiana. And yet the Web site that the Vice President touted as really going to blow us away, it lists all these grants, all your money going to districts that don't even exist. So the Times Picayune asked Ed Pound, who is the director of communications for recovery.gov, this is the fancy Web site that Joe Biden said is just going to blow us all away, and, boy, it has, they asked Ed, okay, you're the communications director for this fancy new Web site that's going to detail everything. How does all this work? This is the great accountability model of the transparency of the Democrats. He says, Oh, we rely on self-reporting by recipients for the stimulus money. So Pound said the information from federalreporting.gov is then simply transferred to recovery.gov, and no one, get this, no one checks to verify its accuracy or to take note of the fact that Utah--here is another example--really doesn't have seven congressional districts. Utah has three congressional districts. South Dakota, well, they had a 10th Congressional District in South Dakota, but you see, folks, South Dakota only has one, count them, one--you don't even have to take your shoes off--one congressional district. Louisiana doesn't have 15 congressional districts. It has seven. So even Lesko here could know. We will get back to Lesko here on some examples of some of that ``free money'' that went out. In my home State of Oregon, we have actually five, count them on one hand here, five congressional districts. That is one, two, three, four, five. And yet on this fancy new Web site that is supposed to track all this, news media organizations looked and said, wait a minute, there isn't a double 0 district in Oregon or a 14th or an 8th or a 16th or a 60th or 21st. And this is transparency and accountability in a record amount of money that's being spent? Now, frankly, being an Oregonian and having only five districts, I kind of like the notion that we are going to add congressional districts. Now even the people that don't live there, because there aren't that many, probably wonder about it, but that would give us a little more clout here in the Congress. That would be okay with me. Except you're talking about taxpayers' money here. And it is not creating jobs. Now, Pound went on to say: ``We are not certifying the accuracy of the information.'' So you have the Vice President who is telling us, man, this Web site is going to blow you away. We've got to make sure people know where the money is going. Everybody has to be accountable. This is accountability? Oh, by the way, these are the folks, this is the same government that is going to take over your health care and take over energy production, and they can't even manage a guest list for a dinner party at the White House? This is what we are getting, folks, with too much government. We know what the problem is, according to Pound, and we are trying to fix it. Asked why recipients would pluck random numbers like 26, 45, or 14 to fill in for their congressional district, the communications director replied: ``Who knows, man? Who really knows?'' That was his answer. ``There are 130,000 reports out there,'' he said. Okay. So we have an issue with reporting. Now let's go back to our friend Lesko, because everybody knows him. Anybody that watches TV will see Lesko show up. And he says, where is the government money? There's lots of free government money. Get my CD, buy it, and you can get government money. Well, Talladega County, Alabama, now here they reported that they saved or created, this is frugal now, 5,000 jobs from only $42,000 in stimulus money. Now, I was a journalism major, not a math major, but 5,000 jobs from $42,000, that's $8.40 a job. This is a record. No, but wait. It gets better. The Belmont Metropolitan Housing Authority in Ohio reported 16,120 jobs saved or created from $1.3 million in stimulus funds from HUD. That's $80.46 per job. But the winner, the Lesko winner for efficiency in creation of jobs, goes to Shelton State Community College in Alabama: 14,500 jobs saved or created with $27,000 from the GAO. That is $1.86 per job. Now that's a bargain. Alkan Builders of Alaska reported 3,000 jobs created or saved from 11 million, $3,666 a job. You can see why these aren't real jobs that are being created. It's not even being reported accurately. And yet we are saddling our kids with this enormous debt. So, let's look at a few other examples. Earl E. Devaney, the top monitor of the stimulus in the Obama administration ``acknowledged that he too found dubious the 640,000 jobs figure touted by the Obama administration as proof the stimulus was working and that there were too many errors in the reporting of data to accurately offer that estimate.'' Now, he is the one who actually is the watchdog. And that's what he told The New York Times. Now, how many Americans does it take to fill an $890 shoe order? According to The Wall Street Journal, November 19, on the recovery.gov site, an $890 shoe order for the Army Corps of Engineers created nine new jobs at Moore's Shoes and Service in Kentucky. Really. Head Start in Augusta, Georgia, they claimed they created 317 jobs with a $790,000 grant. Now I happen to be a supporter of Head Start, but it is this reporting issue and whether you're actually creating sustainable jobs. Actually, the money went to pay hikes for 317 workers. That would be a bonus of $2,500 per employee. So you see, Republicans stand up here, and we hear our colleagues on the other side of the aisle saying we need a new jobs summit. We need an economic stimulus. We need Economic Stimulus II because we got to help people get back to work. And Lord knows we do. But that is what they said the last time. And they've been in charge for 3 years around these Halls, and we've never had greater debt, more government takeover and more to come, and record unemployment. We are looking at a 10.2 percent unemployment. It has not gone down since they enacted their proposal. It has gone up, up, up, up, up, up. And Americans are paying the price. And our kids and grandkids are going to pay the price on debt. Now, how about that Alabama housing authority claimed a $540,071 grant would create 7,280 jobs? That's what they reported, 7,280 jobs. It created 14 at best. Fourteen at best. Now, you go back to these congressional districts that have been identified here that don't exist. You remember back to the New Deal when President Roosevelt wanted to increase the Supreme Court from 7 to 9 members so that he could get a majority. Well, it appears this administration takes it one step further, forgetting to add the two more justices. Let's just add, I'm not kidding--let's just add 25 districts, maybe make it 50 new congressional districts, because that's what you would think happened here when this is your reporting. Far from accountable. And this is big stuff. We make a little light of this today perhaps, but this is big stuff because this is debt. This isn't like you have money in your checking account to spend. This is like you went to the bank and borrowed this money and shoved it out the door in record time, and you don't even know where it went. I mean, I suppose Lesko's going to come out with a new DVD soon that says, Ask the government for free money and I'll tell you where it went. We found out. It's gone. Now, I just don't know, and in the next stimulus bill, are we going to create like whole new States? Maybe that's what we should do. When we're done creating new congressional districts, we can go to new States. Why stop at 50? You know, you like Massachusetts, you'll love New Massachusetts. Minnesota? How about South Minnesota or North Minnesota? Let's go for it. East Minnesota. Six little Mini-Me Al Frankens running around and voting for new job grants to States that don't exist and congressional districts that don't exist. And if we created 100,000 new jobs, who can find the voters to say we didn't? They'll love us in West St. Paul and New Duluth. And don't worry, we'll find the voters in South Minnesota to say thanks for the jobs. I mean, this is crazy. I mean, this is just crazy where it's going. I mean, this chart, I think, and I see I've been joined by my friend and colleague from Ohio, Mr. LaTourette. But this is a report that came out in a newspaper here, The Examiner, inflated jobs by State. And it shows, you know, a drainage ditch number one and I don't know what all these are. But they show these inflated job numbers. I would yield to my colleague, Mr. LaTourette, from Ohio.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to share with you and my colleagues the story of Bill Moore and his life-long efforts in support of agriculture and the western ranching industry. Bill is the president of the Oregon Cattlemen's Association, OCA, and a tremendous friend to rural America. At the end of this week, Bill will turn over his gavel to another to lead this fine organization but he will continue his leadership in the field of agriculture. Before he relinquishes his current role, I would like to pay tribute to his leadership over the last several years. A long list of organizations have recognized Bill's enduring support and promotion of the agriculture community's continued viability. Prior to serving as OCA president, Bill served as president of the Malheur County Cattlemen's Association. In his current role as leader for family ranchers throughout Oregon, he serves on the National Cattlemen's Beef Association board of directors. He was honored by the Ontario Oregon Chamber of Commerce in 2000 as the Agriculturalist of the Year. He has served on the local Farmer's Supply Cooperative board of directors, the Burnt River Irrigation District's board of directors and, in what is surely one of the most difficult positions anyone can have, as a member of the Burnt River School District budget board. During his tenure as OCA president, Bill promoted and protected the interests of the cattle ranchers of Oregon. He initiated a new ``Positive Producer Image Project,'' which utilizes a combination of traditional media and DVD production to showcase the valuable impacts ranchers have on Oregon's economy, wildlife, clean water, open space, and cultural heritage. This is the first ever video created by OCA, and it has received national accolades and become the blueprint for other states to follow as they also embark on positive producer image projects. Born in Ontario, Oregon to William and Christine Moore, Bill has a rich history in eastern Oregon. Bill grew up with his five brothers and sisters on a small family ranch near Vale, Oregon. After high school, Bill graduated with honors from Oregon State University with a bachelor of science degree in wildlife management in 1977. He worked for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife for 5 years during and after college. In 1978 Bill married Nancy Ingle and that same year they began their own cattle herd with the purchase of eight cows. They leased land and began to grow their business. During the growth years, Bill worked for Arco Seed Company eventually becoming vice president in charge of seed production. Bill later owned his own seed distribution company. In 1999, Bill and Nancy purchased a ranch near Unity, Oregon where they now center their ranching operation. It is truly a family operation where they have very little hired or outside help and rely on the American tradition of neighbor-helping-neighbor and family-helping- family to grow their business. Bill and Nancy have two children and three grandchildren which they treasure. Bill and Nancy take great pride and joy seeing yet another generation value and learn the ranching business and lifestyle that has meant so much to them. Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in saluting Bill Moore, who has served so ably as president of the Oregon Cattlemen's Association.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. I thank the gentleman, and I thank him for his leadership. Mr. Speaker, I stand up today on this bill, and I actually intend to support it because I think I may differ with my colleague from Washington about some things. But the fundamental issue that I'm upset about is the notion that we can protect lands somehow by never doing anything again on them. And certainly there are areas and I've supported some of these new wilderness designations. I've tried to do it in a bipartisan way and tried to help. But doggone it, there are a whole bunch of other lands. The majority of lands in our State are Federal forested lands that are completely out of balance with nature, that cry out for good stewardship and balanced management. And I hope Washington never has to catch up to Oregon when it comes to unemployment. You get out in parts of my district in eastern Oregon, and we are pushing 20 percent unemployment in county after county. And all too often the biggest economic activity that occurs in the summer is not the harvesting of dead trees; it's the making of lunches for firefighters as catastrophic wildfire takes over. Now, my colleague from Oregon, Mr. Schrader, and I are working on legislation with others, Mr. Hastings and others, that will allow us to go out into the forest and treat these lands. It is a crying shame and I think absolutely erroneous to argue that the only way you protect is to lock up and ignore. This Congress, under Democrat leadership and with the good chairman who took the gavel I used to have when I chaired the Forestry Subcommittee, I hope will actually give us a hearing on our legislation after it's introduced and will actually give it due consideration, as in give us a hearing, give us a markup, let us put it into law. Let's take the Healthy Forests Restoration Act that passed in an overwhelming bipartisan manner by both Houses of this Congress and was signed into law in 2003 that has been very successful around our urban interface areas and wildland urban interface, where we can go in and thin out the brush, work with the communities in collaboration and reduce the threat of catastrophic wildfire. Let's take those authorities that are now proven and workable and save taxpayer money because they're efficient and expand those out so we can protect watersheds, so that we can get ahead of these bug infestations that are killing off enormous swaths of Federal forest. And I don't sense that the chairman--and I'd love to know if he'll take this up--I don't know if he supported the Healthy Forests Restoration Act when it was before the House, but it just so frustrates the people I represent and others that we may argue over a river here or something there and meantime the whole forest is dying, not just in the Northwest and on the east side, pine forest, but you get in Colorado and look at the damage there. Members of both sides of the aisle in Colorado have called for special initiatives to allow thinning there to get ahead of that bug infestation that's killing the pine. You look, frankly, at what has happened across the border in Canada. These are enormous infestations. And if you're concerned about climate change, then you have to have understood that if temperature is rising, the forests can't keep pace with the change. So if you want to do something to protect the forests for the future, then you need to thin them out now to be able to get out of drought and further stress and further bug infestation. And in doing so, we can reduce the cost to the taxpayers because we will get the forests back into balance; and when they catch fire, it will burn naturally and actually be fine. And, by the way, we can put people to work; and that's what this ought to be about. This House should be addressing how you actually use the resources we have in a manageable and responsible way to put people back to work, whether you're in John Day or you're in Prineville or you're in Baker City or out in Wallowa County. It's amazing the policies that have been put in place that restrict our access to our own forests, that even are so tight, so restrictive, you can't even cut a burned dead tree while it still has value and run it through a mill and make a productive wood out of it, lumber out of it. No, we'd rather have some other country do that and then we'll import it, while our stuff stands there and rots. Then, oh, by the way, that becomes the breeding ground for some next expansion of some bug infestation that will take the next healthy forest. You drive around Suttle Lake in central Oregon and tell me we couldn't have prevented the fire that destroyed things there. I can show you where when the Forest Service was given the ability to thin before this enormous fire a couple of years ago, the trees that they thinned around lived. Where they were denied access to go in and do forest recovery work, it destroyed everything. Oh, it will recover. None of us will probably be alive to see it. We might be. But, you know, it shouldn't be that way. It doesn't have to be that way. So while we debate this bill here today on the Molalla River and the Willamette Valley, there's a bigger issue we should be bringing to this floor, and it is about how we are entrusted with the stewardship of America's great forests, those reserved and set aside beginning in 1935 by Theodore Roosevelt, who, by the way, when he did that speech in Utah, said the great purpose of forest reserves is, first, water for agriculture and, second, home-building. Now most people don't attribute that to Theodore Roosevelt, and you can go look up his speech in Utah, but that's what it was for. Now, obviously there are things that we need to do in our forests for other purposes than those two; but, clearly, protecting watersheds is an essential stewardship obligation that this Congress for too long has not done enough to deal with. And part of it, sure, we can add more money here and more money there and that can be good and we can debate how much, but the real issue is the underlying law that needs to be fixed so that our forest managers who are trained professionals can go out to do what they were trained to do. Can you imagine, let's say, if you were a veterinarian, and I don't know if there are any on the floor, maybe Mr. Schrader, but if you were a veterinarian and you had to go through the process a forester has to go through to treat an animal, you might as well shoot it in the head because it's never going to survive long enough to get the treatment you know you need to prescribe. So let's be reasonable about these things. We've done it before in a bipartisan way. We can do it again before America's great forest reserves go up in smoke and are destroyed. You go back to that Colorado example when the Hayman fire occurred and that whole watershed, the pictures of the mud coming into their drinking water and the dead fish. We don't have to live that way. But simply making the argument, as one of my friends made, that, well, we're just behind the next State in terms how much we set aside and don't ever do anything with and ignore is the wrong argument in my book, and so I would respectfully disagree with my friend from Oregon who made that argument because I don't think that's the measurement of good stewardship. The measurement of good stewardship is how you take care of it for the future, what you leave for the next generation, and that doesn't mean you never touch it again. It means active management where it's appropriate. It means saving our watersheds and habitat for all God's creatures; and it means, by the way, in doing so, we can figure out a way to turn biomass into energy and turn our natural resources into jobs. That's what we need. And it can be hand in hand, and it can be responsibly done.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the rich history of Oregon's People's Utility Districts, PUD, and the efforts of Northern Wasco County PUD, the lone PUD in Oregon's Second Congressional District. Last month, Northern Wasco County PUD joined Oregon's numerous Municipal Electrical Utilities and Rural Electrical Cooperatives to celebrate the 23rd anniversary of Public Power Week and to recognize over seven decades of public power generated by the clean and renewable federal hydropower system in the Pacific Northwest. I commend Northern Wasco County PUD for their continued commitment to the utilization of clean renewable power in Wasco County, as well as their exemplary efforts in energy efficiency and conservation. On September 28, 1937, President Franklin Roosevelt stood on Oregon soil as he dedicated the newly constructed Bonneville Dam, which became one of the first in a series of dams to be installed along the Columbia River as part of the President's vision to improve economic opportunities, flood control and, more importantly, provide electricity to communities throughout the Pacific Northwest. Since that day, public power utilities across Oregon, including Northern Wasco County PUD, have harnessed the renewable power of the region's hydroelectric dams to provide clean renewable electricity to Oregon's communities and deliver steady supplies of power to small and large businesses. By providing some of the lowest-cost power to businesses in the Nation, public power utilities play a major role in maintaining thousands of jobs throughout rural and urban Oregon. Besides delivering reliable hydropower, public power utilities and their ratepayers' across the West have invested a tremendous amount of financial resources in energy conservation and renewable energy projects. Since Congress passed the 1980 Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act, Oregon, Washington, Idaho and Montana have conserved a combined 3,700 average-megawatts of energy. This savings is equal to the annual combined energy needs of Idaho and western Montana, or the output of seven 500-megawatt coal-fired power plants. These conservation efforts have also resulted in a reduction of 13.5 million tons of CO2 emissions and nearly $2 billion in consumer savings per year. Over the years, Northern Wasco County PUD customers have invested $27 million in two hydroelectric projects, both of which allow for enhanced fish passage and an increased supply of renewable power. These projects include a five-megawatt generator located at The Dalles Dam and a 10- megawatt generator at the McNary Dam. Both projects generate clean power with no emissions and enhance the survival of listed fish along the main stem of the Columbia River. In addition, Northern Wasco County PUD is developing a methane gas capture energy project in partnership with the The Dalles, Oregon at the city's wastewater treatment plant as well as a micro-hydroelectric generation installation on the city's water mainline. Furthermore, Northern Wasco County PUD is exploring a U.S. Department of Energy grant for potential geothermal generation in cooperation with a group of other northwest utilities. From my conversations with Northern Wasco County PUD officials, I know they are most proud of their commitment to providing their residential and industrial customers with adequate and predictable supplies of energy at affordable prices, especially in light of the difficult economic circumstances facing rural Oregon. I also know that the commitment of public power utilities to providing clean renewable energy options for customers is strong. In fact, many now offer their residential, commercial and industrial customers the option of purchasing up to 100 percent renewable electricity produced from resources such as solar, wind, geothermal, biogas, biomass and low-impact hydro. Madam Speaker, as the debate continues about how to best address climate change, energy independence, and our smarter energy future, it is imperative that entities providing public power in the Pacific Northwest, like Northern Wasco County PUD, receive credit for the work and investments they have already made in protecting our environment through the responsible use of the renewable energy hydropower system and through energy conservation. I commend them for these efforts.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. Madam Speaker, consistent with the House Republican Leadership's policy on earmarks, to the best of my knowledge the request I have detailed below is (1) not directed to an entity or program that will be named after a sitting Member of Congress; and (2) not intended to be used by an entity to secure funds for other entities unless the use of funding is consistent with the specified purpose of the earmark. As required by earmark standards adopted by the House Republican Conference, I submit the following information on a project I requested and was included in the Conference Report for H.R. 2996, the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010. Account: EPA--STAG Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Project Project Name: Umatilla County for Milton-Freewater Stormwater System Improvements Legal Name and Address of Requesting Entity: Umatilla County, 216 SE 4th Street, Pendleton, OR 97801 Project Location: The City of Milton-Freewater, Oregon Description of Project: The Conference Report for H.R. 2996 appropriates $300,000 for the Milton-Freewater Stormwater System project. According to the requesting entity, this funding will be used by Umatilla County to assist in the development of a stormwater treatment system for the city of Milton-Freewater, Oregon. This is a beneficial use of taxpayer funding because it will enable the community to construct a holding pond to catch silt-laden storm and winter water runoff which currently clogs the drainage system and deposits silt into drinking water wells.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the more than 100 members of the Marine Corps League Rogue Valley Detachment 386 of southern Oregon on the occasion of the Marine Corps' 234th birthday. Since 1921, all Marines--past and present--have heeded the order issued by Major General John A. Lejeune to come together each November to remember the history, honor, and traditions of their Corps. Next week, on November 10, I will have the honor and the privilege of joining with the Rogue Valley detachment to celebrate and commemorate the founding of the United States Marine Corps when, in 1775, the Second Continental Congress resolved to raise two battalions of Continental Marines. For the 234 years that have followed, the United States Marine Corps has stood as the epitome of America's military strength. From the Battle of Belleau Wood to the Battle of Khe Sanh, from the sands of Iwo Jima to the streets of Fallujah, from Grenada to Beirut, the Marine Corps has never failed in answering the call to defend this Nation and its interests around the world. Marines truly have served in every clime and place in defense of freedom. It is this tradition of service and commitment to freedom that most impresses me whenever I meet a Marine or former Marine. Proving that ``Once a Marine, Always a Marine'' is more that just a slogan, the members of the Marine Corps League Rogue Valley detachment are dedicated to the purpose of preserving these traditions and promoting the interests of the United States Marine Corps. They do this by promoting the ideals of freedom and democracy throughout their community and by volunteering aid and assistance to all current and former Marines and Fleet Marine Force Corpsman and their families. In the past year, the Rogue Valley detachment, led by Commandant Loren Otto, organized its first annual ``Tee It Up for Local Heroes'' golf tournament and raised $2,100 to support Toys for Tots, the Marines Helping Marines Wounded Warrior program, and to provide care packages for deployed service members. A portion of these funds also went to support the three local Young Marine units that the detachment sponsors in southern Oregon. I am very pleased to note that the Rogue Valley detachment is the only Marine Corps League unit in the country that sponsors this many Young Marine units. The detachment's commitment to making a positive impact on America's future is without question and we are indeed fortunate to have members Dave Dotterrer and Anthony Guillory serve on the National Board of Directors for the Young Marines. Other detachment members have sent out nearly 100 comfort packages to deployed Marines and soldiers. The detachment also recently volunteered to support their local community when the Cycle Oregon tour came through the Rogue Valley and in return raised over $500 to put toward future fundraising efforts. In addition, the detachment regularly offers an Honor Guard detail to the Eagle Point National Cemetery to provide funeral honors for their fallen brethren. Finally, in probably their most fulfilling service to community, the Rogue Valley detachment collects and distributes toys for the yearly Marine Toys for Tots program throughout Jackson and Josephine counties. By their actions and deeds, the men and women of the Marine Corps League Rogue Valley Detachment 386 have demonstrated the honor, commitment, and values that Marines have been renowned for since their inception. While our gathering next Tuesday to mark this auspicious occasion in the Corps' 234-year history may be small compared to others, I am extremely honored to share this time with such a dedicated group of veterans, constituents, and friends. Madam Speaker, I encourage all Members of Congress seek out their local Marine Corps League detachments or active duty Marines on November 10 and raise a glass to celebrate the world's finest fighting force. Semper Fidelis, Marines, and Happy Birthday.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. I want to thank my colleague from Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I stand in strong support of S. 509, which would authorize the VA to construct this new, multiple specialty outpatient clinic building as the Jonathan M. Wainwright Memorial VA Medical Center in Walla Walla, Washington. Now the Walla Walla VA Medical Center serves more than 65,000 veterans in a 14-county area that spreads over northeastern Oregon, southeastern Washington and central western Idaho. It's an integral part of the VA's Northwest health care network and has long established itself as a very important resource for veterans and the veterans community. Now, the construction of this outpatient clinic, along with campus renovations, upgrades and additional parking, will help this facility better serve our men and women who have worn our uniform. This investment in the Walla Walla VA Medical Center will cement its place as a provider of health care to veterans in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho by providing them with a modern facility that will improve quality-of-care delivery and that will continue to allow them to provide the best care possible. Since 2003, when the VA's Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services, or CARES, Commission released its draft recommendation for the closure of this facility, veterans have rightfully raised concerns about the future of VA-delivered health care in this very rural region of our country. These veterans face the real possibility of having to drive hundreds of more miles to receive even the most routine care at the next closest VA facilities, which are located in Boise, Idaho; in Portland, Oregon; or in Spokane, Washington. Like others in 2003, I voiced my strong concerns regarding the proposed realignment through a letter to then-Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Anthony Principi, and I submitted testimony to the CARES Commission. Through concerted efforts by area veterans, local advocates and elected officials, former-VA Secretary Jim Nicholson fully realized the importance of the care provided in this facility and reversed the commission's decision. Today, the Walla Walla VA Medical Center continues to make a name for itself through the quality of care that it provides to our veterans. I was there in December of 2008, and I had the opportunity to meet with the new director of the Walla Walla VA Medical Center, Mr. Brian Westfield, and to receive an update on the facility, which has recently expanded its reaches into my congressional district through the opening of a very important clinic, a community outpatient clinic in La Grande, Oregon. Last fall, the VA approved $71.4 million to design and construct this new, multiple specialty outpatient clinic in Walla Walla. The legislation we consider today would authorize that project. It is my hope that, with the completion of this clinic, the Walla Walla VA Medical Center will continue its tradition of providing quality care to the men and women who have given so much in service to our Nation. So I thank you again for the opportunity to speak in favor of Senate bill 509. I thank Senator Murray for bringing this forward, and I thank members of both the Oregon and Washington delegations and of the Idaho delegation for their support. I look forward to the passage of this legislation.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. I want to thank the gentlelady from North Carolina for her leadership consistently in this House for common sense. I'm glad that she understands agriculture like some of us do in the West as well. I want to talk today about the rule and the rules of this House. As my colleague from California said pretty clearly, for too long we have had a process that's been followed in this House, regardless of who was in control of this House, to make sure that the people and the press and we politicians have a chance to read the bills before they're voted on. Consistently, when the will of the majority has been exercised, we have waived the House rules of the 72-hour requirement. We need to change that, and we can do it on a bipartisan basis. My colleagues, Mr. Baird and Mr. Culberson, have legislation, H. Res. 554, introduced in June, to change the House rules to require 72 hours for bills like this, the so-called ``stimulus,'' to be put on the Internet for the people, the press, the public, people affected, and us, to actually read them. Now this bill was 1,073 pages. It cost $787 billion. And we were allowed 12 hours to consider it. This legislation is the national energy tax, the cap-and-trade bill. It's 1,420 pages, 16\1/2\ hours to review, and it cost $846 billion. Now, this House recently passed a resolution saying that on the Ag appropriations conference report, the issue before us at the moment, that we should have 72 hours to consider it before it's voted on. That hasn't always been the case on all these rules. As I mentioned, on the national energy tax, on the stimulus, even the health care bill before it came to the Energy and Commerce Committee, 1,026 pages, we had 14 hours and 43 minutes to consider. You know, it's kind of interesting. If you go back to the beginning of our country, and I just put it in comparison, the Declaration of Independence, same type-face size, nine pages, 4 days; the entire United States Constitution, 82 days, 24 pages; Bill of Rights, 57 days and 3 pages. Yet one-sixth of the economy, we're given, what, 14 hours and 43 minutes for health care in committee; 16\1/2\ hours for the national energy tax, 12 hours for the stimulus. It's time to change how our House operates. It's time for the Rules Committee to bring forward H. Res. 544. And since that doesn't appear to happen, that's why I filed the discharge petition No. 6 to bring forward House Resolution 544 so that we can improve this process and gain some credibility with the folks back home who think we actually should have time to read these bills, that they should have time to read these bills, including bills like the Ag conference report. Now, 182 members, as of yesterday, have signed this petition. It only takes 218. We have six Democrats who have signed it. Yet there are 35 Democrats who have cosponsored the underlying resolution, but have not signed the petition. I know the Speaker has been supportive of this similar process of changing the House rules a couple of sessions ago. It is a bipartisan calling. It is difficult when you're in the majority to change the rules that affect how you operate. But isn't that what real reform is all about? It's saying, For once, we will stand up; we will listen to the people; we will change the rules; and we will have a more open and transparent process, which should lead to better policy.

Mr. WALDEN. And it is a wonderful cleanser, if you will, to a process that, frankly, has lost most credibility among the people of America. You see, they think we should read the bills, and they think we ought to understand them. Moreover, they now, in this modern age of Internet communications, believe we should post them on the Internet so that they, the public, the taxpayers, the people writing the checks to pay for this government, can have an understanding of what is in there. So I would encourage my colleagues to vote against the previous question and to allow us to move forward on reform and transparency in this House.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call my colleagues to join me and Congressman Brian Baird and Congressman Culberson in signing a discharge petition to change the rules of the House so that Members of Congress have at least 72 hours to read bills like this. This is the so-called stimulus. We had 12 hours. Now, the Speaker has said we will all have 24 hours. We are asking for 72. The stimulus was 1,073 pages, $787 billion. This is the cap-and-tax bill, 16\1/2\ hours to digest it, 1,428 pages, $846 billion. We should have a chance to read these bills and understand them. Congressman Baird and about 90 of us are cosponsors of H.R. 544. It's time to bring it to the floor for a vote. Sign the discharge petition. Let's bring sunshine into the process. Let's allow Americans, their Representatives and the press the time to read these bills before we have to vote on them here on the House floor.