Economy

     THE MINIMUM WAGE -- (House of Representatives - July 28, 2006)

   (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)

   Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I want on the record today because of the raucous debate that we just had. For those who voted ``no'' on this bill dealing with the minimum wage, in the clarity of the lateness of the night, let me be very clear. I have voted for the minimum wage many times. In fact, Democrats have pressed this issue over and over again. But what should be clear is that the vote that was taken today will be a minimum wage that will be delayed. Whereas the Democratic bill would have started in September, this will not start until January, and it will not be effectuated until 2009.

   This is bogus. This is insincere. This is not real. It can also be understood that I did not vote against the relief for my State of a sales tax, sales tax relief on Federal income tax. This bill will go nowhere. I will vote up or down on a minimum-wage increase and the sales tax relief for Texas.

   I wish we had been able to bring up H. Res. 945 to bring relief to the Lebanese and humanitarian aid but, of course, we end today and tonight without doing our job.
    
     DO-LESS-THAN-DO-NOTHING CONGRESS LEAVES AGAIN WITHOUT ADDRESSING AMERICA'S PRIORITIES -- (House of Representatives - July 28, 2006)

   (Mr. PALLONE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)

   Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, as the Republicans prepare to leave on a 5-week vacation, this Congress is best described as the ``do-less-than-do-nothing Congress.''

   Despite the fact that the minimum wage has not been increased in 9 years, House Republicans refuse to allow a clean vote on the minimum wage, which will prevent 6 million Americans from receiving a much needed pay raise. If Republicans were really interested in raising the minimum wage, they wouldn't attach it to bills they know will never be signed into law.

   And despite the fact that Republicans have been critical of border security, they continue to refuse to come to the negotiating table so that we can pass a comprehensive immigration and border security bill into law this year.

   And despite the fact that gas prices are once again at record highs, House Republicans have yet to pass a tough price gouging bill into law, and refuse to join us in repealing $20 billion in tax breaks and subsidies to their friends in Big Oil.

   Mr. Speaker, the American people have every reason to be disgusted with this House. It is time we take America in a new direction. The American people want a Congress that works for them.

     EXXONMOBIL PROFITS -- (House of Representatives - July 28, 2006)

   (Mr. KUCINICH asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

   Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, ExxonMobil profits surged 36 percent to $10.4 billion in just the last 3 months. That means they made $1,310 a second in profit. In the 1 minute I have to address this Congress, ExxonMobil will make $79,080 in profit. In 1 minute they will make more than most hardworking Americans make in a year.

   As consumers are being gouged at the pump, Big Oil runs the administration, bringing us war and environmental disaster and economic decline. Oil was at about $23 a barrel at the start of this administration. Now it is at $74 a barrel. If this administration goes ahead and attacks Iran, it will go to $130 a barrel and about $5 a gallon for gas.

   This Congress must do more than genuflect with tax breaks and subsidies to Big Oil. It is time we took the side of the consumers whose budgets are being crushed and mobility being crushed by $3 a gallon gas. It is time for a 100 percent excess profit tax on the oil companies. That is what my bill, H.R. 2070, does. It will lower the price of gas because it will tax excess profits of oil companies and it won't increase the price of gasoline.

   My minute is up, but the oil companies' profits are eternal, unless we stop the price gouging with a 100 percent excess profits tax.

     RAISE MINIMUM WAGE TODAY -- (House of Representatives - July 11, 2006)

   Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Speaker, House Republicans have a chance to give more than 6 million Americans a much-deserved pay raise. Would you believe that the minimum wage has not been increased in 9 years? It is the second longest amount of time that hardworking Americans have had to go without a pay raise, resulting in the hourly wage being at its lowest level in 50 years.

   House Democrats want to expand economic opportunity for all Americans. We want to increase the minimum wage from $5.15 an hour to $7.25. It is only fair. These workers play by the rules every day. All they want in return is to make a living wage.

   Do my Republican colleagues really believe that $5.15 an hour is still a living wage? House Republicans claim that the only people who make the minimum wage are teenagers. Wrong.

   Mr. Speaker, 75 percent of minimum wage workers are either the sole or one of two breadwinners in the family. House Republicans also like to claim that if we increase the minimum wage, jobs will be lost. Wrong again. Today in the States that mandate a higher minimum wage, job growth has actually gotten higher. No more excuses.

   RAISING CONCERNS ABOUT THE ECONOMY -- (House of Representatives - July 11, 2006)

   Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, in July of 2001, a few months after President Bush took office, gas was $1.33 a gallon. Five years later, July 2006, it has more than doubled to $3.00, and in places like Chicago, it is as high as $3.40 a gallon.

   But this is not the only place where the administration has failed middle-class families. Since 2000, the cost of health care has increased 73 percent to $11,000 for a family of four. The cost of tuition at a 4-year public college has increased 38 percent since 2001 and, at the same time, average weekly earnings have declined by 1 percent in America.

   So while costs spiral out of control, middle-class families have less money in their pockets. That is not exactly what I would call a record of achievement. Yet today, the President said the economy is strong and getting stronger. The American people know that such statements are wrong and getting wronger. The President's statements show how out of touch he is with the struggles and challenges American families face today.

   Mr. Speaker, all is not well on Main Street. It is high time that Washington and this Congress took action. It is time for a new direction. It is time for a change.

   ENERGY SOLUTIONS NEEDED -- (House of Representatives - July 11, 2006)

   (Ms. WATSON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)

   Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, all summer the American people have been facing record prices every time they go to the gas pump. Some have cut vacation plans, others are pinching their monthly paychecks attempting to make ends meet. Washington should be acting to pass a comprehensive energy package that relieves pain at the pump and reduces our dependence on foreign oil.

   Unfortunately, House Republicans have refused to act on any substantial energy legislation this year. How bad do things have to get before House Republicans are finally willing to act? Instead of actually coming up with real solutions, House Republicans prefer the status quo. They refuse to act because of their cozy relationship with Big Oil and see no problem with the $16 billion in profit the three largest oil companies reported during the first quarter of the year.

   Mr. Speaker, while House Republicans are content with the status quo, Democrats are ready to take America in a new direction. We will stand up to Big Oil and protect consumers from price gouging.

 

     SOARING GAS PRICES -- (House of Representatives - May 03, 2006)

   (Mr. STUPAK asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

   Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, it seems almost everyone these days is rightfully outraged at the massive profits of oil and gas executives and companies. While they are raking in record profits, gas prices hit historic highs. That is, everyone except House Republicans.

   It is not enough that Republicans supported provisions in the energy bill last year that provided oil companies with $20 billion in special interest gifts while neglecting to include any real initiatives that would lower gas prices, but House Republicans then repeatedly refused to support Democratic efforts to give the Federal Trade Commission the authority to investigate all price gouging at all points of the supply chain. And last week, House Republicans had the opportunity to roll back $5 billion in additional tax breaks for oil companies over the next 5 years but voted overwhelmingly to reject this Democratic proposal.

   Are House Republicans that far out of touch? Don't they realize that companies with profits of $130 billion last year do not need tax breaks? Mr. Speaker, the cozy relationship House Republicans have with oil and gas executives is hurting everyday Americans who are struggling to pay record prices at the pump.

     AMERICA'S ENERGY NEEDS -- (House of Representatives - May 02, 2006)

   (Mr. WILSON of South Carolina asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

   Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, today, the average cost of a gallon of unregulated gasoline in Columbia, South Carolina, is 72 cents higher than the price of May 2005.

   Yesterday, I met with dozens of constituents at the West Metro Chamber of Commerce building who expressed their serious concerns about the rising gas prices and America's energy crisis. Fortunately, Republican leaders have announced a series of realistic, short-term steps to reduce the cost of gasoline. By opening up ANWR, banning price gouging, streamlining boutique fuels, and encouraging innovation for advancements in hydrogen technology, we are supporting realistic measures that will immediately help American families.

   As we continue to actively address America's energy needs, Minority Leader Pelosi and House Democrats should support this critical mission. Gas prices continue to soar, and our country cannot afford for Democrats to continue to support policies that restrict American energy supplies.

   In conclusion, God bless our troops, and we will never forget September 11.

     NO IS NOT AN ENERGY POLICY -- (House of Representatives - May 02, 2006)

   (Ms. FOXX asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)

   Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, House Democrats sure do like to stand on this floor and complain about energy costs, but when push comes to shove, they refuse to do anything about it. In fact, since President Clinton vetoed legislation to open ANWR to drilling in 1995, House Democrats have taken a page out of his book by voting no to energy solutions time and time again.

   While House Republicans have proven our commitment to lowering the cost of fuel, House Democrats have opposed many measures to increase the supply of American energy.

   A large number of Democrats voted against legislation expanding clean nuclear energy supplies. Democrats voted against legislation that would encourage refinery expansion. They voted against legislation that would ban price gouging, and many voted against legislation that would promote greater conservation.

   I cannot for the life of me understand why the Democrats continue to complain about energy when they continue to vote ``no'' on every responsible proposal that would help us produce more American energy at affordable prices. Voting ``no'' is not a sound energy policy.

URGING ACTION ON THE ENERGY CRISIS -- (House of Representatives - April 25, 2006)

   The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Dent). Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel) is recognized for 5 minutes.

   Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, everyone is talking about gas prices. This morning President Bush presented the Nation with, he said, a ``plan to lower gas prices.''

   A little over a year ago on June 6, 2005, energy was $2.09. I use that date because that was the date that the President of the United States signed his energy bill that he hailed would be a great improvement for energy and energy prices here in America. $2.09. Today in Chicago it stands on average a little over $3 in the Chicago area. Over a little less than a year ago when the President signed his energy bill, the one that this Congress delivered to him, energy was $2.09 a gallon. Today in Chicago gas is $3.32 a gallon.

   In the year in which we debated the energy bill, the oil and gas interests spent $86 million lobbying this Congress and got $14.5 billion in taxpayer subsidies. They spent $86 million lobbying the House of the American people, and they got a $14.5 billion gift.

You cannot get that type of return on Wall Street. That was about a 10 percent return. You cannot get a return like that on any other investment where you give $86 million to influence the people's House and get $14.5 billion of hard-earned taxpayer money, and energy is trading at $75 a barrel.

   I understand if you want to help the oil and gas companies at $17 a barrel, $25 a barrel to help them drill for energy. At $75 a barrel, I would expect Exxon and Mobil and Chevron and Phillips, all who are making not just good money, historic record prices, would actually be able to go on their own and drill without the taxpayers having to pay for it.

   So not only are we paying a record amount of $3.50 a gallon, not only are they making record profits, but at $75 a barrel, the taxpayers are paying them $14.5 billion. So the American consumer pays more at the pump, and they pay more on April 15 because of what this Congress did. Over the last year, in less than 1 year, energy went from $2.09 to $3.30, but that is only one example.

   Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

   Mr. EMANUEL. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.

   Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that we are drilling for oil in Texas, California, Oklahoma, and Nebraska. How did the gentleman vote when we wanted to drill in the ANWR, which is 3.5 times the size of Texas? We could have gotten almost 2 million barrels of oil a day, and it would have helped these prices.

   Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I voted against that; and I vote against giving them $14.5 billion because I do not believe there is a worse example of corporate welfare, only to be followed by the prescription drug bill and the corporate tax bill that was a $5 billion problem. You all handed out $145 billion to corporate interests. Only in Washington do you try to resolve a $5 billion problem that cost you $145 billion, and it still did not resolve the original $5 billion problem.

   I bring this all up for one simple point: For the last 5 years, this is supposed to be the people's House, and when that gavel comes down, it is supposed to open the people's House, not the auction house. And from the prescription drug legislation to the energy legislation to the corporate tax bill, you have sold off America's interests. Billions of dollars have been spent lobbying the people's House, and it shows when you go from product to product, from line to line. That is what has happened here.

   Now all of a sudden everybody is worried about how we are going to deal with the energy problem. When you had an energy bill, you hailed it as a great victory for the American people. Since that time energy has gone up more than a buck a gallon at the pump.

   But that is also an example of what has happened with the corporate tax bill and the pharmaceutical bill. People have used their influence. I do not bemoan what the energy companies have done. I do not bemoan what the pharmaceutical companies have done. I do not bemoan what the HMO industry has done. I do not bemoan what corporate interests have done to influence this Congress. What I bemoan is what the Congress has done for that money and what they have done to the American people's interests. And what is happening here, because now this week I think it is ironic we are all talking about energy, this Congress is going to bring up a lobbying bill. That piece of legislation has become the incredible shrinking legislation. It does nothing. The Washington Post called it ``a watered down sham. Simply a joke.''

   USA Today writes, ``Congress still doesn't get it. After more than a year of negative headlines about political corruption and money-soaked alliances with lobbyists, House leaders are weakening their already anemic excuse for reform.''

   It doesn't deal with an independent Office of Public Integrity. It does not ban gifts from lobbyists. It does not close the revolving door for Members who leave here. It does not deal with disclosure of lobbyists' solicitation of campaign checks.

   The lobbying legislation we are dealing with is exactly the energy legislation we dealt with. The two are the same pieces of legislation. Those who have given and they are giving their checks because all that is left on K Street is checks. There are no checks and balances left in this system.

GASOLINE PRICES--SOBER ACTION DEMANDED -- (House of Representatives - April 25, 2006)

   (Mr. PRICE of Georgia asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)

   Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, talk is cheap, and gas prices aren't. With summertime right around the corner, Americans are making plans to pack up their car and hit the road for a summer vacation. However, this year gas prices are putting a damper on those summer plans.

   The President and most Members of Congress appreciate something the American people know well, America has an addiction to oil. But higher gas prices today are the product of many different factors, including governmental regulation and heightened worldwide demand. Here at home we are best able to adapt by using tools at our disposal.

   In the weeks ahead, Congress must continue to act on behalf of the American people by providing incentives for energy conservation and the development of alternative energy sources. We should expand our domestic oil production, including building new refineries and expanding current ones. Above all, Members of Congress cannot talk about the rise in energy prices and then say ``no'' to reforms when it comes time to vote.

   Right now, talk, not oil, is cheap. Shortsighted solutions will not be effective. I urge my colleagues to work together on behalf of all Americans. Our Nation certainly has the will to evolve our actions and the capability to meet these challenges.

ESCALATING GAS PRICES -- (House of Representatives - April 25, 2006)

   (Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)

   Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Madam Speaker, as every other Member, I have just returned from my congressional district, which includes a major part of the Dallas metropolitan area, and they have some of the highest gas prices in the Nation.

   Recent reports revealed that gas prices have shot up nearly 25 cents per gallon over the past 2 weeks. In December of 2003, gas averaged $1.50 a gallon. Now gas is reaching $3 a gallon. While I agree that supply-and-demand forces are part of the reason behind the escalating gas prices, I also believe that price gouging is a fundamental problem.

   Congress must act and enact innovative policies such as windfall profit tax on the gas companies and greater investments in alternative fuels, fuel efficiency, even public transportation.

   Madam Speaker, I urge the Republican leadership to stop the rhetoric and start thinking about the real change.

WE USE TOO MUCH MIDDLE EAST OIL -- (House of Representatives - March 29, 2006)

   (Mr. KINGSTON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)

   Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, in 2003, the U.S. public spent $103 billion buying oil from nondemocratic countries such as Venezuela, Syria and Iran.

   In fact, it is so bad that you could say that we are doubly funding the war on terrorism against us. We need to get off Middle East oil.

   Congressman Eliot Engel and I have introduced H.R. 4409, which sets that goal of getting us off Middle East oil by the year 2025. We do it through existing technology. We accelerate the use of hybrids by doubling the tax credit for purchasing a hybrid.

   We give automobile manufacturers a tax credit for making more lightweight vehicles that are more fuel efficient. We give truckers a tax credit for buying alternative power units so at night they do not have to burn diesel fuel while they are sitting in truck stops.

   We adopt the Gil Gutknecht E-Line 10 by 10 language on ethanol.

   This is a very good bill. I invite all of my colleagues to take a look at H.R. 4409 and consider being a cosponsor for national security.

ENERGY PRICES -- (House of Representatives - March 29, 2006)

   (Mr. BUTTERFIELD asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)

   Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Speaker, gasoline prices are once again on the rise. Over the last 2 weeks, prices are up by 14 cents, 40 cents higher than at this same time last year. Americans are looking to Washington for relief, but no relief has occurred. That is because House Republicans rubber-stamped an energy plan that was written in secret by a Cheney energy task force, whose participants are still not known to the American people.

   Based on the final law, one can only assume that the American consumer was not represented at those closed-door meetings. The Bush administration, Mr. Speaker, has admitted that this energy law will do absolutely nothing to reduce the pain Americans feel when they fill up at the pump.

   In fact, according to the President's own administration, the final energy law will actually lead to higher gasoline prices. As gas prices increase in the coming weeks, the American people should blame House Republicans who rubber-stamped an energy policy written by and for Big Oil at the White House.

ENERGY -- (House of Representatives - March 28, 2006)

   The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne) is recognized for 5 minutes.

   Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Speaker, I think most Americans are pretty interested, very concerned about the high cost of energy, particularly fuel.

   At the present time, we are nearly 60 percent dependent on foreign oil. OPEC provides the largest part of that oil that we are importing. We currently have a very large trade deficit, and petroleum is really the major part of, at least the largest single entity in that trade deficit, and this is a major threat to our economy. Right now, the purchase of foreign oil contributes about one-third of that trade deficit that we are now experiencing.

   The United States has only 3 percent of the world's petroleum reserves. So we are highly dependent on the rest of the world. We are now using more petroleum than we are discovering. So we are on a downhill slope. Obviously, we have to do some things differently than what we have been doing, and I think the energy bill we passed here in the Congress last summer was certainly a step in the right direction.

   Many people may remember there was a renewable fuel standards in it that was fairly significant. There were incentives for wind, solar, hydrogen fuel cells which may be the wave of the future, something that is not a renewable fuel standard, but also some nuclear incentives were in there. We have not done much nuclear production for a long time, whereas Europe has moved ahead, and much of the energy in Europe is now due to nuclear power.

   A couple of the major issues in a renewable fuel standard have to do with ethanol and biodiesel, and the remainder of my remarks will be addressed mainly to those topics.

   First of all, a renewable fuel standard adds $51 billion to farm income over 10 years, and the good news for taxpayers is that this reduces government farm payments by $5.9 billion over that 10-year period. That is money that otherwise would be paid by the taxpayer. It also reduces the trade deficit of the United States by roughly $34 billion, and it significantly reduces air pollution as well.

   So we think that obviously there are some tremendous benefits to the renewable fuel standard. Currently, we are producing roughly 5.9 billion gallons of ethanol this year, 2006; and the energy bill mandates by the year 2012, just 6 years from now, that we produce 7.5 billion gallons; but, actually, we will far exceed that at the pace that we are now producing ethanol.

   By 2025, there is a goal on the part of many of us to become independent of the oil that is produced in the Middle East, which would mean we would need to produce roughly 60 billion gallons of ethanol, biodiesel, and those types of fuels. And this is doable. It is going to take a concerted effort, a commitment on the part of our country, but we can do that. Technology is changing rapidly.

   One thing that I think is important to show is that we often hear that, well, ethanol is okay, but it actually burns up more energy than it produces. And that is not true. Ethanol, for every Btu of fossil fuel used, yields just about 1.4 Btu's of energy because a lot of the energy in ethanol comes from the sun. In contrast, gasoline, for every 1 Btu of fossil fuel used to produce it, yields about eight-tenths of a Btu. So there is an energy deficit.

   The same is true of MTBE. And, of course, MTBE is rapidly being phased out, so there is a tremendous demand now for ethanol to fill that gap. So, anyway, the technology is certainly changing.

   Something that is on the horizon is cellulosic ethanol. This is ethanol that would not necessarily be made fromcorn, but would be made from switchgrass, rice, wheat, corn stover, so corn stalks, wheat stalks, and rice stalks can be used. These are things that are currently sometimes burned or thrown away. Also wood chips. So there is a tremendous opportunity out there in parts of the country that are not necessarily in the Corn Belt to be in some form of the ethanol industry.

   Biodiesel is now where ethanol was about 10 or 15 years ago. It is on the cusp of really becoming a major part of our fuel supply and shows great promise. There are many spin-offs and by-products from ethanol. For instance, biodegradable plastics can be made in the process of wet milling. And right now a great deal of our packaging stores, like Wal-Mart and others, are now using biodegradable plastics.

   So we think there is a great future here. And, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity to address the House.