because by lodging the court in the d.c. court of appeals, it goes to the homeowners, small businesses, grandma, grandpa, and all of those individuals will have to travel 1,000 miles. this is because the burden that must be shouldered by a plaintiff is very steep. the challenge evidentiary determination made in the environmental impact statement, for example, a plaintiff must demonstrate they are not supported by substantial evidence in the record considered as a whole. to meet the standard, plaintiffs will have to retain experts, locate and prepare witness and gather and review documentary materials. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. mr. denham: i claim time in ame.

i reserve the balance of my time. ms. jackson lee: i reserve. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. who seeks time? mr. denham: i reserve my close, mr. chair. the chair: the gentleman from california reserves his time to close. ms. jackson lee: does the gentleman have speakers? the chair: the gentleman from california has the right to close. ms. jackson lee: does the gentleman have any speakers besides himself? mr. denham: i'm reserving for my personal close. the chair: the gentleman is reserving to close. ms. jackson lee: he has no other speakers -- he has no other speakers but himself. the chair: the gentleman has indicated he is reserving the time for his own closing. ms. jackson lee: my friends, again, i would have hoped having worked with the gentleman from nebraska, the proponent of this legislation, that we would

continue to work in a bipartisan fashion. this amendment is to relieve the burden on some of the very people many of us represent, and that is, of course, those individual claimants who happen to be in far away places that now have to go to the d.c. court of appeals and bear the burden of responsibility dealing with when you challenge, the factual evidentiary determination made in an environmental statement. the plaintiff must demonstrate they are not supported by substantial evidence in the record considered as a whole. that's an extreme burden that will have to be offered by plaintiff and will have to secure lawyers here in the d.c. area and have to travel here and bear extra expenses and it will be necessary to locate and prepare witnesses and even relocate themselves, gather and review documentary materials. and i would suggest that it is obviously a stress and a burden.

this bill has in section four, no right to judicial review. so, in essence, it means that you have one track to go in for number of issues that come forward. i'm concerned. and for that reason i think our amendment has the strength of purpose that is niss. let me also add if i want to be very clear, why should we burden the plaintiff, individual plaintiffs, mr. chairman, with financial burdens that are excessive? my amendment gives them a fair amount of time to get a response and to participate in this process. i ask my colleagues to support the amendment. and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. denham: this seament seeks to undermine a streamlining provision that sets deadlines for filing claims. opponents of projects often wait

until the final possible day to file claims. setting deadlines has no impact on legal rights. this bill is limited in the types of claims that receive the expedited review to just three, validity of final orders, constitutionality of the act, adequacy of the environmental impact statement. these claims must be filed within 60 days of the final order or action giving rise to that claim. no other claim is affected by the 60-day deadline. two months is more than a.m. will time to file with the d.c. circuit. extending to a year is one more delay tactic. i urge a no vote and yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from texas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. . in the opinion of the chair, the

noes have it and the amendment is not agreed to. ms. jackson lee: i request a recorded vote. the chair: further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from texas will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 8 printed in house report 113-88. for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? ms. chu: i rise to offer amendment amendment number 8. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 8 printed in house report 113-88 offered by ms. chu of california. the chair: the gentlewoman from california, ms. chu and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california. ms. chu: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise today to offer an important amendment along with

congress members polis and connolly, which would authorize construction of a highly controversial keystone x.l. pipeline. our amendment calls for g.a.o. to conduct a study on the cost of cleaning up oil spills from this pipeline. we need to know how much it is going to cost taxpayers to decontaminate when the pipeline leaks. we need to know how a spill will harm the environment. will it make americans sick, pollute our water and contaminate our farms. americans have the right to know the impact that a spill would have. there are many serious questions in some of the analyses of the project, if not glaring holes, take greenhouse gas emissions, take pipeline safety and spill response, take alternative pipeline routes.

there's too much what we don't know. what we do know is that the pipeline will transport oil that is highly could rose i have making spills more likely and difficult and costly to clean up. pipelines in north dakota, minnesota, wisconsin and michigan spills nearly four times as much crude per mile than the national average in the last two years. and yet, the keystone x.l. pipeline as planned will cut across america's heartland and will run above a main source of drinking and farm water for nine states, endangering hundreds of thousands of people. that is why i oppose the bill. we cannot rush a decision that could have so many harmful impacts on the health of so many americans and i urge the house to support our amendment. join me in asking the g.a.o. to study the cost of spill cleanup and impact on our health,

environment and water. the american people deserve to know. i reserve. the chair: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. mr. denham: i claim time in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. denham: these issues have already been the subject of study by state department, the environmental review process which included four different environmental impact statements annualizing oil spills of varying sizes, the types of releases. additional studies would waste taxpayer dollars. i reserve the balance of my time. e chair: the gentleman reserves. ms. chu: i yield representative polis 1 1/2 minutes. mr. polis: i would like to thank my colleague from california and mr. connolly from virginia. this amendment would require that government accountability office, which is independent, to evaluate the true costs of

potential spills from the keystone x.l. pipeline. americans want to know. we want to know what the impact of tar sand spills are on public health, on the environment, on the quantity and quality of water that's capable for agriculture and farmers and for municipalities and for drinking. we all know that tar sands crude oil can be dangerous. we saw the recent spill in may flower, arkansas. it's critical to address the true costs of oil pipeline spills and true impact. it is inevitable that the pipeline will have costly spills and leaks. spills are especially concerning because the pipeline that is going over the world's largest that supplies drinking and irrigation drinking water to millions of americans. instead of short circuiting the process, we should be working to

ensure that spills won't impact the health of our communities and the quality of our water. i thank the gentlelady for her time. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the entleman from california rise? mr. denham: does the gentlelady yield back? the chair: the gentlelady reserve? ms. chu: i reserve. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. mr. denham: i reserve the balance of my time. ms. chu: i yield to representative connolly for one minute. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. connolly: i thank my colleagues and i couldn't be in much better company under an amendment that is simple and straightforward. the american people are entitled to transparency. as mr. polis indicated, leaks are inevitable in any pipeline. could roads, especially with this kind of crude oil which is

highly could rose i have, you are going to have leaks. the american people need to know the cost of cleanup and dangers to the environment. that is straightforward and my colleagues share in the value of transparency in government and we ought to be doing here in the pipeline. i support the amendment and urge its adoption and i yield back to the gentlelady from california. the chair: the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: i reserve. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. mr. denham: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from california reserves sm the gentlelady reserves. ms. chu: i urge the house to support our amendment. the american people deserve to know, and i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. mr. denham: the american people have had five years of studies, longest studies that have happened on any pipeline in our nation's history. what the american public are waiting for are the jobs that go with us. u.s. pipeline operators have transported oil sands, crude,

for over 40 years. this is not a new concept. the 2011 pipeline safety act further strengthens safety by increasing penalties for violations and authorizing inspectors to new authorities for an oil spill response plan. that was a bipartisan we passed out of here just last session. transcanada has agreed to 57 conditions on the pipeline's construction and operation, which is expected to make it one of the safest ever constructed. i urge a no vote. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time sm the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. the gentlelady from california. ms. chu: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from california will

be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 9 printed in the house report 113-88, for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? mr. cohen: to ask that the amendment be consented to as read. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 9 printed in house report 113-88 offered by mr. cohen of tennessee. mr. cohen: moved that it be considered as read. the chair: pursuant to the rule, the amendment has been designated. mr. cohen: thank you, sir. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 228, the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cohen is recognized for five minutes and someone in opposition will be recognized. mr. cohen: this requires transcanada and future owner/

operator to submit its oil spill response plan to the governor. the current law requires the department of transportation to maintain current copies of the oil spill response plans and provide any person a copy. however those copies are allowed to exclude information like specific response resources and deployment plans and information on worst case scenario discharges. i understand there are concerns about broad distributions of the plan and has proprietary information but should not apply to governors of state. and the governors of some states that the pipe would run through. they have the right to evaluate the plans and integrate the emergency systems and reliance upon the redacted plan they would receive from the federal government is not adequate.

people's lives are at stake and they work together. nor should these governors wait until a spill has occurred to send first responders in harm's way. the only time the company is required to share the unredacted copy. south dakota was realizing the problems. >> and the mandate and the other states shouldn't have to jump through hoops to obtain information in order to provide emergency response to protect their citizens. when i offered this amendment in the transportation committee, chairman shuster realized the need to balance safety with the information becoming public. this strikes the proper balance. he offered to work with me in the future and i appreciate that kind offer. while i look forward to that partnership and i commend the chairman for his work to address

the issue, this bill would improve the keystone pipeline situation today. we can't wait for some possible future legislation in the likelihood of a potential spill. the potential effects could be devastating. the truth of the matter the pipeline is unprecedented and dangerous and will be spills. besides of arming our states with available information in order to respond adequately would not be responsible. mr. chairman, i appreciate this time and i know this is important and demonstrates congress' respect for governors, governments and the men and women who risk their lives to protect us. i urge all my colleagues to support the amendment and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. denham: i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. denham: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. cohen: i would ask that we

unanimously support this amendment. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. . mr. denham: implementation must be done carefully. in our committee markup, chairman shuster said he would work on this issue more broadly in context of re-authorization. despite these reservations, i'm prepared to accept the amendment. i'd like to yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from nebraska, mr. terry. mr. terry: i appreciate the gentleman from tennessee bringing it. i appreciate all of the time and effort that the transportation and infrastructure committee has put into it. i would agree that it's reasonable. the governors should have this. in fact, transcanada has agreed to a variety of additional measures that would be part of this and the governors should have this. i agree with the gentleman's conclusion.

mr. denham: yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from tennessee. those in favor say aye. any opposed say no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 10 printed in house report 113-88. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. holt: i have an amendment at the desk, mr. chairman. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 10 printed in house report 113-88 offered by mr. holt of new jersey. the chair: pursuant to hution 28, -- house resolution 228, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. holt, and a member opposed, minutes. control five the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. holt: mr. chairman, this

amendment that i'm offering on behalf of the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly, and the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. markey, simply requires that the oil transported through the keystone x.l. pipeline, the refined products made from the oil as well, stay in the united states except under certain circumstances. now, the proponents of the keystone pipeline, as we've heard today, say it is important for u.s. energy security. now, that can't be true if the oil just passes through the united states on its way to other countries. yet -- and there is nothing in the underlying legislation that would require that the oil transported through the keystone pipeline or the refined fuels produced from that stay in the united states to benefit american consumers. as a matter of fact, the president from transcanada gets

a sweetheart deal through this legislation was asked whether he would commit to keeping the keystone tar sands oil and the refined oil in the united states, he said no. adopt why we need to this amendment. the u.s. oil consumption peaked in 2005. it's declined by more than 10% since then. during the same period, u.s. petroleum production increased 38%. so how is this balanced? we're exporting it. now, that's not necessarily bad. for years the import of oil hurt our balance of trade, but in 2011 and the united states became a next exporter of etroleum products in centuries, we exported petroleum products. in 2012 exports increased to

3.2 million barrels per day. the keystone pipeline would transport the dirtiest oil in e oil from can -- dirtiest oil in the world to come to the united states where it would be transported to other countries. this is just a pipeline. about three dozen permanent workers assigned to this pipeline. otherwise all we get from this s the risk of a spill. according to the energy information administration, more than 76% of the current u.s. petroleum exports come from the gulf coast. in fact, 60% of the gas and 42% of the diesel produced at texas gulf coast refineries was exported. that fact that the refined product will be exported is not speculation.

look at the business plans of valero, one of the nation's largest refineries, which operates several facilities on the gulf coast. valero's 2012 annual report claims that the u.s. markets are oversupplied to the point where the company's chief executive recently said, quote, there's so much it's got to be moving. our view is that it's flooding the gulf coast, end quote. the solution, well, valero is shipping domestically produced crude to canada for refining under a license that allows the company to send up to 90,000 barrels a day for more than a year. it's more than doubled what we exported to canada last year. that's right, one of the largest u.s. refiners in the gulf coast wants to massively increase exports of american crude to canada at the same time that we are passing this legislation to send canadian tar sands oil to the gulf coast

. i would like to ask the proponents of this to explain how this makes sense. the president of the american petroleum institute and the c.e.o. of conocophillips have said that we should change u.s. law to allow for the expanded exports of domestically produced oil. well, the re-export of crude oil is already allowed under current law. without my amendment, crude oil that comes out of keystone could circumvent u.s. refineries and be exported as crude. i ask my colleagues to think hard about how that helps america. the keystone x.l. pipeline would ask the united states to bear all of the environmental risk of transporting the dirtiest oil in the world without ensuring that u.s. consumers or our energy security see any benefits from this. if the proponents of this

legislation are serious about ensuring that the keystone x.l. pipeline really does enhance u.s. energy security, they will vote yes on this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from nebraska rise? mr. terry: i ask to claim time in opposition and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. terry: just a couple points here. let's get the total picture here. we consume if america about 18 million barrels of oil per day. that's what we consume domestically. we've reduced that from 20 million a couple years ago. currently, when we focus on opec oil countries, we're importing daily about 4.3 million of that 18 million we need from opec countries, saudi

arabia, venezuela. and so building this pipeline, about 800,000 barrels is about enough to offset the heavy crude from venezuela. even with this pipeline running at its maximum, we will still ed to import from opec countries. so the reality is, the numbers will dictate that we have a long way to go before we're flush in oil where we could be energy independent, not dependent on opec. that's one of our goals here in this legislation is to be free of opec oil, keep it in north america. now, he also mentioned, the gentleman from new jersey, a good friend and classmate of mine, that a representative, high-level representative from transcanada said, no, we're not

going to guarantee that it won't all be exported. let's put it in context. there's people who are exercising or exercising the oil out of the ground. they contract with transcanada, transport that to the customer that will have control over it and refine it. so the common carrier in the middle has no control over the contract between the producer and the refiner. that's why he said no. they have no say so over what the refiner does. now, the refiner just basic common sense is going to tell you that it economically is cheaper to refine the gasoline in louisiana, texas, oklahoma and kansas, and then send out the gasoline product. and that gasoline's going to stay here domestically. maybe a small percentage, i don't know, but the reality is

economics is going to tell you that. but here's why this amendment has to be defeated, and this is why this is just kind of an absurd amendment because it says none of that oil that's put in a barrel could be exported. none of it. none of it is byproducts either. so if you made it into -- took the oil and made it into a plastic container of whatever you're exporting, you can't do that because it's plastic made from something that came through transcanada. the gentleman also mentioned diesel. even at the highest level of our dependence on opec oil, because of our use of gasoline as our dominant source of transportation as opposed to diesel, which is our simbyotic relationship with europe where they use diesel, not gasoline, we have exported that so we can't even continue that level symbiotic hip that

relationship. we can't do that. d as in every barrel there will be lubricants, there will be gels, there will be other industrial uses that are exported all the time that we couldn't do here. but what the american consumer wants is the gasoline from that, and economics, marketplace pressures are going to tell you it's just a lot cheaper to refine it here and then send it to their gas stations and that's what the consumer wants. that's what's going to happen. even the state department that was a fall is i that the gas -- fallacy that the gasoline was going to be exported. so this is one of those amendments that sounds populous and good but when you think it good, it's just a measure to kill the pipeline. and so i urge all of my colleagues to vote no, and i

yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new jersey. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. mr. holt: mr. chairman, i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. holt: i request a recorded vote, mr. chairman. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new jersey will e postponed. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, proceedings will now resume on those amendments printed in the house report 113-88 on which further proceedings were postponed in the following order. amendment number 1 by mr. weber of texas. amendment number 2 by mr. waxman of california. amendment number 3 by mr. johnson of georgia.

amendment number 4 by mr. connolly of virginia. amendment number 5 by mr. rahall of west virginia. amendment number 6 by ms. esty from connecticut. amendment number 7 by ms. jackson lee of texas. amendment number 8 by ms. chu of california. and amendment number 10 by mr. holt of new jersey. the chair will reduce to two minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote after the first vote in this series. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 1 printed in the house report 113-88 by the gentleman from texas, mr. weber, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed in house report 113-88 offered by mr. weber of texas.

the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support for the request of a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 246, the nays are 168. he amendment is adopted. the unfinished business is request for recorded vote on amendment number 2 printed in house report 113-88 by the gentleman from california, mr. waxman, on which further proceedings were postponed, and

which the noes prevailed by a voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2 printed in house report 113-88 offered by mr. waxman of california. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of a request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of epresentatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the eas are --

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 146 and the nays are 269. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is request for a recorded vote on amendment number 3, printed in house report 113-88 by the gentleman from georgia, mr. johnson, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the nays prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 3 printed in house report number 13-88 offered by mr. johnson of georgia. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of a request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is

ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of epresentatives.]

the chair: the yeas are 177, the nays are 239. he amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is request for a recorded vote on amendment number 4, printed in house report 113-88, by the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the nays prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 4 printed in house report 113-88, offered by mr. connolly of virginia. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of a recorded ote shall rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote.

[captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of epresentatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 176. the nays are 239. the amendment is not adopted. is a inished business

request for a recorded vote on amendment number 5, printed in house report 113-88 by the gentleman from west virginia, mr. rahall, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the nays prevailed by voice vote. the clerk: amendment number 5, printed in house report number 113-88, offered by mr. rahall of west virginia. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 177, the nays are 238. he amendment is not adopted.

the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number six printed in house report 113-88 by the gentlewoman from connecticut, ms. esty, on which further proceedings were postponed, the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number six printed in house report 113-88, offered by ms. esty of connecticut. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 183, the nays are 233.

the chair: on this vote, the -- the yeas are 1924erk nays are 234. the amendment is not agreed to. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number seven printed in house report 113-88 by the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the nays prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will reezz dig -- redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number seven printed in house report 113-88, offered by ms. jackson lee of texas. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device.

this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the [01ku&z

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 182, the nays are 234, the amendment is not agreed to. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number eight printed in house report 113-88, by the gentlewoman from california, ms. chu, on which further proceedings are postponed, and on which the nays prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number eight printed in house report 113-88, offered by ms. chu of

california. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 185, the nays are 231, he amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 10 printed in house report 113-88 by the gentleman from new jersey, mr. holt, on which further proceedings were postponed or on which the nays prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 10 printed in house report 113-88, offered by mr. holt of new jersey. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request

for a recorded vote will rizz and be counted. a sufficient number having risen a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the eas are -- the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 162, the nays are 255. he amendment is not adopted.

the question is on the amendment in the nature of a substitute as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the yeas have it. the amendment is adopted. accordingly, under the rules, the committee rises. the chair: mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house on the state of the union has had under consideration h.r. 3 and pursuant to house resolution 228, i report the bill back to the house with an amendment adopted to the committee of the whole. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the

whole on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration the bill h.r. 3, and pursuant to house resolution 228, reports the bill back to the house with an amendment adopted in the committee of the whole. under the rule, the previous question is ordered. and a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment reported from the committee of the whole? if not, the question is on adoption of the amendment in the nature of a substitute as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the yeas have it and the amendment is agreed to. the question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to approve the

construction and maintenance of the keystone x.l. pipeline and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the ouse will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york rise? >> i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman opposed to the bill? mr. bishop: in its current form, i am. the clerk: mr. bishop of new york moves to recommit the bill h.r. 3 to the committee on transportation and infrastructure with instructions to report the same back to the house forthwith with the following amendment. at the end of the bill, add the following new section, section 9, requirement that transcanada keystone xl pipeline play for any spill cleanup on american soil. transcanada keystone pipeline

l.p. mr. upton: i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the amendment. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection? f not, so ordered. the gentleman from new york is recognized for five minutes. mr. bishop: thank you very much. the bishop-capps amendment is the final amendment. it will not kill the bill. if adopted, the bill will proceed to final passage as amended. our amendment which is similar to amendments offered during our committee markup of h.r. 3, corrects massive loophole in current law that exempts eystone x.l. pipeline -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the house is not in order. the gentleman deserves to be heard. the gentleman from new york. mr. bishop: unlike u.s. crude oil company, tar sands importers will not pay into the oil spill trust fund even though it will be used to pay for any cleanup

costs for any spill on the keystone x.l. pipeline. that's right, and all others get all of the protections of the fund if they have an oil spill, but they do not have to pay a dime into it up front. as we have seen during the debate on this floor, we can argue over the merits of tar sands oil and argue over the merits of granting special permit waivers to transcanada to build the keystone pipeline. however, i would hope we could all agree that this congress should not allow the importers of keystone pipeline tar sands the per barrel charge that all other oil companies pay to finance the oil spill liability trust fund. in 2011, the internal revenue service concluded that the definitions of crude oil and petroleum product in the tax code do not clearly include tar sands. this spreppings, if allowed to stand, exempts the keystone x.l. pipeline tar sands of excise

taxes. in short, this is a $66,000 per day tax break. i am sure that some of my republican colleagues will argue that h.r. 3 is not the appropriate vehicle for making this change to the law. we should not single keystone x.l. pipeline and the congress should consider this change as a part of comprehensive tax reform. to my colleagues across the aisle, i would argue this entire bill is about sing willing out the keystone pipeline, providing special rules and deeming permits approved for anything anyone can think of. our amendment will ensure that transcanada certifies to the president that keystone pipeline tar sands will be subject to the per barrel excise tax that funds the trust fund ensuring they pay their fair share. i yield the remaining time to this amendment's co-sponsor, the gentlelady from california, mrs. capps. mrs. capps: i thank my colleague

for yielding. mr. speaker, whether it's drilled on land, offshore or transported via after pipeline, oil spills are inevitable. spills happen. and they will continue to happen regardless of what we have been told by the oil companies building and maintaining the pipeline. transcanada says it will implement lots of safety measures, but accidents happen. in fact, accidents have already happened 14 times on the existing transcanada keystone pipeline and they would will almost certainly happen on the proposed keystone pipeline, too. our amendment ensures that those responsible for the spill pay to clean it up. in 1969, my home district was victim to one of the worst oil spills in u.s. history. i know firsthand the devastating damage to human health, to property, to natural resources that are caused by oil spills. i know there have been numerous assurances that keystone x.l.

will be safer and risks will be minimal, but safer simply does not equal safe, especially when transport tar sands crude. tar sands crude is not only more could rose i have and dangerous, but far more difficult to clean up in the event of a spill. look at the spill many michigan in 2010. nearly three years after that spill, the cleanup is still ongoing and the costs are approaching $1 billion. a spill from keystone could have similarly devastating impacts on the american heartland. if we are going to bear 100% of the spill risks as americans, the least we can do is ensure that those responsible pay to clean it up. that's all this amendment does and i think there is broad agreement on this point. this is our opportunity to fix the problem right now. if the keystone x.l. pipeline is approved as is, the tar sands

crude oil will get a free ride through the united states. our amendment ends this. i urge my colleagues to end the free ride and vote for this amendment. and i yield back the balance of our time. mr. bishop: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? mr. upton: mr. speaker, i wish to speak in opposition to the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. upton: a review how to treat crude oil for the purposes of the oil spill liability trust fund is one fact we look forward to having but needs to be at the appropriate place and time. i got to say we are fully supportive of the goals and funding mechanisms of the trust fund and the allocation of these should be done etbly among

petroleum products entering the u.s. for use. however a bill to approve a single pipeline project is not the appropriate vehicle for this date. frankly, it needs to be part of the tax reform bill that i'm sure mr. camp and others are going to move later on this year. i wish we could have debated this as an amendment to this bill, but we don't have that opportunity. it's simply a motion to recommit. let's push it to the right date, and that is part of tax reformulater this year. mr. speaker, we have waited 1,700 days for this project. many of us have folks that commute 80 to 90 to 100 miles a day. they need a source of gasoline. canada provides a million and a half barrels literally every day to the united states. they want to send as much as six million barrels by 2030.

this is the best way to do it. why send it by truck or rail, send it by pipeline. safer, more economical and it's going to help the consumer. i remind my colleagues that 62 members of the u.s. senate voted for this project. we need to do it here. reject the motion to recommit and vote for final passage. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. without objection, the previous question is ordered. the question is on the motion to recommit. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the gentleman from new york. mr. bishop: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered members will record their votes by electronic evice.

pursuant to clause 9, rule 20, his vote will be followed by a five-minute vote of passage of the bill if ordered. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of epresentatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote --

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 194, the nays are 223, the motion to recommit is not agreed. to the question is on passage of the bill. he house will be in order. he house will be in order.

he house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to speak out of order for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you very much, mr. speaker. members, last week the largest caucus here in the house of representatives, the congressional sportsman's caucus, made up of republicans and democrats, had its normal yearly shoot, which consists of trap, skeet, and sporting clays and i am glad to say that this year, the republicans regained the trophy. if i could, i will yield to my co-chair of the congressional sportsman caucus, the gentleman from mississippi.

>> thank you. mr. thompson: i can can say to my colleague, this time, you were lucky. i look forward to next year. but the other thing you said is so important, the congressional sportsman caucus is the -- largest caucus, bipartisan caucus, here in congress. those of you who are not members, we ask you to come join us. we do a lot. but for the good that we do, the good that we serve, it's a good deal. thank you very much. >> i thank the gentleman and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. without objection, five-minute voting will continue. the question is on passage of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it.

the gentleman from new jersey. mr. holt: i request a recorded vote, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman requests a recorded vote. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having risen a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 41, the nays are 141 with five voting present and the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina rise? ms. foxx: mr. speaker, i send to the desk a privileged report from the committee on rules for filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 3232, resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 1911, to amend the higher education act of 1965 to establish interest rates for new loans made on or after july 1, 2013, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the distinguished gentlelady from north carolina rise? ms. foxx: i ask that when the house adjourns today it adjourn to meet at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered. or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1949. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. -- clerk:

the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman seek to pass the bill as amended? >> yes. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1949, a bill to direct the secretary of education to convey the advisory committee on improving postsecondary education data to conduct a study on improvements to postsecondary education transparency at the federal level. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from indiana, mr. messer, and the gentleman from new jersey, mr. andrews, each will control 0 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from indiana. mr. messer: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks . the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. messer: mr. speaker, i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. messer: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of h.r. 1949, the improving postsecondary

education data for students act. i want to thank chairman kline and higher education subcommittee chairwoman foxx for their work on and support of this measure. i also want to commend the ranking member, mr. miller, subcommittee ranking member hinojosa, and our colleagues for their contributions to this bill. few decisions in life are bigger than whether to attend college and which college to attend. yet many families struggle to wade through the complicated maze of statistics available to find the information they need to make fully informed, cost-conscious decisions. consequently, they may choose schools or programs that don't meet their needs and leave them with high debt and limited career potential. despite federal efforts to improve data collection and transparency in the higher education system, families and students still struggle and institutions of higher learning are spending more time and money than ever.

during the 2012-2013 academic year, institutions spent an estimated $850 -- 850,000 man hours and almost $31 million to fill out required federal surveys. higher education leaders have highlighted several of these requirements as duplicative to state and local transparency efforts and may partially contribute to the increase in college costs. through the improving postsecondary education data for students act, we hope to simplify this process and help ensure students can access the information they need to make good decisions while lessening the burden on colleges and universities that have far too many reporting requirements today. the bill would require the department of education to evaluate the information colleges and universities are required to provide to determine what helps make students better consumers and what simply buries them in paper.

and the schools they atend in paper as well -- they attend in paper as well. the information yielded by this report will play a critical role in assisting the education and work force committee's efforts to re-authorize the higher education act. we need to ensure students have the information they actually need in a user-friendly manner to help them make the best decisions they can. we also must streamline the current regulatory burden of unnecessary and unhelpful reporting requirements imposed on institutions of higher education. this bill will help guide that process. i urge all of our colleagues to support the improving postsecondary education data for students act and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. andrews: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. andrews: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased to rise in support of the gentleman's legislation. i think it's an example of how we can work together and achieve a benefit for the american people. i commend him for introducing the bill and would outline our

reasons for our support. probably the second largest expenditure most americans make in their lifetime is a college education for themselves or for their children. second only to their real estate, to the home that they buy. it's surprising how little consumer information is available to families before they make that choice. if you buy a phone, you can find out what apps it can run and how much bandwidth it has, how much it can store or what it can do or what it can't do. you can find all this information about what the phone costs, what it does and how it works. but if you're about to enroll in a school that purports to teach website design or if you're about to send your son or daughter off to a college to major in philosophy or engineering, it's surprising how little you know about that school. and the gentleman's proposal is that there be an effort by the department of education to make

those data more accessible and more transparent for students and their families. questions that are natural to ask. what it does -- what does it cost to go to this school? what happens to students when they graduate from the school? what kind of jobs do they get? how much money do they make? how much debt do they graduate with? who transfers in and out of the school and what numbers? how many people finish their education at this school? i'm not suggesting that there's any one-size-fits-all list of questions and it's the right list of questions. what i'm suggesting is that the maximum amount of information should be available to families and students to make reasoned decisions about this sort of thing. the only comment that i'd make further is that we would encourage, mr. speaker, the committee leadership to consider bipartisan legislation that's been sponsored by mr. duncan hunter jr. on the majority side, i'm involved in

it on the minority side, and in the other body it's sponsored by senators widen and warner, along with senator rubio, that would create this kind of information in a user-friendly web-based environment as soon as it possibly could be done. i view this bill as complimentary to that effort. and look forward to working with the gentleman and the other leaders of the committee on this issue. i'd finally say that on our side we do strongly believe that the time has come for a full re-authorization of the higher education act. there are a myriad -- there are myriad issues. tomorrow we will have student loan financing issues on the floor. questions about pell grants, the cost of college and numerous other issues that we think are best dealt with in an omnibus and comprehensive fashion. having said that, we commend the gentleman for his introduction of the bill, urge its support and i reserve the

balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from indiana. mr. messer: i thank the gentleman from new jersey for his comments and his leadership on this important topic. certainly pledge to work with you on both this bill and the other bills that you mentioned. would now like to yield one minute to my good friend, the gentleman from virginia, mr. cantor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cantor: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman. i want to thank him for his leadership in bringing this bill forward. as well as appreciate the ranking members' support on this as well. mr. speaker, i rise today spo -- to support this act. american moms and dads are working tirelessly to help their children achieve their dreams. for many, that dream includes college. however, the cost of postsecondary education has become increasingly difficult for a lot of families to bear. young graduates today are not only confronting a tough job market had they leave school, they are continually facing a

growing mountain of debt that is financially burdensome and extremely difficult to pay back. many students choose a school and their major without ever knowing the earning potential their field -- of their fields of study. this leaves many young americans with a lower than expected income and struggling to pay down their loans once they graduate. for some, it can take decades. this has got to change. in my home state of virginia, we've become a leader in attempting to address this problem. in 2012 virginia enacted a requirement that schools in our state publish information regarding the proportion of graduates with employment, their average salary and higher education debt at 18 months and five years after graduation. i expect that this data will become extremely useful to parents and students alike. unfortunately data available to virginia's limited -- the data available in virginia is limited to graduates in the

commonwealth. this means that information available in the state database fails to fully capture students that graduate from a school like the university of richmond, which attracts students from 46 different states. very often they go on to take jobs throughout the country where they become leaders in their field. we can help resolve this situation. the federal government currently has a significant amount of data that could help parents and students make better decisions regarding the financial benefits of perspective schools and majors. but this information's often hard to understand or difficult to access. this bill requires the secretary of education to convene a 15-member advisory panel to provide the recommendations on how to improve the information available to parents and students when deciding on their schools and majors. this panel will provide an interim report within six months and a final one within one year for congress' consideration during the

re-authorization of the higher ed act. this legislation will certainly kick start the process of improving transparency in higher education and provide students and parents with information that they need to make informed decisions so that a college education can continue to be a source of empowerment for millions of americans. this bill is a great step in the right direction. i want to thank the gentleman from indiana and his leadership , mr. he'ser -- messer, chairman john kline, chairwoman virginia foxx, and the rest of the education and work force ommittee for their work on this issue and i urge my colleagues to support this bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. andrews: i would just ask my friend, mr. speaker, if he has any other speakers? mr. messer: two others. mr. andrews: i would reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from indiana. mr. messer: i would like to recognize my friend and colleague from the great state of indiana, mrs. brooks.

mrs. brooks: mr. speaker, i rise today in strong support of the improving postsecondary education data for students act. i am the mother of a current college student and a recent college graduate. as well as a former general council and senior vice president tech community college in indiana. i personally and professionally understand the difficult and often life-defining decisions our young people make when they decide where to attend college. students want to make the most educated decision they can but currently they struggle to access and process all the data they need to make that best decision for themselves and their future. and it's not because there's a lack of data being reported. currently the federal government requires colleges and universities to report overwhelming amounts of information, as congressman messer already said. rather than having institutions across the country spend over 850,000 hours and almost $31 million to fill out all these

required federal surveys, why not allow our higher ed institutions to spend those hours and those dollars doing a better job serving our students in classrooms, advising students and figuring out ways o lower tuition costs? the problem is, the government is not requiring the right information and putting it in a a readable format for students system of this requires a survey on which factors students and paraphernalias want and need when considering their post-secondary options. i recognize that this is a bipartisan piece of legislation that will benefit students. this bill is simple, it helps congress improve transparency as we approach re-authorization of the act. i urge adoption of this important bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman from new jersey continue to reserve in mr. andrews: yes, mr. speaker,

i do. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana. mr. messer: i would like to recognize my good friend from georgia, i yield two minutes to mr. collins. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. collins: i rise in strong support of this legislation. i have a 17-year-old son, copeland, and my wife and i are helping him through the complex, difficult process of choosing a higher -- a place of higher education to attend. there are a lot of factors to consider. in this economy, our children deserve the best possible chance we can give them to find a job that will allow them to provide for themselves and their future families. the key to good decision making is having accurate information this will provide copeland and the other students in northeast georgia with the best possible data that they and their parents can use to select toe the right post-secondary path for them.

i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill, i thank the gentleman for his leadership, and this is a positive solution for our country and a positive solution for families looking for a solution for higher education. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. andrews: i continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana. mr. messer: i have no additional speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana. excuse me, new jersey. mr. an cruise feather -- mr. andrews: that's not so bad. again, this is an example of how we can work together. we are pleased to support this bill, i urge a yes vote and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana. mr. andrews: i'm a former state legislator from indiana, they used to say back there, good bill, should pass. it's great to have an opportunity to work across the aisle on a bill that just makes sense. my colleague, ms. foxx, made

sense -- made the point, there's a lot of data out there for families but there's a difference between data and information. our goal with this bill is to help bring this data together, get past the data dump an get families the information they need while at the same time, lessening the regulatory burden on our colleges and universities. they are doing the best they can with limited resources as well. with that, i urge my colleagues to support the bill and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. all time has expired. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. all time has expired. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 271. resolving environmental conflict acts. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 261, a bill to clarify that compliance with an emergency order under section 202c of the federal power act may not be considered a violation of any federal, state, or local environmental law or regulation and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore:

pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from texas, mr. olson, and the gentleman from texas, mr. green, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. olson. mr. olson: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials in the record on h.r. 271. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. olson: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. olson: i rise in support of h.r. 271, resolving liability act of 2013. my colleagues and i carefully drafted this bill last year to resolve a conflict between the federal power act, environmental rules that if left unresolved could create serious problems for the liability of you are nation's electric grid.

with a hot summer coming and power demands set to surge, the potential for dangerous power outages is rising alongside the mercury. just last week, states like california and my home state of texas were warned by regulators that electricity reserve margins could dip dangerously low. texas faces critical electricity shortages in the next few years. we simply won't have enough power, reliable power, guarantee our grid. rolling blackouts in texas alone would impact over 25 million people. as coal plants continue to be cities across the country could experience blackouts. when the power fails and the a.c. shuts down on a hot,

100-beg day, it's the elderly, the young, and the poor who uffer first. experience shows that in rare and limited circumstances, emergency actions have been needed to ensure the reliable delivery of electricity. when an emergency exists, due to a sudden increase in demand for electricity or a shortage of supply, the department of energy has a tool of last resort to address the emergency. that tool is an emergency order under section 202c of the federal power act. d.o.d. -- d.o.e., i'm sorry, can allow a connection to be made or a power plant to yen rate epeculiar trissity when outages occur due to weather events, equipment fail yours

electricity supply is too low to avoid a blackout. as they should, d.o.e. can mandate a company to comply with an order even if it means a brief violation of environmental laws. unfortunately, under current law, a company or individual can be penalized for violating environmental laws even when they're following a federal order to a void a -- to avoid a blackout. in recent year, these con thricting federal laws have resulted in lawsuits and heavy fines for electricity providers complying with legal orders. unless congress passes this legislation to resolve the potential conflict in the laws, section 202c tool is in jeopardy. h.r. 271 eliminates the uncertainty facing power

generators and their customers by providing a needed safety valve which clarifies that compliance with an emergency order under section 202c of the federal power act may not be considered a violation of any federal, state, or local environmental law or regulation. to be clear, these emergency orders are not issued lightly and only under extreme power scenarios.lity in the past 30 years, this authority has only been invoked about half a dozen times. if the need arises mitigating circumstance legislation will nsure that d.o.e. works to minimize adveers environmental impacts by balancing them with liability considerations. while some people are concerned that h.r. 271 doesn't go far enough to protect plant

operators who may face lawsuits from environmental group, my bill is a vast improvement over current law. major utilities, both public and investor owned, believe a federal court would be hard pressed to overrule an emergency order by the d.o.e. in a crisis, d.o.e. will get deference which will apply to utilities following these orders. d.o.e. will consult with clean air regulators but the final decision in emergencies will always firmly remain in the hands of those charged with keeping the power flowing. the protection h.r. 271 offers is critical. given the number of retimes that have been announced as operators grapple with new air and water rule, i worry that

d.o.e. may need to use its authority more often in the uture. i still expect d.o.e. emergency orders to be an exception and not the rule. in those rare instances when the authorities -- when the authority is evoked, we should not punish generators who are following orders from the federal government to keep the power on in emergency. resolving this conflict is critical which is why i reintroduce this bipartisan legislation in the 113th congress. it will allow america's power companies to comply with federal orders to maintain grid reliability during an emergency. without the threat of lawsuits or penalties. i'm pleased with the widespread, bipartisan support that this bill has received this bill is proof that we can find common ground in washington, d.c. when working to address a glitch in federal

law and provide reliable energy supply to all americans. i want to thank chairman fred upton, ranking member henry waxman and subcommittee chairman ed whitfield and subcommittee member bobby rush for their support and assistance in moving this bill forward. i also want to thank my original co-sponsors on the committee, gene green of texas, mike doyle of pennsylvania, literry of nebraska, and -- ann kinzinger of illinois, and their staffs for working with me to fix this problem, to keep the power running for all americans in an emergency. mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to support this commonsense, bipartisan legislation that protects consumers, the environment, an those who provide the power. thank you, i reserve the

balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. green: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. green: i rise today in strong support of h.r. 271, the resolving environmental and grid reliability conflicts act. i'm proud to be an original co-sponsor of this bill that we worked on with my good friends, congressman pete olson and congressman mike doyle last congress. his bipartisan legislation addresses a law when a company may be ordered to break federal law, it gives the d.o.e. authority to avoid electric liability -- reliability emergency. at the same time the possibility of violating environmental laws in regular

-- and regulations may restrict the operation of power plants or transmission lines. a company may have a moth balled power plant because it reached its clean air limit for a year. if a company or publicly owned utility ised orered to operate under section 202c at the same time it's prohibited from operating in accordance with the d.o.e. order, the operator must choose which legal mandate to follow. these conflicting legal mandates should not complicate an electric liability crisis but they co-. it is not fair to put a power generator in this position. it's a -- as a longtime member of the energy and commerce committee and someone who worked on environmental legislation in that time, it was never our intention to put electric generating facilities in a position of having to choose between compliance with one law over the other and while there is has only been a couple of instances to date where a generator has been in

this situation, the potential for conflict will grow as several coal-fired plants are scheduled to be taken offline in coming years. that's why congress needs to address the issue, otherwise we risk threatening our electric reliability and for certain regions of the country this issue is coming fast. h.r. 251 clarifies that if an emergency order issued pursuant to section 202c macon flict with an environmental law or regulation, the order shall expire 90 days after issuance. this does two things, it ensures they have the necessary authority to keep the lights on in true emergencies, however, it then gives d.o.e. the authority to renew and reorder after the 90 day period after consulting with other agents to mitigate potential adverse environmental impacts.

mr. speaker, this is not a messaging bill, it's not an anti-e.p.a. bill or anti-toxic standards bill. instead it's a commonsense bill that will address a worrisome deficiency in current law that is only going to become more prm innocent in current years. i want to thank our colleague, ranking member mr. waxman for his conned support of this bill. this is one of a handful of bills supported by both democrats and republicans in the energy and commerce committee and supported across he utility industry. it's time we get back to legislating and not messaging. with that i encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, support this bill. and, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. mr. olson: mr. speaker, i have no one on my side willing to speak so i will close if my colleague will as well. mr. green: mr. speaker, i will yield back the balance of my time and just encourage our

colleagues to support this great legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. olson: thank you, mr. speaker. in closing, i want to thank chairman upton, ranking member waxman, subcommittee chairman whitfield and subcommittee ranking member rush for their assistance in getting this bill passed in the 113th congress. if my colleagues want to go home next week with a example of bipartisanship for their constituents, vote for h.r. 271. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 271. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended and the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the chair announces the speaker's appointment pursuant to section 2 of the migratory bird conservation act, 16, u.s.c., 1715-a, and the order of the house of january 3, 2013, of the following members on the part of the house to the migratory bird conservation commission. the clerk: mr. wittman of virginia and mr. dingell of michigan. the speaker pro tempore: the chair announces the speaker as i appointment, pursuant to section 6 -- 672-b of the national defense authorization 11-239 iscal year 2013, and the orders of the house of

january 3, 2013, of the following individuals on the part of the house to the military compensation and retirement modernization commission. the clerk: mr. michael r. iggins of washington, d.c. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir, pursuant to section 4-c of house resolution 5, 113th congress, i am pleased to reappoint the honorable james t. mcgovern of massachusetts as co-chair of the tom lantos human rights commission. thank you for your attention to these appointments. signed, sincerely, nancy pelosi, democratic leader. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute peeches.

for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i thank the speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize an exceptional hoosier couple, mr. betton and mrs. sandy marks who are being honored with the 2013 h.a.i. life distinguished service award by the hebrew academy of indianapolis. mr. marks has served as president of both the hue brew academy and the bureau of jewish federation, and president and as chairman of the state of israel bondses. mr. rokita: he has also served as a many of the nominating commission and has volunteered with other civic and professional organizations. mrs. marks has devoted her life to education, serving on the hebrew education committee and as a board member of the

school. she recently retired from washington township schools but continues to serve the district and indiana as a school psychologist. she is also a trusted friend and confidant of mine on education issues in my capacity as chairman of the subcommittee on k-12 education. mr. and mrs. marks are wonderful entrepreneurs, excellent philanthropists and, most of all, friends. i am honored to know them, even since my days as indiana's secretary of state, and i know they will continue to serve as leaders in our indiana community for many years to come. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. it's an honor to follow the subcommittee chairman from indiana in k-12 and because i'm going to recognize a leader in our k-12 community in illinois.

mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize matthew maddux for being named the v.f.w. national citizenship education elementary teacher of the year. matthew is a fifth grade teacher at columbus elementary school in edwardsville, illinois, and he was selected as the teacher of the year from among 60,000 other teachers for his dedication to education, innovative teaching style and resource development. mr. davis: in the classroom, matthew has made it a commitment to recognize the sacrifices made by our nation's veterans, by regularly inviting veterans to visit and share their stories to help make history much more relevant to his students. in addition to being an educator, matthew has proudly served our country in the illinois national guard's 445th chemical company since july, 2011, and has enrolled in officer training school at camp

lincoln in springfield, illinois. far too often our nation's educators do not receive the credit and recognition that they deserve. so i am proud to stand here today to congratulate matthew maddux for the work he does in the classroom and also to thank him for his service to our country. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leave of absence requested for mr. clyburn of south carolina for today, mr. hinojosa of texas on may 14, 2013, mr. gary g. miller of california for today and the balance of the week, and mr. young of florida for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the requests are granted. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from nebraska, mr. fortenberry, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.

mr. fortenberry: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i recently visited the eastern nebraska veterans home in belleview. it's a lovell place that is well designed to care for those who have served in the protection of our country. i had a nice visit talking with many of the veterans there. each with their own unique stories of service to our nation. a conversation though with one man in particular, mr. speaker, has stuck with me ever since. now in his 90's, don mcbride sat quietly as i was speaking to the entire group, but as i was leaving, i went over to him to thank him for his commendable service to our nation. but as soon as i got those words out, don stopped me. you see, don has a very

interesting story. as i understand it, he did not directly enlist in the united states military. it was a unique situation. don was a pilot with pan-am airlines and during world war ii, he helped the war effort by flying planes into china. during world war ii, china was our ally. in all, don flew 524 missions. he had to put a few planes down a couple times because they were shot so badly. but he didn't stop. he and his fellow pilots did what was -- whatever was needed for the war effort. whether it was engaging japanese aircraft or delivering aid to remote places in that rough terrain. for his service, don was awarded the presidential citation, four bronze stars, the air medal, the distinguished flying cross and the china service medal.

he didn't want to tell me all this. he was quite reserved about it. but his nurse encouraged him to share his story. but again, as i went to thank him, don stopped me and he said this, mr. speaker, he said, we don't need any thanks. every man here did it because he wanted to. because it was necessary. i don't know of anybody who has ever been sorry for serving. mr. speaker, it is this spirit of selflessness that lives on in so many of our veterans. and the military men and women who are serving our nation today. they gave and continue to give for one simple reason, it is necessary and it is their duty. on memorial day this coming monday, we will gather for an occasion that is both solemn and joyful. we honor those who gave

everything in service to their countrymen. the formal remembrance of fallen heroes mixes feelings of both sorrow and pride. that a person would lay down is life for his friends, for another, is the noblest of human ideals. that we would unite in gratitude to reflect on the sacrifices of those who have gone before us is one of the greatest human expressions. and for those who are veterans, mr. speaker, who have stood next to persons who have given their all, perhaps holding them as they died, watching helplessly as war consumed another innocent life, their living presence, mr. speaker, the living presence of our veterans today is an honor to those who did not come home. communal remembrance is a

longstanding human tradition. when we focus our remembrance on the war veterans who have sacrificed for us, the act is particularly meaningful and appropriate. ever since there has been fighting and dying in war, there's been a calling in the human heart to memorialize the fallen heroes of battle, especially in this nation, born in war, where the legacies of those who died defending our country are written on our hearts and are seen clearly in the blessings of liberty that we still hold today. in spite of our political divisions, in spite of the ranker and divisive -- rancor and divisiveness that sometimes exist in this body and this nation, we are still called to yield to proper reflection about that which is noble and that which is good. mr. speaker, yet for nearly 100 years, our fledgling country did not have a day set aside to

remember and celebrate the sacrifices of fallen soldiers. in america, the practice of memorial day began in the years immediately following the civil war. in 1868, the head of an organization of union veterans established what was called decoration day at the time. for the nation to decorate the graves of the civil war dead with flowers. the day picked was may 30, a day in late spring, to ensure that the flowers would be in full bloom across our nation. throughout the countryside, people began to visit cemeteries, to decorate the graves of fallen soldiers, both union and confederate. on one noted occasion, women living near columbus, mississippi, deep within the defeated confederacy, were so disturbed by the site of a neglected grave of union soldiers that they took care to see that these graves were roperly decorated as well.

decoration day grew and soon ceremonies were hold throughout the nation. after world war i, tv exup and downed to honor those who died in all american wars. decoration day soon became known as memorial tai. it was only in 1971 that memorial day was declared a national holiday by an act of congress to be celebrated annually on the last monday in may. mr. speaker this coming monday we will continue this solemn tradition and reflect upon its profound meaning. we honor those fallen heroes of yesterday for their sacrifices on our behalf. their bravery has afforded us the liberty and security we enjoy today. but the price of the blessings of peace has not come without great cost. since the revolutionary war, more than 42 million americans

have risked their lives for our country. of those, more than 656 thourblings service members have died in battle. their loss runs deep in the lives of those who they left behind. wives lost husbands, husbands lost wives, parents lost children and children lost parents. the soldiers ultimate -- the soldiers' ultimate sacrifice is not merely his own, mr. speaker. in 1944, along the northern coastline of france new york a place called normandy, the future of civilization hung in the balance. at 6:30 a.m. on june 6, the first wave of american troops went in at a place called omaha beach. as their higgins boat troop carriers open, 18 and 19-year-old young men from

cities and farms from new york do braska were asked to the impossible. dash across hundreds of yards of open beach with no cover in the face of a hail of german machine gunfire and mortars and take the high ground. somehow, some way they did this they withstood the violence and made their way to the steep hillside. mr. speaker, last winter, i stood where those soldiers landed at water's edge and looked across that beach. it is hard to get the mind around the chaos of that day, to feel what they felt as the horror unfolded before them. i made my way to that steep hillside, now so peaceful and lovely, and stood in a german machine gun bunker, a young german soldier manned the machine gun that day and in a

book he wrote shortly before he died a few years ago, he said he wept as he fired his gun at the slaughter that unfolded efore him. i walked around a nearby american cemetery with its orderly rows of white crosses testifying to the price our dear soldiers paid. i stopped at the grave of a young man named billy d. harris from oklahoma. billy d. harris had married young and died young. his wife didn't know that her husband had been killed and buried there until about 10 years ago. such is the chaos of war. she never remarried. she had all her hopes that her husband would one day return to her. i proceeded on to the little --

to a little town where our airborne troops landed the night before the invasion. some fell into the town square occupied fi germans. one soldier's parachute got caught on the church roof and he hung there as the battle raged below. a replica of the parachuting soldier still hangs from the church today. in august of 1944, a young dil doctor left his wife and two children and entered the army. he was first headquartered at a hospital in england where the last official record shows he was located. as patton's army moved against the german, captain luther sexton fortenberry went into action into france, probably to begin field operations there. in november of 1944, he was killed byed or nants explosion. he was my grandfather and he was initially buried there at

he cemetery, now he is re-entered here in washington in arlington national cemetery. as part of our civic life, mr. speaker, we honor the memory of all those who served us. we all know of the great battles and heroic sacrifices t places like bunker hill, omaha beach, fallujah, what we do not know are the untold story, witnessed by no one, of americans who fought it out to the death to preserve our country. we also do not know the untold stories of the many who left their families and quietly performed their duty with no questions or demands made. the vet raps who maintained tanks and aircraft, tooked, omputed, cleaned, and drove.

today, we not only honor our loved ones and ancestors lost long ago as well as those who have left us recently, the sting of loss is not so distant for some whose loved ones have given their lives of late in iraq and afghanistan. of the american soldiers who have been killed there, 72 were nebraskans. like so many of our colleagues, mr. speaker, i have attended many funerals and memorial services for those who have been killed from my district. i have seen many of the families bravely bear the weight of this devastation. i have seen communities come together to honor their local heroes and to help bring healing to these hurting families. i could not be more proud of these patriots and their family members, their remarkable

bravery, their remarkable honor, their character, their selflessness. young men and women of the highest caliber. who, like so many before them, gave themselves for their country, fighting courageously for for america and our ideals of liberty, equality, and justice. for which they died. mr. speaker, i was recently john ted by the family of donghara. he and his family are new americans, his parents came here from laos. he was killed several years ago when his helicopter was shot down in afghanistan. you may remember the incident. we lost 30 service members. on memorial day,on ease family is gathering in south sioux city, nebraska, to erect a

statue in his honor. i'm grateful, privileged, to be canned to join them on that day. like his fellow soldiers, john was an american. he was loyal. he was brave. and now he is free. his sacrifice and the sacrifice of all american veterans, brings to mind the seriousness of our time and memorial day is anest to terrible -- especially important time for the reflection from lawmakers. we carry a tremendous responsibility to recognize the real life consequences behind our policy deliberation, analysis --age cease, and votes. on that first decoration day in 1868, major general john logan offered his post these words as they he ordered them to decorate the graves of the war

dead. he said this, mr. speaker. we should guard their graves .ith sacred vigilance let pleasant paths invite the going of reverend visitors and fond mourners. let no raveplgs of time testify that we have forgotten as a people the cost of a free and undivided republic. mr. speaker, during a visit to a nearby hospital to see our ounded here in washington, there was a soldier there who was -- whose wounds were pretty devastating. and as i was leaving, i noticed there was a sign hanging on the outside of his door.

it dade, america, land of the free, because of the brave. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. pocan, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. pocan: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise on behalf of the congressional progressive caucus. the congressional progressive caucus has been fighting for economic fairness for the middle class and those striving to be in the middle class for this entire country and today we would like to talk specifically about the growing student debt, the skyrocketing student debt that we have in this country.

just this past weekend, 6,200 students graduated from the flagship university in my state mitigating circumstance alma mater, u.w. madison. these young people leave madison with new friends, new skills, new knowledge and most importantly, access to increased economic opportunity through their college diploma. students with a bachelor's degree have half the unemployment rate of those with a high school degree and in 2012, students with a bachelor's degree earned almost 80% more than someone with a high school diploma in a similar position. unfortunately, these students are also leaving college with something else. unprecedented levels of student loan debt. the drastically increasing student loan debt held by americans across the country can be considered nothing less than a crisis. not a looming crisis, by -- but an urgent, already here crisis. total student debt in this country now tops $1 trillion. that exceeds all the credit

card debt in this country. and that's up from just $200 billion in 2000, just 12 1/2 years ago. and every second in america, total student debt increases by $2,854. according to the new york federal reserve, total student debt has tripled over the last eight years, representing a 70% increase in both the number of people with debt and the average debt held per person. about 2/3 of the class of 2011 graduated with student debt and their average debt was more than $26,000. in my home state of wisconsin the weight of student loan debt is severely affecting college graduates' ability to support themselves and their families. there's an organization in wisconsin that i want to give thanks to and credit to, one wisconsin now, a progressive think tank.

they have made it one of their leading efforts to talk about rising student debt and the trillion dollar debt we have and what it's doing to our economy. and thanks to them i have some stories and figures to share, specific to wisconsin, and nationwide. according to one study from one wisconsin, the average monthly payment made by a -- made by wisconsinites with a bachelor's or advanced degree is nearly $400 a month, $388 to be exact. before someone can pay their rent or mortgage, their utilities, their groceries, child care, they are already $400 in student loans. and if they're lucky, they'll have some funds left over to save for retirement. because of these exorbitant rate, it will take the average citizen in my state almost 19 years to pay off their student loan debt from a four-year university. there's some long-term economic effects to this. the effects of the skyrocketing costs are two-fold. number one, at a time when a

college degree is more important than ever to obtain reliable employment, we are in grave danger of placing too many young students out of a college education. these drastic increases in tuition occurred at the same time we have seen the worst economic downturn since the great depression. we know that to compete for the jobs of the 21st century and drive in a global economy, we need a grow, skilled, educated work forest, particularly in the areas of science, technology, engineering, and math. it is estimated that the u.s. will need 22 million more college educated workers by the year 2018. partly driven by rise in college costs we are expected to fall short by three million workers. our colleges and universities such as u.w. madison and boyd college and others in my district have the talented faculty to produce our 21st century work force buey