that works for the american people, that actually does reduce the risk of death, disease, and youth useage of tobacco. when you lock them into the highest risk and likelihood of death, you haven't fulfilled that. when you don't require states to use the money that they were given for cessation programs, how can you expect that you're going to reduce youth usage? when you see that 48 states have a higher prevalence of marijuana use among youth than they do above tobacco, how can you conclude that just by giving the f.d.a. the jurisdiction to regulate tobacco that somehow that means you're going to have a reduction in youth usage. itit's just not going to havment the american association of public health physicians states that this product orbs are the most effective way to fight death, disease associated with current tobacco users. let me state at that again. the american association of public health physicians states that these are the best tool we have to get people to quit smoking. as a matter of fact, i'm proud to say that the american association of public health physicians yesterday e

it enables coal useage to grow as the demand for electricity increases nationwide. it opens the door to a more secure energy future and the creation of millions of new jobs, innovating, deploying and exporting to the world. the new low carbon dioxide emitting technologies that will power our energy future. these are sound reasons to approve the bill. for those who still harbor doubts, let me make a more practical argument to vote for passage. in march of 2007, the supreme court held that carbon dioxide is a pollutant. you should that ruling and the terms of -- under that ruling and the terms of the existing act, the environmental protection agency is now effectively required to regulate co-2 emissions. federal regulation for greenhouse gases is now inevitable. it is not a question of whether we're going to have regulation, the only question is whether the regulation will be our carefully balanced congressionally adopted, economically sustainable regulation as contained within the bill before us today or whether we'll have e.p.a.'s regulation under the blunt instrume

doubling vehicle fuel efficiency, cutting home and business energy useage in half, having solar power work as cheaply as coal. making biofuels as cheaply as gasoline, cheaply saving carbon emissions from our coal-fired plant, safely storing nuclear waste and producing electricity from nuclear fusion reactions. it energizes an entire nation to reach those goals through innovation, their ideas and their imagination. but perhaps the most important thing this amendment does is it restores american competitiveness by sending out two signals. first of all, it sends a signal out across this country to the american people that we trust them and america's coming back on its competitive edge. and secondly, it sends a shot across the bow of every country, telling them we're not go to go surrender, but compete and win on a fair playing field and we're going to restore a competitive advantage that is going to lead us for the next 50 years. and finally, madam speaker, it invigorates a whole generation of americans to go into math and science and be part of our energy solution for years to come. wit

it will help cut carbon emissions, will help have a more reliable grid and will improve our energy useage, which is an important part of our bill. i mentioned energy efficiency measures, which include building standards. one of the questions that we already had, our initiatives for future government buildings to be built green. if not, why not? the bill establishes new standards for building efficiency requiring new buildings to be 30% more efficient by 2012, 50% more efficient by 2016. states are offering allowances they can sell to support adoption and enforcement of the new standards. department of energy must enforce stands in states that do not incorporate building standards into their state building codes. also, we have appliance standards. it mandates new efficiency standards in lighting products, commercial appliances. vehicle standards, the bill discussion draft has included provisions to harmon nies federal fuel standards with e.p.a. carbon emission standards and california standards for light-duty vehicles. these provisions were dropped in the reported bill after the administra

each year, you're paying a tax on your private health insurance premiums caused by the increased useage of the public plan. in tennessee, the tenncare covered about 60% of the cost in actually providing the plan. medicare and another plan that we had, pays about 90% of the cost and uninsured pays somewhere in between. what i think will happen with this public plan is that once again, because politicians are involved in designing the plan, what will happen is, more and more things will be promised about what will be covered in the plan. but when it comes to paying for it and if we have time, we can discuss the massachusetts plan a little bit, what will happen is you will have a medicaid plan that doesn't pay the cost. you will he a medicare plan that doesn't pay the cost and you will have a public-funded, quote, competitive plan that is subsidized by government, but doesn't pay the full cost of the care, meaning more and more costs will be shifted onto the private payers. what will happen over time, i think, is that again, individuals, small businesses, 20, 30, 40 people in the business