. >> thank you congressman inslee. just to respond to mr. hibbard, i want to make very clear that ferc is very committed to competitive market solutions. we would choose to do anything that would be contrary to that but when a man looking transmission there is not market barriers and those include the issues of siding, cost allocation and agreeing with commissioner azar i think it is necessary to allow the states to move forward to see if they in fact can do some interconnect wide planning, collectively that they are moving forward in the eastern and western interconnects and see from that the cost allocation can be agreed upon but if not we have to have that pressure, that federal pressure to inform that process to make sure it moves forward, to insure we meet our national goals. >> thank you. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from wisconsin. >> thank you mr. chairman. when i hear the discussions about connecting with generation through transmission to load centers on the east coast, i sort of feel lik

>> thank you, congressman inslee. just to respond to mr. hibbard, i want to make very clear that ferc is very committed to competitive market solutions. we wouldn't choose to do anything that would be contrary to that. there's some nonmarket barriers and that includes the issues of siting and cost allocation and i think it's necessary to allow the states to move forward in those areas to see if they, in fact, can do some interconnected wide planning collectively that they're moving forward both in the eastern and western interconnects and then see from that the siting and cost allocation can be agreed upon. we need to have that federal pressure behind it to inform that process, to make sure that it moves forward, to ensure that we meet our national goals. >> thank you. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from wisconsin. >> thank you, mr. chairman. when i hear the discussions about connecting dakota wind generation through transmission to load centers on the east coast, i sort of feel like wisconsin could

mr. dingell, mr. boucher, mr. doyle, mr. inslee, mr. green mr. butterfield, mr. stupak mr. rush. i mean so many members, including members off the committee, like henry cuellar from the state of texas who worked with us on natural gas-related issues. we will not be here unless we had the cooperation of so many members across the full spectrum of the house. during this process we have received valuable input and expertise from other leaders in the house like chairman rangel on trade issues, chairman peterson on agriculture issues, amongst, again, many others. the legislation we have before us today is the most important energy and environment legislation to ever have been considered in the history of the united states. the consequences for our country are great unless we act to deal with these issues. this legislation sets a new course for our country creating millions of new clean energy jobs while reducing our dependence upon imported oil. and when it becomes law and it will, for the first time in the history of the united states congress, for the first time in the history of ou

mr. lucas: madam speaker, i yield myself the remainder of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 3 1/4 minutes remaining. mr. luke youas: my fellow members, let me rise to conclude the house agriculture, the republican portion of this discussion this evening and remind my colleagues one more time that this bill has a tremendous effect on rural america and production agriculture. when 115 farm groups send in letters, and food groups, expressing their on cig to the bill that says something. 115 groups. madam speaker, i would also be remiss if i didn't express my appreciation and the appreciation of my colleagues on the republican side of the ag committee to chairman peterson. he made, we believe a good faith effort in gaucheuations with chairman waxman to try to correct the worst features of this bill. unfortunately, -- in gaucheuations -- if in negotiations with chairman waxman to try to correct the worst features of the bill. the underlying problem is, this bill will raise t

mr. inslee: i'm pleased to commend the webcaster settlement act of 2009 to my colleagues. i want to make two or three points. first the phenomena of online radio is a tremendous service for constituents. 42 million americans enjoy this on at least a semiregular basis. it is growing rapidly. it is a very, very beloved service. when it goes missing, as it did recently in my city of seattle, a little station called o.c.o., was providing underground music to my community and had to shut down as a result of the c.r.b. decision and it is much missed, we hope to get this and many other things back up when we get this settlement. i think there's widespread agreement that the 47% of revenues the c.r.b. decision would require simply is not sustainable for the industry. i want to commend all parties to the discussions to try to find an appropriate way to move forward. the third point i want to make is that keeping online radio going and healthy is not just about entertainment. it's about news, it's about public information, it's about emergency preparedness. we've got to do everythin

inslee: mr. speaker, americans are the most innovative and the most entrepreneurial people on the face of the earth. that is the reason that the people want us to pass the american clean energy and security bill this week. this bill will give americans what they want. more energy independence, less pollution. and most importantly millions of new jobs of americans building the new businesses, putting up solar panels, putting up wind towers, and stringing new electrical wire that we need. now, what is this going to cost americans? according to the congressional budget office approximately the cost of one postage stamp a day. 47 cents. do americans want to rid ourself of the scourge of addiction of saudi oil for a postage stamp a day? you bet. do americans want us to limit pollution and make polluters pay so that americans can have cleaner air for the cost of a postage stamp a day? you bet. do americans want three million new jobs in this country for postage stamps? you bet. americans want it. the s

dingell, to mr. inslee, mr. stupak, mr. israel, to mr. braley, to mr. waxman. this is truly the work of a lot of people coming together. and ultimately the approach has produced a win-win-win-win situation. a win for consumers who get a new, more fuel-efficient vehicle, a win reducing our dependence on foreign oil and a win for an industry that's struggling. it's always a win-win, members from the two coasts can join together and come up with a compromise that all sides can support. the price of a gallon of gasoline is rising inextrishly back up to $4 a gallon. it has gone up $1 at the pump on a national average since december. the price of barrel of oil has gone from $30 to $69 since december. this is the kind of bill we need to put in place. my congratulations to the gentlelady. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from ohio continues to reserve. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. upton: i reserve the balance of my time at the moment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan continues to reserve. w

the gentleman from texas, mr. inslee. >> mr. sperling i tried to listen carefully to your testimony and in listening to what i must admit i find myself in agreement with most if not all of the principles that you lay out, compensation plans should measure rapport performance, structured in alignment with time horizons and risk should be allowed was signed-- risk management and the rest. for most of my life i have signed the back of the paycheck but there was a time i actually sign the front of a paycheck. there was a time i served on the compensation committee of the new york stock exchange company. and not unlike the gentleman from california in his opening statement, i thought i worked very hard to try to insure that these principles were put into place. i remember and unhappy ceo when i was part of committee informing him he would not be getting the pay package compensation structure that he had desired. i guess my question for you is, since i have found this challenging and i was in the private sector for 12 years and have b

inslee from washington. mr. spratt from south carolina. the speaker pro tempore: there's no objection. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois for a motion. mr. quigley: mr. speaker, i move now that the h d

i woke up this morning i saw my friend and colleague, mr. inslee, speaking on c-span. this bill was going to cost only a postage stamp. look at the paper this morning, gasoline will only go 2 cents a gallon. i hope they are true but don't think they are going to be true. we had amendments as a safety valve in case it does go up. the c.b.o. and american petroleum institute says that gas prices are going to go up 77 cents a gallon. diesel price, 88 cents a gallon. some energy costs could go up by 40% to 50%. we had amendments that said, hey, if gasoline goes up to five bucks a gallon, we'll take off this cap and trade f electricity price goes up more than 10%, we'll take off cap and trade f unemployment reaches 15%, it's almost there already in michigan, we'll take off this job killing provision. were those amendments allowed? no. then we got the whole issue of india and china, jobs going someplace else. that consumed a couple hours of debate i think in full committee, yet no amendment at all allowed on the house floor. mr. speaker -- madam speaker, my folks want to work

let me turn and recognize the gentleman from washington state, mr. inslee. >> thank you. i'd like to put in the record with no objection, a letter from california berkeley, a letter describing the reason and the appropriateness in of expanding new tradition lines, if i can put that in the record. >> with no objection, it will be included. >> chairman wellinghof i wanted you to expand on your thoughts on how ferc could implement, if it does receive back-stop sighting approval, how it could implement a greenhouse gas performance interconnection standard for new transmission and/or some criteria associated with compliance or fulfillment of the nation's renewable energy goals. several of the other witnesses made reference of something in that nature. could you tell us how that could work even though we've heard the physical explanation that electron is an electron is an electron. how could this function? thank you, congressman inslee. well, first of all we would initiate a rule-making and as part of that all stakeholders would have an opportunity to provide any proposals as t

allen going to turn and recognize the gentleman from washington state, mr. inslee. >> thank you. first i would like to put in the record a white paper which is quite instructive called title green powers super highways provided by the american wind energy association and the solar energy industries association. mr. chair, if i may? >> without objection. >> thank you mr. chair, i appreciate that. this white paper does confirm what some of the witness talked about which is that we have got three and a thousand megawatts of wind projects waiting in line is essentially to connect to the grid and they point out that the lack of transmission capacity is also hindering state's ability to meet multiple renewable energy goals and it just confirms what several of the witnesses have testified today. i want to ask mr. detchon about the greenhouse gas interconnection standard that your proposal has inc. and basically what essentially allow federal backstop authority in relationship to those sources that are low, zero greenhouse gas amending generators. could you tell us how you envision that

i'd like to also commend judiciary ranking member, mr. lamar smith, for his leadership in making this a truly bipartisan effort. and i urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california, mr. issa, is recognized. mr. issa: thank you, mr. spker. it's now my pleasure to yield for our response to the gentleman from south carolina for such time as he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the gentleman from california yielding. h.r. 2344, the webcasting settlement act of 2009, grants limited statutory authority to sound exchange. the government designated entity that is responsible for disbursing webcast royalties to

mr. speaker, the bipartisan cars act will sure up millions of jobs and stimulate local economies. it will reduce our dependence on foreign oil. it will provide much-needed financial assistance to consumers to trade in less fuel-efficient vehicles, for vehicles which achieve a measured increase fuel economy. what the cars act will not do is allow someone to trade in a vehicle and receive a voucher to purchase a vehicle that is less fuel economy. we have ensured environmental integrity in this bill. and this bill demonstrates that we do not have to bind ourselves to the arguments of the past. we no longer have to give into the temptation of either or thinking. the cars act demonstrates that we can free ourselves of the false thinking of either you are for the environment or you are for jobs. we can do both. 2009 auto sales are down nearly 42% below the 2005 peak. we have not seen such a decline since 1955, and this decline jeopardizes our country's largest manufacturing industry. these are not ordinary times. these times call for bold action. three million to five million jobs are a

mr. inslee: i request permission to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentleman is recognized. mr. inslee: i want to point out we know this is going to help the auto industry, but i want to point out how it's going to affect con so -- consumers. consumers will save 100,000 gallons of gas a year because of the fuel efficiency of the car. that's $250 -- 250 million gallons of gasoline we otherwise will not be burning. the reason i point this out is there is a benefit to the environment in our efforts to stop global warming in this bill. mr. israel and myself had earlier introduced a piece generally in the same direction heading with the leadership of betty sutton and bart stupak. some argued that the efficiency provisions of this bill are not aggressive enough. the bill i introduced and mr. israel did had more aggressive targets. but i want to point out one of the most singular achievements of this bill. if we are going to stop global warming, we have to come together across the country. folks in