Mr. Chair, the amendment before us would correct a fundamental misunderstanding that has been allowed to slip into H.R. 5854, the FY 2013 Military Construction/VA Appropriations bill. The Grimm Amendment would not have the effect of…

I am astounded at the number of times that we are talking about the GM bailout.

It is interesting when we talk about targeted tax cuts that we always do seem to go back to the same areas, that all the problems in America seem to reside around the energy companies.

People do want to know what it is going to cost to insure their car. And I will tell you what, I have got to tell you, the answer is with the insurance agents.

I never talked to one person that came through those doors that said to me, hey, by the way, Kelly, I need to look at that information on, let me see, what is it, the relative collision insurance cost information.

I really appreciate having the opportunity to testify.

Not one person in that room has ever talked to a prospective owner about this booklet; never been asked about it, never been questioned about it.

Thank you, Mr. Welch, for allowing me to sponsor this amendment with you. Energy savings performance contracts present a great opportunity for this government to do two of our highest priorities: number one, create jobs and, number two…

But that's how it has been interpreted. That's why we're saying let's make it clear that we can neither forbid nor deny.

I thank the gentleman for yielding. The reason it's needed, as I mentioned, is because some of the Federal Agencies have taken the President's language in the executive order to mean that they can require or should require PLAs.

Mr. Chairman, I have enjoyed hearing this, and I would say, if the gentleman from New York, if what he were saying were correct, he would be right and I think all of us would vote for this amendment. But he's not. He's not right. The…

No. There's an important word there, ``mandatory.'' It wouldn't allow the mandatory use. It's back to neutrality.

I'm not sure if they know what they're interpreting then. But CRS, which looks at this, says it's neutral, so make no mistake----

We don't have to because the agencies have issued guidance that we can look at where they have interpreted the President's executive order as to require the use of PLAs. That's why we offered the amendment.

It simply takes the thumb off the scale that's there right now because these agencies have issued guidance. Now, you can say that the agencies may take this as a thumb on the other side of the scale.

Nobody can control what they're doing. But this language simply makes it neutral, and that's what I'm trying to correct here. I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. LaTOURETTE. I move to strike the last word. The Acting CHAIR. The…

Wherever they make sense, that's fine. I just don't want a finger on the scale either way. Mr. LaTOURETTE. I hear you. And if that was true, the wording of your amendment would be----

I thank the gentleman for yielding. I just want to say first that the gentleman mentioned that he thought that this bill had been written by the Associated Builders and Contractors. That's not the case. This issue was first brought to my…