But you are not increasing it. It has declined.

I have to ask you, if you are not going to relinquish these lands, what are you going to do to use this tremendous asset that you are sitting on to restore prosperity to these communities?

The principal factor that was cited in these mill closures was the dwindling supply of timber coming from Federal lands.

I find it disturbing that you would come here and make that kind of representation.

And those ESA costs have nothing to do with power generation. They are tacked on, having nothing to do with that power generation.

When we were managing that land in a sustainable manner it supported a thriving economy.

Is this a cheap form of electricity? Is this a good investment for our taxpayers?

It is amazing, when you pull out a pocket calculator, the lunacy of some of the requirements and the costs that they impose, real costs on real people paying real electricity bills every month.

My advice would be not to wait for Federal legislation, just give it your best shot, so that people at least have a ballpark estimate of what they are paying through their power bills for all of these mandates.

taxpayers are being asked to risk $3.25 billion on the same technology and by the same Administration that has just delivered the Solyndra scandal.

The Chair is delighted that at this hearing of the Water and Power Committee the Ranking Member has had an epiphany on free markets.