Joseph Knollenberg: “Mr. Chairman, unlike what the gentleman just said, this amendment is not the same as last week. This is totally…”

“Mr. Chairman, unlike what the gentleman just said, this amendment is not the same as last week. This is totally different. This is a gutting amendment. Last week's amendment had to do with EPA. Now what the attempt on the part of the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver) is is to cut the heart out of the language that is law. This is law that was passed in 1999, and the law of last year. Seven times the President has signed language that is now in effect. What H.R. 4690 is not about, it is not about funding of research and development for clean power with renewable energy, or funding to develop new homes that are more energy-efficient, or trying to reduce methane emissions. In fact, what this amendment does is it trips through the year 2000, through the 1999 year, and brings us really back to a point where we were before we even started this language. Incidentally, I would tell the Members, in 1997 the Senate unanimously, by a vote of 95 to nothing, instructed the Clinton-Gore administration not to sign the Kyoto treaty. They did. The United States Constitution requires the advice of the Senate to all treaties, requires the consent of the Senate to all treaties, and balances the power of government between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. This is not the same as the amendment last week.”