I must profess myself disappointed, Mr. Chairman. Throughout this process, we were led to believe that would take place in a bipartisan fashion.

Yet we did not receive the Committee print on Monday night until a mere 7 minutes before the deadline.

We have not held a legislative hearing on this bill; indeed, this committee print, excuse me, these committee prints, bear little resemblance to the committee prints we discussed two weeks ago.

I say committee prints, because by separating this markup into 6 separate committee prints, rather than into one bill with six titles, the majority has deliberately sought to limit the ability of the minority to offer amendments.

This is in sharp contrast to the process by which this Committee, under the leadership of Joe Barton, considered the Energy Policy Act of 2005. In that process, we accumulated a solid body of evidence during numerous hearings and provided the minority with discussion drafts and committee prints well in advance of scheduled markups, then sought to be as inclusive as possible during those markups.

Turning now to the substance of the bill. As Ranking Member Barton pointed out -- where's the energy?

Mr. Chairman, if we want to have an environment bill, then let's have an environment bill. Let's not dress up an environment bill as an energy bill.

The only good news that I can see, is that between the last committee print and this one, the low-carbon fuel program has been removed. If we're not going to do anything to help gas prices, at least we aren't going to make them worse.

I thought the purpose of this bill was to improve energy security. This bill doesn't do that.

It doesn't contain incentives for cellulostic ethanol or biodiesel or seek to reform the CAFE program.

I am strongly supportive of reforming the CAFE program, and was extremely disappointed to learn that my provision, which would incentivize the use of biodiesel by adding B20 biodiesel blend to the alternative fuels definition under CAFE, and had been in the original committee print, has been taken out of the bill.

Even more disappointing is that we will be considering the in such a way that prevents us from offering amendments which would revisit this issue.

If we want to be serious about improving energy security, we need to be serious about alternative transportation fuels.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to the markup this morning and know that my Republican colleagues and I look forward to offering amendments to improve the bill.