S10940 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE December 11, 2008 

they see him, as we do here in the Senate, as a man of great stature and wisdom. 

I thank JOHN for his service and for 

his friendship, and Marcelle and I join 

all Members of the Senate in wishing 

JOHN and Jeanne all the best in their 

future endeavors. 

CHUCK HAGEL

Madam President, I rise to acknowledge the work and commitment of a 

colleague whom I have had the pleasure of serving with for the last 12 years 

here in the U.S. Senate. Senator CHUCK

HAGEL joined the Senate in 1997 after 

an already successful career in business 

and public service, both in his home 

State of Nebraska and here in Washington, DC. 

While in the Senate, CHUCK has been 

a strong independent voice for all Nebraskans and citizens of this country. 

He is not afraid to share what is on his 

mind and he is certainly not afraid to 

reach across the aisle to work with all 

Senators. In one of his first acts of bipartisanship, Senator HAGEL joined me 

as a cosponsor of the Landmine Elimination Act of 1997. I worked with 

CHUCK, who was himself injured by 

landmines while in Vietnam, to ban 

new deployments of antipersonnel 

landmines. 

Senator HAGEL has demonstrated an 

incredible alacrity on defense and foreign policy issues. While it was not 

popular within his own party, he made 

the difficult decision to support a 

timeline for the withdrawal of troops 

from Iraq. This is just one example of 

many stances he has taken in Washington that demonstrates how CHUCK

HAGEL was an independent voice that 

Nebraska is proud to call their own. 

I am also pleased to know CHUCK and 

Lilibet as wonderful travel partners. 

The last trip we took together, in May 

2007, was to the Middle East to assess 

regional conflicts in Jordan, Lebanon, 

Israel and the West Bank. Trips like 

these provide the opportunity to get to 

know Senators and their spouses beyond the day-to-day encounters in 

Washington and I cherish the time we 

had to together. 

I am pleased to call CHUCK a friend 

and voice of reason in the U.S. Senate. 

I will miss him as both a friend and 

colleague. Marcelle and I and wish him 

and Lilibet well in whatever way he 

will next serve Nebraska and our Nation. 

PETE DOMENICI

Madam President, I would like to pay 

tribute to the senior Senator from New 

Mexico, a dedicated public servant, a 

respected lawmaker and a man I am 

proud to call my colleague, PETE

DOMENICI. 

From his first days in the Senate in 

the 93rd Congress, to now 35 years 

later, Senator DOMENICI has earned a 

reputation as a powerful champion for 

New Mexico. While he and I have not 

agreed on some issues, I have never 

questioned his commitment to do what 

he believed was right for this country 

and the State of New Mexico. However, 

I might question which of our Italian 

grandmothers made a better meatball, 

but then again I wouldn’t want a fight 

to break out here on the Senate floor. 

Senator DOMENICI has too many accomplishments to list here today. Senator DOMENICI has had a long and distinguished career in the U.S. Senate. 

However what stands out most to me is 

his unending drive to enact Mental 

Health Parity legislation which he 

worked on so closely with our late colleague Paul Wellstone. I believe it was 

a fitting tribute to enact this legislation in the closing days of the 110th 

Congress. 

I know it can sound repetitive when 

people hear Senators make remarks 

such as these about our colleagues as 

they are leaving the Senate. But I 

think it is important for the public to 

know that despite all the squabbling 

that goes on in Washington, there is 

the deep respect, affection, and caring 

that goes on among the Members of 

this body. After an incredible 35 years 

of service New Mexico and the whole 

United States are grateful, and I consider myself fortunate to have served 

33 years with PETE DOMENICI in the 

U.S. Senate. Marcelle and I wish PETE

and Nancy the best. 

GORDON SMITH

Mr. COLEMAN. Madam President, 

when the Founders envisioned this 

Senate, I believe they hoped it would 

be a place where strong opinions, established life skills and varied experience would come together to serve the 

nation. Senator GORDON SMITH of Oregon has matched that standard and 

the whole nation has benefited. 

I have always been encouraged and 

inspired by Senator SMITH’s forwardlooking mind and his energetic advocacy of a better life for all Americans. 

He has fought for better schools for our 

children. He confronted the reality of 

America’s ‘‘drop-out culture’’ and 

fought for individualized attention for 

at-risk kids. 

We have worked together to ensure 

that the Medicaid Program fulfills its 

promise to America’s less fortunate, 

and to extend the excellent quality of 

American health care to a broader and 

broader share of the population. 

It has been an honor to work with 

GORDON SMITH on the Aging Committee 

in particular. His tireless advocacy to 

ensure that our seniors are afforded the 

dignity and respect they deserve has 

been an inspiration. 

GORDON SMITH has also been a strong 

voice for Oregonians on the environment and the natural treasures in their 

State. And he turned personal tragedy 

into a nationwide effort to prevent suicide. 

On issue after issue, GORDON SMITH

has demonstrated a boundless enthusiasm for the process of reform, and a 

confidence that we can always make 

government programs more responsive, 

more relevant and more effective for 

the American people. 

Like the modern day Oregon pioneers 

he represents, GORDON SMITH has always demonstrated both a fierce independence and a strong belief that there 

is a better way—if we dream big, work 

hard and stick together, there is no 

problem too big for America. 

In ‘‘Mr. SMITH Goes to Washington,’’ 

Hollywood memorialized the commonsense man, of impeccable character, as 

the ideal Senator. GORDON SMITH would 

have fit the part perfectly. I will dearly 

miss his integrity, his enthusiasm, and 

his friendship in this place. But I am 

excited for what the next chapter of his 

leadership will mean to Oregon and 

this country. I hope we can all bring 

more of his can-do spirit and positive 

energy to the urgent challenges we face 

in the days ahead. 

f 

TRIBUTE TO TUCKER SHUMACK 

Ms. SNOWE. Madam President, I rise 

today to recognize Tucker Shumack’s 

dedicated service to the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship over the past 3 years. An 

integral part of the committee staff, 

Tucker always performed his duties 

with the livelihood and success of 

small business owners in mind. 

Tucker began his Capitol Hill service 

in the office of Senator Paul Coverdell 

from his home State of Georgia. After 

attending law school, Tucker returned 

to Washington to work for the Congressman, and later Senator Johnny 

Isakson, also from Georgia. When he 

came to the Small Business Committee 

in the fall of 2005, Tucker was wellgrounded in the ways of Capitol Hill. 

From day 1, Tucker was proactive in 

efforts to mitigate the often unfair tax 

structure that small business owners 

face. Tucker’s insights on these subjects have proven immensely critical 

to me over the years. 

Tucker has had many legislative successes helping me forge commonsense 

bills that appeal to Members on both 

sides of the aisle. Just last year, Tucker was invaluable in helping me develop provisions to extend the Work 

opportunity tax credit, to expand small 

business expensing and enhance the refundable child tax credit. These vital 

extensions give more people a chance 

at gainful employment and allow thousands of small businesses to succeed 

and thrive. 

Whether it was extending the new 

markets tax credit, advocating for a 

fairer and simpler Tax Code, or confronting the mess known as the alternative minimum tax, Tucker consistently brought colleagues together to 

find reasonable and sound solutions to 

the myriad tax problems facing Americans. His ability to forge lasting relationships has made him a key player 

on Capitol Hill, and his diligence and 

perseverance have made him a trustworthy ally. My legislative priorities 

have been well served because of Tucker’s talents and expertise. 

Always the Southern gentleman, 

Tucker is easy to get along with because of his charm, grace, and wit—the 

latter of which Tucker is most famous 

December 11, 2008 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10941 

for. His ability to make others laugh 

cannot be overstated! He has certainly 

had a lasting impact on those with 

whom he has worked over the years, 

and his cordial demeanor and welcoming smile will be missed in the 

Halls of the Capitol complex. 

On a personal note, Tucker and his 

wife Kristine recently welcomed their 

first child, Tucker, Jr., into the world 

in August. I am sure that Tucker will 

be a great father, and look forward to 

hearing about the Shumack family’s 

adventures throughout the years. 

Tucker’s departure from the Small 

Business Committee is a true loss. I 

owe Tucker a debt of gratitude for his 

phenomenal work on behalf of the 

American people. I am confidant that 

he will quickly become a well-liked and 

respected member of his new office. I 

speak for my entire staff when I wish 

Tucker well in his new job, and in all 

his future endeavors. 

f 

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY 

OFFICE ANALYSIS 

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, earlier this summer, when gasoline prices 

were topping $4 a gallon, I asked the 

GAO to analyze potential savings from 

the establishment of a national speed 

limit. I did not prescribe what that 

speed limit should be, merely asked the 

GAO to conduct an analysis at which 

speeds vehicles were most fuel efficient 

and make a determination as to whether a national speed limit would have 

positive impacts on the conservation of 

gasoline. 

My interest in this approach to gas 

conservation was spurred by a desire 

for a measure that would provide immediate relief to the overstretched 

budgets of households across America. 

I was also dusting off a solution used in 

the past, specifically, the number of 

barrels of oil saved when a national 

speed limit was imposed in 1974 in response to the Arab oil embargo. 

Last week, I was pleased to meet 

with the GAO and hear their findings 

on the relationship between vehicular 

speed and fuel economy as well as how 

reducing the speed limit might affect 

fuel use and perhaps cost. 

While the days of my service in the 

U.S. Senate are numbered, it is my 

hope that these findings by the GAO 

can serve as a useful tool to my colleagues who will return in the next 

Congress, as I know the interlinked 

issues of energy, transportation, and 

climate change are going to remain the 

focus of much debate and policy making in the coming years. 

Mr. President, I thank the GAO for 

its work, and I ask unanimous consent 

that GAO analysis be printed in the 

RECORD. 

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the 

RECORD, as follows: 

Energy Efficiency: Potential Fuel Savings Generated by a National Speed Limit Would Be 

Influenced by Many Other Factors 

In response to Senator Warner’s interest in 

obtaining information on the possibility of 

using a national speed limit to reduce fuel 

consumption, the Government Accountability Office reviewed existing literature 

and consulted knowledgeable stakeholders 

on the following: 

What is the relationship between speed and 

the fuel economy of vehicles? 

How might reducing the speed limit affect 

fuel use? 

Due to a limited time frame of two months 

to complete the work, to address these objectives, we limited our analyses to light-duty 

vehicles, such as cars, sport utility vehicles, 

and pickup trucks and relied on the expertise 

of GAO and knowledgeable stakeholders to 

identify the most relevant economic and 

transportation literature. We provided a 

draft to the three agencies whose officials we 

consulted for our analyses—the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Energy (DOE), and the Department of Transportation (DOT)—and incorporated relevant technical comments. We did 

not examine other aspects of implementing a 

national speed limit, such as potential safety 

impacts. In summary, we found the following. 

According to Literature and Stakeholders, Reducing a Vehicle’s Speed Can Potentially 

Increase Its Fuel Economy, Depending on 

the Vehicle’s Characteristics 

For a vehicle traveling at high speed, reducing its speed increases fuel economy. In 

general, at speeds over approximately 35 to 

45 mph, if a vehicle reduces its speed by 5 

mph, its fuel economy can increase by about 

5 to 10 percent, because air resistance, or 

drag, increases exponentially as a vehicle 

goes faster. Conversely, air resistance diminishes more rapidly as a vehicle slows down, 

thus increasing its fuel economy. 

According to existing literature and 

knowledgeable stakeholders, there is no single speed that optimizes fuel economy for all 

vehicles. Optimal speed for fuel economy for 

individual vehicles ranges widely, but is generally between 30 and 60 mph, depending on 

a vehicle’s characteristics. For example, according to the most recent published data— 

a 1997 study by Oak Ridge National Laboratory, commissioned by the Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), that examined fuel 

economy at different speeds for nine automobiles and light trucks from model years 

1988 through 1997—the optimal fuel economy 

for a 1994 Jeep Grand Cherokee, a sport-utility vehicle, would be about 26 miles per gallon at a steady 40 mph. In contrast, in a 2008 

internal study by the Argonne National Laboratory for the Department of Energy (DOE), 

examining four vehicles, the optimal fuel 

economy for a 2005 Toyota Echo, a subcompact car, is about 69 miles per gallon, 

achieved when traveling at a steady 30 mph. 

However, a vehicle’s fuel economy also depends on other factors besides air resistance. 

Factors that enhance fuel economy include 

engine efficiency enhancements (e.g., fuel injection), electronic and computer controls, 

more efficient transmissions, and hybrid 

technology. However, other factors, such as 

increased vehicle weight, decrease fuel economy. 

In general, over the last 2 decades, fuel 

economy gains resulting from advances in 

automotive technologies have largely been 

offset by increases in vehicle weight, performance, and accessory loads. Specifically, 

vehicles are heavier than in the past, because they are larger and include more technologies. For example, average vehicle 

weight has increased from 3,220 pounds in 

1987 to 4,117 in 2008, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In addition, trends show that recent vehicles, on 

average, have bigger, more powerful engines 

that yield better performance—i.e., acceleration and greater speed—at the expense of 

fuel economy. For example, according to the 

same EPA report, average horsepower has increased from 118 to 222 over the same period. 

Further, increased accessory loads, such as 

air conditioning and electronics, have also 

reduced fuel economy. According to EPA, 

from 1987 through 2004, on a fleetwide basis, 

technology innovation was utilized exclusively to support market-driven attributes 

other than fuel economy, such as performance. Beginning in 2005, however, according 

to EPA’s analysis of fuel economy trends, 

technology has been used to increase both 

performance and fuel economy, while keeping vehicle weight relatively constant. 

According to Literature and Stakeholders, a Reduced Speed Limit Is Only One of Many 

Factors That Could Affect Total Fuel Use 

Lowering speed limits can potentially reduce total fuel consumption. According to 

literature we reviewed examining the impact 

of the national speed limit enacted in 1974, 

the estimated fuel savings resulting from the 

55 mph national speed limit ranged from 0.2 

to 3 percent of annual gasoline consumption. 

According to DOE’s 2008 estimate, a national 

speed limit of 55 mph could yield possible 

savings of 175,000 to 275,000 barrels of oil per 

day. This range is consistent with estimates 

of the impact of the past national speed 

limit. According to the Energy Information 

Administration, total U.S. consumption of 

petroleum for 2007 was about 21 million barrels of oil per day. 

However, other factors, including drivers’ 

compliance with a reduced speed limit, 

would affect the actual impact of a lower 

speed limit on the amount of fuel savings. 

Reducing the speed limit does not necessarily mean that drivers will comply. In 

fact, in 1975, under the previous national 

speed limit, about half of the states reported 

more drivers exceeding the national speed 

limit of 55 mph than complying with it. 

States may vary in their ability to enforce 

the reduced speed limit, in part due to cost 

and limited resources, affecting driver compliance. Moreover, a national speed limit 

would not affect many of the miles driven in 

the United States, such as those in urban 

areas, where most vehicles are already traveling at lower speeds due to lower speed limits or congestion. According to FHWA, fewer 

than one quarter of the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the United States would likely 

be directly affected by a changed speed limit. 

In addition, congestion forces some vehicles 

to travel slowly, no matter what the speed 

limit, meaning a reduction would have little 

or no impact on fuel consumed on congested 

roads. 

Other external conditions also affect fuel 

economy, such as road conditions, including 

whether a road is steep or flat, and weather 

conditions, including wind speed and direction. Finally, other aspects of driver behavior may also affect fuel consumption. For example, driver behavior may be affected by 

fuel prices. Higher prices may cause people 

to drive less or purchase more fuel-efficient 

vehicles. Similarly, driving at a consistent 

speed can reduce fuel consumption. In contrast, aggressive driving such as accelerating 

or stopping quickly can increase fuel consumption. In addition, proper vehicle maintenance—including regularly changing automobile fluids and filters and properly inflating tires—improves fuel economy. 

The speed limit is only one tool among 

many for potentially conserving fuel. Certain realities such as congestion on our nation’s roads, how people drive and maintain 

their vehicles, and emerging technologies 

are other potential considerations as the nation looks for options to conserve fuel.