S334 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 13, 2009 

members have 20 or more years of service. 

‘‘It is like a family here, the staff cares for 

the residents and relationships are developed 

that are important to the residents.’’ 

One of the most unique attributes of Bourbon Heights is the support from the community and the volunteers who are in the floors 

every day providing support and help to the 

regular staff. 

‘‘As I travel around the state attending 

meetings,’’ McKenzie said. ‘‘Other Activity 

Directors are amazed at the level of community support that we have at Bourbon 

Heights.’’ 

The giant trophy in the lobby is awarded 

for one year and will be passed on next year 

to a new recipient. A trophy cup will remain 

at Bourbon Heights as a reminder of this 

year’s honor of being named the best nursing 

home in the state. 

Bourbon Heights was chartered in 1965 

when it opened as a senior care center. It is 

a non-profit organization. The land is owned 

by the county and the buildings and improvements are part of the Bourbon Heights 

Corporation and under the direction of the 

board of directors that oversee the non-profit 

organization. 

f 

CONGRATULATING THE SAN DIEGO 

CHARGERS 

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I 

wish to send my congratulations to the 

San Diego Chargers for the remarkable 

way that they turned around their 2008 

season in the National Football 

League. 

During difficult economic times, as 

they face hardships and uncertainty, 

millions of sports fans across America 

turn to their hometown teams for solace and inspiration. 

Few teams this year faced as many 

hardships as the Chargers, and few 

teams in any year have overcome adversity with such inspiring tenacity. 

Hampered by injuries to star running 

back LaDainian Tomlinson and other 

key players and suffering through a series of heartbreaking losses, the Chargers began the 2008 season with just 

four wins in their first 12 games. With 

3 weeks to go in the regular season, 

they trailed the division-leading Denver Broncos by three games. Though 

their fans remained loyal and the team 

remained confident, few outside observers gave them any chance reaching 

the NFL playoffs. 

Over the next 5 weeks, though, the 

Chargers made an amazing run. Beginning on December 4th, three consecutive San Diego victories and two Denver losses left the Chargers just one 

game back entering a December 28 

showdown with the Broncos. 

In the decisive game, the Chargers 

staged an awe-inspiring offensive display to crush the Broncos 52–21 and win 

the AFC Western Division championship. They became the first team in 

NFL history to have been 4–8 and make 

the playoffs and the first team ever to 

win their division after being three 

games behind the leaders with three 

games to play. 

Six days later, on January 3, the 

Chargers faced a terrific Indianapolis 

Colts team in the playoffs. In perhaps 

the greatest NFL game ever played in 

San Diego, the Chargers beat the Colts 

in overtime, 23–17. 

Every playoff tournament ends sadly 

for every team but one. Last Sunday, 

on a snowy day in Pittsburgh, the 

mighty Steelers ended the Chargers 

season. 

But nothing can dim the luster of the 

Chargers’ late-season run. Their dramatic turnaround is an inspiration to 

sports fans everywhere. 

Mr. President, I grew up in Brooklyn, 

in the shadow of Ebbets Field, where 

baseball fans endured years of frustration with the annual cry of ‘‘Wait Till 

Next Year.’’ When I was in high school, 

our dream finally came true, and ‘‘next 

year’’ became this year. 

With a talented young team that has 

triumphed over adversity, the San 

Diego Chargers can look forward to 

next year with pride and confidence. I 

salute the Charger players, coaches, 

staff, and ownership along with their 

loyal fans—for a great 2008 season. 

f 

WHITE MOUNTAIN LAND 

MANAGEMENT 

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I rise 

today to speak briefly about the White 

Mountain National Forest and the U.S. 

Forest Service’s efforts to manage 

these lands for the benefit of all Granite Staters. In particular, I wanted to 

extend my appreciation and support for 

the agency’s commitment to implementing its 2005 management plan for 

the forest, including the Mill Brook 

timber harvesting proposal. 

It goes without saying that the 

White Mountain National Forest is a 

special place for all New Hampshire 

residents. Drawing millions of visitors 

each year, these lands have long appealed to those who enjoy the outdoors, while also providing natural resources that support communities 

across the State. Through balanced, 

multiple-use management policies, I 

remain confident that the White Mountain National Forest will remain one of 

the crown jewels of the National Forest 

System for generations to come. 

As such, I was pleased when, in 2005, 

the U.S. Forest Service released its 

new management plan for the White 

Mountain National Forest. Striking a 

delicate compromise among stakeholders, it was overwhelmingly supported in New Hampshire and established a consensus-based blueprint for 

how this natural resource will be managed. I applauded all of the hard work 

and public outreach that the Forest 

Service put into this plan and was 

pleased to coauthor legislation that 

implemented its wilderness recommendations. Signed into law in December 2006, the New England Wilderness Act designated nearly 35,000 acres 

of new wilderness in the Forest and 

strengthened our nation’s commitment 

to land conservation. 

The 2005 management plan also included timber harvesting, which is critical for both regional economic activity and wildlife diversity purposes. The 

timber industry is one of the largest 

manufacturing industries in New 

Hampshire, supporting well paying jobs 

and local communities, especially in 

the north country. Carefully managed 

timber harvesting can also play an important role in maintaining habitats 

that are critical for certain types of 

wildlife. 

Fully consistent with the 2005 plan 

and its timber harvesting guidelines, 

the Forest Service has proposed logging projects which have been subject 

to environmental review, are limited in 

scope, and have the support of well respected groups across the spectrum 

such as the Society for Protection of 

New Hampshire Forests, Appalachian 

Mountain Club, the National Audubon 

Society, the New Hampshire 

Timberland Owners, and the North 

Country Council. Two of these proposals, the Batchelder Brook and Than 

Brook Resource Management Projects, 

have been unsuccessfully challenged by 

certain environmental groups such as 

the Sierra Club that do not represent 

the view of most Granite Staters. Even 

though they seemed fine with the 2005 

management plan when it was released, 

these groups now want to undo it via 

lawsuits and other challenges that use 

up taxpayer resources and stymie economic activity in New Hampshire. Fortunately, the courts have so far ruled 

in favor of the Forest Service and have 

allowed these two timber harvesting 

projects to proceed. With each ruling 

against these challenges, it has been 

my hope, as well as the hope of many 

others in our State, that all parties 

would now act in good faith and respect the 2005 management plan’s timber harvesting guidelines. 

Unfortunately, this has not been the 

case, and it is why I am once more 

speaking on the Senate floor about the 

White Mountain National Forest. Once 

again, we now have the Sierra Club and 

its allies trying to tie up yet another 

important timber harvesting proposal, 

the Mill Brook project. This project, 

which consists of around 1,000 acres, is 

wholly consistent with the plan’s timber harvesting guidelines. It is also 

supported by a large number of well respected environmental groups and the 

New Hampshire Fish and Game Department. But this is apparently not 

enough. Recycling some of the same 

legal arguments that have proven unsuccessful in the past, the Sierra Club 

and its friends are trying to thwart the 

good intentions and popular support of 

the 2005 plan, choosing the path of antagonism over the spirit of compromise. 

Now of course, I recognize that it is 

within these groups’ rights to file an 

administrative appeal and try to hold 

things up. And I also recognize that 

such tactics may appeal to their partisan supporters. That being said, I 

also feel that these groups’ actions are 

meant to undermine the longstanding 

consensus approach that New Hampshire has taken to environmental protection and the management of the 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with SENATE
January 13, 2009 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S335 

White Mountain National Forest specifically. During these challenging 

times, I also find it hard to understand 

why some groups are trying to thwart 

the Mill Brook proposal when their 

previous attempts to block similar 

projects have not succeeded, especially 

when timber harvesting in this area 

will provide an economic boost for the 

Granite State. 

As I have said in the past, the White 

Mountain National Forest can and 

should be accessible to a wide variety 

of uses, including timber harvesting. 

While I certainly agree that the Forest 

Service must follow the law and carry 

out certain environmental reviews, I 

also believe that this administrative 

appeal runs counter to New Hampshire’s interests. I therefore hope that 

this appeal process is resolved as soon 

as possible and that we can all support 

the Forest Service’s management of 

the White Mountain National Forest, 

including the Mill Brook project. 

f 

IDAHOANS SPEAK OUT ON HIGH 

ENERGY PRICES 

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, in midJune, I asked Idahoans to share with 

me how high energy prices are affecting their lives, and they responded by 

the hundreds. The stories, numbering 

well over 1,200, are heartbreaking and 

touching. While energy prices have 

dropped in recent weeks, the concerns 

expressed remain very relevant. To respect the efforts of those who took the 

opportunity to share their thoughts, I 

am submitting every e-mail sent to me 

through an address set up specifically 

for this purpose to the CONGRESSIONAL

RECORD. This is not an issue that will 

be easily resolved, but it is one that deserves immediate and serious attention, and Idahoans deserve to be heard. 

Their stories not only detail their 

struggles to meet everyday expenses, 

but also have suggestions and recommendations as to what Congress can 

do now to tackle this problem and find 

solutions that last beyond today. I ask 

unanimous consent to have today’s letters printed in the RECORD. 

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

RECORD, as follows: 

HONORABLE MIKE CRAPO: My name is Brian 

Gross and my wife Kelly and I have lived in 

Idaho since January as I graduated from the 

University of Wisconsin-Madison and received a job at Idaho National Laboratory in 

Idaho Falls. We settled into a comfortable 

fifteen hundred square foot town home and 

own two cars that we both drive to work 

every day. Our extremely short commute of 

4 miles and 3 miles respectively requires that 

we spend around $160 per month on gasoline. 

Though both cars achieve no less than 20 

miles per gallon in the city and upwards of 32 

miles per gallon on the highway, we would 

use more than our entire month’s budget for 

gasoline if we made a trip to visit our relatives in North Dakota 800 miles away, making a trip for the holidays a rather expensive 

venture. 

One would think after seeing the Hubbert 

curve peak near the earlier part of this decade, you would want to begin the move towards other sources of fuel for our vehicles. 

If the OPEC embargo of 1973 was not enough, 

what will it take before we make the shift? 

The wonderful businessmen of Toyota and 

Honda appreciated the coming situation and 

conveniently developed a car that would contribute greatly in allowing the former to surpass all of the big three companies in sales of 

automobiles for the first time ever in April 

2007. Even though GM and Ford have turned 

around with several hybrid and electric car 

projects, that still leaves the transportation 

industry vying for even more expensive diesel fuel. In my opinion, the first step for Congress would be to drastically subsidize the 

expansion of domestic biodiesel production. I 

mention only biodiesel, because of the issue 

with corn based ethanol cutting into our 

food supply. To counter that issue, why don’t 

we revitalize methanol, which can be produced from garbage, as a fuel? Ford produced 

several vehicles subsequent to the oil embargo which ran on methanol, so the concept is 

proven, we just need to reestablish the fuel 

production industry. 

As for electricity production, I as a nuclear 

engineer strenuously support the expansion 

of nuclear power. The loudening drum beat 

for action against anthropogenic climate 

change, though I am not a advocate of the 

theory, has drawn support for nuclear and 

public opinion is shifting in its favor. Assuming that you are an avid supporter of the INL 

and the nuclear industry, I would like to address my frustration with Senator Harry 

Reid’s ignorance and stubbornness of the 

Yucca mountain repository. I hope you are 

asserting the fact to him and his supporters 

that it is a repository, not a dump as they 

keep calling it. I’m sure you’ve used the example of the French as the right thing to do 

considering 80% of their electricity is generated by nuclear, their waste is reprocessed, 

and most importantly, they are energy independent. 

Lastly, I would like to thank you for addressing the issue of energy with the people 

of Idaho. I hope you will carry our message 

to the Senate with great fervor and it will 

not fall upon deaf ears. 

BRIAN J. GROSS, Idaho Falls. 

Our family is affected very little. You see, 

Senator Crapo, a year ago I was anticipating 

something like this and bought a 35mpg Kia 

Spectra, with which my wife and commute 

to our jobs 60 miles round-trip every day. 

About a year ago, I noticed how the value 

of the dollar was on a steady decline due to 

Bush Administration policies (Chinese debt 

to fund the war, flooding the globe with 

USDs, unregulated futures commodities) and 

expected that since the value of a barrel of 

oil was based on the USD, and the value of 

the USD was on the rapid decline, I had better do something fast. So I bought the best 

value in a high MPG automobile that I could 

find, a Korean car. I would have bought an 

American car, but again, I was looking for 

value, and no American manufacturers could 

offer the same value as South Korean made 

Kia. A shame. 

So, to answer your question—It has not affected us that much at all. We were prepared 

because we could see the future based on our 

analysis of Republican policies. 

BRUCE BACON. 

DEAR SENATOR CRAPO: Thank you for wanting to know what the people think. Energy 

prices really haven’t changed my life at all. 

I produce almost all the power and hot water 

I need with solar panels and have a solar 

charging electric car. 

Producing more oil in the U.S. will solve 

nothing as any new supply will be bought by 

China and India. We need to change fuel 

sources. Electricity will be the future fuel 

source and it must be generated in Idaho by 

hydro/geothermal/wind/solar. Renewables 

are: Free fuel forever. 

Nuclear will only make us more dependant 

on imports. We import 58 percent of our oil 

which is not a good thing. We import over 92 

percent of the uranium used to fuel nuclear 

power plants. So, we should be talking about 

getting off our dependence of imported nuclear fuel with the goal of shutting down our 

nuclear power plants when the renewable 

generation is in place. 

JOHN WEBER, Boise. 

I’m not going to bore you with sad tales of 

my life today. I want all you folks in DC to 

tell the enviros they’re killing a country 

whose life and economy are based on oil. If 

they want a perfect world in one national 

park from coast to coast, find another country to do it in. 

Next, I want you to take crude oil off the 

commodities markets. All that is is people 

making all the money they possibly can and 

not having a care about what they are doing 

to people worldwide. 

Is this asking too much of people elected 

to represent us instead of listening to a minority that makes a lot of noise. And if 

you’re making money off of crude on the 

commodities market, then I guess you’ll get 

rid of this E-mail. 

MIKE ARNOLD. 

I am lucky enough to work only 10 miles 

from my home. My husband got a job at the 

same place as I, so now we can carpool to 

work, saving on fuel. However, he is in the 

process of getting hired on with the police 

force. We have an SUV that we are in over 

our heads on in payments, as many Americans are. We also have a dodge diesel that 

gets 18.0 miles to the gallon. We leased this 

vehicle and have 2 more years left to go. The 

only reason we did this was because gasoline 

was $3.00/gallon and diesel was $1.99/gallon. 

Then, prices soared. We are no longer allowed to go camping, hunting, riding our 

ATVs, or even go fishing. It costs too much. 

Not only are we feeling confined to our 

home, but businesses are suffering too. We 

are willing to pay a campground fee to have 

fun, but we cannot even afford to leave. We 

take our children to daycare, go to work, 

pick our children up from daycare, and go 

home. On Sunday, we go to church and come 

home. We do not have the luxury of going to 

the store for fun anymore with the spare 

change we have. Our stimulus check went 

into the bank to pay for future fuel costs. By 

the way, it’s gone now. 

I fully support the means of finding alternate energy not only for fuel, but for electrical power as well. 

STEPHANIE L. ROVIG, Middleton. 

I was around for the first ‘‘energy crisis’’ 

in 1973. A few years later, Americans were 

again reminded that our oil comes from 

‘‘over there,’’ is a finite resource, and should 

be conserved. But we did not listen. So here 

we are, thirty-five years later, with another 

opportunity to change our driving habits and 

our energy consumption. Switching to 

biofuels and electricity is not going to help 

much: the production of both consumes huge 

quantities of fossil fuels. Americans must 

conserve energy. We must learn to think differently about our energy consumption. We 

are like the dieter who loses fifty pounds, 

looks great, feels great, and then slowly 

gains all the weight back because he had not 

changed the way he thinks about food. 

Americans get into ‘‘feel good’’ mode. We 

walk conservation, talk conservation, and 

sometimes even drive conservatively. But 

when the newness of higher gas prices wears 

off, we go right back to overconsumption. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with SENATE