Boehner Column: "New Technologies Deliver New Cleaner Energy"

Usually when you hear the word “nuclear” it means that Iran is in the news again. But I think that we need to view “nuclear” in another light, as in safely and cleanly delivering on our energy needs and helping us achieve our goal of energy independence.

While the price of gas has been slowly creeping upward in the years since President Clinton vetoed a bipartisan bill that would have opened up parts of a desolate plain in Alaska for oil exploration, the true consequences of President Clinton’s ill-advised decision have only recently become fully apparent. Families and small businesses this summer are being pummeled by skyrocketing gas prices that have put an unacceptable squeeze on their budgets.

In a recent e-mail to constituents, I asked people to tell me how they’re coping with gas prices. I did this because I want to be able to share these real-life stories with the politicians and bureaucrats in Washington whose policies are blocking our nation’s path to energy independence. The response to my request was staggering. I heard from grandparents who are limiting their visits to grandchildren. I heard from farmers in rural areas who cannot drive to the post office more than twice a week to get their mail and families who are cutting back on groceries.

Just as the United States has the capacity and the ingenuity to increase domestic production of oil in an environmentally-safe way to help lower gas prices, so too can we pursue technology to lower the cost of electricity. And we can do so using clean nuclear energy.

Believe it or not, France can serve as a great example for us here at home when it comes to nuclear power. Today, 440 nuclear reactors in 31 countries generate 16 percent of the world’s electricity – including 30 percent in the European Union – but France most assuredly leads the way.

Today, France derives 78 percent of its electricity from more than 50 reactors and “recycles” nuclear fuel for further use – a textbook example of “energy efficiency,” which we hear so much about these days in Washington.

In a sign that we may have finally been turning the corner on nuclear energy, last year Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told a House committee that “I have a different view on nuclear than I did 20 years ago” because of advances in technology and that she believes nuclear energy “has to be on the table.” Unfortunately, the Speaker’s actions speak far louder than her words. In spite of its clear advantages to American consumers, the Democratic Congress has refused to promote nuclear power.

For those of us here in Ohio , particularly near Fernald and the Miamisburg Mound Laboratory, the word “nuclear” may have a certain connotation. But, as other nations around the world have demonstrated, nuclear energy in the 21st Century is the safest, cleanest source of energy you can find. In fact, we’re proving it in this country as well. For more than a generation, nuclear technology has powered our Navy with incredible safety.

It’s time now for our leaders in Washington to step up to the plate. The American people deserve a Congress that is willing to make these difficult decisions. Let’s begin to free our nation from the shackles of energy dependence through the clean, safe, and efficient nuclear power.

Boehner Column: We Can Increase American Energy in an Environmentally Sound Way

For years I’ve been an advocate for increasing the production of American energy in an environmentally responsible way to liberate our nation from its dependence on foreign oil. And for years, such reforms have been blocked by Washington politics. This summer, we’re witnessing the bitter consequences of Washington ’s failure. Skyrocketing gas prices are hurting working families and destroying jobs right here in our region. It didn’t have to be this way. . .and it doesn’t have to stay this way.

General Motors announced recently it will close its Moraine plant in two years because the products made there are no longer in demand. Sales of pick-up trucks and midsize SUVs are down since gas prices keep going up. Just days after the GM announcement, DMAX Ltd., also located in Moraine, announced that it would lay off 290 hourly workers at its diesel-engine plant by mid-July. The DMAX plant builds engines for large trucks and vans, which are also not in demand as gas prices continue their upward climb. What began as a steady drain on family budgets has turned into a dire situation. We’re losing good jobs.

The situation is an outrage. It has been clear for decades that we must strengthen the development of alternative fuel sources and increase the production of American energy. It has also been clear for many years that these steps can be taken in an environmentally responsible way. Why hasn’t it happened? A lot of the blame goes to politicians who say one thing and then do another. Many have promised to increase our nation’s energy supply, but consistently voted against legislation to achieve it.

We have plenty of oil spread throughout Alaska , Montana , North Dakota , the Rocky Mountains and offshore, but extreme regulations prohibit us from going after it. How ridiculous are our current restrictions? As columnist George Will recently noted, China is drilling for oil off U.S. shores, but American oil producers can’t. Congress has repeatedly denied them permission to do so, even over the objections of the coastal states nearest to the potential drilling zones. Instead we’re importing more than 60 percent of our oil from other countries, including a number of nations hostile to America .

Meanwhile, our domestic resources remain locked away, including 86 billion barrels of American oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS); 10.4 billion barrels in a tiny, desolate portion of the remote Arctic coastal plain; and 2 trillion barrels of American oil shale in the Intermountain West.

I’m for increased domestic production, and I have been for years. But don’t take my word for it; look at my voting record. Ninety-one percent of current House Republicans (I’m one of them) have historically voted to increase environmentally-responsible production of American-made oil and natural gas. By contrast, 86 percent of House Democrats have consistently voted against it.

Here are just a few of the most recent examples:

Aug. 4, 2007: the House voted down an amendment to H.R. 3221 that would have included provisions for more oil and gas from Alaska , the OCS and oil shale; removed bureaucratic obstacles to allow construction of more refineries; and promoted more research and development into efficient energy sources. I voted for this amendment; Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) voted against it.

June 29, 2006: while I was serving as House Majority Leader, the Republican-led House passed H.R. 4761, a bill that would have provided incentives to coastal states to permit offshore oil and natural gas exploration under strict environmental protection. I voted for this bill; Speaker Pelosi voted against it.

June 7, 2006: the Republican-led House passed H.R. 5254, a bill that sought to lower gas prices by expediting the permitting process for expanding oil refineries. I voted for this bill; Speaker Pelosi voted against it.

May 26, 2006: the House passed H.R. 5429, a bill supporting environmentally-sound oil and gas exploration and production in the Alaskan coastal plain. I voted for this bill; Speaker Pelosi voted against it.

These are just some of the most recent examples of my votes. You can find more votes on my website, www.johnboehner.house.gov.

I don’t believe $4 gas was the “new direction” Americans believed Congress would take under Speaker Pelosi, but unfortunately that’s where we are. And under Democratic leadership, not only is the U.S. House not doing anything to increase production of American energy, it’s actually trying to enact stricter regulations that further hamper our chances of achieving energy independence. Unless we take immediate steps to increase our own production in an environmentally sound way, we will remain dependent on foreign and oft-times hostile regimes.

Increasing production is just one of the steps we need to take. We also need to conserve more. We need biofuels. We need alternative fuels. We need to have a real serious conversation about the cleanest form of energy, nuclear power. But none of this will make a difference unless we’re willing to explore our own land here in America and increase domestic energy production in an environmentally safe way. We can do this.

House Republicans have announced we will force a steady stream of votes in Congress in an effort to get the energy reform process moving. We need your help to get Congress to take action. Washington is broken. Working together, we can begin to fix it. And we must.

Boehner Column: Energy Independence America Deserves

Energy Independence America Deserves

Gas prices in Ohio soared over $4 per gallon last week, and that’s a record I am sure families would rather not have achieved. We can waste our time pointing fingers and finding someone else to blame, but the fact is we cannot meet our own energy demands. When it comes to energy production, we’re stuck in the 1970s while our global competitors are going after 21st century technologies. We haven’t built a refinery in the United States in 30 years, and 70 percent of our energy needs are supplied by other countries. We have to stop this dependence on foreign energy; we must begin to meet our own needs.

Simply pointing out that we keep going in the wrong direction is not enough, which is why I am pleased to lead House Republicans in introducing an energy agenda that offers both short- and long-term solutions.

To help ease pain at the pump in the short-term, I am supporting legislation that would impose an immediate freeze on public money for lawmakers’ pet projects (“earmarks”) and use the resulting savings to reduce the federal budget deficit and suspend the 18.4 cents per gallon federal gas tax for the summer. No one should mistake this for a comprehensive solution, and I’m under no illusions that this alone is going to ease the pain motorists are feeling. But stopping the earmarks is something we ought to do anyway in Congress until fundamental changes are made in the spending process, and using the billions of dollars in savings to reduce the deficit and provide even a small measure of relief for families at the gas pump seems like a much more responsible use than frittering it away on pet projects most Americans will never see or use.

Even more important, though, are the long-term solutions embraced by House Republicans that will boost supplies of all forms of energy here at home. The reforms we’re advocating will reduce our dependence on foreign oil and remove the threat of blackmail from foreign dictators who control our energy supplies. At the same time, we will be creating jobs here at home and growing our economy. This is a win-win for everyone, and House Republicans are aggressively seeking solutions to the challenges we face.

First, we will increase the production of American-made energy in an environmentally responsible way. This includes the exploration of next generation oil, natural gas and coal, as well as the production of advanced alternative fuels like cellulosic and clean coal-to-liquids all the while protecting our natural resources.

Second, we will promote clean and reliable energy sources like advanced nuclear and next generation coal, while encouraging clean power from renewable energy such as wind and hydroelectric power. Nuclear energy has proven itself as a safe, carbon-free and environmentally-friendly alternative. France relies on nuclear power for 80 percent of its electricity needs, while here in America it meets just 19 percent of our need. Clearly, we must do better to utilize this energy resource.

We use an estimated 20 million barrels of oil each day, and we haven’t been able to meet our own demand since 1970. As I mentioned previously, we haven’t built a refinery in more than 30 years and there are thousands of capped wells that, while some may have run dry, could help supply us with oil.

A recent report from the U.S. Department of the Interior notes that an incredible 62 percent of oil on federal land is inaccessible for development and another 30 percent is restricted. This leaves just 8 percent of America ’s 31 billion barrels of on-shore oil available for use. The report also states that of our nation’s 231 billion cubic feet of on-shore natural gas, only 10 percent is accessible. Is it any wonder we’re paying such steep gasoline and energy costs when the vast majority of our domestic supply is tied up by extreme regulations that prohibit us from going after them?

Under the House Republican energy agenda, we will cut red tape and increase the supply of American-made fuel and energy to lower prices. Heavy-handed bureaucratic regulations and limitations on the construction of new oil refineries have decreased energy supplies and increased prices.

Finally, we will encourage greater efficiency by offering conservation tax credits to Americans who make their homes, cars and businesses more energy efficient. This will give more families and businesses the chance to take advantage of the newest, most efficient energy technologies available.

All we’ve seen from Washington lately are more of the same failed approaches that caused the long gas lines and rationing we had in the 1970s. Working families across the 8th Congressional District today are feeling the pain of these failed policies. It is inconceivable that we would continue down that same path again, especially when we have the technology, the know-how and the desire to make a change that will give us the energy independence we deserve.

Boehner represents Ohio ’s 8th District, which includes all of Darke, Miami and Preble counties, most of Butler and Mercer counties, and the northeastern corner of Montgomery County . He was first elected to Congress in 1990.

Boehner Column: Using Our Troops to Score Political Points Does Not Honor Their Sacrifice

By Rep. John Boehner:

Earlier this year, Congress worked quickly to pass a bipartisan stimulus package to help middle class families and small businesses and boost our economy. We were able to accomplish this because leaders in both parties passed a clean bill, refusing to let it turn into a “Christmas tree” with all sorts of unrelated spending attached to it.

Unfortunately, this good example wasn’t repeated when it came time to craft legislation to fund our troops in harm’s way. Instead, Democratic congressional leaders tried to use and abuse our troops by attaching tax hikes and spending increases to what should have been a clean bill to fund our men and women in combat. Outraged legislators who support the troops and their mission refused to go along with the scheme, and it fell apart. I was among these legislators who took a stand on behalf of our troops by voting “present” on the bill instead of being complicit with the politicians’ exploitation of our military personnel.

At this point, the Majority should have done the right thing. It should have put a “clean” troop funding bill on the floor for an up or down vote, and sent it to the President. Instead, the Democratic Majority stubbornly did nothing. And the result was that Congress let our troops down by failing to pass a clean troop funding bill before Memorial Day.

The consequences of this failure are considerable. Admiral Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in early May, “We need [the troop spending bill] very badly before the Memorial Day recess. We stop paying soldiers on the 15th of June and we have very little flexibility with respect to that.”

Congress heard the Admiral’s warning. But the Democrats who run Congress didn’t heed it. Instead, congressional leaders saw an opportunity to advance their political agendas. Knowing the troop funding bill is popular and certain to pass, politicians in Congress tried to attach tax increases and unrelated spending increases to it – in effect, exploiting our troops by forcing them to carry unpopular political provisions they knew could not pass Congress on their own.

Attaching these “riders” is the sort of stunt that has made Americans extremely cynical about Washington . That anti-war forces in the U.S. House would employ this scheme right before Memorial Day was irresponsible at best and depraved at worst.

Congress owes our military men and women the funds they need for success in Iraq and Afghanistan . That means passing a bill free of unnecessary riders trying to enact an immediate withdrawal from Iraq and add-ons such as $210 million to cover cost-overruns for the U.S. Census Bureau. The American people know our troops are carrying a heavy burden on their shoulders, and they don’t like the idea of Washington politicians exploiting our troops by using them as a vehicle for tax hikes and spending increases. By voting “present,” we were able to stop this scheme and give Congress another chance to do the right thing by passing a “clean” troop funding bill.

Unfortunately, the Majority that runs Congress still didn’t do the right thing. Unhappy that it couldn’t get its way, the Democratic congressional leadership left town for the Memorial Day recess without holding a vote on a clean bill. Then it had the audacity to launch political attacks against legislators who had refused to go along with its cynical scheme, distorting their “present” votes as a vote against the troops. Never mind that dozens of Democratic legislators, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) herself, voted “no” on the troop funding bill itself.

If, as Admiral Mullen warned Congress, the Pentagon is forced to stop paying soldiers by the middle of June, it will negatively affect military families while our troops are fighting overseas. Our soldiers, sailors and airmen should not have to worry about the financial well-being of their husbands, wives, sons, or daughters while they’re halfway across the world facing insurgent bullets and roadside bombs.

Our fighting men and women deserve to be honored for the sacrifices they made and continue to make in defense of our freedom. Lawmakers in the U.S. House can show their gratitude by passing a clean spending bill and giving our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan the resources they need to win and come home safely. It’s disappointing that the Democratic Congress was so devoted to the idea of using our troops to carry unrelated spending and tax increases that it went home for Memorial Day without passing legislation to fund our men and women in harm’s way.

Boehner Column: "It’s Time for a Bipartisan Plan to Lower Fuel Costs"

We recently marked the two-year anniversary of congressional Democrats saying they had a “commonsense plan” to lower fuel costs. Problem is, that plan has never been revealed and gas prices are, on average, $1.25 per gallon higher than in 2006.

The rising costs are having severe effects not just on family budgets but on industries and local governments. The Richmond Palladium-Item reported on April 2 that surging gas prices forced that city’s police department to have fewer patrol cars. Some school districts in Bowling Green , KY , are looking at cutting bus routes and even, as reported by WKBO News, “going to four day school weeks” because fuel prices are so high.

In Texas , volunteer fire departments are reducing their equipment budgets to be able to afford gas, and the U.S. Department of the Interior recently noted that the trucking industry is poised to spend $135 billion on fuel this year – a $23 million increase from 2007.

To put the true extent of this into perspective, consider that the average American family consumes 1,143 gallons of fuel per year, according to the Energy Information Administration. Based on the $2.33 price per gallon of gasoline when the Democrats took control of Congress on January 4, 2007, a family would have spent $2,663 per year on gas. But based on today’s price – a whopping $3.56 per gallon – that same family would spend about $4,069 per year – that’s $1,406 less for summer vacations… $1,406 less for necessities like food and clothes… and $1,406 less for retirement or college savings.

Memorial Day weekend – the traditional start of summer travel season – is just around the corner. Until we begin to address our problems with regard to domestic supply, we will remain at the mercy of foreign fuel suppliers and you will continue to pay higher and higher costs. A recent study by Canadian bank CIBC states that the price of oil is expected to soar to $225 a barrel by 2012 as supplies tighten. The cost of a barrel currently hovers around $120.

Enough is enough. Empty rhetoric and political promises have done absolutely nothing to lower fuel costs. So far in the 110th Congress, not one energy bill brought to a vote in the U.S. House has contained a single watt or gallon of new domestic energy, despite assurances from Democratic leaders that they have a “commonsense plan.” It’s time to see that plan. But if there is no such blueprint that will take real action to reduce costs without raising taxes, then it’s high time they stop playing partisan games and work with House Republicans to develop a plan that will work.

The best way to bring down prices is by increasing all forms of energy – such as biofuels and nuclear – and especially by increasing our domestic supply of oil in an environmentally responsible way. The U.S. Geological Survey recently announced that the Bakken Shale that stretches across Montana and North Dakota may hold as much as 3.7 billion barrels of oil. The irony is that we have plenty of oil right here at home – more than 10 billion barrels in Alaska , 30 billion barrels offshore and an incredible 1.3 trillion barrels in the Rocky Mountains . We just can’t go after it because of extreme environmental regulations.

We can – and we must – find a balance between being responsible stewards of the environment while producing our own energy. In the midst of a slowing economy, falling home values and soaring costs of living, these fuel costs are a heavy premium for working families, particularly those in suburban and rural communities who are paying more and more just to drive to work each day. Isn’t it time for a bipartisan, comprehensive plan to reduce our dependence on foreign sources of energy, lower costs here at home and invest in all forms of energy to provide relief to working families, create American jobs and grow our economy?

Boehner Column: "Fuel Prices Rising, Taxes Hikes Threatened . No Relief in Sight From Wasteful Washington Spenders"

It’s possible that by the time you read this column, the federal government will have already cashed the check you wrote for your 2007 taxes. And if you think that was bad, wait until you see how big a check you may write very soon if Congress passes all the tax hikes it’s threatening.

Three times in one recent week, the Democratic-led U.S. House refused to side with taxpayers, instead choosing to continue their tax-and-spend ways. Using a proposal introduced by my colleague, Rep. Tim Walberg of Michigan , House Republicans forced three votes on the House Floor to try to stop the largest tax hike in American history. Rep. Walberg’s bill, the Tax Increase Prevention Act, would stop the $683 billion tax increase passed by Democrats in March as part of their Fiscal Year 2009 budget proposal.

Stopping this massive tax hike will help every American taxpayer, including low- and middle-class families, working parents with children and seniors. With record-high gas prices, rising food costs and declining home values, the last thing we need and the last thing our economy needs is a tax increase.

The tax relief enacted previously by House Republicans led to a robust economy, low unemployment and increased savings for working families. But the Democrats’ budget proposal assumed that this tax relief will expire, sending tax rates soaring: personal income taxes will go up, the child tax credit will be slashed in half, the marriage penalty will be re-introduced, the death tax resurrected, taxes on dividends and investments will go up, and even seniors will see their retirement savings taxed at higher rates.

One of the hardest things for middle-class families right now is they can’t seem to catch a break. In today’s economy, it’s getting harder and harder to save, especially with every spare dollar seeming to go to rising fuel costs. And another week has gone by without hearing from Democrats what their plan is to lower gas prices, as they promised two years ago. Instead, gas prices have hit a nationwide average of $3.44 per gallon, according to AAA. Experts are predicting that prices will spike even higher in May, and the summer driving season isn’t even upon us yet.

The harsh reality is that since January 2007, gas prices have increased so much that motorists are paying $1.11 more per gallon to fill up than they were before the beginning of last year. The Associated Press recently reported that fuel costs “appear poised to resume their seemingly endless trek toward a record high milestone of an average $3.50 a gallon. Forecasters call for gas to peak as high as $3.65 within a month.”

Our working families deserve better than this.

We are too dependent on foreign oil. We must increase domestic production by building more refineries and opening up areas of the country to exploration in an environmentally-safe and responsible manner. At the same time, we must commit ourselves to develop long-term energy alternatives. The benefits of expanding our energy portfolio are not just in reducing prices and reducing our dependency on foreign oil but increasing opportunities for new family-wage jobs and growing American industries.

We need to advance commonsense, comprehensive energy solutions that increase American supplies in all forms. Instead, we’re stuck with bad ideas like a 55-cent increase in the federal gas tax and raising other taxes to pay for wasteful Washington spending while middle-class families struggle to make ends meet. It’s time to put aside political maneuvering and work together to bring relief to working families tired of Washington double-speak and empty rhetoric.

Boehner Column: "Killing Colombia Free Trade Agreement Maintains Economically Dangerous Status Quo"

It was bad news for our region recently when the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, which would have created good jobs for Ohio and opened new markets for Ohio farm exports, was killed by political gamesmanship in Congress. In refusing to bring this agreement before the House for a vote, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has signaled that she puts the concerns of big labor bosses above those of Ohio ’s farmers and working families.

Agriculture is the backbone of the economy here in the 8th Congressional District. We rely not only on current markets to move our products but also on expanding to new ones. Powerful labor bosses in Washington , however, oppose the Colombia trade agreement. They contributed huge sums of money to the Democratic Party in 2006. They’ve pledged to pump even larger amounts into the Party’s coffers in 2008. And in exchange, they got what they wanted on the Colombia trade deal: it was unceremoniously killed by the Democratic Speaker of the House.

Democratic leaders’ political maneuvering clearly tells our trading partners, allies and our own workers that catering to special interests is more important than creating jobs and helping our economy grow.

For the past 15 months, Administration officials have negotiated with Congressional leaders to find a responsible compromise on a trade agreement that would let U.S. goods enter an important South American market virtually tariff-free. Current rates vary, but U.S. cars going into Colombia face a 35 percent tariff; furniture is hit with a 20 percent tariff; and high-quality U.S. beef is socked with an 80 percent tariff. Compare that to Colombian goods, which since 1991 have enjoyed almost complete duty-free access to our markets.

In February, the House voted to extend the Andean Free Trade Preferences Agreement that allowed Colombian goods to continue entering the U.S. virtually tariff-free while maintaining the unfair status quo on our exports. The intent of the Colombian agreement was to eliminate the barriers on our goods entering that country, which would lead to more jobs here in Ohio and throughout the country as businesses would no longer need to worry about meeting stiff tariff rates.

In addition to being a valuable potential trading partner, Colombia is America ’s leading democratic ally in South America . It has waged a long and so-far successful battle against drug traffickers and terrorists that seek to destroy its government and establish a kind of Communist narco-state. Efforts to destabilize Colombia ’s government are supported by leftist Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, a committed ally of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Cuban dictators Fidel and Raul Castro. Colombian President Alvaro Uribe has repeatedly said that the best help America can provide against Colombia ’s adversaries – who are our adversaries – is to pass the Colombia Free Trade Agreement.

President Uribe was certainly not alone in encouraging us to pass this important agreement. Many valuable international partners expressed a desire to see Congress take swift action on the agreement and send it to the President for his signature, arguing it would send an overt signal of our shared desire to see stability and democracy in Latin America . Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper pointedly addressed security concerns in a speech last September before the Council on Foreign Relations. “If the U.S. turns its back on its friends in Colombia , this will set back our cause far more than any Latin American dictator could hope to achieve,” he said. In fact, an Investor’s Business Daily editorial grimly notes that the political maneuver used to kill this agreement was being called the “Chavez Rule” in the Latin America media.

Indeed, having seen the political games that just played out, how can any nation trust that future trade agreements made with the United States will not meet the same fate? Speaker Pelosi’s unfortunate decision is likely to wreak havoc on our international trade commitments and on future attempts to open new markets for goods produced by American farmers and producers.

A complaint that frequently surfaced among those seeking to kill this agreement was that the administration allegedly did not consult with congressional leaders. Let me set the record straight on that. There have been hundreds of meetings over the last 15 months in which the administration reached out to the Democratic leadership in Congress in hopes of reaching mutual agreement on how and when the treaty should be considered. Labor and environmental standards identical to those included at the behest of Democratic leaders in the Peru Free Trade Agreement that the House approved in February were written into the Colombian agreement. There were also serious conversations between the administration and the Speaker of the House specifically over the past six to eight weeks.

Despite all of this, the Colombia Free Trade Agreement become another in a long list of legislative victims of election-year political gamesmanship. What could be more fair to our workers than to provide access for our goods to important new markets in South America virtually tariff-free? Our global competitors are already working to expand their exports to Colombia through trade agreements. By killing our agreement with Colombia , Democratic leaders sacrificed more than 200 years of international credibility for the shallowest possible short-term gain. This trade agreement was good for our farmers, ranchers, small business owners and other American exporters who will now continue under an unfair and economically dangerous status quo.

Boehner represents Ohio ’s 8th District, which includes all of Darke, Miami and Preble counties, most of Butler and Mercer counties, and the northeastern corner of Montgomery County . He was first elected to Congress in 1990.