The state of Minnesota is a state that believes in science. We brought the post it note to the pacemaker, we believe in science. And as a former prosecutor, I also believe in evidence.

What we have been hearing from this administration time and time again, whether it is about energy policy, where they've actually done literally nothing the last eight years when it comes to pushing us forward where we should be when you look at the rest of the world with technology and with hybrid cars an electric cars and with new gas mileage standards which came out of this congress, or whether it is about climate change, which I’m about to address today.

They've been living in an evidence-free zone and it's time to bring out the evidence. The administration made headlines twice last week in its ongoing effort to do nothing about climate change. We learned that there was political interference with science. Political interference with the evidence and the fact.

We also learned that the administration won't issue the global warming regulations mandated by the Supreme Court. I'm a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee. And some of my colleagues might recall last fall when Dr. Juli Gerberding was invited to testify before our committee. She was invited to testify on how climate change could impact public health. Unfortunately, her testimony that she delivered was marketedly different from what she and her staff at CDC had prepared. The Office of Management and Budget got its hands on the speech and removed about seven pages that discussed the impacts of global warming.

Seven pages redacted. These pages included explanations and descriptions of the links between climate change and heat stroke, weather disasters, worsening air pollution, allergies, food and water-borne infectious diseases, mosquito and particular born infectious diseases. I would say that is relevant to the job of the head of the CDC and something that she should be allowed to testify about when it comes to climate change. Well at the time it was a brouhaha because someone leaked the testimony, a whistle blower brought it to our attention and the white house claimed that they need to edit her testimony because of this -- quote -- "Broad characterizations about climate change science that didn't align with the UN Environmental panel on climate change report."

 Last fall we provided a number of example s of how her testimony was closely aligned with that report. Her testimony included the statement that -- quote -- "The west coast of the US is expected to experience significant strains on water supplies as regional precipitation declines and mountain snow peaks are depleted. Forest fires are expected to increase in frequency, severity, distribution, and duration."

In fact, the IPC has found -- quote -- "Warm spells and heat waves will likely increase the danger of wildfires.” So they were completely consistent. I don't have to tell anyone. You don't have to read a report to know what has been going on in California for the past two weeks. Global warming didn't cause the fires, but it intensifies the three main causes of wildfires, high temperatures, summer dryness and long-term drought. 

The bush administration didn't change the testimony because of concerns regarding accuracy. They didn't worry about if it matched with our report because it, in fact, exactly did. They did it for political reasons. So it was really no surprise to me at all when the news broke last week that both the office of the vice president and the president's council on environmental quality had actually stepped in to interfere with her testimony.

This revelation came to us from Mr. Jason Burnett, former associate director of the EPA who informed Chairman Boxer he was approached by the Council on Environmental Quality staff and asked to work  with the CDC to remove from the testimony any discussion of the human health consequences of climate change.

Upon reviewing the original testimony, he came to the same conclusion we've reached. Since the science was correct, he didn't think he should alter the statement. He wasn't operating in an evidence-free zone but wanted the facts and information out there. I'm sorry to report that even though the administration has been caught red handed in this behavior time and time again it hasn't stopped them from continuing their interference with scientific fact.

Last week we learned that the Office of Management and Budget has been sitting on an e-mail from that same former associate deputy administrator of the EPA regarding the endangerment of public health from global warming. When they realized what it contained the OMB received this e-mail and they realized what it contained they first tried to make Mr. Burnett take it back and then they tried to bury it.

We learned last week of the administration's decision to leave office without taking any regulatory action to address climate change. This is wrong. The bottom line is that this white house is leaving it to the next president to show leadership, to show leadership on energy and to show leadership on climate change. Mr. President, I can't say it more plainly than this: our climate is changing.

If we don't stem the tide it will have grave consequences to our health and foreign policy. It should begin with science and evidence, and it should end with science and it should evidence with evidence. That's how we come to the right policy outcome. We cannot have the wool pulled over the eyes of the American people anymore. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.