Energy Policy Act of 2003 - cont.
ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2003 - CONTINUED
NATIONAL SUPPORT FOR THE DURBIN CAFE AMENDMENT
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, when one lists all of the groups that oppose this, on business and labor, frankly, we would have found the same opposition in 1975. Those are the same groups that were arguing it is physically impossible for us to have more fuel-efficient cars. If they would have had their way, we would still all be driving cars at 14 miles a gallon or worse.
This Congress rejected those same groups and their positions 28 years ago, but we have not done a thing since. As a result, the fuel efficiency of our cars and trucks has gone down. Is that in the best interest of America? Is that as good as Congress can do, to abdicate our leadership and responsibility on something this essential?
I look at these automobile manufacturersmany of them are my friends and I have worked with them. Certainly, United Auto Workers has been one of my strongest supporting organizations since I have been involved in politics, but I just disagree with them. I believe America can do better. I think if we challenge American business and labor to work together for more fuel-efficient vehicles, they can rise to the challenge. But if we throw in the towel, as the Bond-Levin amendment does, then we know what is going to happen. We are going to continue to see this situation get worse.
The Senator from New Mexico talks about the Landrieu amendment, and I voted for it because it was a wonderful little message to include in this bill, but it does not have any teeth. It has no enforcement. What it basically says to the President is we hope he will see the light, we hope he will lead the way, and if he does, we would sure like to help him.
If that is the case, if that is all Congress is about, why do we have this bill? Why do we not say to the President of the United States, why doesn't he take care of the energy needs of America, and if he needs us, call us? Well, we do not say that. We say we accept our part of the responsibility to pass reasonable laws based on sound science to make America more energy secure.
I say to my colleagues, if we have an energy bill that does not address the fuel efficiency of vehicles, we have ignored the most important energy and environmental issue that should be debated under this bill. The special interests will have won the day again, as they failed in 1975, and as a result we will continue to see dependence on foreign oil, more air pollution, and less energy security for America.
That is not what we should promise to further generations, and I urge my colleagues to support my amendment.