Energy Policy Act of 2003 - cont.

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, under the unanimous consent agreement, I have 2 minutes to speak in opposition to this amendment.

I understand some of my colleagues have offered this amendment in good faith in an effort to address the issue. The amendment which was just defeated addressed the issue. It would have increased fuel efficiency of cars. This Bond-Levin amendment establishes additional criteria for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to meet before they recommend and implement any increase in fuel efficiency.

What does this mean? Here are the existing standards that have to be met with the passage of this amendment. We add all of these new standards that have to be met. There are more hurdles to be cleared. It is an invitation for litigation because as the rules are announced those who oppose them will be able to step forward and say: you didn't meet this Bond-Levin criteria or you didn't meet this one. It just means further delay.

We know what NHTSA has done on its own. It has increased fuel efficiency by 1.5 miles per gallon in a span of 18 years. This is false hope. This is a figleaf for those who just voted no and say they want to vote yes. I encourage my colleagues to oppose this amendment.