Hearing of the House Select Energy Independence and Global Warming Committee - Shock and Oil: Where Military Concerns Meet Consumer, Climate Crises

Statement

Hearing of the House Select Energy Independence and Global Warming Committee - Shock and Oil: Where Military Concerns Meet Consumer, Climate Crises

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

REP. EMANUEL CLEAVER (D-MO): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It's difficult to follow a powerful sermon like the one just delivered by Mr. Blumenauer, which I would say amen to what he just said.

As I read this morning a number of newspapers, including Financial Times, about what is going on in Pakistan, I became alarmed. Not because Pakistan is a supplier of oil but because if things go further awry, it could completely destabilize the Middle East in ways that Iraq never could. And thinking about what is going on in Iran and hopefully dealing with this concern internally, I could not help but think that conflict in Pakistan, if it ends up in some kind of civil war and if the tribal areas get more U.S. weapons, there's no telling what could happen.

But it occurred to me that even in the midst of all of these developments in the Middle East that we are not, even after the Al Gore film and all of the discussion, we are NOT retreating from our appetite for oil. In 1980, the United States imported 27 percent of the oil it uses each day. And today, we are importing 60 percent of the oil we use each day. So it's not like all of the awareness is creating some reaction. It is what Mr. Blumenauer said, you know, we talk about it, and then we just continue to go ahead. We continue to splurge. This is chilling. And so I'm looking forward to hearing your comments and then engaging dialogically, because I'm also frustrated that we're not moving. And maybe something will happen after November of next year.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

REP. EMANUEL CLEAVER (D-MO): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

One of the problems we have, I think, is that we live in a time in our country where everything is politicized. I'm frustrated over how we have politicized global warming, how we've politicized even the oil crisis. And so it's difficult for us to coalesce and move toward a solution, because what we say and think reverberates across the land. And if you listen to radio and television talk shows, you can see what has happened. It's ugly out there. And rather than turn down the volume, we continue to turn it up. So this issue has already become muddy because of the way it is politicized.

Do you have any suggestions on how we might be able to depoliticize the oil dependence issue or independence? Is there something you can suggest that we do? Say, can we write a song? Could we get Mr. Hall to write a hit song? I mean, what do we need to do?

MR. BLAIR: An admiral giving advice on politics is like a politician giving advice on maneuvering ships, so I venture into this with great -- (laughter). But what those of us on the council thought was that what's required here is a compromise between those who have opposed fuel efficiency standards on the grounds that it's interfering with business and those who have opposed further exploration and development of alternatives on the grounds that it runs environmental risks and it's not pretty to have an oil rig out your back door.

What we strongly recommended a year ago was that in order to provide the political cover for everybody to do what everybody recognizes is in the national interest is both sides have to give. And it's got to be a comprehensive package so that it's recognized that all participants are doing the right thing for the country.

And even though they can be accused of making compromises with something that they pushed in the past, it's in the common good. And that's really -- it's naive. It's kind of Civics 101. I'm not a politician, but I think that it's sort of the time that we all have to give a little to do the right thing for everybody.

So my answer to your question would be to, you know, both sides of that center chair need to give a little bit, and let's do more conservation. Let's do more domestic production. Let's do more alternatives. We've taken polling data within the country, and the people recognize that.

But it's getting that popular support shredded through the filter of individual interests into a bill, which you all know better than I do is the hard part of this. But it seems, at the end of the day, if it's comprehensive, then the people will have felt that their elected representatives, whether in the executive branch or on the legislative side, have done the right thing for the country. So that's kind of a naive answer, Mr. Cleaver, but that's the one that I would give.

MS. BROWNER: Mr. Cleaver, I mean, I think the simulation actually would be a way in which you might find some common ground. In the simulation we did, there were three of us who were noted Democrats. Everyone knew we were Democrats, although we were not playing Democrats or Republicans. There were three that are well- known Republicans; you would recognize them immediately as Republicans. And then there were some former military brass who we're never sure what they are; they're very good about that. (Laughter.)

But, you know, what happened is we were unanimous in our take- away from the experience. So it didn't matter what our political persuasion was when we came to the scenario. Our experience of the scenario was it was a shared one. And what we thought needed to be done was remarkably similar across the party lines when we stepped out at the end and resumed our regular identities.

And so I think, you know, it could go a long ways towards perhaps bridging some of the gaps that inevitably exist as you all wrestle with important legislation. And if that doesn't work, I agree Mr. Hall should write a song.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source