Stop Excessive Energy Speculation Act of 2008 - Motion to Proceed
Floor Speech
STOP EXCESSIVE ENERGY SPECULATION ACT OF 2008--MOTION TO PROCEED -- (Senate - July 22, 2008)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the price of gasoline and diesel fuel, a price that is affecting all Americans. High prices at the pump challenge many Americans who travel great distances for work, for school, or to shop for groceries. This is especially acute in sparsely populated States such as Wyoming.
These prices are resulting in dramatic impacts to our economy. America is now importing more than 65 percent of the oil we consume. We are sending hundreds of billions of dollars overseas to foreign nations that are not necessarily our friends.
It is well beyond time for Congress to act and to adopt meaningful short-term, medium-term, and long-term solutions. As a matter of principle, I believe the Senate must act on a set of solutions rather than pursue a piecemeal approach.
I am an original cosponsor of two pieces of legislation that include a range of solutions--S. 2958, the American Energy Production Act, and S. 3202, the Gas Price Reduction Act. Combined, these bills include provisions on advanced technology, on speculation, and on added supply. The bottom line is, we need to find more and use less.
Today, I wish to speak on two points. One is limiting market speculation, and the other is increasing domestic production.
Based on a range of testimony, it is clear to me that there is dramatic disagreement on the extent to which excessive speculation contributes to the runup in oil prices. As a physician, I am quite concerned that some may have misdiagnosed the energy crisis. In my view, it is a classic misdiagnosis where policymakers focus too much attention on the symptoms of the predicament rather than the underlying causes of the problem.
I am absolutely convinced that the fundamental issue here is one of supply and demand. Simply because market speculation is a symptom of that larger problem does not mean we should shy away from addressing it head-on. Dealing with speculation, however, is not the full answer. We must combine these efforts with meaningful action to expand domestic supplies and to encourage conservation and energy efficiencies.
On the issue of market speculation, I have concluded three fundamental points: One, American consumers should not bear the burden of those who seek to manipulate markets. Two, the United States should not push our financial services trading to foreign countries. We should not replace excessive speculation with excessive regulation. And three, we should strengthen the futures trading markets. This can be done through investing in additional research, requiring transparency, putting more cops on the beat, and strengthening requirements on foreign boards of trade.
Efforts to address market manipulation require a careful balance. Increased visibility into transactions must not turn into onerous regulations.
More importantly, steps to curtail speculation must be combined with real solutions to address the underlying fundamental of domestic supply and demand. We must insist on efforts to increase our energy supplies, promote conservation, and encourage energy efficiencies. We would be failing the American people if we did not talk about increasing the domestic supply of energy.
I must comment on proposals to punish companies that some believe are not developing leases as quickly as they should. This is a ludicrous argument. Frivolous lawsuits and substantial administrative hoops dramatically delay oil and gas exploration and production even on valid existing leases. These punishing tactics being proposed are akin to leasing an apartment, only to have your landlord withhold the keys and complain about why you haven't moved in yet. Rather than punishing existing operators, we can and should streamline the permitting process.
Recently, I was in the part of Wyoming known as the Powder River Basin. It is in the northeastern part of the State. I heard firsthand about the obstacles people are facing when they try to find more oil and gas. American producers are routinely faced with rules and regulations that limit drilling for one reason or the other.
Typical restrictions are related to both occupancy of the land and the time during the year American producers can operate. Examples of prohibitions include extensive restrictions for bird roosting, for bird nesting, for migration, and for wildlife feeding.
The seasonal prohibitions currently limit exploration to a small fraction of the year in many areas. As we can see from this chart, some areas are off limits to produce for all but 10 weeks of the year, from August 16 through October. This is the only time of the year they can produce. If this calendar represented the blackout dates for using our frequent flier miles rather than the dates blacked out for finding the energy that powers our airlines, I guarantee you that outraged citizens all across this country would be pounding down the doors. Let's take a look. January blacked out. February blacked out. March blacked out, April--go through the calendar--May blacked out, June, July. And the charge from the other side of the aisle is that companies are not producing on their leases fast enough.
The bottom line is, there are many reasons why there may not be active exploration and production on lands already under lease. If Congress is serious about producing oil on existing leases, then Congress needs to critically review the process needed to develop oil and gas wells.
As of late June in Wyoming's Powder River Basin, there were 2,589 applications to drill that were awaiting approval by Federal bureaucrats. These are on land where the company has already paid for the lease but is not yet permitted to drill. They have paid the rent, but they have not yet been given the keys to move in.
The vast majority of the applications face extensive administrative delays. What is the current law? The current Federal law requires that permits be either issued or deferred within 30 days of the day the Government receives the completed application.
That is right, the law says Federal bureaucrats must give an answer in 30 days. Well, there are many instances where there is not even the acknowledgment that the submitted application was received. Moreover, the applications sit for months and months, in some cases even over a year, and still Federal bureaucrats have not processed the application to drill.
In a small provision that was slipped into this year's consolidated appropriations act, these production companies now have to, in addition to all the paperwork, pay $4,000 every time they request a permit to drill--a permit that is on land that they have already leased and paid for, a permit that is not being processed in a reasonable, timely manner, and a permit that may not be processed for months or even years.
There are over 850 drilling permits, just in Wyoming, that have been specifically delayed due to policy development, environmental delays, and even litigation. For people to say that oil and gas operators are sitting on leases without any intent to drill is intentionally misleading. In my State, the producers want to drill and they are waiting to drill. They are simply waiting for the Government traffic cops to give them the green light.
For people who claim they want to increase domestic supply of energy on leases that have already been paid for, there is a place you can focus your effort. Focus on the thousands of permits nationwide, and especially in my home State--permits that have not yet been granted, permits that are being held up while waiting for the Government bureaucrats to act. The leases have been paid for, the workers are ready, and literally, today, standing by ready to work. All we are waiting for now is for the Government paperwork.
This is no way to run a country.
I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Will the Senator withhold his request for a quorum?
Mr. BARRASSO. I will withhold the request.
Source