Energy

Floor Speech

ENERGY -- (Senate - July 24, 2008)

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, when historians look back at the 110th Congress, they will say the most vexing domestic issue we faced was a rapid and dramatic rise in the price of gas at the pump. As it stands today, they will have to conclude that the Democratic leaders ignored the problem by refusing to unlock the domestic energy resources that were put off limits when gas and oil were cheap.

If these historians do their homework, they will note the irony in all of this. They will note that these same Democrats were the ones who took the majority less than 2 years ago, promising to do something about gas prices that were a lot lower back then than they are today.

I recently received a letter from a dialysis center in Kentucky. It was an urgent plea to do something about gas prices. The letter said some of the rural patients who have to go to this center for treatment three times a week are now foregoing their dialysis treatment because they cannot afford the gas to get there. This is the kind of crisis high gas prices is for low-income and sick people.

After reading that, I have a simple question for our friends across the aisle: If you won't act now, with dialysis patients unable to get into town for treatment, when will you unlock the natural resources Americans have right under their own feet? What is it going to take? Clearly, this is a very serious problem for the American people, and we have an obligation to address it, and the time to do it is now. I am afraid the Democrats who run the Senate want it all to somehow go away. They have been going to great lengths to make sure it goes away. They are cancelling hearings when they are afraid the issue might come up, and they are muzzling their own Members, more than a dozen of whom favor a balanced solution that includes more domestic production and increased conservation. They are telling them the same thing they are telling the American people: No, we can't.

The problem we face, as everyone knows, is that the demand for oil is rising faster than the supply, and the solution, as everyone knows, is to increase supply and lower demand. Yet this week, the Democratic leadership in Congress is saying: No, we can't. They are saying: No, we can't produce a single barrel of oil at home.

Instead of increasing supply, they are trying to distract us with the same blame game they roll out whenever the demands of some special interest group conflict with the will of the people.

This time they have turned their attention on speculators. They say the reason gas prices have nearly doubled since the Democrats took over a year and a half ago is the speculators.

Well, Republicans have no problem strengthening regulation of the futures markets. That is part of the bill that 44 of us are sponsoring. But if Congress does not allow any new exploration, it is perfectly clear what the speculation about future prices will be: not good. The speculators are betting on scarcity, and the majority is helping to prove them right.

So here we are. After months of frustration, Americans are hearing from the Democratic leaders that Congress is going to do one thing about the single most vexing issue in America today. The Democratic leaders are telling the American people that the solution is to write up some new guidelines for energy traders, call it a day, and head home. And if we do not support this very timid solution, they will go back to the blame game again. They will say Republicans voted against lowering gas prices, when the fact is not a single person in America who does not sit behind a desk on the other side of the aisle thinks this particular speculation provision will do anything to lower gas prices.

Let's be perfectly clear: A vote for this narrow bill alone is not a serious vote about high gas prices. It is an abdication of our responsibilities as lawmakers. It is an insult to the American people who are demanding every single day that we do something to ease their pain at the pump.

This is not a theoretical problem. This is not a looming problem. It is an urgent problem. It is an urgent problem with families who have to struggle to put food on the table or send their kids to school. It is an urgent problem for the dialysis patients in my State who can't get treatment because they can't afford to get to town to see the doctor. And Americans are hearing the Democratic leadership's response, which is: No, we can't.

The ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, my good friend from New Mexico, put it this way. He said that in his 37 years of service in the Senate, he has never seen a single bigger problem met with a smaller solution. The Senator from New Mexico said he had never seen a bigger problem met with a smaller solution.

I would put it this way: Americans are saying the house is on fire, and the Democratic leadership is showing up at the scene with squirt guns.

Let's put the scope of this bill in perspective. During last year's energy debate--a year ago--on the Energy Independence and Security Act, 331 amendments were proposed, 49 amendments were agreed to, and gas prices were $3.06 a gallon.

Two years before that, during the debate on the Energy Policy Act, 235 amendments were proposed, 57 amendments were agreed to, and gas was selling for $2.26 a gallon.

With gas prices in some places at more than double what they were then and when Americans are clamoring for dramatic action and when it is clearly the No. 1 issue in the country, the Democratic majority wants us to tighten the leash on a few speculators and then head home and do nothing else until next year.

To drive down gas prices, we could be opening the Outer Continental Shelf. Democratic leaders say: No, we can't. To drive down gas prices, we could be lifting the ban on development of vast oil shale deposits in Western States that sit on three times the reserves of Saudi Arabia. The Democratic leaders say: No, we can't.

To drive down gas prices, we could be approving incentives for battery-powered electric cars and trucks. Democratic leaders say: No, we can't.

To drive down gas prices, we could be voting to open untapped American oil. Democratic leaders say: No, we can't.

To drive down gas prices, we could be voting for new clean nuclear technology, but Democratic leaders say: No, we can't.

To drive down gas prices, we could be approving new and promising coal-to-liquid technology. Again, Democratic leaders say: No, we can't.

When will the Democratic leadership listen to the 77 percent of Americans who want us to use our own domestic resources to drive down the price of gas and say: Yes, we can. When will they listen to more than a dozen of their own Members on the other side of the aisle who are saying: Yes, we can.

Americans never imagined they would be paying these prices at the pump, but if the Democratic leadership has its way, Americans will be paying even more in the years to come. When that time comes and there is no one else to blame, they will look around and see that there is no one else around to blame but themselves. Then Americans will know whom to blame, and I can tell my colleagues it will not be the speculators.

Mr. President, I see my friend from Arizona on his feet, and I am wondering if he wishes to ask me a question.

Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I wonder if my colleague would yield for two questions.

Mr. McCONNELL. I would be happy to.

Mr. KYL. I thank the Senator. Mr. President, I believe at least twice the majority leader has made a comment about my colleague from Arizona, John McCain, and I wanted to see if the Republican leader's understanding is the same as mine.

The majority leader said: ``McCain says drilling is only psychological and won't make a difference.''

I have checked the actual record of what Senator McCain said. It was a discussion of offshore drilling, which Senator McCain strongly supports on the Outer Continental Shelf, and the question was whether there would be short-term relief. Here is precisely what Senator McCain said in response:

I don't see an immediate relief, but I do see that exploitation of existing reserves that may exist--and in view of many experts that do exist off our coasts--is also a way that we need to provide relief. Even though it may take some years, the fact that we are exploiting those reserves would have psychological impact that I think is beneficial.

Now, I ask the leader: Is it correct, in your view, that what Senator McCain was saying is that while the benefits of production would take some years to achieve, there could be an immediate psychological benefit simply from the decision that we were going to do this, such as the $20 reduction in the price of a barrel of oil following shortly after the President's announcement that he was going to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling?

Mr. McCONNELL. My understanding of Senator McCain's position is the same as my good friend from Arizona. I believe he states correctly the position of his senior colleague from Arizona on this important issue of whether it would be useful for America--the third-largest oil producer in the world, sitting on vast reserves--to expand the usage of those reserves, particularly on the Outer Continental Shelf.

Mr. KYL. Secondly, Mr. President, the second question. The Republican leader said a moment ago that speculators were betting on scarcity and the majority is doing everything to prove them right.

With respect to a decision to begin production off our shores on the Outer Continental Shelf, is it the Senator's opinion that this would have a beneficial effect on drawing down the price of futures in the oil market because the decision would be seen as a commitment to produce more?

Mr. McCONNELL. I would say to my friend from Arizona, my view on that is probably not as significant as others. For example, the famous oilman, T. Boone Pickens, who has been in town this week and who has met with Republicans and Democrats, has made it quite clear that he thinks we ought to be doing all these things, both on the find-more side, which would certainly involve greater use of the Outer Continental Shelf which is currently off-limits. He thinks we ought to be doing all these things. I gather that most experts understand the law of supply and demand, and if you increase supply and diminish demand, you are working in tandem to get gas prices down. I think it makes elementary good sense that that is the only way we will be able to make progress on this issue.

Mr. KYL. I thank the leader.

Source