Comprehensive American Energy Security and Consumer Protection Act

Floor Speech

COMPREHENSIVE AMERICAN ENERGY SECURITY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT -- (House of Representatives - September 16, 2008)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

This is a serious issue, and there are a lot of related issues.

The gentleman who spoke before me, and I have a great deal of respect and affection for him, we treat one another with respect. We put a price-gouging bill on the floor because we were concerned about the spikes in pricing. Indeed, we saw, as Ike was coming and bearing down on Texas, before it ever got to the shoreline, there were $5 per gallon prices, before it ever got to the shoreline, before it ever destroyed anything.

My friend voted against the price-gouging bill.

These are serious pieces of legislation. The Republicans were in charge of the House for 6 years. In 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, they controlled the White House.

I have in my hand the eight pages that the administration, Mr. Bush, has submitted to us, President Bush submitted to us, over the last 8 years. Six of those years they were included in the appropriations bills passed by the Republican Congress and Republican Senate and signed by a Republican President.

In each of those bills, the administration asked to continue the moratoria on drilling, every one of them, passed for 6 years by your Congress. We didn't have the votes to pass anything.

Then we took over the control, because the Congress was fed up, frankly, with a complacent, do-nothing Congress, complicit in moving in the wrong direction, which 82 percent of America thinks we are now on, the wrong direction.

This Congress has mightily tried to change direction, and, in fact, we have in many areas, including a comprehensive energy bill last year that the President signed. Sam Bodman said it was a great bill, the Secretary of Energy. It passed in a bipartisan fashion in both the Senate and the House.

President Bush, in last year, fiscal year 2008, submitted a budget document, he submitted it, which said, the moratoria should continue. This year, the President submitted a bill, for the 2009 fiscal year, which said the moratoria should continue.

So these crocodile tears about how Democrats have taken over and all of a sudden gas prices have spiked, you give us far more credit than we deserve in light of not being able to override the President's veto on almost anything that he didn't want. He signed some things that he didn't want like the minimum wage. He signed some things he said he wasn't going to sign, like the GI Bill. He signed some things that we passed through the House and Senate.

But these crocodile tears are unwarranted by your record, and by the submissions of the budgets, by your President, for 8 years running. Now, a couple of months ago, the moratoria which was put on by George Bush, his father, was lifted. Why? Because our constituents are hurting. Why? Because we are being held up by those who are selling oil. Why? Because the market is being manipulated and speculators are impacting on price.

You think that's not the case, or do you think all of a sudden demand went down by a third, so it went from $146 down to $92 today, within just a few months. Who believes the free market operates in a way that demand spikes for oil that much in a 90-day period? Nobody on this floor who is rational believes that.

Something is rotten in my home of Denmark. And, actually, it's not rotten in Denmark; it's rotten someplace, though. Mr. Abercrombie is going to speak on behalf of this bill, as he met with Mr. Peterson and tried to come together.

Originally this bill, the gang of 20 in the Senate, which apparently you don't like, because they are undermining the drill, drill, drill political advantage that you have sought, the 20 said let's deal with four States. We are saying let's deal with every State. We do say with sensitivity, as the previous speaker said about his State, States are going to have the opportunity to make a determination as to whether they want to proceed.

Now, you could argue that that shouldn't be the case, because, after all, that's Federal. It's not State property, you get that far out.

We have done a lot of work. We have done a lot of work in trying to work across this spectrum. I want to congratulate Mr. Rahall and Mr. Green and others who have worked so hard to try to bring us together.

I will tell my friend, we do deal with oil shale in this bill. In your bill, you repeal a section which had caused a problem. We repealed that as well, so your bill and our bill did the same thing on that. Furthermore, we said three States that have substantial oil shale ought to have the same opportunity that the coastal States have to opt in to develop that.

Whether the technology is available now, I don't know. In part, I believe the arguments used on this floor, which I will say as an aside, I think was a misuse of this floor. But notwithstanding that, arguments that were made day after day after day were not accurate, and you knew they were not accurate, which is why it made it so difficult to respond to.

None of you ever mentioned the fact that the President of the United States, George Bush, submitted, months ago and 7 years prior to that, and you passed 6 years in a row, on your watch, the moratoria, of which you now wring your hands.

All of us are concerned. All through the summer and into the fall Americans have been filling up their cars at record prices in my district and every district, $60, $80, $100 a tank and looking for Washington to help, to see what we could do about it. We are trying to do something about it.

Now, you passed an energy bill in 2005. Your Speaker, Mr. Hastert, your majority leader or now minority leader, Mr. Boehner, and my good friend, your whip, said to us, and I won't quote them all at length but I will quote your Speaker, Americans need this bill--your energy bill passed in 2005--to lower their energy prices, to drive economic growth and job creation, and to promote greater energy independence. That's what you said your bill was going to do.

You also said, of course, in 2001, that we were going to have the greatest economy we would ever have seen if we passed your economic improvement program. I doubt that any American believes that you accomplished that objective. You passed your bill, the President signed it. Just a short number of months later prices went from $1.46, when you took over, to over $4.20.

If it was a successful energy program, it was a successful energy program in driving up the price of gasoline for all of our consumers. To see what we could do about this we met, we talked to Mr. Abercrombie, we talked to Mr. Peterson to try to bring our caucus together. It was a diverse caucus. A lot of people felt President Bush was right, those 8 years that he submitted those bills and that you passed 6 years you were in charge.

To relieve the strain on their budgets and their families, not 10 years from now but now, today, I am sure you are wondering whether we will throw up our hands on the work of compromise and retreat into finger pointing. I think we can do better than that on both sides.

Both of us want to make sure that we bring prices down, and both sides of the aisle want to see energy independence. We can pass this bill, the Comprehensive American Energy Security and Consumer Protection Act. You say it's not perfect. Many Members on our side say it is not perfect, but it is a very significant step and a very significant expansion of where oil could be found.

I would reiterate, there are 68 million acres right now, right now, as I stand here, that could be drilled upon right now without any further legislation, regulation or administrative action.

This legislation, this bold step towards a comprehensive energy policy, is worthy of the 21st century. Lower gas prices today, American oil and natural gas for the years to come, that's what this bill promises and will provide, and serious investment in a new generation of energy technologies for a cleaner, more secure energy future. It's all here, and we are all going on record this evening.

Here is what the energy package is going to accomplish. First, we are going to drill for more oil and gas here at home. That's what Americans have said. Use our resources. Don't rely on the Middle East. Don't rely on Venezuela. Don't rely on Russia. Certainly, don't rely on Iran. Drill here.

We have both said all along, we put a bill on the floor, drill responsibly in presently leased land, that Mr. Rahall led. Most of you, many of you voted against it. For many of my colleagues, I know that drilling is the most contentious part of this compromise, but we have worked hard to find common ground.

Drilling will come with strong, new environmental protections. Americans want that. They want resources, but they want them safely gotten. It will take place well offshore, as opposed to the 3-mile zone that will go up for grabs in 15 days if we vote this bill down and do nothing.

I don't know how many of you are for that. Maybe all of you are for it on that side. I don't think our citizens are for it. In the areas closer to shore, we are letting the States themselves make the final call. To my colleagues on the Republican side who argue that States won't opt in without revenue sharing, I reply this, if the ground swell for drilling is as strong as you have said it is, and I believe it is, surely our State leaders will listen.

Do not ascribe to us the only ones who will respond to the public's desire to find more resources. Certainly our State leaders will respond as well. They will feel comfort that their State has made that determination.

That's not to mention the job creation that will occur in States, what a motivation that is. We are also including diligent development provisions, which, by the way, you included in your 2005 bill. We thought it was a good provision. We called it ``use it or lose it.'' You voted against it because it wasn't your bill. You voted for it when it was development in your bill. When we put it on the floor, you voted against it.

Second, we are going to take immediate action to lower the price of oil by releasing 10 percent of the oil in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. We proposed that; the President said ``no.'' We said don't buy any more. The President said ``no.'' Both of those policies are now being pursued by the administration.

Tax incentives for plug-in hybrid cars, solar and wind power, biofuels and energy efficient homes. Why? Because we can't drill ourselves out of this. We need to drill, we want to drill, we are providing for drilling, but that's not the solution.

It is part of the solution. We all understand, you say, all of the above. We say, yes, let's invest in alternative research, for cutting-edge energy research, support for mass transit and renewable energy.

We need all of those steps if we are going to be energy independent.

Some day soon I think we will look back on these investments as the beginning of the end of our oil addiction. We are going to fund them by recovering the royalties the oil companies owe the American people. Who here believes you need to incentivize a company to produce a product that is getting the highest price it has ever gotten in history. I don't find that premise in my free market concept. The free market operates that if people are buying your product and they are paying you a very good price, by golly, you try to provide more product for them.

Refineries were operating at less than 90 percent, or about 91 percent this summer, the lowest point they have been at refining capacity in a number of years, not because they didn't have supply. They have got supply. There are no shortages, there are no lines. They are just charging a high price.

We are going to fund that research, as I said, by asking the oil companies to pay their fair share. They are making good money and our citizens shouldn't have to pay more to run their government because some oil companies are not paying their fair share. It simply doesn't make economic sense to do billions of dollars of tax cuts to oil companies while our citizens are paying high taxes.

All of that is our energy solution. We have not left a stone unturned or a remedy untried. To my Democratic colleagues, I don't think a single one of us is happy with every single provision in this bill. I know I am not. There would have been some additional things I would have liked in this bill. But I also know that is the price of a good compromise, and making good compromises is our business. To my Republican colleagues, you have told us loud and long, and I want to congratulate Mr. Peterson for the work he has done in bringing this issue to the fore and talking about it, not just this year because I have known him for a long time. We served on the Appropriations Committee, and he has been consistent and constant in his focus on this issue.

Your Presidential candidate is running for office under the motto ``Country First.'' We would all run on that platform.

I am for Mr. Obama, as all of you know. He wants to see change and a new direction. But certainly all of us agree that our country comes first, perhaps not before God, perhaps we would say our family is critical, but certainly country is our consideration.

Democrats and Republicans, we are all being watched today and they can see partisan differences, partisan divide, and sending a partisan bill to the Senate. We can perhaps do that, and maybe we will. Our public will not be pleased. This bill is not perfect. It is not everything you wanted; it is not everything I wanted. But it is a substantial expansion on drilling, a substantial investment on renewables, a substantial investment on conservation. We ought to pass this bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, they go no place in the world, my friend, where they pay less than they do in the United States to those nationalized countries that allow them to drill. No place in the world do they pay less. If they went to Venezuela, they pay 93 percent. If they went to Norway, they pay 78 percent. Nowhere in the world, my friend, do they pay less than they pay here, and the difference is made up by your taxpayers and my taxpayers.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is a good bill. It is not a perfect bill. But it is a good-faith effort to move this issue forward, to make us independent, to bring prices down, to invest in the future which renewables are clearly the harbinger of, and to make sure that we take the action our public wants.

I thank Mr. Rahall for his leadership, and I urge every Member of this body on both sides, vote for this piece of legislation. Move us toward energy independence, not just today but tomorrow and tomorrow.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source