Climate Security Act of 2008--Motion to Proceed
Floor Speech
CLIMATE SECURITY ACT OF 2008--MOTION TO PROCEED -- (Senate - June 02, 2008)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. DOMENICI. Let me comment on your observation. First, I thank you for indicating that I had something to do with the rise of nuclear power, which we are all glad to call a nuclear renaissance. I did have a lot to do with it, and I am very proud of that.
I think the Senator knows I will not be here very long because I have decided to retire after 36 years, and that means this January. But I am very confident that even leaving in that short time from now we have set the seeds for the nuclear renaissance. It will be in the world, not just in America. But it would always have been short of what it could be and should be if America was not part of this renaissance. If America wasn't a part, the world somehow would not feel right about nuclear. And since we started it, and then we unpropitiously stopped producing it and stopped all the leadership we had, we are starting anew. So there is great excitement in the American nuclear community, which is expanding dramatically.
Universities are establishing new nuclear physics courses. I think the Senator from Oklahoma knows that. We have put money in the energy and water bill, $10 million to $15 million a year, for universities to get started and bring them up where they were, and that is going to be very exciting. But have no doubt, since the United States knows how to produce the very best nuclear powerplants--the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is of the highest quality--they are not going to approve licenses unless they are absolutely certain of plant designs and that locations are absolutely the best. And that is going to take a little while.
We had, I think 33 or 34 is the number that are in the process of applying, with about 7 or 8 firmed up, completed, and all the process they need to submit being done. That is so exciting when you consider that in 20-plus years we had zero, not a single one, until we passed the Energy Policy Act. And the distinguished Senator from Oklahoma was not on the Energy Committee, but he was very helpful at every step as we produced this Energy Policy Act, which included, as everyone agrees, all of the ingredients to cause American nuclear power to have a renaissance, and it is doing that.
Now, there is no way we are going to effectively clean the CO2 we produce in the use of power without nuclear power. It is the one big source of power that has no CO2 emissions attached to it, so it is good we are moving there. But today we have a bill before us that has to be discussed, debated, and amended, as I see it, for such a long period of time for the American people and the Senators to understand its implications, that today I choose to just speak about one little part--the impact of this bill on oil and gas prices.
This is a bill that purports to put America on a path of producing less and less CO2, but it has some real difficult hurdles to cross as we move there. In the meantime, there is no question that it has an impact on a lot of things, and we have to consider whether it is worth all the ramifications, considering what the bill will or will not do.
So, Madam President, let me remind Senators that we are all coming back from our home States. I am returning from my home State of New Mexico, where I visited constituents and listened to their concerns. In every town I visited, at every event I attended, and during every meeting, I took the same issue and put it before the people and discussed it with them. They asked the same questions over and over: How will Congress deal with the rising gas prices? I expect that most every Senator had similar experiences during his or her recent recess travels.
This morning, the price of gasoline was, on average, a record of $3.98. Now, I used an average, and I got that from an appropriate official. In many places it has already passed the $4 mark, but it averages $3.98. At the start of this Congress, the average was just $2.33, meaning the cost of gasoline has jumped by 70 percent in just 18 months.
Record gas prices are causing tremendous pain for Americans. In one recent survey, 40 percent of workers said the high price forced them to change the way they get to and from work. Many have stopped driving altogether. Public transit ridership is at an all-time high. Others have traded their vehicles in for smaller ones. But most importantly, many are feeling the impact on the family budget. They are just feeling like they can't make it because they only have one way to go to work. They have to work, and if there are two workers in the family, when you add the price of gasoline to that, it becomes an expense they can hardly bear.
The impact is not limited to transportation. It affects nearly every aspect of American life and ripples throughout our economy. As fuel costs rise, as I indicated, family budgets are stretched. Millions have canceled vacation plans and cut down on shopping trips. For those living paycheck to paycheck, the price at the pump is the difference between being able to pay their bills on time and going into debt. Runaway energy costs also hurt our businesses, as evidenced by recent announcements from Ford Motors and American Airlines.
High gas prices even impact the quality of education that our children receive. A school district in Minnesota has already announced that schools will move to 4 days a week to avoid budget shortfalls. Schools in North Carolina are planning fewer field trips for their students, which are often among the most memorable experiences that our children can have.
As these examples illustrate, the consequences of high energy prices are widely felt, far-reaching, and difficult to overcome. We must take real steps to ensure that these are properly addressed and that we are not telling these same types of stories in the future.
After hearing our constituents plead for relief from high gas prices, it was my hope that Senators would rededicate themselves to reducing the cost of oil and gas. Instead, by bringing up a bill to establish a cap-and-trade regime, which we will hear much about in the ensuing days, the majority has chosen to go in the opposite direction from reducing gas prices or holding them steady for our constituents.
As the summer driving season begins, and oil prices remain at near all-time record highs, it is simply incredible that the first measure debated in this session will not be a bill to lower energy prices by producing more of our own energy but a bill that will, in fact, substantially increase energy costs.
By assigning a cost to the carbon content of traditional fuels, there is no question this bill will increase the cost of gasoline. According to EIA, gas prices could rise by 41 percent in the year 2030. The EPA places this figure as high as a $1.01 per gallon by the year 2030.
Every policy has a price, but as we continue to face record energy prices, the costs of this bill are simply unacceptable, no matter which version is up for debate. An economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas recently told the New York Times that:
Every one-cent increase in gasoline means Americans pay $1.42 billion more a year for gas.
An absolutely incredible number. You wonder why the economy is being affected by these enormous price increases of gasoline and diesel fuel. At a time when they can least afford it, this will translate to even greater pain at the pump for consumers. At a time when the strength of our economy is already a serious concern, it will lower the bottom line of American business and jeopardize their global competitiveness.
When recesses end and we make our way back to Washington, it is our obligation to do our best to resolve the concerns of our constituents. Right now we should be working to find a way to reduce energy prices. Instead, as we begin to debate a cap-and-trade regime which may not work, it is clear there is a fundamental disconnect between many in this Chamber and the American people who simply cannot afford to pay more for energy. As the Boxer bill proves, there is much Congress can do to raise these prices and we are setting about to do that.
I commend my colleagues for trying to tackle the task of reducing carbon emissions to address global climate change. However, the American people are facing higher costs and tough economic concerns. They are worried about their family budgets and about their jobs. This bill will make these worries greater and increase those costs even more.
I will be speaking at great length as we consider this bill in the coming days and I will speak of many other issues besides the one today, for there are many more. I speak of only one today which I think we should start with, and know what we are dealing with in terms of the side effects of legislation that is controversial. It is not only controversial but many are quite certain it will not do the job.
Source