Mr. SANFORD. I rise in support of the rule because I think that this illusion of energy independence has, in any case, been postponed by the very actions that work against this rule would represent because we're talking here about 5 years of postponement. And I think to have real energy solutions here in the United States means, first off, using the energy solutions that are represented in this continent.
I think it is by no means a fix, it's by no means a cure--in deference to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle--but it is an important step in the right direction. I think as well it represents a step toward energy independence, which is also about national security.
I think it's a step toward jobs, which are vital in this country and needed at this time--more than 20,000. And I think ultimately it's a pocketbook issue. Where, as you think about driving time coming this summer and the number of people who will be filling up their tanks, this is a step in the right direction toward energy independence, energy security, and ultimately jobs. For that reason, I rise in support of the rule.