George P. Kazen Federal Building and United States Courthouse

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, as my two colleagues from Indiana leave--again, congratulations on their bicentennial.

There are many great Hoosiers who have made their way to the State of Washington. One was a most beloved Mariner broadcaster named Dave Niehaus, who was from Evansville, IN. He was a great, great part of our sports history. Certainly, I should mention Dave Calabro, who was a Hoosier and another great announcer for our basketball team. We also have the great Bill Ruckelshaus, former EPA Director under President Nixon.

He works on salmon issues and does other great things.
Congratulations to those Hoosier Senators today.

Energy Legislation

Mr. President, I come to the floor with my colleague Senator Murkowski of Alaska to talk about all the great work that was put into developing the Energy Policy Modernization Act. The Presiding Officer knows well how much work we put into that legislation.

We are here today after many markups, many amendments, and what was an unbelievable Senate vote of 85 to 12, to urge our House colleagues to consider the conference report on this legislation before adjourning for the year. There are so many important provisions in this legislation that should be enacted.

We reached an agreement to mark the National Park Service's 100th birthday by making an investment in our national parks. In response to requests from 47 Senators, the bill protects hundreds of thousands of acres of land.

We were also able to reach agreements on important issues such as water resources, providing and securing funding for fighting forest fires, and making sure that communities that are at risk of wildfires get the attention they so deserve. Having lost seven individuals fighting wildfires over the last decade and a half, I can say, from the State of Washington's perspective, it is essential that we provide the communities the resources they need to fight fires. We also included a sportsmen's bill that will help hunters and fishers.

We were also able to reach agreement on numerous energy provisions.

For instance, the legislation bolsters our energy security against cyber attacks. We improve the Department of Energy's capabilities to protect the grid. We are not just talking about hardening some of our physical infrastructure such as hydro power projects, but actually the work that it takes to make the grid more resilient from hacking. We also reached agreement on provisions to develop the workforce that will be needed to fill the 1.5 million new energy workers that the Quadrennial Energy Review estimates will be needed by 2030.

We were also able to reach agreement encouraging investments in hydro power projects, geothermal energy, nuclear power and other emissions-free resources. Finally, this conference agreement also would promote innovation in many areas of science that are so important to us.

What is so frustrating is that we followed regular order in putting together an Energy bill. We held numerous hearings followed by a 3-day committee markup. On the Senate floor, we considered in excess of 300 amendments. We then worked all summer long and all fall with our House colleagues to reach a conference agreement.

It is so disappointing to now have our House colleagues refuse to consider these important provisions. There were many hard-fought issues upon which we eventually agreed. We all had to come to the table and take into consideration all interests. Whether you are talking sportsmen and open access to hunting, which my colleague from Alaska so championed, or whether you are talking about how to get water agreements that involve fishermen, tribes, farmers, and a variety of river interests--we were able to accomplish that.

Or whether you are talking about fixing the fire funding budget issue that has been debated back and forth among our House and Senate colleagues for almost 7 or 8 years now, we were able to reach agreement on all of these things. It is very irresponsible for our House colleagues to drop the ball by failing to consider these solutions and taking yes for an answer.

What is even more outrageous is that now the House wants to take a provision subject to the Energy and Natural Resource's jurisdiction-- the California water issue--and airdrop it into the WRDA bill, which is subject to the jurisdiction of the Environment and Public Works Committee.

As much as our House colleagues like to boast about their mythical no-earmark rule, the California water deal that is now being decried in newspapers in California as the ``midnight rider,'' was airdropped in as an earmark in the WRDA bill and sent over to the Senate. This is an issue that should be considered by the Energy Committee.

I say to my colleagues that, if you want energy policy considered in the future and you want it to be a product of the regular order process in the Senate that creates consensus, you need to say to our House colleagues that are refusing to move forward on a conference report that this situation is problematic. The process that we are supposed to follow includes the Senate and House resolving differences as part of a conference committee. Instead, if we pass the WRDA bill, we will be rewarding those that wish to sidetrack regular order and drop into bills other items that have not been worked out and basically don't adhere to the rules of the Senate or even the House's own rules against earmarks they hypocritically claim to follow.

It is a very cynical view of the world to allow the House to add Energy and Natural Resources Committee jurisdictional legislation into another committee's bill and violates the House's own rules and basically overruns the collaborative process we used for the Energy Policy and Modernization Act. The House has, instead, turned to backroom deal making.

I join my colleague, Senator Murkowski, tonight to describe the great and hard work that was done in our conference. I think she and I believe in it. I think we believe in the Senate the way it is supposed to work. We believe in the hard work that it took to reach compromise on so many issues, and I think we want to make sure that our colleagues know that getting to yes was just inches away.

It is very unfortunate that the House, instead of doing its homework, pursued a very cynical approach to the legislative arena--something I thought we jettisoned a decade ago--airdropping things in the dark of night. I mistakenly thought the House leadership was being earnest about making sure that the legislative process is transparent.

I hope our colleagues will understand these are important policy issues and take the remaining days--if we happen to be here an extra few days this weekend or even into next week--and encourage the House leadership to get our energy and natural resources bill enacted and bank what is good public policy in the best interests of the United States.

I thank my colleague from Alaska for her leadership on the Energy Committee, her hard work and dedication, her willingness to work across the aisle, and a willingness to be very tough on these important thorny public policy issues--and not to back away from that--and to find solutions for everybody in the Senate.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source