[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 124 (Friday, October 6, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10045-S10046]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       THE PROGRESS OF THE SENATE

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I want to speak about energy, which seems 
to be one of the things I think is very important that people are 
talking about. But first I wish to comment a little on the progress, or 
lack thereof, that we are making in the Senate. It is not unusual that 
we come up to the end of the session and find ourselves kind of blocked 
up here, and things have been postponed until now. Of course, it is the 
appropriations bills that always end up in this category. We have 13 of 
them to pass in order to keep the Government going. The fiscal year 
expired at the end of September, of course. We have extended our time 
and will do it into next week again.
  One of the important roles of Congress is this allocation of funding. 
It is one that is very important and really needs to be given all the 
attention we can give it. I think we ought to move as quickly as we can 
to do that job. I hope we don't end up with huge omnibus bills at the 
end of the session. They are so large that people don't know what is in 
them. I would rather we deal with them individually as much as 
possible. Let me say that one of the things we ought to consider, which 
I have supported since I have been in the Congress--and from my 
experience in the Wyoming Legislature--is I think we ought to have a 2-
year budgeting arrangement, which would alleviate this sort of thing 
every year. Nevertheless, we are not there.
  However, we need to move forward. When we are ready with the 
appropriations bills, we ought to do that. I favor the bill being 
talked about here. I think it is a good bill. I don't know why it 
wasn't brought up earlier in the week when we were sitting here and 
didn't have anything before us. Now we are down to the last hours of 
this week and we bring up something that stops the opportunity for us 
to pass legislation regarding appropriations. I think that is 
unfortunate. In any event, we ought to be doing that.

  Obviously, one of the difficulties with appropriations has been this 
idea of attaching to them the kinds of things that are not within the 
appropriations process because it is the end of the session, and 
because they have not been handled, or some refused to handle them 
earlier. That was wrong, in my opinion. I hope we consider a rule that 
would make that more difficult.


                             Energy Policy

  Regarding energy, we ought to talk about that. We ought to talk, more 
importantly, about where we want to be, and what we think the role of 
the domestic energy program ought to be to achieve what we consider to 
be our goal. I have become more and more aware of the importance of 
that sort of thing in all the legislation that we address. Really, it 
became clear to me when we were talking about re-regulation of 
electricity. We got wrapped up in all the different kinds of details 
that necessarily go into it, but really I don't think we had a clear 
vision of where we wanted to be when we were through. We didn't have a 
clear vision of our goal.
  To a large extent, I think that is the case with energy. We have high 
prices, for gasoline, for natural gas, and we are going to have higher 
electricity and heating oil prices, and so on. Of course, that is the 
problem we see, but what do we see as the solution? I think certainly 
these high prices ought not to be a big surprise. This administration 
hasn't had an energy policy. We were very happy when oil was $10 a 
barrel. When it gets up to $35 a barrel, we are very unhappy, and I 
understand that. I don't recommend that, either.
  We ought to have intermediate pricing. You don't do that without an 
energy policy. We have lacked a domestic energy policy that keeps us 
from being entirely dependent and subservient to OPEC and the foreign 
oil producers. We have allowed ourselves to do that.
  It is not new that we don't have one. The Clinton administration has 
relied on short-term fixes. The most current one was to release crude 
oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which was 30 million barrels, 
and I don't suppose that will change the world. That is a short-term 
kind of reaction, not a long-term solution to where we are going. That 
has been the latest short-term fix.
  I agree with increasing funding for Low-Income Housing Energy 
Assistance, and other short-term fixes. Those are good, and they have 
to be done because of where we are. But the fact is, if we are going to 
get out of that over time, then we have to do something different. We 
have to take a look at EPA's regulations that have had the effect of 
shutting down coal-fired powerplants in the Midwest. We have more coal 
resources probably than most anything. We can do more about the 
difficulties that have happened in the past. We have done a great deal 
because coal is now a clean source, but this administration has made it 
more and more difficult for that to happen. The fact that coal supplies 
56 percent of the Nation's electric energy is very important, of 
course.
  I have a personal feeling about it because our State is the highest 
producer of low sulfur coal. We have had 36 refineries shut down since 
1992. No new ones have been built since 1996, largely because the EPA 
pressed for continuing restrictions that make it much more difficult. 
This administration--particularly the Vice President--calls for green 
alternatives. I don't know of anybody who opposes that idea. Green 
alternatives, right now, provide about 2 percent of our energy needs. 
It is going to be a very long time before solar or wind energy moves in 
to do that. So that can't be our short-term/long-term policy.

  There are a lot of things that can be done and we are moving to try 
to do that. It has to do with domestic energy policy which would help 
increase domestic production so that we are not totally subject to the 
whims of OPEC. Since 1992, our oil production in this country has gone 
down 17 percent. Consumption has gone up 14 percent. Part of that is in 
States such as Wyoming in the West, where 50 percent of the State is 
owned by the Federal Government. Those areas of Federal land--not all--
are for multiple use.
  We found this administration making it much more difficult for 
exploration and production to take place for the multiple use of public 
lands. That is not a good idea. U.S. jobs were involved in the 
exploring and producing. We used to have 400,000 of those jobs. Now it 
is less than 300,000, which is a 27-percent decline. These imports are 
rapidly growing--up 56 percent now--and we need to move forward with 
that.
  This is really an issue we can do something about. We need to do 
something about it. I could go over a lot of things this administration 
has brought about that have helped to create the energy crisis we are 
in now. I am urging that we look at some of the things that are 
available to us and that we can do to reach the goal we want in order 
to be more self-reliant for our energy. We can do something about 
consumption, too, and I have no problem about that. However, that is 
not a short-term problem. A short-term problem is going to be the price 
to farmers, ranchers, truckers, and to people who use oil particularly 
for heating in the wintertime.
  Certainly we are not going to be able to solve this problem in the 
next few days. I hope we can move forward with our appropriations 
process, which is obviously before us now. I do think we ought to be 
giving a great deal of thought to establishing a domestic energy policy 
that will, in fact, help level out our dependency on foreign oil and be 
good for this economy and good for American citizens.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I await the return of the Senator from 
Alaska, who I believe would like to object to a unanimous consent 
agreement I may seek.
  If the Senator from Connecticut is waiting, perhaps we can extend 
morning business for a few minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Morning business has been extended.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, Senator Stevens and I will have a joint 
statement on an unrelated matter.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, if my friend from Connecticut will yield, 
morning business has been extended until 11:15, with time evenly 
divided between Senator Stevens and Senator Dodd. I think everybody 
will get their wish, because Senator Stevens will be here momentarily 
to make a statement and,

[[Page S10046]]

following Senator Stevens, Senator Dodd will make a statement.
  Mr. McCAIN. I apologize to the Chair. I thought when I left the floor 
that morning business had expired at 11 a.m.
  I will await 11:15.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I know my colleague from Alaska is going to 
come here shortly to share some thoughts and comments with me this 
morning. I will begin in order to move things along.

                          ____________________