[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 165 (Monday, December 3, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12277-S12278]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              SENATE WORK

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, we continue to hear in the Senate a 
powerful argument put forth by the assistant majority leader. Yet I am 
struck by the idea the Railroad Retirement Act under consideration now 
is a given. There are 70 cosponsors on that piece of legislation; I am 
one of the cosponsors. Yet we are also denied the ability to move an 
energy policy act that the Nation is demanding, as well as a stimulus 
package which, again, the Nation favors.
  I challenge my colleagues and Americans by asking why just a few can 
deny a State such as Alaska its ability to develop and market its own 
natural resources, not only for the good of the economy of Alaska but 
also at a time when this Nation's economy is struggling and it would 
contribute to the rebuilding of that economy. I find that 
disheartening. This is important.
  The season of Christmas is fast approaching. We should be finishing 
up our work. There are two things that have to be done: Finish the 
appropriations process to run this Government, and also develop an 
appropriation for our military in a time we are at war. By the way, 
this is a war that will not be won at Camp Pendleton, Fort Bragg, or 
any other military installation, but will be won in every community 
around this country. Yet the military now is carrying the load to 
destroy the core of terrorism.
  Why deny those resources when just across the border, in the tundra--
and one must remember, this is not a pristine wilderness when we talk 
about ANWR, as one might envision wilderness in my State of Montana 
where we already have 3.5 million acres. This is tundra. It runs for 
miles and miles and

[[Page S12278]]

miles. It can be developed to the advantage of this country and to its 
economy without disturbing hardly anything that far north.

  At a time when the national economy is struggling, if you can provide 
any kind of a job, anything that would contribute to the rebuilding of 
that economy and the infrastructure of it, that should not be denied.
  What do we hear? We hear how much we need an energy policy, but we 
see no action in the Senate. We hear the speeches about a stimulus 
package, yet no action is forthcoming. We talk about conservation. It 
has been a foregone conclusion of the task force that was put together 
under the chairmanship of the Vice President, when they look at our 
energy situation and assess it, that they will conclude we should then 
take the proper actions so we can rely on our own ability to provide 
the energy for our country. The conclusion was drawn that we cannot 
conserve our way out of this one.
  This past weekend, I looked at the area with probably the greatest 
utilization of wind power that we have in this country. Yet it only 
contributes less than 1 percent to the Nation's need for electricity. 
That will not work.
  I can tell you what spurs conservation faster and more efficiently 
than any rule, law, or regulation that the Government could impose: 
High prices. All you have to do is ask those who live in California. 
That is what spurs conservation. That is what spurs the imagination and 
the inventiveness of this society. When the cost goes high from the 
lack of a supply of energy, that spurs us to deal with it.
  So I say, yes, maybe the unions oppose the Lott amendment. They would 
not oppose the Lott amendment if it was a stand-alone, though. It just 
happens to be on a railroad retirement act. That act has the support of 
over 70 Senators in this body.
  So I challenge my colleagues and I challenge Americans, when Canada 
develops their energy supply and a way to deliver it to their people, 
keeping their energy costs so low that they are a very strong 
competitor in the global market, are we denied that? We have to look at 
ourselves and say, why? Based on science? I do not think so. Based on 
technology? I know that is not true. So we have to conclude the reasons 
lie in other areas.
  As we hear this debate about going forward, I want Americans to 
understand and realize this about the development of our energy 
resources. Conservation as we defined it and as it has always been 
defined is the wise use of a natural resource. Why can't this move 
forward? It would but for a few who are opposed because of other 
reasons, other than science and technology.
  So I hope the Lott amendment can be approved and we can move forward 
on this issue, finish our work on appropriations, finish our work on 
the stimulus, and go home for the holidays. I know there are those who 
want to go home a little bit earlier. I am not one of those who say we 
should leave with our work undone because the last time I looked, I 
think I get a check for the month of December. So we might as well work 
if that be the choice of this body.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Utah is 
recognized.

                          ____________________