[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 61 (Wednesday, May 5, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4853-S4855]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         RISING GASOLINE PRICES

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I intend to use my leader time this 
morning and comment, if I may, on gasoline prices. They continue to hit 
record highs.
  According to the Department of Energy, the average retail price of a 
gallon of gasoline in America is more than $1.84, up 23 cents in the 
last two months, 33 cents in the last year, and 37 cents in the past 36 
months.
  In my State of South Dakota, the average price of gasoline is $1.80 
per gallon, with many communities seeing much higher prices than that. 
Even more troubling, the Department of Energy expects prices to remain 
high through the summer. This is of particular concern for rural States 
such as South Dakota, where many people have no choice but to drive 
long distances daily to get to their jobs, to receive health care, or 
just to shop for essentials. Americans are increasingly frustrated with 
skyrocketing gas prices and want to know what the Federal Government is 
going to do about it. And they want action now.
  In March, I sent a letter to the President recommending that he take 
several initiatives that could curb gasoline prices at home. First, I 
suggested that he use the prestige of his office and his relationships 
with foreign leaders to press the Organization of Petroleum Exporting 
Countries--OPEC--to increase production, thereby relieving some of the 
pressure on gas prices in the United States in the long term. This is 
not a radical idea. In fact, on more than one occasion in the fall of 
2000, then-candidate Bush put the challenge directly to the President. 
His message was clear:

       What I think the President ought to do is he ought to get 
     on the phone with the OPEC cartel and say, ``We expect you to 
     open the spigots.''

  If that was good advice then, it is certainly sound counsel now. 
Unfortunately, President Bush has not followed his own advice.
  Secretary of Energy Abraham announced earlier this year that the Bush

[[Page S4854]]

administration would not call on OPEC to roll back their scheduled 
production cuts. Secretary Abraham said, ``The United States is not 
going to go around the world begging for oil.'' On April 1, OPEC went 
ahead with the production cuts.
  In my March letter, I also asked the President to follow the Senate's 
advice and stop diverting oil from the marketplace to fill the 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve. On March 11, the Senate voted 52 to 43 for 
an amendment that would stop the diversions of oil. Simply put, it is 
illogical to be taking oil out of the marketplace when gasoline prices 
are so high. If anything, we should be doing just the opposite. The 
President has ignored the Senate's advice, and gasoline prices continue 
to rise.
  To add insult to injury, we now know that the large oil companies are 
reaping record profits as a result of the volatility in the gasoline 
market, while consumers are struggling with higher prices at the pump. 
Over the past year, the ``Big Four'' oil companies have seen an average 
increase in their U.S. profits of 157 percent. Chevron-Texaco has seen 
a 294 percent increase in its U.S. refining and marketing profits. BP 
has seen a 165 percent increase. ExxonMobil has seen a 125 percent 
increase. And Conoco-Phillips has seen a 44 percent increase.
  Consumers have reason to be upset. While the big oil companies are 
raking in record profits, President Bush remains reluctant to take 
steps that could reduce the costs consumers face. It is time to 
reconsider this posture.
  In the short term, I hope that President Bush will take another look 
at the value of encouraging OPEC to increase production now.
  Senator Wyden, who is on the floor this morning, has introduced a 
resolution calling on the President to do just that. I hope the Senate 
would ratify it and would encourage, on a bipartisan basis, the 
President to take this action with the passage of the resolution. This 
resolution contains the same language as the resolution the Senate 
passed unanimously in 2000, when then-Senators Ashcroft and Abraham 
joined others in offering it. I hope that the Senate will act on the 
Wyden resolution soon.
  I also encourage the President to reconsider his decision to continue 
filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. But short-term fixes are not 
the answer to our longer-term energy supply problem. The Nation needs a 
balanced, national energy policy. This Congress has considered 
comprehensive energy legislation. I have voted for the conference 
version of this legislation twice--once in November when it contained 
the controversial MTBE liability relief provision, and again last week 
when Senator Domenici offered a slimmed down version with the MTBE 
rider as an amendment to the Internet tax bill. It was defeated both 
times by bipartisan votes.
  It is no secret that I strongly support the renewable fuels standard 
provision of the comprehensive energy bill. That section would double 
the amount of ethanol produced in the United States over the next 10 
years. In the process, it would boost rural income, improve air 
quality, and extend domestic gasoline supply.
  The use of domestically produced, renewable ethanol has effectively 
lowered gasoline prices to motorists whenever it has been made 
available during its 25-year history. This is because high-octane, 
clean-burning renewable fuels, especially ethanol, increase available 
volume of finished gasoline by more than 10 percent today and give 
gasoline markets more supply options.

  In addition, the reduced tax that is imposed on renewable fuel also 
saved consumers millions of dollars each year as ethanol blends are 
nearly always priced lower than conventional gasoline.
  Reenactment of the renewable fuel standard would result in more than 
500,000 barrels per day of high-octane, refined ethanol for blending 
with gasoline, saving the United States $4 billion in imported oil each 
year because we would double the use of renewable fuels.
  Unlike the comprehensive Energy bill which remains stalled by 
bipartisan opposition to specific provisions, the renewable fuel 
standard enjoys strong bipartisan support. It has been reported out of 
the Environment and Public Works Committee twice and passed by the 
Senate twice, both times by more than a two-thirds vote. It is still 
pending in the Senate today. Last June, 68 Senators voted in favor of 
RFS when then-Majority Leader Frist and I offered it as an amendment to 
the Energy bill. The renewable fuel standard will help blunt rising 
gasoline prices. If Congress is not able to pass the RFS as part of a 
comprehensive energy bill, it should pass it on its own. It is the 
right thing to do for consumers.
  Beyond that, we have to recognize this country cannot sustain its 
current consumption of gasoline and of transportation fuels. We have to 
find ways in a comprehensive energy policy to deal with an issue that 
many on the other side are unwilling to deal with, and that is 
conservation. We have the capacity to improve conservation, to reduce 
per capita demand. We have a capacity now to use the technological 
innovation, the extraordinary research that has been offered in the 
last 20 years to bring down consumption in both comprehensive as well 
as in individual and specific ways. I have absolutely every confidence 
that if our Members would continue to work on comprehensive energy 
legislation with an understanding of the importance of conservation, of 
reduction of our insatiable appetite for more and more energy, we could 
do it. It must be a part of any long-term energy policy if, indeed, we 
are going to bring this country to a balanced and a pragmatic 
appreciation of the extraordinary implications of current energy policy 
and demand in this country today.
  Again, I hope we all recognize the volatility and the extraordinary 
danger economically and financially we put our country and all 
Americans in if we are not prepared to address energy prices, gasoline 
prices, more effectively than we have so far at the Federal level.
  Mr. REID. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. DASCHLE. I am happy to yield.
  Mr. REID. We worked yesterday at great length on the FSC bill and 
were able to get the amendment we have been trying to get a vote on for 
several months dealing with overtime. The amendment, of course, passed. 
That is out of the way.
  The Democrats are offering lots of amendments. We have amendments 
that are pending that have been offered by a number of Democratic 
Senators, amendments we have in the queue, and other Democrats have 
indicated they are willing to offer their amendments.
  I say to my friend, the distinguished Democratic leader, on our side 
we feel this bill is doable and we can do it quite quickly. I want the 
record to be spread with a statement from the Democratic leader that we 
want the bill to pass. If it does not pass, it is not going to be 
anything that has been done by the minority. The FSC bill is important. 
We realize it has been important for some time and have done everything 
we can to get it passed.
  Would the Democratic leader indicate his feelings about this most 
important piece of legislation.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I respond to the distinguished assistant 
Democratic leader by first thanking him for again clarifying our 
circumstances with regard to the FSC bill. I said in the Senate 
yesterday, and I know he has reiterated our commitment, that we will 
pass the bill this week if we can get the cooperation of Senators on 
both sides.
  Working with the distinguished assistant Democratic leader, we have 
winnowed down the number of amendments on our side to a handful. We are 
very confident we can finish the consideration of the pending 
Democratic amendments, certainly within the next couple of days. I have 
yet to hear from our Republican colleagues as to the status of the 55 
amendments that were offered on their side. I have no information that 
would lead me to believe they have had similar success. I hope that is 
not the case. I hope they have been able to convince Republican 
Senators that 55 amendments, as prolific as that sounds, would make it 
impossible to finish the bill this week.
  We are prepared to continue to work to see we bring our debate on 
this bill to closure. I am confident we can do that, at least on our 
side, and I appreciate very much the Senator from Nevada working so 
diligently with the managers of the bill to accommodate our optimism 
about our success in completing the bill this week.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Oregon.

[[Page S4855]]

                      STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE

  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, at a time when there are record gasoline 
prices for the American consumer and record oil company profits, the 
Bush administration is filling our Strategic Petroleum Reserve at 2\1/
2\ times the average fill rate. Over the last 2 years, the average fill 
rate has been about 120,000 barrels a day. Recently, it has been 
hovering around 300,000 barrels a day. Using the figures provided by 
the administration's Energy Information Administration Office, these 
policies would raise the price of oil per barrel about $1.50.
  I come to the Senate today to say I believe the Bush administration's 
policies with respect to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve are hitting 
the American people with a double whammy. For the American people, more 
of their tax dollars are now being spent for filling the Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve and more of their take-home dollars are being spent 
on gasoline at the pump.
  I come today to say if the Bush administration is not willing to at 
least reduce the fill rate of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, I ask 
the Bush administration to stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve 
with a firehose. It is that simple.
  Over the course of the year, the administration may say, we reach an 
average fill rate of 120,000 barrels a day. There is a great amount of 
oil in some months and no oil in other months.
  To that, I say the months before the peak driving season, when 
gasoline is already at record prices, are not the months to go whole 
hog in filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. This is not the time to 
pour in the maximum amount of oil. One reason is because oil prices are 
already so high that American taxpayers are spending top dollar for the 
oil being put into the reserve. Anyone who has ever had to run their 
own family finances knows when prices are high, sometimes you wait 
until the price comes down to buy what you want.
  There is another, more compelling reason to slow the rate of fill in 
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. It is because this administration's 
policy is actually contributing to the high gas prices shellacking 
working Americans' pocketbooks every day from coast to coast.
  I am of the view the American consumer is about to get hit by a 
perfect storm with respect to these gasoline prices. The combination of 
OPEC cutbacks, the fact the Federal Trade Commission--the agency that 
is supposed to protect our consumers--is sitting on its hands, the fact 
you actually get a tax break for closing a profitable oil refinery, 
these Strategic Petroleum Reserve policies, is going to create a 
perfect storm that is going to be devastating for American consumers 
across our country.
  I know my colleagues are here and want to talk about this issue, as 
well, so I will abbreviate my statement.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from the great State of 
New Jersey.
  Mr. CORZINE. Thank you, Mr. President.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, will the Senator yield in order for me to 
make a unanimous consent request.
  Mr. CORZINE. Certainly.

                          ____________________