[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 83 (Wednesday, June 16, 2004)]
[House]
[Pages H4269-H4272]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE REPUBLICAN HOUSE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt) is recognized
for half of the time until midnight as the designee of the majority
leader.
Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, tonight we are going to talk a little bit
about the accomplishments of the Republicans in the House of
Representatives, accomplishments that are going to help us bring jobs
back into America.
Over the last generation, our government has consistently created
policies that have prevented us from keeping jobs in America. The
Republicans in the House have come up with a plan to change that
environment so that we can quit the outsourcing of jobs and start the
insourcing of jobs. We have divided the issues that have been created
by the Federal government into 8 categories. Each one of those
categories or issues is going to get a week of our time, a week of
dedication to deal with this issue, bring important votes to the floor,
and change the environment and bring more jobs into America.
We started out with health care the week of May 11, health care
security. We then went to bureaucratic red tape termination, life long
learning. This week was energy self-sufficiency and security. We have 4
more topics that deal with ending lawsuit abuse.
Now, under health care security we passed flexible spending accounts
to allow employees more choices in their health care. We passed medical
malpractice liability limitations to lower the cost of health care by
lowering the liability insurance. And we also passed the Small Business
Health Fairness Act which allowed small businesses and other
associations to bond together to go out and purchase from health care
providers and thereby lowering the cost of health care in the United
States.
We went on to bureaucratic red tape termination, and we dealt with 4
bills with Occupational Safety and Health or OSHA. We had small
business day in court for OSHA. We had OSHA Review Commission
Efficiency Act. We had the Independent Review of OSHA Citations act. We
had the OSHA Small Employer Access to Justice Act. And then we
completed that week with the Paperwork and Regulatory Improvement Act.
We went on to lifelong learning the next week. We talked about the
Teacher Training Enhancement Act, the Priorities for Graduates Studies
Act, Back to Work Incentives Act, and we completed that week with
workforce Reinvestment and Adult Education Act and having the conferees
appointed as well.
{time} 2310
This week we passed three pieces of additional legislation: the
Energy Policy Act of 2004, the Renewable Energy Project Siting
Improvement Act, and the U.S. Refinery Revitalization Act. Fifteen
pieces of legislation have been passed. It is part of the plan that we
have that is part of the aggressive nature that the House has taken on
to bring jobs back to America.
Next week, we are going to be dealing with research and development.
[[Page H4270]]
Our opponents on the other side of the aisle, the House Democrats,
have come up with an answer to our agenda. They have an alternate
agenda, and that agenda is very interesting. It is on their Web site.
It consists of 28 proposals compared to our 8. Thirteen of those
proposals call for more government spending. Seven of those proposals
call for more government regulation. Eight call for some outlandish
schemes such as textile summits, other conferences, more lawsuits and
targeted tax credits.
The business environment today has been forced to outsource jobs
because of government regulations, because of government red tape,
because of government policies, and the Democrats think the solution is
more government. I think that that is wrong.
I have a quote here, Mr. Speaker. It starts out by saying, America
must get to work producing more energy. The Republican program for
solving economic problems is based on growth and productivity. A large
amount of oil and natural gas lay beneath our land and off our shores
untouched because the Democrats seem to believe the American people
would rather see more regulation, taxes and control than more energy.
That quote was made by Ronald Reagan, July 17, 1980.
The problem is pretty much the same because we have not gotten any
bipartisan support on trying to create jobs and improve energy
sufficiency in America.
I have a chart here, Mr. Speaker, that talks about America's energy
security, a lesson of supply and demand. We can see clearly on this
first part of the chart that supply, which is the manufacturing of
petroleum and coal product jobs, have gone down since 1995, and we are
here at 2003. The consumer price index of energy prices has continued
to go up.
You can see there was a dip that came down some in the recession, but
our demand has continued to grow, and the reason it has is because our
economy is growing. The reason our economy is growing is because of the
tax relief that has been passed by House Republicans and signed by the
President into law. So we have been fighting this battle for some time,
and let me just show one other chart here before we go on to another
speaker.
This is what the House Republicans have done to provide America with
a comprehensive energy plan. It starts out on January 1, 2001, and
indicates on January 3, George Bush takes office. Then we can see that
we have made several efforts. President Bush released his energy plan,
delivered it to Congress. We responded by passing a House energy bill
for the first time. We set up another second passage over on April 11,
2003, almost a year and a half later. We passed it a third time on
November 18, 2003, and yesterday we passed it for a fourth time. Each
time it has been stopped by the Democrats. We have not had the ability
to get it to the President's desk, but the result of not having a
comprehensive energy plan is it has driven gasoline prices at the pump
from below $1.50 up to in excess of $2.
It is time for us, Mr. Speaker, to move on with the energy policy and
get a plan passed and to the President so that we can lower energy
costs and create jobs.
I have with me a gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Chocola) who is going to
address some additional issues about bringing jobs back to America as
related to energy policy, and I yield to him at this time.
Mr. CHOCOLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me,
and I thank him for his leadership on this very important issue that I
think is crucial to our economic security and job creation in our
country.
As we focus this week on energy and its role in ensuring our economic
security, I remind my colleagues, as my friend from Kansas just did,
that the House of Representatives has passed three energy bills before
this week, since 2001, all with the aim of exploring and increasing
domestic energy production in hopes of staving off the type of energy
crisis we face today.
Even though the employment rate has gone down significantly, and the
economy as a whole is showing clear signs of improvement, the greatest
impediment and risk to sustaining our growing economy is the rising
cost of energy. Energy is the lifeblood of the American economy, and we
can ill-afford to ignore the pressing need to pass comprehensive energy
legislation. We cannot wait for another blackout of the kind that we
saw last August or for another spike in gasoline prices that we see
today.
Mr. Speaker, it is imperative that we act now. The energy conference
report the House has passed is a jobs bill. We call a lot of things
here in the House of Representatives job bills, but this bill clearly
fits the description. It is estimated that 838,500 jobs will be created
if this energy policy is actually enacted. From natural gas and coal,
to nuclear and renewable energy exploration and expansion, our domestic
energy reserves will be a dramatic boost to the American workforce.
The rising cost of gas prices is just one of the most visible
consequences of lacking a national energy policy, and it is a stark
reminder of our need to utilize and explore our domestic energy supply.
By hindering exploration and utilization of our country's energy
potential, we continue our reliance on foreign energy sources. Since
2001, the United States has sent over $300 billion and countless
American jobs to OPEC and other foreign Nations to meet our energy
needs here at home. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce,
America loses 12,389 jobs for every $1 billion we spend on imports.
This translates to 1.7 million jobs America has sent overseas for oil
every single year.
This legislation will help ease our dependence on foreign oil by
requiring 5 billion gallons of renewable fuel to be included in all
gasoline sold in the United States by 2015. This increase in the use of
ethanol will save 1.3 billion barrels of oil by 2016, and improve the
trade deficit by $28.5 billion over the next 15 years, and adds $135
billion to the American economy by 2016 through increased agricultural
demand and new capital spending, and generate $32 billion in income for
American consumers over the next 15 years.
Along with oil, natural gas has been an indispensable energy source
in this country. Natural gas is responsible for 20 percent of our
Nation's energy production and is expected to play an increasingly
important role in addressing our Nation's future energy needs. Yet the
volatile price of natural gas over the past new years is constricting
our economic growth. For example, an estimated 85,000 jobs have been
lost by the U.S. chemical makers since U.S. natural gas prices began to
rise in mid-2000. Over the past few years, our reliance on natural gas
has left our small business community susceptible to the fluctuations
of the natural gas market, and it is hurting our economy and our
workforce.
Mr. Speaker, I find it ironic that last August, on the same day that
we saw a blackout in parts of the Midwest and the northeast, I chaired
a hearing in my District, in the 2nd District of Indiana, on natural
gas prices. At that hearing, we heard from school districts, we heard
from businesses, we heard from social service organizations about the
devastating effect that the rising cost of natural gas has had on their
endeavors. Probably one of the most interesting things I learned during
that hearing is that here in the United States, in our non-park, non-
wilderness lands, we have enough natural gas to supply 100 million
households for 157 years.
I would like to share just one quick story about a company in my
District called Koontz-Wagner Electric that testified at that hearing
and talked about the impact that the rising cost of natural gas has.
They utilize natural gas to run the energy needs of their plant and
much of their equipment, and this year, they saw an increase of $60 to
$90,000 above their expected levels in natural gas costs. That is money
that could have been invested in their business, could have helped
create jobs, but instead went to pay for the energy costs that made
them less competitive in the global economy.
Just last week, I spoke with a fertilizer company, one of the largest
employers in one of the counties in my District, and they have seen
their main input cost, $90 percent of their cost is nitrogen, and over
the last 2 weeks they have seen their nitrogen costs increase by 15
percent, putting their company and their employees at risk. They have
seen that not only in the last 2 weeks, but week after week they
[[Page H4271]]
have seen double digit increases in their most important costs, again,
putting their company at risk.
But there is a solution, and it is enacting a comprehensive energy
policy in this country. A comprehensive energy bill includes such
provision as the creation of a natural gas pipeline from the Alaska
North Slope to the lower 48 States. This pipeline will improve access
to natural gas and promote competition in the exploration, development
and production of natural gas to help secure our Nation's energy
future. This legislation also provides for more natural gas exploration
and development by providing royalty relief for deep and ultra deep gas
wells in the shallow waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Improved access to
North America's abundant natural gas resources will help to reduce high
utility bills, create jobs and provide more than $500 million of
increased revenues for the U.S. economy.
{time} 2320
Mr. Speaker, as I said, energy is the lifeblood of our economy. We
can no longer afford to ignore this pressing need. We must remain
committed to pursuing a comprehensive energy policy in order to reduce
our dependence on foreign oil, lessen the cost of gasoline and home
utility bills, and help create more jobs right here in America.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt) for
bringing this Special Order to the floor to talk about this very
important issue. I urge my colleagues to support enactment of this
energy policy.
Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr.
Terry).
Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak tonight
on energy week in the House of Representatives. Frankly, it feels a
little bit like the movie ``Groundhog Day.'' I think we have been
through this at least once before. Each time we go through it we have
an opportunity to improve it, and each time we also feel a little bit
frustrated that others in this Capitol do not share the same passion
for a comprehensive energy policy.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt) opened up with a
discussion about the impact of higher gasoline prices on a timetable
starting when President Bush was sworn in and gas was about $1.35 a
gallon. I think it is $1.32 on the chart here. Because of the inaction
of being unable to produce a comprehensive energy policy, what American
citizens have seen is continuous rise and spikes in gasoline prices,
and this has certainly captured the headlines and the lead-off stories
on national news as we pay record prices across the Nation, seeing a
little bit of relief.
But as we focus on gasoline prices, probably the more devastating
aspects to our family budget and our economy is frankly the increase in
price of natural gas. Alan Greenspan has spoken several times that the
increase in natural gas prices has become a drag on our economy. So let
us work through that a little bit. H.R. 6 that we have passed in the
House of Representatives four times provides incentives for additional
exploration within the continental United States. There is a lot of
discussion about drilling in Alaska, but ANWR is not part of H.R. 6,
but we provide incentives for exploration in the continental United
States, as well as a new pipeline to run from Alaska to the continental
United States, and that is one of the issues being stalled here.
What we need to realize is natural gas provides America about 25
percent of its current energy needs and is used by almost two-thirds of
American households. That is right. That is for cooking, appliances,
that is for heating our homes. But what many do not realize, as this
chart shows, not only for electrical generation and residential use,
but industrial use, as the gentleman from Indiana mentioned. Natural
gas is used in the production of food to fertilizers, from cars to
clothes, from aluminum to electronics. Natural gas is so essential a
raw material that it is a basic element in many common products such as
paints, fertilizers, propane, film, medicines, and almost all power
plants which have been built in the last 15 to 20 years use natural gas
to generate electricity.
What is great about it is it is low emission. It is a clean fuel to
use. Here in D.C. when we walk around downtown, there are bright buses
which pass through which say ``Using Clean Natural Gas.'' Yes, we use
it in transportation as well.
The issue with the price of natural gas is just basic high school
economics: It is supply and demand. Over the last, and here is a chart,
it talks about just a few years ago natural gas prices were pretty
stable around $1.50 CFM.
This chart here actually is wrong, and I need to take a second to
correct it because it shows that it tops off at about $5, but just 2
weeks ago it was trading at $6.70 and it is now trading above $6. In
other words, Mr. Speaker, the price of natural gas is off the charts,
and we are not doing a darn thing about it.
Now the soaring natural gas prices, let us talk about the ripple
effects that it has through our economy. It is putting a pinch on our
families. As I understand from our local gas utilities, it is costing
the average family in my district several hundred dollars a year just
in additional heating and utility costs. But let us talk about what it
is doing to our economy and jobs.
The U.S. chemical industry has cut at least 90,000 jobs because of
the high price of natural gas. Several plants have closed and moved
their doors overseas. Yes, overseas. Now let us talk about why they are
moving overseas. Why do our farmers now have to import fertilizer and
pay twice as much as they did 3 years ago? Let us look at this. In the
United States because of our demand and lack of supply, we are paying
about $6.50 CFM. We can go down to Mexico and Central America and pay
less than one-sixth. What is a business to do? When we criticize
businesses for moving offshore or out of America, yes, it frustrates
every one of us that those jobs are moving out, but let us look at some
of the causes and deal with that. What is a manufacturer going to do
when the basic input, as the gentleman from Indiana said, when it is
about 90 percent of the input costs for fertilizer, what is that
fertilizer plant going to do? They are going to go where it is a
cheaper price and reduce their costs dramatically and sell it back.
I believe these natural gas prices really provide an unfair
disadvantage to our American manufacturers, and we need to do something
about it.
The Energy Policy Act which the House passed once again yesterday
would boost natural gas production by removing barriers and creating
sensible incentives. It would increase the depreciation period of
natural gas pipelines from 20 to 15 years. It would increase energy
conservation and efficiency by 50 percent over 5 years, and it would
relieve pressure on natural gas markets, diversifying our energy
portfolio by increasing power generation from clean coal, fuel cells,
microturbines, emission-free nuclear power, and renewable energy
sources. By adopting this balanced plan, we would increase natural gas
supplies and save U.S. customers approximately $1 trillion in natural
gas costs over the next 20 years. Yes, Mr. Speaker, I said $1 trillion.
Now, it is time that we stop holding Americans hostage, our economy
hostage. Let us fight some of the root causes of our loss of
manufacturing jobs and pass a comprehensive energy bill.
Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr.
Terry) for that very important information about how we are going to
bring jobs back to America by passing comprehensive energy policies
that will lower costs for natural gas and make it more economical to do
business in the United States.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce) to
talk about bringing jobs back to America with a comprehensive energy
policy.
Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Kansas (Mr.
Tiahrt) for bringing this issue in front of the body.
Mr. Speaker, there are two things that our standard of living in
America is based upon.
{time} 2330
Our standard of living is very high in this country because of two
basic, essential facts. First, we have affordable food and, second, we
have affordable energy. Both of those things determine how we live our
everyday lives, how much we have got to spend on our kids' school
clothes, how far we have got to
[[Page H4272]]
spend on the schools that our kids go to, those things are determined
by the basics that we do not have to spend more than a small amount of
our income on either food or energy.
Mr. Speaker, House bill 6, the energy bill, really begins to address
the fact that jobs are being sent overseas because of high energy costs
but it also addresses the more relevant fact of the cost of energy in
our homes. I had some high school students in my office today. They
asked, what is your position on drilling in ANWR? I said absolutely,
that I supported it in my campaign, and that I have supported it since
I got here. They asked, why would you do that? And they seemed to be
asking it in good faith. You could tell that they had had discussions
in their school and they were asking for my opinion because they had
received the other side. I said, it is very simple. You hear your
parents talking about how much it costs to fill up their car with
gasoline, about $40 to $50 to $60 now depending on what size tank you
have. I said, you have heard your parents talk about it. Yes, yes, it
is very much higher. The fact is that we are talking about supply and
demand and they were a little curious about that. They did not really
understand it fully. I said, it is simply like cell phones. When cell
phones first came out, the supply was very limited so you might pay
$450 or $500 for a cell phone but today they will give them to you just
to get the business. That is because as the supply of cell phones has
increased, the price has gone down. Petroleum is exactly the same way.
If in 1995 President Clinton would have signed the ANWR drilling bill
that was put in front of him, both House and Senate in 1995 passed that
bill, if he had signed that, today we would have 1.5 million new
barrels of oil coming down the Alaska pipeline and into our shores.
What our attempt is today to lower the price of gasoline in our cars is
we have gone to the Saudi Arabians and we are asking them on bended
knee, we the United States is asking Saudi Arabia on bended knee to
increase production by somewhere between 1 and 2 million barrels per
day. We know that at that figure, the price would come back down to
what Americans are used to paying for a gallon of gasoline. But
instead, President Clinton vetoed the bill that was passed by the House
and by the Senate, he vetoed the bill, so today instead of having the
1.5 million barrels that we are asking the Saudi Arabians for, that 1.5
million barrels would have been produced on American soil and with
American jobs, instead it is being produced somewhere else and then we
have the higher energy costs and we are more dependent on foreign oil.
My friend from Nebraska talked about the high price of natural gas.
There are some very compelling things in the price of natural gas. It
is being pushed up because the Federal Government is requiring that
many of our electrical generating plants convert from coal into the
clean-burning natural gas. The Federal Government demands that we
convert electric plants over to natural gas, therefore, pushing the
demand up while at the same time the Federal Government at the
insistence of some of the extreme environmentalists is beginning to
limit access to the natural gas drilling that is available. The
drilling that they are stopping, the drilling that the extreme
environmentalists are stopping is not in pristine areas. They are
exactly in areas on Federal land that have been drilled before. There
is no reason to say that we cannot drill there except the extremists
believe in their heart that America has too much.
Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, to wrap up as our time expires, we call our
plan to bring jobs back to America ``Careers for the 21st Century.''
This week we have been talking about tonight is the energy self-
sufficiency and security. Next week we are going to talk about research
and development.
____________________