[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 147 (Tuesday, November 8, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12471-S12472]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
OIL COMPANY WINDFALL PROFIT TAX OFFSET
Mr. REED. Mr. President, recently Senator Collins and I introduced an
amendment to the proposed budget reconciliation bill to fund a $2.9
billion increase in the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program by
placing a temporary 1-year windfall profit tax on big oil companies. I
filed this amendment to the budget reconciliation bill to begin the
dialog, and I intend to call for a vote on my amendment when the Senate
debates the tax reconciliation bill in the next few days.
Last week, oil companies reported record profits for the third
quarter on surging oil prices. Chevron posted profits of $3.6 billion.
BP's profits rose to $6.5 billion. Royal Dutch/Shell profits grew to $9
billion. And ExxonMobil profits gushed up 75 percent to nearly $10
billion. According to BusinessWeek, that equals $150 million in profit
for every working day in the past 3 months.
This year has been an exceptionally lucrative one for the oil
industry and an exceptionally impoverishing one for American families
and seniors. Profits going to big oil are money coming out of wallets
of working families and seniors and wealth draining out of our
communities.
Fully funding LIHEAP is a vital imperative. I believe the big oil
companies should help shoulder the cost. Rising energy prices could
financially wipe out working-class families and seniors this winter.
Americans are experiencing extraordinarily high runups in energy prices
that jeopardize the ability of many families to keep their homes warm
during this coming winter season. Energy costs to the average family
using heating oil are estimated to hit $1,500 this winter, an increase
of almost $325 over last winter's heating season. For families using
natural gas, prices could hit $1,000, an increase of $300.
For a family using propane, prices are projected to hit $1,300, an
increase of $230. For families living in poverty, energy bills are now
over 20 percent of their income, compared to 5 percent for other
households. People who are living in poverty, many of whom are working,
are paying 20 percent of their income for heating bills. That is
compared to 5 percent for the rest of America's families.
Let me tell you what this amendment means. If we are successful, it
would add $2.9 billion to the LIHEAP program to bring total funding to
$5.1 billion this winter. With $5.1 billion, the National Energy
Assistance Directors Association estimates that LIHEAP could serve 12
million families this year. This is double the number of families
served last year but still only one-third of those eligible. Even with
this increased funding, we would not reach all the families who
qualify, but we would reach those families who are most in need,
particularly in this very difficult winter heating season.
States could also increase the level of benefits to help these rising
costs, in addition to enrolling more personnel in the program.
This amendment means that seniors will not have to choose between
buying lifesaving medication and paying their natural gas bills.
Working families will not have to decide between putting food on the
table or putting heating oil in their tanks. And what is the cost of
this amendment to big oil? It is about 10 percent of their profits from
one quarter of 1 year, or in the case of ExxonMobil my amendment would
represent just one-third of their profits for one quarter. This is a
small price to pay to keep American families safe and warm this winter.
Two weeks ago, I wrote an open letter to the oil industry asking that
they act as good corporate citizens and take this step voluntarily. I
was pleased to hear that Senator Grassley, the distinguished chairman
of the Finance Committee, reiterated my plea recently, and I hope that
we will be able to work together on this effort. I also hope that
Senator Gregg, the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee, will
join Senator Collins and me in our efforts to increase LIHEAP funding
through this temporary windfall profits tax. I also hope the
administration will join our bipartisan effort to help American
families. Unfortunately, to date, the administration only appears able
to say no to American families and seniors and yes to the oil industry.
Last month, Secretary Bodman said no, the administration would not
seek
[[Page S12472]]
additional funding for LIHEAP this winter. The supplemental
appropriations request the administration sent to Congress last week
did not include funding.
Recently, Secretary Bodman, answering questions on whether the
administration would support oil companies voluntarily donating profits
to LIHEAP, said, ``No, sir. I wouldn't support it. It is similar to a
tax.''
In 1980, Congress enacted the Crude Oil Windfall Profits Tax Act.
This legislation established LIHEAP. Twenty-five years later, with
energy prices overwhelming workers' salaries and seniors' Social
Security checks, it is time for Congress again to take action and tax
windfall profits to aid in energy assistance.
I also want to mention it is my intention that when we consider the
tax reconciliation bill this month, I will offer an amendment to
provide a tax credit to working American families to help them pay for
their energy bills this winter. Our Nation's priorities must be to help
these families, and I hope working together with my colleagues we can
provide that help and assistance.
Mr. President, I inquire how much time is remaining in morning
business on the Democratic side?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Two minutes.
Mr. REED. I yield the remainder of the time to the Senator from
Massachusetts.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, is that the extent of the time?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
Mr. REED. In morning business.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if I may clarify what the situation is, 2
minutes in morning business is left, and that is being allocated to the
Senator from Massachusetts, fine, no problem there. But as I
understand, the Senator from Massachusetts also wishes to address the
Levin amendment; am I correct?
Mr. KENNEDY. That is correct.
Mr. WARNER. At which time is the expiration of the 2 minutes. Then
the time is charged to the Levin amendment; is that correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. At the conclusion of morning business, the
Senate will proceed to consideration of S. 1042, and the Senator then
may seek recognition.
Mr. WARNER. I hate to interrupt the Senator from Massachusetts, but
if you have to do it, you have to do it.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I intend to speak probably 7 minutes. I
will use the 2 minutes now and request time on the Levin amendment.
AMENDMENT NO. 2430
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, a year and a half ago, Americans were
stunned by the revolting images of men and women wearing the uniform of
our Nation torturing and abusing prisoners at Abu Ghraib.
At the time, we had hoped those photos pictured an isolated instance,
but we have learned since that our own leaders at the highest levels of
our Government, in the White House, in the Pentagon, and in the Central
Intelligence Agency, have allowed a wide pattern of abuse to occur. Abu
Ghraib, it seems, was only the tip of the iceberg.
American officials abused prisoners in Iraq, Afghanistan, and
Guantanamo, and now we learn the CIA maintains secret prisoners in
Eastern Europe where Vice President Cheney arrogantly and
unapologetically hopes to permit torture as a permanent part of
American policy.
These actions deeply offend American honor and ideals. They invite
retribution on our own troops by those who treat them as we treat their
prisoners, and they harm America's image around the world and make the
war on terror that much harder to win.
These abuses should not be swept under the rug and forgotten. The
American people deserve to know what their government is doing. Those
who have violated our norms and values under the color of the American
flag should be held accountable.
That is why I strongly support the Levin amendment to create a
commission with responsibility for learning the truth. Its findings not
only would bring much needed accountability of those responsible for
these abuses but also would guide our handling of the detention and
interrogation of detainees in the future.
From what we have learned to date, it is clear that our political
leaders made deliberate decisions to throw out the well-established
legal framework that has long made America the gold standard for human
rights throughout the world. The Administration left our soldiers, case
officers, and intelligence agents in a fog of ambiguity. They were told
to ``take the gloves off'' without knowing what the limits were. Top
officials in the Administration endorsed and defended practices that
we've condemned in other countries. And the consequences were
foreseeable.
In rewriting our human rights laws, the Administration consistently
overruled the objections of experienced military personnel and those
who represent American interests abroad. As Secretary of State Colin
Powell warned the White House, ``it will reverse over a century of US
policy and practice in supporting the Geneva Conventions and undermine
the protections of the law of war for our troops.'' Senior Defense
officials were warned that changing the rules would lead to so-called
``force drift,'' and without clearer guidance, the level of force
applied to an uncooperative detainee might well result in torture.
But these wise words fell on deaf ears. Officials at the highest
levels of the administration somehow viewed the rule as inconvenient
and quaint. As Lawrence Wilkerson, former Chief of Staff to Secretary
Powell, said:
I don't think in our history we've ever had a presidential
involvement, a secretarial involvement, a vice-presidential
involvement, an Attorney General involvement in telling our
troops essentially carte blanche is the way you should feel.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has used 2 minutes.
____________________