[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 161 (Thursday, December 15, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Page S13651]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ANWR
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, over the past year, and on more
occasions than I'd like to remember, I have talked about the abuse of
process that proponents of drilling in the Arctic Refuge have resorted
to in their attempts to pass an unpopular and misguided measure. Sadly,
the Senate faces the very same issue today. Let me unequivocally state
that talk of attaching an extraneous and obviously controversial
provision regarding the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to the
Department of Defense appropriations conference report--a provision
that was not included in either the House or Senate version of the
bill--is flat out irresponsible and should be rejected.
This last-ditch effort to attach the Arctic Refuge drilling provision
to the Department of Defense appropriations bill--or any other bill
that is a ``must pass'' before we adjourn for the year--really reflects
poorly on this body. And, what does it mean for greater mischief down
the line? That whenever we can't move an unpopular proposal through the
regular legislative process, there's no need to worry: you just attach
it to an important funding bill? Is this the precedent that we, members
of both parties, want to set? I sincerely hope not.
Let me be very clear: I would prefer to be talking about setting a
new path for our country's energy policy--a path that reduces our use
of fossil fuels while favoring renewable sources of energy.
Unfortunately, some of my colleagues are dead set on looking to the
past, instead of to the future, for our sources of energy and are even
willing to go so far as to use the bill that funds our men and women in
uniform as a vehicle for their controversial measure. I am deeply
disappointed by this latest move.
I strongly urge any of my colleagues who are currently trying to add
language to the Defense appropriations bill, or any other bill we need
to consider in the coming days, that would open up the Arctic Refuge to
oil and gas development, to reconsider those efforts. Continuing down
that path, the path of circumventing established legislative processes
to move measures that can't pass on their own merits, is an
irresponsible abuse of the rules under which we operate that should be
rejected out of hand.
____________________