[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 100 (Wednesday, July 26, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8211-S8216]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     GULF OF MEXICO ENERGY SECURITY ACT OF 2006--MOTION TO PROCEED

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate resumes consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 3711, which 
the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       Motion to proceed to S. 3711, a bill to enhance the energy 
     independence and security of the United States by providing 
     for exploration, development, and production activities for 
     mineral resources in the Gulf of Mexico, and for other 
     purposes.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the time 
until 10 a.m. shall be equally divided between the two leaders or their 
designees.
  Who seeks recognition?


               Recognition of the Acting Majority Leader

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from the great State of 
Wyoming.


                                Schedule

  Mr. THOMAS. This morning we will have approximately 1 hour of debate 
prior to the cloture vote on the motion to proceed to the Gulf of 
Mexico energy security bill. The vote will occur at about 10 o'clock 
today, and immediately following that vote we will recess for the 11 
o'clock joint meeting. I remind my colleagues to remain in the Chamber 
following that vote so that we may proceed at 10:40 this morning to the 
Hall of the House of Representatives to hear the address by the Prime 
Minister of Iraq. I thank all Senators for their attention.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Who yields time?
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I understand there are 15 minutes 
equally divided. I am not sure what equally divided means this morning, 
but we will do our best. I think Senator Bingaman may be here and might 
want the opposition's time. We will try to use our time in favor of it 
as judicially as we can. I start by yielding myself 6 minutes.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator is recognized for 6 
minutes.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, today is a very important day. Let me 
explain why that is to all the Senators and those who are interested.
  First, I am going to try to convince our colleagues today that this 
small lease sale that we are talking about is one of the most important 
issues spoken of in this Chamber this year. This morning, as the Sun 
rises over the majestic dome of the Capitol and families wake up across 
the land, whether it be in Albuquerque, NM, or in New Orleans, LA, or 
Miami, FL, as they wake up, millions of Americans around the great land 
find their homes cooled and after breakfast they start their cars, 
drive their children through their neighborhoods, in carpools or 
otherwise, to get some needed relief from

[[Page S8212]]

the heat. But for these families there is no relief from the high cost 
of energy.
  For too long we have remained unable to provide a remedy for that. In 
the words of the man in charge of our Nation's monetary policy, ``one 
likely source of the deceleration [of economic growth] is higher energy 
prices, which has adversely affected the purchasing power of households 
and weighed on our consumer attitudes.''
  In plain speak, that means if we don't take action, we are in 
trouble. I assure my colleagues, there is a growing chorus in America 
and this chorus demands energy relief. It demands our attention to the 
simple piece of property in the Gulf of Mexico.
  We are here to talk about whether to proceed on an item that is 
critical to American jobs and to our Nation's economy. In the Gulf of 
Mexico we have a piece of real estate owned by the Government that is 
the subject matter of what we choose to call the Gulf of Mexico Energy 
Security Act. We direct the Secretary of Interior to lease the area 
commonly known as 181 within 1 year after the date of the enactment of 
this bill. We further remove the moratorium or restriction on the area 
to the south of 181 and we direct the Secretary to lease that area 
also.
  Taken together, these are 8.3 million acres. I will explain them on 
the map here in a second, briefly, so I can have my fellow Senators, 
two of them who want to speak, have an opportunity to do so. They have 
been vital in getting this done.
  But let me summarize. This 8.3 million acres contains 1.26 billion 
barrels of oil, American oil, and 5.8--or rounded out--6 trillion cubic 
feet of natural gas. These resources under the sea are American assets 
on American lands and the power to unleash these resources lies in the 
hands of the Senate. Or we can walk away and adopt an alternative and 
that is to continue to increase our dependence on foreign sources of 
energy from hostile regions of the world.
  As American jobs hang in the balance, I remind my colleagues that 
between 1999 and 2005, a period of time equal to one term in the 
Senate, the price of natural gas in the United States increased 289 
percent. At the same time we lost over 3 million jobs in the 
manufacturing sector.
  In the words of the Federal Reserve Chairman:

       High prices of natural gas reflect strong demand and 
     diminished supplies.

  This vote today is a step toward correcting that imbalance.
  Also, in this gulf coast bill we provide protections to the Florida 
coastline. Thanks to the skills and heart and concern of the 
distinguished Senator Mel Martinez from the State of Florida, we have 
protected the Florida coastline in this legislation.
  I say to those opposed to this legislation, these provisions are a 
compromise between those who seek additional access to new areas of 
development and those who do not want to develop off their shores. We 
struck a balance. Here in the Senate that balance has the overwhelming 
support of those who seek additional Outer Continental Shelf deep sea 
access, and the overwhelming support of those whose priority is coastal 
protection. I am proud of this balance and I defend it against those 
who challenge it and seek to undermine it.
  Finally, the bill is both fiscally responsible and meets the needs of 
the coastal States that make the sacrifice of hosting our energy 
infrastructure. It takes care of them in a fair way.
  I do not take my fiscal responsibility lightly and I do not make the 
fact of fiscal responsibility a light issue. I come at this issue with 
a vast experience in budget matters in the Senate and I can tell you 
this: The cost associated with sharing the OCS receipts must be weighed 
against the cost of inaction. I can tell you for certain, inaction 
would be devastating. When the destruction of the Hurricanes Rita and 
Katrina ravaged our Nation's gulf, it was a national tragedy, not 
simply a regional occurrence. Our response should continue to be 
national in scope and wide in its vision.
  We have all heard the anecdotes of how this region hosts about half 
of our Nation's refining capacity and infrastructure. We heard 
statistics from the Mineral Management Service that showed that the 
Outer Continental Shelf plays a major role in supplying our energy 
resources.

  Let me summarize. The Gulf of Mexico is the most prolific producing 
offshore region and we cannot leave one giant piece of it--one piece of 
real estate owned by the people that is probably more energy laden than 
any other piece of real estate in the lower 48--we can't leave it sit 
there. We have struck a fair balance in this bill and I can say for 
certain it deserves the sincere consideration of every Senator.
  When we start voting, I believe every Senator should say, in 
fairness, let us proceed. A few days from now an overwhelming number of 
Senators should say proceed to permit this property, owned by the 
people, with supplies of gas for the people--let it be used by the 
people so we don't have to spend more money overseas, sending our 
dollars and our hard-earned currency to buy what we own, that we can 
produce in the next decade.
  The production will be astronomical if we put our heads to 
understanding that it is America's property, it is America's resources. 
There is no risk. We ought to get on with changing 25 years of what 
started in California, of a fear that was irrational, and get on with 
reasonable, rational, safe, deepwater drilling.
  I yield the floor.
  The Senator from Louisana is here and when she is finished, I would 
yield the remaining time to Senator Martinez.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Louisiana is 
recognized.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I appreciate the introduction to this 
important measure by the chairman of the Energy Committee, Senator 
Domenici. No one has worked harder, in my view, in this entire Chamber, 
and perhaps in the entire Congress, to help us reach a reasonable, 
balanced energy policy. The Chairman knows, and I agree with him, we 
can't drill our way out of this situation. But neither can we conserve 
our way. We have to stay on parallel tracks to drill more where we can 
of oil and gas, and conserve more where we can.
  The last Energy bill reached a pretty good balance of that. This is 
another step forward in that reasonable, rational, progressive road the 
chairman is trying to provide. He is providing excellent leadership and 
I am proud to support his efforts.
  This bill, as the Senator from New Mexico said, will open up 
significant tracts of land off of the gulf coast for drilling of oil 
and gas that we need as a nation. I have spoken about this bill many 
times in terms of its benefits to Louisiana and the gulf coast, and I 
will again this morning. But before I do that, I would like to speak to 
the national issue.
  Senator Domenici is correct when he said this country needs these 
reserves--and we need them now. This area of the gulf, 8.3 million 
acres that we have been able to negotiate based on the good work of 
Senator Martinez and others in the Gulf Coast States, will provide more 
than six times the amount of natural gas that this country imports in 
the form of LNG each year. Let me repeat that--six times the amount of 
natural gas--liquefied natural gas--that this country imports every 
year. It has more oil than the proven reserves of Wyoming and Oklahoma 
combined. There is more oil here for our Nation that desperately needs 
it.
  Our manufacturing sector is doing the best it can do to hold onto 
jobs in the United States. This is an issue that Senators on both sides 
of the aisle feel strongly about: keeping jobs in America. If we want 
to keep jobs in America, we need to follow the Chairman's lead and open 
up lease sale 181 and 181 South.
  Only a year ago, the price of natural gas was $15 per million Btu. 
Today we are fortunate. It has gone down to $6, but 3 or 4 years ago it 
was $2. It is volatile and it is too high. We need to take it down and 
stabilize it for manufacturing and agricultural interests from which 
every single Senator in this body benefits.
  We are competing internationally. Overseas they can produce natural 
gas for a fraction of what it costs us here. Our industries are 
struggling to hang on because the price is too high. This will help to 
get our price down, to stabilize it, and bring down the futures that 
are driving up our prices.

[[Page S8213]]

  The same for oil: only a few years ago a barrel of oil was $35 a 
barrel. Today it is selling for about $75 a barrel.
  We need to open up more domestic reserves--first, for the country 
because it is a smart and balanced energy policy. It is sound economic 
policy--to keep jobs right in the United States.
  Second, we must open up these domestic reserves because it is sound 
environmental policy. Let me speak about the gulf coast for just a few 
moments.
  I have come to this floor many times in the 10 years that I have been 
here to talk about the gulf coast where I was born and raised, part of 
the country that I think is the most beautiful and the most special. Of 
course, we all think the place we are born is that way. But I have also 
said this coast is America's only energy coast.
  This is a satellite picture taken just recently. It shows the coast 
of Florida, the coast of Alabama, Mobile Bay, the great boot of 
Louisiana, the shore of Mississippi, and the great expanse of the shore 
of Texas. This area, since the 1940s, has been the only area in the 
United States that has allowed offshore oil and gas drilling. We have 
experimented there for 40 years. We made a lot of mistakes. But we have 
done a lot of things right. Now we have an industry that actually 
resembles the space program more than it does the old-time roughneck 
industry with oil greasy derricks of the old days, as seen in those 
black and white pictures. Today, the industry deploys technology that 
looks like a spaceship out in the Gulf of Mexico. We are proud of the 
gulf. Every widget, every gadget, every seismic device, every flange, 
every wellhead in large measure has been crafted, designed, and built 
by people along the gulf coast--and it is a trade that we are proud of. 
We do it without major spills. We do it simultaneously as we enhance 
our fisheries, and we do it proudly. We want to continue to do it.
  We have laid thousands of miles of pipeline that send oil and gas not 
just to Louisiana but all over this country for people who live in New 
York, New Jersey, Maryland, places like Illinois, places in the 
Midwest. I want you to see where these pipelines start. They start in 
the Gulf of Mexico.
  We drill for oil and gas proudly--and we don't use it just for 
ourselves, but we use it for everyone in America, to keep these lights 
on in this Chamber, to help cool people's homes. As we have seen many 
times after heat waves strike, people can die in large numbers when the 
utilities go off.
  This is not a laughing matter. This is a very serious matter. We are 
proud to do it, but we cannot do it any longer without sharing in a 
portion--a very reasonable portion--of the revenues that are generated. 
We need those revenues to ensure the safety of the massive amounts of 
infrastructure that rest atop our rapidly eroding coast.
  We generated this year from this section of the gulf about $6 
billion. The projections are that it could go up to $12 billion. If we 
pass this bill, it will open up some other areas which will generate 
for the Treasury of the United States of America upwards of $15 billion 
a year.
  The question to my colleagues is, do you think the people who help 
generate this revenue, the 10 million people who live along this coast, 
could share in a partnership with these great resources so we can 
provide some revenue stream to help protect ourselves and the nation's 
energy infrastructure from hurricanes that come our way; restore the 
vital wetlands that support this entire Nation; protect and support the 
mouth of the greatest river system in North America, the Mississippi, 
help drain two-thirds of the United States, the river that takes 70 
percent of the grain from the Midwest?

  Is it possible that we could set up a partnership that works for 
everyone? Or is that impossible these days in Washington?
  My people at home can't even understand it. They say: Senator, who 
would be against revenue sharing?
  We are not asking for all of it. We would like 50 percent, but we 
negotiated a good deal, at 37.5 percent the same percentage that 
onshore states used to receive from production on the federal lands in 
their states before it was raised to 50 percent. We are not trying to 
be hogs, but we are drowning down here.
  If you think I am joking about drowning, I would like to show you a 
picture of one road. Senator Domenici has seen this. It made him 
shudder. This is the highway to Port Fourchon, which is the highway 
that links the United States of America to about 70 percent of U.S. 
offshore oil and gas production. This looks like a Third World nation.
  I have come here and begged for money to help with this highway. We 
cannot, as a State of only 4.5 million people, support the entire 
infrastructure of the United States of America. We can't do it. We are 
not that rich. We are a Southern State that has serious challenges. I 
am not saying we are a charity case, but we can't build highways for 
everybody with only our money, particularly highways that basically 
carry the natural resources of the Nation. This is what it looks like.
  This is the scientists' projected land loss of the Delta plains. This 
is from the USGS at the Department of the Interior. This map shows the 
projected land loss. From 1932 to 2050, this is the land lost and the 
projected land loss by 2050.
  People wonder why New Orleans is flooding. This picture shows us why. 
The great marshland that protected us--up the great river system and 
the major ports which helped western expansion for the Nation--put it 
away from the water and protected it so it could help the Nation grow. 
Since then, we have not done our job using the revenues wisely and 
reinvesting in this great wetlands to protect it.
  This is an opportunity to pass a bill that is balanced, that is 
smart, that is necessary, that is needed, and that will be put to great 
use by the coast of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas to 
protect the barrier islands that protect the great energy resources of 
the Nation and the wonderful people who live there.
  In conclusion, I will say this: I have taken Senators on planes, 
flying over these coastal wetlands. I look down at these ports and 
these bays. In the middle of hurricanes, people whose homes, schools, 
and churches were destroyed were sleeping on concrete in tents to keep 
these pipelines open for the Nation when they did not have homes for 
themselves.
  I am not going to go home until a solution is found for the wetlands.
  I see the Senator from Florida. I will yield my time. I thank him for 
his extraordinary leadership in finding the solution for the gulf 
coast. This is a gulf coast bill. It is not a Louisiana bill, nor a 
Florida bill--it is a gulf coast bill. We are Gulf Coast States. I am 
very proud to have Senator Martinez's support.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Florida is 
recognized.
  Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. President, I join my colleague, the Senator from 
Louisiana, and thank the chairman of the Energy Committee for his help 
in moving this bill today. I know it is a very important day for the 
United States but also for the people of Florida.
  S. 3711, the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006, is a bill 
that will not only provide very needed resources for our Nation, but it 
also provides something that is very important to those of us who love 
and are from the State of Florida, which is protections for our State 
from encroachment by those who would wish to drill and explore for oil 
and gas in the Gulf of Mexico.
  For many years, Members of the House and Senate from Florida have 
been joined in a struggle to ensure that Florida's economic and 
environmental interests be protected as exploration for oil and gas in 
the Gulf of Mexico took place.
  I am pleased to say that as we have worked through this issue, one of 
the things that was paramount in our minds was providing some zone of 
permanent protection for the State of Florida. In this particular 
arrangement, which we have been able to reach thanks to the good work 
and understanding of the needs of Florida by Chairman Domenici and 
others, we have been able to find a zone of protection for the State of 
Florida--a zone of protection that begins in Pensacola and moves south 
125 miles in Florida waters but provides an extraordinary zone of 
protection for the State of Florida, as we obtained not only 125 miles 
but frankly 237 miles from the coast of Tampa and almost 325 miles from 
the coast of Naples. The entire west coast of Florida is going to enjoy 
protection of well over 200 to 300 miles.

[[Page S8214]]

  We are, in fact, going to be protecting the State of Florida's 
military mission line. The military in Florida have had a long and 
close working relationship. We value what they bring to our State and 
what they provide for our national defense.

  The military mission line, in this area, is going to be observed and 
protected. That is what provides this extraordinary zone of protection 
beyond the 125 miles we see here. Why is this important? Because while 
we could not do this permanently--and there is no such thing as 
permanence--we have been able to provide this zone of protection, all 
of this in yellow, to the State of Florida until the year 2022, a long 
time from now.
  In addition, a further protection of that, which is incredibly 
important for our State, there are any number of leases that were at a 
different time under different leadership and, perhaps, with not as 
much thought of the impact it could have on our State, our economy, our 
beaches, our environment. Many leases were given to oil companies, not 
much more than 3 miles off the coast of Florida, some 8, 10, 15, or 17 
miles off the coast. The State of Florida has, in fact, purchased some 
of the leases in the past. I commend Governor Bush for leading the 
effort to do so.
  Under this bill, under this arrangement, the leases that are interior 
in the area of Florida can then be swapped out for leases in the areas 
that will be explored. It is a great and wonderful opportunity for 
those who are holding leases close to the coast of Florida to swap them 
out for areas far beyond where they currently are, thus eliminating, 
beyond the year 2022, any threat on the gulf coast from drilling.
  This is an important and good day for Florida. It is something we 
have battled for long and hard. Senator Bill Nelson and I--my colleague 
from Florida--filed a bill early this year which provides a 150-mile 
zone of protection. This is not 150 miles relating to the panhandle, 
but it is 125 miles and is, as others have said, the best deal on the 
table.
  Is this the answer to our problems? Certainly not long term, 
certainly not forever. Certainly we have to understand that the future 
of America, as the President said in his State of the Union Message, is 
moving away from our dependence, our addiction to fossil fuels. We have 
to understand that this is at best a bridge into the future. This is at 
best a way to provide for now so that Florida industries that have been 
so dependent on gas, such as the phosphate industry, such as 
fertilizers, and the generation of electricity to cool and warm Florida 
homes, will not be imperiled.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The time of the Senator has 
expired.
  Mr. MARTINEZ. I ask unanimous consent for an additional 30 seconds to 
conclude.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. MARTINEZ. I know Florida can play a significant role in the 
development of ethanol and other alternative fuels. I know this is an 
opportunity for us to bridge into the future. I am delighted that today 
we are going to provide Florida the kind of protection it needs.
  I welcome the opportunity to move S. 3711. It is the last measure, it 
is the last line. There cannot be any other way but this way if we will 
have the support of Florida Senators.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Who seeks time? The Senator from 
the great State of New Mexico.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. How much time remains?
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Twenty-eight minutes on your side.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Is there time remaining for the proponents?
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. There is no time remaining for the 
proponents.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, shortly I will be voting for cloture on 
the motion to proceed to S. 3711. I will be urging other colleagues to 
do as well. I am not casting my vote for cloture because I support the 
bill in its current form. On the contrary, I think the bill that has 
been brought before the Senate is seriously flawed on several grounds. 
I am voting for cloture on the motion to proceed because I want to have 
a chance to propose amendments to the bill, propose improvements to the 
bill. I want this bill to represent good, long-term energy policy and 
good, long-term fiscal policy for the country.
  I am aware of statements made by some that once the Senate is on the 
bill, there will be an attempt to frustrate the ability of Senators to 
offer legitimate energy amendments. I will certainly oppose any attempt 
to prematurely invoke cloture on the bill. Our energy problems in the 
country are serious business. They cry out for thoughtful responses. 
They also deserve a process in the Senate that is serious and is 
thoughtful.
  In this Congress, we made great progress on energy because we adopted 
an open, inclusive, and bipartisan approach on the issues. In my view, 
that record is at risk if we adopt a process on this bill that is a 
closed process.
  I hope the Senate consideration of this bill will be in the vein of 
the consideration we gave to the last Energy bill. Americans want 
positive, forward-looking solutions to our energy problems. They want 
us to use America's technological know-how to come up with innovative 
solutions and approaches to our problems. We are only going to be able 
to find those forward-looking solutions if everyone is given a 
legitimate opportunity to help the Senate work its will on this 
legislation.
  I yield the floor and retain the remainder of my time.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. REID. I ask that the time during the quorum call be charged 
equally against both sides.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. No time is remaining on the side of 
the proponents.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Vitter). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, this past weekend I was in Tennessee--in 
Nashville, my hometown. The visit was an opportunity for me to catch up 
with constituents. Again and again, whether I was in Nashville or over 
in Carter County at a wonderful pig roast or over in Jackson, TN, west 
Tennessee or Memphis, the concern of the high cost of gasoline, the 
high cost of cooling homes, and the impact on local businesses came up 
again and again and again.
  As I was driving through the streets of Tennessee, the average price 
of gasoline in Nashville, I remember specifically, was $2.87 a gallon--
kind of a bargain if you compare it to here in DC, where many metro 
area prices averaged over $3.08 a gallon this weekend. But people back 
home in Tennessee feel that it is anything but a bargain. They feel the 
pinch in their wallets, and it affects how they live every day--whether 
it is driving their kids to school or taking their vacation at this 
time of year or filling that tractor with fuel.
  Across the Nation, Americans are compensating for these high gas 
prices and high energy prices by cutting back, feeling the squeeze and 
having to cut back in other areas. We think twice about going out for 
dinner or lunch at a restaurant. We select our vacation destinations 
based today on how far one has to drive from home rather than the 
appeal of that destination. And we wait a few weeks longer than 
comfortable before turning on that air-conditioner or heating our 
homes. That is the direct cost these high energy prices have on our 
everyday family life.
  Many Americans fail to realize the indirect but the very real 
passthrough costs of high energy prices, the extra energy costs that 
are hidden in the

[[Page S8215]]

prices of the consumer goods and services we use every day. It is not 
just gasoline prices that are putting that squeeze on American 
consumers. Right now, American consumers and industries are paying the 
highest natural gas prices in the world. That translates into, yes, 
higher heating and cooling bills but also higher prices for farmers 
trying to buy fertilizer for their fields, higher prices for products 
made with chemicals, higher prices for paper products, higher prices 
for manufacturing jobs, which means those jobs ultimately are lost here 
in America.
  Six years ago, America's natural gas bill was $50 billion. Last year, 
it was four times that, $200 billion. In countries competing for 
American jobs, the price of natural gas is often one-sixth--one-sixth--
as much as it is here in the United States. Thus, when U.S. companies 
are having to pay more for the energy they need, it makes it harder and 
harder for them to compete in this global marketplace. When they can't 
compete, they have to make very tough economic decisions that many 
times result in American jobs having to move overseas--where energy 
supplies are much more plentiful and the costs are much lower.
  The National Association of Manufacturers estimates that more than 
3.1 million high-wage manufacturing jobs have been lost in this country 
over the last 6 years--largely as a result of those high energy prices. 
Of more than 120 world-scale chemical plants under construction around 
the world, only 1 is here in the United States. The high cost of 
natural gas hurts farmers because natural gas is used to make 
fertilizer. It is hurting the forest industry. It is hurting the paper 
products industry. Mr. President, 267 mills have closed, and 189,000 
jobs have been lost since this runup in natural gas prices over the 
last 6 years.
  We are all familiar with the energy challenges facing America. We are 
dangerously dependent on foreign sources of oil. We are dangerously 
dependent on foreign sources of oil--much of it coming from countries 
with unstable governments or with interests that are cleary contrary to 
those of our country.
  This disparity will only increase if we do not take action. We have 
to act to increase the amount of American energy. And that, of course, 
we could use right here in America today.
  The bill before us--the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act--is going 
to do just that. It is action. It will reduce our dependence on foreign 
oil and natural gas by opening up more than 8 million acres in the gulf 
to domestic exploration. The area opened under this bill is estimated 
to contain 1.26 billion barrels of oil and over 5.8 trillion cubic feet 
of natural gas. It will have an impact on the prices consumers pay at 
the pump and on their power bills, as we look to the future. It makes 
sense: increased supply, when we know that price point is ultimately a 
product of supply and demand.
  I want to make it clear that while this is a first step toward 
addressing the energy challenges we face, it is an important step. 
There is a lot more we can and should do in the future to break what 
the President called our ``addiction'' to oil, to diversify our energy 
resources, to increase the use of renewables and alternative sources 
such as ethanol and biodiesel, clean coal technology, and nuclear 
power, and to decrease, to minimize, to lessen consumption by 
consumers.
  One year ago this week, the Senate passed a comprehensive national 
energy policy which, over the course of the last 12 months, has 
achieved impressive results. As a result of the Energy bill, 27 new 
ethanol plants have broken ground, 150 more are in the works. The 
amount of ethanol and biodiesel we use in our gasoline will more than 
double over the next 6 years, saving 80,000 barrels of oil a day, and 
401 new E-85 pumps have been installed. As a result of that 
comprehensive Energy bill passed last year, the nuclear industry is 
planning to build 25 new reactors in the United States, enough to power 
15 million households with clean, emission-free electricity. Because of 
the Energy bill passed last year, 120 clean coal facilities are in the 
planning stages, enough to replace 2 million barrels of oil a day by 
the year 2025. And because of the comprehensive Energy bill of last 
year, wind power, solar power, and hydrogen fuel cells all got a major 
boost. The Energy bill was part of the solution.
  The bill on the floor today is that next critical step. Once we pass 
this bill and begin producing more of America's energy, we will still 
have a lot more work to do. We need to do more to encourage development 
of innovative 21st century technologies that will break our addiction 
to foreign oil. Whether ethanol or hydrogen or coal-to-liquids or new 
approaches that we can't even imagine today, we must do all we can to 
support those new technologies, those advanced technologies that will 
move us beyond the debate over oil and over gas.
  For the foreseeable future, we are going to be talking about oil and 
gas. That is why the bill before us today is so critical. The Gulf of 
Mexico Energy Security Act will substantially reduce our dependence on 
foreign oil and natural gas. It will increase moving toward energy 
independence. It will strengthen our national policy. It will reduce 
the cost of living for American consumers.
  In a post-9/11 world, energy security is a matter of national 
security. Now more than ever America needs America's energy. That is 
what this bill does. It brings more American energy to American 
consumers. It is a bipartisan bill.
  I especially thank Senators Domenici and Landrieu, Vitter, and 
Martinez, and so many others for helping us get to this point. I hope 
the Senate will now vote to allow us to begin debate on this 
legislation so that we can continue to deliver meaningful solutions to 
the American people.
  I yield the floor.


                             Cloture Motion

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the hour of 10 a.m. 
having arrived, the Senate will proceed to a vote on the motion to 
invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 3711. Under the previous 
order, the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to 
     proceed to Calendar No. 529, S. 3711, a bill to enhance the 
     energy independence and security of the United States by 
     providing for exploration, development, and production 
     activities for mineral resources in the Gulf of Mexico, and 
     for other purposes.
         Bill Frist, Pete Domenici, Richard G. Lugar, Mitch 
           McConnell, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Jim Bunning, Trent 
           Lott, Christopher S. Bond, Tom Coburn, Wayne Allard, 
           David Vitter, Mel Martinez, Thad Cochran, Jim DeMint, 
           John Cornyn, Lindsey Graham, Jeff Sessions.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum 
call has been waived.
  The question is: Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the 
motion to proceed to S. 3711, a bill to enhance the energy independence 
and security of the United States by providing for exploration, 
development, and production activities for mineral resources in the 
Gulf of Mexico, and for other purposes, shall be brought to a close?
  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Biden) and 
the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) are necessarily absent.
  I further announce that if present and voting, the Senator from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) would vote ``yea.''
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 86, nays 12, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 217 Leg.]

                                YEAS--86

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Clinton
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dole
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Isakson
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kohl

[[Page S8216]]


     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Santorum
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner

                                NAYS--12

     Boxer
     Dayton
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Lautenberg
     Lieberman
     Menendez
     Murray
     Reed
     Sarbanes
     Snowe
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Biden
     Kerry
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 86, the nays are 
12. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in 
the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.

                          ____________________