[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 103 (Monday, June 25, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8353-S8354]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
POSITIVE ENERGY DIRECTION
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, last week this body passed energy
legislation that finally sets the U.S. energy policy in a new, positive
direction. In 2005, I opposed the Energy bill because it did not
establish a sound and fiscally responsible energy policy. The Renewable
Fuels, Consumer Protection, and Energy Efficiency Act of 2007 will help
wean the United States of oil dependence, encourage the development of
renewable energy, and promote energy efficiency, and I was pleased to
support it.
The bill includes many important provisions. A renewable fuel
standard of 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel by 2022 will help spur
the development of advanced fuels such as cellulosic ethanol, which
holds a lot of promise for my home State of Wisconsin. The bill also
includes anti-price gouging language, based on Senator Cantwell's bill
that I cosponsored, to protect consumers from price gouging by sellers
and distributors of oil, gasoline, or petroleum distillates during
natural disasters and abnormal market disruptions.
The bill also includes a proposal of mine that supports local
renewable energy--an issue I am committed to advancing and hear a lot
about during the listening sessions I annually hold in every county of
Wisconsin. My amendment, cosponsored by Senators Sanders and Menendez,
guarantees that a new energy and environmental block grant program
would provide resources to cities and counties nationwide to reduce
fossil fuel emissions, reduce energy use, and improve energy efficiency
while ensuring these improvements do not harm the environment and
retain the benefits of activities within the local community, such as
encouraging local or cooperative ownership of bioenergy efforts.
Our Nation's addiction to oil poses a significant threat to our
economy, our security, and our environment. The Federal Government
should allow and encourage State and local governments to improve their
energy policies while creating opportunities for rural Americans to
produce and benefit from renewable energy. My amendment is based on my
larger effort to increase opportunities for rural America outlined in
my Rural Opportunities Act. Introduced in February 2007, the Rural
Opportunities Act helps sustain and strengthen rural economies for the
future and create more opportunities in rural communities. A crucial
component of the bill is ensuring that the potential benefits from
domestic renewable energy are gained in an environmentally responsible
manner that benefits local communities.
During debate on this important bill, I also supported several
efforts to improve it. I was pleased to cosponsor several successful
amendments including one offered by the senior Senator from Wisconsin,
Mr. Kohl, to make oil-producing and exporting cartels illegal, and make
colluding oil-producing nations liable in U.S. court for violations of
antitrust law. I also cosponsored the amendment from the Senator from
Colorado, Mr. Salazar, that states the sense of Congress that America's
agricultural, forestry, and working lands should provide 25 percent of
the total energy consumed in the United States from renewable sources
by the year 2025 while continuing to produce safe, abundant, and
affordable food, feed, and fiber.
I supported an amendment offered by the Senator from Indiana, Mr.
Bayh, that sets aggressive targets for reducing oil consumption by
10,000 billion barrels a day by 2030. The language is simple--it sets
our goal, and we have to figure out how to get there. We are a country
of innovators. Whether it is wind, solar, biodiesel, or a technology we
still have not dreamed of yet, we can--and we must--break our addiction
to oil. This bold, aggressive amendment can help ensure that we meet
our goal of real energy independence and security.
Any plan to move away from our dependence on oil needs to address
fuel efficiency standards for our vehicles. In the last few years, I
have joined a majority of my Senate colleagues in supporting
legislation requiring the administration to increase fuel efficiency,
but we have so far been unsuccessful in getting this requirement
enacted. I supported a proposal from several of my colleagues,
including Senators Pryor and Levin, that was crafted to increase fuel
efficiency standards substantially without jeopardizing the jobs of
many hard-working Wisconsinites. It is unfortunate this amendment was
never offered. I will be following the House and Senate conference
closely to ensure that the final bill strikes the right balance on this
issue.
I am also disappointed that the Senate was unable to muster the
necessary votes to overcome Republican objections to a tax package
reported by the Finance Committee that would boost energy efficiency
and renewable energy programs. The cost of these new or extended tax
incentives was fully offset. It is also unfortunate that the Senate
could not once again pass a renewable portfolio standard to ensure that
all States' utilities are producing a minimum percentage of renewable
energy. My home State of Wisconsin is one of about 20 States that
currently have such a standard, but a Federal standard would help level
the playing field.
It is encouraging, however, that the Senate soundly rejected
proposals to mandate the use of and direct Federal money to develop
coal-to-liquid facilities. Private investors have not been willing to
invest in this technology in the United States because of significant
capital costs and risks, not to mention the unproven technology to
capture and store greenhouse gas emissions.
Energy security is an important issue for America and one which my
Wisconsin constituents take very seriously. I am pleased this bill
rejects the efforts of some of my colleagues to insist on drilling for
oil and gas in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Drilling in the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would sacrifice one of America's
greatest natural treasures for a supply of oil that would not
significantly enhance our energy security. The supply of oil in the
Arctic Refuge may not last more than a year, would not be available for
many years to come, and would decrease gas prices by only a penny when
the Refuge is at its highest
[[Page S8354]]
rate of production. Drilling in the Arctic Refuge does nothing to
address the immediate need of the Federal Government to respond to
fluctuations in gas prices and help expand refining capacity. Those who
offer the Refuge as the solution to our need for energy independence
are pointing us in the wrong direction.
This year's Energy bill finally moves past this misguided debate and
other fiscally and environmentally irresponsible proposals. The United
States is at an important juncture. By supporting the Energy bill, I am
supporting a new direction for our Nation's energy policy: one that
encourages renewable energy, conservation of the resources we have, and
American innovation.
____________________