[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.

                          ____________________