[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 110 (Monday, July 7, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6346-S6347]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        GAS PRICES REDUCTION ACT

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, there is no question what the No. 1 
issue is on the minds of the American people. It is the price of gas at 
the pump. It is literally off the charts. For those of us who have 
looked at surveys over the years, it is hard to recall, other than the 
post-9/11 period, a single issue that has enjoyed this kind of 
dominance in public opinion polls in America. I was home last week. I 
heard from a lot of Kentuckians on this issue. I know I wasn't the only 
one hearing the same thing. The high price of gas is the No. 1 issue 
facing Americans at this time. It should be the No. 1 issue for the 
Senate. Americans are hurting. They have every right to expect their 
elected representatives to actually do

[[Page S6347]]

something about it. We need to take up and pass legislation which not 
only makes a statement but which also makes a difference.
  Just before the Fourth of July holiday, 44 Republicans introduced the 
Gas Price Reduction Act, a series of proposals to increase American 
energy production, to increase conservation, and to make sure that 
excessive speculation is not driving up the price of oil; basically, 
find more, use less. This is the only legislation that has been offered 
that has both a real chance to pass and will truly help consumers at 
the pump.
  The find more provisions include increased exploration on the outer 
continental shelf, where States want it, and lifting the ban on western 
oil shale exploration. Under use less, we propose incentivizing the 
development of plug-in electric cars and trucks, and the advanced 
batteries needed to power them.
  We can and should increase development of alternative sources of 
energy. But conservation, alone, is not the way out of this problem. 
The current spike in energy prices is a supply and demand problem, not 
a demand and demand problem. If prices are going to come down, we need 
to find more energy at home and use less. We must do both.
  The goal of finding more energy at home, rather than relying on the 
Middle East, is not a fantasy. America is already the No. 3 oil 
producer in the world, and a number of States have indicated they would 
like to open up the area off their coasts to even more oil exploration, 
but they are prohibited by a Federal ban. At $4.10 a gallon, this 
nationwide ban no longer makes sense. It should be lifted with prices 
where they are now. It should be up to individual States to decide 
whether to allow exploration 50 miles off their coasts.
  We should also lift the ban on oil shale development which the new 
Democratic congress enacted last year. Our western States are sitting 
on a sea of oil three times as large as the oil reserves in Saudi 
Arabia. Yet at the insistence of the Democratic majority, we are not 
allowed to touch it. They have put a 100 percent ban on oil shale 
exploration. With gas prices at more than $4 a gallon, this prohibition 
makes no sense.
  Some on the other side say that opening up new off-shore exploration 
or using oil shale would not have an immediate effect and therefore 
should not be done at all. But the effect of allowing new exploration 
at home would send a clear signal to the international markets that we 
are willing to take serious steps to increase supply even while we move 
to conserve.
  There is already a strong bipartisan consensus on the importance of 
conservation. In addition to working with our friends on the other side 
late last year to pass the first increase in fuel efficiency standards 
in more than three decades, Republicans are also looking in this bill 
to conserve energy by spurring the development of plug-in electric cars 
and trucks.
  But conservation alone won't resolve this problem. Conservation is 
just one side of the problem. We need to find more and use less, if we 
want to bring prices down.
  Finally, I know there have been concerns that oil speculators are 
contributing to the rising price of gas. Our bill addresses this 
concern through putting more cops on the beat at the Commodity Futures 
Trading Commission, increasing transparency and strengthening U.S. 
futures markets.
  The Gas Price Reduction Act is a dramatic step in the right 
direction. In putting it together, Republicans were careful to focus on 
proposals that already have support from the other side of the aisle. 
We are not interested in simply making a statement. We are determined 
to address the problem. We want to pass legislation which will make a 
difference to families feeling the pinch.
  This bill contains provisions that should be agreeable to both sides 
of the aisle. It tackles both sides of the energy issue by increasing 
supply and curbing demand. We should do both.
  There are many important issues facing the Congress, but few are more 
important than addressing the issue of energy. It is time to act, and 
this balanced approach is a good start.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, before my friend leaves the floor, I think 
there should be an opportunity, based on his statement and my 
statement, to do something about gas prices. We have introduced a piece 
of legislation we have had. We have had votes on it here before. It 
deals with a number of issues, including whether OPEC should be subject 
to the antitrust laws, which the former chairman of the Judiciary 
Committee and now ranking member thinks is very important, as does 
Senator Kohl and others on our side. That is part of ours. There are a 
number of issues. But to get everybody to agree that everything in it 
is good is difficult.
  That is the same problem we are going to have with the proposal my 
friend talks about, the so-called new Republican piece of legislation. 
From what I have said and what he has said, it seems that we could 
certainly get together and agree on, if not all of both packages, some, 
and move forward.
  For example, I mentioned this speculation thing. Maybe we can do 
that. I come from the western part of the United States. That is where 
most of the oil shale is. We had a great program going in the 1970s, 
when suddenly we took away the tax incentives for more work on oil 
shale. This isn't anything I personally think is repugnant. I think it 
is something we should take a look at. I have already given my views on 
offshore drilling and onshore drilling.
  So we want to work together. The message that I hope comes from our 
discussion early this afternoon is that Democrats and Republicans want 
to try to do something about gas prices. Hopefully, during this next 
work period we can do it.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, not by way of rebuttal but agreeing 
with the majority leader, the American people are demanding that we do 
something. They are not kidding about this issue. I appreciate the 
spirit of the remarks of the majority leader. Just to give an example 
of the shifting views on this, a Pew poll just announced last week, 
taken very recently, indicates that just among political liberals 
alone, just to give one snapshot of how the public is evolving on this 
issue, the number of liberals, liberals only, who favor increased 
energy exploration doubled. That is just among a subset of the American 
population. The American people are demanding that we act.
  I appreciate the comments of the majority leader. Hopefully, we will 
be able to find a way to do both things, both to find more and to use 
less.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________