[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 113 (Thursday, July 10, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6564-S6565]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Mr. Dodd, and Mr. Menendez):
  S. 3239. A bill to prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from 
issuing new Federal oil and gas leases to holders of existing leases 
who do not diligently develop the land subject to the existing leases 
or relinquish the leases, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I would like to talk about the strong 
concerns I am hearing back home about gas and diesel prices and about a 
bill I am introducing today in response to those concerns.
  We all know that over the past 12 months, the price of a gallon of 
gas has risen over a dollar, from around $3 last year to over $4 today. 
Diesel has increased from $2.91 a year ago to $4.72 per gallon today.
  At the listening sessions I hold in every county of my State each 
year, Wisconsinites are, of course, talking about how those soaring oil 
prices are hurting their pocketbooks. And it is not just at the pump. 
They are feeling the pain also at the grocery store, on the farm, and 
at the ticket counter. Those high fuel prices are having a rippling 
effect throughout our entire economy. Wisconsinites, like Americans all 
around the country, are feeling squeezed. With no relief in sight, the 
anxiety and tension keep building. Americans are emotionally, 
physically, and financially drained. My colleague from Minnesota, 
Senator Klobuchar, had it right when she stated that Americans are 
running on empty.
  Here is what I am hearing from Wisconsinites. One constituent told 
me:

       I have done everything I can to use as little gas as 
     possible, even before prices got so high. My two-parent 
     family (with two children) has only one car. I ride my 
     bicycle or walk to work and use the car as little as 
     possible. However, the rising cost of fuel is causing higher 
     prices for food and other necessities which are becoming more 
     difficult for my family and others.

  From another parent:

       I have an adorable child I am trying to raise on a budget 
     that no longer reaches from paycheck to paycheck. I currently 
     work an hour away from where I live as the jobs are not 
     available in [my] area. Between the rising price of gas, 
     electric/heat and food, my husband and I can barely pay our 
     mortgage.

  I have heard from many others who are struggling as they care for 
elderly parents. One lady has a mother in a nursing home, and she used 
to visit her three times a week. However, with the nursing home 20 
miles away and high fuel prices, now she can only afford to visit her 
mother once a week. That, to me, is a very poignant example--one of so 
many examples--of the real human impact these gas prices have.
  Even those who have managed their money well and have saved are 
struggling. One constituent commented that he had planned to put extra 
money toward retirement and pay down debt. With the high fuel prices, 
he does not have any extra money and is worried that he will end up on 
government assistance at the age of 57.
  There are more letters and more e-mails and more phone calls. The 
high cost of driving affects all kinds of people and livelihoods. It 
affects kids whose parents cannot drive them across town to a friend's 
house or to soccer practice because they have to conserve gas to get to 
work. It affects young students and senior citizens who are on fixed 
incomes. Small businesses are finding they need to increase prices to 
cover increased transportation costs. Farmers are, of course, feeling 
the pinch in one way or another, whether it be fertilizer or fuel or 
transportation or feed for livestock and dairy farmers.

  All over the country, people have resorted to alternative forms of 
transportation in an effort to escape these costs. There is a range of 
positive proposals to improve systems in Wisconsin from the Kenosha-
Racine-Milwaukee commuter rail, extending Amtrak to Madison, or just 
adding buses or routes. While I strongly support long-term plans to 
invest in mass transit, I also recognize that at least for the time 
being in many parts of Wisconsin and in this country, it is unrealistic 
for many to rely on mass transportation. Commuting to work, be it 
across a large city or between two towns, is a gas- and dollar-guzzling 
task that many people cannot avoid or, increasingly, afford.
  For the large number of Americans living in predominantly rural 
areas, this is especially challenging due to the typically longer trips 
and fewer transportation options. So Wisconsinites want to know: When 
is the Federal Government going to provide some relief?
  With my support, Congress has made some progress. Last December we 
enacted energy legislation, H.R. 6, that

[[Page S6565]]

raises corporate average fuel economy standards for vehicles while 
protecting American jobs. It also increases the requirement for 
alternative fuels from 8.5 billion gallons in 2008 to 36 billion 
gallons in 2022. I also recently cosponsored an amendment to make the 
Federal Government stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which 
is 97 percent full. Fortunately, Congress passed this legislation, and 
the administration finally agreed to stop taking oil off the market to 
store it underground. The bill, H.R. 6022, was signed into law in May.
  We also made some progress in preventing market manipulation. I 
cosponsored the Oil and Gas Traders Oversight Act, S. 577, which would 
help ensure that the previously unregulated trading commodities are 
subject to greater Federal oversight by requiring the reporting of 
trades, and then a similar provision was included in the final version 
of the farm bill which was recently enacted.
  These are positive steps, but much more needs to be done. So today I 
am introducing legislation that seeks to answer a question more and 
more Americans are asking, which is: Why aren't the oil companies 
developing 66 million acres of land that they are already leasing from 
the U.S. Government? Those same companies, and some of my colleagues, 
say we need to open more Federal lands to drilling. Well, I guess I 
would like to know then why the oil companies are not producing on most 
of the Federal lands they already have under lease.
  At a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, I actually had the 
chance to ask the top five oil executives in the country just that 
question, and it was incredible. They couldn't come up with any good 
explanation at all. In fact, one of the executives told me they have 
the manpower and the infrastructure to put all of their existing leases 
of Federal lands into oil production.
  I find this troubling. No one is talking about pulling oil out of a 
hat, but with 75 percent of currently leased Federal lands and waters 
not producing oil and gas, Congress needs to insist on some 
accountability on this point. This is why today I am introducing the 
Responsible Federal Oil and Gas Lease Act. This bill says if oil and 
gas companies want to lease additional lands, they must either be 
producing or diligently developing their existing Federal leases, or 
they have to give up those leases. This way, if a company makes the 
business decision to terminate or not pursue exploration, then the 
lease will be made available to other companies who might actually 
drill or figure out a way to get some oil out of this land. This is a 
responsible way to increase production and keep the private sector 
accountable for production.
  So with over 100 billion barrels of oil under Federal lands and 
waters that are being leased or are available for leasing, Congress 
must properly encourage their development, and oil companies should use 
the land they already have before coming to Congress, hat in hand, 
asking for more land.
  This bill is similar to legislation introduced by Representative 
Rahall which the House considered last month. I will work to make sure 
the Senate follows their lead. I am also cosponsoring a bill introduced 
by my colleague who is on the Senate floor, my good friend Senator 
Dodd, that encourages oil companies to utilize the land they have been 
granted by making them pay fees on land under lease but not in 
production.
  There are a number of other steps Congress should take, including 
addressing the role of excess speculation in the energy futures market 
and clamping down on OPEC's price fixing. I am a cosponsor of S. 879, 
which would authorize the Justice Department and the FTC to sue foreign 
countries under U.S. antitrust law for limiting the supply or fixing 
the price of oil. Also, of course, we need to aggressively pursue 
alternative fuels, efficiency, and renewable energy because the facts 
show that even if we drilled every corner of the country, and offshore 
too, that wouldn't solve our energy problems.
  In the long term, the Government's Energy Information Administration 
reports that opening more Outer Continental Shelf regions to drilling 
``would not have a significant impact on domestic crude and natural oil 
gas production or prices before 2030,'' nor will it significantly 
affect prices after 2030, the agency reports, ``because oil prices are 
determined on the international market.'' In short, the facts are 
telling us that we simply cannot just drill our way out of this, and 
more drilling does not necessarily mean lower prices at the pump.
  Unfortunately, a minority of Senators have repeatedly blocked efforts 
to expand renewables and address price gouging and excess energy market 
speculation. I sincerely hope we can get beyond this partisan 
bickering. My constituents don't want finger-pointing or name calling; 
they want some relief, and they deserve it. They also deserve to know 
that we are pressing forward on plans that embrace a new energy future.
  Thirty years ago, our Nation was rattled by our reliance on oil. If I 
am still here in 30 years, for the sake of my constituents, I hope we 
will have succeeded at diversifying our energy uses and oil does not 
still have a stranglehold over our citizens and the economy.
                                 ______