[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 114 (Friday, July 30, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6544-S6546]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      ENERGY AND NATIONAL SECURITY

  Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to support 
the Oil Spill Response Improvement Act of 2010. It is a bill that seeks 
to directly deal with one of the most serious issues facing our country 
today in the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon incident and how the 
Federal Government responds to what will likely turn out to be one of 
the worst ecological disasters that have taken place off our Nation's 
shores.
  The bill is a targeted piece of legislation that supports jobs in the 
gulf coast region, prevents our Nation from relying further on foreign 
nations for our energy needs, and protects the American taxpayer from 
being placed on the hook should, God forbid, a future incident ever 
occur. Specifically, the bill gives the President the ability to raise 
caps on economic damages done by oil companies. It creates a Price-
Anderson model where all entities operating in the gulf would share the 
risk, as we do with the 104 nuclear powerplants. I don't think the 
public is aware of the fact that they all have the same insurance 
policy, and if something were to go wrong with one nuclear powerplant, 
all the others' insurance would be called upon. So there is no question 
about liability; they just take care of the problem. We need to do the 
same thing in terms of these oil rigs.
  The legislation maintains the integrity of the Oil Spill Liability 
Trust Fund. It provides States an additional funding system to be used 
to protect the ecosystem. It accelerates the lifting of the deepwater 
moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico. It creates a bipartisan spill 
commission with subpoena power to investigate causes of the Deepwater 
Horizon explosion. These are good ideas that I think will address the 
crisis at hand. They are good ideas that will help get people back to 
work in the gulf.
  I know Senator Reid has proposed an alternative piece of legislation. 
I understand that it maintains the current moratorium on deepwater 
drilling off the Outer Continental Shelf, creates a liability regime 
that will likely limit production in the Gulf of Mexico to only the 
largest of oil companies, and raises the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund 
to pay for untested efficiency programs.
  I welcome a robust debate, but looking at the schedule next week, my 
understanding is that the majority leader will likely fill the tree and 
not allow any amendments. So what we are probably going to see is a 
Republican-Democratic side-by-side taken care of in 1 day. To be 
candid, this is a much too serious issue to cram into 1 day with just 
side-by-side proposals. And I think that gives rise, for those watching 
what we are doing here in the Senate, to some feeling that what we are 
doing here is not genuine, is disingenuous and, quite frankly, if we do 
this next week, I think what it will do is further cause the public to 
think less of the institution of the Senate.
  Regardless of whether you are a Republican or a Democrat, you ought 
to be concerned about the fact that since polling has been done 
regarding the approval of the Senate, the numbers today are the worst 
we have ever seen. So something is going on out there, and they are 
watching what we are doing and they are saying: These people seem to be 
more interested in partisan politics or who is going to win the next 
election in terms of how many new Senators or who is going to control 
the House of Representatives instead of really looking at the problems 
confronting our country. They are asking: Can't you people work 
together on a bipartisan basis to solve the problems we have? There is 
a fear and uncertainty today in this country that I have never seen 
anything like, and I think all of us should be concerned about how the 
people in this country feel about what we are doing here.
  Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, environmental advocate, 
oil industry employee, I think all should agree that Congress needs to 
respond intelligently to the situation with action that balances 
environmental risks with our Nation's energy requirements.
  Much of the responsibility for this spill should lie on the shoulders 
of a few bad actors in the private sector, and they are primarily with 
BP. I have to say, from my looking at this, there is gross negligence. 
It is amazing what they knew about and didn't do, and I think that will 
all come out, although I imagine there is going to be enough blame to 
go around once we have had a chance to step back and see just what 
happened.
  I must also say that I think the decisions this administration has 
made, not only in reacting to the spill but also in its general 
attitude toward domestic oil and gas production, have been disastrous 
for the gulf region.
  Last year, I sat down in my office with Secretary Ken Salazar to talk 
about domestic oil and gas production and our Nation's energy strategy. 
In that meeting, I conveyed to him that I have always believed one of 
the most pressing challenges America faces today is reducing our 
reliance on foreign sources of energy. I called it the second 
declaration of independence--finding more oil and using less. I told 
Secretary Salazar that I was concerned about the administration's 
actions that were limiting energy production in the United States.
  He disagreed with me. Secretary Salazar said the Department was in 
the process of restructuring and undergoing a thorough review to ensure 
proper oversight of the oil and gas industry was being provided. He 
pointed out that the Department was moving forward with lease sales in 
the Atlantic and that, in his opinion, things were just fine. I took 
him at his word and waited but didn't see any change in the 
Department's attitude.
  I sent a letter to the Secretary on April 19, 2010--April 19--
reiterating my concern that his Department was ignoring its obligations 
to oversee domestic oil and gas development and focusing too much of 
its attention and resources on renewed efforts to promote renewable 
energy projects that make good photo-ops but would have little effect 
in meeting our Nation's long-term energy needs.
  I expressed further concern that efforts to lease areas of the Outer 
Continental Shelf for oil and gas production were being restricted. For 
example, in November of 2009, the Department of the Interior acted to 
shorten the lease terms for a specific sale of leases in the Gulf of 
Mexico. The shortening of the lease terms will likely do nothing to 
guarantee more discoveries but, rather,

[[Page S6545]]

serve to increase risk as companies are rushed to complete production 
before the expiration of their lease.
  Three months later, I have yet to receive an answer to my letter. And 
this is particularly disappointing to me because I consider Secretary 
Salazar--a former colleague--a friend, and I have always respected him.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record 
the letter I sent to Secretary Salazar.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                         United States Senate,

                                   Washington, DC, April 29, 2010.
     Hon. Ken Salazar,
     Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Secretary Salazar: I believe one of the most pressing 
     challenges America faces today is reducing our reliance on 
     foreign energy sources and crafting a comprehensive national 
     energy policy for the United States that makes use of every 
     energy resource at our disposal. It is critical that we 
     improve our energy security to increase our competitiveness 
     in this growing global marketplace and improve our national 
     security.
       As the Secretary of the Interior, you play an instrumental 
     role in implementing energy policy. And your department 
     should be applauded for its work in managing the nearly 8,000 
     active onshore leases and the over 55,000 active offshore 
     leases, for its successful lease sales in 2009, and for 
     scheduling additional Federal oil and gas lease sales for 
     2010.
       I am concerned however, by your comments that the 
     Department of Interior is moving adequately to promote 
     domestic production of oil and natural gas, and your efforts 
     to ``balance'' the federal government's procedures dealing 
     with the leasing of federal lands for energy production. I 
     know that you are sincere when you say that you are trying to 
     find an approach to managing the nation's natural resources 
     that provides the protection necessary to ensure that we are 
     not sacrificing irreplaceable natural treasures while 
     allowing for the safe and responsible production needed to 
     address future energy needs. But from what I have witnessed 
     and from what I have gathered from accounts conveyed me, I am 
     troubled that DOI is coming across as being more concerned 
     with catering to the political whims of the environmental 
     community.
       Some have argued that unlike the attention being paid to 
     renewable energy projects, government action that would 
     promote increased domestic oil and natural gas production is 
     getting neglected. I am of the opinion that there is no 
     silver bullet when it comes to meeting future energy needs. 
     We are going to need a wide portfolio of energy options that 
     include different sets of technologies and solutions. As 
     such, no particular energy option should receive preferential 
     treatment on the basis of its constituencies. But neither 
     should the domestic production of a reliable and abundant 
     energy source, such as oil, natural gas, or coal, be 
     curtailed for the same reasons.
       I was encouraged by the President's announcement to 
     consider expanding oil and gas production on the U.S. Outer 
     Continental Shelf. This is a good first step, but there are 
     still large areas both in Pacific and Atlantic that would 
     remain off-limits to exploration. Further, much of the 
     Eastern Gulf of Mexico remains under a congressional 
     moratorium until 2022.
       While steps are being taken to expand domestic offshore oil 
     and gas production, I must tell you I have concerns that as 
     DOI works to schedule lease sales in the select areas that 
     have been released from moratoria, progress could very easily 
     be stalled completely by external roadblocks such as lawsuits 
     from the environmental community. This is a strategy that 
     groups have successfully utilized to halt the construction of 
     coal fired power plants. I hope the Administration and with 
     your leadership at DOI will follow through with this proposal 
     and expand our domestic oil and gas resources.
       Additionally, your department is taking unilateral action 
     that could be construed as making more difficult for oil gas 
     production to take place domestically. For example, last 
     November DOI acted to shorten the lease terms of an upcoming 
     Central Gulf of Mexico lease sale. Industry argues that the 
     shortening of the lease terms does nothing to guarantee more 
     discoveries but rather takes away from companies the 
     flexibility necessary to operate in an extremely challenging 
     and risky environment.
       I continue to value our friendship and will work with you 
     as we both seek to achieve energy security, the creation of 
     jobs, and the rebuilding of our economy. I am optimistic that 
     we can bridge any differences as we strive to make the United 
     States more energy independent from oil rich foreign 
     countries who do not share our interests.
           Sincerely,
                                              George V. Voinovich,
                                            United States Senator.

  Mr. VOINOVICH. Meanwhile, the Gulf of Mexico is now under a revised 
moratorium on deepwater offshore drilling imposed by President Obama 
and the Department of Interior. This moratorium jeopardizes 30 percent 
of this Nation's domestic oil production and 13 percent of our natural 
gas production.
  There are 33 drilling platforms currently idle in the Gulf of Mexico. 
That doesn't sound like a large number, but keep in mind that these 
rigs are really the size of factories. Each platform supports as many 
as 1,400 direct and indirect jobs, which means that as many as 46,200 
jobs could be lost in the short term because of this moratorium. As 
these are good-paying jobs, this could amount to as much as $10 million 
in lost wages per month, per platform.
  Further, the moratorium threatens the livelihood of more than 300,000 
oil and gas workers in the region. The loss of revenue will be in the 
billions. A 6-month moratorium could result in a $147 billion loss in 
local, State, and Federal revenue over the next 10 years. Oil and gas 
production in the Gulf of Mexico is a significant revenue stream for 
the Federal Government. A moratorium on production that lasts 6 months 
could cost the Federal Government between $120 million and $150 million 
in lost royalties and a $300 million to $500 million decline in 
government revenue in just 2011. That is next year.
  This is sure to have a devastating effect on our Nation's long-term 
national security. I have said over and over that Americans are hurting 
from our addiction to oil. I am not sure they fully realize the extent 
to which our national security, and indeed our very way of life, is 
threatened--threatened--by our reliance on foreign oil.
  Every year, we send billions of dollars overseas for oil and pad the 
coffers of many nations that do not have our best interests at heart, 
such as Venezuela, whose leader has threatened to cut off his oil 
exports. Today, over 80 percent of the world's oil reserves are in the 
hands of governments and their respective national oil companies, and 
16 of the world's 20 largest oil companies are state owned. Russia has 
proven it has no qualms about using energy as a weapon. In Venezuela, 
Hugo Chavez has forcefully consolidated the nation's vast oil reserves 
under the control of their state-owned oil company. He frequently uses 
the company as political leverage in his region.
  With the rise in national oil companies around the world and the 
apparent weaponization of the globe's energy resources, U.S. domestic 
oil production has been on a decline. We now import nearly 60 percent 
of our oil, and as a consequence we are sending billions of dollars 
overseas and putting our faith in the hands of regimes that do not have 
our best interests at heart. For example, in 2007, we spent $327 
billion to import crude oil and refined petroleum products. In 2008, 
the amount we shipped overseas spiked to more than $700 billion. In 
other words, we take American money and send it overseas. And 55 
percent of that money, or nearly $400 billion, went to oil-exporting 
OPEC nations. Today, oil amounts for over half our trade deficit.
  Our dependence on foreign oil is even made more troubling when you 
consider our Nation's financial situation. The national debt stands at 
$13.3 trillion--more than double the $5.6 trillion that existed when I 
came to the Senate in 1999. By the end of 2010, the national debt is 
expected to have grown to over $14 trillion. Last year, we borrowed 
$1.4 trillion.
  The best way I can explain the soup we are in is that last year, for 
every dollar the Federal Government spent, we borrowed 41 cents. Most 
people, when I tell them that, just can't believe it. But that is the 
situation. This year, we are going to borrow $1.5 trillion or another 
year where we will borrow 41 or 42 cents for every dollar we 
spend. Over half the privately owned national debt is being held by 
foreign creditors, mostly foreign central banks. In fact, foreign 
creditors have provided more than 60 percent of the private funds the 
U.S. Treasury has borrowed since 2001, according to the Department of 
Treasury.

  Who are the creditors? According to the Treasury Department, the 
three largest foreign holders of U.S. debt are China, Japan, and the 
OPEC nations.
  These concerns led me to introduce the National Energy Security Act 
last year with Senator Byron Dorgan. The bill expands development of 
domestic oil and natural gas by streamlining the inventory and 
permitting of the most promising areas of the Outer Continental Shelf. 
By the way, the group that is supporting this is a group of former 
admirals and generals who basically said we have to do something; 
because of the fact of too much reliance

[[Page S6546]]

on foreign oil we are in terrible shape. We are on thin ice, in terms 
of our national security.
  In addition, the bill provides $50 billion in Federal loan guarantee 
authority for low-carbon electricity, including nuclear and advanced 
coal. It promotes the electrification of the transportation fleet to 
reduce dependence on foreign oil, supports building the crucial 
infrastructure necessary to create a robust, reliable national grid, 
and strengthens electricity transmission, including giving FERC the 
power to site transmission lines.
  Americans today demand action and they demand we come together in a 
bipartisan fashion to solve not only this crisis in the gulf but our 
larger energy crisis. For 10 years, I have been a member of the 
Environment and Public Works Committee and for 10 years I have tried to 
coax Congress into harmonizing our energy, our economy, and our 
environment. Congress has refused and now the chickens have come home 
to roost and we are paying the price because we were not able to get 
together.
  I believe the best message we can send the world is that we get it. 
We must demonstrate that we can safely and responsibly produce oil off 
our shores, while also promising ourselves that we are going to use 
less by undertaking a renewed effort to make the United States of 
America the most oil-independent nation in the world. I envision an 
America 10 years from now where we can have enough oil to take care of 
our needs. I imagine an America that is the least reliant country in 
the world on oil, an America where our economy is not threatened by our 
reliance on foreign energy sources. It will be an America that has 
created hundreds of thousands of jobs through responsible development 
of our Nation's resources and through the creation of new industries in 
the field of alternative energy.
  Wouldn't it be great for our children and grandchildren to one day 
celebrate the time America put aside its differences and came together 
to announce what I refer to as a second ``Declaration of 
Independence''--to find more and use less? I believe, with this 
attitude, we can rekindle the American spirit of self-reliance, 
innovation, and creativity to usher in a new era of prosperity.
  The first step is to pass the Oil Spill Improvement Act to get people 
back to work in the gulf and to give the Department of Interior the 
tools it needs to provide proper oversight of the oil and gas industry. 
Second, Congress needs to do its job--make the passing of a 
comprehensive energy bill a priority and provide certainty as to how 
our Nation will supply energy to its economy in the future.
  I reiterate and call upon my colleagues, the majority leader, the 
minority leader, for us next week to put out the Republican proposal 
and the Democratic proposal, and to have back-to-back votes will do 
nothing but increase the cynicism that is out there among the American 
people about what we are doing in the Senate. Next week, we should 
finish the small business bill--get on with that. We ought to get on 
with consideration of the Kagan nomination by the President and we 
should come together and say let's get serious, let's work during the 
August break to see if we cannot come together on a compromise between 
the two back-to-back bills so maybe when we get back in September we 
can have something we can all agree on and get passed and reassure the 
American people we are serious about dealing with their problems and 
maybe even give consideration--I know this would be difficult--to look 
at what many of us have suggested, to look at the bill that Jeff 
Bingaman and the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee put 
together on a bipartisan basis.
  Perhaps we could look at a bill Senator Rockefeller and I have worked 
on for over a year that deals with capturing and sequestering carbon; 
to look at a title that deals with nuclear energy that I worked with 
with Senator Lieberman and others--and get something done. It may not 
be satisfactory to a lot of the environmental groups, but at least we 
would move the ball down the field this year so people know we are 
serious about becoming less reliant on foreign sources of energy and 
also that we are genuinely concerned about reducing greenhouse gas 
emissions.
  As I said, I have been around here, this is the 12th year on 
Environment and Public Works. For years, we wanted to do something 
about NOX, SOX, and carbon, bring down the caps. 
The environmental groups said: No, we won't agree with that, we have to 
include greenhouse gas emissions, so we did nothing.
  I will never forget the Secretary of State, when she was a Senator 
from New York, and she wanted a compromise on emissions because the 
Adirondack Council and the folks from the Smoky Mountains agreed if we 
did the Ps, reduce SOX, NOX, and mercury, we 
could move along, and then the environmental groups came along and they 
gave her the ``Villain of the Month Award.'' Hillary Clinton gets the 
``Villain of the Month Award'' because she is trying to work on a 
compromise to move us down the road.
  We have some time left. I know it is going to be difficult because we 
have the backdrop of the election facing us. I hope once that is over 
we have a robust lameduck session so we can deal with some of the 
things that are on the minds of the American people and, hopefully, 
perhaps this Commission that you and I wanted to see done on the floor 
of the Senate, that the President finally had to do through Executive 
action, could come back here with some positive suggestions on how we 
can deal with our debt and these budgets that are not going to be 
balanced as far as the eye can see.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________