[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 12243-12244]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                             ENERGY POLICY

  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam President, I will share a few remarks at this 
time about the rise in gasoline prices that are impacting American 
families. I recently pumped the gas at a gas station in Alabama. I 
talked to a lot of people. I talked to a young lady who commuted 50 
miles plus, every day, to go to college. She talked to me about working 
part-time and going to college, how much the gasoline prices were 
eating into her weekly budget, and what she was trying to do to keep 
those prices down.
  It does impact Americans. Gasoline increases hurt our Nation's 
productivity. It is a transfer of wealth that could be spent on 
computers, education, better equipment, shoes, food, housing, that has 
to be spent on a substance for which we previously had paid less. That 
is a diminishment of our national wealth. It is important and should 
not be treated lightly.
  Over a year ago, we had gasoline in many States, depending on the 
amount of tax those States imposed, selling at close to $1 a gallon.
  Senator Hutchison noted most of our gasoline comes from foreign 
sources. In fact, the Energy Information Agency reports that we are 
buying 56 percent of our oil on the world market.
  Just last year, we were buying oil at $10 a barrel, transporting it 
across the ocean, refining it, shipping it to gasoline stations and 7-
11 type stores, for sale all over America. One could go down to a gas 
station and buy that gasoline for around $1 a gallon, and 40 cents of 
that dollar was taxes. So the gas was actually 60 cents a gallon.
  People say the oil companies are all evil and horrible, but I think 
those numbers are pretty good. Madam President, 24 hours a day at 
virtually any town intersection in America, anyone could buy gasoline, 
if we take the tax off, for around 60 cents a gallon. That is a 
remarkable achievement. Go to the same gas station and buy a bottle of 
water; you will probably pay $3 or more a gallon. The little bottles of 
water cost 70, 80, 90 cents a bottle. Still there has been a remarkable 
increase in gasoline prices over the last 12 months.
  How did we go from $1 to $1.50, $1.60, $1.70, $1.80, and even $2 a 
gallon for gasoline? What happened? How did it happen? If we are going 
to set good policy, we ought to ask ourselves that question.
  The main issue is that OPEC wanted more money. The oil-producing 
group, the cartel, so to speak--Middle East countries including Saudi 
Arabia along with Venezuela, and others --that overwhelmingly supply 
the oil to meet world demand, got together and decided they wanted more 
money. They made a political decision they were going to do certain 
things, as Senator Domenici said, to drive up the price of gasoline. 
The world economy was coming up, so Asia was using more gasoline, other 
nations were using more gasoline. So they simply quit producing as 
much. They reduced their production, and they didn't cheat on one 
another. It actually worked. They created a worldwide shortage.
  The price for a barrel of gasoline, at $11 a year or so ago, rose to 
over $30 a barrel. It hovers around $30 a barrel now and is more than 
double today what it was last year at this time. That has driven up the 
cost of gasoline.
  First, we have to understand that. In addition, we are now in a 
summer vacation time cycle. People take their trips. We use more 
gasoline in the summer than at any other time. That is another 
complication. Increased demand creates upward price pressure.
  There have been problems with pipelines, and I don't dispute that. 
Gasoline companies, pipeline companies, the distributors, and the 
people who actually run the gasoline stations, set the prices as they 
choose, some of those businesses are catching this rise and perhaps 
trying to make a few extra cents. It does not surprise me that is the 
case.
  Fundamentally, we have a shortage of supply in this world. The OPEC 
nations have done that through political action. It is very serious for 
our economy. There will be a negative impact on our Nation.
  How did that happen? When political activities occur, you can only 
respond, basically, politically. It seems to me, this administration 
has not been alert at all to the problems we are facing. The Clinton-
Gore administration has not understood energy policy. It has effected a 
series of small steps, really no-growth extremist steps, that have 
debilitated our own American oil and gas industry, leaving us more 
vulnerable to a determined OPEC cartel that demands higher prices. That 
is basically what happened to us.
  How are we going to defeat that? It is going to really take political 
action to use our power against it. Frankly, there are some people in 
this country--most people who are sophisticated know this--who believe 
we ought to have higher gas prices. That is the Clinton-Gore 
Administration's policy for America. They believe if gasoline prices go 
up, we will drive less, we will buy their kind of small cars, windmills 
will become more popular, solar panels will be more popular, and that 
kind of thing will happen. They believe we ought to have higher energy 
prices.
  I believe we ought to support alternative energy sources, but I do 
not believe we ought to be taxing American people to encourage them to 
alter their lifestyles, taking money out of their pockets, making them 
pay more money for gasoline for these agendas. I am concerned about 
that.
  With regard to how it is impacting America, I think it is a fairly 
simple matter. What is really happening in this country is we are 
paying 20 cents, 30 cents, 40 cents more a gallon because of OPEC price 
increases. That is, in effect, a tax on American consumers by OPEC. In 
effect, when you go to the gasoline station and you buy a gallon of 
gas, if it is 10 cents, 20 cents, 30 cents, 40 cents more because of 
their prices they are charging, we are paying them that much more. It 
is not an economic thing; it is done by their political monopoly cartel 
power because of our failure to produce energy domestically.
  We need to do better to produce more energy in this country. I have 
to say we have a policy in our Nation, by this administration, that is 
contrary to that idea. For example, if we are going to increase energy 
production in America, we need to promote production and exploration. 
One of the ways we could do this is to open up areas of federal land 
with proven oil reserves.

[[Page 12244]]

  We have, in Alaska, an ANWR region with huge supplies of oil. In 
fact, that region of Alaska, is about the size of the State of North 
Carolina, and the size of the area where the oil would be produced is 
about the size of Dulles airfield. It is a very small area, but within 
that small area they can produce huge reserves of oil. This 
administration has steadfastly, through vetoes, refused to allow oil 
production there even though a majority of this Senate has voted for 
it, as I recall. They do not dare because they think it might have some 
environmental impact.
  Experience shows that today's oil and gas production technology has a 
minimal negative environmental impact and in ANWR it affects a tiny 
area. So they have taken that source of oil--oil which could help us 
compete effectively in the world and stop the transfer of our wealth to 
Saudi Arabia and give us greater bargaining power--off the table.
  There are huge reserves of natural gas in the Gulf of Mexico--huge 
reserves. Natural gas is one of the cleanest burning fuels we have. 
Much of our electricity generation is being transferred from coal and 
other fuels to natural gas because it burns so much cleaner and it is 
relatively inexpensive. Vice President Gore, in his speeches in New 
Hampshire during the primary campaign, said that not only did he oppose 
any further drilling for natural gas in the Gulf of Mexico, but he 
wanted to cut back on those leases already approved for drilling. I 
think that is an extremist position. They drill for gas right within 
the Mobile Bay, my home town. It is a clean substance, compared to oil. 
Even if it leaks, it evaporates rapidly. It doesn't have the sludge 
that oil does.
  To stop production of gas in the Gulf of Mexico is an extremist 
position and one which will make us more vulnerable to Saudi Arabia and 
OPEC. It is not acceptable.
  This administration refuses to allow production of oil in the Rocky 
Mountain area where as much as 60 percent of the land is owned by the 
Federal Government. They virtually shut off drilling in those areas.
  There has been growing interest in coalbed methane production, in 
which you can drill a well into coal seams and bring out methane gas, a 
very clean burning gas. New technology has made the production of this 
clean fuel economically viable, but through environmental regulations 
which even the EPA does not support, this fledgling energy production 
source is at risk.
  Finally, this administration has steadfastly opposed the use of 
nuclear power, which Senator Domenici mentioned. They refuse to allow 
us to store waste nuclear fuel, spent uranium fuel rods, in a remote 
desert tunnel in Nevada, where we used to blow up atom bombs on the 
surface. It ought to be done. By refusing to allow spent fuel to be 
safely stored, it compromises our ability to produce more of our energy 
by nuclear power which produces absolutely zero air pollution. It is a 
nonpolluting source of power.
  France already generates 80 percent of their power by nuclear power. 
Japan is moving in that direction. We have to realize we need to do 
more with nuclear power. In fact, in this country, over 20 percent of 
our power comes from nuclear. But we have not ordered and brought on-
line a new plant in over 20 years.
  Those are the actions which must be done be done. The policies this 
administration support are wrong, the consequence of these policies are 
clear: shortage of energy and higher prices. That is what will occur. 
That is what is occurring. I think we need strong leadership from this 
administration to deal with this problem now.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
  Mr. DORGAN. I ask unanimous consent to speak in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________