[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 20266-20267]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                                 ENERGY

  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I again rise to focus the Senate on an 
issue that is without question a high priority one for the Congress and 
for the American people and one I hope we can deal with before we 
recess or adjourn this first session of the 107th Congress. I am 
talking about the critical need for a national energy policy.
  For over a decade, we have wandered in the energy world without a 
policy that truly directed our resources and our public policy toward 
assuring that our Nation was self-reliant on its primary energy 
sources. Over that time, we have grown increasingly dependent upon 
foreign sources for those primary resources.
  As a result, if what is now going on in the Middle East were to erupt 
in a

[[Page 20267]]

broader shooting war, it is possible we could see a curtailment of 
supplies out of those oil-rich countries that could not only create a 
critical crisis here but would drive up fuel prices at the pump 
dramatically. It is not happening right now. It is not happening 
largely because of a flat economy, less use, and because the OPEC 
nations recognize that the world economy is soft at this moment and 
have chosen not to turn the spigots on their oil wells down; therefore, 
driving up the price.
  It is temporary, and we all know that it is temporary. Over a year 
and a half ago, they made it very public that it was their intent to 
drive the world price of crude oil up to $28 to $30 a barrel and to try 
to sustain that price. It is now below that.
  It is obvious to me and to all of us who watch this issue that they 
are intentionally holding the price down because of the world economy 
and their fear of its softening.
  That is one side of the issue. The other side of the issue for us is 
a quick examination of our infrastructure and the systems of our 
infrastructure and the failure of that to deliver the kind of energy 
our growing economy and our growing Nation needs. We saw that for 
almost a year in California with rolling blackouts that truly crippled 
the economy of that great State, largely because they had chosen the 
wrong policy as it related to continuing to develop energy sources and 
to upgrade the infrastructure that served the public.
  As a result of all of that, we had a new President come to town not 
quite a year ago and say that without question one of the most critical 
needs of this Nation is a national energy policy. He established that 
as a very high priority.
  Well, while he was doing that, we in the Senate, and our colleagues 
on the other side of the rotunda in the House, were busily working at 
the crafting of such a policy. We have spent countless hours and over 3 
years in the Senate, with literally 100 or more very detailed 
investigative kinds of committee gatherings for the purpose of trying 
to determine how that policy ought to look, how we ought to shape it, 
and how we ought to present it to the American people.
  All of that work has been done. In fact, the House worked rather 
quickly. They sensed the urgency, as we did, and before the August 
recess they had produced their version of a national energy policy. It 
appeared to me--and I think to all of us--that by late fall we would 
have a similar bill and we would be voting on it on the floor of the 
Senate because the Energy Committee, under the guidance of Chairman 
Bingaman, was working its will, starting a markup. Our attempt was 
going to be considerably more extensive than that of the House. But 
that work was well underway.
  Then comes September 11. We are refocused for a moment, as you know, 
and for all the right reasons. But this Senate is not a single-action 
Senate. There are 100 Senators, and there are multiples of committees 
and lots of chairmen, and there are hundreds of staff people. Clearly, 
the Energy Committee of the Senate should have been, and could have 
been, continuing its work toward the production of a bill to come to 
the floor of the Senate.
  Then, in a rather unprecedented move, over a week and a half ago, the 
majority leader of the Senate basically told the chairman of the Energy 
Committee to cease and desist. No longer was he to mark up a bill and 
get it to the floor. Why? The argument was that it was politically too 
divisive. Too divisive to talk about a national energy policy, to tell 
the citizens that this Senate was going to work with the President to 
develop a policy to move us toward energy self-sufficiency, that is 
divisive? I don't think so. I think that is leadership. I think that is 
what our country calls out for at this moment, and people certainly are 
getting it in most instances.
  But in the area of national energy policy, the leader of the Senate 
is not leading at this moment. Now he says he has instructed the 
chairman of the Energy Committee to craft a bill that they will build 
up through the office of the majority leader and it will come to the 
floor, or it could come to the floor, or it is possible to have a vote 
on it prior to a recess or adjournment of the first session.
  Well, that is not good enough. I don't believe so. I believe a strong 
majority of the Senate agrees with me that it is time we dealt with a 
national energy policy and let the chips fall where they may, let the 
votes fall where they may. As a result of that, Frank Murkowski, our 
ranking member of the committee, I, having served on the committee for 
a good number of years, and a lot of other folks are engaged in trying 
to craft an energy bill. It won't be as broad or expansive as it might 
have been had we had the will to work the committee and had the 
committee not been instructed to stand down and desist, but we will 
introduce that bill. We believe that can be done on Monday.
  We are working with the administration. Now we are asking in a very 
straightforward way, and I think an honest and responsible way, for the 
majority leader of the Senate to give us time to bring his bill to the 
floor; let us bring our bill to the floor and let us work out our 
differences. Everyone knows the issues at hand and all of us have a 
pretty good idea of what a national energy policy ought to look like. 
Then we can work with the House. Prior to adjournment, or following 
adjournment, we can rest assured that a national energy policy bill 
will be on the desk of the President of the United States, so that if 
there is a dramatic energy shock in the future, we will have done the 
right thing. We will have prepared the country, directed our resources, 
directed the infrastructure of this country toward the development of a 
greater sense of self-reliance because my guess is that if we fail and 
gas lines mount in a time of crisis, this Senate will be scrambling to 
make up politically what they are now trying to dodge.
  It is not a time for politics. We have worked very cooperatively 
together on a lot of issues since September 11. Energy should not be 
one issue that is politicized. But by the very action of the majority 
leader himself, he is on the verge of risking that possibly happening. 
So I ask him to honor his commitment that he made publicly--and I have 
no reason to believe he would not--to get an energy bill to the floor, 
allow us to get ours to the floor, allow us to offer amendments, and 
let the Senate work its will. Two or three days of debate, don't we 
have time to do that when we are standing idle, waiting for decisions 
to be made, waiting for judicial nominees to come to the floor, and 
waiting for appropriations bills to come to the floor?
  Remember, there are 100 Senators. There are numerous chairmen. This 
Senate can work in multiples of ways beyond just a single issue and a 
single action. I think it is time that we as Senators insist that the 
leadership of the Senate allow us to bring what I believe is one of the 
top issues in America today, a national energy policy, to the floor so 
that the American people will know we did the right thing in trying to 
protect them and their future and the economy of this country from any 
major shock, should we ever get into a situation in the Middle East, or 
in those primary production areas on which we are now so reliant, which 
are well beyond our border and well out of our control.
  With those comments, I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Vermont is 
recognized.

                          ____________________