[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 7]
[Senate]
[Pages 9535-9536]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                   IMPORTANT ISSUES BEFORE THE SENATE

  Mr. THOMAS. Madam President, we, of course, have been dealing, over 
the last several weeks, with some of the most important issues that 
will be dealt with in this entire year, as we should. One, of course, 
is the budget. I think our success in the budget is holding down 
spending to something somewhat below what it has been in the past. 
Because we have had a surplus, the expenditures have gone up really 
more than you would imagine they would in terms of inflation and those 
kinds of things.
  So this budget was held--I think the President asked for 5 percent--
to a little in excess of that, but, nevertheless, a reasonable budget 
of which we can be proud.
  The question now, of course, is staying within the budget. The budget 
is not an imposition of a limit; it is a pattern and a scheme to try to 
stay within. But it does not necessarily ensure that. That will be the 
real challenge.
  The second thing we have dealt with, and have not yet completed, of 
course, is education. For most people in this country, education is the 
first issue they mention when they talk about issues.
  Again, there are some rather basic issues that really ought to be 
talked about and decided. One issue is, What is the role of the Federal 
Government in elementary and secondary education? I think most of us 
would agree--and our experience has been--that State and local 
governments have the principal responsibilities in education. With that 
certainly ought to go the opportunity to make the decisions on a local 
basis.
  The schools in Wyoming, obviously, have different needs, and have 
different uses for the dollars, than in areas of the country such as 
Pittsburgh or New York. And, therefore, local decisionmakers ought to 
have a chance to be able to use those dollars in the ways they are 
needed.
  Another issue in education, of course, is the basic question of, What 
is the role, in terms of expenditures, of the Federal Government? I 
think over the past number of years the Federal Government's 
contribution financially has been something less than 7 percent. So it 
is a relatively small contribution but a very important one and has 
caused us to have some of the programs that, of course, are very 
essential to our young people and very essential to education.
  The tax bill that has been talked about is probably the most 
important thing we will do for a very long time. Hopefully, we will 
conclude that this afternoon. We will return a substantial amount of 
the surplus to those people who have paid it in and, at the same time, 
retain enough money to do the things that most people believe are a 
high priority; that is, to pay down the debt--to pay down all of the 
debt that is available to be paid down--to do something more with 
Social Security and pharmaceuticals, to ensure that Medicare is strong 
and continues in the future, and, of course, to have some flexibility 
so that there will be money there for increased expenditures for the 
military and for security.
  I think all of those areas will be covered in this proposal that is 
before us.
  The next issue that has a much higher profile now than normally is 
the question of energy. Of course, one of the reasons that it is now on 
so many people's minds is because prices have gone up substantially. 
There is the difficulty in California, the shortages that have occurred 
there. You can talk in many ways about why it has happened and what was 
the cause, but, nevertheless, it is there. Certainly there are some 
fairly interesting things that have happened there that have brought 
about the difficulties in electric energy.
  But energy, of course, has been an issue for some time. It is not a 
brand new idea. It isn't hard to understand that when the market 
messages tell you that consumption is going up and production is going 
down that you are going to have a wreck inevitably and you need to do 
something about it.
  It is not hard to tell that we have put ourselves at risk when we 
find ourselves depending nearly 60 percent on oil imported into this 
country as opposed to domestic production. That is an increase that has 
changed substantially over the last several years.
  I suppose one might also say that it is not hard to imagine that you 
have some problems when you really have not had an energy policy for 
the past number of years, so that whatever has been done has not been 
part of a coherent plan to provide sufficient energy.
  So I am very pleased to applaud the President and Vice President Dick 
Cheney for the effort that they have put in--and immediately put in--to 
the energy issue. The White House energy tax force, chaired by Vice 
President Cheney, has produced an energy package that has now been 
presented to the public and to the Congress with some 105 proposals 
that need to be considered, some of which can be done by administrative 
fiat within the Government. Others will have to come to the Congress, 
of course, to be acted upon.
  I have been serving on the Energy Committee for some time and have 
been very interested in public lands and the interior. It has been very 
interesting that we focused entirely on the Department of Energy which, 
in turn, has not focused much on energy but,

[[Page 9536]]

indeed, has had most of its focus, over the last several years, on one 
of its other responsibilities, which is nuclear: nuclear waste, nuclear 
security, Los Alamos. Those kinds of things have been almost the entire 
attention of the Department of Energy as opposed to energy.
  So it is significant to me that in this work group the Vice President 
has included not only the Secretary and the Department of Energy, as, 
of course, it should be, but also the Department of Interior, which 
manages our public lands--which have some of the greatest energy 
reserves--and also EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency, which has 
had a great deal to do with the production of energy and the 
regulations that have been promulgated.
  So I think it was an excellent idea to have this collaborative 
effort, to bring several different agencies together. I hope they 
continue to be a part of dealing with the whole energy issue.
  So I certainly support a program that recognizes that we have 
significant energy demands and one that begins to look for a solution--
a solution that also includes conservation and the protection of the 
environment. I think those are very key elements.
  I come from the State of Wyoming. We have a good deal of energy 
production in our State. Some call it the Btu capital of the world. We 
have probably the largest reserve of coal in the United States, as well 
as natural gas and oil. We have uranium, all those kinds of things. We 
also have some of the most beautiful mountains and flats and prairies 
of any State in the Union. And we have, for a number of years, produced 
energy. We intend to continue to do that. We intend to continue to do 
it in such a way that you can protect the environment at the same time 
you have multiple uses of those lands. But there will be lands that 
will not be used for a multiple use. They have been set aside as 
wilderness. They have been set aside as national parks, and that is as 
it should be. And so we do have to differentiate.
  But in the policy, of course, we talk about energy and fuel 
diversity, which I think is very important. Certainly we are going to 
have a number of kinds of fuels that we can use, coal being one.
  There is emphasis on clean coal technology so we continue to research 
ways that coal, which now produces about 52 percent of our electric 
generation, can be used with less intrusion into the air. We can do 
that. In this plan there are opportunities for that.
  Renewables: We need to take a look at the long-term importance of 
renewables. Certainly all of us would like to see more power generated 
from wind and solar. Currently only about 1 percent of our consumption 
is produced by renewables. It can be greater, and we hope it will be.
  Hydro: Of course, we need to take a look at our opportunities for 
renewables in hydro. Interestingly enough, some of the 
environmentalists who are critical of the President's plan more 
recently were asking to tear down dams. It is sort of a paradox.
  Nuclear has a role, certainly. We have seen over the last few years 
that nuclear-generated power is probably the most clean power that is 
available and can be done in a safe manner. We need to do more there. 
We need to do something, however, about the waste storage, of course. 
That has not yet been resolved.
  These are some of the things that can be done, and I hope we do them. 
We have an opportunity to set out a policy and then use a combination 
of production and conservation to protect our environment. Those are 
the challenges we can indeed meet.
  I yield time to the Senator from Utah.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.

                          ____________________