[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 9]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 12000]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET HEARING ON ECONOMIC AND BUDGETARY EFFECTS 
                       OF NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. ANDER CRENSHAW

                               of florida

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, June 26, 2001

  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, last week, the House Budget Committee held 
an informative hearing on the economic and budgetary effects of our 
nation's energy policy. Energy has always been a necessary ingredient--
either directly or indirectly--to all our goods and services. 
Particularly as our economy becomes more and more dependent on 
technology, energy is increasingly the crucial ingredient.
  As if to punctuate this point, the Energy Information Administration 
at the Department of Energy has concluded through its research that 
falling energy prices can enhance economic growth by about 0.3 
percentage points over a 2-year period. Furthermore, stable energy 
prices that are not fluctuating widely may enhance growth by as much as 
0.7 percentage points over 2 years. Only a few tenths of a percent can 
make a world of difference, particularly for small businesses, small 
investors, and working families.
  The President began speaking about the need to develop a national 
energy policy that addresses both long-term and short-term problems and 
solutions long before the energy crisis in California became apparent. 
The plan of action that he has presented to the nation through his 
National Energy Policy Development Group is responsible, sound, and 
comprehensive. It includes suggested solutions to our lack of domestic 
energy supply and our dependence on foreign sources, as well as 
recommendations for the development of energy supplies for the 21st 
Century.
  Furthermore, for the most part, the President has made a serious 
effort to take into account local concerns and interests where they 
intersect with the nation's interest in an energy policy that crosses 
geographic boundaries. I do, however, hope to have the opportunity to 
work with the President and his administration to find a compromise to 
the proposals to develop oil and gas exploration in the Eastern Gulf of 
Mexico that is consistent with the wishes of Floridians.
  Florida is renowned for its pristine and beautiful beaches and 
oceans. Our economy relies upon that reputation remaining intact and 
vibrant. In fact, 40 million tourists traveled to Florida in 1999, 
spending $46 billion in Florida's hotels, shops, restaurants, and 
attractions. It is because of our commitment to the environmental and 
economic health of our state that Floridians have consistently opposed 
oil and gas development less than 100 miles off the shores of Florida. 
This is a position that has had the support of Republicans and 
Democrats alike.
  There is currently under consideration within the Administration 
proposals to explore within this safe harbor that Florida has 
requested. While I am pleased by the healthy and productive ongoing 
debate on this matter, I remain opposed to drilling within this safe 
harbor. I have been encouraged by the seeming willingness of the Bush 
Administration to work with the State of Florida to seek further 
moratoriums in the Straits of Florida region by the famous Florida 
Keys. And, I am very hopeful that the Administration will work with the 
State to consider restricting lease sales in the Eastern Gulf so that 
oil and gas exploration can be pursued for the nation while respecting 
the concerns of Florida.

                          ____________________