[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 7]
[Senate]
[Pages 8793-8794]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             ENERGY POLICY

  Mr. REID. Madam President, in Reno, this weekend, the price of a 
gallon of unleaded gasoline was $2.22. Premium gasoline costs more than 
that. The higher blend fuels in Nevada cost about $2.50 a gallon.
  My friend and neighbor from the State of Idaho, the senior Senator 
from the State of Idaho, was in the Chamber a few minutes ago talking 
about the fact that if we pass the energy bill that had previously been 
on the Senate floor, and the one that came back from conference, we 
would have all of our energy problems resolved. I want to disabuse 
anyone within the sound of my voice, that simply is not factual.
  That energy bill was a bad bill. It did nothing to help the cost of 
gasoline. The thing it would do is give the industry just what it 
wants, billions of dollars in the form of subsidies and tax breaks, 
with no real conservation requirements.
  We want an energy bill. We, the minority, want an energy bill. But we 
want an energy bill that will diversify our energy supply, reduce our 
Nation's dependence on foreign oil, and protect the environment.
  The one thing the bill did not have in it that came back from 
conference was ANWR. That was at least something of which we were able 
to convince people of good will around here: The fact that the United 
States has, at its fingertips, less than 3 percent of the oil reserves 
of the world, recognizing that we cannot drill our way out of our 
problems. And that includes the oil that is supposedly in the ground in 
Alaska. We cannot produce our way out of our problems. Almost 97 
percent of the oil reserves in the world are someplace else. So we have 
to do things that are smart and not only look to the short term but to 
the long term.
  There is no doubt that the price of crude has contributed to the 
higher gasoline prices in Nevada and throughout the rest of the country 
these last few years. But the outrageous 55-cent-per-gallon increase in 
Nevada, since January, has not been driven by the rising cost of crude 
oil only, but I believe by corporate greed and profit. These oil 
companies and refiners are getting rich, and middle-class families are 
getting gouged.
  The stalled energy bill will do nothing to reduce the high price of 
gasoline because it fails to either improve regulations on an oil 
industry that is over-concentrated or rein in demand by adopting 
tougher fuel economy standards. Instead, the legislation proposes just 
what the industry wants--I repeat, giving billions of taxpayers' 
dollars to large oil companies in the form of subsidies and tax breaks, 
with no conservation requirement whatsoever.
  The Bush administration's own analysis concludes that the legislative 
incentives to reduce our reliance on foreign oil in the bill will have 
only a negligible success. The administration report concludes that 
implementation of the energy bill would reduce net petroleum imports by 
about 1.2 percent in 21 years--a reduction hardly worth the billions of 
dollars taxpayers would give away to the oil companies.
  We must also pressure the Saudis to increase production instead of 
cutting it back by a million barrels per day. I have said on this floor 
previously that Saudi Arabia and the OPEC nations can do a great deal 
to relieve the problems we have. They are our allies. That is something 
that I am not too sure exists. It is a one-way street with them. But I 
was pleased to hear that Saudi Arabia has said they will recommend at 
the next OPEC nations meeting to increase production by at least 1.5 
million barrels a day. That is nice because they just cut back 
production by a million barrels of oil a day.
  We need to be releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to 
drive down prices. We have to stop putting extra oil in the Reserve, 
for which we are paying an arm and a leg.
  In terms of meeting the Nation's energy needs, we should increase the 
use of alternative fuels and renewable energy resources. That is the 
thing we can do to take a bite out of big oil. We can rely more on the 
Sun, the wind, geothermal, even biomass.
  So I was encouraged that in the FSC bill the Finance Committee put in 
energy incentives, including the section 45 production tax credits for 
renewable energy. That will allow us to use the things that are 
renewable like the Sun, wind, and, of course, geothermal heat.
  So I applaud Senators Grassley and Baucus for having this section 45 
production tax credit for renewable energy resources that expands and 
extends the credit for these issues that I have talked about, these 
renewable resources.
  Renewable energy will protect consumers and create jobs. It is 
important to stop declaring our energy independence when that is not 
the case. I do not think it serves any purpose to come out and talk 
about how great this bill is that failed. If it were that great, it 
would not have failed. It is a bill that does nothing to solve the 
energy needs of this country.
  One of the big issues in that bill, of course, was the fact that this 
substitute fuel that had been manufactured around the country, MTBE--
what the bill proposed is that you just simply forget the fact that 
companies that used MTBE polluted the ground, and that people have 
suffered from it.

[[Page 8794]]

  No one knows of a better example of that than what took place in 
Utah, Nevada, and California. MTBE polluted the water systems there. 
These companies have had to respond in damages as a result of 
litigation filed by the water entities in that area. So what this bill 
would have done is taken away the right of these entities, such as in 
the Lake Tahoe area, to seek recourse for the damages caused by these 
chemicals to the water supply.
  So the bill that was before the Senate, and the conference report 
that was defeated, was a bad bill. It was a bill that was a sop to the 
car manufacturers and the oil companies. That bill would have done 
nothing to solve the energy problems of this country.
  The legislation we will be asked to work on this week, the FSC/ETI 
bill, has something that will help the long-term needs of the country. 
I hope we don't become righteously indignant as my friend did--for whom 
I have the greatest respect. He is a fine man, and we have worked 
together on a number of issues dealing with western land problems. The 
fact is, passing the bill that came before us, that was defeated 
because there weren't enough votes to go forward on the conference 
report, was some of the best action the Senate has ever taken. If we 
want to respond to the energy needs of the country, we need to do 
things that really help the consumers and not big oil and big auto 
manufacturers.
  I was stunned to learn that New Yorker magazine has come out today 
with a story by a man named Hirsch that talks about some of the things 
going on in the torture chambers in Iraq, not the torture chambers that 
were there and run by Saddam Hussein but torture chambers that were 
there--I am embarrassed, humiliated, and disappointed to say--and were 
run by Americans. He talked about the story on public radio today, and 
this is a message that I understand and I think all Americans have to 
understand: We can't have a few enlisted people, as we refer to them--
no longer draftees; everyone is enlisted--nonofficers, take the fall 
for what went on there. He talked about the reason pictures were taken, 
both the videos and stills.
  I ask unanimous consent for 2 additional minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. They were going to be used to show the prisoners' families 
and neighborhoods. That is why they were produced. This was not 
something that was done by some soldiers just trying to do something to 
pass the time of day; the people who were in the officers corps 
instructed these men and women that they were to take these pictures 
and what they were to be used for in the future. I know some of these 
nonofficers did things that were wrong, and I am so grateful there were 
people in the military who came forward and said enough is enough. That 
is the reason we know about it now. But let's not have a few of the 
nonofficers be the scapegoats for what went on.
  We are a mighty nation. We have to respond accordingly. We cannot 
allow a few underlings to take the fall for what obviously was a 
concerted action that officers were involved in. It is just a question 
of how high up in the officers corps the problem went.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.

                          ____________________