[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 5913-5914]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           SETTING PRIORITIES

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I know we have a lot of things on our 
minds with some distractions, of course, but I will talk just a moment 
about some of the things I believe we ought to have as priorities. We 
need to establish our priorities so that we can work on the things we 
collectively believe have the most impact and should really be acted 
upon. Obviously, there are all kinds of ideas among us, and as we talk 
to people who come to see us and our people at home, why, there are a 
million things, but there are some that seem to be in need of 
consideration more quickly.
  One of them is energy. We have talked about having an energy policy 
now for several years. The evidence now is even stronger that we need 
an energy policy which gives us some kind of insight as to where we 
need to be in 10 or 15 years so that as we approach the problems, we 
can discover the things it takes to attain those goals.
  Our energy policy has always been a broad policy, as it should be. It 
has been a policy that talks about conservation, efficiency, 
alternative sources, renewables, as well as domestic production. 
Certainly, one of the things that is most important, that the 
administration and the President has pushed, is to do some work to make 
sure coal fits into the environment satisfactorily. Coal is our largest 
fossil fuel, and we ought to be using coal for electric generation 
rather than some things other than coal, such as gas. Almost all of the 
generation plants over the last 20 years have been gas, largely because 
it is more economical to build a smaller plant closer to the market 
with gas than coal. So not only do we need to do something about the 
carbon and the exhaust from coal, but we also

[[Page 5914]]

have to do something about transmission so that we can economically 
create electricity at the mine mouth and get it through our 
transmission system to the market.
  We passed a highway bill a number of years ago, and we have never 
been able to get it completely passed, so we have just passed on the 
old one. It is certainly more than past time to get a highway bill. 
There is probably nothing that has more impact on our economy, creates 
more jobs, and allows for other things to happen in the economy than 
highways. We certainly need to do that.
  Additionally, one of the things that becomes clear, and even more 
clear as we spend time on Social Security, which we should, is personal 
savings accounts that people can have for themselves. As I have gone 
about talking about Social Security, I have always tried to remind 
folks that Social Security was never intended to be a retirement 
program. It is a supplement. It is a supplement to the retirement 
programs that we put together.
  There are a number of ways, of course, where there are incentives for 
savings, whether they be retirement programs or 401(k)s in which the 
employers participate. Now we have a potential for savings that can be 
spent earlier than retirement, that could be used for almost anything. 
One of the real issues is to have medical savings accounts so that we 
can buy cheaper insurance policies with a higher deductible and, 
therefore, have some money to pay for that.
  There is nothing, perhaps, more important than to get ourselves into 
a position of people preparing for their own retirement. This Social 
Security discussion has shown basically what young people could do by 
putting aside a relatively small amount of money every month and having 
it earn interest for them.
  One of the things I recognize is a little bit regional is the 
Endangered Species Act. It has been in place for a very long time. In 
my judgment, it has not been as effective as it could be. I am not for 
doing away with the Endangered Species Act, but we have roughly 1,300 
species listed as endangered and have only recovered about a dozen. So 
the emphasis has been in the wrong place. We are going to have an 
opportunity to be able to do that, and it has great impact in many 
cases. It is kind of used as a land management tool so that we lose the 
multiple-use aspect of public and even private lands because of 
endangered species.
  There are a lot of things I think we ought to be doing.
  Finally, it seems to me that we ought to have a system that takes a 
look at programs after they have been in place 10 years, or whatever--
after they have been there for a while. We should restudy those 
programs, reanalyze those programs to see if, indeed, the need for them 
is still what it was when they started; to see if they could be made 
more efficient after 10 years or, indeed, if they don't need to be 
there anymore. I know it is very difficult. There gets to be a support 
group that forms around all the programs that are funded, of course. It 
becomes difficult to change.
  But it is too bad, when we think about it, to pass programs that are 
spending Federal money and have them out there when there is no longer 
any need for them or when the time has come where something different 
needs to be done.
  I am hopeful we can get something done. I am thinking about putting 
something in bill form that will provide a review or oversight of 
programs that are in place to see if they are still important, to see 
if they are still being done efficiently, and to see if they could be 
done a better way or, indeed, need to be done at all.
  These are some of the things I think are very important. I hope we 
try to set some priorities. I understand out of 100 people there are 
going to be many different ideas, but that is part of our challenge, to 
put 100 people together and decide what are the five most important 
issues that impact this country and impact our States.
  I hope we can do that and I look forward to that opportunity.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Alexander). The Senator from Missouri.

                          ____________________