[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 14886-14887]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                        GAS PRICE REDUCTION ACT

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, as we stand here, Americans are 
suffering from the most dramatic oil shock in memory. A single barrel 
of crude oil costs almost three times today what it did a year and a 
half ago. This is a crisis that demands our full attention. Yet, until 
now, Democrats on Capitol Hill have responded as if high gas prices 
were a mere distraction. Their proposals have been the legislative 
equivalent of a fly swatter, when the American people are clamoring for 
the heavy artillery.
  Part of the reason for this timid approach by our friends on the 
other side, as anyone can see, is the upcoming election. They have made 
no secret of the fact that they do not want to consider real 
legislation until Inauguration Day, when they hope their candidate will 
take the White House.
  We need to realize Americans are more concerned, at the moment, about 
paying for groceries and filling their tanks with gas than they are 
about the political calendar. Americans are not thinking about next 
January, they are thinking about today. They expect their elected 
representatives in Washington to take serious steps now to lower the 
price of gas.
  The proposal the Democratic leader outlined on gas prices last week 
falls laughably short. It has all the marks of a political exercise 
nervously cobbled together in the face of constituent pressure and none 
of the elements of a serious plan that would actually lower the price 
of gas or reduce our dependance on the Middle East. The Democrats will 
have to do better than this if Americans want to see their gas prices 
go down.
  Here is their plan. First, they propose curbing speculation. 
Democrats want us to forget that no reputable economist thinks 
speculators alone are the reason for the spike in gas prices or that a 
recent report by the 27-nation International Energy Agency chided 
politicians who blame speculators alone as searching for a scapegoat 
instead of looking for real answers.
  Naming speculators alone is not a serious proposal for lowering the 
price of gas. We do need more cops on the beat at the CFTC, but if 
Democrats think the answer to $4-plus-a-gallon gasoline is curbing 
speculation alone, then they are obviously asking the wrong question.
  Second, their plans call on the President to release 10 percent of 
the oil contained in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. It is encouraging 
to see our friends on the other side acknowledging that increasing 
supply has an effect on price. But at best, this is a polite nod in the 
direction of supply; it is nibbling around the edges. Again, it is very 
timid.
  Even if we were to tap 10 percent of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, 
as they suggest, that would only allow for the release of 70 million 
barrels at a time, when Americans are using more than 20 million 
barrels of oil a day.
  Let me say that again. Even if we were to tap 10 percent of the 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve, as is suggested by our friends on the 
other side of the aisle, that would only allow the release of 70 
million barrels, and we use 20 million barrels a day now. In other 
words, this is a 3-day solution. It should go without saying that a 3-
day supply of oil is not a serious proposal for lowering the price of 
gas.

[[Page 14887]]

  Next, the Democratic plans for high gas prices call for increasing 
production on 68 million acres already leased to oil companies. This is 
the so-called ``use it or lose it'' provision that says scolding energy 
companies for not producing fast enough will magically cause gas prices 
to go down.
  Let me remind my friends that this is why we call it ``exploration.'' 
Those who do it should be encouraged, not threatened. The fact is, the 
Secretary of the Interior already has this authority to revoke a lease 
if it is not being used according to the original terms of that lease.
  Democrats do not mention this at their press conferences, nor do they 
mention that many of these leases are simply unproductive, nor do they 
mention that the Federal Government has declared 85 percent of offshore 
land and 62 percent of known offshore oil reserves completely off 
limits to new exploration. Nor do the Democrats mention that, because 
of them, 100 percent of Western oil shale is off limits, despite the 
fact that experts estimate the Western States that have oil shale 
deposits are literally floating on a sea of oil roughly three times the 
size of Saudi Arabian oil reserves. In other words, ``use it or lose 
it'' is already the law of our land. ``Use it or lose it'' is not a 
serious proposal for lowering the price of gas.
  Finally, the Democratic plan says we should stop exporting oil that 
is produced domestically. Well, that is an interesting idea. Last year, 
America exported only 10 million barrels of crude oil overseas--that is 
half of what we use in a day--including sales to Puerto Rico. Today 
alone, America will use more than 20 million barrels of oil. This is a 
half-day solution to a yearlong problem. It is, in other words, a joke.
  The crisis is real. Americans are suffering from high gas prices. 
They deserve better from their elected leaders in Washington than half-
day or 3-day solutions and bad jokes. They deserve a year-round 
solution.
  Americans deserve a solution that says if prices are going to go 
down, supply needs to go up. They deserve a plan that lifts the ban on 
offshore exploration and oil shale development, even as we continue to 
promote conservation.
  Americans know this crisis is not only a demand problem; it is a 
supply and demand problem. Until more of our friends on the other side 
acknowledge this, record-high prices will persist.
  Now, some of our friends are beginning to acknowledge the undeniable. 
As of today, ten Democrats have expressed at least some level of 
willingness to explore offshore. They are acknowledging a groundswell 
of public opinion, even among self-described liberals, in favor of more 
domestic supply.
  Republicans have a proposal that was designed specifically to attract 
their support and the support of any other Member of the Senate who 
actually is interested in achieving a result. It promotes energy-
efficient vehicles such as plug-in electric cars and trucks. It 
addresses supply and demand by lifting the ban on Western oil shale 
development and opening exploration far from the shore of States that 
want it.
  Ours is a serious proposal that directly addresses the price of gas 
at the pump. It is not a gimmick. It is not a half-day Band-Aid on a 
year-round problem. It is a solution. It is what the American people 
are demanding of us.
  High gas prices are a serious problem and demand to be taken 
seriously. It is time our friends on the other side put partisan 
differences and timid, peripheral half-measures aside and get serious 
about this urgent situation. The American people expect and deserve it.

                          ____________________