[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 14]
[House]
[Pages 19187-19188]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          ENERGY PRICES RISING

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Tennessee (Mr. Cohen) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. COHEN. Madam Speaker, our Nation is suffering. While many 
citizens are living paycheck to paycheck, energy prices have been 
rising, affecting the daily lives of Americans, getting to their jobs, 
getting children to school, and causing the cost of goods to increase 
significantly due to rising transportation costs. Rising energy costs 
affect individuals, families, and businesses, both large and small.
  We must gain control of energy prices, and must do so in a reasonable 
and rational manner, with an eye toward the future and a plan which 
accomplishes energy independence while respecting our environment and 
providing real relief to individuals, not promoting yet another program 
that benefits Big Oil, at the expense of the taxpayer.
  There are very real differences between Democrats and Republicans 
when we talk about energy issues. We are in the mess we are in now 
because the interests of Big Oil have, for far too long, been given 
priority over the needs of our citizens. Big Oil has reaped the 
rewards. Even now, while Americans struggle for ways they can reduce 
their individual energy consumption, ways they can survive while the 
price of gasoline, home energy costs, groceries, indeed almost 
everything has outstripped their income, the Republicans are touting a 
plan that, according to yesterday's and today's New York Times 
editorials, would do little to increase the supply or reduce the price 
of oil.
  The New York Times editorial: ``It would do little to increase the 
supply or reduce the price of oil. Oil companies already have access to 
nearly 80 percent of all American offshore oil that is technically 
recoverable. This bill would probably open up less than half of the 
remaining 20 percent, amounting to approximately two-thirds of 1 
percent of all globally recoverable sources. The Department of Energy 
has already stated that the effect on prices would be insignificant.''
  The very party which has led us down this path of dependence on Big 
Oil, that has repeatedly squelched innovation and interest in renewable 
resources and alternative forms of energy, now wishes to save us with 
the simple mantra: Drill, baby, drill.
  According to another New York Times op-ed published yesterday, 
drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and from currently 
restricted offshore sites could translate into an extra million barrels 
of oil a day in the year 2025. That is 17 years from now, Madam 
Speaker. Please note that. An extra million barrels in 2008 or 2009? 
No. 2025.
  Sure, it takes time to make real change. But 17 years from now we can 
expect the Republican fix to result in lowering the price of crude by 
only 1.3 percent. So the party of Bush and Cheney, the party of Big 
Oil, the party that Texas gave us, is going to fix the situation they 
have created just 17 years from now, and with a 1.3 percent cut. In the 
meantime, Big Oil's profits will continue to rise.

[[Page 19188]]

  The Republican record on energy programs which have helped Americans 
is poor indeed. Let's look at the facts and decide if we need another 
Republican energy plan.
  According to the Energy Information Administration, the price of gas 
is now $3.65, up from $1.46 when President Bush took office. A 150 
percent increase. The price of gas was $2.29 when Republicans adopted 
their energy plan. Today, it's a 59 percent increase. $3.65.
  Republican energy policies have resulted in record profits for oil 
companies. The five largest companies have posted profits of $556 
billion from 2001 to 2007, including $123 billion in 2007 alone. Yet, 
Republicans have voted against nearly every energy initiative brought 
to the House floor.
  Madam Speaker, I submit to you we must do everything we can, and 
examine every option in our efforts to help American citizens and to 
change our energy culture. Yes, we must look at drilling, but we need 
to be responsible in our approach and ensure that we are making 
decisions that actually achieve our goals, and our goals must be to 
help the taxpayers, not the oil corporations.
  We must look at alternative forms of energy, we must look at 
renewable energy, we must look at every aspect of energy consumption 
before we act. There are real differences here, and I hope Congress 
will do the heavy lifting and make the difficult choices necessary to 
do what is right for the American people.
  It's long past the time for rhetoric. It's time to tackle this real 
challenge and come up with real solutions, not short-term fixes, which 
will lead the American public, once again, footing the bill for Big 
Oil.
  Madam Speaker, today the New York Times had another editorial. The 
New York Times' independent observations:
  ``Voters are furious at high gas prices. Republicans are happily 
pandering at their anger. Congress has sensibly renewed the moratorium 
each year for the last 26. Unfortunately, these are not sensible times, 
which means that congressional Democrats, particularly House Speaker  
Nancy Pelosi, must try hard to make the best of a bad situation. The 
situation, briefly, is this: The Republicans have been bludgeoning the 
Democrats with the claim that Democrat opposition to offshore drilling 
is to blame for high fuel prices and that drilling is the answer, or 
one answer, to the country's dependence on foreign oil. We find it hard 
to imagine that they really believe what they say. Drilling will have 
no impact on fuel prices for at least 15 years, if then, and any number 
of efficiency measures will do more to reduce the country's dependence 
than drilling for America's modest offshore reserves. But the chant of 
drill, baby, drill, is playing far too well. Ms. Pelosi's compromise 
deserves support.''

                          ____________________