[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 8]
[Senate]
[Pages 11528-11529]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          CLIMATE SECURITY ACT

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the majority leader said recently that 
global warming was ``the most important issue facing the world today.'' 
Let me repeat that: the most important issue affecting the world today. 
And nearly three-fourths of the Senate thought it was important enough 
to have a debate on the Senate floor. Seventy-four Senators voted to 
bring this measure to the floor for debate because they recognized the 
significance of this issue. Yet the majority is blocking fair 
consideration.
  Instead of allowing a full debate with an open amendment process 
designed to improve the bill, the majority last night filled the tree. 
What are they afraid of? Why don't they want to consider amendments to 
a bill addressing what they call ``the most important issue facing the 
world today''? If it is the most important issue facing the world 
today, it certainly deserves a lot longer debate than a few days.
  At $6.7 trillion, the climate tax bill--which is what we have before 
us--the climate tax bill is the largest bill we will consider this 
Congress. As the Wall Street Journal noted, this legislation represents 
the most extensive--the most extensive--reorganization of the American 
economy since the 1930s, which is why, of course, I am mystified as to 
why the Democrats decided to block the consideration of any and all 
amendments designed to improve this bill: no consideration of gas 
prices, no consideration of clean energy technology. A bill with such 
widespread ramifications merits serious, thoughtful consideration and a 
thorough debate.
  A good example of how to handle a bill like this properly, another 
time when our good friends on the other side were in the majority--and 
there was a Republican in the White House--when the Senate considered 
the Clean Air Act amendments in 1990, the process took 5 weeks on the 
floor. There were about 180 amendments offered. I was here then, and 
nobody was telling one side or the other what they had to offer. Nobody 
said you have to show me your amendment first or I will not let you 
offer it. And 131 of those amendments were ultimately acted upon by the 
full Senate.
  As it currently stands, we would not even spend 5 days on this bill. 
But we would like to spend more time on the bill and would encourage 
the majority to open the process. I don't know what they are afraid of. 
Since when did we descend to the point in this body that we would not 
let somebody offer an

[[Page 11529]]

amendment unless they get to read it first? That isn't the way the 
Senate used to operate. Yet the majority blocked us from offering even 
one amendment regarding this massive restructuring.
  That makes me wonder, why doesn't the majority want a fair debate on 
this bill? What are we afraid of? If this bill alone will ``save the 
planet,'' as has been suggested, why are they refusing to allow an open 
debate or more than 2 days on the bill?
  Perhaps they don't want to expose this bill for what it really is: a 
climate tax. It is a climate tax. This legislation will raise gas 
prices, electricity prices, diesel prices, natural gas prices, and 
fertilizer prices. It will also put America at a significant economic 
disadvantage compared to the rest of the world.
  Given that families are already struggling to pay record gas prices--
it is nearly $4 a gallon now--Congress should be working to lower gas 
prices, not increase them.
  Republicans are eager to offer amendments to the Boxer climate tax 
bill to develop clean energy solutions and promote economic growth. In 
America, we tackle problems like this with technology, not by clamping 
down on our own economy. If this is a problem--and many of us believe 
it is--the way to get at it is with technology and then sell it to the 
Indians and Chinese, who, I assure you, are not going to do this to 
their own economies. They are going to take advantage of our foolish 
decision to clamp down our own economy and have jobs exported to China 
and India.
  If the majority is serious about debating this issue, then let's have 
a real debate, complete with an open amendment process. Don't shut it 
down after only 1 day.
  This is entirely too important to consumers, to our economy, and to 
the climate to block a thorough consideration.

                          ____________________