[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 8205-8207]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                IDAHOANS SPEAK OUT ON HIGH ENERGY PRICES

  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, in mid-June, I asked Idahoans to share with

[[Page 8206]]

me how high energy prices are affecting their lives, and they responded 
by the hundreds. The stories, numbering well over 1,200, are 
heartbreaking and touching. While energy prices have dropped in recent 
weeks, the concerns expressed remain very relevant. To respect the 
efforts of those who took the opportunity to share their thoughts, I am 
submitting every e-mail sent to me through an address set up 
specifically for this purpose to the Congressional Record. This is not 
an issue that will be easily resolved, but it is one that deserves 
immediate and serious attention, and Idahoans deserve to be heard. 
Their stories not only detail their struggles to meet everyday 
expenses, but also have suggestions and recommendations as to what 
Congress can do now to tackle this problem and find solutions that last 
beyond today. I ask unanimous consent to have today's letters printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

       I certainly feel the impact of huge and unpredictable 
     increases in all the necessities: gas/fuel, household energy 
     costs, food, clothing, travel, etc. All of these have risen 
     rather dramatically, sort of like dominoes. I am spending a 
     lot more for a lot less. As I am deciding not to go do 
     something or go buy something, I think of all the merchants 
     and businesses that will, if they are not already, suffer 
     from this (all of us not going places, and buying so much 
     less). I have almost totally quit eating out. Movies are out 
     of the question. I have greatly cut down on my driving. I 
     will just not visit places that I do not absolutely have to 
     (and, truth be told, there are not really that many places 
     one absolutely has to go). I go to the closest grocery store, 
     as they are all expensive. I go to the closest gas station. 
     There is no public transportation between my place of work 
     and my home, which is a real hardship. In fact, our bus 
     service is not bad in Boise, but it is cumbersome and 
     limited. I find this to be a problem. I will not be doing the 
     traveling and vacationing this year that I usually do. I will 
     not be able to visit family members that do not live in 
     Boise. This is not good for business, or morale and attitude 
     (mine). Because I have much less disposable income now, my 
     charitable donations will be, and already are, less. It is so 
     expensive to drive to any of the organizations where I like 
     to help out (``volunteering'') that it has had to be cut out. 
     Driving to attend the civic and fun groups that I am a member 
     of and the activities that I like to participate in is now 
     too costly to continue attending. Shopping? Out of the 
     question, with the exceptions listed above. By the way, did 
     you know that the average fuel usage in Ford's (last, I 
     believe) cars--in his day--was 25 mpg. Do you know what it is 
     in this country today? 21 mpg. We all know that this is 
     ridiculous. Clearly, the only entity that benefits from this 
     is fuel companies, and automakers that have not had to retool 
     their factories for decades. And even with that ``savings'', 
     they're hurting, too, now.
       My suggestions, wishes, and hopes?
       More public transportation, more types of public 
     transportation, more coverage, more frequent times that 
     public transport goes by, at a minimal cost to riders. And we 
     could use the money that we would save on highways to fund 
     it! Trains are wonderful, both for passengers and goods.
       Laws that insist that all parts of the automobile industry 
     quickly get cars ready for market that are lighter, safer, 
     and much more fuel efficient; that include speedily 
     implementing the roll-out of vehicles (all vehicles, 
     including commercial and military) that some of them are 
     already developing, that are outstanding in design and are 
     environmentally responsible. I should say, that are already 
     in development, although perhaps not by the mainstream auto 
     makers. The use of fossil fuels should be seriously lessened. 
     Oil and gas companies should pay their rightful taxes, and 
     should not be subsidized. New ``green'' fuel sources should 
     be subsidized at the rate that oil and gas companies 
     currently are, and should get breaks on their taxes for the 
     early years. These should include, but be not limited to: 
     wind, solar, geothermal; and research into new, unknown 
     possible energy sources (with low environmental impact) 
     should also be encouraged with subsidies and whatever helps, 
     within limits. And the whole ``alternate fuel'' scenario 
     should have some honesty, reality, and integrity infused into 
     it. Specifically: ethanol is in no way environmentally 
     responsible or viable. It is just a give-away for the 
     corporate farm industry. Nuclear fission energy should be 
     banned. There is no way to ensure safe use now, or of the 
     spent fuel in the future, and it misuses precious water 
     resources. I am okay with working towards trying to make 
     nuclear fusion work.
       No new drilling--anywhere! Americans can come up with 
     better ideas--let us go back to that ``good old American 
     ingenuity and know-how.'' We used to be on the cutting edge 
     for creativity, inventiveness, and new ideas--and the 
     development of them. Let us ``Be The Best We Can Be.''
       And, lastly, and strongly related to the energy problems we 
     are experiencing: land and soil should be nourished and 
     protected. It should be used in an honest and responsible 
     way. That means, for example, that corn should actually have 
     nutritional value, should have lowered sugar levels, not 
     continue to be genetically and artificially altered so as to 
     be useless for actually providing nutrition for people, 
     because it is nothing but sugar that makes the creation of 
     corn syrup, which is destroying the health of our kids, among 
     other unhealthy products, easy and cheap to produce for 
     greedy and/or corporate ``farmers.'' The land should be 
     cherished, not over-used, misused, and abused. It should be 
     mindfully used to produce food for people--good, nourishing, 
     healthy food to nourish healthy children, mothers, and all of 
     us.
       The health, safety, and financial benefits of changing our 
     practices and policies are so extensive that it would take 
     too much space to enumerate here. We could be at the world 
     leaders of industry, development, inventiveness, and 
     productivity if we, as a country, were willing to look at 
     things in a fresh way, rather than stubbornly clutching at 
     ``doing things the same old way.''
       We are supposed to be conservatives--let us actually 
     practice conserving.
     Susan.
                                  ____

       Our family of 5 spends more than $500 a month now on 
     gasoline (for 3 vehicles--our 3 kids can all drive now), not 
     to mention the higher food prices that are a result of higher 
     fuel costs to truckers and the foolish ethanol policy of the 
     government. We are needing to work additional jobs just to 
     try to make basic ends meet and avoid going deep into debt. 
     If prices go up further, we will still be going into debt 
     just to cover the basics of food, clothing, transportation 
     and shelter.
       We are an average family (financially we make about 60,000 
     a year from 3 jobs between all of us, with 2 now in college--
     1 just starting, but living at home), but face above average 
     costs when compared to the averages mentioned in the media 
     and by politicians. For example, Barack Obama makes light of 
     a temporary lifting of the gas tax, saying it would be 30 
     cents a day. We would be at least twice that much, and many 
     truckers would save even more if diesel tax was lifted. And 
     we are an average family, so I do not believe his numbers for 
     a minute.
       We cannot afford to buy an expensive high gas mileage small 
     car to offset the higher gas prices. We must continue to 
     nurse along our two more than 10-year old vehicles that get 
     19 miles per gallon. Most poor and lower-middle class are in 
     the same situation as us. The upper middle-class and wealthy 
     may be able to handle it to some better degree, although I am 
     not a participant in class envy and they should be considered 
     too. But it is interesting how the [liberals] claim to care 
     about the poor and middle class, yet their do-nothing policy 
     on energy contradicts their claims.
       If they think taxing oil companies and redistributing the 
     tax to poor and middle class with rebate checks will solve 
     the problem, they are wrong. The tax will be passed on in 
     ever-higher gas prices and/or the oil companies could limit 
     production to stay just below the windfall tax threshold, 
     thus causing shortages and even higher prices. It did not 
     work when Jimmy Carter tried it, and tweaking it a little to 
     allow oil companies to trade the tax for alternative energy 
     production would likely not help much, in my opinion. We need 
     to get the price down, not give each person a small piece of 
     the large wealth redistribution that helps them for only a 
     few months.
       The government needs to remove the restrictions and 
     regulations that hinder progress in tapping our domestic 
     energy sources of all types. Many claim that tapping into our 
     domestic oil and natural gas resources would not do any good 
     for many years. They are wrong. And even if they were right, 
     do you avoid planting a tree just because you will not get a 
     full crop of fruit or sufficient shade for several years? 
     This ``tree'' of increased domestic oil supply should have 
     been planted over 10 years ago.
       But here is why they are wrong: if speculators are part of 
     the cause of increased oil prices whenever there is something 
     in the Mideast that brings concern about possible reduced 
     supply, then they would logically be part of the cause of 
     reduced oil prices if they received good news that our 
     government was finally serious about allowing increased 
     domestic supply. There would be an almost immediate drop in 
     oil prices which would soon show lower prices at the pump. On 
     top of that, the foreign nations that have control over us 
     now would not want to see us quit buying from them in the 
     future, so they would likely increase production to try to 
     get us to not increase our production. Increasing their 
     production would cause an additional price decrease within a 
     short amount of time.
       Increasing our domestic drilling and exploration would 
     create additional jobs, as oil companies would hire people to 
     do the additional exploration and drilling. And additional 
     revenues would be created for the states that participated, 
     by leasing land, taxes paid through the additional 
     employment, etc. This would help our national

[[Page 8207]]

     economy as well, as it became a positive ripple effect.
       Increasing other types of energy sources, such as wind, 
     solar, coal, shale, nuclear, natural gas, etc. are all good. 
     Even ethanol is good where it can be produced regionally and 
     help regionally without being forced on us at a certain level 
     by the government, causing a shortage of corn and higher food 
     prices.
       A final thought: we need fewer lawsuits by 
     environmentalists, which bog things down way too long. We 
     need to reform the laws to keep them from preventing us from 
     solving this problem. If the government okays further 
     drilling, etc, but allows the radical environmentalists to 
     bring up lawsuit after lawsuit, we'll still be in trouble. 
     Allow a basic environmental process to ensure we are doing 
     this in a reasonable manner, and then have them get out of 
     the way so we can start making use of our resources.
       Thanks for allowing me to give my input.
     David, Boise.
                                  ____

       I am a 15-year Idaho resident, and I commute about 55 miles 
     a day to work. The cost of gasoline/diesel is having a 
     profound effect on the local economy-not to mention my own 
     finances. Idaho, and most other inland states, are feeling 
     the effects directly in higher prices across the board. I 
     know several small business owners, in different markets, who 
     have related to me the disastrous impact this is having on 
     them. I cannot stress enough that we need to increase the 
     supply side of this equation. But, of course, everyone in 
     Washington knows this and the situation is being exploited by 
     those on the left to increase dependence on government.
       It is obvious to me that the liberals in Congress see high 
     fuel prices as vehicle to provide them greater control over 
     the lives of the citizens of the United States. The more low 
     income people have to spend on fuel, the more likely they are 
     to require government support in other areas of their lives. 
     This is intended to cement the liberal base as permanent 
     government serfs with no choice in for whom they vote. 
     Ultimately, this is an attack on our liberty from within 
     that, if left unchecked, will result in less freedom, and 
     more and bigger government.
       There are a number of facets to this problem: environmental 
     regulation, government regulation, and political demagoguery 
     that is unparalleled in our history. The oil companies are 
     not the problem. Most people I know realize this and are fed 
     up with environmental bullshit reasons for not exploring for 
     more oil. The notion that there is a shortage of oil or, that 
     we are running out of oil, is simply not born out by the 
     facts. But facts do not matter when there is an agenda. As 
     Goebels said, the bigger the lie, the easier it is to sell.
       I would love to discuss this at length with you, but I am 
     losing faith in the process. However, I appreciate that you 
     are fighting the good fight. Please keep it up.
     Mike.
                                  ____

       I am not sure if I have any faith in our Congress changing 
     anything but I feel some satisfaction with at least voicing 
     my thoughts and if I may say so my feelings about these 
     soaring energy costs.
       Yes, the soaring energy costs have had a huge impact on me. 
     I am a single women working as a Physical Therapist 
     Assistant. I live 30 miles from my place of employment. I own 
     horses so I own a pick-up truck. Up until recently I only 
     drove my truck. It was not great on fuel economy, but as a 
     person with only one income, a house payment, a vehicle 
     payment, plus other bills. It was not feasible to buy another 
     vehicle. As a single women that is not mechanically inclined 
     (nor do I have the time), I need vehicles that are safe and 
     reliable. Well, now, I have a small vehicle. So now I have 
     two vehicle payments, plus full coverage insurance on two 
     vehicles, plus a house payment, plus fuel, plus all the other 
     costs to get buy! Fuel for my truck, just to go back and 
     forth to work for one week was costing me between $80 & 100 
     reg. gas, the ``cheap'' stuff! That is not counting doing 
     anything on the weekends, or any ``extra'' driving. That is 
     simply working 4-5 days a week. I usually work (4) 10s and 
     sometimes a few extra hours on day 5. So yes, now my grocery 
     bill has been reduced, my credit cards are being used more, 
     and it scares the hell out of me!
       My home energy bill also nearly doubled. I have not doubled 
     my use. I am away from home most of the time. I rarely watch 
     television, except to turn the news on from 4:30 A.M. to 6 
     A.M. when I am getting ready for work. I turn my computer on 
     for a few minutes several days a week. I go to bed early so 
     my lights are not even on much, yet my power bill doubled! 
     No, I do not use much air conditioning either! I have a small 
     house less than 1100 square feet. I have had it for sale for 
     over a year and I have not been able to sell it. I replaced 
     the roof last summer. The windows could stand to be replaced, 
     yet I cannot afford to replace those old aluminum windows 
     with vinyl.
       Oh, I know most people would say to give up my animals and 
     move to town, but then what is all of this about? What pray 
     tell am I working for? My animals bring me joy and peace from 
     a crazy world. I have raised/owned Arabian horses since 1985, 
     and I have owned horses in general most of my 50 years. So 
     the thought of going to work just to pay taxes, lay on a 
     couch and watch TV after work and on weekends does not sound 
     like much of a life to me. So if we cannot have a few things 
     that bring us joy and comfort why are we working?
       Yes, the out-of-control energy costs is slowly wiping all 
     of ``working'' people out. If everything is taken away and 
     all that is left is work, who wants to live that life? Think 
     about it! Better yet, maybe those [who enjoy privileges and 
     expensive lifestyles] should come live with us that really 
     have to work and live on a budget. Let us take away those 
     expense accounts and all the other freebies! Do you know how 
     many people think like me? There are a lot.
       Thank you for giving me the time to get this off my chest.
     Judy, Wendell.
                                  ____

       I do not wish to join the whining masses about how energy 
     prices have affected us all. Instead, I wish that Congress 
     would act to pass a national energy policy that would 
     encompass all areas of energy development. We did not win 
     World War II by building only ships or tanks or airplanes, 
     etc. We conquered the global threat at that time by building 
     all assets necessary to win and developed new technologies 
     for the future. The liberals' bumper sticker mantra that we 
     cannot drill our way out of this mess refuses to acknowledge 
     that the way out of this ``mess'' is to get out of our 
     ``boxes'' and look at the wider picture. Back in the 1970s, I 
     learned that C-ration California peanut butter burned right 
     out of the can whereas Georgia stuff would not. Why limit our 
     research to corn, chicken parts, et.al. as potential fuels? 
     We should not keep subsidizing our farmers to not plant if 
     corn and other foods/fuels are now in such demand. We 
     obviously need greater oil production and refining capacity 
     as a significant part of overcoming those forces in OPEC that 
     continue to enslave us to their output. We should work on 
     developing Hydrogen fuel cell technology and put real 
     delivery ability on the ground because who is going to buy a 
     car he cannot refuel? We absolutely must develop nuclear 
     reactor improvements and capacity which is being developed 
     right now in Idaho. Limit individual financial incentives for 
     energy savings because their cost savings should be incentive 
     enough and any rewards beyond that are too open to fraudulent 
     claims and wasting taxpayer money. Congress is too good at 
     wasting our money already. Buying ``conservation credits'' 
     like Al Gore does for his estate is a sham for the wealthy. 
     It is akin to buying indulgences centuries ago that was the 
     final ``straw'' that began Martin Luther's Reformation. The 
     [conservatives] in Congress lazily missed an opportunity to 
     make a worthwhile energy policy that ``thinks outside the 
     box'' in the last several years and, I fear, that if the 
     [liberals] win control of either house in November that we 
     are doomed to suffer the consequences laid out over a 
     thousand years ago by a Greek philosopher that all 
     democracies are doomed to failure that as the people vote 
     more liberties and indulgences to themselves their 
     governments will be more unable to pay for them and they will 
     lapse into anarchy. I believe we are in the third of his four 
     stages right now.
       I hope this has not been too boring or offensive. We, as a 
     nation, must act to avoid an energy demand catastrophe, and 
     our Congress is that body that our forefathers have ordained 
     as the ones to do that task. I appreciate your time if you 
     have really read this,
     Bill, Idaho Falls.

                          ____________________