[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 8658-8659]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             ENERGY POLICY

  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, what has happened in the Gulf of Mexico 
makes one thing very clear; that is, America's energy policy is a 
disaster. I thank Senator Kerry, Senator Lieberman, and Senator Boxer 
for their leadership in pointing out the need for America to get off 
its addiction to oil and promote safe and clean energy sources for 
America so that we can be independent, so that we can achieve the type 
of economic growth we need and contribute to a cleaner environment. If 
we do our energy policy right, as Senator Kerry, Senator Lieberman, and 
Senator Boxer have been telling us, we can solve all three problems.
  I must tell you, I think one of the most urgent needs for an energy 
policy

[[Page 8659]]

is to make America more secure. We spend almost $1 billion a day on 
imported oil that goes to many countries that disagree with our way of 
life. Americans are actually helping to fund those who are trying to 
compromise America's security. That makes no sense whatsoever.
  The Department of Defense has pointed out that our energy policy 
actually contributes to international instability. We spend a lot of 
money trying to figure out how we can make the world safer. One way we 
can make the world safer is to develop an energy policy where we are 
self-sufficient, where we do not have to rely on imported oil.
  We can also solve the second problem, and that is economic growth. 
Take a look at what is happening in China. They are investing heavily 
in solar and wind power because they know they are going to create 
jobs. We want to create these clean jobs in America. We want to 
manufacture the component parts for solar and wind. We want to be able 
to manufacture component parts for nuclear. We believe we can create 
jobs in America by having a policy that relies more on clean energy. 
There are more jobs to be created, much more so than in oil. For the 
sake of our economy, we need to develop a comprehensive energy policy.
  Then, for our environment, I can talk a great deal about why we need 
to move forward and get the pollutants out of our air and reward those 
who use clean technologies. Climate change is real. Tell the people on 
Smith Island, as they see their island disappearing because of the 
rising sea level, or tell those who see the traditional seafood 
industry go in decline because of warmer waters. We know climate change 
is real, and it is causing instability around the world. We need to 
deal with it.
  If we need a reminder, take a look at what is happening in the Gulf 
of Mexico. BP originally told us there was 1,000 barrels a day leaking. 
Now they tell us it is 5,000. We do not know whether that is accurate. 
We know one thing: It has caused an environmental disaster in the Gulf 
of Mexico. We can expect dead zones because of oxygen deprivation. We 
can expect that our wetlands, which are critically important for our 
ecosystem and to protect our environment, will be invaded by this oil. 
As Senator Nelson points out frequently, if it gets into the Loop 
Current, it could very well go through the Keys and the east coast of 
the United States.
  The tragedy of this is, we all know we cannot drill our way out of 
our energy problem. We have less than 3 percent of the oil reserves and 
we use over 25 percent. We know we cannot drill our way out of our 
energy problems.
  Additional exploration will give us very little as far as energy 
independence. I will talk about the mid-Atlantic because I am most 
familiar with the mid-Atlantic. We have been told by recent studies 
that we may have enough oil in the mid-Atlantic to handle our energy 
needs for 2 months in the United States. Think about that--the risk 
factor versus the reward. It makes no sense whatsoever.
  If we have a Deepwater Horizon episode in the mid-Atlantic, it will 
be catastrophic to the Chesapeake Bay. Many of us have invested a lot 
of energy to clean up the Chesapeake Bay. We know we need to do more. 
EPA has come out with its game plan. I filed legislation with my 
colleagues to have a stronger effort in cleaning up the bay. But if we 
had an oilspill in this region anywhere near what happened down in the 
Gulf of Mexico, it would set us back for generations.
  Some say: Is that a real possibility? Could that really happen? Let 
me tell you about the lease site 220 off of Virginia which is being 
primed for offshore drilling. That is 60 miles from Assateague Island 
and 50 miles from the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay. The prevailing winds 
are toward the coast, which means a spill is likely to come on the 
coast a lot quicker than we saw in the Gulf of Mexico.
  I have a few suggestions for my colleagues. First, we need to stop 
any further offshore exploration of gas or oil until we have put in 
place the regulatory structure to make sure we have done adequate 
environmental assessments before any new drilling is permitted. That is 
the least we can do.
  We know the exploration plans submitted by BP Oil told us there was 
virtually no risk, and if there was a spill, they had the proven 
technology to make sure it did not reach our coastlines. The proven 
technology was these blowout protectors that we note failed in the 
past, had very little experience at 5,000 feet of water, and as a 
result we see the disaster that has unfolded.
  The regulatory system is not independent. It needs to be changed. We 
need to make sure other agencies in the Federal Government that are 
knowledgeable about wildlife are consulted before permits are granted. 
At least we need to make sure those regulatory changes are in place.
  Secondly, we need to protect, as Secretary Salazar has said, those 
places in America that are environmentally too sensitive to risk 
drilling. Secretary Salazar points with pride--and I agree--to the west 
coast of the United States or to the North Atlantic.
  The area off the coast of the Chesapeake Bay is environmentally too 
sensitive to risk drilling for the little bit of oil that may be there. 
I urge my colleagues to provide protection--permanent protection--from 
the offshore drilling in the mid-Atlantic.
  Then we need to consider legislation for a comprehensive energy 
policy in this Nation. I applaud Senator Kerry and Senator Lieberman 
for bringing forward a proposal. It is a good start. I compliment them 
for the manner in which they handled offshore drilling because they 
give States, such as Maryland, a veto if the environmental risks are 
there. To me, that is far better protection than current law and better 
than what the administration has proposed.
  I hope we can do better. There are provisions in the bill I want to 
strengthen. There are issues I want to make sure are added to it. But 
unless we get started on energy legislation, unless we bring to the 
Senate Floor and are willing to debate, as we should, an environmental 
and energy policy for our country, we won't have a chance to move on 
these issues.
  I can't tell you how many people I have talked to in the State of 
Maryland who say: Look, we need to be energy independent, we need to 
create jobs, we need to be sensitive to the environment. But we can't 
do that unless we have a bill before us.
  I want to applaud Senators Kerry and Lieberman for their efforts. I 
hope we will have a chance to consider that, and I can assure my 
colleagues that I will have some suggested changes for that legislation 
in order to strengthen it so we truly can achieve the goals of making 
America more secure, of creating the jobs we need and being an 
international leader on preserving our environment to make sure that 
polluters do not continue to pollute our environment.
  With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the 
absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. FRANKEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________