THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Doc Contents
As domestic oil production continues to decline, U.S. dependence on foreign oil has actually grown, from 36 percent in 1973, to
[Page: H1228] GPO's PDF
Mr. Chairman, it is time we recognize that oil is a strategic commodity. It is absolutely vital that the government have policies in place that protect the U.S. oil and gas resource base. Oil is the nation's economic lifeblood, and we need to get ourselves off foreign life support.
This is not an easy task. Now that the price of crude is high, we might make the mistake of assuming that domestic oil and gas producers do not need our assistance. One only has to look to history to know that this assumption is a dangerous one. Prices will continue to wildly fluctuate unless we act now to stabilize the market. The best way we can do that is to take back some of the control we have lost to other oil producing nations.
After the sustained drop in the price of crude in recent years, it will take time and stability for the domestic industry to fully recover. Tax reforms could be a major step toward directing capital to finding and recovering oil and gas in the United States and bringing these resources to market for the benefit of all Americans.
With this goal in mind, I had hoped to bring a package of tax incentives for domestic oil and gas producers to the floor today as an amendment to this bill. Unfortunately, the Republican leadership did not allow my amendment to be made in order. My amendment would have reformed the tax code to provide incentives for domestic oil and gas production and exploration by removing the barriers to capital access that are causing the mass exodus of independent producers from the domestic industry. The lack of foresight and hindsight on this issue is frustrating and troubling to me.
Mr. Chairman, I am not suggesting that we should vote against this bill. It at least brings some level of attention to the underlying problem. But this is clearly an exercise in futility, and I am greatly disappointed that the Republican leadership has chosen to deny us a meaningful debate on the policies that would get to the heart of this country's energy problems. I urge my colleagues and the leadership to join me in a serious effort to craft a national energy policy, one that affords us price stability as well as economic and national security. Our independence and future security depend on it.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I support the Oil Price Reduction Act of 2000, but I regret that the rule has substantially lessened the potential impact of this legislation by preventing the consideration of meaningful proposals to relieve our country's energy crisis.
This bill makes an important statement--the United States will no longer tolerate the manipulation of our energy supplies by a price fixing cartel, and we are prepared to take concrete measures to protect the American people from inadequate supply and astronomical prices. We have the opportunity today to begin dismantling OPEC's unfair and disingenuous pricing policies by investigating the detrimental effects of these policies on the United States economy, and by undertaking decisive diplomatic steps to change the current situation. We have a responsibility to our constituents to ensure that our economy is no longer held hostage to the whims of those countries that export their oil to us.
But while this legislation is a good start to solving our energy problems, it could have been a great deal stronger. We should be debating legislation that explicitly authorizes the President to consider a country's involvement in oil price fixing when making decisions about U.S. assistance or arms sales. We should be debating an amendment to use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to increase the supply of oil in the domestic market. And we should be debating an amendment to strengthen programs that develop energy efficient technologies.
Mr. Chairman, this bill is a good start, but it doesn't go far enough. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and also to continue to work together to enact the meaningful remedies that we could not debate today.
Mr. SWEENEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this legislation that takes a reasonable first step at illuminating the failure of our nation's energy policy.
Gene Sperling, the chief economic advisor in the Clinton Administration might have it right when he calls their dealings with OPEC ```Quiet Diplomacy.''
`Quiet'' is what this Administration's reaction has been since experts began warning of an impending crisis last November. The silence is deafening.
In the Northeast, we've been calling for help for months. I contacted the Administration in January to urge action, and I know many of my colleagues here did as well. We received what I would call a ``quiet'' response. Our pleas have fallen on deaf ears.
After a winter of economic hardship for so many in the Northeast, Spring breaks with no promise of easing their burden. While the rest of the nation reels from daily-increasing gas prices, we in the Northeast have been suffering for many months.
Mr. Chairman, Northeasterners' budgets continue to get socked, the only difference being it hits at the gas pump instead of their heating oil tanks. Silence from the Clinton Administration.
I would ask the President, when are you going to start feeling our pain?
``Quiet'' does not describe the anger of my constituents bearing this burden. ``Quiet'' does not describe my response or that of my colleagues joining me here today.
We are here to raise the volume on this debate and talk about ensuring a consistent energy policy.
An energy policy that promotes reasonable fuel prices through the growth of domestic oil production.
A policy that supports alternative energy sources, takes the needs of America into account and preserves the environment.
Mr. Chairman, by ending the silence I hope we can forge a consensus and move towards a sound energy policy.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, our nation needs a real energy policy rather than allowing ourselves to be surprised with global price changes. We need to support incentives to improve energy efficiency such as tax credits for new energy and alternative fuel technologies, as well as improved efforts to weatherize homes and businesses.
As Charles Krauthammer pointed out in the Washington Post, we are becoming a nation of oil addicts. The past decade has seen an increase in gas-guzzling SUV's and a dramatic increase in the number of vehicle miles traveled. Average fuel efficiency has remained unchanged for the last 10 years. Congress has repeatedly refused to increase CAFE standards for SUVs and light trucks , going so far as to prevent the U.S. Department of Transportation from even studying the impacts on oil consumption and air quality from increased CAFE standards .
In real terms, there have only been four years out of the last 70 where the price of a regular gallon of gasoline was as low as it is today. Gasoline is getting cheaper and cheaper all the time. There are some real problems for home heating oil costs and supply flows, but it is important to put gas prices in perspective.
Nevertheless, we need to make sure that the free market is really free. If that requires legislation, let's get on with it. Everyone needs to play fair and by the rules. Any suspicion that oil producers are artificially ``fixing'' the price of oil should be investigated fully. Oil producing nations do receive assistance from us, and we need to make sure they understand that unless the free market is allowed to work, we may reconsider future assistance. Our diplomatic efforts should be firm but not heavy-handed.
Our nation cannot afford to set our own energy policy with the assumption that petroleum supplies are unlimited and that we will always have the world's lowest oil prices. Record low oil prices last year made us lazier on conservation and the development of new energy technologies. A kink in the supply chain today could develop into a full blown oil crisis tomorrow. We need to remain vigilant on providing people with more transportation choices and higher efficiency standards to conserve the oil we have.
Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today on this legislation by my good friend from New York (Mr. GILMAN)--not to point fingers at anyone for finding ourselves in the circumstances we find ourselves in today, but simply to make a plea--that we develop and implement a workable national energy policy.
Today's legislation does not do that. In fact it deals mostly with symptoms of the problem--not the underlying problem itself.
OPEC is only a transitory problem. Oil prices rise and oil prices fall--and it has been that way since oil took its place as the fuel of choice for such basic uses as transportation, hearing and industrial processes. The measures contained in this bill to bring the OPEC cartel to its knees are nothing more than a reiteration of authorities that already exist in law today.
One of the real problems is availability of competing fuels in the areas of the country reliant on heating oil. And there are others. Let's look at the northeast. Natural gas provides a clean alternative to heating oil, but they can't burn it in those areas if they can't get it. The federal government can do more to ensure that natural gas is more readily available to industrial New England as well as its residential consumers. I believe fuel competition would do wonders for fuel prices in the Northeast and help clear the air in the process.
Let's work on things like getting natural gas into the northeast--things that we can accomplish--not tilt at windmills like OPEC--which we are unlikely to influence in the short term. The OPEC members will have a falling-out--just like they always do--and prices will fall. Let's pay more attention to what we can do
[Page: H1229] GPO's PDF
I'm going to vote for this bill but without any enthusiasm. I believe it will accomplish little or nothing and it detracts from dealing with the hard issues that really will help bring about stable oil prices. The northeast and the oil patch have a common objective--stable prices, and we ought to have the opportunity to bring legislation to this floor which will do that.
Let's don't kid ourselves. It's easy to beat up on OPEC. The hard part is finding agreement on things that really work--like increasing domestic production, expediting pipeline projects, opening up some of our public lands to exploration and development. When we take on those issues, I will know that we are really serious about finding solutions that will help us out the next time prices run-up. Let's finish our fun today, then turn our attention to the really hard issues.
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I reluctantly support the rule and will support the bill, but I think we should be doing more. The bill, as amended by this rule, would direct the President to undertake diplomatic efforts to convince countries engaged in oil-price fixing that the current high oil price levels will negatively affect global economic growth rates.
I think this is something that the President has been doing all along, but I support this congressional action to emphasize the importance of this strategy.
I am hopeful that the passage of this bill will spark a much-needed global discussion on current high oil prices. But it's not enough for us to hope that this global discussion will result in reduced oil prices. Here at home, we need to remember the importance of seeking out alternative energy sources to replace our dependence on ever-dwindling supplies of fossil fuels.
That's why I hoped to offer an amendment to the bill that would have authorized the President's fiscal 2001 budget request for the Department of Energy's solar and renewable energy research programs. It was to be very similar to an amendment I offered and the House unanimously adopted on the Floor during last year's debate on HR 1655, the bill to authorize the Department of Energy's energy research programs. However, the rule does not make that amendment in order. I would have preferred a rule that would have done so.
Unfortunately, the Senate has not yet acted on the DOE authorization bill, It seems to me that we ought to seize the opportunity for the House to once again move to reauthorize these important programs that can lessen our dependence on foreign oil.
There would have been no inconsistency between my amendment and the purpose of the underlying bill. Just like the underlying bill, my amendment would have helped to lessen America's dependence on foreign oil and thus to act as leverage against the price increases of foreign producers. Given the current public concern about the high price of imported oil, I believe it would have been appropriate for the House to consider not just one approach to reducing oil prices, but to consider all approaches that promise to bring down prices by addressing the core problem: our continued dependence on imported oil.
We need to invest more in renewable energy programs. They benefit our economy by stimulating private sector activity and adding jobs. They reduce our reliance on imported oil. They have a positive impact on air and water quality. Renewable energy and energy efficiency is all about an investment in America's future--the future of our energy security, our environment, and our international competitiveness.
We can't go on year after year without giving adequate attention to developing renewable energy. For our investment in these technologies to pay off, our efforts must be sustained over the long-term. To me, the recent rise in energy prices indicates that we haven't been paying enough attention to the long-term.
Once again, Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that we are here today to address this urgent issue. I just wish we were being asked to vote on a bill that did more than merely encourage the President to engage in diplomatic efforts as a way to reduce oil prices. It's time for us to think about addressing serious problems with serious solutions.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 3822 regarding OPEC's role in raising oil prices to the detriment of the U.S. and other industrialized nations. I want to commend the Chairman of the International Relations Committee, Mr. GILMAN for his efforts to find ways to help our constituents with this problem.
Everyone knows prices are skyrocketing at the gas pump. Others are beginning to realize that crude oil prices are also driving up the costs of paving your driveway, painting your house or installing new carpet--all of which contain oil products.
Prices for most everything else will also likely rise as well as transportation costs are passed on to consumers.
It is critical, Mr. Chairman, that we find a short-term solution to this problem. But it is equally critical that we find long-term solutions so that we are not faced with another price crisis next Fall or next year.
The International Relations Committee reported this bill which was designed to reduce or terminate foreign assistance or weapons sales to any country that engages in oil price fixing. This is a reasonable position to take because it sends a message that if our friends among the oil producing nations wish to continue to have good relations with the U.S., which is supporting their efforts to defend themselves and their resources, then we all must cooperate across the board.
Last week, I wrote to President Clinton, urging him to take immediate action to persuade the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to increase production. OPEC is meeting next week to reconsider whether they should boost oil production in order to allow oil consuming nations, particularly the U.S., to refill its critical oil reserves and to stabilize oil prices. We all know that the oil producers were not happy when oil sold for $10 per barrel. And maybe we, as a nation, did lower our commitment to energy conservation in the wake of cheap prices at the pump. But now the pendulum seems to have swung too far in the opposite direction and it is critical that the OPEC nations understand the position of the United States well in advance.
As I pointed out to President Clinton, we went to war and shed American blood to protect two Persian Gulf OPEC nations--Kuwait and Saudi Arabia--from Saddam Hussein and we pitched in with unswerving support for Venezuela during its recent natural disaster. It is inexcusable, then, that these same countries are conspiring to keep oil production low which results in increased gas and other fuel costs. Similarly, in the case of Mexico, the health of their economy is highly dependent on the strength of ours. They must know that these policies will slow the economic vitality of the U.S., which in the long run will negatively affect their own economies.
Having said that, Mr. Chairman, once crude oil prices are stabilized, the President and the Congress must resolve to create a new national energy strategy. As Energy Secretary Bill Richardson said on February 16th: ``It is obvious that the federal government was not prepared. We were caught napping.''
That is unacceptable. It is also unacceptable that the U.S. relies on foreign imports for 56 percent of its crude oil needs--up from 35 percent during the 1973 Arab oil embargo. At the same time, domestic production has fallen dramatically.
U.S. energy policy is serious business. It affects our entire economy. When the administration is admittedly caught napping, the American people suffer.
Mr. Chairman, I urge passage of this legislation as a sign of our concern to our friends in OPEC. But beyond that, we must, as a nation, get serious about our future energy needs.
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, we have a crisis in this country, and I rise in support of using all of the tools at our disposal to end this crisis. I rise in support of the American people, the American family, and the American worker. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of the Oil Price Reduction Act of 2000.
We need to pass the Oil Price Reduction Act to officially hold the Clinton-Gore Administration accountable for the oil crisis that they have created. Any spike in the oil prices dramatically affects every family in the country. When the price of transportation rises--all prices rise. Nothing, not a loaf of bread, not a home computer, not a gallon of milk can get from their points of production to the home without using petroleum to fuel the machines to get it there.
Families in the Midwest and the northeast have been forced to readjust their budget to ensure that they could afford heating oil during the mass cold spells this winter. Now families are looking to take a vacation, and have to take another look at their wallets to make sure they can afford it. Even if they can make the trip, many will be forced to change the duration or possibly the destination of their vacation.
THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Doc Contents