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
                Contents Display    

Sadly, the Bush administration's budget reneges on the commitments the President made to pursue renewable energy sources. Critical R&D programs were cut. Energy efficiency and technology deployment programs were cut between 35 and 50 percent. That is unacceptable. And it is a disaster for our energy future. Actions speak louder than words. That is why I am outraged but not surprised that the administration's commitment to environmentally friendly sources of energy

[Page: H2940]  GPO's PDF

   I would say to our President, if he were here, now is the time to increase funding for national energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. It is absolutely not the time to cut funding. Cutting funding for vital energy efficiency and renewable energy programs is a step backward, a step in the wrong direction, and a serious blow to our efforts to craft a sensible national energy policy.

   This is especially frustrating because we do have bipartisan support for renewables and clean energy policy. In fact, it is pretty overwhelming. As the lead Democrat of the Subcommittee on Energy of the Committee on Science, I am preparing energy policy that is environmentally sound, that will result in lower cost solar energy, wind power, bio energy and geothermal energy. Relief for the American people, in the short and long term, is where our Federal priorities should be, not on increasing our dependence on fossil fuels as the administration intends to do. This dependence on fossil fuels got us into this situation in the first place.

   Like my constituents and my colleagues, I strongly believe there is an important role for the Federal Government to encourage sensible short-term and long-term policy in order to solve the energy crisis. As this Congress debates energy policy, we must broaden our horizons by thinking out of the box. We must encourage policies for the future.

   I urge the Bush administration to rethink their recent actions to join us in this endeavor because, after all is said and done, what happens in California, the sixth largest economy in the world, will happen across this Nation. It is time to step up to the problem now. It is time to make a short-term commitment to California to make sure we stabilize this situation. And it is absolutely time to look at smart energy policy for our future so that we will no longer have blackouts.

   I very much thank the gentleman from California for doing this and for letting me be part of it.

   Mr. FILNER. We appreciate the leadership of the gentlewoman from California on the Committee on Science and hopefully someday her chairmanship of the subcommittee. We are looking forward to her report on renewable energy sources.

   There are supposedly several plans that have been put on the table to look at this energy problem in its broadest sense. President Bush put out his energy plan several weeks ago. It had 105 recommendations. Not one of them gave any hope or any help to the western States for immediate relief. Overall, his plan is an unbalanced one that puts big oil and utility special interest friends of his who are already reaping record profits ahead of the consumers, all of us as consumers and the environment. He wants to drill in the Arctic and other pristine areas. There is no relief for consumers facing high gas prices and high energy costs. There is no help for the consumers out West who are being gouged by utilities. He wants to produce some of the fossil fuels and give tax breaks for nuclear plant construction. In fact, when his Secretary of the Treasury, I believe, was giving testimony to a congressional committee, he said on the safety record of nuclear energy, if you leave out Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, there is no problem with nuclear energy. That is coming from the Cabinet of this administration.

   He does nothing for fuel efficiency in his plan. The President claims to want to do something about it but slashes funding as we have just heard for energy efficiency and renewable energy by more than 25 percent. He delays putting in our fuel efficiency standards . He has rolled back such standards for air conditioners. He is using the excuse of the California crisis to roll back all environmental regulations, breaking his campaign promises on clean air, for example, and undercutting all kinds of other protection. And he benefits not the consumer or the average American but the oil and gas industry, the utilities, the nuclear and coal producers who have contributed, coincidentally, millions to the Bush campaign.

   There is another plan on the table, a plan that was devised by the Progressive Caucus of the Democratic Party. With us this evening is the chairman of that Progressive Caucus, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. KUCINICH) who will outline a plan which actually will help us in this crisis and not hurt us as the Bush plan does.

   Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, as chairman of the Progressive Caucus, I am proud to be here this afternoon to present our alternative. But before I do, I would like to offer a perspective on this issue. My father and mother, Frank and Virginia Kucinich, when they raised a large family in Cleveland, Ohio, many years ago, I can remember vividly the scene in the kitchen where they were counting their nickels and their dimes at the kitchen table, you could hear the click of the coins against the table, one of those old enamel top tables, and they were counting their nickels and dimes so they could have enough money to pay their utility bills. I am sure that there have been a lot of families in this country who had to worry about those nickels and dimes in being able to pay the utility bills because today more and more families are finding out that the cost of electricity is beyond their meager budgets.

[Time: 16:30]

   Families are finding out that even if they are blessed enough to have even the tiniest bit of economic security, that they cannot keep up with rising utility bills. Families are finding out that even if they have a little bit of affluence, they cannot keep up with rising utility bills. The nickels and dimes have turned to five dollar bills and ten dollar bills, and people are counting them out and they cannot keep up with the rising electric bills.

   Today, all eyes are on California where the people of California have been the target of a deliberate manipulation of energy supplies by energy companies that has raised prices in that State. Blackouts in California have been the result of a policy which has tried to strangle the market in favor of energy companies that have done nothing but manipulate the market and manipulate energy prices and gouge consumers.

   Now, this is not just a humble Member of Congress from Cleveland, Ohio, stating this. These conclusions have been reached by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, by the California Public Utility Commission, by the California Independent System Operator, by Credit Suisse and by the Public Utilities Fortnightly publication.

   Now, there are people around this country who say, well, it is a California problem. Do not believe it. This is a matter that is coming to a light switch near you in your neighborhood soon. Rolling blackouts and outrageous prices are today strapping citizens of California because deregulation has permitted energy companies to rig the market and price electricity as high as the market will bear.

   The Tellus Institute's report, called the Progressive Pro-Consumer Solution to Today's Electricity Crisis: Just and Reasonable Rates show that these events are not from a lack of supply and, Mr. and Mrs. America, they are not unique to California. I quote from this Tellus Institute report about the solution being just and reasonable rates, and they say every State that chose to restructure its electric industry and deregulate generation did so in the hope that tangible benefits would result. The general assumption was that retail electricity prices would decline relative to what rates had been under regulation. As a matter of fact, everyone remembers they told the American people, if they deregulate their rates are going to be cheaper. That is what they told the people of California. That is what they told the people of Ohio. That is what they are telling people all over the United States.

   In California and in many States, almost every one of these States now faces rising electricity prices. In California, deregulation has helped to create rolling blackouts, has caused exorbitant electricity prices, threatening the financial health of the State. In general, the goals of restructuring go unfulfilled. The price of electricity is higher than before and the quality of service has declined dramatically.

   The Progressive Caucus has moved into this breach, into this massive evidence of price gouging, to come up with a solution that I will go over very briefly. That solution, the general approach is, it mandates a fair electricity

[Page: H2941]  GPO's PDF

   Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I just want to show this chart, which shows the coalition of organizations and individuals which support that concept in the Committee on Energy and Commerce, which is called the Price Gouging and Black-out Prevention Amendment. We can see not only all the governors of the western States, but farmers and businesspeople and working people and consumers, public safety people, health care providers, all of which support the end of the price gouging that the gentleman has advocated.

   Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

   Mr. FILNER. I yield to the gentleman from California.

   Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I just want to point to that chart. The bill before this Congress to provide for rate caps or for regulation of these wholesale energy prices is supported not only by the governor of California, but by the governors of Oregon and Washington, and by the American Association of Retired Persons, AARP, the Consumers Union, the Consumer Federation of America. These are organizations that look out for consumers and there should be no doubt as to what approach is in the interest of consumers.

   Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. SHERMAN) for those comments.

   Mr. Speaker, I would ask the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. KUCINICH) to continue the outline of the Progressive Caucus.

   Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Sherman Oaks, California (Mr. SHERMAN) for his remarks.

   Mr. Speaker, in going back to the solution to high prices: Fair prices nationwide with federally set cost-based rates, including refunds.

   Utilities are entitled to a modest profit. Any business is. But when one starts talking about California electricity generator profits that for one company, Calpine, increased first quarter of 2000, 424 percent; Dynergy, 102 percent; Williams, 100 percent, all of those figures were increased for the first quarter of 2000 over the last year. People are making a killing at the expense of the consumer.

   So we are trying to address that in the Progressive Caucus by coming up with a solution and a plan that provides for fair prices nationwide with federally cost-based rates, including refunds. The solution to rolling blackouts is to mandate generators to produce electricity. The solution to issues relating to energy efficiency is to mandate increased energy efficiency .

   With respect to renewables, mandate increased renewable energy production. Clean air aspects, mandate the development of clean air technologies. Public power, provide financial incentives to encourage public power systems and remove key barriers.

   Now, what most people are not aware of across this country is there are actually over 2,000 municipally-owned electric systems, one of them being in Cleveland, Ohio. What most people are not aware of is that the right of utility franchise, now listen to this, Mr. and Mrs. America, the right of utility franchise belongs to the people. There is no inherent right for the private sector to own a utility. Understand that. The people have the right to a utility franchise. We give the private sector, in theory, the right to operate a utility in exchange for reliability of service and low cost. That is the way it is supposed to work, but, Mr. and Mrs. America, it does not work that way.

   Consumers are getting gouged by these companies that are using our own rights; they are using the right that we give them to operate a utility.

   We have a plan here with the Progressive Caucus to take back the right that we have through a measured approach that would mandate fair electricity markets nationwide and mandate sustainable energy policies. But the truth is that if these energy companies do not respond, if they insist on price gouging, if they insist on price manipulation, then the people have a right to take that franchise back because that is a Democratic right. That right is vested in the people. It is in our State constitutions and we have the right. What we give, we can take back. If they do not want to give us decent rates, then we punch their ticket, take their charter and reclaim our government and reclaim the ability to save our nickels, our dimes, our $5.00, our $10.00, to save our families, to save our way of life.

   ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

   The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. ROGERS of Michigan). The Chair would just remind Members to please address all remarks to the Chair.

   Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. KUCINICH), the former mayor of Cleveland, for his leadership on this issue. We hope that the caucus program can be, in fact, on our agenda at some point in the future.

   Mr. Speaker, as California experiences this problem, the Congressional representatives all over California have been trying to make sure that our State and our Nation does not go under, and one of the leaders in this effort has been the gentleman from Sherman Oaks, California (Mr. SHERMAN). We thank the gentleman for his ideas and his energy and his contributions in coming up with a solution.

   Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. SHERMAN).

   Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by commending our colleague, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. KUCINICH), who, in an earlier lifetime, was mayor of Cleveland and fought against overwhelming odds to maintain municipal ownership of the utility company there.

   In my City of Los Angeles, we also have municipal ownership of our utility system, and we do not have any of the problems that are hitting the rest of the State, and which hit San Diego so hard.

   Mr. FILNER. Any price increases?

   Mr. SHERMAN. None.

   Mr. FILNER. Any blackouts?

   Mr. SHERMAN. No blackouts. Good service. No problems. Where we had regulation, as we had in our State for well over 50 years, no problem; where we have municipal ownership even today in the City of Los Angeles and other cities in California, no problem. As I understand it, no problem in Cleveland today.

   Mr. KUCINICH. Right.

   Mr. FILNER. I will tell the gentlemen, by the way, that because the situation in San Diego has become so grave with doubling and tripling of rates, with scores of businesses facing bankruptcy and closing their doors, the whole community is virtually united as saying we must get control of our future. We are going to establish in San Diego a municipal utility district where we can begin to get some leverage on the system. If we owned 1,000 megawatts of electricity, one-third of our needs, we could have tremendous impact on the whole situation.

   So we in San Diego, like the State of California in general, is moving toward a municipal ownership, to get out of, really, the heel of the cartel of energy wholesalers that is destroying our economy.

   Mr. SHERMAN. I should point out that while I say Los Angeles has no problem, we are bound together with the rest of the State, just as the whole country is bound to California, an the economic problems facing the other cities in the State of California affect us.

   I should also point out for our colleagues, who might think well, if Los Angeles has no problem, a huge part of California has no problem, that the Los Angeles municipality is roughly 10 percent of the State of California. So much of, as the gentleman knows, the Los Angeles area lies outside the city limits and outside the protection of municipal power. What has happened to our State is that we are being bled dry. We paid $7 billion for the generation of electricity for our State in the year 1999. In the year 2000, we used the same amount of electricity but instead of paying $7 billion, we paid $32.5 billion. This year for the same amount of electricity, we are going to pay $60 billion to $70 billion.

   Now, this has fully hit home in San Diego because the utility there had a

[Page: H2942]  GPO's PDF

   In contrast, those in my district who live just outside the city limits were somewhat protected, protected for months. We saw disaster in San Diego, but we, just outside the city limits of Los Angeles, were safe because billions of dollars of Southern California Edison's net worth was used up, paying the gouging prices and selling to consumers at a regulated price. Of course, that could not go on forever because the gouging reached such a level that it bankrupted enormous utilities, threatens to wipe out the surplus of the State. The gouging reached levels that we never imagined as we thought that only San Diego consumers would be faced with this problem.

   The voraciousness of these companies reached an incredible level.

   Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I may bring my colleague, the gentlewoman from San Diego (Mrs. DAVIS), just to share with us some of the experiences that San Diego has had and what conclusions they lead for us to take in this Congress.

[Time: 16:45]

   Mrs. DAVIS of California. I wanted to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. FILNER) for providing us this time today. We have been talking about how people generally are feeling about this; and those of us in San Diego, we were at the epicenter last year.

<<<

>>>

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
                Contents Display