The Standing Rules of the Senate are drafted to encourage vigorous public debate on our nation’s most important issues. Indeed, the U.S. Senate is often referred to as “the world’s greatest deliberative body.” The Rules allow any Senator to seek recognition from the Chair at any time and, absent a temporary agreement to the contrary, to speak without interruption so long as he or she wishes. Debating important questions before the Senate is one way a Senator can highlight an issue, advocate for a change in policy, or voice his or her opinion on pending legislation.
Senate debate occurs in public, and is televised on CSPAN and transcribed in the Congressional Record. For your convenience, I post transcripts of my Senate floor speeches on this site for your review. I hope you find them informative and useful. My web site also makes available information on my voting record and legislation that I have sponsored in the Senate.
 print | |
 email |
| |
Sessions Speaks on Energy
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
ENERGY
Mr. President, it is no doubt that the American people are engaged on the question of energy, and gasoline prices primarily. But they are worried about their country. They are worried about their own budgets. They are worried about the direction the Nation is heading and the fact that we are becoming more and more dependent on foreign sources of energy. It impacts our national security as well as our economy.
We know that now $600 billion, perhaps $700 billion a year of American wealth is transferred abroad on an annual basis to purchase the 60 percent of imported oil we utilize in America, in our transportation system primarily.
That is a wealth transfer the likes of which the world has never seen. It is not good for our economy.
The average family--and I have calculated it based on a two-car family driving 24,000 miles a year--is paying $105 more per month for gasoline than they were 1 year ago using the same number of gallons of gasoline.
This is a big deal. There is no doubt about it. After our families pay their taxes, after they pay their Social Security, after they pay their house payment, their insurance, their retirement, and their other bills, now $105 more every month is hitting them because of increased gas prices, and 60 percent of that money is going abroad to purchase the gasoline in a wealth transfer that is adversely affecting our economy. This is a national crisis. There is no doubt about it.
This Nation needs to do something real. We need to take action that will work. I am, frankly, very open to a lot of different ideas that we might be able to adopt. I think both parties have ideas that would work. We need conservation. We need biofuels. We need more production of energy at home. All of those things, it seems to me, are quite possible. This Government should accelerate it and make it a reality. Yet we remain here, unable to act in any way it seems.
For example, agriculture. Yes, crop prices, commodity prices are up, but the fuel that is utilized on the farm has doubled. Fertilizer prices, which come so often from natural gas, have also doubled. Our chemical industry, most of it is a worldwide industry. They have plants, these big chemical companies do, all over the world. When they decide where they are going to make a new chemical, they ask who has the lowest price for energy. Natural gas is often a component of new chemicals and because of prices--we have seen a flat or declining chemical industry and an expansion of it in other places where the price of energy is lower.
I believe the future of the American economy is at stake. We must carry out conservation efforts. I see my esteemed colleague, Senator Bingaman, here. He had a hearing a week or so ago and he has had some of the best hearings on energy. I am honored to serve on his committee. We had some fabulous hearings with some wonderful witnesses. The hearing I refer to included Dr. David Green at the Oak Ridge Center in Tennessee, a National lab, a Federal lab, as a witness, and he made a series of suggestions for immediate actions on energy. This is just to increase the miles per gallon that we get. His first thing is driver behavior. He contends that the average driver, if they drove better, could save 10 percent. Curb aggressive driving, observe the speed limits, don't carry extra weight in your car, have vehicle maintenance, have realistic speed limits. For every 5 miles per hour over 55, the fuel economy, Dr. Green says, declines 7 percent.
He talks about heavy trucks. Improved aerodynamics on the truck could save up to 600 gallons per year--just doing that--and other suggestions he made--low-rolling resistance tires. Better tires get better gas mileage. Driver training can be a big asset, updating fuel economy standards, the labeling of used cars. When people go out and buy a used car, it wouldn't be hard to have posted the mileage of all used cars so that the person could see what that mileage would be if they bought that particular used vehicle. He goes on with a number of other things.
I say that just to point out that he was just one witness in one area: automobiles and vehicles. There are many more things we can do to conserve fuel and I support this.
I believe we ought to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels as soon as possible. I believe we should get away from them as much as we possibly can and reduce our imports. This would include, for me, supporting investment in and promoting hydrogen vehicles and fuel cell vehicles. I think natural gas vehicles do have a role to play. Produce more diesel vehicles that get 35 to 40 percent better gas mileage. Half the cars in Europe are diesel; we only have 3 percent. Why is Europe doing that? They get better gas mileage. They tax diesel less in Europe; we tax diesel more. We have a new sulfur diesel fuel that is extremely clean.
All right. I think we are in a position--and I think the Presiding Officer understands this--the American people want us to do something. We need to reach across the aisle and accomplish something.
How much time remains, Mr. President?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 2 minutes 45 seconds.
Mr. SESSIONS . I have to conclude that this is the problem. I don't believe it is the Democrats I know in Alabama, or I don't believe it is all the Democratic Senators and Congressmen I know in Washington, but let me tell my colleagues what is happening and where we are and how we have reached an impasse that has to be broken.
Former Vice President Gore, a former Democratic nominee for President of the United States, made a speech recently and said that within 10 years, we should generate all of our electricity without any fossil fuels. Half of our electricity today is coal. Twenty percent is natural gas. He would eliminate all of that and replace it with biofuels, with solar, wind, and the like. That is a radical proposal--a proposal that is not within the realm of possibility. It is a stunning idea that simply cannot be achieved that fast. I would favor it as soon as we could, but we have no way of doing that.
Senator Obama, the Presidential nominee now, praised that speech. He didn't adopt everything in it, thank goodness, but he did praise Gore and his speech. He has indicated he opposes further drilling, and he is at best lukewarm, if not unfavorable, to nuclear power.
The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, said she wanted to save the planet. She has been opposing any production through drilling or shale oil or clean coal or offshore production. Our own leader, Senator Harry Reid, has said sometimes he favors production, but his only proposal he has brought forth on the floor of the Senate is to sue OPEC for not producing enough oil. I would suggest we could sue the Congress for not producing enough oil in America. He wanted to tax oil companies, which means you certainly would not get any more oil doing that. Now, we have a speculation bill. Not one of those three pieces of legislation actually would produce any energy.
So let's get out of this. This is not a position the Democratic Party can take. It is not a position a majority of Democrats in America believe in. I am prepared to meet halfway. Let's move to hybrids any way we can. Let's do more biofuels. I think that can work. Let's go to wind, producing as much and as fast as we can. I am for whatever works if it is reasonable and not placing an unfair burden on the American people.
All I can say is, we are seeing a position here that is not acceptable. It is radical. It is damaging our economy. It is saying we will not do the things necessary to create a bridge to get us to nuclear power, clean fuels in the future that can get us off fossil fuels.
I thank the Chair and I yield the floor.
