add to del.icio.us			digg this		print		email

Floor Statement: Boxer Climate Tax Bill

Floor Statement: Boxer Climate Tax Bill - Wednesday, June 04, 2008 View video | Can't view the video?

Mr. President, I first want to raise the concern that I have that this extraordinarily complex piece of legislation -- I've been advised that the 342-page bill that we have on our desks that we all assumed was the working document to which we've been drafting amendments is actually not going to be the document that we are going to be working from as early as this afternoon. I've been informed, and I would just ask colleagues whether this is, in fact, the case, that there's actually another bill, not 342 pages long, but 491 pages long that will be laid down this afternoon by Senator Boxer. It's very difficult for any of us to be prepared when the target continues to move and those who are concerned, as the Senator from California and the Majority Leader have been, about the speed with which we address this bit of legislation, this does nothing but slow us down and make our job harder, and I would hope that that is not the case, but that is what I am reliably informed.

To me it's just counterintuitive, to say the least that we would undertake to pass a piece of legislation with a price tag of $6.7 trillion that will actually raise gas prices by 147% when families in my state and across the country are already paying an extra $1,400 a year for gas prices as a result of Congressional inaction. Actually, it's -- I guess it is wrong to say Congressional inaction, because Congress has actually acted to impose a barrier to developing America's natural resources right here at home to the tune of roughly three million barrels of oil a day. Which, if it was made available, if Congress would simply get out of the way that would be additional supply, which would bring down the price of oil which would give us some temporary relief as we transition to a clean energy future for our country and for the world. And by that I mean by developing things like greater use of nuclear power, using good, old-fashioned American ingenuity, research and development to research new clean-coal technology.

But in the near term I think that we all have to acknowledge the obvious fact that oil is going to continue to be part of our future, but, hopefully, it will be a bridge to a future of clean energy independence. But not unless Congress acts and Congress is the problem and I suggest that when we look around for the causes of our current energy crisis, that Congress simply look in the mirror because we are the problem. And it's unfortunate that when the Senate had an opportunity recently to vote on the American energy production act, that only 42 Senators voted for it. Well, that was when gas was about $3.73 a gallon. Today the average price of a gallon of gas is $3.98 a gallon. I asked the question then, and I will ask it again today -- is the Senate going to reject an opportunity to develop America's natural resources and bring down the price of gasoline at the pump when gasoline is at $3.98 a gallon? How about when it is at $5 a gallon or $6 a gallon? Where is the tipping point at which Congress is finally going to wake up and realize that it is the reason why Americans are paying too much at the pump?

Well, instead of dealing with that urgent need that affects every man, woman, and child in this country, this Congress has decided to head down another path and that path is a bigger government, more taxes, higher energy costs for electricity and gasoline and with the uncertainty that any of this will actually have an impact on climate. Especially given the fact that countries like China and India of a billion people each are not going to agree to impose this upon themselves. And so America is going to do this, presumably, while our major global competitors are not and we're going to suffer not only those higher prices, but job losses, reduction in our gross domestic product, and a competitive disadvantage with the rest of the world. Why would we do that our ourselves? At the same time we see this sort of Rube Goldberg bureaucracy that would be created. I think that Senator Dorgan yesterday said that this bureaucracy would make "Hillary care" pale in comparison with its complexity as reflected on this chart. This is the kind of huge expansion in government power over our lives and over the economy that is really unprecedented in our country, and I suggest is the wrong solution -- is a wrong answer to what confronts us today.

In my state in Texas it has been estimated that under the Boxer climate tax legislation that as many as 334,000 jobs would be lost as a result of the increased cost -- and taxes associated with this bill. With $52.2 billion loss to the Texas economy. An $8,000 additional surcharge on any Texas household. That is over and above the $1,400 that each Texas family is paying because of Congressional inaction on oil and gas prices. Electricity cost, 145% higher, gasoline 147% higher. I don't know why at a time when the American people and the American economy are already struggling with a soft economy in many parts of the country why we would do this to ourselves. It simply does not make any sense to me. And I would like to have an explanation from our colleagues who are advocating this particular legislation, how they could possibly justify this. What could be the possible rationale for a piece of legislation that would do this to my state and have this sort of draconian impact on the economy of our country.

I've heard some talk that said that gas prices have increased during the time that President Bush was in office. Well, this is what's happened since our friends on the other side of the aisle have controlled both the House of Representatives and the United States Senate. You see that's the huge spike in gas prices during a Democrat-controlled Congress. But this should not be a partisan issue. This is a matter of the welfare of the American family and of the American economy. Why in the world would we not want to work together to try to develop the natural resources that God's given us to create that additional three million barrels of supply of oil so we can reduce our dependence on imported oil from foreign sources?

The alternative proposed by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle is, ok, we're going to impose higher taxes on the oil industry. Which, of course, will be passed along to consumers and raise the price of gasoline even more. Or they say we're going to have another investigation into price gouging when the Federal trade Commission has investigated time and time again and found no evidence to justify a charge of price gouging when it comes to gasoline prices. Or they say we're going to sue OPEC, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, which has got to be the most boneheaded suggestion that I've heard. Because, of course, what in the world would you ask the judge to order if you were successful in suing OPEC, I presume to open the spigot even wider so we would be even more dependent on foreign oil and not less. It is time for a solution. This bill is not it. I would call on my colleagues to do what we can to open up America's resources to development and bring down the prices at the pump.