Paul Tsongas feared that one day the oil and gas industry would push Congress to open some of America's last acres of pristine wilderness to drilling -- destroying a national treasure in search of not nearly enough oil to meet our nation's energy challenges. Today, the Bush-Cheney Administration has proposed giving the industry its wish, making drilling in the wildlife refuge a centerpiece of their energy policy. It's up to us to resist these efforts, rekindling our nation's conservationist spirit and offering a better choice -- a common-sense energy policy that thoughtful public servants like Paul Tsongas championed.

Drilling in the wildlife refuge is not sound energy policy. The Administration promises that drilling in ANWR would increase oil supply by 1 million barrels each day and solve local energy problems. This argument is muddled at best and cynical at worst. Oil production in the Refuge is nearly a decade away, and there may be far less available oil there than peak predicted production -- studies reveal that it may produce as little as 300,000 barrels per day, depending on reserves, price and other factors. We could spoil the wilderness to satisfy our national oil demand for only six months.

Drilling for oil in the Arctic is no substitute for a sustainable energy policy – we should choose a better course that alleviates immediate problems, conserves energy, supports renewable technologies, and wisely maximizes our natural resources.

This means immediate energy assistance for struggling families and stressed small businesses, addressing rather than ignoring regional problems -- including the financial struggles of small businesses in the Northeast, where last year the cost of home heating oil jumped as much as 80% to 100%. In Massachusetts, during one cold snap the prices jumped so high without any warning – 22% in the cost of natural gas – that we declared a state of emergency. Mom-and-Pop stores and local restaurants that need to keep the heat on, day-cares and nursing homes caring for children and senior citizens have been devastated by skyrocketing prices. Congress should pass and the President should sign into law small business disaster loans before more hard-working small businesses -- the engine of our economy -- run out of fuel.

It's also time to do more with less. Conservation is not deprivation if we properly harness technology. Increasing the efficiency of new buildings could save more than 1 million barrels of oil equivalent every day and boosting automobile efficiency by as little as 3 miles per gallon -- well within the capabilities of Detroit today -- would save 1 million barrels of oil each day, more than double the potential oil production of the Refuge. Conservation should also be backed by smart investments in renewable energy. Gains in solar, wind, geothermal, fuel cell, and biomass will reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and insulate us from OPEC's market power. Oil, gas and coal will be part of our energy mix for the forseeable future, and we should increase production in appropriate areas and improve our overall energy infrastructure, including developing Alaska's Prudhoe Bay and its 38 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. These are common sense approaches to our nation's energy needs -- and none require dismantling Paul Tsongas' work to protect America's pristine wilderness. In fact, a responsible energy policy is in keeping with Paul's legacy of marrying practical, competitive, long term economic and environmental practices. And these are principles worth fighting for -- which is why I will filibuster efforts to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and instead insist that we engage in a far better debate about the interests of our fellow citizens. Paul Tsongas believed in a serious and thoughtful effort to meet this nation's energy challenges -- and I hope President Bush will join us in renewing that effort today.