Mr. President, I rise today to speak in favor of legislation introduced by my friend Senator McConnell that would take our country in the direction of greater domestic energy production and robust job creation.

Mr. President, few issues today are more critical to the American taxpayer than the price of energy. Whether it’s powering our homes, fueling farm equipment or filling up our cars at the pump, the price of energy directly impacts costs of goods and operating expenses for American producers.

While a multitude of variables impact the cost of gasoline, it’s important we don’t overlook the main factor impacting prices at the pump – which is, global supply and demand of crude.

With roughly 70 % of the price of gasoline and diesel contingent on the price of crude, it’s easy to understand that any fluctuations in global supply and demand of crude is the most important factor determining what consumers pay at the pump.

As we can recall from 2008 and 2009, a weakened global economy drove down the demand of crude by almost 2 million barrels of oil per day, which helped bring down the high price of crude.

While both the U.S. and the world, particularly China, have seen economic improvement over the past year which has resulted in increased demand for all commodities, including oil, recent instability in the Middle East has again placed uncertainty on the global supply of crude.

This is in addition to monetary policy recently carried out by the Federal Reserve that has decreased the value of the U.S. dollar by further expanding the amount of money in circulation. This policy has increased the price of all commodities. In fact, a study released this week by the Joint Economic Committee estimates that the declining value of the dollar, as a result of this second round of quantitative easing, has increased the price of a barrel of crude oil by approximately 17 dollars.

For too long, our country has been overly reliant on unstable, foreign countries for our supply of petroleum. Understanding, again, that this commodity is traded on a global scale, increased domestic production can’t serve as an immediate magic bullet for solving rising gas prices; but it’s certainly a strong start.

For one thing, by developing more of our own domestic sources of energy, we’ll be sending less U.S. dollars overseas to countries that often times don’t have our best interests in mind.

Also, by increasing domestic production, we can continue to fight against our 9% national unemployment rate.

In an effort to address the growing public frustration over rising gas prices and unemployment, this past weekend the Administration, among other things, announced plans to initiate greater development of our domestic resources by extending leases impacted by the Gulf drilling moratorium, expediting the environmental review of seismic testing along the Atlantic coastal region, and directing the Department of Interior to conduct lease sales in Alaska.

While this news is encouraging on its face, it’s hard for me to think that this announcement is going to produce results any different then what we’ve consistently seen the past 3 years; namely the Administration paying lip service to American businesses while carrying out policy that does the exact opposite.

Unfortunately, this idea of promoting energy security and job creation while instead carrying out regulations and legislation counter to these objectives has been a consistent theme among the Democratic Party over the past fifteen plus years.

In fact, since 1995, there have been at least eight instances where Democrats in Congress, or in the White House, have killed major legislation that would have taken historical steps towards addressing domestic energy access and production, and could have possibly prevented the situation we see ourselves in today.

Considering in my state alone that the oil and gas industry supports over 119,000 jobs and annually contributes $14 billion dollars to the Kansas Gross State Product, it’s not hard to understand that much of our concerns regarding the U.S. economy and rising unemployment could be addressed if we stopped hindering the abilities of American businesses to grow and produce.

I’m sure most Americans wonder why Washington is even considering policy that is counter to an industry responsible for this type of job creation.

Sadly, this is exactly the proposals floated by some of my colleagues in Congress, and by our own President.

In President Obama’s 2012 Budget Proposal, he put forth almost $90 billion worth of tax increases on the oil and gas industry. Taxes that the non-partisan Congressional Research Service has stated could make oil and natural gas more expensive for U.S. consumers and likely increase foreign dependence.

Complementing the president’s troublesome budget proposal, last week a number of my colleagues introduced legislation singling out U.S. owned integrated oil and gas companies by removing tax expenditures those companies rely on to hire more American workers, develop greater amounts of needed energy, and support the millions of American investors whose IRA’s and pension funds invest significantly in energy stocks. What’s even worse, at least six Democratic members are on record admitting that this legislation will do nothing to reduce prices at the pumps. So to address Americans concerns about rising gas prices, my Democratic friends have introduced legislation that they readily know won’t ease the price at the pump – this makes absolutely no sense.

In addition to the fact that the Democratic energy bill won’t help reduce gas prices, I want to further highlight the negative impacts it would have on American investors.

Probably the biggest distortion repeated in the media and by some of my friends here on Capitol Hill is the notion that a few, select corporate executives are the sole benefactors of record high profits enjoyed by these energy companies. When in reality, it’s the millions of middle class American investors whose retirement plans benefit greatly from healthy corporate profits.

Because these companies are publicly traded, they’re owned largely by individuals and institutional investors responsible for managing the mutual funds, IRA’s, and pension plans of millions of Americans whose future economic security depend on the success of these companies. For example, in Kansas alone, there are over 18,000 shareholders of Exxon mobile. That’s 18,000 of my constituents who will be hurt by any legislation that targets the citizen investors who actually own these companies.

Beyond individual shareholders, many teachers and state government employees rely on strong returns on their investments in these companies. One example is the New Jersey Public Employee Pension Fund. It’s holdings of U.S. based integrated oil and gas companies make up over 4% of its total portfolio.

Realizing the likelihood of a strong return on their investment, it’s no wonder why so many public employee pension funds throughout the country invest heavily in energy companies.

Thankfully, the Democrat’s energy tax increase proposal was defeated last night, as its passage would have done absolutely nothing for reducing energy prices, or helping the economic security of millions of middle class American investors.

Unfortunately, the problems facing true economic growth and energy security don’t end with misguided tax policy. In addition to making it more costly to produce domestic energy, the administration is working to close off some our nation’s most abundant sources of energy.

For example, under the current administration, the Department of Interior cancelled 77 oil development leases in Utah that were located within a larger formation covering three states that the Bureau of Land Management has estimated contains around 800 billion barrels of oil – more than three times the proven reserves in Saudi Arabia.

This, of course, is in addition to the Gulf of Mexico deep water drilling moratorium imposed last summer which has had a lasting negative effect on Gulf Coast economies.

In closing, I want to reiterate my point about the underlying economic factors which, like it or not, are the driving forces behind the price of gas at the pump. As global demand rises, prices will also simultaneously rise. As global demand is potentially disrupted, as we see in the Middle East, then market instability will follow.

If we can allow greater access to our own domestic resources and provide industry the necessary tools to expand, which is exactly what Leader McConnell’s energy bill would do, then we’ll be able to put more Americans back to work and add to the global supply of crude, which over time will undoubtedly help stabilize prices.

Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the Floor and I notice the absence of a quorum.