|
|
|
|
|
|
“A Comprehensive National Energy Policy” |
|
Saginaw, Michigan
|
|
Friday, September 29, 2000
|
|
|
Everywhere I’ve traveled this great country, I’ve found Americans worried about energy. Motorists are concerned about what they have to pay at the pump. Homeowners, especially here in the Midwest and in the Northeast, are worried about the cost of heating their homes this winter. In California and elsewhere, small business owners and families alike are seeing their electricity bills skyrocket.
In Michigan and other states, the hardships are real and growing. Many people here heat their homes with natural gas and propane. Today, at the wellhead, natural gas costs twice as much as last year. And affordable energy is vital to Michigan’s great economy - with its automobile manufacturing base and a growing high tech sector.
The situation is critical for our nation.
President Clinton warns of a possible recession. His fears could be well placed. Our nation has had three recessions in the last generation - and each one was tied to an energy shock. After seven and a half years in office, and four months before departing, Mr. Clinton and Mr. Gore have begun to grasp a problem that has been years in the making.
This administration tries to take credit for our economy - but they have forgotten what makes it run. Even today - in our new, high-tech economy -America runs on oil and gas and coal gained from the earth, and from water held behind our dams.
In fact, the New Economy has made us more reliant on these sources. Six years ago, many Americans had never used the Internet. Today, many are, and we think of our New Economy as quiet and far removed from the Industrial Age. In some ways it is. Yet, today the equipment needed to power the Internet consumes eight percent of all the electricity produced in the United States.
Over half of that electricity comes from the burning of coal, and about 15 percent comes from natural gas.
Our nation uses about 20 million barrels of oil a day, and the need only grows. No matter how advanced our economy might be, no matter how sophisticated our equipment becomes - for the foreseeable future, we will still depend on fossil fuels.
Against this background, our country has a great and urgent need for a comprehensive energy policy, with leadership from the president himself. Without a long-term strategy to ensure steady, reliable supplies of energy, we put at risk our economy and the way of life it supports.
Today, America has no energy policy - as the secretary of energy himself reminded us recently. He admitted that the Clinton-Gore administration was “caught napping” when fuel prices began to rise. This is a good description - and it took an election to wake them up.
Since this administration took office, America’s need for oil has increased by 14 percent. Over the same period, our imports of foreign oil have increased by more than a third. Never before has our country been more dependent on foreign supplies.
Today we import 56 percent of our oil. In 20 years, on our current path, that figure could be as high as two-thirds. Meanwhile, our own production of crude oil is at the lowest level in 50 years. And our refining capacity has not kept pace with demand.
Let me put this plainly: oil consumption is increasing. Our production is dropping. Our imports of foreign oil are skyrocketing. And this administration has failed to act.
As a result, America, more than ever, is at the mercy of foreign governments and cartels - at the mercy of big foreign oil.
On the Clinton/Gore watch, the American government has lost credibility with OPEC nations, including our Gulf War allies. We fought a war in defense of some of these countries - and, today, our standing with them is low, our needs are ignored.
On the Clinton/Gore watch, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq has become a major supplier of oil to America. This means that one of our worst international enemies is gaining more and more control over America’s economic future.
Now, just weeks before an election, this administration, in a calculated political move, has decided to tap crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Their plan calls for the release of thirty million barrels - about 36 hours worth of consumption in the U.S. economy.
At best, we merely swap slightly lower prices before the election for higher prices after November 7. But releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve also leaves our country even more vulnerable to foreign suppliers, including Saddam Hussein. Every barrel of the Strategic Reserve we release today for political reasons is one less barrel we have for threats to our security. The Strategic Reserve is meant for a foreign war or major disruption in supply, not for national elections; it is a Petroleum Reserve, not a political reserve.
The administration’s neglect of oil has been compounded by its neglect of natural gas.
Millions of businesses and homes rely on natural gas. Michigan is the sixth largest consumer of natural gas. The administration claims to support it because natural gas burns clean.
But this administration has restricted natural gas exploration, despite the fact that our nation is rich in natural gas. And the administration has made it harder to deliver natural gas, delaying some of the nation’s biggest pipeline projects - projects to provide power and heating for the Midwest and the Northeast.
My opponent says he is for natural gas - he just doesn’t like people to find it or move it to where it is needed.
Even as they pay more for gas and oil, many Americans, especially in California, are also facing record-high electric bills and brownouts. Our New Economy is demanding more electricity - and we are having a hard time keeping up.
Our nation needs more sources of power. Yet the Clinton/Gore administration is consistently hostile to our existing sources of power. They overburden our coal industry with regulations and litigation. Hydroelectric power provides over a quarter of electricity for California - but the Vice President refuses to tell us whether he will breach dams, and shut down this clean source of power.
The administration seems never to have concerned itself with the domestic energy supply, except to tax, regulate, and therefore diminish it. The Vice President likes electric cars - he just doesn’t like making electricity. In speeches, he calls auto workers his friends. In his book, he declares the engines they make an enemy.
This is the record of seven and a half years - a record of inattention, misplaced priorities, and last-minute ploys. It will fall to the next administration to repair this damage and reverse this course.
We must begin where the need is greatest, and provide immediate assistance to those least able to afford heating oil. Congress provided $600 million in emergency funds for crises like the one we face today. But $155 million of those funds remain unspent, and they should be released. The president should provide this money to those who need it For the future, I am also proposing that any federal royalties collected from oil and gas production above certain price thresholds will be dedicated to provide help to low-income Americans.
We must make sure that short-term supply problems do not adversely affect Americans and threaten our economy. In the future, to ensure that heating-oil supplies are available when needed, I support the creation of a Home Heating Oil Reserve. This reserve will blunt the impact of future shortages - temporarily increasing supply in time of need.
And when those stocks fall short, I will require the Department of Energy to notify Congress and make specific recommendations. In the future, no administration should be caught napping when supplies are low.
These steps will help consumers confront an urgent, short-term need. But our goal is not just to manage crisis, it is to avoid crisis in the future. Our nation must actively build its long-term energy security.
First, I will make energy security a priority of my foreign policy.
I will use the tools of diplomacy to increase the flow of crude oil from foreign suppliers. I will rebuild American influence and credibility with the members of OPEC, and with nations in the Persian Gulf. Many of those relationships have faltered in recent years. I would remind our friends in the Persian Gulf that our relationships are not merely commercial, but strategic - they own the oil, and America offers its protection. In the end, it is America that protects the peace, America that safeguards their independence.
I will build strong relationships with energy-producing countries in our own hemisphere. I will invite the governments of Canada and Mexico to join in developing a North American Energy Policy - a policy rooted in the principles of free trade and the free flow of energy across our borders.
I will also support energy exploration in non-OPEC nations - places like the Caspian Sea basin and Western and Southern Africa - to help diversify the world’s energy resources.
Second, I will encourage more energy exploration and production here at home, while protecting the environment.
We should open a small fraction of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for responsible oil and gas exploration -- exploration that will be environmentally sound. The Vice President says he would rather protect this Refuge than gain the energy, but this is a false choice. We can do both - taking out energy, and leaving only footprints. Critics of increased exploration and production ignore the remarkable technological advances in the last 10 years that have dramatically decreased the environmental impact of oil and gas exploration.
With the same concerns in mind, I will ask the Department of Energy, working with leading environmental and conservation groups, to identify other federal lands that can be opened to environmentally sound exploration for oil and natural gas.
I will support new pipelines. Gas pipelines are essential to America’s energy future, and we must build them without sacrificing the environment, public health or safety. Within these parameters, we will require federal agencies to streamline the regulatory process for pipeline approval, which in some cases has taken over three years.
We must also expand our refining capacity by addressing regulatory hurdles. The oil we pump from the ground can’t be put into our cars or furnaces. First it has to be refined - and today, every refinery in America is running flat-out. Unless we expand our refinery capacity, we will be relying more and more on foreign countries to provide us with gasoline and heating oil.
Third, to keep pace with America’s growing demands, I will promote the production of electricity.
Our country has abundant supplies of coal. If we can overcome the environmental challenges of coal-fired plants, we will be much closer to energy security. Already there is progress - overall emissions from these plants are down one-third since 1970. To build on that progress, my administration will commit two billion dollars over the next decade to fund research into “clean coal” technology.
Another environmentally sensible source of electrical power is the hydroelectric dam, which is clean, reliable, and provides low cost energy. In the Pacific Northwest, I oppose the breaching of dams.
I support the deregulation of electricity - which we have done successfully in Texas. This provides more choice and competition, to the benefit of the consumer. We are meeting increasing demand. Competition will keep a downward pressure on prices. Other states are also deregulating their markets. But the federal government sometimes slows this process. Federal deregulation would make electricity more reliable, and promote competition. I support it.
Fourth, to enhance America’s long-term energy security, we must continue developing renewable sources of energy. The deregulation law I signed in Texas also requires the production of 2,000 megawatts of new renewable energy by 2009. Texas will soon be the largest market for renewable energy in America. Promoting renewal energy is a goal all America should share.
When we open the Alaskan reserve to exploration, I will dedicate up-front funds received from energy companies - called “bid bonuses” - to be earmarked for basic research into alternative energy sources, such as solar, wind and biomass.
And I will propose investing every dollar of the production royalties from ANWR in conservation efforts. If estimates are borne out, this could provide hundreds of millions of dollars in conservation resources every year.
Fifth, as we promote electricity and renewable energy, we will work to make our air cleaner. With the help of Congress, environmental groups and industry, we will require all power plants to meet clean air standards in order to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide within a reasonable period of time. And we will provide market-based incentives, such as emissions trading, to help industry achieve the required reductions.
In Texas, we passed one of the toughest laws in the nation to clean up so called “grandfathered utilities” under the Clean Air Act. My opponent calls for voluntary reductions in such emissions. In Texas we’ve done better - with mandatory reductions, and I believe the nation can do better.
I believe that we can develop our natural resources and protect our environment. I believe in the promise of renewable energy. But I also recognize that renewable energy represents less than 4 percent of our energy needs. As Governor of Texas, I have required some of the most significant increases in renewable energy in the country. But I recognize we still must rely on other sources.
So America must have an energy policy that plans for the future, but meets the needs of today.
Here, as elsewhere, the voters have a clear choice. Here, as elsewhere, the contrast is stark. My plan opens the door to more energy, to fuel a growing economy, and a new economy. We take the path of exploration, and innovation, and national self-reliance.
My opponent takes a different path. In a long Washington career, he has supported higher energy taxes and higher energy prices; more regulation and more central controls. In 1993, he cast the tie-breaking vote in the Senate to raise gasoline taxes. He is proud of that vote, and everything else he has done to place limits on energy. That year, he wanted an even greater tax -- the BTU tax -- one that his own administration figured would cost the typical consumer $320 a year.
All this comes from a certain view of the world.
My opponent believes the consumption of energy is the problem, and must be discouraged - by taxes and regulations. It helps explain why he has never made energy production a priority. It is the reason he views American oil producers as adversaries, and the automobile as a threat.
These arguments are familiar. We have heard them since at least the 1970s. And, at the end of that decade came an answer. In the face of another energy crisis, and at the end of another administration, Ronald Reagan said:
“America must get to work producing more energy. Large amounts of oil and natural gas lie beneath our land … untouched because the present administration seems to believe the American people would rather see more regulation, more taxes, and more controls than more energy. Our problems are acute and chronic; yet all we hear from those in positions of leadership are the same tired proposals for more government tinkering, more meddling, and more control. Can anyone look at the record of this administration and say, ‘Well done?’”
That was Ronald Reagan, running for president in 1980. Today we might ask the same question about the present administration. They have had seven and a half years to develop a sound energy policy. They have had every chance to avoid the situation that confronts us today. And now they have nothing but excuses, bad ideas, and - as the clock runs out - one last ploy, opening the strategic reserve.
We are paying a steep price for seven and a half years without an energy policy. Americans are concerned about the staying power of our prosperity; more immediately, they are concerned about paying their bills in the winter to come. But before the cold of December comes November, and one day of decision. On Election Day, we can put our country on a new and better course.
Thank you.
|
| |
