A joint resolution relating to the approval of the proposed agreement for nuclear cooperation between the United States and the Russian Federation.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce a piece of legislation on behalf of myself, Senator Nelson of Florida, and Senator Carper dealing with the subject of energy speculation. I want to run through a couple charts, and I want to describe the reason for the introduction of this legislation.

This chart shows the price of oil and what has happened to the price of oil. The price of oil has nearly doubled in a year. There is no justification for it, no fundamentals of supply and demand that explain what has happened to the price of oil.

These commodity contracts, by and large, are traded in this country on something called the commodity exchange--NYMEX, it is called. This is what it looks like. They trade back and forth, and there are legitimate reasons to trade on the exchanges. Those reasons to trade on the exchanges are for legitimate hedging for actual physical petroleum products for future delivery. The problem is, with respect to the oil markets, the legitimate hedging has become a smaller part of what is traded. There is now this unbelievable speculation going on in the commodity markets. That speculation has perverted the market, broken the market, causing the price of oil and gasoline to be well above that which is justifiable.

We have an organization in the Government called the Energy Information Administration, the EIA. They are the ones who know what there is to know about energy issues. As shown on this chart, here is what they have told us. Back in May of 2007--last year--here is where they said the price of oil would be. Back in July, they said it would be on this line, as shown on this chart; back in September, on this line. I hope they were not buying any commodities on the basis of their advice--they would be flat broke in a month. Here is what happened to the price. It went straight up. All the while, the EIA did not seem to have the foggiest notion of where the price was going to go. Why? Because the fundamentals do not justify what is happening.

Now I have the EIA coming down to testify before my subcommittee this week. I want to ask them these questions. They insist there is very little speculation in this marketplace. But most experts insist this has become an unbelievable spectacle of speculation that injures America's drivers and consumers, injures our industry, and causes great damage to our economy.

A House study, just in the last few days, from the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, said here is what has happened to the commodities market with respect to oil. As to the oil futures market: 37 percent used to be speculators in that market. Now it has gone to 71 percent. The speculators have taken over that market.

When the Commodity Exchange Act was passed by the Congress in the 1930s, here is what the congressional report said: This bill authorizes the Commission--the Commodity Futures Trading Commission; that is supposed to be the regulating body--to fix limitations on purely speculative trades and commitments.

Hedging is exempted. But for purely speculative positions, we provided the authority to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to deal with that because we did not want this market to be taken over by speculators.

I have used these charts many times.

This one has to do with Fadel Gheit, the top energy analyst for Oppenheimer & Co. Here is what he says:

There is absolutely no shortage of oil. I'm convinced that

oil prices shouldn't be a dime above $55 a barrel.

I call it the world's largest gambling hall. . . . It's

open 24/7. . . . Unfortunately, it's totally unregulated. . .

. This is like a highway with no cops on the beat and no

speed limit and everybody's going 120 miles an hour.

I will not show all the charts I have shown in the past, but the CEO of Marathon Oil says:

$100 oil isn't justified by the physical demand in the

market.

It was recently reported Americans drove 4.5 to 5 billion fewer miles in the last 6 months than in the previous 6 months. So we are driving 4 or 5 billion fewer miles, using less energy. Four of the first 5 months of this year, crude oil inventories were up--not down, up. So if the supply of the product is going up and the use of the product is going down, the marketplace would have you believe--or at least you would expect--the price would come down. Instead, the price has gone up, which demonstrates this is not about market fundamentals. It is about an unbelievable orgy of speculation in the marketplace that is not justified.

Now the question is, Will Congress do something about it or will it just apply some lip gloss? Is this just something where we act as if we are doing something or are we going to drive the speculators out of this market? I am introducing legislation that is tough and real and will address this issue.

The regulating body here is the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. It has acted like most regulating bodies in recent years. Most of them are run by people who came to the Government not liking Government and not wanting to regulate. It all goes back to Mr. Pitt, back in 2001, in which he said: The Securities and Exchange Commission is going to be a business-friendly place. Well, we have seen a lot of these agencies that are business friendly. They just get out of the way and pretend they are in a deep Rip van Winkle sleep, and they are not going to see anything and they are not going to know anything and they are not going to care much about anything.

This agency is not much different--the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The fact is, it has been asleep on its feet, just dead from the neck up. It is time for us to say to this agency: It is your job to regulate. The fact is, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, when he signed this legislation some 70, 80 years ago, said:

It should be our national policy to restrict, as far as

possible, the use of these exchanges for purely speculative

operations.

Franklin Roosevelt knew it. Why doesn't this Commodity Futures Trading Commission know it?

The legislation I am introducing today does a couple things. No. 1, it demands the Commodity Futures Trading Commission by date certain to distinguish between that which represents normal hedging transactions between producers and consumers of a physical product and the rest, which is speculation. It says this market is designed for normal hedging of risks between producers and consumers of a physical product. Others who are engaged in excess speculation are going to be slapped with a higher margin--a 25-percent margin requirement--that is either quadruple or quintuple the current requirement, depending on what is assessed between the 5- and 7-percent rate. But this essentially says to speculators: It is going to cost you more to speculate in this marketplace if you are one of these folks who just want to speculate to make a lot of money.

Will Rogers talked about this long ago. He talked about people buying things they will never get from people who never had it. That is what is going on with investment banks, hedge funds, and a lot of others who are neck deep in this marketplace. They have never seen a barrel of oil. They don't want a barrel of oil. All they want to do is speculate and make a bundle of money. The problem is, it is damaging this country.

My legislation, No. 1, requires the separation of legitimate traders verses speculators. It puts an increased margin requirement on the speculators to try to wring some of that speculation out of the market.

No. 2, it requires position limits that are significant, imposed by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

No. 3, it requires the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to revoke or modify any previous actions they have taken in which they have prevented themselves from being able to regulate and see the transactions that exist in this futures market.

Unbelievably almost, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which is the regulator, decided, on its own volition, that it would allow, for example, a London exchange, largely owned by American interests, to come in and trade on computer terminals in Atlanta, GA, and pretend they are not American. So the Commodity Futures Trading Commission said: Do you know what, we will do a letter of no action so we can't regulate and can't see it. That is unbelievable, in my judgment. It is an unbelievably irresponsible position for a regulator to have taken. It is taken, I suppose, by those who believe ``regulations'' is a four- letter word. It is not. If ever we wonder about that, take a look at what has happened to the price of oil and gas in a situation where speculators have taken over.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is a regulator of this market. It has done a miserable job. It has nearly all the authority it needs to do the right thing. What I propose to do with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission is wring the speculators out of this market. They have distorted the market, broken the market, and we end up in a situation now where the price of gasoline is devastating this economy. The price of oil is not justified by supply and demand. When that happens, there is a responsibility for this Congress to act. It is an urgent responsibility, in my judgment, now for this Congress to say what is happening is wrong, it is hurting this country's economy, it is hurting industries and the American people, and we need to do something about it. The best start, in my judgment, would be to pass this legislation I am introducing today.

One final point. I am reaching out to Democratic and Republican offices in the hopes that this will be a bipartisan piece of legislation that will address a very serious issue on an urgent basis and begin to do something that moderates the price of oil and gas that many experts have told us is 20, 30, and in some cases 40 percent above that which is justified by the marketplace. We should not stand for it. We do not have to. We ought to pass this legislation soon.

Mr. President, we must do all we can to ensure that our young people have the skills necessary to compete in today's global economy. My home State of Massachusetts has done an outstanding job ensuring that educators have access to the high-quality tools necessary to adequately prepare our students for the future. In particular, they have been one of a handful of pioneering states that have created a statewide, online education ``portal'', which is a suite of web-based tools that enhance the teaching and learning experience for teachers, parents, and students.

Education portals are a one-stop resource for educators, parents, and students to support teaching and learning, as well as leadership skills. Portals provide access to shared resources and create an entry point to other information and services including: lesson plans; research-based training resources; model classroom examples; engaging interactive media; listservs; and after-school resources. Among other things, a portal allows educators to quickly search for lesson plans or other resources by content standard, grade level, specific student and classroom needs, and/or topic. It also provides a secure, on-line community for educators to collaborate and discuss teaching and learning experiences, as well as providing a vital communication tool between the school and parents.

It is for these reasons, I am sponsoring legislation to help my State and others secure the funding they need to improve their education systems and prepare their students for success. While it is true that Congress has done a lot to promote education technology and set higher standards for teachers, more must be done to address the divide that afflicts so many of our rural and urban schools.

What is missing is a funding source for states to develop and maintain web-based tools for training, communication, collaboration, and curriculum planning. The Empowering Teaching and Learning Through Education Portals Act establishes annual competitive grants that will provide funding on a one-to-one basis for states that wish to implement and maintain best-practice education portals. The legislation also provides new tax incentives to private organizations that support State education portal efforts.

The Empowering Teaching and Learning Through Education Portals Act bridges the urban-rural digital divide by ensuring that all districts have access to the best available resources. It supports high quality teaching, professional development and retention of teachers and promotes an on-line support network and learning community for teachers and administrators. Furthermore, it provides teacher coaching and guidance in order to address the challenges of teaching a diverse student body, and collaborate on winning strategies to address various learning styles, needs, and achievement levels. It offers administrators tools to securely communicate and collaborate with district personnel, as well as with the Department of Education, and gives them access to formative assessments and other resources. Finally, it provides a means to actively engage students in a rich, relevant, multimedia environment that results in improved learning and student retention.

It is imperative that we prepare our children for the sophisticated workforce of the 21st century and an increasingly competitive global economy. This legislation takes some of the brightest ideas for modernizing teaching and learning and matches them with the dollars needed to translate them from paper to practice. That, I believe, is a goal we can all agree on.

I urge my colleagues to support the Empowering Teaching and Learning Through Education Portals Act.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today Senator Lugar and I introduce, by request, a resolution of approval of the proposed agreement for peaceful nuclear cooperation between the United States and the Russian Federation, which the President transmitted to Congress on May 13, 2008, pursuant to sections 123b. and 123d. of the Atomic Energy Act. Pursuant to section 130i.(2) of that Act, the majority and minority leaders have designated Senator Lugar and me to introduce this resolution.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that

Calendar No. 942, S.J. Res. 42, be indefinitely postponed.